Comments

• markolopa

  2011-04-06 15:05:32

  Hello,
  
  I am from the FFII and your comments about a division within it sounds strange and puzzling to me. If there is an issue you want to discuss I suggest you to formulate it more clearly and openly. The way you did, it gives room to bad interpretations.
  
  Thanks for the very informative blog! Marko

• twitter

  2011-04-06 17:36:53

  FFII's position on software patents is an unambiguous condemnation. I don't see what Andre says to contradict this in the first nine minutes, other than say that he had an initial hesitation to oppose Microsoft and ooxml before he researched the subject. Perhaps I'm looking at the wrong video?

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2011-04-06 18:30:30

  On the issue of patents, the FFII is single file. And that's what matters the most.

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2011-04-06 18:28:35

  Hi markolopa,
  
  The example I gave in the video is one which I merely see for the second time; back in 2008 and now again I find that Andre and Ben disagree/d about the No<OOXML campaign. In addition, there are constrictions found in the @xoobab account (president) and @ffii account (e.g. one agrees with me and retweets, the other says it's incorrect). That again is misalignment between Ben and Andre. Then there are older examples like http://techrights.org/2009/08/31/hijacked-by-large-corps/
  
  No organisation -- unless it is tyrannical -- has one uniform view. IOW, this is fine.

• a.rebentisch

  2011-04-06 21:07:50

  Beating the bush to catch the snake - as the Chinese say. You're guessing.

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2011-04-06 21:16:16

  Can you provide some examples? The reason I brought this up is, the other week I quoted Ben, published a post, he then liked it too (it would seem so because he linked), but you replied by saying that it was not correct. So I just don't know anymore who speaks for FFII. I didn't mean to misrepresent anyone. I could use some clarifications to avoid upsetting individual members.

• verofakto

  2011-04-06 21:50:44

  I could use some clarifications to avoid upsetting individual members.

  
  
  The same old story, except that this time you aimed the gun at yourself. Here's a hint: If you want to avoid upsetting people, don't insult them. That usually works.

• a.rebentisch

  2011-04-07 14:56:19

  By explaining which statements are wrong I would reveal internal information, e.g. about the twitter process.
  
  In terms of who speaks for what the generally accepted approach is to attribute things as they are. When I write in my private blog (or file a document access request) I do that on my own behalf. When an association where I am a board member adds spin and references to it via twitter is fine for me but it is just a referrer. If I want to make it a request of the org there would be a press release of the respective org.
  
  Concerning Google I see no reason to smear the company. In fact Benjamin does not do that: http://twitter.com/zoobab/statuses/55273151675908096 He highlights that regulatory action is usually much cheaper than suffering the consequences. Tactically Google may take the appropriate decision: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/04/patents-and-innovation.html
  
  Example for Dr. Schestowitz: Immediately an obese man has to be sent to hospital, his doctor finds. His complete blood count shows. A colleague of the doctor regrets "Malnutrition is a challenge of our society. Sports and carrots would be cheaper than hopitalization of obese persons".

• twitter

  2011-04-07 17:00:59

  People have to guess where information is scarce. Thank you for clarifying your position or lack of one and how that relates to FFII.
  
  I hope that after some reflection, you will realize that Benjamin is correct and that no smear was intended. From your OOXML talk, you and Roy have a lot in common but you admit giving too much credit to big companies. It is disappointing, though not surprising, to see that you consider it a smear disagree with Google's decision to spend $900,000,000 on patents. This would only be a good tactical move if they are bidding to drive troll costs up rather than to purchase something that should be worthless. Even this is a long term defeat because it legitimizes software patents. As Microsoft partners who pay patent royalties for Android and GNU/Linux have already learned, there is no patent portfolio or royalty payment provides protection against the insane US patent system and abusers like Microsoft, MPEGLA and other proxies for big publishers and telcos. No matter who they pay or what they do, they find themselves embargoed, threatened and sued. I agree that Google deserves the benefit of the doubt but software patent purchases are a clear loser for Google and everyone else.
  
  Thank you for your continued and courageous advocacy of software freedom.

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2011-04-07 18:42:24

  @a.rebentisch: I did not refer to your personal site as a FFII position, just the @ffii account (whose stance I mostly agree with, about 95% of the time).

• a.rebentisch

  2011-04-07 20:49:37

  @twitter I disagree. You read too much from Florian Müller. He also communicates along these lines.
  
  Example: I do not find it wrong to make a fortune out of speculation against currencies and support regulatory reforms against abuses of the monetary system. It is impossible for me to find "hypocrisy" in that conduct.
  
  That makes it an intellectual challenge for me to take such arguments seriously.
  
  Fear mongering makes the spook. No one gets scared to use Android because of desperate attacks from market competitors: http://bit.ly/gIA5hP If Google buys out Nortel, its not their misconduct but shows the burden/costs of the current regulatory environment for them.
  
  @Schestowitz: http://techrights.org/2011/04/02/transparency-triumph/

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2011-04-11 06:06:37

  @twitter I disagree. You read too much from Florian Müller. He also communicates along these lines.

  
  
  There is the spin which gets accentuated, but the claim is hinged on real hypocrisy.

• twitter

  2011-04-11 06:10:59

  I don't think Google's purchase of Nortel's patents is misconduct so much as it is a waste of money. Microsoft proxies will attack no matter how large Google grows their patent portfolio beyond the 500 or so they have. The money is better spent eliminating the problem at the roots. No one should be burdened with business method and software patents.

• a.rebentisch

  2011-04-07 21:24:06

  @twitter I disagree. You read too much from Florian Müller. He also communicates along these lines.
  
  Example: I do not find it wrong to make a fortune with speculation against currencies and support regulatory reforms against abuses of the monetary system. It is impossible for me to find "hypocrisy" in that conduct.
  
  That makes it an intellectual challenge for me to take such arguments seriously.
  
  Fear mongering makes the spook. No one gets scared to use Android because of desperate attacks from market competitors. If Google buys out Nortel, its not Google's misconduct but shows the burdens/costs of the current regulatory environment for them.
  
  @Schestowitz:here