Hall On Worldwide Open Source Movement 193
adamsmith_uk writes "There's an article up on ZDNet
summarizing an interesting speech from Jon "Maddog" Hall about non-US open-source, as well as protecting open-source from 'looters' - well worth a read: 'The open-source development community is an international treasure and should be protected as such, said veteran Linux advocate Jon "Maddog" Hall, in a talk in Birmingham, UK, that emphasized the role of open-source software outside the United States.'"
looters ? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:looters ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Did anyone notice that he basically called theft of IP "stealing"? Isn't this what we've been fighting in the music area, that it's breaking copyright etc, but not stealing?
Re:looters ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Something like the shard of pottery with the earliest known human writing is a treasure that belongs to everyone so the looters in Iraq were taking something that belongs to everyone and trying to make it private. In that sense the analogy with SCO is a good one.
Also, if you take Thomas Jefferson's famous analogy that "he who lights a candle from mine gains illumniation without diminishing me" (from memory so don't quote me
Re:looters ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:looters ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:looters ? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:looters ? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:looters ? (Score:2)
Re:looters ? (Score:5, Interesting)
A relevant quote from Lawrence Lessig's blog [stanford.edu]:e rits can never be quashed. There is no one to say âenough, letâ(TM)s move on.â(TM) So every great idea that your type creates, weâ(TM)ll just wait, watch, and then take. Always.â paraphrased from a conversation with someone from within one of the (how many are there?) largest proprietary code companies.
âoeWhat you donâ(TM)t understand, Lessig, is that your bullshit âopenâ(TM) or âfreeâ(TM) types will never â" NEVER â" be able to compete with corporate organization. Squabbles-about-egos-pretending-to-be-about-the-m
------------
Re:looters ? (Score:5, Interesting)
This probably already happens. I know that I often spot a nice technique in GPL or BSD code and use the idea (not the code) in my own programs. Seems perfectly legitimate. I also pick up ideas from co-workers, magazine articles, books, and so on. As long as you are not outright copying the code why would that be considered a problem?
I think that more and more that OSS is being used as an 'open university' where ideas are tested and played with. As long as no patents are involved the ideas and designs do not belong to anyone.
Re:looters ? (Score:2)
That's why this whole "looking at GPLd code will contaminate you" stuff is wrong IMHO. Copying code is a clear violation, it can be proven if necessary (given the balance of probabilities). OTOH taking a useful idea or technique cannot be.
If taking ideas or algorithms is violating the license, then what about code style? Working on others open sourced code has massi
Duh - No. This *is* stealing. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you think about it for a bit... about a tenth of a second should be sufficient in most cases... no.
Copyright violation is not stealing. Let's all say it together: copyright violation is not stealing. It's just copyright violation.
What SCO is doing, however, is attempted theft (although not in the conventional sense). They're trying to take the IP for themselves, so no one else can have it (at least without paying SCO). This is taking from someone. Not just making a copy for themselves without permission. This is theft, not copyright violation.
His use of the term is almost ironically correct.
bingo. (Score:3, Interesting)
When you take work someone else did, claim it's "derivative" and then keep them from using it, you are indeed a theif. SCO would essentially be destroying the original copy for the author as
Re:looters ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Isn't this what we've been fighting in the music area, that it's breaking copyright etc, but not stealing?
Yeah, and if I cheat on my taxes they can lock me up for "tax evasion"; but they d***ed well better not acuse me of stealing. That just wouldn't be fair.
I hereby move that the Open Source and Free Software movements be combined and reorganized as The Society for Pointless Debates Revolving Around Semantics and Nomenclature or SPDRASN. I think that SPDRASN should be pronounced "spud raisin" and that a spud raisin is a wrinkled potato, not a white grape. What do you think?
Re:looters ? (Score:2)
Dammit, it's not looters! Read the Fine Sig.
Looters act in a situation of chaos. That characterization is inaccurate in this case. The word "pirate" clearly fits.
Re:looters ? (Score:2)
Did you read the article? Someone announcing to sue everyone using Linux while continueing to sell it to its customers can certainly be called a looter, no?
