Summary: Version 2 of the European Interoperability Framework (EIF) addressed by Open Forum Europe and IBM's Bob Sutor, along with a European colleague

What has happened to EIFv2 is a very serious matter that we wrote about (in chronological order) under:

1. European Interoperability Framework (EIF) Corrupted by Microsoft et al, Its Lobbyists
2. Orwellian EIF, Fake Open Source, and Security Implications
3. No Sense of Shame Left at Microsoft
4. Lobbying Leads to Protest -- the FFII and the FSFE Rise in Opposition to Subverted EIF

The FEFE, the FFII, and several others have expressed their "dissatisfaction" with EIFv2 (that's putting it too kindly) and Glyn Moody points out that "Open Forum Europe blasts leaked EIFv2 [pdf] - http://bit.ly/1YWylC calls "for a withdrawal of the document"; the pressure mounts #eifv2"

Quoting the founder of the FSFE, Moody also retweets: "The idea of the "Openness Continuum" in #EIFv2 is as sensible as considering North Korea a part of the "Democracy Continuum""

Arnaud Le Hors from IBM (Europe) wrote about the subject as follows:

The leaked updated document of the European Interoperability Framework (EIF) is generating a lot of noise and for good reason. It is taking back what could be considered one of the most advanced features of the previous document: its insistence on the use of open standards.

In particular, the new document contains the following puzzling piece instead:

interoperability can also be obtained without openness, for example via homogeneity of the ICT systems, which implies that all partners use, or agree to use, the same solution to implement a European Public Service.

I don’t know about you but, to me this statement simply makes no sense. And I wonder to whom it could truly make sense.

Indeed, interoperability is defined in wikipedia as “a property referring to the ability of diverse systems and organizations to work together”. That seems about right to me.

So, how could “homogeneity” possibly qualify has a way of obtaining “interoperability”? Aren’t “homogeneity” and “diverse” opposing each other?

IBM's main standards and Free software person has pointed back to the criticisms from Open Forum Europe.

In particular, OFE objects to the diminished role stated for open standards for interoperability. If you are European, I recommend you make your voice heard, one way or the other.

As we showed before, the EIF had been subverted after heavy lobbying from many parties that include Microsoft front groups, namely CompTIA, BSA, and ACT [1, 2, 3].

Microsoft itself is busy violating the GPL and running away from justice, as usual (same story with Hyper-V [1, 2, 3]). Ars Technica reiterates the fact that Microsoft pulls the evidence away from sight. ⬆

"There's free software [gratis, dumpware] and then there’s open source... there is this thing called the GPL, which we disagree with."

--Bill Gates, April 2008