06.29.11
IRC Proceedings: June 28th, 2011
|
|
|
|
ES: La Diferencia Entre el Chantaje Sistematizado de Microsoft contra Linux y el Chantaje Sistematizado en Contra de Linux de Oracle
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: El General Dynamics Itronix tratado de patentes descifrado; Oracle – a diferencia de Microsoft – toma la escandalosa denuncia Android contra Google, quien tiene buenas razones para dar la batalla, sino que también los nombra las patentes reales.
El último acuerdo de extorsión Microsoft acaba de ser anunciado y la cobertura de ello controlado hasta cierto punto. En lugar de prestar atención al éxito de Android/Linux[http://www.neowin.net/news/500000-android-device-activations-per-day] (“500.000 activaciones del dispositivo Android por día”), los propulsores de Microsoft intenta asociar Android con demandas por patentes, malware, etc Entre los dispositivos Android contaminados con impuestos de Microsoft, previamente eran Samsung, LG, HTC, y por suerte no el Nook, que a diferencia del Kindle (Amazon no, Android) es defendido por Barnes & Noble. Observe el patrón, sin embargo, los extorsionados se encuentran donde los EE.UU. empujan los tratados vergonzosos de patentes de software de alimentación forzada[http://techrights.org/2010/12/04/blackmail-for-swpats/].
Android Libre todavía está disponible de Sony, Motorola, Asus, Dell, Acer, Cisco, Archos, Toshiba, Sharp, y muchos más. Compañías/EMPRESAS QUE DEBEMOS EVITAR POR SUS PAGOS A Microsoft (por patentes desconocidas, presuntamente relacionados con Linux) son Novell / SUSE / Attachmate, Xandros, Turbolinux LG, Fuji Xerox, Brother, Melco, Samsung, Kyocera Mita, IO Data, y HTC. Bravamente -nos quitamos el sombrero – Motorola y Barnes & Noble se defendieron[http://techrights.org/2011/04/27/bn-and-changing-the-patent-system/], por lo que es una batalla en curso en los tribunales y Google debe tratar de ayudar estas empresas que asisten a las salas de audiencia -Hola Google, ¿nos escuchas?-. Ellos están bajo el fuego, ya que Microsoft está desesperado por hacer que Linux sea más caro y también convertilo en su fuente de ingresos propia. Los impulsores de Microsoft hacen el juego con esta trama escandalosa. Por ejemplo, el ahora en silencio (tal vez por la seguridad de su trabajo en ZDNet), la títere de Microsoft, Mary Jo Foley no hace nada para promover la justicia[http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-convinces-another-android-vendor-to-sign-a-patent-protection-deal/9826] en su cobertura superficial de las noticias del departamento de Relaciones Públias de Microsoft:
El 27 de junio, Microsoft anunció que General Dynamics Itronix firmó un acuerdo de patentes con Microsoft por dispositivos con Android Itronix. Microsoft caracteriza el acuerdo de ofrecer “una amplia cobertura en la cartera de patentes de Microsoft por los General Dynamics Itronix dispositivos usando la plataforma Android.”
Algunos periodistas me preguntaron por comentarios al respecto. Un comunicado de prensa dio la noticia (como de costumbre Microsoft probablemente lo empujó temprano) los refuerzos de Microsoft fueron informados, posiblemente, con el fin de amortiguar la extorsión y preparase con los temas de conversación. Para quienes se perdieron la noticia, Microsoft SIMPLEMENTE EXTORSIONO a otra compañía que vende Linux. Microsoft utiliza las patentes de software. Como de costumbre, el trístemente célebre MS Florian bailó como bailarina de flamenco con la noticia (en Twitter), celebrando la extorsión. Como siempre tiende a simpatizar con el chantaje sistematizado de Microsoft [1[http://techrights.org/2007/06/08/shuttleworth-on-racketeering/], 2[http://techrights.org/2009/07/17/racketeering-melco-microsoft/], 3[http://techrights.org/2009/12/29/microsoft-extortion-software-patents/], 4[http://techrights.org/2009/07/24/red-hat-on-microsoft-two-face/], 5[http://techrights.org/2009/09/08/staples-employees-anti-linux/], 6[http://techrights.org/2009/07/01/patent-racketeering-myhrvold/], 7[http://techrights.org/2008/02/22/open-for-patents/]].