Re:looters ? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:looters ? (Score:5, Interesting)
That is not who is being called a looter in TFA which you apparently didn't R. The looters mentioned in the article are an analogy for SCO. Maddog says that the world needs to step in and prevent SCO from destroying the international public treasure of the OSS the way the U.S. should have stepped in and prevented the destroying of the international public treasure in the Iraqi museums. He gives examples of Munich, the UK, and Brazil as places where local governments at one level or another are supporting OSS. He did not even remotely imply that someone using OSS would be a looter.
Re:looters ? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:looters ? (Score:2)
Why would somebody using an open source code be called a 'looter' ?
In short, its probably an Ayn Rand reference. See Atlas Shrugged [amazon.com] for the long, long, long, long explanation.
For the medium explanation, Atlas Shrugged describe a world in which those who are 'capable' are leached upon, taxed, condemned, and harnessed by the less capable, often called 'looters.' Those who can, do. Those who can't, either petition the government to rewrite the laws in their favor, or work for the government.
The clea
Re:looters ? (Score:2, Insightful)
Now that Microsoft is becoming more and more like Unix, what prevents them from stealing the kernel and embed it in their operating system? We cannot look at their source code.
How can we prevent this from happening?
Re:looters ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:looters ? (Score:2)
Re:looters ? (Score:2)
neccessary? (Score:5, Interesting)
Not trying to be a troll here, but it just seems to me that if you were to take open sourced software and released it closed source, unless you did it in the US, you would be fine, right? But how can all those VCD Dealers in Malaysia get busted by the Motion Picture Association of AMERICA?
I think the real legal threat to open source is the fact there isn't a huge legal padding fee behind them, hence the Open/Free (yes they are the same) software, no money exchanged.
Re:neccessary? (Score:5, Funny)
You'd better beleive Joe, as for as them tanks can roll.
G.W.B.
Re:neccessary? (Score:4, Interesting)
I can think of two scenarios for countries outside the US:
Re:neccessary? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not trying to be a troll here, but it just seems to me that if you were to take open sourced software and released it closed source, unless you did it in the US, you would be fine, right?
No, most countries have signed copyright treaties that mean that copyright is global. But beyond that, it is perfectly legal to release open source software as closed source if the license allows that. For instance the license for Python and Apache allow that. You must be thinking of the GPL.
But how can all those VCD Dealers in Malaysia get busted by the Motion Picture Association of AMERICA?
They can't. They get busted by their local police for breaking local copyright laws that are created in order to be in conformance with international treaties.
I think the real legal threat to open source is the fact there isn't a huge legal padding fee behind them, hence the Open/Free (yes they are the same) software, no money exchanged.
It is because you do not understand what Open Source and Free software are that you think that they are the same and that they are both equivalent to GPL when neither is.
Re:neccessary? (Score:3, Informative)
And then of course nations who ar
Re:neccessary? (Score:2)
Please correct me if I'm wrong, I thought that the GPL more or less embodied the principles of Free software.
Re:neccessary? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:neccessary? (Score:2)
Did VCD dealers in Malaysia get busted by the MPAA? If so, I'd guess that Malaysia is in on the Berne Convention or has some other agreement.
Re:neccessary? (Score:5, Informative)
Dmitri was in Moscow when he 'committed' the alleged 'crime'. Except that it wasn't a crime in Moscow, it was perfectly legal. He was later invited to a conference in the United States where he spoke on a related topic, but what he said is not alleged to have been criminal (anywhere). So he committed no crime either in the United States or anywhere else in the world. He did something in Moscow which might have been criminal if he had done it in the United States, but he didn't.
There are lots of things that are legal in one country but illegal in another. For example, carrying or even posessing any sort of hand gun is illegal here in Scotland. Do you think that if you've ever carried a handgun anywhere in the world, if you visit Scotland you should be arrested and charged?
Re:neccessary? (Score:2, Informative)
I'm not defending the DMCA, but it was within the US borders.
-Eyston
Re:neccessary? (Score:2)
He was arrested in Las Vegas. I was under the impression that was within the borders of America.
