Domain: actonline.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to actonline.org.
Comments · 19
-
Links to Tech CEOs' demand for $250M from Feds
Let's see - study comes from a Microsoft/Google/Apple-sponsored group that asks site visitors to join the CEOs of those companies to demand that Congress cough up $250 million in K-12 computer science education funding.
-
Re:no privacy in your own thought..?
http://actonline.org/act-blog/files/Tinfoil-Hat2.jpg [actonline.org]
-
What the actual quote said:
Senator: “Do recognize that in the words that are used in antitrust kind of oversight, your market share constitutes monopoly, dominant — special power, dominant firm, monopoly firm. Do you recognize you’re — you’re in that area?”
Schmidt: “I would agree, Senator, that we’re in that area" link -
Re:Could rewrite, EU tries to kick Americans out.Microsoft is one of 59 members of the Association for Competitive Technology.
The only victim here is the readership of Slashdot. There is a concerted campaign here to slate Microsoft regardless of any basis in reality.
[1] [actonline.org]That's disingenuous at best.
Microsoft may be one of 59, but most of the rest are Microsoft partners.
To pick only the headlined companies:
These smaller, entrepreneurial technology firms like Sax Software, ComponentSource and EnsuredMail have long been the driving force behind innovation and job growth in the industry.
- Sax Software; Microsoft VB and ActiveX tools.
- ComponentSource; Microsoft WinForms, ASP.NET, WPF and Silverlight tools & controls.
- EnsuredMail; Microsoft Outlook mail filter.
See any pattern there?
-
Re:Could rewrite, EU tries to kick Americans out.
Microsoft is one of 59 members of the Association for Competitive Technology
[1]. The only victim here is the readership of Slashdot. There is a concerted campaign here to slate Microsoft regardless of any basis in reality.Wikileaks claims the president of the ACT has strong ties to Microsoft, but only provides the ironically named, unsourced open-access Wiki, SourceWatch[2], as evidence for this latest smear campaign.
This is not the work of Microsoft. This lobbying was perpetrated by the software industry in general. People round here fail to see, for reasons unbeknown to me, that Microsoft is not exceptionally evil as corporations go.
-
Re:IANAL, but...Are you quoting a legal judgment, statement from the FSF, or otherwise? Or is that just your own misguided interpretation? A stetement from Eben Moglen, co writer of the GPL and legal council to the FSF.
http://impact.freethcartwright.com/2007/09/gpl3-impact-gui.html When a program is labelled 'GPLv2 or any later version';... the author is delegating to the users a part of the authority to relicence. Now if the users can opt to license under GPLv3, they get the rights to patent licenses and encryption keys. The FSF is trying to force people like Tivo to provide these.
http://blog.actonline.org/gplv3/index.html So how would this affect GPLv3? Lets take one provision in particular, the so-called anti-Tivo provision in section 6, which requires anyone that distributes GPLd code as part of a consumer product to include installation information and the ability to install modified versions of the code on the consumer product. One could argue that the FSF has limited the scope of the license to prohibit distribution in consumer devices that dont allow modification of device software, meaning that a breach would be copyright infringement. I think the more logical reading is that the FSF has imposed an additional obligation on producers of consumer devices. Failure to fulfill that obligation would be a breach of contract, not a copyright infringement. While it's not clear that any of this pseudo contract / pseudo license stuff designed to collectivise private property is enforceable, it's also not clear that it isn't. Some people - including Eben Moglen - have speculated that Microsoft may be distributing GPL3 software by selling vouchers and thus may have to license all its patents for free.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/05/16/MS-patent-claims-complicated-by-GPLv3_1.html The provision was put in specifically to make deals such as the one Microsoft struck with Novell "useless" to Microsoft so that it cannot make similar pacts that include royalty payments with other companies, said Eben Moglen, chairman of the Software Freedom Law Center and a Columbia University professor of law and legal history who cowrote the GPLv3 draft with the Free Software Foundation's Richard Stallman.
"Rather than discriminating among parties so customers feel safe [from litigation] and not developers, we instead will be turning the Microsoft-Novell deal into a patent-insurance factor for everybody," he said.
