Slashdot Mirror


Hall On Worldwide Open Source Movement

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.'"

61 of 193 comments (clear)

  1. looters ? by silverbolt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    By its very nature, open source is available for anybody to use. Why would somebody using an open source code be called a 'looter' ?

    1. Re:looters ? by mackstann · · Score: 4, Insightful

      * AND * breaking the license. Using open source software within the terms of the given license is not looting. Commercial products != evil.

    2. Re:looters ? by jdhutchins · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He was refering to companies who were trying to destroy open source software by claiming IP rights over them. They are the "looters", not OSS users.

      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?

    3. Re:looters ? by Tancred · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yep. Only these museum looters have sued the curators and are selling tickets to the public to see the exhibits that they used to get in free to see.

    4. Re:looters ? by dubStylee · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Why would somebody using an open source code be called a 'looter'

      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.

    5. Re:looters ? by dubStylee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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?

      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 :-) ... the equivalent for SCO would be someone that takes the candle everyone was lighting off of and locks it away where no one can see it or light off it.

    6. Re:looters ? by LoztInSpace · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But in the other favourite /. case of music, surely lighting my candle from yours (copying a song) is depriving the guy who sold you your matches (the artist).

    7. Re:looters ? by lysium · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I believe he is also referring to something we may see more of in the future -- commercial developers repacking open source software, or just taking the underlying design, and calling it their own. This is going to start happening in the American software industry, and likely in the far corners of the globe as well.

      A relevant quote from Lawrence Lessig's blog:
      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-me 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.

      ------------

      --
      Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
    8. Re:looters ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      All you slashdotter's feel that dull ache in the middle of your forehead? That's called experiencing cognitive dissonance. Trying to believe at the same time that making a copy of a music CD IS NOT theft, while making a copy of a freely given program, modifying it, and not releasing the source code of those modifications IS theft; enough to make your head explode.

    9. Re:looters ? by istartedi · · 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?

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    10. Re:looters ? by dubStylee · · Score: 2, Informative

      See my reply to someone else below on why the 33 number is bogus. But even if only 1 item was stolen, let's say the Mono Lisa (though we have lots of other works by Da Vinci, unlike the archaelogical treasures which are entirely one of a kind), it is still valid to say that an international public treasure was destroyed.

    11. Re:looters ? by boots@work · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's funny that you should use that example. There is a wonderful old satire by Swift (iirc), in which candlemakers petition the government for laws requiring curtains to be closed all through the day, so that people will not unfairly deprive candlemakers of income.

    12. Re:looters ? by miu · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I believe he is also referring to something we may see more of in the future -- commercial developers repacking open source software, or just taking the underlying design, and calling it their own.

      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.

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
    13. Re:looters ? by floyd-robinson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is necessary to prevent open source from being looted by commercial corporations.

      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?

    14. Re:looters ? by alekd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That would be "A Petition From the Manufacturers of Candles, Tapers, Lanterns, sticks, Street Lamps, Snuffers, and Extinguishers, and from Producers of Tallow, Oil, Resin, Alcohol, and Generally of Everything Connected with Lighting." by Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850), not Swift. You can read it here

  2. neccessary? by SuperDuG · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I mean if the US can hold a Russian for violation of the DMCA (remember Dimitry) obviously American Law extends further than the borders of america.

    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.

    --
    Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
    1. Re:neccessary? by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 5, Funny

      "obviously American Law extends further than the borders of america"

      You'd better beleive Joe, as for as them tanks can roll.

      G.W.B.

    2. Re:neccessary? by GammaTau · · Score: 3, 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?

      I can think of two scenarios for countries outside the US:

      1. The country recognizes and enforces copyrights (e.g. Australia and most European countries). The copyright is international so open source in these countries is just like open source in the US.
      2. The country perhaps says it regognizes copyrights but does not really care of enforce them (e.g. some Asian countries). Since the government doesn't care about enforcing copyright, people can copy and modify the software as it were in public domain. This might not be strictly open source (since no one has to provide the source code) but you could still share binaries and source if you have them.
    3. Re:neccessary? by smallpaul · · Score: 4, 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.