Yes! (Score:5, Funny)
Exactly! And what do you do with international treasure? You bury it away in some dingy, windowless room where no one will ever find it, without an visitors.... to prevent it from getting stolen, y'know.
Hence all OSS developers really need to be locked away in.... uhh ehrmm... oh, NM.
Re:Yes! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Yes! (Score:2, Insightful)
Disclaimer : if you don't have a sense of humour, you probably shouldn't read my posts
Re:Yes! (Score:2)
Re:Yes! (Score:2)
Re:Yes! (Score:2)
Well, at least it's Windows-less.
herd mentality (Score:5, Insightful)
A word from the Grammar Nazi (Score:2, Funny)
Dear Sir,
Your attempted use of the possessive pronoun "its" is incorrect. Literally, your sentence has the following meaning:
"It is continued acceptance is a forgone conclusion at this point."
Clearly, this does not make any sense. The correct usage is "its", and not "it's". Please remember this for future reference.
Sincerely,
Grammar Nazi
Re:A word from the Grammar Nazi (Score:5, Funny)
So what you are saying is.... (Score:2)
So what you are saying is that we need to change our herd mentality to a GNU/herd mentality?
other places? (Score:2, Funny)
I REALLY hope... (Score:5, Insightful)
F/OSS advocates have to stick together. Divide and conquer still works, lo these many centuries later.
that would be silly. ZDNet sucks again. (Score:3, Insightful)
This approach can have massive benefits outside the United States--the country where most proprietary software originates--allowing greater price flexibility and a focus on specialized needs, Hall argued.
ZDNet generally sucks. It's doubtfull a free software advocate would really say that. Free software has the same massive benifits inside the US as it does outside the US. The Free Software Foundation is headquartered in the US, Richard Stallman, Eric Raymon
US legal precedents (Score:5, Insightful)
This would not only protect OSS, but allay the fears of fence-sitting businessfolk.
Re:US legal precedents (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, save us from small-minded, narrow, ignoratn American parochialism. There are over 150 legal jurisdictions in the world. None of them gives a monkeys about what happens in any other. There's nothing special or magic about an American court
intentional Rand reference? (Score:4, Interesting)
Casting the Free software movement in the mold of objectivist capitalism might be an interesting thought experiment.
If proprietary software vendors are the "looters" the intellectual efforts of those who can for the sake of those who cannot, it turns a lot of the corporate FUD on its head.
Re:intentional Rand reference? (Score:3)
Re:intentional Rand reference? (Score:5, Interesting)
In my mind, this is the model of transaction that Free software is strongest in, and that works the best.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:intentional Rand reference? (Score:3, Interesting)
If proprietary software vendors are the "looters" the intellectual efforts of those who can for the sake of those who cannot, it turns a lot of the corporate FUD on its head.
If you read the article you'll see that the looters are people who want to destroy open source (in particular SCO), not proprietary software vendors who want to take advantage of it. By definition they do not "hurt" it.
Re:intentional Rand reference? (Score:2)
And in that context, the practice of "locking-in" a customer to an endless upgrade cycle without ever pulling back the curtain to show what is going on, or giving access to code, even code that is no longer being marketed, is looting both the intellectual commons and the capital marketplace by fencing off plentiful resources as if they were
Publicd domain??? NOT! (Score:5, Informative)
WTF?!? It's NOT public domain.
Hall seems to know what he's talking about, so I'm going to guess that the article author - Matthew Broersma - did a botch-job in paraphrasing him. Note that this comment isn't actually in quotes, unlike four other comments attributed to Hall.
-
Iraq looting story has been well-disproven (Score:4, Informative)
Anyway, I realize the speech was about something else and this quote was probably selected because of its topical nature (or the reporter's leanings), but the story has been well disproven as a falsehood seized upon by the media in their frenzy to discredit the US and the UK. I'm surprised to see the "thousands and thousands" version of the story, intended to swing public opinion against the Iraq war, still being referenced.
