EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

12.29.08

Sun Responds — Gently — to Novell’s OpenOffice.org FUD

Posted in GNU/Linux, Kernel, Microsoft, Novell, Office Suites, Open XML, OpenDocument, OpenOffice, SUN at 4:48 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Hands and sun

SUN Microsystems’ OpenOffice.org team seems to be responding in a subtle fashion to Novell’s most recent strikes against OpenOffice.org [1, 2].

It is crucial to remember that quality assurance is nothing to sneeze at when it comes to software which stores information like medical data and people’s wages. Microsoft’s quality assurance — or lack thereof, especially in Microsoft Office — has already proven to be detrimental, so the last thing the world needs is a leading open source office suite which is equally buggy, to the point where it gets its mathematics wrong (that would be Microsoft Excel and Microsoft OOXML).

Those who favour negligence and are willing to accept no level of authority in the development can just hop onto the Go-OOXML Web site, whose opening words and introduction to the software go like this: “Go-oo has built in OpenXML import filters and it will import your Microsoft Works files.”

Yes, these are the very first words one finds in Novell’s fork [1, 2, 3, 4] of OpenOffice.org. It’s all about OOXML. Go, Go, OOXML. They even call it "OpenXML," thus lending credibility to the confusion which associates "OpenXML" with open source and OpenOffice (“Office Open OOXML”). It’s important to remember that Novell helped the standardisation of OOXML, which was a corrupt affair.

OpenOffice.org is no sinner. It is also valuable to bear in mind that Linux (the kernel) is built in a similar fashion because of the need for quality control. Patchmasters like Andrew Morton and Linus Torvalds do run a receptive cathedral, not a bazaar (Pamela Jones applied this same analogy to her work in Groklaw).

As people may recall, Con Kolivas abandoned Linux development because his admirable role was not wholeheartedly accepted, but should we fault Linux like Novell want us all to fault OpenOffice.org by poisoning our minds? This is not the first time that Novell slams Sun products out in the open [1, 2], which is uncalled for and counter productive.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

72 Comments

  1. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 4:54 pm

    Gravatar

    Such a gentle response they don’t even mention Novell and indeed point out that OOo really needs automated QA processes outside Sun.

  2. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:04 pm

    Gravatar

    I explained their likely intent. Now you’re just giving them a rebuttal.

  3. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:20 pm

    Gravatar

    You “explained their likely intent”? Fascinating how easy you find it to put words in the mouths of others.

  4. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:22 pm

    Gravatar

    Care to explain why else they posted this today, despite it being a sort of holiday?

  5. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:28 pm

    Gravatar

    I realise for a full-time student this might feel like a holiday, but many people are working today and tomorrow, and there are no official holidays I know of today in Germany.

    Maybe they posted it because, y’know, people might be interested in what happened in Beijing recently?

  6. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:29 pm

    Gravatar

    These videos have been out for a while. I linked to them here several weeks ago.

  7. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:32 pm

    Gravatar

    Given that the directory listing says that they were uploaded nine days ago – with a genuine holiday in between – I find that somewhat surprising.

    Where is this specific link you mention?

  8. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:36 pm

    Gravatar

    it’s here.

  9. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:38 pm

    Gravatar

    Interesting. I see the file were overwritten. When I saw them they were already quite old. Let me do some fun with Google cache.

  10. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:38 pm

    Gravatar

    I’m not sure how a link on the 17th – 12 days ago – counts as “several weeks” since it’s not even two.

  11. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:39 pm

    Gravatar

    Got it.

