One problem caused by Europe for free software is database licensing,
which isn't quite the same as copyright over databases. Someone has
published a first draft of an open data licence to try to cover this.
Is this useful for free software or not?
Introduction: http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/2007/09/24/open-data-commons-licence-now-o…
Draft: http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/open-database-licence/
Discussion list: http://lists.opencontentlawyer.com/listinfo.cgi/tcl-discuss-opencontentlawy…
I'm slightly concerned about the triple-whammy of database licensing,
copyright licensing and a contract. I'm very happy to see the
confusing CC-style anti-TPM wording made irrelevant by permitting
parallel distribution.
There's also an Open Data Factual Info Licence which puzzles me a bit
because *information* is not covered by copyright, only the expression
(the licence also seems to state this in point 2.4), so it seems a bit
unnecessary.
Please comment on the owner's site and/or here. I'll try to link the
two in a few minutes.
Thanks in advance,
--
MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
http://www.ftacademy.co.uk/
CeMAP certificate
CeMAP course
CeMAP course in London
CeMAP course London
CeMAP courses
CeMAP financial advisors
CeMAP financial advisor
CeMAP financial qualification
CeMAP financial qualifications
CeMAP intensive course
CeMAP intensive courses
CeMAP intensive training
CeMAP intensive training course
CeMAP intensive training courses
CeMAP London
CeMAP financial advisor training
CeMAP financial courses
CeMAP financial training
CeMAP mortgage advisor
CeMAP mortgage advisors
CeMAP nvq
CeMAP nvq course
CeMAP nvq training
CeMAP
Our primary course delivery concentrates on two specific and
fundamental courses required for anyone wanting to become a competent
mortgage advisor.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more!
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658
Hello!
My name is Abla Kandalaft. I am a both a student and a journalist for
European current affairs and online magasine cafebabel.com. I am currently
researching an article on associations or groups in Europe that are opposed
to microsoft's monopolistic tendencies and have worked to offer
alternatives. All this in the light of the european commission court case
against microsoft and its upcoming verdict on 17th september. I have found
your name upon brousing the internet for boycott and campaign groups. I
would be very grateful if you would agree to answer a couple of questions
via email. This should not take more than 10 mins of your time. It's just to
have an overview of the alternatives there are to microsoft, how campaign
groups have delt (if they have) with pressure from microsoft, and your
opinion on the ongoing trial.
Thank you for replying to this mail
Best regards
Abla
_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk
Dear FSFE Team and Free Software community,
I hearby resign from my position as Italian Chancellor and Fellowship
Coordinator for the FSFE.
I have contributed to the growth of the organization since 2001,
including the creation of projects such as the Fellowship and
GNUvox.info, the fight to the swpat directive, the opposition to OOXML
and many other successful activities.
So it is with a heavy heart that I must recognize the organization has
taken a direction that I can no longer support, one which I feel will
eventually make it irrelevant in the community, if not defunct.
In June 2007 I devised with other team members a constructive proposal
to re-organize the foundation as a starting point for reforms. It fell
on deaf ears. It has since become clear that all efforts would be made
to ensure that my resignation was necessary.
I will continue to promote Free Software within other organizations and
in other ways.
I wish to thank all the people who generously contributed time and
expertise to the Italian chapter and the Fellowship.
Regards,
Stefano Maffulli
From now on, please contact me using my personal email addresses:
stef maffulli net or stef zoomata com
My personal blog is at http://maffulli.net
Hello everyone !
I have a question about the GNU-FDL licence when I publish a
document on the web. My problem is the interpretation of the rule "100
copy => transparent format".
When I publish a FDL-licensed document on-line (free download) do
have to suppose that the 100 copy rule applies ?
I have two user-case.
1. I typeset a LaTeX document for basis school in physics. The website
where I publish only accepts one file[1]. So I prefer to publish a pdf
version instead of a zip with the pdf and the LaTeX sources files. This
is simpler for the reader. The pdf format being an opaque format, do I
violate my own FDL licence ?
Of course, I left my email address in the document and I send LaTeX
source-files to everyone ask.
2. The second user case is much more trollful ... but it is truth. We
want to create collaborative physics and mathematics texbooks[2], but
most of potential collaborators are Word-users. You know that arguments
like "freedom, interoperability and so on" do not work because "everyone
has Word, thus in fact OOo is not interoperable" ... hum ...