Aquí está los cohetes de PR -Relaciones Públicas[http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2011/jun11/06-27ItronixPR.mspx]- repitidos como loro por los chacales de Microsoft. General Dynamics Itronix “dispositivos que funcionan con la plataforma Android” serán “cubiertos”, dice la PR, como si la extorsión tiene mucho que ver con “cobertura” (de la espalda tal vez). La firma de un acuerdo de patentes es un caso de poner una sonrisa en algo muy hostil, como hemos explicado antes. Microsoft amenaza con demandar y luego hace una ruta de escape condicionada a la “protección” y la pretensión de que el acuerdo es amistoso. Para Microsoft es importante decir que “el contenido del acuerdo no han sido revelado” (mayor incertidumbre) y “las partes señalan que Microsoft va a recibir regalías de General Dynamics Itronix bajo el acuerdo.” Eso es EXTORSION. Ahora mira lo que el extorsionista líder de Microsoft dice que para promover aún más extorsiones: “Nos complace haber alcanzado este acuerdo con General Dynamics Itronix, lo que es un ejemplo de cómo los líderes del sector dirigen la propiedad intelectual.” Traduccion: aquellos que no están de acuerdo con cough “dinero de protección” son irrespetosos de la ley.
Este acuerdo demuestra la continua intimidación y persistencia de Microsoft para obtener alrededor de Google e imponerle impuestos en su sistema operativo basado en Linux, por lo general mediante la intimidación de los distribuidores de Android con amenazas de demandas. Microsoft sabe que para las empresas pequeñas luchar el caso en el tribunal habría menos incentivos que para Google, que actualmente lucha contra Oracle para defender Android de las patentes de software. Este acuerdo es otro ejemplo de los daños de las patentes de software, que parecen ser una especie de sistema de seguridad social a los antiguos monopolios o monopolios en decline. La gente debe preguntarse si el sistema de patentes promueve la innovación o promueve litigios que simplemente aumenta el precio de todo lo que compramos y reduce los incentivos para los desarrolladores, cuyos empleos son eliminados para dar paso a los abogados de patentes.
Glyn Moody, escribió sobre el tema de las patentes de software que fallan en contra de Android. Eso fue apenas unas horas antes del anuncio de arriba y que básicamente dice que las patentes de software están claramente fallando[http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/06/the-failed-experiment-of-software-patents/index.htm]:
He señalado anteriormente que estamos asistiendo a una maraña de patentes clásica en el campo de los smartphones, con todo el mundo y su perro demandando a todos los demás (y a sus perros.) Pero, sin duda, una de las aplicaciones más cínicas de los monopolios intelectuales es el jucio de Oracle contra Google. Esto golpeó por completo de la hermosa cara de Larry Ellison detectar una oportunidad de obtener un poco de dinero adicional sin necesidad de hacer mucho con excepción de punto de su departamento jurídico en la dirección correcta.
[...]
Aun suponiendo que Google ha violado voluntariamente todas las patentes que Oracle afirma – y que aún no se ha demostrado – es difícil ver cómo Oracle ha perdido realmente las “oportunidades” como resultado. En todo caso, el enorme éxito de Android, que se basa en Java, es probable que aumente la demanda de programadores Java, y en general hacer todo el ecosistema Java más valioso – en gran medida en beneficio de Oracle.
Así pues, independientemente de las regalías que puede o no puede ser obtenidas, Oracle tiene en cualquier caso, ya ha adquirida en la acción de Google, y continuarán beneficiándose de la subida de Android como sistema operativo líder de smartphones. Además, como Android se utiliza en otras áreas – tabletas, set-top boxes, televisores, etc – Oracle volverán a beneficiarse del enorme aumento del tamaño del ecosistema Java sobre las que tiene control sustancial.