    Index of /~ooocon2008

    [ICO] Name Last modified Size Description

    [DIR] Parent Directory  
    [VID] friday_1365.mp4 17-Dec-2008 08:57 157M
    [VID] friday_1371.mp4 17-Dec-2008 09:10 192M
    [VID] friday_1384.mp4 17-Dec-2008 09:18 141M
    [VID] friday_1394.mp4 17-Dec-2008 09:29 175M
    [VID] friday_1397.mp4 17-Dec-2008 09:36 111M
    [VID] friday_1404.mp4 17-Dec-2008 09:46 145M
    [VID] friday_1419.mp4 17-Dec-2008 09:57 171M
    [VID] friday_1422.mp4 17-Dec-2008 10:06 144M
    [VID] friday_1426.mp4 17-Dec-2008 10:11 81M
    [VID] friday_1427.mp4 17-Dec-2008 10:19 123M
    [VID] friday_1429.mp4 17-Dec-2008 10:22 89M
    [VID] friday_1447.mp4 17-Dec-2008 10:30 124M
    [VID] friday_1448.mp4 17-Dec-2008 10:39 147M
    [VID] friday_1464.mp4 17-Dec-2008 10:48 138M
    [VID] friday_1468.mp4 17-Dec-2008 10:57 159M
    [VID] friday_1470.mp4 17-Dec-2008 11:09 210M
    [VID] friday_1472.mp4 17-Dec-2008 11:13 96M
    [VID] friday_1475.mp4 17-Dec-2008 11:18 105M
    [VID] friday_1476.mp4 17-Dec-2008 11:27 154M
    [VID] friday_1477.mp4 17-Dec-2008 11:35 138M
    [VID] friday_1481.mp4 17-Dec-2008 11:41 109M
    [VID] friday_1482.mp4 17-Dec-2008 11:46 112M
    [VID] friday_1484.mp4 17-Dec-2008 11:52 107M
    [VID] friday_1510.mp4 17-Dec-2008 12:01 152M

  12. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:40 pm

    Gravatar

    I found it in Roberto’s site. Let me see if it was older at the time. This feels like archeology.

  13. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:43 pm

    Gravatar

    Got it.

    http://robertogaloppini.net/2008/12/14/openofficeorg-extensions-and-templates-ooo-30-book-ooocon-videos-openofficeorg-links-14-12-2008/

    OOoCon videos (temporary folder) – Few videos of the OooCon 2008 are on line, check them out.

    Yup. December 14th when he posted this and I can vaguely recall the files being older at the time.

  14. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:45 pm

    Gravatar

    “A few of the files” doesn’t indicate in any way that the one from Thursday, which we’re talking about, was uploaded.

    Particularly since the listing you’ve given shows that it wasn’t there when other files dated the 17th actually were.

    So you’ve helped prove my point, thanks :)

  15. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:49 pm

    Gravatar

    Why would they upload and promote a presentation which talks about the very same thing that rebuts Novell’s FUD from the weekend?

  16. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:52 pm

    Gravatar

    Difficult to see how a presentation from Beijing – 5th-7th of November, remember – could rebut anything from last weekend.

    Maybe Sun engineers have a crystal ball.

  17. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 5:59 pm

    Gravatar

    I suspect they picked a good one out of the bag at a particular time for a particular reason.

  18. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:02 pm

    Gravatar

    Yeah, and that’s you putting your opinion into their mouth.

    Given that Michael Meeks’ criticism of the project didn’t revolve around the success (or not) of the QA project, I don’t even understand how you think Sun’s presentation even vaguely addresses his concerns, let alone rebut them.

    Michael is despairing of the number of people committing code to OOo. QA is only a very small part of that, and indeed Michael says “I’m pleased when people [..] help with the QA burden”. And Sun say they want to see wider outside QA participation.

    If anything, those two messages on QA actually agree.

  19. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:08 pm

    Gravatar

    The point Sun makes is that OOo does not hastily accept everything is due to QA.

  20. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:08 pm

    Gravatar

    Michael isn’t asking them to hastily accept everything.

  21. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:09 pm

    Gravatar

    Right. He just wants to supersede them.

  22. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:12 pm

    Gravatar

    Again, your opinion. That’s not what his article asks for. Do you need to read it again?

  23. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:19 pm

    Gravatar

    No, thank you. :-)

  24. the11thplague said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:31 pm

    Gravatar

    Hum, nice point AlexH, indeed, I read this guy because of his opinions, and not for a “objective analysis of facts”.
    May you add a “maybe” to your suppositions, Roy ? :-)

  25. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:34 pm

    Gravatar

    This pattern of defence from Sun has been consistent even regardless of this post, which I doubt is a coincidence.