"These treasures were created over tens of thousands of years, and all of a sudden, because of the lack of foresight of a few greedy people, a lot of them were removed from the world," he said. "The world has to decide whether or not to send in troops to guard this free and open-source software, to protect it for the world's use."
Even The Guardian [guardian.co.uk] has backed off of the earlier story.
If you want a right-wing source instead of a left-wing source, try WorldNetDaily [worldnetdaily.com] which was published more than a month before the Guardian one (it helps to use multiple sources).
And even if the original version of the story had been true, I could really care less about some museum pieces compared to the lives of the US and UK military, the Iraqi people, the Kurds, etc.
Re:Iraq looting story has been well-disproven (Score:2)
And even if the original version of the story had been true, I could really care less about some museum pieces compared to the lives of the US and UK military, the Iraqi people, the Kurds, etc.
Why is it a question of comparing lives to museum pieces? You send a team of soldiers and they guard the museum. They are probably in less danger than they would be walking on the street where people take pot shots at them. Certainly less danger than grandstanding on top of a Saddam statue!
Re:Iraq looting story has been well-disproven (Score:2)
Re:Iraq looting story has been well-disproven (Score:2)
LOL! I love it when the tactics devised by the right-wing fall back against them.
People are still claiming a lot of things about President Clinton too, that were long proven to be false.
Re:Iraq looting story has been well-disproven (Score:2)
It's nothing new to either side.
Re:Iraq looting story has been well-disproven (Score:2)
Your painfully naive if you believe the right-wing didn't take this to an extreme for Clinton.
It's nothing new to either side.
Oh it's been around a long time. People still believe FDR knew the Japanese were going to attack at Pearl Harbor and did nothing because he wanted us into the war.
But nobody made it into an actual business venture until the GOP did so in 1993.
Hey MadDog! What happened to LI?? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Hey MadDog! What happened to LI?? (Score:3, Informative)
One unbeatable advantage of Open Source (Score:5, Insightful)
When the source to the system you are employing is open to all, you have an advantage that cannot be matched by the closed-source vendors: The possibility of having someone local (and cheap) help support your system. It's standard, it's known, it was probably studied at school. Compare that to closed-source where you are dependent on the vendor or its designated partners for support.
Now as the article says, if you are a large corporation you might want to hire another large corporation for support. That's their right, and it's fine. But if you are a small company, or an entity with limited funds (such as a non-profit), it's nice to have the choice to get a local guy to help out instead at greatly reduced costs, and possibly even better quality if he or she is enthusiastic about the program in question.
Open as in free. Can't beat that advantage.
Re:One unbeatable advantage of Open Source (Score:4, Interesting)
John has what it takes to protect the community (Score:4, Funny)
John can hide the entire open-source community in his beard [sgala.com] to protect it and keep it warm.
i like maddog (Score:5, Insightful)
RMS has done alot of great service towards free software but he is a fanatic. Just read India's communist newspaper for more info [cpim.org] . His comments on the SCO case show he does not care about the Linux kernel being fudded out of corporate America. He only cares about his precious gnu and views Linux as not part of it or just a kernel. This shows his radical side because he hates anything corporate.
I shudder whenever he opens his mouth. He really does make us in the free software community look bad.
Maddog however cares about Linux acceptance in corporate America and is in favor of other non gpl ( or non free according to RMS ) OSS like FreeBSD.
I wish people would look up to Maddog as the opensource leader instead of RMS.
Re:i like maddog (Score:3, Informative)
Just because his words were printed in a communist newspaper doesn't make them wrong.
This portion especially I found salient and insightful:
Stallman said that vigorous efforts are on to colonise the world of computer users by a few big monopoly computer companies and called for resisting this phenomenon by spreading the network of free software movement. He called upon countries like India to emphatical
Re:i like maddog (Score:5, Insightful)
"Bill Gates donations of computers to Indian schools is really aimed at getting children hooked on to licensed software. It is a bit like selling cigarettes to children."
OK, tell me that's not the voice of a fanatic. Note firstly that he doesn't make any distinction between good and bad software, or MS and non-MS, just 'licensed' and umm...unlicensed? I thought that the GPL was a license too. Also consider the parallels between being comfortable with a given user interface and application set, and a physiological addiction to nicotine. Yeah, GREAT comparison Richard!