Por supuesto, estoy totalmente sorprendido de encontrar Oracle hace esto. Pero para ser justos con el Larry Ellison y su empresa, esto no es sólo acerca de Oracle, pero también tiene que ver con los problemas inherentes a las patentes de software, que fomentan este tipo de comportamiento (por lo menos no por la recompensa que generosamente, a veces.)
Oracle podría demandar a los distribuidores de que no sea Google Android y luego extorsionan. Sin embargo, Oracle no juega tan sucio como Microsoft. Sólo el financiamento de SCO, por Microsoft, pudo utilizar este tipo de estrategia, aunque aún SCO no fue tan lejos como Microsoft.
Para Microsoft, la posibilidad de amamantar el trabajo de otras personas puede ser esencial para la supervivencia, porque la empresa tiene una gran deuda (y en realidad no pagó billones por Skype, aunque se lo hagan creer a los periodistas, por razones que hemos tratado por separado). Las vacas de dinero de Microsoft se están muriendo y mi co-host Tim lo expresó así[http://openbytes.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/microsoft-to-make-money-again-off-competitors-more-popular-products-the-parasite-is-back/]:
Como un parásito, Microsoft se alimenta de otro, sin embargo, ¿puede culparlos? El teléfono Windows 7 no es el asesino del Iphone como Microsoft PR quiezo hacernos creer, y eso es sólo una «pieza» en su catálogo de productos. Microsoft tiene todas las batallas en todos los ámbitos, esta disparando en todas las direcciones y al mismo tiempo que sus competidores están saliendo con productos que la gente sí quiere comprar.
Para mí es muy revelador que Microsoft no va contra Google directamente. Me pregunto por qué es eso? ¿Podría ser como el matón patio de la escuela se mete con los más pequeños que ellos mismos, a sabiendas de que sus reivindicaciones de patentes no se pondrá a prueba en el tribunal? ¿Podría ser que Microsoft sabe exactamente cuánto “valor” hay en sus demandas y Google sabe que luchar.
Microsoft se pregunta por qué su nombre está embarrado con muchos en el mundo de la tecnología? Para mí, estas acciones muestran a Microsoft como un PARASITO y un COBARDE. Si usted siente que puede justificar las acciones de Microsoft luego que me encantaría saber de usted. Si no puede, entonces tal vez este tan asqueado como yo de cómo Microsoft está permitido a continuar así.
“Nessuno” en USENET, escribe: “Convencelos de que está bien. “¿Qué bonita pequeña familia que tiene allí? Ser tan malo si algo le sucediera a su linda niña.”
“Por supuesto que ganan más dinero extorsionando a Linux de lo que ganan vendiendo su propia mierda”.
Esto es lo que un sitio pro-Linux[http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/General-Dyamics-Itronix-enters-patent-agreement/?kc=rss] tenía que decir sobre el acuerdo:
El mes pasado, un analista de Citi, dijo que Microsoft está recibiendo $ 5 por teléfono con Android de HTC, y está tratando de exprimir $ 7.50 a $ 12.50 por el dispositivo de otros fabricantes. Según algunos observadores, la suma de $ 150 millones por año a partir de HTC es cinco veces más ingresos que recibe Microsoft por su Windows Phone.
Aunque muchos de los acuerdos de dispositivos en Linux parecen estar relacionadas con las reclamaciones de patentes de Microsoft sobre el sistema de archivos FAT, como se reveló en el juicio de éxito de Microsoft contra TomTom, las reclamaciones Android en lugar podrían estar relacionadas con las técnicas de interfaz del usuario. Al menos esto es lo que fue revelado por Microsoft cuando Barnes & Noble se negó a pagar dinero de protección a Microsoft a través de su Nook lector electrónico basado en Android, y fue demandado por Redmond en marzo. Las declaraciones oficiales de Microsoft en este caso sugiere que las técnicas de interfaz de usuario citados pueden ser similares a los cubiertos en el caso de HTC.
