06.28.11
IRC Proceedings: June 27th, 2011
|
|
|
|
ES: Derechos Versus Libertades
“De acuerdo con algunos puntos de vista, ciertos derechos se derivan de Dios o la Naturaleza”-Wikipedia
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: Ya sea secular, religioso, político o apolítico, se supone que la gente tienen derechos, sin embargo hoy en día el término “derechos” se atribuye a las corporaciones, que no son seres humanos.
La palabra “derecho” era de alguna manera, ha sido secuestrada por los “chicos malos” – aquellos que se ven como “buenos” por el mérito de ser más poderoso que todos los demás. En un principio, sino en una medida hasta esta fecha, la palabra correcta se asoció sobre todo con leyes que protegen al público de los que tienen demasiado poder. Frases como “titular de los derechos” probablemente diluyen la palabra “derecho” de la misma manera que la palabra “abierto” ha sido mal usada en muchos aspectos (hemos cubierto esto mucho en el pasado). Uno podría argumentar que la palabra “libre” llegó a significar barato y “libertad” ahora significa desregulación (es decir, más poder a los que ya están en el poder), así que cuando el Dr. Richard Stallman me dijo que el nombre de “Techrights” no sería inteligente – argumentando que “los derechos” es un término cargado – Me fui con ese nombre de todos modos. Ese nombre fue propuesto por nuestro servidor web, Tracy. Por cierto, Stallman estará en un futuro episodio de TechBytes, tan pronto como tenemos todo resuelto. El tema de la celebración de consultas sobre el nombre puede ser llevado hasta allí.
“Las empresas no tienen derechos, la gente sí.”Las patentes a veces se dice que caen dentro de los “derechos de propiedad intelectual” (DPI), lo que es gracioso, porque un sitio con “derechos” en su nombre en realidad va en contra de muchos de los llamados derechos, alegando en cambio, que es el derecho de los inventores a hacer su trabajo sin necesidad de leer las solicitudes de patentes y el derecho de los ciudadanos en todas partes no pagar el impuesto a empresas de otros países que no tienen nada que ofrecer que no sea en realidad un trozo de papel. Lo que encontramos en algunos de los bytes de sonido que contiene los “derechos” en ellos es que, así como la “libertad” llegó a significar la desregulación (por ejemplo, “libre mercado”), y los derechos llegó a significar algo que en realidad perjudica a los derechos reales de los ciudadanos. Es todo hablar PR – Relaciones Públicas -y tenemos que recuperar nuestro vocabulario, aunque el camino es un poco abrasivo. Las empresas no tienen derechos, que la gente sí. █
Traducción hecha por Eduardo Landaveri, Administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
ES: Las Patentes de Software Detienen el Progreso, lo Muestra James E. Bessen de la Universidad de Boston
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: Otra investigación más demuestra lo que siempre estamos viendo – que las patentes de software son una aporte negativa y ahora hay más pruebas que Apple aumenta su extorsión sobre Android (Linux).
Mientras que los grupos como la OIN usa las patentes de software para luchar contra el uso de otras patentes de software[http://www.unixmen.com/software/1789-oin-a-patent-pool-to-protect-linux-users-from-lawsuits] (la lucha de fuego contra fuego, confundiendo a la gente sobre el problema es uno de “calidad”[http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=cfa47bfe-e244-4345-92fc-dd10db9a6bdd]) grupos como la FFII(Fundación para una Infraestructura de Información Libre), nosotros mismos, la FSFE (Fundación Europea de Software Libre), y la FSF (Free Software Fundación) trabajan duro para convencer a la gente de la necesidad de que las patentes de software como un todo tienen que ser abolidas. James E. Bessen, de la Universidad de Boston (cerca de la FSF), ha publicado este artículo académico[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1868979##] cuyo resumen dice:
Este informe examina los cambios en el comportamiento de las patentes de la industria del software desde la década de 1990. Se observa que la mayoría de las empresas de software siguen sin patentes, la mayoría de las patentes de software son obtenidas por unas pocas grandes empresas en la industria del software o en otras industrias, y el riesgo de litigios de patentes de software sigue creciendo de forma espectacular. Dados estos resultados, es difícil concluir que las patentes de software hayan proporcionado un beneficio neto social en la industria del software.
También se puede encontrar aquí[http://www.bu.edu/law/faculty/scholarship/workingpapers/Bessen-Generation-Software-Patents.html] y en otros lugares. Carlo Piana dice[http://twitter.com/carlopiana/statuses/84169219897425921]:
Bessen: estudio sobre # swpats muestran un beneficio para los bolsillos profundos y abogados, no SWindustry o la sociedad.