  26. AlexH said,

    December 29, 2008 at 6:37 pm

    Gravatar

    @the11thplague:

    “Maybe” does get added now and then, it usually just means “I know I have no evidence” rather than “I think I have some evidence” (which later turns out to be bad).

    What someone interested in the facts would do is write to the person who wrote the post, rather than hang their own opinion on the things someone else didn’t say. But the latter is much easier, and you can pump out more articles that way.

  27. Thomas Holbrook II said,

    December 30, 2008 at 4:20 am

    Gravatar

    @AlexH: So why not write to the person who posted instead of complaining about others not doing so?

  28. AlexH said,

    December 30, 2008 at 4:24 am

    Gravatar

    @Thomas: because I’m not the person claiming to speak for them.

  29. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 4:26 am

    Gravatar

    Well, you claim to know better. In my eyes, you refute the obvious.

  30. AlexH said,

    December 30, 2008 at 4:39 am

    Gravatar

    No, I don’t claim to know better. I offered an explanation that because the videos have very recently become available, it’s not surprising that they only recently blogged about them.

    You seem to think that twelve days is weeks, and that their blog is some kind of strategic riposte to a blog post almost three months old, even though the subject matter of the two is entirely different.

    I know which explanation looks the simplest to me, and equally which other one looks like tinfoil apparel. But I don’t claim to speak for them.

  31. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 4:42 am

    Gravatar

    tinfoil apparel.

    Weasel word noted.

  32. AlexH said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:01 am

    Gravatar

    It’s not a “weasel word” to point out a far-fetched conspiracy with no supporting evidence.

  33. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:02 am

    Gravatar

    conspiracy

    Weasel word noted.

  34. AlexH said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:07 am

    Gravatar

    Oh look, someone beat me to it and did ask them if it was a response to Meeks!

    Answer? No!

  35. Thomas Holbrook II said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:07 am

    Gravatar

    @AlexH: I see nobody else has commented on the post in question. Why not just ask the person if it was in response to the claims of OpenOffice.org being sick that was three months old (yet it made it to the front page of Digg and Slashdot recently)? What could it hurt?

  36. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:11 am

    Gravatar

    Fair point, Alex. Sun’s defence leaves the hypothesis in tact because of its previous responses to that same Meeks FUD.

  37. Thomas Holbrook II said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:11 am

    Gravatar

    …and that’s what I get for posting at the same time as you. So it does appear that there was a response as well.

    My point: instead of criticizing others for not checking their information, why not do so yourself? I almost asked the question myself.

  38. AlexH said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:14 am

    Gravatar

    @Thomas: if I were the one posting an article, I would ask the question first before posting what I think the answer is. The problem is that basic research like this is never done on this site.

    If it falls to “critics” and “hecklers” like me to do the research and actually sort out the fact from the fiction, then it’s a very sorry state of affairs indeed.

    I don’t hold out any hope of this article being corrected, as Roy has just said, he still thinks it’s correct even though nothing supports it.

  39. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:23 am

    Gravatar

    The main point of this post is my own rebuttal. There is a link at the start to what I suspect is a timely reminder of QA, which has always been Sun’s defence.

  40. AlexH said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:53 am

    Gravatar

    Just a shame that it says “Sun responds” at the top instead of “Roy’s opinion”.

  41. SR said,

    December 30, 2008 at 5:56 am

    Gravatar

    How very interesting that a site devoted to a conspiracy theory specifically notes “conspiracy” as a weasel word…

  42. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 6:03 am

    Gravatar

    The only “conspiracy” here — going by the definition of the word — is Novell and Microsoft, who for a verifiable fact conspired against the GPL when they signed the patent deal.

  43. SR said,

    December 30, 2008 at 6:21 am

    Gravatar

    Where is it proven that Novell *conspired against* the GPL when they signed the deal.

