A bit of advance notice here: "The inaugural Creativity & Business
International Network (c&binet)</a> will take place at The Grove
in Hertfordshire from 26 – 28 October *2009*" - is this something that
free software and free culture supporters should get involved with?
http://www.dcms.gov.uk/reference_library/media_releases/5561.aspx
Please ask the above question as widely as you like (I've only sent it
here), but please send web links to discussion@fsfeurope
Thanks,
--
MJ Ray (slef)
Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small
worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
(Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Finally I did it.
I decided to point to an higher goal asking Dell to produce a free
software laptop.
I made a campaign in english and italian inviting all the people to ask
Dell for a machine with coreboot, atheros wireless chipset and gnewsense
preinstalled.
Now I am asking your support.
Could you support my campaign?
Could you inform all your readers and friends about that?
We really need to join all our forces this time to achieve the goal.
Please contact all the GNU/Linux user groups, let's spread this as never
done before!
Thank you very much for all your help.
English campaign: www.sorbaioli.org
Italian Campaign: www.sorbaioli.org/blog
- --
Graziano Sorbaioli -- www.sorbaioli.org
I'm an FSF member -- Help us support software freedom!
http://www.fsf.org/jf?referrer=5796
NO EMAIL from gmail accounts, >1Mb, html, ms-office files
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFJBvuWTtn97LA90HMRAoLNAKDD3PcMVxlTAtSHUW1rDxYkXcd0xgCfSxr+
3U6WQg2aCCvZ1RxyPl84zcA=
=DOsC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This was an important month for Free Software. Not only was Software Freedom
Day held (as always) on the 20th, but this years marks the 25th anniversary of
the GNU Project. Celebrations took place across Europe and our Fellows
continued to support Free Software in local areas with enthusiasm and passion.
Other important events took place. On the policy level, FSFE engaged with
representatives of the World Bank to explain why Free Software continues
to be important in both economics and politics. On the legal level, meetings,
speeches, panels and training events continued to build infrastructure for the
future.
Shane, FSFE Zurich Office
1. The GNU's 25th Birthday in Berlin, Germany
2. The smallest unit of freedom: A Fellow - Sean Daly
3. Reach the people - Software Freedom Day in Berlin, Vienna and Utrecht
4. Fellowship events throughout Europe
5. Free Software for World Bank financed projects
6. Freedom Task Force activites - GPLv3 in The Netherlands, panels in Italy and speeches in Berlin and Winterthur
7. European Legal Network special interest group meetings in London and Brussels
FORTHCOMING EVENTS
8. FSCONS 2008, Gothenburg, Sweden (2008-10-24 to 2008-10-26)
9. NLUUG Autumn Conference and CELF Embedded Linux Conference Europe, Ede, Netherlands (2008-11-06 to 2008-11-07)
1. The GNU's 25th Birthday in Berlin, Germany
The GNU-project turned 25 on the 27th of September. FSFE and the Berlin Fellows
were at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin to pop a cork and have a party. The
event started at 3pm with some champagne and music to celebrate. A great time
was had by all!
2. The smallest unit of freedom: A Fellow - Sean Daly
"In Europe, Microsoft's foot-dragging in complying with the 2004 Monti
Decision concerned me, and I saw that with very few exceptions, the
mainstream and tech media seemed not to cover fully all that was going on,
in particular the important role of the intervenors like Samba and the
FSFE. I felt that since traditional journalists were missing a vital part
of the story, perhaps it was time for a nontraditional journalist to step
up and report on that part."
Read the whole Fellowship interview: http://fellowship.fsfe.org/interviews
3. Reach the people - Software Freedom Day in Berlin, Vienna and Utrecht
On Saturday the 20th of September, FFII and FSFE's Fellowship group from Berlin
had a barbecue and manned an information booth. At the booth they explained
what Free Software is and why it is important for society. Meanwhile, Vienna's
Fellows celebrate the annual "Software Freedom Day" in a Pub called Pint Pub
in Vienna. The highlight of the event was the performances of the bands "Club
Valat" and "Klaus (from Fadin' to Whiteout)". Finally, in The Netherlands,
Shane Coughlan, Freedom Task Force coordinator at FSFE, delivered a keynote
speech at the Dutch Software Freedom Day event at Liefland College, Utrecht.
