08.27.09
Posted in Europe, Mail, Microsoft, Search, Security, Servers at 6:44 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft flags all Web sites as phishing Web sites and the NHS can’t deliver E-mail
A COUPLE of years ago, people lost their entire mailboxes because Microsoft OneCare erroneously deleted them. In response to this, said Arno Edelmann, Microsoft’s European business security product manager: “Usually Microsoft doesn’t develop products, we buy products. It’s [OneCare] not a bad product, but bits and pieces are missing.” Sounds like negligence and poor quality control.
A similar type of bug strikes again and it is causing havoc in the United Kindgom.
MS phishing filter blacklists everything
[...]
A wide range of uk.com websites were misclassified as malign by anti-phishing technology built into the latest versions of Microsoft’s browser software on Wednesday.
That’s now all by the way. Also in the news we find the Microsoft-centric NHS [1, 2, 3] suffering E-mail problems. People’s lives are at stake. They claim it’s a network issue, but the LSE tried the same defense, apparently fraudulently. Given the utterly poor record of Microsoft in E-mail (and lack of compatibility too), it truly takes inside jobs to put such anti-competitive “me too” software inside an enterprise. By “inside job” we refer to cases where someone works both for Microsoft and another enterprise (Microsoft calls it “insider friend, ‘the fox’”).
In the sight of more Microsoft advertisements dressed up as “articles” in the BBC, David Gerard wrote the following satire. It revolves around Ashley Highfield, whom we mentioned a few days ago because he is one among many Microsoft people inside the BBC.
Microsoft has unveiled new technology that will allow the BBC to completely outsource its technology news section to Microsoft.
This cements an informal relationship that has been in place since BBC News slimmed down surplus staff such as subeditors, proofreaders or most of the journalists. “Tech news is a brutally competitive area,” said Ashley Highfield of Microsoft, formerly of the BBC. “It’s a race against time to be first with the rewrite of the press release. I must point out that my current job is in no way related to the Microsoft-based technology I put in place when I worked for the BBC.”
Microsoft is also using its so-called “search engine” to control what people think [hat tip: Tony Manco]. It’s part of a trend which will persist as long as Microsoft relies on ignorance and cronyism to sustain its business. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Intellectual Monopoly, Law, Patents at 5:56 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Magna Carta monument, Runnymede
Summary: Breaking the law (constitution) to make new laws that illegalise Freedom
• The Fallacy of Intellectual Property
Intellectual property violates the libertarian principles of homesteading and exchange, and it makes no sense as a right at all without the assumption of an omniscient and omnipotent organization willing to enforce it. Unlike homesteading and exchange, intellectual property is not something that anyone can reasonably expect to be able to defend and control.
• Unconstitutional aspects of ACTA (also see [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14])
The controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement exceeds the European Union competence. National Constitutional Courts may invalidate aspects of ACTA.
• Patents: Horizontal vs Vertical Innovation
Patents promote horizontal innovation, but restrict vertical innovation. Without patents we will have more vertical innovation but less horizontal innovation. Even if Horizontal and Vertical Innovations are equally good in terms of their merits, one thing is clear, without patents, a lot more people will be able to use the technology, this is some place where a patent-less society will beat a pro-patent society hands down.
Just like if words were copyrighted, and you required a license to use the words, we would have had a LOT of innovation (horizontal) in terms of development of language and you required a license from John Locke’s estate to use the term ‘liberty’, there would have been billions of words in English (a lot of them doing the same thing what others do), but a lot less number of people would be educated, and most of our brain cells would have been wasted on keeping track of 15 different terms for ‘liberty’, and ‘passion’.
• Your genome isn’t that precious – give it away (genome too becomes someone’s private property and monopoly [1, 2, 3])
A more radical approach – and one likely to appal the privacy advocates – is to throw off the shackles of privacy protection altogether. This is the line followed by Harvard Medical School’s Personal Genome Project, which aims to make personal genome sequencing more affordable and accessible. The PGP obliges those who choose to participate to make their genetic data and other personal information available to researchers and the public.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, FUD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, OpenOffice at 5:24 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Shameless tactics from Microsoft describe Free software as “piracy” and now an “endemic problem”
THE PREVIOUS POST showed that Microsoft is hoping to eradicate software which is available free of charge. Specifically, it was about Free software. The freedom enabled by this software is less relevant to Microsoft and is therefore less of a concern. Microsoft must introduce scarcity, or else people might — God forbid — realise that they do not need to pay for an operating system and office suite.
A disinformation campaign seems to be a weapon of choice. Microsoft’s "Delta Team" presentation still requires a point-by-point rebuttal. “It’s telling that slide 2 shows the definition used by Microsoft, and thus F.A.S.T. and B.S.A., for piracy means any and all non-Microsoft software,” tells us one reader. We have already shown examples where the BSA is doing this. Another person writes:
Seems obvious to me what’s going on here, but I’ll bite.