Como SIEMPRE este acuerdo es una buena noticia para Microsoft Florian (que trató de empujar a los abusados a la sumisión) y es también la validación de la posición de otros cabilderos de las patentes de software (y de su propio bolsillo), como Steve Lundberg[http://techrights.org/2011/04/22/monopolies-on-algorithms/], que aún continúa en la mismo[http://www.patents4software.com/2011/06/particular-machine-not-required-ex-parte-dietz-appeal-2009-008029-bpai/].
El sueño de Microsoft es un mundo donde cada dispositivo que ejecute casi cualquier sistema operativo será una fuente de ingresos para Microsoft, debido a las patentes de software. Esa es la visión que tienen – una visión donde la gente que escribe los monopolios (patentes), no el código. Apple también está comenzando a inclinarse a esta onda ahora que Linux le confiere una carrera por el dinero. Apple y Microsoft son parte de un mismo problema y como hemos explicado antes, tratan de imponer la ley los EE.UU. (USPTO con los monopolios) en los países asiáticos que en realidad hacen un montón de dispositivos basados en Linux. Apple comenzó a presionar a Samsung, con una demanda de patentes (no ir contra Google) y el “largo divorcio de Apple con Samsung es casi final”, escribe The Register. “La tensa relación entre Apple y Samsung ha dado un paso más cerca de la fractura por completo, con un informe en el Commercial Times en idioma chino con rumores refrescantes de que TSMC se convertirá en nuevo es el mejor amigo de Cupertino”.
“Incluso si Apple subieron en el 2012, su negocio sólo representa alrededor del 2 por ciento del negocio de TSMC,” explica el autor.
“El resto, probablemente va a Android, de” observa “Homero” en USENET.
“Bueno, tengo que decir que estoy sorprendido y asombrado esto sucedió después de que Apple follo Samsung con una falso looky-feely demanda.
“Ahora parece que el brillante Samsung, eh, quiero decir de Apple iPhoney se convertirá en una mucho menos brillante de Corea iPhoney … a partir de los más finos plásticos. La buena noticia es que también vendrá con una caja libre hecha de pieles de perro y una antena de dos metros de altura con la que realmente puede conseguir una señal.”
Nota del Traductor:
Para recapitular, EMPRESAS QUE DEBEMOS EVITAR POR SUS PAGOS A Microsoft (por patentes desconocidas, presuntamente relacionados con Linux) son Novell / SUSE / Attachmate, Xandros, Turbolinux LG, Fuji Xerox, Brother, Melco, Samsung, Kyocera Mita, IO Data, HTC, Nokia y General Dynamics Itronix.
Empresas que debemos apoyar por su estancia en las patentes de software y su resistencia a ser chantajeados por Microsoft: Barnes & Noble y Motorola. Este apoyo es condicionado mientras ellos no se rindan frente al chantaje de Microsoft
Cuando necesites un nuevo telefono, tableta o Book Reader considera los productos de estas empresas y apoyalas. La independencia digital de los países del Tercer Mundo esta siendo peleada en este momento. Por que apoyar a empresas que buscan la sumision de nuestros paises a SUS intereses.
“La visión de Microsoft es donde la gente que escribe los monopolios (patentes), no el código” -Significa que si algunos de tus hijos se decide a estudiar programación o ciencias de computación, tendrá que PAGAR a estos MONOPOLIOS -Apple y Microsoft- por cada nueva invencion que ellos quieran crear. Asi que piensalo bien, no mires a la propaganda de estos monopolios y apoya la lucha contra toda patente de software y la mejor manera es hacerlo es con tu bolsillo. █
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.
Translator’s Note (In English, what Landaveri added, apprending the following at the end)::
To recap, these COMPANIES MUST BE AVOIDED BY THEIR PAYMENTS to Microsoft (unknown patents presumably related to Linux) are Novell / SUSE / Attachmate, Xandros, Turbolinux LG, Fuji Xerox, Brother, Melco, Samsung, Kyocera Mita, IO Data, HTC , Nokia and General Dynamics Itronix.
Companies we should support for their stay at software patents and their resistance to being blackmailed by Microsoft: Barnes & Noble and Motorola. This support is conditioned as long as they do not surrender to Microsoft’s blackmail.