Él también dice[http://twitter.com/carlopiana/statuses/84170937733353472]:
Por supuesto que no necesitamos ningún estudio para observar cómo las #swpats son inútiles y malas #. Sin embargo, es tranquilizador tener pruebas y números lo respaldan
Piana llegó a decir que la única solución es abolir las patentes de software. Él es aparentemente asociados con la FSFE y representó al equipo de Samba en su caso contra Microsoft, que abusa de patentes en este campo (aún lo hace).
El ex jefe de la FFII resume el papel[http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/06/23/1742209/A-Generation-of-Software-Patents-Examined?utm_source=slashdot&utm_medium=twitter] al escribir:
“James Bessen de la Universidad de Boston ha publicado un estudio de referencia [resumen, texto completo disponible en el enlace, de forma gratuita] en una generación de patentes de software. En cuanto a casi 20 años de las patentes de software, se encuentra “la mayoría de empresas del software todavía no las patenta, la mayoría de las patentes de software son obtenidas por unas pocas grandes empresas en la industria del software o en otras industrias, y el riesgo de litigios de patentes de software continúa aumentar de forma espectacular. Dados estos resultados, es difícil concluir que las patentes de software han proporcionado un beneficio social neto en la industria del software. Hecho “que no sorprende a nadie en actualidad innovando en software.”
El actual jefe de la FFII cita al autor[http://twitter.com/zoobab/statuses/84193092361658368] diciendo que “es difícil concluir que las patentes de software han proporcionado un beneficio neto social en la industria del software”
Apple es por su parte cada vez más de un agresor de patentes[http://www.muktware.com/news/24/2011/1508] contra Linux (esto comenzó el año pasado[http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Apple_vs_HTC]):
El Bully de Apple en Cupertino ha presentado una demanda de patentes contra Samsung en Corea del Sur.
No sólo Microsoft está en una posición de tratar de destruir a Linux. Es una plataforma demasiado bueno para construir un sistema operativo a (WebOS, Android, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, etcétera). Apple y Microsoft no pueden competir. █
Traducción hecha por Eduardo Landaveri, Administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
Translation produced by Eduardo Landaveri, the administrator of the Spanish portal of Techrights.
06.27.11
Software Patents Face New Challenges as FTC Notified, Bilski Case Invoked, and Re-examinations Carried Out
Summary: Another look at the complaint against MPEG-LA, Oracle’s case against Google’s Android, and Paul Allen’s case against the world
The fight against aggression with software patents is met with some early success, but it is premature to declare victory before final judgments. Moreover, addressing the problem on a patent-by-patent basis would be inefficient and almost impractical.
Patents are hurting standards and the FTC is being informed of that by the good folks behind Ogg (EN | ES).
It was not so long ago that there was federal intervention following bad practices with patents from Rambus, as we explained at the time [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. For the patent holder/s it is great to have standards which virtually force everyone to pay a tax, but for everyone else it is unfair, unreasonable, and discriminatory.
According to Patently-O (a pro-patents blog), it is possible that more resistance to software patents will soon need to come. To quote their conclusion:
That Federal Circut decision was based on the court’s machine-or-transformation test that was subsequently discredited by the Supreme Court in Bilski v. Kappos (2010). In the wake of its Bilski decision, the Supreme Court vacated the Federal Circuit’s Prometheus decision and remanded for a new opinion. On remand, the Federal Circuit again affirmed that the Prometheus claims are eligilble for patent protection.
The Bilski test or Bilski case keep coming up on occasions and sometimes they become a successful basis for invaliding patents that reach the courtroom. But a step further is needed. Anything short of elimination of all software patents would simply leave Free software in a dubious state, or a state where only a subset of it is approved for use (but not for redistribution). Right now even Java, despite being Free software (supposed to be GPLv2, not v3), is under a patent attack from Oracle. Since Google is willing to go quite far and challenge the allegations, Oracle’s patents (that it bought from Sun) are almost deemed unenforceable (if they become invalid, which is increasingly likely). To quote:
Oracle’s Java infringement case against Google isn’t going exceptionally well for the database giant these days, with another setback delivered by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in the form of a patent reexamination this week.
Historically, things haven’t been rosy for Oracle since their August 2010 lawsuit was launched, accusing Google of infringing on Oracle’s Java software.