4. Fellowship events throughout Europe
The Fellowship Group in Berlin met on the 11th of September at their usual
venue, the New Thinking Store on Tucholsky Strasse. In Vienna the local
Fellowship group invited Shane Coughlan, FTF Coordinator, to deliver a speech
entitled "The Professionalisation of Free Software. Where we are going next."
The new Zurich Fellowship group also had a meeting, once again getting together
at the FSFE Zurich office to discuss ways of spreading the word about Free
Software in Switzerland and to generally have a good time. In Lille, a
Fellowship stand was manned at the "Braderie de Lille" (Lille's flea market)
by our very own French intern, Benjamin Morant, and Rainer Kersten from the
Duesseldorf office.
5. Free Software for World Bank financed projects
FSFE president Georg Greve delivered a course as part of the annual
"Procurement of Information systems in World Bank-Financed Projects"
course at the International Training Center (ITC) of the
International Labour Organisation (ILO) in Turin, Italy. As in the
past years, the course provided insights to the World Bank project
managers on the economic and political basics of Free Software, as
well as practical issues such as licences, business models and best
practice examples.
6. Freedom Task Force activities - GPLv3 in The Netherlands, panels in Italy and speeches in Berlin and Winterthur
Shane Coughlan, Freedom Task Force coordinator at FSFE, hosted a three hour
workshop entitled 'Licensing questions and Legal issues in the light of
GPLv3' for the launch of the GPLv3 at the University of Tilburg, The Netherlands
on the 19th of September. This event is sponsored by NLnet. He also represented
FSFE on the 'NESSI Open Source Working Group' panel at the OSS 2008 conference
in Milan to explain Free Software and the reasons behind Free Software licences.
This was followed by a speech entitled 'Free Software licenses and other
questions' at OSiM World at Berlin on the 17th of September another talk
entitled 'The strategic implementation of Free Software in business' at
the OpenExpo conference in Winterthur, Switzerland, on the 25th of September.
7. European Legal Network special interest group meetings in London and Brussels
FSFE's legal project - the FTF - coordinated a special interest group meeting
in London to discuss business processes and supply chain management. Another
meeting was held in Brussels on the 29th of September to discuss software
patents and other legal issues. These meetings were held for members of the
European Legal Network, and it is hoped that the discussions prompted by
them will lead to greater understanding and support for Free Software by
European legal decision-makers.
FORTHCOMING EVENTS
This is only a partial list, and only contains events where our presence
has been confirmed at time of drafting this newsletter. For a more complete
list of events FSFE will be involved with, please consult
http://www.fsfeurope.org/events/
8. FSCONS 2008, Gothenburg, Sweden (2008-10-24 to 2008-10-26)
For 2008, FSCONS is a collaboration of FSFE, Creative Commons, and Wikimedia
Sweden. There will be three tracks (Free Culture, Free Software, Free Content),
each lead by one of the main organisers. Topics will range from modern kernel
design over citizen journalism all the way across to licensing in the 21st
century.
http://www.fscons.org/
9. NLUUG Autumn Conference and CELF Embedded Linux Conference Europe, Ede, Netherlands (2008-11-06 to 2008-11-07)
The FSFE will be attending the NLUUG Autumn Conference on Thursday 6th
November. This year's theme is 'mobility'. Feel free to come to our booth
and ask about Free Software! Shane Coughlan, Freedom Task Force coordinator
at FSFE, will also deliver talk entitled 'The strategic implementation of
free software in business' at the CELF Embedded Linux Conference Europe 2008
at the same location on the following day, Friday 7th November. The successful
implementation of Free Software requires an understanding of the best policy
and processes applicable to its context. Shane will discuss how FSFE's legal
project and its European Legal Network have engaged with this issue by
producing generic market knowledge for supply and purchasing contracts,
work flow documents and deployment methodology. The location for both
conferences is Hotel en Congrescentrum De Reehorst, Ede, Netherlands.
http://www.nluug.nl/events/nj08/index.html
You can find a list of all FSFE newsletters on
http://www.fsfeurope.org/news/newsletter.en.html
Copyright (C) FSFE. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire
article is permitted in any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
>> 8) Making market share the top priority:
>> Might be true. I *do* have the feeling of a slight sellout happening
>> (e.g. Firefox), which causes loss of the actual vision - and a drift
>> away from the "good cause".