    Can you cite even one source, given that it’s a verifiable fact? And opinion blogs are not credible sources ;-)

  44. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 6:27 am

    Gravatar

    No, they admitted this. They sat down and discussed ways to work around the GPL (find loopholes). This is confirmed by Novell and Microsoft.

  45. homburg-hansen said,

    December 30, 2008 at 9:52 am

    Gravatar

    You cannot ‘conspire’ against a license, mate.

    You use it or you don’t use it, but you can’t conspire against it. You might as well conspire against traffic regulations… Bollocks.

  46. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 9:58 am

    Gravatar

    Look up the definition of “conspire”.

  47. homburg-hansen said,

    December 30, 2008 at 10:21 am

    Gravatar

    # Civil conspiracy (US), agreement between persons to break the law in the future
    # Conspiracy (crime) (US), agreement between persons to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement
    # Conspiracy (political), a plot to overthrow a government

    That’s the joy of Wikipedia.

    Which one shall it be, _your_ conspiracy?

  48. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 10:34 am

    Gravatar

    Which is this dictionary and what are all the definitions offered by it?

    I always use Cambridge, which defines it as:

    conspiracy
    noun [C or U]
    when people secretly plan together to do something bad or illegal:
    The three men are accused of conspiracy.
    [+ to infinitive] She has been charged with conspiracy to murder.
    I think there was a conspiracy to keep me out of the committee.

    That’s correct. Novell and Microsoft conspired to hack the spirit of the GPL and betray all those who supply Novell’s code.

  49. homburg-hansen said,

    December 30, 2008 at 11:07 am

    Gravatar

    conspiracy
    noun [C or U]
    when people secretly plan together to do something bad or illegal:

    1) no illegal activity here
    2) nothing secret, everybody knows it
    3) ‘bad’ depends on your POV

  50. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 11:18 am

    Gravatar

    1) no illegal activity here

    It says “OR”. It can be either “bad or illegal.”

    2) nothing secret, everybody knows it

    Nope. The negotiations took about six months and were held behind closed doors since around May of 2006.

    3) ‘bad’ depends on your POV

    Bad it is from the point of view of:

    1. FSF/GNU/SFLC
    2. GNU/Linux developers
    3. Samba developers
    4. Wine developers
    5. Many businesses, including (former) Novell/SUSE customers
    6. Red Hat, Canonical, Mandriva and other Linux vendors
    7. Lots of users
    8. Some Novell employees who left as a result of the deal

    Who is in favour of the deal? Let’s see… Ron Hovsepian, John Dragoon, Susan Hauser, Justin Steinman, Microsoft, Miguel de Icaza…

  51. homburg-hansen said,

    December 30, 2008 at 11:49 am

    Gravatar

    Well, that’s certainly a way to look at it! ^_-

    With that wide interpretation of ‘conspiracy’ I can mark your website a conspiracy:

    1) Secrecy: You and your friend Shane decided a non-public meeting to set up a website.
    2) Malicious intent: to hurt Novell (certainly bad from Novell’s point of view.)!!

    There you are, the big boycottnovell-conspiracy…

  52. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 12:00 pm

    Gravatar

    The true story is that Shane was the founder of a GNU/Linux distribution and he was appalled by the deal, so he started this Web site. He did not have much time to write here, so he invited me to contribute. None of this was ever a secret or maliciously intended.

  53. homburg-hansen said,

    December 30, 2008 at 6:38 pm

    Gravatar

    Certainly it was? Did he consult anyone on his decision to launch an all-out attack against Novell? Isn’t his intent to hurt a company and its employees highly malicious?

  54. Thomas Holbrook II said,

    December 30, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    Gravatar

    @homburg-hansen: It’s called having an opinion. If I wanted to, I could argue that you have the intent to harm somebody based on your actions (i.e. claiming that somebody wanted to hurt a company and employees), but then again, that would be silly, now wouldn’t it? I believe the old blog of helios (before bandwidth issues caused him to change over to Blogger) had a comment from an anonymous Novell employee that stated something along these lines: The head of Linus Torvalds being delivered to Gates on a silver platter.

