05.12.13
Posted in Free/Libre Software, Microsoft at 11:24 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Let us tell you about FOSS…”
Summary: Microsoft FUD by proxy; or, how the old claims that FOSS is complex and dangerous are now coming from firms created by people from Microsoft Corp.
The other day we mentioned OpenLogic, which had most recently played a role in a wave of claims that FOSS is where high risk exists. This two-part [1, 2] FUD piece from Jilayne Lovejoy (from OpenLogic at the company’s own site) is yet more of the same. Behind the company we have one man, a man who came from Microsoft. Coincidence?
“Behind the company we have one man, a man who came from Microsoft.”As Alex Woodie (pro-Linux) helps remind us, proprietary software is where dangers lie, not FOSS. To quote his article: “Enterprises shouldn’t be surprised to discover they’re having trouble understanding their enterprise licensing agreements. While Oracle, SAP and other big players publicly tout transparency and fairness in their licensing and pricing policies, customers often disagree when they get to the bargaining table or open the results of an audit.
“Oracle and SAP are in unique positions as the two biggest and most respected enterprise software companies in the world. Combined, they account for more than 40 per cent of the worldwide ERP market. No other enterprise software vendors offer software lineups that are as broad and deep as those of Oracle and SAP.”
Be wary of Microsoft FUD campaigns that portray FOSS licences as complex and dangerous. It is reality distortion, just like the manufactured anti-Google smears. Consider some of the other new Microsoft FUD, portraying online office suites as bad even though Microsoft too is going in that direction (Microsoft is behind). As AOL put it: “After Bing and its Scroogled campaign, Microsoft is now taking aim at Google Docs. Jake Zborowski, Microsoft’s senior product manager for Office, actually published two anti-Docs blog posts today: one homes in on document fidelity, and the other, which includes a number of user testimonials, argues that Google Docs isn’t quite ready for primetime.”
“Over a decade ago Microsoft released many whitepapers demonising FOSS for licensing risk. It got chastised for it.”What about Office 360? That pile of garbage cannot even stay online, let alone process documents reliably and deal with formatting correctly. To Microsoft, the hypocrisy matters not.
Over a decade ago Microsoft released many whitepapers demonising FOSS for licensing risk. It got chastised for it. There was blowback. Now Microsoft has partners like Black Duck absorbing the flames and making those same old claims seem more legitimate.
Let us mention again the caution needed when dealing with Coverity. The company is not a proxy, but output was “initiated between Coverity and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2006 and is now managed by Coverity.”
Well, where is Coverity’s own code? The matter of fact is, one has to be careful legitimising voices whose interests are not clear. Sometimes these proprietary software companies make business out of fear — a fear of FOSS driven by hyped-up articles that alter perceptions. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents, TomTom at 11:06 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
In Soviet Russia, only Microsoft ever gets sued
Summary: Misleading article helps portray the aggressor as a negotiator, using patently false claims that are easily disprovable
The notion of SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) is well understood in the legal world. If the cost of defending oneself in court is higher than the cost of settlement and the outcome at the court is not so crucial (e.g. if you make Android devices but not Android itself), then the legal system can be perturbed and radically manipulated. It enables people in suits to call ‘business’ what really is the direct equivalent of the Mafia demanding ‘protection’ money from local shops. It’s akin to what some label “financial terrorism”, evoking particular detrimental behaviour through economic strangulations.
“It enables people in suit to call ‘business’ what really is the direct equivalent of the Mafia demanding ‘protection’ money from local shops.”Matt Asay, whom we sometimes refer to as Mac Asay for his advocacy of Apple products and Microsoft apologism*, has this article titled “Microsoft’s Mobile Patent Strategy: Threaten, Don’t Sue” (untrue, see TomTom and others, as it was definitely neither the first nor last). The article comes from a site formerly (until very recently) managed by an inflammatory anti-Linux man.
SLAPP tactics are not taken into account by Mr. Asay, so his hypothesis is misleading. It makes Microsoft look quite soft. Asay cites this article from many years ago and says “Microsoft has never been one to sue. In its long history, the company has only taken someone to court a small handful of times, and itself has had to pay out more than $9 billion in damages. Perhaps because of how hard Microsoft has been spanked by the courts, it has taken a different tactic with Google Android.”