    4. Re:neccessary? by Eyston · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dmitri was arrested in the United States and was charged with trafficking a circumvention device because the program, which was copyrighted to him, was being sold for a profit off of US servers.

      I'm not defending the DMCA, but it was within the US borders.

      -Eyston

    5. Re:neccessary? by Centinel · · Score: 2, Informative
      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.

      ...compliance with which, I might add, is an issue examined by the US State Dept. when doling out foreign aid requests. And since the good 'ole boys in Big Government are cozy with the good 'ole boys in Big Business, a country that scoffs at copyright laws might not get investment from transnational corporations.

      And then of course nations who are copyright scofflaws can be strung out to dry by the World Trade Organization.

    6. Re:neccessary? by smallpaul · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, the GPL "ebodies the principles of Free software" but the Free Software Foundation recognizes many other licenses as Free. In particular, there are many license that are Free but non-viral, like the X license or the Python license. The FSF says: "The term ``open source'' software is used by some people to mean more or less the same thing as free software. However, their criteria are somewhat less strict; they have accepted some kinds of license restrictions that we have rejected as unacceptable."

    7. Re:neccessary? by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 4, Informative
      Well, Dmitry was in Las Vegas at the time, so that's inside the border. If you rob a casino in Vegas, you get arrested, whether you're Russian or not. Better to argue that the law is flawed than to argue about jurisdiction.

      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?

      --
      I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
  3. Yes! by bad_fx · · Score: 4, Funny

    The open-source development community is an international treasure and should be protected as such

    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.

    1. Re:Yes! by LoztInSpace · · Score: 4, Funny
      some dingy, windowless room where no one will ever find it
      Mom's basement?
  4. herd mentality by Tancred · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Many IT decision-makers have a herd mentality (e.g. nobody was ever fired for buying Cisco routers). Open Source use passed a critical mass a while ago and enough of the herd is heading in that direction now that the obvious advantages outweigh the fear of the unknown. It's continued acceptance is a foregone conclusion at this point.

  5. other places? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    outside the U.S.? does he mean Canada? or that other place to the south? Mex Co. something?

  6. I REALLY hope... by flacco · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...this doesn't degenerate into a US-vs-World sideshow.


    F/OSS advocates have to stick together. Divide and conquer still works, lo these many centuries later.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  7. US legal precedents by sbszine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The best protection open source can get is US legal precendents. The defeat of SCO would be a good start, then a decision upholding the GPL so that it gets taken seriously.

    This would not only protect OSS, but allay the fears of fence-sitting businessfolk.

    --

    Vino, gyno, and techno -Bruce Sterling

    1. Re:US legal precedents by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The best protection open source can get is US legal precendents. The defeat of SCO would be a good start, then a decision upholding the GPL so that it gets taken seriously.

      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

      --
      I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
  8. intentional Rand reference? by imsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if the use of "looters" is intended to point towards the Ayn Rand novel Atlas Shrugged.

    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.

    1. Re:intentional Rand reference? by timothy_m_smith · · Score: 2

      The thought of invoking Ayn Rand is interesting in this scenario. However, I doubt Ms Rand would have ever supported a movement that involved people providing their hard work and ideas without direct compensation.

    2. Re:intentional Rand reference? by imsmith · · Score: 5, Interesting

      She may not have, but within her philosophy is the principle that when there is no expectation of assistance by those who cannot placed upon those who can AND there is no force to compel those can to act for the sake of those that cannot, there is a moral and just transaction that can take place between those that can and those that cannot, for the sake of those that can.

      In my mind, this is the model of transaction that Free software is strongest in, and that works the best.

    3. Re:intentional Rand reference? by smallpaul · · Score: 2, 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.

  9. Re:Since he compares the SCO suit ... by sebi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    to the "looting" of the Iraqi national museum (at last count, 33 pieces, not tens of thousands), I guess the open source community is pretty safe.

    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?

  10. A word from the Grammar Nazi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's continued acceptance is a foregone conclusion at this point.

    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

    1. Re:A word from the Grammar Nazi by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 4, Funny

      Behold the Proper Capitalization Nazi! The first letter of every sentence must be capitalized. Additionally, the pronoun "I", used to refer to oneself, must also be capitalized. I have also informed my friend, the Proper Colon Use Nazi, of your infraction. Prepare to have your malignant colon rectified!