They’re simply trying to make it seem like using anything for free (in their terminology, pirating) is wrong. They want to create this (false) impression that all software directly has some form of strictly monetary value because when people realize that there’s no sensible reason to pay for basic software (like operating system, desktop environment, productivity apps), they’ll all of a sudden realize how (stupid) it is to pay hundreds of dollars when it’s so easy to make. So they try to brand it as badly as they can by calling it pirating so they can hang on to their outdated business model.
It’s not the first time MS has used this truth-distorting tactic. They’ve also tried to redefine open standards to allow for patent-protected software. See: http://politics.slashdot.org/story/09/08/03/130254/Micro…
Of course, even they know that it’s wrong, but the audience they’re preaching to is probably too dumb to realize and/or enamored by those dirty marketing bastards. And if it were actually true, it wouldn’t be so vague anyways
Similarly, Microsoft seeks to create confusion by substituting cost with suitability for work. It’s the old “commercial” versus “proprietary” lie, which is spread by Bill Gates.
“This also leads to locking down of the Internet and banning of media/protocols that are used for perfectly-legitimate purposes like distribution of Free software.”The FSF complained about these tactics in a recent RIAA case, saying the people were (mis)educated so as to believe that sharing was inherently wrong. This also leads to locking down of the Internet and banning of media/protocols that are used for perfectly-legitimate purposes like distribution of Free software.
Guess who else has just joined this campaign against “free” — one that portrays “free” as bad? It’s Microsoft’s mouthpiece [1, 2] Rob Enderle, who says that there is an “Endemic Problem with Free Products.”
It’s important to be aware that Microsoft is knowingly engaging in this type of propaganda whose aim is to daemonise not only “libre” but “free of charge” too. The same applies to Microsoft's own ecosystem where inexpensive applications are now frowned upon.
The Inquirer writes about Microsoft’s rather suicidal move. It will start charging more British people for the use of Office. For a long time, Microsoft has relied on illegal copying as means of spreading its software even amongst impoverished populations, but not anymore, apparently.
The benevolent programme (*cough*) will see the firm offer Office users in the UK and twelve other countries the chance to validate their copy through official sources, while also regularly asking whether that’s something they would like to do, you know, just in case.
[...]
The upcoming release of Microsoft Office has additional anti-piracy measures designed to stop over-licensing, including volume activation tools for IT managers. This is pitched as better enabling firms to manage their applications software inventories, but we all know what the Vole means.
It’s not really “piracy”, which means something else altogether. And based on coverage from The Register, John McCreesh rightly suggests that this is a huge opportunity for Free software. [via Glyn Moody]
Microsoft reveals huge potential market for open source
According to Microsoft anti-piracy guru Keith Beeman quoted in El Reg:
In 2008, 41 percent of software on the world’s PCs was obtained illegally or used without a license… That equates to more than $50bn in losses for the global software ecosystem.
Microsoft makes a mistake by “cracking down” right now. As Bill Gates put it, “It’s easier for our software to compete with Linux when there’s piracy than when there’s not.” The same applies to OpenOffice.org.
“OpenOffice.org has long campaigned for Microsoft to put more effort into stamping out software piracy, especially through effective anti-piracy controls in its software,” concludes McCreesh. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Dell, GNU/Linux, HP, Law, Microsoft, Office Suites, Open XML, Patents at 4:34 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft wants Linux to pay Microsoft for software patents, but such patent must not apply to Microsoft
MICROSOFT’S deal with Tuxera is truly mystifying not because its nature was kept secret but because of the way it was announced.
People of Tuxera are going around the Web and spreading (almost flaunting) the patent deal. Maybe Taxera would be a more suitable name for the company because of what it is doing. It’s not alone though. The Var Guy is promoting LikeWise at the moment, neglecting to add that Likewise Software is connected to Microsoft [1, 2] and it typically means more software patent royalties (tax). These companies are using supposedly “open-source” implementations of Microsoft software and then add a “Microsoft tax” to them. Microsoft hopes to substitute “free” (gratis and libre) with “patent encumbered” and “legal”.
As always, patent law applies to Microsoft not the way it is applied to others. As one person points out in Linux Today:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137107/Mic rosoft_wins…
The DOJ is fast tracking Microsoft’s appeal against the Word XML patent injunction. It seems there is one law for Microsoft and one for everyone else.
It is not only the US DOJ which is in Microsoft’s pocket [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]. Watch who else showed up to defend Microsoft: “The i4i-Microsoft Appeal – HP and Dell Ask to File Amicus Briefs in Support of Microsoft”
HP and Dell have asked the court to allow them to file amicus briefs in support of Microsoft’s Emergency Motion to Stay Permanent Injunction Pending Appeal in the i4i patent litigation.