This is nonsense. Microsoft sued plenty of times. We covered many examples.
“As reported by Reuters,” he continues, “Microsoft now makes far more on Android patent royalties than it does on its own Windows Phone OS. (For some this might make Microsoft a patent troll, but we’ll leave that for a separate blog post.) In fact, by some estimates Microsoft will clear $3.4 billion in Android royalty fees in 2013, and is on pace to top $8.8 billion within the next few years.”
“Truthfully, given Microsoft’s business practices, it deserves no real opportunity in mobile devices and its executives should be trailed for racketeering, among other abuses.”No evidence for that, as we noted the other day. These are mere guesses and FUD that Microsoft just loves printed/echoed in the media (it leads to intimidation against Android adoption by companies). There are numerous other issues with Asay’s article. He doesn’t use facts properly. But it it is easy to agree with his closing words: “It’s time to give Microsoft the chance to prove itself in mobile, too, rather than collect fees on others’ hard work.”
Truthfully, given Microsoft’s business practices, it deserves no real opportunity in mobile devices and its executives should be trailed for racketeering, among other abuses.
Gutierrez, Smith and other top lawyers, even Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates to some degree, are behind the racketeering. There is a law against racketeering and it should be put to use at long last. It was put there for a reason. █
____
* Asay, a former Novell employee, routinely communicates with Microsoft employees and he was also interviewed for a job at Microsoft at one point, later letting the company intrude the FOSS world via OSBC, OSI, etc.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in IBM, Patents, Red Hat at 10:43 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
The Simpson family as they first appeared in The Tracey Ullman Show. (via Wikipedia)
Summary: Revisiting the stance of FOSS proponents on software patents and patent trolls; Mozilla, IBM, Red Hat, and Nokia (also before Microsoft takeover) discussed
A former (maybe present, still) Microsoft booster, Nancy Gohring, writes about the former chief of innovation at Mozilla. She makes Mozilla look bad by describing former staff as though it is still tied to Mozilla. She writes: “Todd Simpson, formerly chief of innovation at Mozilla, just made an intriguing job change. From working at the community-driven organization on open source projects, Simpson has joined InterDigital, a company commonly accused of being a patent troll.”
Mr. Simpson lacks ethics. The company he joined is unethical and he should have known this. InterDigital was already covered here under posts such as [1, 2, 3]. Mozilla itself is unequivocally against software patents, so why do this type of demonisation by attribution to Mozilla in the headline? Here are some relevant articles we published:
You want to pick on a FOSS proponent which is strongly in favour of software patents? Then pick on IBM. The company’s staff has been trying to shift the debate to trolls, replacing legitimate grassroots movements with corporate-controlled agenda that dilutes efforts and weakens real progress (the way USAID, for example, does it). Watch the following new statement: “Software is thriving and highly innovative – do not eliminate patents for software, instead address those that abuse them”
“You want to pick on a FOSS proponent which is strongly in favour of software patents? Then pick on IBM.”Who said it? The Chief Patent Counsel of IBM (we mentioned similar statements from him before). So this rogue policy comes from the very top, still. Chastise IBM, not Mozilla. As for Red Hat, which is a close ally of IBM, it manages to keep a mind of its own. The other day its CEO said: “I think I speak for the entire software industry that software patents are a bad thing. The entire software industry has been aggressively promoting a position that says software shouldn’t be patentable. It gets tied up with, obviously, the pharmaceutical industry, which believes patents are necessary to drive innovation in pharmaceuticals, and it continues to go around and around and we make some progress here and there. Hopefully it gets solved someday, but I don’t think we’re close to it.”