>>
>
> Firefox is proprietary software. See:
> http://directory.fsf.org/project/gnuzilla/
>
*sigh*
I know, I know... Mozilla's becoming similar to google:
they're doing something good, but on the other hand they're pulling some
strange stunts which makes me doubt to trust them (First it was the
name, the logo and trademark problems, now it's non-free code in their
binaries...)
Unfortunately it became incredibly confusing to follow the different
kinds of pure-GNU firefox browser forks. I've spent a whole evening
doing some reading about their differences, motivations, etc...
Seems like the info in my head is already outdated, because I've just
encountered "IceCat", which I thought was supposed to be "IceWeasel".
Now it's getting so damn confusing, that if you try to explain this to a
regular user, they'll just roll their eyes, sigh, shake their head and
walk away.
Why is this necessary [1]:
"The gNewSense BurningDog browser and the Debian IceWeasel browser are
similarly derived from Firefox, also with the intent of being free
software. Technically, however, these projects are maintained entirely
independently of IceCat. (Previously, this GNU browser project was also
named IceWeasel, but that proved confusing."
What's really confusing is that I have 3 free browsers now! Why the
fork? ...again?
HOWEVER:
What should one do now?
Let's imagine a conversation where I encounter people, tell them about
free software and it goes like this:
(A... someone, B... me)
A: "Sounds great! Where can I get started?"
I should now answer:
B: "Hm... use a free browser. Get IceCat!"
A: "Cool. never heard of it. I'm using Firefox"
B: "it's not free software... please use IceCat"
A: "ok. where can I get it?"
B: "apt-get install icecat"
A: "How do I do that with Windows?"
B: "Oh. sorry. you can't use any free software with windows. You will
never be able to gradually migrate to freedom. good bye."
I want things to be good. So I want things to be free (as in GPL).
...but I also don't want to end up grumpy and alone, completely
incompatible with the rest of the world.
This is why I want the rest of the world to understand why FS is the best.
What are your opinions regarding the Firefox/icecat issue here, when it
comes to "spreading the word"?
Pb
[1] http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
Hi,
ich wollte einen Asus EEE PC901 haben, leider gibt es in Deutschland nur die Windows-Version. Die Linux-Version wird bei uns nicht vertrieben.
Hat schon mal jemand einen Refund von Asus bekommen ?
cu romal
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 11:10:55 +0200
> Von: Matthias Kirschner <mk(a)fsfe.org>
> An: paolo del bene <ninuxpdb(a)gmail.com>
> CC: booth(a)fsfeurope.org
> Betreff: Windows Refund (was: Re: Booth Digest, Vol 66, Issue 3 Refund windows errata correge)
> Hi Paolo,
>
> Next time please send such information to discussion(a)fsfeurope.org.
> booth(a)fsfeurope.org is for the coordination list for FSFE's precense at
> booths.
>
> * paolo del bene <ninuxpdb(a)gmail.com> [2008-10-11 20:31:24 +0200]:
>
> > in Wed Aug 20 10:51:55 2008 i sent you an e-mail, where i communicated
> who
> > did the refunds, all is correct, but the URL does not fine, so please
> change
> > this old one
> > "http://paolo-del-bene.pbwiki.com/licenses-refund" with the new one,
> which
> > you can see
> > below.
> >
> > http://paolodelbene.blogspot.com/2008_08_01_archive.html
>
> I added the link to http://wiki.fsfe.org/Windows-Tax_Refund. This page
> still needs a lot of work to make it useful for visitors, but it is a
> start.
>
> Best wishes,
> Matthias
>
> --
> Deputy German Coordinator, Fellowship Coordinator
> Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) [] (http://fsfeurope.org)
> Join the Fellowship of FSFE! [][][] (http://fsfe.org/join)
> Your donation powers our work! || (http://fsfeurope.org/donate)
> _______________________________________________
> Booth mailing list
> Booth(a)fsfeurope.org
> https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/booth
I've often thought that FSFE's involvement in the MS antitrust case was
unclear. The mainstream media generally focussed on the fines, so when FSFE
was associated with the case, it might have looked like a simple exercise in
MS-bashing. It was actually about helping Samba and free software
developers in general, so here's my attempt to explain it:
(pasted below)
http://fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/fsfe_s_antit…
I wrote it now because we've just put online our new PDF on this:
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/ms-vs-eu/leaflet-ms-vs-eu.en.G.pdf
And then I saw that the Samba developers are very happy with what they're
getting due to Microsoft's compliance:
http://people.samba.org/people/abartlet/a-year-since-microsofts-appeal-fail…
==================
FSFE's antitrust victory with Samba
FSFE's role in the antitrust case was to ensure that free software
developers would be able to use any interoperability information that
Microsoft would be forced to publish. After 5 years of work, the last court
case was won last year. There were always doubts about whether Microsoft
could really be pinned down, but from Samba developer Andrew Bartlet's
blog, it seems the Samba team are now loving the interoperability
information.
