☂ Procurement And Copyright Article Available

My article about how procurement policies need to address copyright ownership is now available from the Essays section.

☝ Is Open Source Good For Security?

I’ve two stories about the discovery and resolution of bugs in important software packages – Solaris and Java – that suggest a properly-functioning open source community gets security problems fixed faster than a closed process. Read about it on ComputerWorldUK.

☝ Open Source Procurement and Copyright

Legacy procurement rules that try to demand custom copyright licenses and the assignment of new copyright to your company could be costing you dearly. They could be preventing you getting the freedoms open source brings, and along with them the flexibility and control that will make you competitive. It’s worth fixing the rules and gaining the freedoms.

Read about it on ComputerWorldUK.

☂ O Artigo “Direitos Humanos estão acima dos Direitos do Autor” Agora Disponível em Português

O artigo “Direitos Humanos estão acima dos Direitos do Autor” está agora disponível traduzido para o Português na seção Essays. Muito obrigado a Bruno Souza por doar seu tempo.

☝ Fixing The Chilling Effect of Trademarks

Brazil’s new License for Trademarks (Licença Pública de Marca, or LPM) adds additional rights on top of those delivered by open source. It ensures that any trademarks used in the software can be freely used by the community and means that control of trademarks can’t be used to chill the ability to exercise the four freedoms. Is the answer to trademark conflicts like we’ve seen around Hudson and LibreOffice?

Continue reading at ComputerWorldUK

☝ OSI and FSF Collaborate In DoJ Referral

Before Christmas I reported that the Open Source Initiative (OSI) had written to the German Federal Cartel Office (FCO) asking them to investigate the acquisition of Novell assets by the CPTN Group as a possibly anti-competitive move by CPTN’s four members. I described that move as “unprecedented” because it was the first time OSI had chosen to intervene in a competitive situation on behalf of the open source community it represents.

Today, another unprecedented action was provoked by the same situation.

Continue reading on ComputerWorldUK

☝ Google, Chrome and H.264 – Far From Hypocritical

When Google announced yesterday that they were withdrawing from their Chrome browser embedded support in the HTML5 <video> tag for the H.264 encoding standard, there was immediate reaction. While some of it was either badly informed views by people who can’t handle indirect causality or astroturf trolling by competitors, some of it was well-observed. For example, when they said:

“Though H.264 plays an important role in video, as our goal is to enable
open innovation, support for the codec will be removed and our resources
directed towards completely open codec technologies.”

they indicated that a motivation was to only use “completely open” technologies in Chrome. Yet they did not mention Adobe’s proprietary Flash system, designed for embedded media programming yet definitely not “completely open” even by Adobe’s special definitions of the word.

Continue reading on ComputerWorldUK

☂ Copyrights vs Human Rights

My article on how human rights trump copyrights is now available in the Essays section. It has also been republished at OpenSource.Com.

★ The Typhoid Mary of Three Strikes

Just before Christmas we saw the Spanish Parliament reject yet another attempt to introduce laws in Europe restricting Internet freedoms. There have been a rush of them this year, popping up in country after country, each national government calmly pretending it was their idea and they thought of it unaided and they think it’s a really good one, honestly. Yet many of us saw the mysterious pattern, like a fairy ring of mushrooms on a lawn, and surmised the empty centre wasn’t so empty after all.

Over the last year, we saw them spring up all over the world, notably in Australia and in France but also in many other countries. It seemed odd that so many legislatures should simultaneously feel the urge to create extrajudicial protection for mainly foreign – American – copyright holders, especially in a market where the emergence of alternative models favours local rather than imported talent.

Much of the fuss about Wikileaks has focussed on meta-issues. But there are interesting insights to be gained by correlating the information in the (carefully edited) diplomatic cables. So far I’ve seen nothing that wasn’t already the product of informed cynicism, but a useful confirmation casts light on “three-strikes”-style copyright-owner protection laws. Wikileaks has confirmed that the invisible something at the centre of them all is indeed what we thought it was – USTR, proxied by US diplomats.

About USTR

The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) performs the task of protecting American business interests and is now soundly gamed by large corporations. In 2010 its “Special 301” list came to public notice for declaring open source software to be akin to an anti-American tariff barrier, and USTR plays many other roles, mostly more covert, in attempting to create business advantage for its favoured businesses through diplomatic channels.

While I was working with others on preventing software patents being uniformly available in Europe in the middle of the decade, one point of fascination was the presence of USTR in the process of pro-patent advocacy, as well as the way certain large companies appeared to have permanent staff at the US Trade Mission. So I had long suspected USTR would be connected with the outbreak of the three-strikes disease. Wikileaks reveals that the “Typhoid Mary” of three-strikes law – claiming innocence while spreading infection – is indeed USTR.

Cables released already show they have been “helping” a range of governments. Indeed, the unseemly rush to impose the Digital Economy Act without discussion in Britain with the connivance of all political parties spoke loudly of civil servants briefing every MP who asked on a top-secret imperative to obey the Americans or face the awful consequences. I’ve no doubt that we’ll find the data to support the conjecture that every instance of three-strikes legislation globally has their fingerprints.

Here are some of the traces of USTR’s activities reported in the cables so far:

Responding

What can we do about this? Truth be told, not much given a modern society where government largely ignores citizens instead of representing them, preferring the collective soothing explanations of professional lobbyists. But there are two things.

First, the Spanish experience sets an important precedent. No politician wants to champion a new law as their own and then have it disclosed that actually they are acting as an agent for a foreign power, as Sinde had happen in Spain (even if her film industry background predisposed her to act against the citizens she was supposed to be representing). So we now know to ask in every case whether these laws are the result of US pressure, creating a resistance in the future to the effectiveness of USTR’s malign influence.

Second, USTR’s magnum opus – ACTA – is still not a done deal. The Wikileaks cables confirm USTR is the driving force, and also confirm that European politicians are getting cold feet over some of the ACTA malarkey. Let’s keep up the public pressure, both individually and through bodies like ORG, FSFE and EFF. We may yet find that the collective voice of the Internet-savvy citizens becomes as effective for citizen freedoms as the lobbyists have become for commercial advantage.

[First published in ComputerWorldUK on December 23, 2010]

☝ OSI Refers Novell Transaction To Competition Authorities

The Open Source Initiative (OSI) Board of Directors announced today that it has taken the unprecedented step of referring the proposed sale of Novell’s patents to the CPTN consortium (led by Microsoft and allegedly including EMC, Apple and Oracle – unlikely bedfellows) to the German competition authorities.

Continue reading over at ComputerWorldUK