Lastly, former Linux proponent Nokia has been a strange animal for a long time, promoting both software patents and Linux at a later stage (along with FOSS). After Microsoft had taken over things, Nokia started feeding trolls more than before (Nokia’s use of MPEG-LA against Ogg involved staff that had come from Microsoft to Nokia about half a decade ago) and not much has changed on the patents front. An excellent new article (no longer behind paywall) says: “Of course, Google already knows if Nokia was the mysterious twelfth member of the defunct MPEG LA patent pool, and, if it was, then Google has known about its patents for quite some time. But either way, nothing stops any other company from springing a similar attack on VP8 or any other codec. In the battle to make VP8 an MTI standard in any web specification, the parties that benefit from license sales of rival codecs have no incentive to cooperate. That goes for H.264 as well as for the next generation, and it is not merely a hypothetical problem. Apple’s Maciej Stachowiak has already voiced his objection to making VP8 an MTI standard in HTML5. The agreement between MPEG LA and Google has smoothed over the issue of VP8′s patent status, but it cannot perfectly resolve it, simply because nothing can.”
We covered this before, back when it was news. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 10:24 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Software patents may be imported by the United Kingdom (UK) via the Unitary Patent
Summary: The UK is modifying its law to accommodate takeover of national interests by foreign interests which may usher in software patents among other nasty elements of protectionism (primarily exported by multinational corporations from across the Atlantic ocean)
Treaties and so-called ‘free’ trade agreements are an effective tool for large-scale policy laundering. EU economies have been hurt by such deals that serve the super-rich (heads of corporations) at the expense of everyone else. It’s time to do something about it. Activism is desperately needed.
The German government has spoken out against the EPO's disregard of the law. Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (of APRIL, based in France), who has been watching software patents in Europe, says “the only beneficiary from #UnitaryPatent and #UPC is the #PatentMicrocosm” which of course includes the EPO. The patent lawyers are a parasitical element which impedes innovation and taxes everything.
“EU economies have been hurt by such deals that serve the super-rich (heads of corporations) at the expense of everyone else.”What we need is for people to start speaking out against the parasites, that’s all. Citing this article, “Danes may well have a referendum on the European Unitary Patent Court as it’s been judged as giving up sovereignty,” writes Loz Kaye, Leader of Pirate Party UK. Here in the UK, a new bill is being passed and a fellow Brit, Dr. Glyn Moody, cites the Open Rights Group while showing (in his own words) “New powers to enable the UK to implement the Unitary Patent Court Agreement” (not just in the UK, either).
Unless people know that this is happening, activists remain weak in opposing these moves. We must really do more to drive away the Unitary Patent as an initiative or even a concept/idea (it keeps coming up with different names/brands). It is not even constitutional, some argue (in previous incarnations when it was known as Community Patent), or simply adverse to the treaty upon which the continental union is based.
Opposing patent law is not illegal; it’s not even qualifying as civil disobedience, not yet anyway. Patents are all about protectionism; the less of them we have, the less power those already in power (and their assistants) will have. In a world where consensus or public opinion endorses software patents it will be harder to reform the system; right now the issue is mostly compartmentalised (in the US). At the very least we should keep it compartmentalised (i.e. prevent it from expanding/spreading) and ideally we should work to reform the misaligned compartment (USPTO) with its cross-border lobbies. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in America, Law, Patents at 11:29 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The collection of opinions from notable figures and sources that analysed the CAFC decision regarding a software patent in the US
Excessive optimism in NZ will do not good for the cause of software patents elimination. Software patents have been weakened in NZ, but they are not dead. The same is true for EU. Loopholes remain, and they remain by design.
A couple of days ago we mentioned the CAFC (US) ruling/s, noting that it helps legitimise the status quo because mixed messages are sent, offering no decent clarity. It was a missed opportunity. CAFC was not only lobbied by multinational corporations but also front groups like the Business Software Alliance (BSA), which is funded by Microsoft for lobbying (for software patents of course). Here is the original ruling/s [PDF] (text version here). Grant Gross wrote in IDG that the ruling/s could be the end of software patents. It could, but won’t. “The case generated briefs from Google, Facebook, Newegg and software trade group BSA, with some tech companies arguing the Alice patents should be invalid,” he writes. And based on this report, perhaps the headline in particular, Nicolas Charbonnier wrote: “Most Apple and Microsoft patents are hereby invalidated and worthless. Have a nice day.”
