Open Source Initiative Wastes Money on PR Agencies, Still Fronts for Microsoft
THE OSI in its current incarnation is a deeply rogue institution. It derives a lot of its budget (most of it!) from Microsoft and it lobbies for Microsoft a lot of the time. It actively helps the attack on copyleft, i.e. on software freedom. We showed a new example of this only days ago.
OK, so what's next?
Just got this new message from Cristin Connelly <cristin@cathey.co>, who seems totally unaware that I am a critic of the current OSI because the OSI is contracting its communications outwards. Who does Connelly work for?
OSI is named as a client:
The textual content of the message itself (actually, HTML page, not E-mail but misuse thereof) isn't nefarious or sinister, but it's worth noting that OSI "supporters" and "sponsors" are paying for bulk or mass-mails to people including me, who never subscribed to such a thing.
There is a moral/ethical question here. Does OSI support SPAM? Sorry, I mean, "email marketing..."
Here is the full message:
Open Source Initiative offers solution to loophole in SEP-R
Dear Roy: Talks are escalating about the European Commission’s proposed Standard Essential Patent (SEP) Regulation (SEP-R), and the Open Source Initiative—the not-for-profit organization tasked with maintaining and defending the open source definition—is concerned about one particular loophole in the regulation.
A blog was published today on this topic by Simon Phipps, Standards and EU Policy Director at the OSI. Here is a link for you to read it in its entirety: https://blog.opensource.org/fixing-a-gap-in-the-sep-regulation/
If you’re working on a story about SEP-R, the following quote may be attributed to Simon:
“The public registration system functions well…if patent owners use it. As it stands, late-registered patents remain as a viable control point for incumbents and NPEs (trolls) as a means to disregard the regulation’s collective pricing measures. This threatens the standards’ ability to create a fair market for both patent owners and licensees.
“The OSI is generally in support of the SEP-R and acknowledges improvements made by the EU based on public feedback. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t still room for improvement. The OSI goes beyond highlighting this loophole by offering a potential solution—recommending the legislation add a waiting period for patent claims registered under the regulation as standard-essential after the standard has been ratified.”
Simon will be representing the OSI at FOSDEM next week and is open to discussions on this topic should you be interested in setting up a meeting or call. Happy to help facilitate that with a reply to this email.
Thank you,
Cristin--
Cristin Connelly
cristin@cathey.co for the OSI
404.931.6752
The E-mail contains spying, such as the links https://cathey-dot-yamm-track.appspot.com/2jKRlnOuVdkfGCZemaO5vxnrsnWygbUzWFbGCekICIJpqul9hjQGnQX2feCQfo4efWVqDoBPaJoYwc46VdQcRS4G69jrksvj9YkS4439scUPBkr5B1BP4Dys6XSQGuOfhGUNo-159mmyKk82miBmOeiuIgZrZ651JsYqssBmkttkA and https://cathey-dot-yamm-track.appspot.com/2kFZ68v6EAh_QlHTbLLOPErygxX-5DuyBE9Z3M5pt8WBwul9hjQGnvOoPr22NBd9kgZJVgcSot-dSNlJB7SGBahskMw0BZd5HV-qCtbfLF8ixeq5Id-9s4yc2Ukz8sEy3wg10lbM1wrgn5G8DV5h8z_sPN1FcF78lZhHBqbIOgjzRRAA5CoBQ2Zmrcyu5gzxNENs0wub9t32yk-KjgyI (they track who is clicking what and when).
There is also a tracking image at the bottom. Looking at the source, it's designed to track and see if you merely view/open their E-mail.
Come on, OSI, who are you kidding? It's like you spend your budget sending spyware/malware to Free software proponents, in effect collecting data on what they are doing. █