I didn't do much on this case. For FSFE, it was mostly Georg Greve and Carlo
Piana. From Samba, they worked with Andrew Tridgell, Jeremy Allison, and
Volker Lendecke.
There were other organisations involved, but FSFE played two key roles.
First, we represented the interests of free software developers. Others had
interests such as the ability of their private company to compete with MS,
or lowering the price of X or Y, or fining MS, etc. These organisations were
on our side, but they could have accepted a solution that excluded free
software. FSFE was there to constantly argue that free software must benefit
from the outcome, and to explain what this required.
The second key role was persistency. The case began with many companies
bringing evidence against Microsoft, but one-by-one they made business deals
with Microsoft and withdrew from the case. This could never happen to FSFE,
so FSFE was a reminder that the European Commission would never be left
alone on this case.
There are two other organisations worth mentioning. SSII is the only other
organisation that, like FSFE, stayed in the case from start to finish. And
ECIS is worth a mention because although they joined late, they added a lot
of strength to what we were supporting.
The antitrust case was sometimes misunderstood. The mainstream media - with
its love of simplifying topics down to numbers - constantly reported about
how much Microsoft were going to get fined. That's a pity. The fines were
never important for us. Helping Samba and other free software projects was
the important part. Done.
Some interesting links
* Our leaflet: FSFE and the antitrust case against Microsoft
* Our project page: Microsoft against free competition
* Seán Daly interviews Georg, Carlo, Volkere, and Jeremy, September 17th
2007
* Seán interviews Georg, April 27th 2006
* Seán interviews Carlo, March 31st 2005
==================
--
Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36 44 19, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/
Support free software, join FSFE's Fellowship: http://fsfe.org
Recent blog entries:
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/fsfe_s_antitrus…http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/openstreetmap_c…http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/why_european_so…http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/eu_states_to_di…
To add some context.
I use nvidious drivers but have been an FSF member for years.
If I cut off non-free drivers and non-free blobs then I reduce my influence over those I'm bringing to free software and their progress may cease until another compromiser comes along.
Me and they will necessarily have a slow journey.
Stallman could have written gcc in assembler but he felt it worth using another non-free compiler as a compromise.
(At work we are now buying machines with ATI video cards, to support AMD's open source move even though these specific cards have closed source drvers)
I don't mind if who considers me an enemy who cares about popularity and not freedom, I know I'm bringing people in as fast as they can come.
Sam
-----Original Message-----
From: Noah Slater <nslater(a)gnu.org>
Sent: 24 October 2008 04:19
To: Yavor Doganov <yavor(a)gnu.org>
Cc: discussion(a)fsfeurope.org
Subject: Re: Comment on "Nine Attitude Problems in Free and Open Source Software"
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 02:50:19AM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> > An organisation can "care for freedom" or popularity in shades of
> > grey,
>
> Yes, I agree. The second name for this is "double standards".
The standards are only double if you lump yours in with theirs.
Don't you see? There is only contradiction from your point of view.
>From Debian's point of view there is none.
You cannot assign your value system onto someone else and then judge the
rationality of their behaviour based on that. This clearly makes no sense.
> > Note that I quoted "care for freedom" as this implicitly judges
> > Debian and Ubuntu from YOUR ethical position,
>
> Of course! During my all conscious life, I have always evaluated
> things from MY ethical position.
I am not expecting you to evaluate things under any other premise.
You have your value system and I expect you to judge things by that. Similarly I
have my value system, and perhaps my email address might indicate to you that it
is not too dissimilar to yours.
My real problem here, and this is not levelled at you directly, I respect the
work you do for the Free Software movement and for The GNU Project. My real
problem is with intolerance towards other people's perspectives.