The article from Groklaw was more in-depth than most and it transcribed /extracted the content of the PDF, making it more accessible and searchable. Pamela Jones wrote: “I remember the first time we wrote on Groklaw that software and patents need to get a divorce. Remember? So long ago, and how everybody laughed at us. I remember that too. I am thinking about Apple and Microsoft and all the software patent bullies. Well, let’s not get ahead of ourselves.”
Restrained optimism is better than excessive optimism, but let’s survey some other optimists. Jones wrote by citation/blockquote, attributing Moore: “Let’s be clear: if all of these claims, including the system claims, are not patent-eligible, this case is the death of hundreds of thousands of patents, including all business method, financial system, and software patents as well as many computer implemented and telecommunications patents” (that is why it’s such a big case).
Brian J. Love, a Law Professor at Santa Clara University, said: “Ultimate analysis of CLS Bank: Back where we started, in that panel draw still determines who wins 101 appeals in software cases.”
Poul-Henning Kamp, “Author of a lot of FreeBSD, most of Varnish and tons of other Open Source Software” (to use his own description of himself), said it “Looks a lot like the end of pure software patents to me” (source).
The Oregonian correctly pointed out that the court was split on the issue. To quote: “The nation’s top patent court issued a deeply divided opinion Friday on how to determine whether software is eligible for legal protection, reflecting the broader debate that has split the computer industry.
“The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, which handles all patent appeals, issued a 135-page decision by 10 circuit judges that included five viewpoints and “additional reflections” from Chief Judge Randall Rader.”
AOL said that the “Federal Circuit Rules Software Invention Unpatentable” and this is inaccurate if applied to the whole, in generality. This gives false expectation that something will happen despite there being no major change.
The bottom line is, as the EFF points out, patentability of software needs to be addressed by the SCOTUS again. The decision there needs to be less than a two-way tie this time around. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Asia, Free/Libre Software, Microsoft at 11:17 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Microsoft customer, not by his own choice (AICTE’s choice)
Summary: Weakening of a Microsoft pact after intervention by freedom-respecting software advocates in India and abroad
THE latest sellout by AICTE was covered here earlier, not before some readers from India sent yours truly links and asked for coverage (the international press totally ignored it). The subject of it, as introduced by Muktware, is total Microsoft lock-in in colleges. Total. Surveillance included. As one man of Indian descent put it: “It seems that the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) has finally rediscovered its wisdom. AICTE is the prime decision-making national-level council that takes care of technical education in India. It accredits postgraduate and graduate programs under specific categories at Indian institutions as per its charter. You can judge its importance from the fact that some of the top Indian universities/colleges like NITs and IIITs are affiliated with AICTE.”
The original announcement came from “Bhuvan Krishna, General Secretary, Free Software Movement of India (FSMI), [who] announced on the FOSSCOM mailing list that AICTE has finally agreed to remove the the mandatory clause from the notice on implementing Office365. The decision comes in light of concerns raised by some eminent politicians, free software supporters and people from the academia.” (source).
To quote the original: “We understand that the AICTE has now agreed and is removing the mandatory clause from the notice. We welcome this decision. However, we demand that AICTE should revise the decision of using Office-365 totally, as it is not in the interest of the students, institutions and colleges. AICTE as a public funded body should not engage in supporting proprietary systems.”
This move is not ideal, but it is a step in the right direction as it permits keeping/using Free software, unlike the deal is written before (prior to revision). This whole thing is still EDGI and should be treated formally as abuse. As we explained before, a software-savvy nation like India, its education sector in particular, hardly needs Microsoft. Moreover, it is against national interests, with or without Microsoft bribes. Even NASA dumps Windows, which ought to tell everyone just how bad Microsoft’s products are from a technical perspective. As one of us (from the US, a former Microsoft MVP) put it: “According to an article at ExtremeTech, NASA has given Microsoft Windows the boot out of the nearest airlock that it should have gotten a long time ago.