The guy truly is a fanatic. Even if he's sometimes right, he's a fanatic.
Re:i like maddog (Score:2)
The GPL is a license. It is a license based upon copyright. Copyright is an affirmation of ownership. Software that is owned is defined by the dictionary as "proprietary".
Re:i like maddog (Score:2)
Doesn't seem a very good analogy to me, since the children still have to save up their pocket money and buy the cigarettes full price. It's more like dealers hanging around the school gates, handing out 'free' samples to get the kids dependent.
I don't like the parent poster tone ' I shudder whenever he opens his mouth. He really does make us in the free software community look bad.'. We're not a political party that has to toe an official line. Any of us can
Re:i like maddog (Score:3, Insightful)
Just for your consideration: the SCO case should demonstrate two things clearly. First, acceptance in corporate America is what brought all this heartache to open source in the first place.
Second, it's the GPL and only the GPL that is protecting everything from SCO. McBride said yesterday that he won't sue Linux distributors after all, because of the
Re:i like maddog (Score:2)
Nonsense. It is the open and free nature of Linux is protecting the distros from SCO, not the specific license. Any license that grants non-revocable permission to freely use, modify and copy Linux would have the same effect once SCO distributed their own copy.
This case isn't about SCO "grabbing" Linux and making it their own. It's about SCO not wanting others to "grab" what they wrongly feel is theirs. But if they distribute Li
Re:i like maddog (Score:2)
If I were him I'd probably kill myself because I'd think the world was just too ignorant to "get it". But lucky for us he has more willpower than your average boarderline personality disorder. I
Re:i like maddog (Score:2)
In fact, RMS once had the thought of killing himself, as described in his biography Free as in Freedom [oreilly.com]. To find the paragraph, search Chapter 7 [oreilly.com] for the word "dynamite".
Re:i like maddog (Score:2)
Re:i like maddog (Score:3, Insightful)
it is clear, salient, insightfull, accurate and calm. Its not 'his precious' gnu - its the 'ideas' hes trying to preserve.. make sure people understand what Libre Software is... thats his goal.
"I shudder whenever he opens his mouth. He really does make us in the free software community look bad."
Give me a break pal, this anti-rms crap is a little obvious. your trolling for 'corporate american acceptance' of G
Protection (Score:5, Interesting)
* ban software patents;
* allow enforcement of software copyright only where irrefutable evidence of infringement exists;
* provide a cheap, fast track method of dealing with frivoulous claims;
* free legal aid for non profit open source providers, but making deliberate misappropriation of IP a criminal offence.
OSM battle depends on Nationalism (Score:3, Insightful)
I think this is the greatest strength of the OSS movement. When a government or country is going to invest millions of dollars into IT, doesn't it make sense for that money to be kept local? Munich signed SuSE, a Germany company. It only makes sense.
The great thing is that this fragmentization is a strength of OSM. A lot of small companies all working on OSS independantly, but all of them providing benefit to each other. It is a system where competition makes everyone stronger.
-Eyston
Re:OSM battle depends on Nationalism (Score:2, Insightful)
Nationalism = Industrial Policy = Trouble
There are a lot of great things about OSS, but nationalism sure isn't one of them.
Munich signed SuSE, a Germany company. It only makes sense
But what if Red Hat offers a better product? Imagine a nation's politicians decide to use OSS to close their markets or even their societies. A commercial vendor cannot afford to alienate customers everywhere, but a government sure can. What is going to happen? Will someone sue Kim Jong Il over his regime's violation of th
Re:OSM battle depends on Nationalism (Score:2)
Cost? (Score:2)
No mention of the cost. Any estimates?
Why not download a totally free distro and burn it to CD assuming you have the in-house resources? A donation could be made in return.