  55. homburg-hansen said,

    December 30, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    Gravatar

    [All this only goes to show that the very idiosyncratic understanding of 'conspiracy' you've outlined above is just ridiculous.]

  56. homburg-hansen said,

    December 30, 2008 at 6:47 pm

    Gravatar

    Thomas; one good thing for the FOSS community has come off boycottnovell.com: It has become very easy to discern the sane people from the tinfoil-hatters.

  57. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 6:54 pm

    Gravatar

    Thomas; one good thing for the FOSS community has come off boycottnovell.com

    BN was cited by Spiegel, Forbes, InformationWeek, IDG (e.g. ComputerWorld), OpenOffice.org front page, etc.

    Don’t try to abolish the site without substantial argument or evidence.

  58. homburg-hansen said,

    December 30, 2008 at 7:16 pm

    Gravatar

    Nobody with any reputation within the FOSS community wants his name associated with this website. Not even its former founder, Shane Coyle.

    It only draws madmen and mean little boys who like to rip the wings from flies… Just look at all the viciousness in Roy’s blog posts and ask yourself whether it has come out of nowhere or whether it’s always been in him, waiting a topic to earth itself in.

  59. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 30, 2008 at 7:21 pm

    Gravatar

    It only draws madmen and mean little boys..

    …And hecklers like yourself, who can’t help smearing because a site like this one attracts over 3 million hits per months and you don’t like what people see.

    FWIW, some CEOs read this site too. Just because they don’t comment doesn’t mean they don’t exist. But they comment privately.

  60. sims said,

    December 30, 2008 at 7:30 pm

    Gravatar

    You guys suck.

    Roy, first of all, if you want your site to hold any credibility, report facts not opinions. Then let the readers put the pieces to the puzzle and discuss their opinions in the comments.

    We all know MS’s OOXML is garbage and MS’s attempt to pollute standards in order to grab more of the market via vendor lock-in and ghey upgrades so we can give them more money to feed the greed demons.

    You don’t need to convince us. Just report the facts – the nice little details that don’t make it to the front page.

    The ghey MS fans will come here and spill vomit on the comments section, and that’s too bad. There’s nothing you can do about it. Arguing with them only makes it worse. Just let them be ghey and sell their internal organs to MS. I don’t really give a what.

    Have a nice day and a Happy New Year!

  61. sims said,

    December 30, 2008 at 7:33 pm

    Gravatar

    BTW, my rant tags were omitted above.

  62. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 31, 2008 at 2:44 am

    Gravatar

    sims,

    Thanks, I was unable to restore any tags (markup) because I do not see any.

  63. sims said,

    December 31, 2008 at 3:40 am

    Gravatar

    That’s cool. I just wrote rant html style tags around the above comment so people would know the contents were volatile.

    Cheers and good luck next year!

  64. ms said,

    December 31, 2008 at 2:19 pm

    Gravatar

    Ugh, fix these article errors…

    “that would ‘be’ Excel”

    “…a similar fashion because of the need ‘tor’ quality control”

  65. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 31, 2008 at 2:21 pm

    Gravatar

    Thanks a lot. It’s fixed now.

  66. Ren in FL said,

    December 31, 2008 at 2:53 pm

    Gravatar

    When does Roy graduate from school so he’ll have to get a real job and have less time coming up with conspiracy theories that are stretched so thin that they’d break if they were rubber bands?

  67. Thomas Holbrook II said,

    January 1, 2009 at 12:15 am

    Gravatar

    @Ren in FL: The fact that you not only visit this site, but commented as well only shows that you are lending credibility to Mr. Schestowtz. If what he said had no credence, then why waste time here?

  68. Roy Schestowitz said,

    January 1, 2009 at 2:50 am

    Gravatar

    It’s also an ad hominem attack that ignores the facts.

  69. Ari T. said,

    January 1, 2009 at 1:18 pm

    Gravatar

    homburg-hansen:

    “It only draws madmen and mean little boys who like to rip the wings from flies”

    I’m sorry to say, but this is not too far from the impression I get of you based on your comments.