“According to the article, dozens of laptops aboard the space station will be purged of their Windows infestations and transitioned over to the more reliable Debian GNU/Linux.”
The Telegraph says: “Computers aboard the International Space Station are to be switched from Windows XP to the Linux operating system in an attempt to improve stability and reliability.”
Here is some more coverage. There is a lot more in a bulk of links in our daily links. This utterly embarrassing new display of Windows error messages in an elevator helps remind us why NASA cannot afford Windows, irrespective of cost. If US government agencies reject Microsoft, why don’t Indian government agencies? Amid bribery investigations against Microsoft it is plausible to suggest Microsoft might be bribing — one way another — the officials involved. Every Free software advocate in India should call for a federal investigation; AICTE should be probed to see why it put forth the outrageous deal to begin with. That deal is not totally dead yet. █
“I’ve been thinking long and hard about this, and the only conclusion I can come to is that this is ethically indistinguishable from bribery.”
–Former Microsoft manager
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in IRC Logs at 6:02 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
IRC Proceedings: May 5th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 6th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 7th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 8th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 9th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 10th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 11th, 2013
Enter the IRC channels now
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in IRC Logs at 5:22 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
IRC Proceedings: April 28th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: April 29th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: April 30th, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 1st, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 2nd, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 3rd, 2013
IRC Proceedings: May 4th, 2013
Enter the IRC channels now
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
Further Recent Posts
- Europe Should Listen to SMEs Regarding the UPC, as Battistelli, Team UPC and the Select Committee Lie About It
Another example of UPC promotion from within the EPO (a committee dedicated to UPC promotion), in spite of everything we know about opposition to the UPC from small businesses (not the imaginary ones which Team UPC claims to speak 'on behalf' of)
- Video: French State Secretary for Digital Economy Speaks Out Against Benoît Battistelli at Battistelli's PR Event
Uploaded by SUEPO earlier today was the above video, which shows how last year's party (actually 2015) was spoiled for Battistelli by the French State Secretary for Digital Economy, Axelle Lemaire, echoing the French government's concern about union busting etc. at the EPO (only to be rudely censored by Battistelli's 'media partner')
- When EPO Vice-President, Who Will Resign Soon, Made a Mockery of the EPO
Leaked letter from Willy Minnoye/management to the people who are supposed to oversee EPO management
- No Separation of Powers or Justice at the EPO: Reign of Terror by Battistelli Explained in Letter to the Administrative Council
In violation of international labour laws, Team Battistelli marches on and engages in a union-busting race against the clock, relying on immunity to keep this gravy train rolling before an inevitable crash
- FFPE-EPO is a Zombie (if Not Dead) Yellow Union Whose Only de Facto Purpose Has Been Attacking the EPO's Staff Union
A new year's reminder that the EPO has only one legitimate union, the Staff Union of the EPO (SUEPO), whereas FFPE-EPO serves virtually no purpose other than to attack SUEPO, more so after signing a deal with the devil (Battistelli)
- EPO Select Committee is Wrong About the Unitary Patent (UPC)
The UPC is neither desirable nor practical, especially now that the EPO lowers patent quality; but does the Select Committee understand that?
- Links 1/1/2017: KDE Plasma 5.9 Coming, PelicanHPC 4.1
Links for the day
- 2016: The Year EPO Staff Went on Strike, Possibly “Biggest Ever Strike in the History of the EPO.”