[...]
Microsoft, if it is guilty of such conduct, might need to revise its business model. If not, if this keeps happening, partners may find themselves at least factoring it into theirs, or at least I would.
Let’s remember that H-P helped Microsoft by lobbying for OOXML and Dell joined the Microsoft-Novell deal. It’s a small world after all. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Courtroom, Finance, GNU/Linux, Novell, SCO, UNIX at 3:59 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Edward Cahn is appointed trustee of SCO just after SCO gets another day in court
TWO DAYS ago we wrote about the newer verdict which might grant UNIX to SCO. Some news sites wrongly interpreted this development as SCO winning a case, also forgetting that SCO is in bankruptcy and now has a legal babysitter. Here is the newly-appointed trustee for SCO.
Mr. Cahn is now in charge of the SCO litigation decisions.
Can SCO even afford any more litigation?
There is additional coverage of the court’s decision in:
• The dead shall rise: Appeals victory sends SCO/Linux trial back to square one
• 10th Circ. Strips Novell Of Unix Copyright
• Ownership of Unix copyright headed to trial
• SCO vs. Linux: Unix copyright dispute enters the next round
• SCO v. Novell appellate decision: $$ from Sun deal affirmed as Novell’s; rest remanded for jury trial (Groklaw)
• SCO Wins Small Victory in UNIX Copyright Case
• SCO vs. Linux: Unix copyright dispute enters the next round
Litigation between the SCO Group and Novell over the copyright to Unix grinds slowly onwards. The Court of Appeals has affirmed that SCO must pay approximately $2.5 million in royalties to Novell, but has remanded the question of whether the copyright to Unix was passed on to SCO when the distribution rights were sold, back to the Utah District Court for retrial.
• Novell, SCO ready for another day in court over Unix fight
Novell, SCO ready for another day in court over Unix fight
[...]
The case traces its root to 1993 when Novell paid more than $300 million to purchase UNIX System Laboratories, which owned the UNIX copyrights and licenses.
• Colorado At 3 A.m. (AP: also here, here, and here)
A federal appeals court on Monday reversed a judge’s decision that granted the copyright of the Unix computer operating system to Novell Inc. A three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a judge erred in August 2007 by granting the copyright to Novell. The panel ordered a trial to determine ownership. By P. Solomon Banda.
• SCO Group wins Unix copyright appeal
SCO Group Chief Executive Darl McBride, who’s been demonized by the Linux faithful, was happy with the decision.
That last one is rather funny. “Demonized”? When someone does what SCO did, it doesn’t require deamonisatiom. SCO refused to show any proof of its allegations and was also unable to prove anything for six years. When is it time to say “time’s up”?
As the comment here states, this whole case has been draining Novell’s coffers in vain:
Considering the legal fees and Novell’s decreasing likelihood of getting anything out of SCO in the end, maybe it’s a suicide pact.
In yet another article about UNIX turning 40, Novell’s role gets the the following mention:
AT&T developed numerous enhancements for UNIX System V, such as file locking, streams, interprocess communication, and merged features from Xenix, BSD, SunOS and System V into its UNIX System V Release 4. Shortly after producing it, AT&T sold all its rights on UNIX to Novell, which combined its NetWare operating system with the System V Release 4 code to produce UnixWare. Novell tried to use it as a competitor to Windows NT, but its efforts were unsuccessful.
Novell also tried to use SUSE as a competitor to Windows, but its efforts were cut short when a form of collusion using software patents was chosen over competition based on technical merit. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Finance, Novell at 3:24 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Novell pulls the plug on its existing UK strategy, hopes for renaissance with Avnet
Novell’s Channel Chief for the UK left the company a short while ago. Novell’s channel is broken by its very own admission and in the UK there is now a major shakeup.
Novell has signed a distribution deal with Avnet Technology Solutions, as part of the vendor’s refocused channel strategy.
So basically, Novell changed distribution partners. How might that resolve the issue?
IT distie Avnet has buddied up with software firm Novell in a distribution deal for the UK.
[...]
Novell’s partner and channels EMEA veep Dan Veitkus said the company had switched to Avnet to ensure “it has the right distributors in the UK”.
There have been other shakeups in this region and tonight we shall see just what effect a channel drought may have had on Novell’s already-poor financial results. Novell is due to deliver this quarter’s results when the market closes today. It has struck no major deal this quarter, except one maybe (National Vision).
A writer from CIO UK compares technology companies to rock bands, having previously compared some to football (soccer) teams.
Novell would be The Who. Former chart-toppers now known by young shavers as ‘the who?’
Novell increasingly slips into obscurity. Even its events get canceled and now we discover that IP Expo is called off too. Novell used to attend it.
Plug pulled on IP Expo
[...]