Oracle acquired Sun Microsystems’ Java technology when it bought the company in 2010. Instead of licensing Java from Oracle to use in Android, Google developed a “clean room” version of the Java virtual machine, Dalvik, for Android instead. Oracle says that Dalvik deliberately infringes on Java anyway, despite efforts to build Dalvik from scratch.
Another case against Google et al., this one from Microsoft’s co-founder, is weakening. Groklaw reveals that:
In a judicious (pun intended) move, the court has considered the motion for stay filed by the defendants seeking to stay the trial until after the USPTO completes the reexaminations of the Interval patents. Despite Interval’s opposition to this motion, the court has granted the stay [PDF], and the trial will now await the outcome of the USPTO determinations.
So here we have another case where upon filing a lawsuit, the patents in question get challenged and perhaps, just hopefully, they might be declared invalid and the lawsuit which is hinged on them get tossed out.
In its patent extortion escapades, Microsoft (or Apple) typically goes around suing small companies or mere distributors that have little incentive — unlike Google — to go ahead and invalidate patents — a tedious and expensive process. █
What Attachmate Does (or Does Not Do) With OpenSUSE, SCO Case
Summary: A look at what Attachmate does with Novell’s side affairs having passed software patents to Microsoft (via CPTN)
ONE THING we keep reminding readers is that Attachmate, a proponent of proprietary software and prominent Microsoft partner, neglects Novell after it gave Microsoft the patents and did almost nothing to utilise Novell’s assets. As an aside, the OpenSUSE project is still very quiet for known reasons, with the exception of cyclical posts like People of OpenSUSE, milestone announcements (very low-profile these days), Weekly News (latest), and flash-player alerts (because Adobe’s software is shoddy). The Mono trap which is banshee (patent-encumbered) is still spreading through OpenSUSE (one of the first distributions to adopt it, if not the first) and we cannot help wondering what the future has in store. Novell is no longer around and Attachmate distanced itself from this project, on which it still has trademarks. Attachmate in general is a very mysterious entity with mysterious funding sources [1, 2, 3].
Groklaw‘s PJ (Pamela Jones) is still around; she is watching Novell’s case against SCO — a case which Attachmate has not halted based on this assessment. It is interesting that, as far as we know, no interviewer has yet asked Attachmate about the court cases against Microsoft and SCO. Attachmate has made no statement about it either, just as it hardly names OpenSUSE or makes a plan for another SLE* release (maybe 12 would be expected, as SLE* 11 contains old packages).
Novell managers are continuing to flee while Attachmate puts its own people in charge. Latest example:
Enterprise software supplier Attachmate has announced the appointment of Norman Rohde as Vice President of Sales for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. Attachmate specializes in software solutions for terminal emulation, legacy modernization, managed file transfer, and enterprise fraud management.
Considering news like this, what are the chances that Attachmate will stick to Novell’s strategy with court cases and OpenSUSE? We will definitely keep an eye open. █
Anticompetitive Remote Kill Switches for Microsoft Xbox
Summary: Red flags in Microsoft’s DRM-encumbered hardware, this time with prospects of (mis)using DMCA laws
There is not so much to say about the Xbox family of products anymore. The founders have all left Microsoft (last one to leave did so recently) and the rivals are doing a lot better, even in the United States.
Last year Microsoft started attacking companies that essentially complemented Xbox360 [1, 2, 3]. It is always a bad sign when a company sues in an attempt to salvage some profit, not at all minding the impact on public opinion.
Ars Technica now asks,”[c]an Microsoft use the DMCA to kill competing Xbox 360 accessories?”
Can Microsoft remotely disable third-party accessories from working with the Xbox 360 and get away with it?
The Redmond, Washington software- and console-maker did just that, and claims copyright law gave it the right. At issue is Microsoft’s 2009 remote disabling of Datel memory cards, which prompted an antitrust lawsuit that lives on today—litigation that has morphed into the latest test of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
The 1998 DMCA makes it a crime or civil violation to offer a product or service that circumvents a technological measure designed to protect copyrighted material.