A good argument in order to use an open format and FDL licence is
that one cannot make "copy-paste" from Wikipedia to Word and publish the
result on the web because of Wikipedia's FDL licence.
So : does the FDL imposes the "100 copy" rule to any on-line document ?
Thanks a lot
Laurent
[1] Namely :
http://www.enseignons.be/secondaire/preparations-34-mecanique-optique-relat…
[2] In french. If you are interested, see
http://www.enseignons.be/forum/ftopic5306-0-asc-20.php
This morning, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) announced that it is
upholding the European Commission's anti-trust case against Microsoft:
http://curia.europa.eu/en/actu/communiques/cp07/aff/cp070063en.pdf
FSFE has been working on this case since 2001, so this is great news. Our
press release (pasted at the end of this mail) is at:
http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/press-release/2007q3/000186.html
The core of this case is that through anti-competitive behaviour, Microsoft
has distorted the file/print server software market. The European
Commission decided that the only way to rectify this is to have Microsoft
publish the interoperability information needed for others to write
alternative file/print server software.
FSFE's role all along has been to ensure that when Microsoft is required to
publish interoperability information for other software developers, SAMBA
must not be excluded from being able to use it. The European Commission has
agreed that this is reasonable because SAMBA is the only remaining
competitor to Microsoft's file/print server software.
There are also some fines of a few hundred million euro, but these aren't
important.
Today, the ECJ backed the European Commission.
Uncharacteristically, Microsoft seem to have fumbled their press work on
this. They haven't come out with any quotable reactions, or even any
attempts to paint this as a victory (like they did when they lost the ISO
OOXML votes).
Sean Daly is down in Luxembourg right now, where Georg and Carlo are, and
there should be an interview done soon which will go on Groklaw later.
==========The press release=================
FSFE, Samba: A triumph for freedom of choice and competition
"Microsoft can consider itself above the law no longer," says Georg
Greve, president of the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE).
"Through tactics that successfully derailed antitrust processes in
other parts of the world, including the United States, Microsoft has
managed to postpone this day for almost a decade. But thanks to the
perseverance and excellent work of the European Commission, these
tactics have now failed in Europe," Greve continues.
Carlo Piana, FSFE's legal counsel: "FSFE and the Samba Team welcome
the decision of the court. This is a milestone for competition. It
puts an end to the notion that deliberate obfuscation of standards and
designed lock-in is an acceptable business model and forces Microsoft
back into competing on the grounds of software technology."
"The Samba Team would like to thank the European Commission for its
outstanding job over the past years. Millions of users around the
world will reap the rewards of their work," comments Jeremy Allison,
co-author of the Samba project. "This is a very important day for the
Samba Team: we hope to finally compete on a level playing field,
without being denied access to interoperability information. Samba
would then be able to offer consumers real choice, with the benefits
of software freedom."
Volker Lendecke of the Samba Team: "Now that the court has decided, we
will be watching closely what the exact licensing terms for the
interoperability information are. It will be very important to make
sure that the information is usable in Free Software, otherwise the
great success the Commission has achieved here is severely
harmed. Samba is one of the most important players in the workgroup
server market, the market in which the comission wanted to restore
competition."
"This is a very good day for Europe, but it is only a step along the
way. The recurrent theme for Microsoft's behaviour over the past years
is an apparent perception of interoperability as a threat to
overcome," summarises FSFE counsel Carlo Piana. "The most recent
example was provided by MS-OOXML, which Doug Mahugh of Microsoft
described as a commercially motivated response to the threat provided
by the ODF ISO standard and the interoperability and choice it offers.
Tactical, not technical considerations were the driving force behind
Microsoft's global efforts to manipulate national standardisation
bodies into blind acceptance of MS-OOXML."
FSFE president Greve concludes: "Today's decision has set a very
important precedent for the future. Secret manipulation of open
formats and protocols has clearly been marked as unacceptable
conduct. We now encourage the European Commission take up the recent
antitrust complaint brought forward by ECIS. In a joint effort with
the Samba Team and OpenOffice.org, the FSFE gladly offers its
expertise to the European Commission for that investigation."
============================================
--
Ciarán O'Riordan __________________ \ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _________ \ GPLv3 and other work supported by
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/weblog \ Fellowship: http://www.fsfe.org