The catch is that no one is sure if Microsoft's agreement to distribute coupons for Suse Linux Enterprise Support through the Novell deal would deem it a Linux distributor and require the company to be compliant with the GPL. And Moglen, who has examined the Microsoft-Novell deal but is under a nondisclosure agreement forbidding him from revealing specifics, said that the answer will remain unclear unless Microsoft and Novell go public with that element of their deal. So clearly the GPL3 is designed to trap people that distribute GPL3 or "GPL2 or later" software or even sell support vouchers for "GPL2 or a later" into being forced to license all their patents for free. It reminds me of the bit in Atlas Shrugged where the looters and moochers are hell bent on taking everthing away from successful innovators and putting it under collective ownership. -
Read the Papers
Bruce Perens has responded to the papers I wrote for ACT without having read them. He made the absurd statement to eWeek, repeated here, that the Daniel Wallace case "shows the GPL is unlikely to give rise to any significant liability." I was talking about GPLv3, not an earlier version and the Daniel Wallace case was based on a predatory pricing theory - not group boycott theory as I discussed. Different facts, different law, different result. It would be great if someone with some legal training look at this, if not Mr. Perens. They are at http://www.actonline.org/documents/ACT-GPLv3-Lega
l -Risks.pdf and http://www.actonline.org/documents/GPLv3-License-o r-Contract.pdf. -
Read the Papers
Bruce Perens has responded to the papers I wrote for ACT without having read them. He made the absurd statement to eWeek, repeated here, that the Daniel Wallace case "shows the GPL is unlikely to give rise to any significant liability." I was talking about GPLv3, not an earlier version and the Daniel Wallace case was based on a predatory pricing theory - not group boycott theory as I discussed. Different facts, different law, different result. It would be great if someone with some legal training look at this, if not Mr. Perens. They are at http://www.actonline.org/documents/ACT-GPLv3-Lega
l -Risks.pdf and http://www.actonline.org/documents/GPLv3-License-o r-Contract.pdf. -
Re:This was one funny article.
Who is Association for Competitive Technology? http://www.actonline.org/aboutus.htm While ACT members include some household names like eBay, Orbitz and Microsoft, our members are primarily small and mid-size companies. Smaller, entrepreneurial technology firms like Sax Software,
Ahhh, yes. Mike Sax. This is the dude that showed up at the committee hearing for the Oregon Open Source bill (HB2892, 2003 session) and made a total FOOL out of himself erecting strawmen to pick a fight with.
He concluded his testimony with this outlandish statement: "Red Hat's business model is to hand out free rice to [prison] inmates and then make money selling constipation medicine." As the author of that legislation, I was in the room and had a hard time keeping from busting out laughing.
But wait! It gets better... he's actually proud of having used the word "constipation" in front of an august panel of lawmakers. It's in his blog here.
Yes, folks, THESE are the people who are opposing Open Standards in government. Constipated indeed!
Ken Barber
-
This was one funny article.
The key sentence:
Jim Prendergast is executive director of Americans for Technology Leadership.
Americans for Technology Leadership Founding members
* Association for Competitive Technology
* Citizens Against Government Waste
* Cityscape Filmworks
* Clarity Consulting
* CompTIA
* CompUSA
* Microsoft Corporation
* 60Plus Association
* Small Business Survival Committee
* Staples, Inc.
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id =8966&news_iv_ctrl=1037
itizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today urged Congress to eliminate the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Advanced Technology Program (ATP), which funds private sector research and development
These are the other tech programs CAGW doesn't like.
http://www.atp.nist.gov/gems/listgems.htm
Who is Association for Competitive Technology?
http://www.actonline.org/aboutus.htm
While ACT members include some household names like eBay, Orbitz and Microsoft, our members are primarily small and mid-size companies. Smaller, entrepreneurial technology firms like Sax Software,
http://www.actonline.org/principles.htm
ACT and its members believe that the best way to achieve a healthy Tech Environment and a thriving technology industry is to apply free-market principles that promote innovation, investment and competition. ACT is committed to core free-market principles including:
1. Consumers, not governments, should pick winners and losers in the marketplace.
2. Small tech businesses thrive on innovation, not regulation and litigation.
3. The law of regulation includes the corollary of unintended consequences.
60 Plus has set ending the federal estate tax and saving Social Security for the young as its top priorities. Why should they be against this? It would save money in the long term.
The Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council (SBE Council) works to influence legislation and policies that help to create a favorable and productive environment for small businesses and entrepreneurship. By educating policymakers, elected officials, the media and the public about the critical role that small businesses play in our economy--and how government actions can positively or negatively affect the small business community.
I don't know about you, but I'd want a refund from the SBE Council if they are supporting not going to an open document standard. A standard means that every small business could work and bid on any part of the project. Odds are most of the work would be done locally and not outsourced overseas. This is a great move for small business. (It is a bad move for those small businesses that store everything in their own little data format that only they know about. Which is exactly what this effort is trying to get rid of in the government realm.) -
This was one funny article.
The key sentence:
Jim Prendergast is executive director of Americans for Technology Leadership.