    Roy:

    Although I think Boycott Novell is a valuable source of information, I’d like facts, opinions and assumptions to be separated more clearly here. Not doing so just helps your opponents in their efforts to discredit you.

  70. Roy Schestowitz said,

    January 1, 2009 at 1:27 pm

    Gravatar

    I try to separate the two using words and references. Is there a more effective of achieving this separation (cues)?

  71. Ren in FL said,

    January 2, 2009 at 12:57 pm

    Gravatar

    @Thomas Holbrook et al -

    I also visit AND comment on MS-biased sites as well – doesn’t mean that I put any credence in what they have to say either.

  72. Ren in FL said,

    January 2, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    Gravatar

    @Roy,
    Nothing in that “status” entry says anything about being anything other than a doctoral STUDENT.

What Else is New


  1. Links 1/10/2016: Linux 4.7.6 and 4.4.23, Blender 2.78

    Links for the day



  2. Dutch Court Rules Against SUEPO (in a Reversal), But EPO Management Would Have Ignored the Ruling Even If SUEPO Won (Updated)

    SUEPO loses a case against EPO management, but the EPO's overzealous management was going to ignore the ruling anyway



  3. New Paper Provides Evidence of Sinking Patent Quality at the EPO, Refuting the Liar in Chief Battistelli

    In spite of Battistelli's claims (lies) about patent quality under his watch, reality suggests that so-called 'production' is simply rushed issuance of invalid patents (one step away from rubberstamping, in order to meet unreasonable, imposed-from-the-top targets)



  4. Battistelli Locks EPO Staff Union Out of Social Conference So That He Can Lie About the Union and the Social Climate

    The attacks on staff of the EPO carry on, with brainwash sessions meticulously scheduled to ensure that Administrative Council delegates are just their master's voice, or the voice of the person whom they are in principle supposed to oversee



  5. Unprecedented Levels of UPC Lobbying by Big Business Europe (Multinationals) and Their Patent Law Firms

    A quick look at some of the latest deception which is intended to bamboozle European politicians and have them play along with the unitary [sic] patent for private interests of the super-rich



  6. Links 29/9/2016: Russia Moving to FOSS, New Nmap and PostgreSQL Releases

    Links for the day



  7. Team UPC is Interjecting Itself Into the Media Ahead of Tomorrow's Lobbying Push Against the European Council and Against European Interests

    A quick look at the growing bulk of UPC lobbying (by the legal firms which stand to benefit from it) ahead of tomorrow's European Council meeting which is expected to discuss a unitary patent system



  8. IP Kat is Lobbying Heavily for the UPC, Courtesy of Team UPC

    When does an IP (or patent) blog become little more than an aggregation of interest groups and self-serving patent law firms, whose agenda overlaps that of Team Battistelli?



  9. Leaked: Conclusions of the Secretive EPO Board 28 Meeting (8th of September 2016)

    The agenda and outcome of the secretive meeting of the Board of the Administrative Council of the EPO



  10. Letter From the Dutch Institute of Patent Attorneys (Nederlandse Orde van Octrooigemachtigden) to the Administrative Council of the EPO

    The Netherlands Institute of Patent Attorneys, a group representing a large number of Dutch patent practitioners, is against Benoît Battistelli and his horrible behaviour at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  11. EPO's Board 28 Notes Battistelli's “Three Current Investigations/Disciplinary Proceedings Involving SUEPO Members in The Hague."

    The attack on SUEPO (EPO staff representatives) at The Hague appears to have been silently expanded to a third person, showing an obvious increase in Battistelli's attacks on truth-tellers



  12. Links 28/9/2016: Alpine Linux 3.4.4, Endless OS 3.0

    Links for the day



  13. Cementing Autocracy: The European Patent Office Against Democracy, Against Media, and Against the Rule of Law

    The European Patent Office (EPO) actively undermines democracy in Europe, it undermines the freedom of the press (by paying it for puff pieces), and it undermines the rule of law by giving one single tyrant total power in Eponia and immunity from outside Eponia (even when he breaks his own rules)



