Attack of the Copyright Were-Rabbit

There is a counter-reformation movement afoot in the world of copyright. The purpose of the movement is to chill the willingness of countries to enact fair use or liberal fair dealing provisions designed to genuinely further innovation and creativity, rather than, as is currently the case, merely to give lip service to those concepts as the scope of copyright is expanded to were-rabbit size.

Another great post from William Patry, one of Google's better hires.

British Library = National Disgrace

I've noted before that there's something rotten at the heart of the British Library, which insists on locking down knowledge in Microsoft's proprietary formats. Now NoOOXML starts to pull all the threads together:

the company Griffin Brown, of which the BRM convenor Alex Brown is the director, sent out a press release 13 March 08 celebrating the 10th anniversary of XML:

Recent moves by Microsoft to standardise its Office products around XML file formats merely confirms that most valuable business data in the future will be stored in XML. … Alex Brown is convenor of the ISO/IEC DIS 29500 Ballot Resolution Process, and has recently been elected to the panel to advise the British Library on how to handle digital submission of journal articles.

What's the betting those digital submissions end up in OOXML?
(Via Boycott Novell.)

Signs of the (Digital) Times

Readers of this blog will know that I am fascinated by the analogue/digital divide, and how the passage from one to the other causes all sorts of interesting problems:

Question: Why is eBay requiring sellers of digitally downloaded goods to list their items in the Classified Ads format?

Answer: Most items that require digital delivery, once created, can be very easily replicated. This ease of replication creates the opportunity for sellers to list thousands of the same item in an attempt to manipulate the Feedback system. It also creates a perception that even legitimate sellers of Digital Goods are manipulating the Feedback system. This dynamic -- real and perceived -- undermines trust across the entire marketplace.

We understand that digital goods, by themselves, are not the cause of Feedback Manipulation, but clarity of policy and ease of enforcement require all digitally downloaded items to be offered via the Classified Ads format.

Tricky stuff this business in the absence of scarcity.... (Via Techdirt.)

UK Copyright: Winners and Losers

I often spout about copyight in this blog, but I enjoy the luxury of ignorance. If you want a really balanced account of the situation in the UK, try this excellent talk given by Ray Corrigan recently:

My brief for this morning is to look at current UK copyright legislation – how it compares internationally, and who are the winners and losers. I will be starting with a whistle-stop tour of UK copyright law in historical context, before looking at international comparisons and then focusing on the winners and losers.

Who could ask for more? Well, apart from a more reasonable copyright regime, of course.

Cheeky Bulgars

How dare they?

The Bulgarian government organised a meeting with Open Source companies and developers on 21 March in Sofia. Nikolay Vassilev, the minister for State Administration, told the representatives of software companies, IT services companies and Open Source developers that the government is about to review the state's IT system and that it wants to get a better understanding of Open Source software. The minister admitted he had once worked with Apple Macintosh, but had in the last thirteen years only experienced Microsoft applications. He told the Open Source advocates he would listen to their views on IT: "We have an open mind and will accept reasonable propositions."

Uighur Splittists?

Where will it all end?

Like Tibetans in Tibet, Uighurs have historically been the predominant ethnic group in Xinjiang, which is officially known as the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. In both Tibet and Xinjiang, indigenous groups have chafed at the arrival of large numbers Han Chinese, the country’s predominant ethnic groups, who have migrated to western regions with strong government support.

Uighurs, like Tibetans, have complained that recent Han arrivals now dominate their local economies, even as the Han-run local governments insert themselves deeper into schools and religious practices to weed out cultural practices that officials fear might reinforce a separate ethnic or religious identity. In telephone interviews, Han residents of Khotan and nearby areas said there was a long history of distrust and tension between Han and Uighur communities. Some Han migrants insisted the atmosphere remained volatile, and said that the Uighurs had been inspired by the recent Tibetan unrest.

Since you ask, the Uighurs actually speak a Turkic language, which means that they have even less to do with the Chinese than the Tibetans, who at least once probably spoke the same language (a few thousands years ago, that is).

Why the Post Office Thinks It's 1998

You may find it hard to believe the Post Office is closing down vast numbers of its local branches that everyone wants to use, but I think I've discovered the reason why: it is so out of touch it doesn't even know what the date is.

It seems to think it's 1998 - you know, those far-off, fabled times, when people wrote Web sites that only worked with Internet Explorer. Like this one, say, which gives the following helpful message when you view it with Firefox:

This website is best viewed on Internet Explorer version 5.3 or above

Watch out, little Post Office, I've heard a terrible rumour that the 21st century is hurtling towards you....

Whatever Happened to Standards?

On Open Enterprise blog.

Linux: Too Much of a Good Thing?

The transformation of the Linux Foundation from a rather sleepy, peripheral player into one of the main voices for open source has been fascinating to watch. It's certainly welcome, too, because one of the problems of Linux in particular, and open source in general, is that the distributed production has tended to lead to dissipation in terms of getting the message across.

Now, in addition to a useful series of interviews with open source luminaires, the Linux Foundation is getting into surveys:

The Linux Foundation (LF), the nonprofit organization dedicated to accelerating the growth of Linux, today announced it is publishing a new report written by kernel developers Jonathan Corbet and Greg Kroah-Hartman, and LF Director of Marketing Amanda McPherson.

The report titled “Linux Kernel Development: How Fast is it Going, Who is doing it and Who is Sponsoring it?” is available today. The paper finds that over the last three years the number of developers contributing to the kernel has tripled and that there has been a significant increase in the number of companies supporting kernel development.

Even though Linux has achieved near-ubiquity as a technology platform powering Internet applications, corporate servers, embedded and mobile devices and desktops, mainstream users know very little about how Linux is actually developed. This community paper exposes those dynamics and describes a large and distributed developer and corporate community that supports the expansion and innovation of the Linux kernel. The Linux kernel has become a common resource developed on a massive scale by companies who are fierce competitors in other areas.

Among its findings:

o Every Linux kernel is being developed by nearly 1,000 developers working for more than 100 different corporations. This is the foundation for the largest distributed software development project in the world.

o Since 2005, the number of active kernel developers has tripled, reflecting the growing importance of Linux in the embedded systems, server, and desktop markets.

o Between 70 and 95 percent of those developers are being paid for their work, dispelling the “hobbyist” myth present from the start of open source development.

...

o More than 70 percent of total contributions to the kernel come from developers working at a range of companies including IBM, Intel, The Linux Foundation, MIPS Technology, MontaVista, Movial, NetApp, Novell and Red Hat. These companies, and many others, find that by improving the kernel they have a competitive edge in their markets.

But one result seems slightly worrying to me:

o An average of 3,621 lines of code are added to the kernel tree every day, and a new kernel is released approximately every 2.7 months.

o The kernel, since 2005, has been growing at a steady state of 10 percent per year.

Surely that means that Linux is steadily becoming more and more bloated? I've always been of the view that one of Linux's great virtues is leanness, especially compared to a Certain Other operating system. While change can be good, I don't think that more is necessarily is better when it comes to lines of code. Perhaps the Linux Foundation's next project could be to study how much of the kernel could be trimmed away to return it to its earlier, svelte self.

OK, So Adobe Supports GNU/Linux – But How Much?

On Open Enterprise blog.

You Must Be Joking

They can't be serious:

This is a proposal for an integrated National Operational Deterrence and Intelligence Surveillance System (NODISS) strategy to be accomplished over a five to fifteen year period concurrent with the introduction of compulsory Identity Cards and the Tracking Database (“audit trail”) of the National Identity Register. It has been prepared by the Domestic Affairs Cabinet Committee Officials Committee, chaired by the Cabinet Office.

What a scoop - that Arsene Ghia has really got her, er...oh, never mind.

In Praise of Journalistic Scum

On Open Enterprise blog.

oCERT – A Dead Cert for Security

On Open Enterprise blog.

Teaching Blackboard a Lesson About Patents

On Open Enterprise blog.

Now the Fun Begins

Sad - but just the end of the beginning....

The Mighty Atom

Here's another reason why ultraportables are going to take off.

Sophie – A Wise Move for Open Source

On Open Enterprise blog.

The Problem Isn't Infringement, it's Indifference

One of the interesting side-effects of the increasing number of artists making their work freely available with great success is that it demonstrates a deep and hitherto unappreciated facet of creativity: that the main problem is never "infringement" but simply indifference. That's why artists should be making it as easy as possible for people to access and share their work.

If any domain needed to understand this, it's poetry. Now don't get me, wrong, I love poetry: I am probably one of the few human beings alive who has read all of Spencer's The Faerie Queene, Byron's Don Juan and Wordworth's The Prelude (don't ask), but the sad fact is practically nobody reads poetry today. So what's the solution? Why, making it freely available:

By now, Poetree.coop has probably been shut down.

While it lasted, it was the best-designed, richest source of p2p poetry sharing available online. Only a typical lunk-headed heavy-handed ploy by the inner circle of poets was able to shut it down.

All the classics were there: Rod McKuen, Roald Dahl, even the Dr. (Seuss) himself. In addition, you could find the complete poetry of Percy Bysshe Shelley, Samuel Taylor Coleridge and even Thomas Moore.

So, amidst all of these gems, what happened? Why the controversy?

Alisha Grant, spokesperson for the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation, had this to say, "We applaud the work of the FBI in shutting down this travesty of copyright. If we want great poetry, America, we're going to have to pay for it."

Oh, of course, it doesn't matter whether anyone *reads* your poetry, so long as you get paid for it. The idea that a real poet might be more concerned with the latter - and worry about the dosh later - is clearly an outmoded idea.