Re:Cost? (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably more expensive then the Microsoft offer, bear with me: Acording to the Register (and other sources, like Heise) Steve "Ape Dance" Balmer interrupted his skiing holidays in Switzerland to shmooz the Munich major and lure them in with very, very steep discounts. Munich however conducted a detailed study about long term aspects (not only costs, but the cost of being an addicted junkie in 5 years, when the dsicounts are no more 90%) and didn't let themselves be fooled.
Why not download a totally free distro and burn it to CD assuming you have the in-house resources?
Because that's not the way you do it, when you have to replace 14000 desktops. That might be fine for a company of 10 or 50 people, but not for a project of this magnitude. "Licensing costs" are probably irelevant here, it's primarily integration and services
SuSE teamed up with IBM in order to execute this project.
Hope this helps
Should the US pass a law protecting Open Source (Score:3, Interesting)
Australia (Score:2)
The current OSS climate in Australia is interesting. At the same time as one state (South Australia) is proposing legislation to use OSS "wherever practicable" [news.com.au], another state (Victoria) is giving Microsoft $80000 [vic.gov.au] to promote .NET use.
OSS vs. "commodity software"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Commercial software is not a commodity, it is the opposite, a corral in which users are captured and bled.
RMS' of course predicted the "Looting of OSS" (or rather was one of the first lootees) and this is why the GPL is so important. The looters become part of the
Non-US? (Score:2)
The U.S. IS THE problem. Look between your own feet
before talking about what you see around you.
So...what now? (Score:2)
Um, this happens all the time. Like it or not, it's part of our society. Capitalism does this. That's why we pass laws which act against immediate profiteers in favor of protecting, say, national parks.
Now, the first national park in the world (Yellowstone) was established by Co
No no no!!! (Score:2)
I am normally pretty calm about errors of fact, but this one made me see some red. Open source software is in fact copywrighted, and not in the public domain. Just because the au
Re:Since he compares the SCO suit ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Here is a little quote from the article:
These treasures were created over tens of thousands of years, and all of a sudden, because of the lack of foresight of a few greedy people, a lot of them were removed from the world.(Emphasis added)
How safe is the open source community again?
Re:Since he compares the SCO suit ... (Score:2)
Perhaps you might find this [nytimes.com] relevant.
Re:Since he compares the SCO suit ... (Score:5, Informative)
The [guardian.co.uk]
Guardian reports "33 major items and around 2,000 minor works have gone". So to use the 33 number as the "real" number of items stolen is almost as bogus as the original claim (an exageration factor of 65 compared to a factor of 81 for the original claim). Over 33 major pieces and 2,000 pieces minor pieces from a museum in the birthplace of civilization is NOT inconsequential however it may relate to the original claim. Civilization is not about to be reborn again anytime soon so there is no replacing those items. Toss the numbers around however you'd like, there was a significant loss.
Re:Since he compares the SCO suit ... (Score:2)
That same thought was in my mind as I typed
Also the thought that "civilization" is rather a misnomer for the current state of affairs in the world. Also the thought that "civilization" was, like OSS ideas, born many places (e.g. China, Mexico, etc.). Oh well, can't say everything at once.
Re:Since he compares the SCO suit ... (Score:3, Informative)
Danny.
Re:US Government and foreign OSS (Score:2)
Meanwhile, some nameless Australian agencies are buying HP Linux machines literally by the truckload. It's good to see.
Re:Hey OSS people: You are an international treasu (Score:2)
[ ] I agree with that statement
[ ] I neither agree nor disagree with that statement
[ ] I disagree with that statement
[ ] I strongly disagree with that statement
[ ] I would like to kill whoever made that statement
[ ] This statement is not relative
This isn't a vote here - imagine if all the comments to this story were one of the above choice - it'd be pretty dull, wouldn't it.
Re:Who are the real looters? (Score:2)
I didn't think he was criticizing to the U.S. here - I think he was referring to the looters.
Re:Analogy to Iraq treasures... (Score:2)
Wouldn't you consider the loss of 25 irreplaceable artifacts from the ancient world "a lot"?
It is good that the bulk of them were recovered (or never stolen in the first place), but I assume if the Smithstonian "lost" 25 artifacts a year, they would consider it a pretty significant blow.