MS Has Free Software Removed From U.N. Paper

linumax writes "Microsoft asked for references to free software to be removed from a document presented at last week's UN World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) conference, the software giant admitted on Friday. The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) is unhappy that the document was changed and claims that even though it was on the panel discussing the document, it was not made aware of Microsoft's changes. The document (2.8MB PDF), known as the Vienna Conclusions, discusses issues around IT and creativity. The original draft of the document discussed how the free software model is changing the way people do business."

Comments

Commercial software buisness practices

[RichMan]

Well the paper might have originally described how free software works but what was done clearly shows how commercial software works.

Trying to stop the sea with its hands

[Khalid]

MS is trying to stop the sea with its hands as they say, all it will manage to do is perhaps to slow it a bit, but everybody knows that nothing will stop the revolution. In a certain way this is pathetic.

Re:thats it...

[CyricZ]

How exactly are you going to "play dirty" with Microsoft?

And will your "playing dirty" result in better open source software? I doubt it. That's why it is probably best for the community to just continue producing superior products, and eventually people will migrate the to the best (and likely open source) products.

Fine

[hug_the_penguin]

Let's remove all favourable references to microsoft off slashdot then.

It's just so absurd, they walk around, flash some cash and get what they want done. This all after the whole european antitrust thing... I find it shocking they CAN have this removed. I wonder this isn't classed as attempted monopolisation, they are, after all trying to lock out other competitors from publicity.

What Microsoft doesn't understand..

[Chicane-UK]

..is that for every token gesture they make to try and make the open source and free software movements warm to them and like them (opening up the next document formats in Office, etc), there is this kind of shit going on.

Sorry Microsoft.. you've earned your reptuation as underhanded, dirty, cheating assholes - and stupid stunts like this just continue to prove that you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

Re:What Microsoft doesn't understand..

[SlowMovingTarget]

Having actually been interviewed (and misquoted) by IT press, I have to say that I wasn't so impressed with there interest in getting the facts right. They were more interested in getting a quote about some technology of ours that was "insanely great" or about how my opinion of someone else's technology was that it was "monstrously horrible."

There was very little journalism in the piece and significantly less technical savvy than I had hoped for. (I happened to mention XDoclet and it came out in the transcript X Doplet, and I was ostensibly speaking with Java-oriented "journalists.")

For many in the IT press, talking to a Microsoft person is "a get" and the facts don't matter so much. If you actually are looking for solid computing journalism, I've been impressed with Linux Journal. It has the feel that Byte and PC Magazine used to have. If you really want to know where MS technology is and where it's going, you'd be much better off reading the MS developer blogs.

lets face it

[3seas]

MS knows they cannot compete with open source software...... why else do they lie every chance they get, about it?

Recently there was an article regarding a clone researcher being looked upon as being bad, when the fact of teh matter is that he only tried to hide the dishonesty of his associates upon his finding out they had lied regarding their donorship.

Now that's a case of one level disconnection from the initial deception. And consider what happened to him for it.

This MS constant lying is first degree deception, outright intentional ..... and they are very persistant about it.

So why are they still in business?

Or is this only more proof that they are not genuine researchers or innovators, just used car salesmen selling the research and innovation others outside of them have done, as their own?

Its ok to lie, if you are a salesperson, but not a genuine researcher..... right?

Re:lets face it

[Obstin8]

I think Open Source has a lot of potential, but until its advocates remove their blinkers, industry will continue to dismiss it as a group of eccentrics on a religious crusade. It is only when open source projects take a mature and pragmatic approach that the projects become relatively successful.

Hmm. Can't wait until Apache becomes mature and pragmatic. Or Debian, and Slackware too. And all those immature projects on Sourceforge. When that happens well, by golly, you'll probably see these eccentric oddities at Lawrence Livermore Labs or running on Cray hardware.

If they were really mature and pragmatic, they just might make it into government use, or even become more commonplace.

We can only patiently wait for that wonderful maturity and pragmatism to blossom. Until then we should be thankful that we are skillfully guided by the benign monopolists. They only have our best interests at heart.

Stage 3: fight

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess the "ignore us" and "laugh at us" phases are officially over.

Re:UN's document is absurd and oxymoronic

[Cyclops]

They DO BELIEVE IN DRM and they explecitly say so:

To ensure ongoing innovation, Digital Rights*cof*Restrictions*cof* Management (DRM) development and deployment must remain voluntary and market-driven.

Of course they are voluntary, did Sony install a rootkit in your computer against their will? Of course not, they even thought you didn't need to bother about it because you didn't know what it was...

Is it other than market driven? The editors practically control the market. I find it harder and harder to buy Music in an unencumbered format...

Re:Tempest in a teapot

[zx75]

Would you rather they played with weapons and armies? For all of recorded history we tried that, and all it got us was to the brink of destruction.

Open dialog is something new, we've only been really trying it since the Soviet Union fell. Give it time for us to learn how to get better at it and do it right before dismissing it.