  14. Links 28/9/2016: New Red Hat Offices, Fedora 25 'Frozen'

    Links for the day



  15. Team Battistelli Intensifies the Attack on the Boards of Appeal Again

    The lawless state of the EPO, where the rule of law is basically reducible to Battistelli's ego and insecurities, is again demonstrated with an escalation and perhaps another fake 'trial' in the making (after guilt repeatedly fails to be established)



  16. After the EPO Paid the Financial Times to Produce Propaganda the Newspaper Continues to Produce UPC Puff Pieces, Just Ahead of EU Council Meeting

    How the media, including the Financial Times, has been used (and even paid!) by the EPO in exchange for self-serving (to the EPO) messages and articles



  17. Beware the Patent Law Firms Insinuating That Software Patents Are Back Because of McRO

    By repeatedly claiming (and then generalising) that CAFC accepted a software patent the patent microcosm (meta-industry) hopes to convince us that we should continue to pursue software patents in the US, i.e. pay them a lot more money for something of little/no value



  18. The US Supreme Court Might Soon Tighten Patent Scope in the United States Even Further, the USPTO Produces Patent Maximalism Propaganda

    A struggle brewing between the patent 'industry' (profiting from irrational saturation) and the highest US court, as well as the Government Accountability Office (GAO)



  19. Patent Trolling a Growing Problem in East Asia (Software Patents Also), Whereas in the US the Problem Goes Away Along With Software Patents

    A look at two contrasting stories, one in Asia where patent litigation and hype are on the rise (same in Europe due to the EPO) and another in the US where a lot of patents face growing uncertainty and a high invalidation rate



  20. The EPO's Continued Push for Software Patents, Marginalisation of Appeals (Reassessment), and Deviation From the EPC

    A roundup of new developments at the EPO, where things further exacerbate and patent quality continues its downward spiral



  21. The Battistelli Effect: “We Will be Gradually Forced to File Our Patent Applications Outside the EPO in the Interests of Our Clients”

    While the EPO dusts off old files and grants in haste without quality control (won't be sustainable for more than a couple more years) the applicants are moving away as trust in the EPO erodes rapidly and profoundly



  22. Links 27/9/2016: Lenovo Layoffs, OPNFV Third Software Release

    Links for the day



  23. The Moral Depravity of the European Patent Office Under Battistelli

    The European Patent Office (EPO) comes under heavy criticism from its very own employees, who also seem to recognise that lobbying for the UPC is a very bad idea which discredits the European Patent Organisation



  24. Links 26/9/2016: Linux 4.8 RC8, SuperTux 0.5

    Links for the day



  25. What Insiders Are Saying About the Sad State of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Anonymous claims made by people who are intimately familiar with the European Patent Office (from the inside) shed light on how bad things have become



  26. The EPO Does Not Want Skilled (and 'Expensive') Staff, Layoffs a Growing Concern

    A somewhat pessimistic look (albeit increasingly realistic look) at the European Patent Office, where unions are under fire for raising legitimate concerns about the direction taken by the management since a largely French team was put in charge



  27. Patents Roundup: Accenture Software Patents, Patent Troll Against Apple, Willful Infringements, and Apple Against a Software Patent

    A quick look at various new articles of interest (about software patents) and what can be deduced from them, especially now that software patents are the primary barrier to Free/Libre Open Source software adoption



  28. Software Patents Propped Up by Patent Law Firms That Are Lying, Further Assisted by Rogue Elements Like David Kappos and Randall Rader (Revolving Doors)

    The sheer dishonesty of the patent microcosm (seeking to bring back software patents by misleading the public) and those who are helping this microcosm change the system from the inside, owing to intimate connections from their dubious days inside government



  29. Links 25/9/2016: Linux 4.7.5, 4.4.22; LXQt 0.11

    Links for the day



  30. Patent Quality and Patent Scope the Unspeakable Taboo at the EPO, as Both Are Guillotined by Benoît Battistelli for the Sake of Money

    The gradual destruction of the European Patent Office (EPO), which was once unanimously regarded as the world's best, by a neo-liberal autocrat from France, Benoît Battistelli


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts