Slashdot Mirror
FSFE Becomes WIPO Observer
wikinerd writes "FSFE, the European branch of Richard Stallman's Free Software Foundation announced that it was granted observer status in WIPO, the international organisation which influences nationwide copyright laws."
Not only does the WIPO influences copyright laws, but it does also affect the patents, which is exactly the point that the GPL v3 plans to take care of.
It's good to have an organism like the FSF being recognised in the, how critical, field of intellectual property!
FSFE will be among the likes of CISAC, IFPI, ISO, UNESCO, WHO, etc. FSFE better shows it's up to the task and comes up with clever arguments why OSS is the way to go (or at least a way to go).
Although it's not unlikely that they would be kept out of the loop, observers can have a very large influence on the UN. Much of the action taken by the body in session is little more than a formality. The majority of resolutions pass by consensus, which means that the vast majority of UN work occurs outside the UN in caucusing to reach consensus. It is here that the FSFE could leave its mark. Although it is perhaps a bit offtopic, last weekend I attended a Model UN where several observers such as the Holy See were able to have a noticeable influence.
English is easier said than done.
Proprietry kernelspace drivers can't be distributed with linux and BitKeeper is not required to hack on linux. Try reading the GPL sometime!
Basically, no. It's not possible. Especially not if you want to have a computer. That free/open source software you would run on your homebrew computer? It's covered by copyright. All free/open software licenses are based on the right of the copyright holder to determine how their work can be redistributed. This holds true for the GPL, even - when GPL'ing a bit of code, you have to put your name, the date, and claim copyright over the code before you can move on to the actual license bit.
Oh, and I don't know why you pick 1954 as the cut-off date for your books; check out the Gutenberg Project's Copyright HowTo, which discusses how to determine whether a book is public domain or not. The rule of thumb is that anything printed before January first 1923 is safe, and only a few very specific cases after that (eg, a work created before 1964 whose copyright was not renewed and did not qualify for automatic re-qualification under the GATT copyright agreement of 1991). In general, nothing printed from January 1st 1923 onward is in the public domain, and won't be until 2019 (barring further copyright extensions, heaven forbid).
No, it is a substantial piece of progress for widespread recognition and acceptance of the older free software movement. The FSFE doesn't speak for "OSS" (open source software). In fact the FSF tells us that the two movements are not the same. This essay explains much and is one of the most underrated essays the FSF has published.
While I'm sure that the open source movement will get some increased publicity from this (largely from people who don't understand what "open source" really means or don't know the difference between the philosophies of the two movements), it's important to understand recent history and see how the messages of the FSF and OSI differ. It's also important and fair to give credit where credit is due. Here, that means using the phrase "free software". I don't know who wrote the blurb at Wikinerds, but they were wrong. The FSFE's press release doesn't mention "open source" or "OSS" at all. Your article is vastly overrated.
Digital Citizen
I agree with you that what the FSF has achieved here is remarkable. However, the FSF doesn't argue for "OSS". They argue for free software. Perhaps that is why they are called the "Free Software Foundation Europe". When the FSF started in the US, "open source" did not exist. The start of the open source movement was over a decade away and the OSI's founders chose to stand for different values, most notably pushing aside software freedom so they could more easily speak to their primary audience: business.
Digital Citizen
Well,
the more civil society organizations, the better. the reason - every organization has typically one chance to speak and currently right holders dominate these sessions because of the excess number of their participating organizations.
FSFE is actually a bit late here, EFF and CSC are already full members and EDRI, IP Justice and the Union for the Public Domain have been observers for a while.
The TRIPS (trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights) are discussed at the WTO, and not at WIPO, which would have been a more logical place for the most important international treaty about intellectual property.
Why ?
Because US did not want to discuss separately a tailor-made law for Hollywood and parmaceutical firms.
So, even with FSFE at WIPO, which is good news, what will this change if it is the WTO that makes the rules ?
It's not so dificult becom a WIPO "Observer":
WIPO welcomes visitorsz to its Geneva headquarters throughout the week. The WIPO Information Center is open to the public weekdays from 9:30 am to 13:00 pm and from 2.00 pm to 5:00 pm [...]
If you are interested please use the Visit request form (printable version)
My city: Barcelona.