It is one thing to say:
"Distributing non-free device drivers is bad, please don't do that."
And it is another thing to say:
"Because you distribute non-free device drivers, you are the enemy."
Is it not best to tolerate differences in opinions? To work towards furthering
your goals? Not to alienating the very people who may share, and may be working
towards those very goals?
> If it doesn't, you feel unconformatble so you can either (1) don't do it; (2)
> tweak your ethical principles. The latter is what's happening with Debian,
> and to the community at large.
Fortunately, or unfortunately as the case may be, things change. Organisations
have a tendency to change in response. This is entirely natural.
Is it not Richard Stallman who blindly criticises networked service, and by
definition, the Web at large, primarily because he does not understand it? Was
this an explicit part of the original Free Software movement, or is he
responding to the changing climate?
Admittedly, this is an unfair example. I appreciate that Richard does not
represent the entire Free Software movement. In fact, Mako Hill and others are
making an extremely valiant effort to address these very issues.
For more information, see: http://autonomo.us/
> > I consider it reasonable to shorten this to the assertion that
> > Ubuntu cares about popularity more than Debian does.
>
> I agree, mostly. I also think that Ubuntu cares more about popularity
> and less about freedom, although the result is really the same. Both
> distros do not teach users to value their freedom.
Again, you are making a false dilemma.
The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the
either-or fallacy, or bifurcation) involves a situation in which only two
alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely
related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think
in extremes, called black-and-white thinking.
-- Wikipedia, False dilemma
Cannot Debian teach users about freedom, simply because they also provide means
for installing non-free software? Must things be so black and white?
> > You are not considering that Debian may share a different value
> > system from you,
>
> I am considering this very deeply, in fact. For years. That's my
> personal ethical dillema with Debian.
You are free to have an ethical problem with Debian, I would not deny you
that. To turn around and l
[The entire original message is not included]
Hi all,
This is the link to a new campaign/petition against Swpat in Europe.
http://stopsoftwarepatents.eu/711000042650/
Please read it and, if you deem it proper, sign it and circulate the
link wherever possible/appropriate.
Regards,
Giacomo
===========
Introduction
Our petition aims to unify the voices of concerned Europeans,
associations and companies, and calls on our politicians in Europe to
stop patents on software with legislative clarifications.
The patent system is misused to restrain competition for the economical
benefit of a few but fails to promote innovation. A software market
environment is better off with no patents on software at all. Healthy
competition forces market players to innovate.
European court decisions still accept in many cases the validity of the
software patents granted by national patent offices and the European
Patent Office (EPO) that is beyond democratic control. They not only
continue to grant them, but also to lobby in favor of them. Despite the
current deep crisis of the patent system, they are unable to reform and
put at risk too many European businesses with their soft granting policy.
On 2005 the Commission appeared to be more supportive to the interests
of major international conglomerates than of small and medium sized
enterprises from Europe - who are a major driving force behind European
innovation. The European Parliament rejected at the end the software
patent directive, but has no rights for legislative initiatives.
Considerations
Studies
A large number of serious scientific and economic studies justify ruling
out patents on software.
Copyright for software, but no patents
Software authors are already protected by copyright law, allowing others
to innovate in the same space generating healthy competition, but this
protection is undermined by patents on software. It is far too easy to
violate patents on software whilst being completely unaware of any
transgression. Software companies do not use and do not need the patent
system to innovate. They must be protected from owners of dubious
granted patents.
Litigation instead of innovation
Software patents miss their legitimate purpose. Patents on software
favour litigation in detriment of innovation, defeating their democratic
justification. They force software producers to spend on bureaucracy,
lawsuits, and circumventing dubious granted claims on software what
would otherwise be spent on Research and Development. Owners of patents
on software, who sometimes doesn't produce software themselves, obtain a
means to exert unfair control over the market.
American mistakes
In the USA there are billions of dollars in litigation over software
patents each year, and not only between software companies, but also
other companies just because they have a web site (this starts to happen
in Europe also). This mistake needs to be avoided in Europe.
We urge our legislators
* to pass national legal clarifications to substantive patent law
to rule out any software patent;
* to invalidate all granted claims on patents that can be infringed
by software run on programmable apparatus;
* to also strive to propagate these rules to the European level,
including the European Patent Convention.