When you need a new phone, tablet or Book Reader consider products from these companies and support them. Digital Independence for Third World countries is being fought right now. Why support companies seeking the submission of our country to their interests?
“Microsoft’s vision is where people who write monopolies (patents), not the code,” means that if some of your children decide to study computer science or programming, they will PAY for these to Monopolies like Apple and Microsoft for every new invention that they want to create. So think about it, do not look to the propaganda of these monopolies and support the fight against software patents and the best way is to do it is with your pocket.
ES: Tienes un Virus? GNU/Linux lo Arregla
(ODF | PDF | English/original)
Resumen: las debilidades de seguridad de Windows como una oportunidad para desinfectar ordenadores de la gente (la eliminación de los sistemas operativos propietarios).
El momento más adecuado para ‘convertir’ Los usuarios de Windows en usuarios de GNU/Linux, es cuando Windows los traiciona -lo que sucede a menudo-, por lo general con virus o malware. El Register dice[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/28/extreme_rootkit_removal_advice/] que Microsoft recomienda a los usuarios a instalar Windows en tales circunstancias:
Microsoft aconseja a los usuarios a re-instalar Windows si llegan a la mala suerte de ser atropellado por un rootkit, particularmente cruel.
El troyano Popureb amarra sus tentáculos tan profundo en el sistema operativo que la mejor opción es atacar nuclearmente a las máquinas en órbita para volver a su configuración original. Los archivos que no han sido copiados con seguridad se pierden en el proceso.
Como el Sr. Pogson señala[http://mrpogson.com/2011/06/28/if-you-have-to-reinstall-your-os-to-keep-your-pc-running-install-gnulinux/], esto es en realidad una valiosa oportunidad para adoptar GNU/Linux;
Si tiene que reinstalar el sistema operativo de su PC para que siga funcionando, considere la instalación de GNU/Linux para detener esta locura.
Esto se refiere a los consejos dados en relación con la defensa a principios de este mes[http://techrights.org/2011/06/14/gnu-linux-advocacy/]. █
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.
The SUSE Experiment Lives On For Now
When GNU/Linux gets Infected by Microsoft
Summary: SLE* (which we used to refer to as “Ballnux”) and OpenSUSE hardly make the news anymore, but when they do, it’s worthless
SUSE LINUX, the essentially closed-source and Microsoft-taxed GNU/Linux distribution, is favoured among companies that see GNU/Linux as necessary but also want to pay Microsoft for ‘permission’ to use it. This new video speaks of SAP, which we wrote about in this context many times before.
The sad thing is that some volunteers continue to help Attachmate do this. Some independent dedicated sites (to Novell) keep promoting its proprietary software [1, 2] and developers sometimes choose to assign their contributions to SUSE. While some help strategically towards the release of new versions of OpenSUSE, others contribute code. Compared to previous years, the OpenSUSE elections have not much visibility this year and the deadline is very near:
As we wrote three weeks ago, June 30th is the deadline for voting for the openSUSE Strategy!
While efforts persist to put SUSE in EC2 (Amazon pays Microsoft for GNU/Linux servers), build service goes down and demonstrates yet another weakness in a series. They renamed the product and maintain it [1, 2] as though it is not just an OpenSUSE project. The brand “OpenSUSE” becomes decreasingly relevant.
“There is no PR department promoting SUSE on the face of things.”Exceptional fanfare is seen in Greece, as before [1, 2] and Google Summer of Code brings about some improvements [1, 2, 3], but apart from that, OpenSUSE is hard to find in the news and SUSE has almost gone invisible. There is no PR department promoting SUSE on the face of things. █
Microsoft’s Behaviour Provides More Reasons for All Countries to Reject Software Patents
Summary: Due to software patents in the United States, Microsoft can act like a thug and extort rivals, making money out of code it never wrote at all
So, another company got sued and entered the racketeering operation set up with Microsoft’s funding, according to this report. Yes, the world’s biggest patent troll has gotten more revenue out of companies which actually make something and another Microsoft patent troll, Paul Allen from Interval, files for more legal action:
In a not surprising move, Interval Licensing has filed a motion [PDF, text below] with the court to reconsider the stay in the proceedings the court just granted two weeks ago. The court will need to consider this motion, and it is worth considering the arguments that Interval advances for reconsideration.