Maybe that's why nobody reads poetry.

Update: OK, so apparently this was an April Fool's Day joke: shame on me. What I *really* meant to write about was this, where the above comments still apply.

Google Squirms

Google seems allergic to the AGPL:

So, first AGPL was not good enough for Google because it was not OSI-approved. That limited its popularity... Now it is OSI-approved. Still, it is not popular enough to be accepted in the Google closed open source hosting site?

...

C'mon Chris, give developers the ability of using AGPL for their own projects in Google Code. Your fight for no proliferation of licenses is something I subscribe to, but AGPL is the license of the future, no matter if Google likes it or not. And I can guarantee you it will become even more popular if it is accepted in Google Code...

Microsoft's Great Besmirching

On Linux Journal.

The Marvels of Modularity

One word that has cropped up time and again on this blog is "modularity". It's one of the prime characteristics of the open source way - and one of its greatest strengths. Now wonder, then, that Microsoft has finalled cottoned on - helped, no doubt, by the abject failure of its Vista monster:

When Windows 7 launches sometime after the start of 2010, the desktop OS will be Microsoft's most "modular" yet. Having never really been comfortable with the idea of a single, monolithic desktop OS offering, Microsoft has offered multiple desktop OSes in the marketplace ever since the days of Windows NT 3.1, with completely different code bases until they were unified in Windows 2000. Unification isn't necessarily a good thing, however; Windows Vista is a sprawling, complex OS.

A singular yet highly modular OS could give Microsoft the best of all possible worlds: OSes that can be highly customized for deployment but developed monolithically. One modular OS to rule them all, let's say.

Modularity has another huge benefit for Microsoft: it will allow it to address the nascent ultraportable market, something that it finds hard to do with its current operating systems.

Needless to say, though, even in making this sensible move, Microsoft manages to add a touch of absurdity:

Unsurprisingly, Microsoft already has a patent on a "modular operating system" concept.

A *patent* on modularity? Give me a break....

More Wisdom on Intellectual Monopolies

Good to see that I don't have a, er, monopoly on outraged posts about intellectual monopolies:

This is why the idea of Intellectual Property is utter nonsense. We cannot purge our minds of what we already know. That which we can perceive with the senses cannot, and should not, be controlled, but the Intellectual Monopolists plainly think it should. Orwell's predictions have turned out to be startlingly accurate.

O Hypocrisy, Thy Name is Sony

Do as I say, not as I do, seems to be the case with Sony:

PointDev, un éditeur français, attaque la maison de disques en justice pour avoir utilisé sans licence un de ses outils d'administration : Ideal Migration.

[PointDev, a French software publisher, is taking the record company to court for having used one of its administration tools, Ideal Migration, without a licence.]

Well let's hope these scurvy Sony dogs feel the full force of the law. (Via Planet Creative Commons.)

Understanding Openness

About that open business:

We start with the adjective lexeme OPEN, which is a pure stative; The window is open doesn't require that it was ever closed (it might have been built that way), and The restaurant is open doesn't require that it was ever closed (it could be one of those restaurants that are always open). The adjective can serve as the base for deriving two verb lexemes, the inchoative OPEN 'become open' and the causative OPEN 'cause to become open'. The story of the PSP opened then goes much as for the PSP closed, but with an important difference. The PSP opened has a passive use, as in The gate was opened by the guard at dawn. But the stative adjective use is hard to get: The gate is opened at the moment is decidedly odd. Why?

Because English already has a way to express this meaning (and a way that's shorter and less complex than the PSP opened): the adjective open. The PSP opened in this use is PRE-EMPTED (or, if you will, PREEMPTED) by the simple adjective open. (Pre-emption is a perennial topic in morphology and lexical semantics. A textbook example: English has no causative DIE alongside inchoative DIE because it's pre-empted by causative KILL; in a sense, KILL got there first, so there's no point in creating causative DIE.)

But... in special circumstances, the PSP opened could be used as an adjective -- with the semantics of the passive, as for disputed above. In particular, The envelope is opened could be used if the envelope was not merely open (rather than closed or sealed), but gave evidences of having been opened, say by slitting with a letter opener. This is a case where open might not be specific enough, so it doesn't automatically pre-empt opened.

Got that?

Truly, Gloriously, Bananas

After taking a nice long shower to remove the white sap like emulsion covering his body, Mr. Gestalt sat down and began jotting down the schematic of his banana time machine, the specifics of which had come to him spontaneously while splitting double-stuff Oreos to lick the insides. Although he lacked any formal training in physics and had been home schooled by rabbits who lovingly raised him in the wild, he felt that he was on to something. Papa Cottonballs would be proud, he thought to himself as he drew something between a trapezoid and a parallelogram with something looking like a snail shell coming out of it.

What would Krapp have said about all these bananas? (Via Read/Write Web.)