Americans for Technology Leadership Founding members
* Association for Competitive Technology
* Citizens Against Government Waste
* Cityscape Filmworks
* Clarity Consulting
* CompTIA
* CompUSA
* Microsoft Corporation
* 60Plus Association
* Small Business Survival Committee
* Staples, Inc.
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id =8966&news_iv_ctrl=1037
itizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today urged Congress to eliminate the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Advanced Technology Program (ATP), which funds private sector research and development
These are the other tech programs CAGW doesn't like.
http://www.atp.nist.gov/gems/listgems.htm
Who is Association for Competitive Technology?
http://www.actonline.org/aboutus.htm
While ACT members include some household names like eBay, Orbitz and Microsoft, our members are primarily small and mid-size companies. Smaller, entrepreneurial technology firms like Sax Software,
http://www.actonline.org/principles.htm
ACT and its members believe that the best way to achieve a healthy Tech Environment and a thriving technology industry is to apply free-market principles that promote innovation, investment and competition. ACT is committed to core free-market principles including:
1. Consumers, not governments, should pick winners and losers in the marketplace.
2. Small tech businesses thrive on innovation, not regulation and litigation.
3. The law of regulation includes the corollary of unintended consequences.
60 Plus has set ending the federal estate tax and saving Social Security for the young as its top priorities. Why should they be against this? It would save money in the long term.
The Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council (SBE Council) works to influence legislation and policies that help to create a favorable and productive environment for small businesses and entrepreneurship. By educating policymakers, elected officials, the media and the public about the critical role that small businesses play in our economy--and how government actions can positively or negatively affect the small business community.
I don't know about you, but I'd want a refund from the SBE Council if they are supporting not going to an open document standard. A standard means that every small business could work and bid on any part of the project. Odds are most of the work would be done locally and not outsourced overseas. This is a great move for small business. (It is a bad move for those small businesses that store everything in their own little data format that only they know about. Which is exactly what this effort is trying to get rid of in the government realm.) -
IE is not just an "application"
As a VB/ASP developer, I know that IE is not just an "application". It's just the "outer layer" of an entire infrastructure of COM objects and services for internet interaction. Removing that WOULD break much of my code. Having to worry about supporting 10+ "alternatives" would be this developer's Hell! I wish to provide my customers with solutions, NOT a mess of extra plumbing!
For a good discussion of this, I suggest you check out this study on "ACTONLINE":
States' Proposed Remedies in Microsoft Case Could Cost Software Developers and Consumers $80 Billion -
Re:And now, the Pro-settlement comments.
Did anyone else notice that the "Association for Competitive Technology" lists Microsoft Corporation as one of its members? Can you say "astroturf"?
-
Ha!
Anyone else find it rather odd that supporting opinions from the Associate for Competative Technology and the Center for the Moral Defense of Capitalism? Maybe not. But then they also were both formed in 1998. Call that a coincidence. Also, the Computing Technology Industry Association was formed in 2000 (as far as I can tell).
I didn't bother searching for the other two opinions for the settlement. Here's hoping that the judge can read between the lines here. Lord knows I can't figure out just who is the main contributer to these organizations. -
Re:fool me once...You also buy your press coverage. The AP article said:
"...a pro-Microsoft trade group, the Washington-based Association for Competitive Technology, said only Microsoft's competitors don't want to see a settlement."
This did not mention that the ACT gets money from Microsoft. Oracle said a while ago:"Microsoft also funded the Association of Competitive Technology for the same exact purpose (of being a front group)."
-
Re:Join ACT and subvert it.What happens if we were to all join up
...Not much unless your willing to become a corporate member ($100 minium fee)
Snipped from the ACT Membership agreement
Voting rights and all other benefits priviliges of the Association are restricted to those members of the Association belonging to the "General Membership" (ie - corp. member) category.
So much for that.Individuals or businesses applying for membership in the "Supporting Member" category acknowledge that no special benefits or privileges are conveyed by such membership except as may be specifically accorded by the Board of Directors according to the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws of the Association.
-
Join ACT and subvert it.
What a sad, pathetic special interest group. Of course, no matter how completely asinine their mission statement sounds, they have the money to shove whatever they see fit down Washington's throat.
What happens if we were to all join up and subvert it from the inside? C'mon everybody, join and start e-mailing them your input. As a concerned member, they have to listen to you
;) -
Join ACT and subvert it.
What a sad, pathetic special interest group. Of course, no matter how completely asinine their mission statement sounds, they have the money to shove whatever they see fit down Washington's throat.
What happens if we were to all join up and subvert it from the inside? C'mon everybody, join and start e-mailing them your input. As a concerned member, they have to listen to you
;) -
M$ also behind members of ATL?