Based on a much-vaunted international model, IP Expo had already attracted some of the biggest tech firms in the country including HP, Intel, Sun Microsystems, Novell and VMware.
The plug was also pulled on Novell’s BrainShare 2009. It canceled due to low levels of interest. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
08.26.09
Posted in Apple, Europe, Law at 8:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Apple perils in the news
• Who rejected Google Voice on the iPhone? (also see: FCC Takes on Apple Just Weeks After Microsoft Executive Becomes Managing Director of the FCC)
Apple’s key argument is that a native Google Voice application would confuse users by replacing the default iPhone voice and text interfaces, and “the iPhone user’s entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways.” So the lads in Cupertino are just trying to protect the users, and keep their lives simple.
• Exploding’ iPhones investigated (also see: Microsoft and Apple Gag Truth Tellers, Disregard Risk of Death)
French consumer groups are investigating reports of iPhones that explode or crack spontaneously.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in FSF, Microsoft, Vista, Vista 7, Windows at 8:00 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Public is taught about Microsoft’s offenses while reactionary dissent comes only from the usual suspects and Microsoft remains speechless
THE Windows 7 Sins campaign was launched earlier today. As expected, the Microsoft crowd went on to bashing the FSF in retaliation. But it’s easy to ignore that because it’s predictable and fidelity based, as opposed to truly rational or ethical.
“As expected, the Microsoft crowd went on to bashing the FSF in retaliation.”The FSF’s key points about Vista 7 look very effective and successful so far. The points are being parroted in the press, which was exactly the goal of this awareness campaign. There is actually a lot to be criticised in Vista 7, but the FSF was broader and more general than that, escaping the confinement of this one product.
Here is some coverage we found to be informative:
i. Free Software Foundation trashes Windows 7
Matt Lee, manager of the new FSF campaign, hopes to make businesses and computer users more aware of what he perceives as the growing dangers of proprietary software from Microsoft and companies such as Apple and Adobe.
“With the release of Microsoft’s updated operating system, business leaders have the opportunity to escape to freedom and join a growing list of leaders who understand that sinking money and time into proprietary software is a dead-end inconsistent with their best interests,” he said.
ii. Free software group attacks Windows 7 ‘sins’
They include: Poisoning education, locking in users, abusing standards such as OpenDocument Format (ODF), leveraging monopolistic behavior, threatening user security, enforcing Digital Rights Management (DRM) at the request of entertainment companies concerned about movie and music piracy, and invading your privacy.
iii. Free Software Foundation launches campaign against Windows 7
The site lists seven sins, saying that Microsoft is “poisoning education” by investing money on lobbying educational departments, “invading privacy”, behaving as a monopoly, forcing updates on users to lock them in, abusing standards, enforcing Digital Rights Management (DRM, or as the FSF calls it Digital Restriction Management) and threatening user security by distributing vulnerable software.
That point about education is a very important one because of EDGI. Even at this moment in the news we have found Australian schools committing the offence of giving children to Adobe and Microsoft, which leas to very angry comments. We wrote about NSW’s fiasco in [1, 2] as schools are being used to train children to become customers of offending companies. Taxpayers are taking the bill. Later on, teachers are educated to treat Free software on a CD like it’s a crime.
The angle taken by SoftPedia makes use of the observation that Vista 7 is technically just Windows 6.1.
Despite Microsoft going for the Windows 7 moniker as the official brand for its latest Windows client release, the actual version of the operating system is 6.1, while Windows Vista, the previous version of the platform, was 6.0. The build string of Windows 7 RTM is in fact 6.1.7600.16385. But it is not only Microsoft that’s insisting on the intimate connection between Windows 7 and Vista. The Free Software Foundation is also introducing its latest anti-Windows push, dubbed Windows 7 Sins, nothing more than a Bad Vista version 6.1. It was the FSF that launched the Bad Vista website in 2006, efforts that have evolved into the Windows7Sins.org.
The Microsoft-sympathetic crowd did its usual thing criticising the FSF for ‘daring’ to criticise their beloved Microsoft, which is only breaking the law on a regular basis in attempt to put competitors out of business. Examples includes the CNET PR drone, TG Daily (which collaborates with Microsoft), SD Times (which Microsoft sponsors through many advertisements) and even Nick Farrell, who loves aggravating GNU/Linux and Mac users.
OPEN SOURCERERS at the Free Software Foundation are staging a demo in Boston in a bid to encourage businesses to throw away Microsoft Windows in favour of free alternatives.
Scott Fulton actually gave it some decent coverage, to his credit. He is not shy to condemn Microsoft where it's deserved.
In summary, this round of publicity seems to have been handled better than “Bad Vista”. Judging by market conditions and the state of the product, this is going to be another Vista. Don’t believe it? Just wait. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