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
  11. Publicd domain??? NOT! by Alsee · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because open-source software is in the public domain, support was provided by local engineers, creating Brazilian jobs, Hall said.

    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.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  12. Iraq looting story has been well-disproven by Daniel+Quinlan · · Score: 3, Informative
    Before I comment on the museum looting story, I should note that I agree that government spending should favor open source (although I think public domain would be fine as well) over closed source. To a large extent it does, but if it's my tax dollars, then I should get more back for it, not less. Spending money on commercial software when good free alternatives exist is not a good use of my taxes, so I'm glad to see maddog talking about this.

    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 has backed off of the earlier story.

    If you want a right-wing source instead of a left-wing source, try WorldNetDaily 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.

  13. Hey MadDog! What happened to LI?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Linux International seems to have gone dead. It was amazing how LI was able to protect the Linux name from the insane US trademark system. But the LI web site seems to be complettely stagent. Instead of taking a stance on SCO's attack on Linux and Open Source, the LI web site continues to praise Caldera/SCO as a Corp. Sponsor.

  14. One unbeatable advantage of Open Source by FunWithHeadlines · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "If you're a global company, you can sign a support deal with a company like IBM. If you're a small firm, you might find you can get your support from a recently graduated college student just down the street," he said. "

    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.

    1. Re:One unbeatable advantage of Open Source by asscroft · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I read this and I think, well shit, if it's standard and everyone knows how to do it, why am I worth $$$ instead of $$ or even $. But then I think about other trades such as plumbing, construction, even medicine. It's standard, it's known and they still are worth the money you pay them. So with knowledge and ability I should be able to still get paid. Maybe.

      --
      because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
  15. John has what it takes to protect the community by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Funny

    The open-source development community is an international treasure and should be protected as such

    John can hide the entire open-source community in his beard to protect it and keep it warm.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  16. i like maddog by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Insightful
    He is an honest guy who is in the middle of the road in terms of closed source vs open.

    RMS has done alot of great service towards free software but he is a fanatic. Just read India's communist newspaper for more info . 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.

    1. Re:i like maddog by Dag+Maggot · · Score: 2, Informative
      I wouldn't call RMS a fanatic, or maybe it's all relative, in which case I suppose I'm a fanatic too.

      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 emphatically reject the Wipo Copyright Treaty which is intended to further strengthen the grip of big business on the markets. "The World Intellectual Property Organisation does not represent public interest and the people must likened software programmes to recipes and said preventing sharing of software was like asking neighbours not to share their recipes. "It is morally wrong to make people promise that they will never share. As it is we don't always share everything with everybody, so why create barriers?", asked Stallman. He cautioned particularly against allowing Microsoft to peddle its software in thousands of Indian schools. "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." He called for encouraging the usage of free software among Indian students.

      --

      I have no pants and I must scream

    2. Re:i like maddog by groklaw · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "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."

      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 GPL. So ask yourself if your views are still holding water or if they need to be revised in light of current events.

      It was one thing to say things like that a couple of years ago, but now things have played out in a way that ought to make everyone reconsider their position and recognize that the GPL was specifically designed to protect free software from greedy and unethical business types who might like to grab whatever they think might make them a quick dollar. And it is working.

    3. Re:i like maddog by swordgeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would call RMS a fanatic. He's utterly incapable of seeing more than HIS side of any issue. Being published in a communist newspaper is entirely irrelevant--communism wouldn't be a bad system, if people didn't suck so badly.

      "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.

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
    4. Re:i like maddog by SubtleNuance · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What are you talking about? Read this article, linked on the page from Hall's article: here

      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 GNU/Linux (for what reason i dont know) -- but really, your just a little over the top with the adhominum attacks.

      Look, over there, RMS was the subject of an article published in a (shock/horror) communist newspaper - gasp! Run and tell the Department of Homeland Security, or Local Chamber of Commerce, or Mr. McCarthy himself!

  17. Protection by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I did RTFA and, while Hall indicated that looting of open source is a potential problem, he did not seem to me to be proposing any solutions. IMHO, the most important "protections" are to closely circumscribe software IP:
    * 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.