BlueCat is not the only victim of patent trolls and neither is “the world”, as Groklaw puts it (in reference to Allen’s lawsuit). Even large companies like Nortel might become trolls’ feast, based on this report:
We have devoted a lot of digital ink at Washington Legal Foundatoin’s blog, The Legal Pulse, to the parasitic activities of so-called “patent trolls” – entities which use their patents as litigation swords rather than empowerment devices for innovation (see, e.g., here and here). With federal patent reform finally a real possibility, trolls’ abusive practices have attracted the attention of policymakers as well as leading civil justice reform advocates. We hope they will also be cognizant of today’s auction of over 6,000 patents owned by bankrupt telecom equipment company Nortel. The triumphant bidder will control a formidable patent portfolio which could fuel billions of dollars worth of offensive patent lawsuits or offer solid defenses against future patent litigation. See this post for a great FAQ on the auction.
We have also just learned that Microsoft might be after Nortel’s patents, after it lobbied against Google buying them. What a hypocrite.
Microsoft itself would be a terrible place for these patents because it continues to extort companies with patents while journalists stand by idly. Microsoft probably briefed some of them because the aapologists are prominent among the search results (i.e. those publishing early) and we have Microsoft boosters like this one at the top of Google News results. This extortion was covered here before and the Microsoft boosters have a lot of fun with it. Microsoft Nick has an article that at least admits bad behaviour by quoting that:
[B&N]’s counterclaim, filed April 25 with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle, described Microsoft as repeatedly arguing that its patent portfolio would “entirely preclude the use of Android Operating System by the Nook,” and mentions that both HTC and Amazon have entered into patent-licensing deals with Redmond.
“Microsoft is misusing these patents as part of a scheme to try to eliminate or marginalize the competition to its own Windows Phone 7 mobile device operating system posed by the open source Android operating system and other open source operating systems,” it read at one point. “Microsoft’s conduct directly harms both competition for and consumers of eReaders, smartphones, tablet computers and other mobile electronic devices, and renders Microsoft’s patents unenforceable.”
We wrote about this at the time. ECT wrote out this too:
…Barnes & Noble (NYSE: BKS) and Motorola (NYSE: MOT), are fighting Microsoft in court.
“Microsoft’s under threat, and part of the threat is that Android is a free operating system, while Windows Phone 7 is not free,” Joshua Greenman, president of Mercury Development, told LinuxInsider.
“Microsoft’s trying to do the same thing with Android that it’s been trying to do with Linux — make the argument that there’s a high cost of ownership for these platforms — and back up its claims with patent lawsuits,” Greenman said.
Microsoft spokesperson Annie Truong declined to discuss the issue.
All in all, this whole affair demonstrates abuse with software patents and moreover Microsoft’s exception in that regard. What we need to do is remove software patents from the United States before these spread further. Sadly, however, SCOTUS Has had disappointing rulings recently (we gave examples), ones that empower monopolies at the expense of people and arguably validate software patents. According to this from Groklaw (it also links to the
Bessen study), not much is being improved and the FFII’s president looks back at Bilski/SCOTUS days with disappointment. To quote:
The primary winners from all this are the patent lawyers. Not only are there few restrictions on what can be patented, but the high court’s failure to articulate a clear rule means even more litigation. All is not lost, though. Justice Stevens is retiring, but Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor all signed onto his opinion. If Justice Kagan sides with her fellow liberals, then they’ll need just one more vote to restore some sanity to patent law. As the patent system continues to inflict damage on the IT industry, the need for reform will only get more obvious. Hopefully, the next time the Supreme Court has an opportunity to fix the problem, Justice Scalia will get off the fence.