A look back at a key event inside the EPO, which marked somewhat of a breaking point for Team Battistelli
- Open EPO Letter Bemoans Battistelli's Antisocial Autocracy Disguised/Camouflaged Under the Misleading Term “Social Democracy”
Orwellian misuse of terms by the EPO, which keeps using the term "social democracy" whilst actually pushing further and further towards a totalitarian regime led by 'King' Battistelli
- EPO's Central Staff Committee Complains About Battistelli's Bodyguards Fetish and Corruption of the Media
Even the EPO's Central Staff Committee (not SUEPO) understands that Battistelli brings waste and disgrace to the Office
- Translation of French Texts About Battistelli and His Awful Perception of Omnipotence
The paradigm of totalitarian control, inability to admit mistakes and tendency to lie all the time is backfiring on the EPO rather than making it stronger
- 2016 in Review and Plans for 2017
A look back and a quick look at the road ahead, as 2016 comes to an end
- Links 31/12/2016: Firefox 52 Improves Privacy, Tizen Comes to Middle East
Links for the day
- Korea's Challenge of Abusive Patents, China's Race to the Bottom, and the United States' Gradual Improvement
An outline of recent stories about patents, where patent quality is key, reflecting upon the population's interests rather than the interests of few very powerful corporations
- German Justice Minister Heiko Maas, Who Flagrantly Ignores Serious EPO Abuses, Helps Battistelli's Agenda ('Reform') With the UPC
The role played by Heiko Maas in the UPC, which would harm businesses and people all across Europe, is becoming clearer and hence his motivation/desire to keep Team Battistelli in tact, in spite of endless abuses on German soil
- Links 30/12/2016: KDE for FreeBSD, Automotive Grade Linux UCB 3.0
Links for the day
- Software Patents Continue to Collapse, But IBM, Watchtroll and David Kappos Continue to Deny and Antagonise It
The latest facts and figures about software patents, compared to the spinmeisters' creed which they profit from (because they are in the litigation business)
- 2016 Was a Terrible Year for Patent Trolls and 2017 Will Probably be a Lot Worse for Them
The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) is planning to weigh in on a case which will quite likely drive patent trolls out of the Eastern District of Texas, where all the courts that are notoriously friendly towards them reside
- Fitbit’s Decision to Drop Patent Case Against Jawbone Shows Decreased Potency of Abstract Patents, Not Jawbone’s Weakness
The scope of patents in the United States is rapidly tightening (meaning, fewer patents are deemed acceptable by the courts) and Fitbit’s patent case is the latest case to bite the dust
- The EPO Under Benoît Battistelli Makes the Mafia Look Like Rookies
Pretending there is a violent, physical threat that is imminent, Paranoid in Chief Benoît Battistelli is alleged to have pursued weapons on EPO premises
- Links 29/12/2016: OpenELEC 7.0, Android Wear 2.0 Smartwatches Coming
Links for the day
- Links 28/12/2016: OpenVPN 2.4, SeaMonkey 2.46
Links for the day
- Bad Service at the European Patent Office (EPO) Escalated in the Form of Complaints to European Authorities/Politicians
A look at actions taken at a political level against the EPO in spite of the EPO's truly awkward exemption from lawfulness or even minimal accountability
- No “New Life to Software Patents” in the US; That's Just Fiction Perpetuated by the Patent Microcosm
Selective emphasis on very few cases and neglect of various other dimensions help create a parallel reality (or so-called 'fake news') where software patents are on the rebound
- Links 27/12/2016: Chakra GNU/Linux Updated, Preview of Fedora 26
Links for the day
- Leaked: Letter to Quality Support (DQS) at the European Patent Office (EPO)
Example of abysmal service at the EPO, where high staff turnover and unreasonable pressure from above may be leading to communication issues that harm stakeholders the most
- Negative Publicity (Personal or by Association With the EPO) is Devouring the Institution
Willy Minnoye, Ciarán McGinley, Lionel Baranès, Theano Evangelou and others near the top of the EPO pyramid recalled in light of old news about them
- 2017 Will be the Year Team Battistelli Collapsed and EPO 'Reform' Became All About Detoxifying the Organisation
Battistelli's circle (or "Team Battistelli") is starting to disintegrate, perhaps in anticipation of a tough year full of new leaks ("WillyLeaks" as some put it)
- With the Demise of Software Patents and Likely Soon Patent Trolls (Based on SCOTUS), Trump Appointments Matter Even More
In light of Trump's awkward history with judges (e.g. attacking them) one can hope that upcoming patent cases at the highest court won't be affected by his pro-big corporations agenda
- Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Bilski Blog is Actually AGAINST Alice and Bilski, in Favour of Software Patents
Looking at some of the latest promotions of software patents in the US and where this is all coming from (and why)
Content is available under CC-BY-SA