  18. Re:Hey MadDog! What happened to LI?? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2, Informative

    You know, LI and Caldera/Lineo were best buddies for a long time. The original Caldera founders (Bryan Sparks and his friends from Novell) were good honest-to-goodness people who wanted to make Linux and OSS happen. But things started to degrade when Ransome Love replaced Bryan, and now SCO has nothing of Caldera left in it. Caldera was a good company (good as in benefactor of the community), got the first successful commercial Linux distro out back in 1995 (if I remember correctly), then got shafted by RedHat over RPM, then pretty much missed all the opportunities that could have made them great, and now they're just plain aggressive idiots.

    In short : John Hall must feel like he's walking on eggs here. SCO isn't at all the Caldera he was talking to back in the good days. I wonder what ties remain between LI and SCO, and if they could be severed for good at last.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  19. OSM battle depends on Nationalism by Eyston · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nationalism.

    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

    1. Re:OSM battle depends on Nationalism by Strudelkugel · · 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 the GPL?

      On a lighter note, think multi-guage railways, NTSC/PAL Corba, left/right-hand drive, etc. Sure, there are standards bodies and other organizations that should ensure all systems play together - But - I will believe it when I see it. How do we know that all of the "programmers-down-the-street" tweaking here, tweaking there, aren't going to make a huge Tower of Babel?

      I'll spell out my theory/bias: OSS applied to the "Global Enterprise" is a huge compatibilty disaster waiting to happen. Embedded OSS seems to be the safe business bet as I see it, because it ties functionality to a responsible vendor while innovative ideas are only limited by imagination of the OSS community.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
  20. Duh - No. This *is* stealing. by oGMo · · Score: 4, 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?

    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.

    --

    Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

  21. Should the US pass a law protecting Open Source by memmel2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The open source movement is finally allowing the computer industry to build a shared pool of intelectual property which can be used to build new and innovate solutions. This has happened in the past in other industries for example the Chemical industry were the trade secrets of yesterday are the textbook examples of today. I think a law that allowed software to be declared "public domain" and forever protected from lawsuits/patents etc etc would be a good thing sort of like a reverse patent. It would allow the computer industry to finally join the rest of the world industries based on a shared core set of technologies.

  22. Re:Since he compares the SCO suit ... by dubStylee · · Score: 5, Informative

    I wasn't commenting on the orignal claims of 170,000, I was commenting on the /.er's claim that only a few were stolen, so in that context, yes it is the part that struck me.

    The
    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.

  23. that would be silly. ZDNet sucks again. by twitter · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ZDNet summarize part of Hall's interview as:

    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 Raymond and Bruce Perens are US citezens. Chances are that Hall mentioned that some software makers in the US might not be happy if free and open software supplanted their eXPensive wares and ZDNet inflated it to that. Software developers, like other profesionals, have long transended national boundaries. Only a maddog would think that US citezens and businesses have something less to gain from free software than someone in the UK.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  24. bingo. by twitter · · Score: 2, Interesting
    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.

    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 well as violating the author's intent for the software to be free.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  25. OSS vs. "commodity software"? by heironymouscoward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is a very strange comparison to make. OSS _is_ commodity software, by its very nature. You cannot get more commodity than perl, Apache, PHP, MySQL, Linux. Open standards are the only basis for true commodity software: TCP/IP, HTTP, etc.

    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 movement.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
  26. Re:Cost? by CaptainZapp · · Score: 3, Insightful
    No mention of the cost. Any estimates?

    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

    --
    ich bin der musikant

    mit taschenrechner in der hand

    kraftwerk

  27. Non-US? by News+for+nerds · · Score: 2

    Perhaps he doesn't know where Linus came from.
    The U.S. IS THE problem. Look between your own feet
    before talking about what you see around you.

  28. Re:Since he compares the SCO suit ... by danny · · Score: 2, Informative
    Actually, the 33 was a complete furphy, the last estimate is about 6000. See this story for details. And that's just from the one institution, other museums and archaeological sites were apparently worse hit.

    Danny.

    --
    I have written over 900 book reviews