Prof. Webbink (Groklaw) looks at the major legal case against Android (seeking billions in damages). To quote:
Last week we began a tracking table on the various reexaminations filed on the patents that Oracle has asserted against Google in their dispute over JAVA-like code included in the Android operating system. Another office action [PDF] has been issued by the USPTO, this one on the ’520 patent, and in this instance Oracle fared a little better. Out of 22 claims subject to reexamination, only eight were rejected.
Fighting against software patents one and one like this is the type of game Webbing might prefer playing because he is into Peer to Patent and all that jazz. But it does almost nothing towards eliminating all software patents. In some ways, it makes things worse, for reasons we gave on several occasions before. Countries must reject software patents as a whole, not on a one-by-one basis .█
Microsoft Lobbyists Still Push for Software Patents in Europe
Summary: Microsoft is still trying to take its monopolies on algorithms internationally, but it uses front groups and lobbyists to hide its actions
IT IS difficult to take one’s eyes off Microsoft because the company is always up to no good. One of Microsoft’s lobbying groups (the main patent lobbyist in Europe, ACT) is being groomed in this Windows-based site which pushes Zuck’s views as news and pushes his agenda a lot, perhaps still not realising that it’s an imposter for very large businesses (which pay him), pretending to represent small ones. Other Microsoft lobbyists exist, but this one has been at it for over a decade (other kept their mask through plausible denial and hacks around disclosure rules) and yet they do not ban him:
The decision was welcomed by industry representatives. Jonathan Zuck, the president of the Association for Competitive Technology, said: “A strong intellectual property protection is essential if the European Union wants to remain competitive and achieve even greater innovation.
“A fragmented and over-complicated patent system does not have a place in today’s market.”
Says the Microsoft lobbyist.
Murdoch’s press says that “EU Governments Agree Common Position In Single Patent Talks” and the FFII’s president responds with:
Europe desperately needs a single patent to boost litigation, validate software patents and favor the growth of trolls
The lawyers’ blog, IAM, paints this as a positive thing (it is for lawyers) and Microsoft’s role too gets revealed a little further:
Philips, Microsoft and DSM have come together to help fund a sustained campaign to promote the benefits of intellectual property to the global economy. The three have established a group called Ideas Matter; and according to a document seen by IAM, the idea behind it is “aimed at a need that most intellectual property based sectors have felt for a long time: expanding awareness of the positive value of intellectual property and improving the reputation of IP, in the face of widespread misunderstanding and criticism among opinion leaders, the press and the public.”
[...]
While Philips, Microsoft and DSM are the currently providing the funds, they are keen to recruit as many organisations as possible to take part.
Well, the lawyers want more damages because they take a cut off that. This Web site is said to have led to some backlash as:
EPO did not liked the unitary-patent.eu logo, asked for its removal
The thing about this “unitary” (a euphemism) plan is that it’s not for industry, it’s for patent lawyers and their clients (large businesses) to tax it along with the middlemen. While the news suggests that it’s inevitable (the corporations usually get what they want, eventually), it turns out that:
The extraordinary Competitiveness Council, meeting in Luxembourg on 27 June, put together the broad outlines of the future EU unitary patent. The 27 ministers agreed a general approach on the two draft regulations submitted by the European Commission implementing enhanced cooperation in this area by 25 member states (Italy and Spain are not participating given their opposition to the translation rules). The proposals concern: 1. the characteristics of and arrangements for issuing the future patent that confers identical protection in the participating member states; and 2. translation provisions.
The Hungarian EU Presidency was applauded for this compromise, which satisfies all the participating states and thus closes the first chapter of the legislative procedure. “The objective of common protection in the participating states is now achievable,” commented Internal Market Commissioner Michel Barnier. He hopes, together with the European Parliament, to consolidate this achievement so that the EU patent will become a reality within two years.
Mr. Barnier named in there. We wrote about him in many older posts over the past year. He deserves a lot of backlash for doing this.