Consoles are essentially a single-purpose computer whose sole purpose is to run games (and there is DRM to enforce this restriction). Kill switches on such consoles is a subject we explored here before. This whole trend helps rationalise the need for software freedom. █
Rights Versus Freedoms
“According to some views, certain rights derive from God or Nature” –Wikipedia
Summary: Whether secular of religious, political or apolitical, people are assumed to have rights, however nowadays the term “rights” is ascribed to corporations, which are not humans
The word “right” was in some way hijacked by the “bad guys” — those who see themselves as being “right” by merit of being more powerful than everyone else. Originally, but to an extent to this date, the word right was mostly associated with laws that protect the public from those with too much power. Phrases like “rights holder” probably diluted the word “right” in the same way that the word “open” got misused in many ways (we covered this a lot in the past). One might argue that the word “free” came to mean inexpensive and “freedom” now means deregulation (i.e. more power to those already in power), so when Dr. Richard Stallman told me that the name “Techrights” would not be clever — arguing that “rights” is a loaded term — I went with that name anyway. That name was actually proposed by our Web host, Tracy. By the way, Stallman will be on a future episode of TechBytes, as soon as we get everything sorted out. The subject of consultation regarding name can be brought up there.
“Companies do not have rights, people do.”Patents are sometimes said to fall under “intellectual property rights” (IPR), which is funny because a site with “rights”in its name actually goes against many of those so-called ‘rights’, alleging instead that it is the right of inventors to do their work without reading patent applications and the right of citizens everywhere not to pay tax to companies in other countries that had nothing to actually offer other than pieces of paper. What we find in some of those sound bytes that contain “rights” in them is that just as “freedom” came to mean deregulation (e.g. “free market”), rights came to mean something that actually harms real rights of citizens. It’s all PR-speak and we need to take back our vocabulary, even if the path there is a tad abrasive. Companies do not have rights, people do. █
Government of India Increasingly Groks GNU/Linux
Summary: GNU/Linux-friendly policies from the Indian government and some encouraging news from Kerala, as well as the Indian education sector which increasingly adopts Free software
ECHRIGHTS is proud to have friends in India*, who continue to teach the West all about the importance of freedom which India not always had. On a separate note, my colleagues from India sure show the way forward in technology, by increasingly adopting knowledge from other countries, refining it, and putting it out there for others to build upon. The country recognises the fact that for excellence in the sciences, knowledge must be shared, not monopolised, and as pointed out by Mark (in IRC) last week, the West’s attempts to put lot of patents inside India — as we covered repeatedly some years ago — is a miserable last effort to keep a foothold despite all the debt (historically, the West used debt to enslave other countries, only to more recently become a principal borrower from countries like China).
“When it comes to Free software adoption, India is doing pretty well.”A long time ago we leaked a document that showed how Europe wanted to harm India, using a treaty involving intellectual monopolies. It is clearly in the interests of large European businesses (not the same as European people). This is not acceptable from the point of view of Indians, who are merely pawns in this battle. If their politicians abandon their voters and choose the path of greed instead, then atrocious treaties like this one too can be signed, acting as a waiver against Indian leadership.
When it comes to Free software adoption, India is doing pretty well. Quite often we include links in this site about GNU/Linux preinstalls in India, even the increased usage there (a new low-cost tablet is coming from India fairly soon, and it only runs Linux). Despite the fact that Microsoft turns a blind eye to counterfeiting in place like India (Microsoft prefers counterfeiting to GNU/Linux), at the government level we have been seeing a lot of support (at least on paper) for Free software, open standards like ODF, and occasionally hostility towards RAND (uniform fee on vital ideas/access) and software patents. On a relative scale, India may not have so much influence on world powers, but it sure nudges other countries in the right direction. Maybe more leaders will become humble through realisation of the impact on their neighbours in the East (there is already a moral awakening to the mistreatment of labour force in China, for example).
To illustrate just how much ahead India has come policy-wise, consider this reference.document available at eGov Standards (a government site) [PDF]. It s a “FOSS friendly one,” argued the person who sent the pointer and indeed, based on a cursory look, this draft is full of references to GNU/Linux and Open Source.
According to this article which we found this morning (“Free or open source for students?”), Kerala has completed a moved to GNU/Linux in education, The wording seems to suggest a complete abandonment of Microsoft Windows. Surely it may take another generation or two for this fundamental change to have a major effect, but it’s a big step in the right direction.
Recent discussions on which software package to be incorporated in the free laptops to be distributed to students this year in Tamil Nadu have highlighted the attempts across the country to promote the use of Free and Open Source Software in education and other fields.
That’s the opening of the article. Kerala is somewhat of a leader in this regard, but it is not alone really. In fact, the hope is that the policy set in Kerala will spread to more regions, even outside of India. Many eyes will be put on Kerala which serves as a bit of a case study when it comes to going into Free software at schools. Microsoft did try to intervene against this [1, 2, 3], but evidently Microsoft failed.
____
* In 2008, for instance, our Indian followers organised a Boycott Novell protest, amongst others.
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