Regarding this analysis [PDF], the FFII’s president quotes:
No further substantive patent law at the EU level should be created
Microsoft Florian mentions this too, in a positive context of course (he must be in favour) and based on another article, Wilcox is validating software patents not just with Peer to Patent [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] but also with endorsement of this “unitary” patent. To quote:
Baroness Wilcox, the UK’s intellectual property minister, said: “The creation of a single European patent and patent court is crucial for UK industry.
“We support a European patent system which gives real benefits for business, consumers and the economy. It is vital to offer businesses the same access to patent protection in their home market of Europe, as competitors in the US, China and Japan enjoy in theirs.”
“A unitary patent and court system will save businesses time and money whether they are patent holders or those seeking to challenge patents. The savings to UK business are likely to be around £20 million per year in translations costs alone.”
What a disgrace. Europe is in danger of becoming Microsoft prey in the sense that its laws may become just a mechanism for Microsoft to tax European companies that use Linux, for instance. See our page about software patents in Europe for chronology. █
New Zealand’s Patent Law Has Room for Improvement
Summary: The NZ patent system lacks clarity, leaving room for software patents from the back door while the multi-nationals ask for yet more leeway
The situation in New Zealand is one that we covered here before and according to a new report, “Don Christie of Catalyst IT, recommend putting the term explicitly in the guidelines, if not in the Bill itself, and either setting ICT industry representatives to work towards a definition of the term or taking on board existing definitions.”
The report from IDG is about the push from multi-nationals versus the locals, who clearly do not want software patents, not even from the back doors (e.g. masquerading software as hardware). To quote the article:
Most submissions on the guidelines formulated by the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ) on patentability of software suggest the guidelines have not achieved the desired clarification of proposed legislation and may have served further to muddy the question of what software is or is not patentable.
Section 15 (3A) of the Patents Bill – currently awaiting its second reading in Parliament – simply states “a computer program is not a patentable invention”. This clause was inserted by the Commerce Select Committee, on the strength of a number of submissions.
Further debate has seen the Ministry of Economic Development suggest that the committee did not intend to exclude “embedded” software – that is, in broad terms, software that controls a machine, achieving a physical effect outside the realm of pure computation.
The IPONZ guidelines attempt to achieve something like that qualification, while studiously avoiding using the term “embedded”. Several submissions, such as those from Fisher & Paykel Appliances and from John Rankin of Affinity and Don Christie of Catalyst IT, recommend putting the term explicitly in the guidelines, if not in the Bill itself, and either setting ICT industry representatives to work towards a definition of the term or taking on board existing definitions.
The NZ situation is important to keep an eye on internationally. If the multi-nationals can make this domino brick fall over and collapse, then other countries (domino bricks) will be targeted in turn, just like with DMCA.
The United States is where most such laws come from and the lobbying power of companies there is astounding. They can afford to have lobbyists and minions in other countries, they even use fake journalists to push agenda. We saw and showed evidence of this beforehand. Microsoft probably does the same with Microsoft Florian to push its spin and smears. Watch how Florian boosts people who serve as Microsoft PR agents pushing Linux smears that Microsoft writes. See this tweet for example. It’s not the exception, but he always has excuses. In a later post we will show Microsoft’s lobbying for software patents in Europe. Those who know who’s who can detect this immediately. █
Got Virus? GNU/Linux Can Fix That.
Wiping Windows
Summary: Windows’ security weaknesses as a chance to sanitise people’s PCs (removing proprietary operating systems)
THE most suitable time to ‘convert’ Windows users into GNU/Linux users is when Windows betrays them, usually with viruses or malware. The Register says that Microsoft advises users to reinstall Windows in such a circumstance:
Microsoft is advising users to reinstall Windows if they happen to be unfortunate enough to get hit by a particularly vicious rootkit.
The Popureb Trojan sticks its tendrils so deep into the operating system that the best option is to nuke from orbit return machines to their original configuration. Any files that aren’t backed up will be lost in the process.
As Mr. pogson points out, this is actually a valuable opportunity to adopt GNU/Linux;
If you have to reinstall the OS of your PC to keep it running, consider installing GNU/Linux to stop the foolishness.
This relates to the advice given regarding advocacy earlier this month. █
Content is available under CC-BY-SA