A Free Software week in the Basque Country

Posted by gerloff on 0

With sights like the old town of San Sebastián and the Guggenheim museum at Bilbao, the Basque country in northern Spain is certainly worth a visit. But the reason that I and FSFE staffer Rainer Kersten spent a week there had nothing to do with old houses, art or pintxos. (Well, *almost* nothing to do with pintxos.) We went there to meet with people from the vibrant community of Free Software activists, to give talks and to build links between the local and the European level.

We came into town from RMLL at Bordeaux in Rainer’s 2CV, a car that by now is something of a minor celebrity in its own right. After settling in with the mayor of Baskooge at San Sebastián, the first stop was a meeting with the regional government on Tuesday in Vitoria.

This meeting was organised by the Technical Office for the Support of Free Software (SALE), which was recently set up by the government, and is run by a number of experienced Free Software people. The Basque government sent some rather high-level representatives, with two Directors General present at the meeting, as well as the director of EJIE, the publicly-owned company to which the government has outsourced its IT work.

Most of all, the government representatives were curious to hear what is being done with Free Software elsewhere in Europe. I presented some example cases, such as Munich, CommunesPlone, and the huge @ndared project in Andalusia. The Basque government just embarked on an effort to open up government data and make it available online. But they don’t yet have a strategy for using Free Software as a motor for regional economic development. This clearly was a new perspective for them, and I made an effort to get the point across that local companies prosper when the public sector moves to Free Software.

After the formal meeting and the obligatory three-hour lunch, we drove back to San Sebastián, arriving just in time for the first Fellowship meeting there. There were Free Software activists with impressive experience, such as a teacher who has succeeded in migrating her school to GNU/Linux.

On Wednesday I had a couple of interviews with a regional radio station and a newspaper, and then it was time to move the base camp to Bilbao.

After a live radio interview [mp3, sorry] there on Thursday, I gave a talk [20100715bienvenidos_al_mainstreambilbao.pdf] about the role of Free Software for regional businesses and the public sector in a technology park. It was really well attended, and we got great feedback. From there, we went directly on to a networking meeting with regional Free Software activists at Deusto University in Bilbao, where Txipi organises a yearly Free Software summer school. We talked about what people in the Basque community are doing, and how linking up with FSFE can help them become more effective.

After so much work, it was time to relax a bit with friends, and those who would soon become friends. We had a Fellowship meeting in Bilbao, where our crowd of fifteen or more people quickly overloaded each bar we went to. The meeting only wrapped up when the waiter took the table away from underneath our last caña.

After too few hours of sleep (again) it was Friday morning, and I headed to the airport for my flight home. It was a great week in a wonderful region. We met a lot of people who have been active for Free Software for a long time. We also came at an exciting point in time, when both the government and local businesses are wanting to emulate the successes that Free Software has brought elsewhere.

Vive la liberté: RMLL in Bordeaux

Posted by gerloff on 0

I spent the weekend at the Rencontres Mondiales du Logiciel Libre in Bordeaux, France.This is the biggest Free Software meeting in France, and the community is tremendously active. There are lots of groups doing great work, from April via Aful and user-operated ISP French Data Network, and I met many impressive, smart and dedicated people.

Benjamin Bayart, the president of French Data Network, asked me an interesting question: Outside France, are there any other user-operated ISPs in Europe? A quick poll of FSFE’s booth staff didn’t turn up any, so I’m passing the question on to you, the lazyweb. If you know other user-operated ISPs, please tell me in the comments.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t come earlier and attend the talks taking place during the week. But the public show of Free Software projects this weekend was right by the river, bringing in lots of people who just wanted to have a stroll. As is the custom with traditional French villages, it was very well organised and tightly run by a competent and respected village chief:

Celebrating a successful RMLL with village chief Abraracourcix
Celebrating a successful RMLL with village chief Abraracourcix

From here, I’m going on to the Basque country in Spain, where I’ll give a number of talks and we’ll have Fellowship meetings in San Sebastián and Bilbao. Hope to see you there!

News picks for June 14, 2010

Posted by gerloff on 0

Danish ministry doesn’t tell parliament about Free Software savings. The Danish Parliament asked the ministry of Finance to prepare a report on the country’s police budget. The ministry commissioned the report to a consultancy. The consultants came back saying that a migration to OpenOffice would save the police some 13 million Euro. The migration would only cost between 270,000 and a million Euro. When the finance ministry sent its report to the parliament, it didn’t include this recommendation. Denmark recently was the latest European country to make ODF mandatory in its public sector, and it seems the resistance to Open Standards isn’t over.

===

Town in Catalonia, Spain names street for Free Software. The town of Berga, close to Barcelona, has named one of its streets “Free Software Street”. On that street there is a public internet center. (Article in Catalán, so not sure I got the details correctly.)

===

Quality journalism pays off: LWN.net raises subscription rates, gets lots of praise in return. In the first price increase since 2002, the basic monthly subscription is now US$ 7, up from US$ 5. Existing subscribers respond by upgrading their subscriptions. If you’re not yet a subscriber: LWN.net is an excellent Free Software news source, and well worth paying for.

Proprietary technology is a waste of money, says Kroes

Posted by gerloff on 0

Expectations were high for Neelie Kroes‘ speech at yesterday’s OFE Summit, and she delivered. This was the first time that the European Commission’s vice president talked about the Digital Agenda which she recently published. I was also curious about any news on EIFv2 after the heated battles of the last months.

Her speech was the first time that she talked about the Digital Agenda in public, and she provided quite a bit of interpretation.  She also made more than clear that there was a huge fight about the Digital Agenda within the European Commission, saying there was “blood on the walls” in the EC. Unsurprisingly, those words don’t appear in the printed version of her speech, which was coordinated with the other Commissioners.

Proprietary technology is a “waste of public money”

She talked about citizens’ freedom to talk to the public sector without being chained to proprietary software. Kroes’ message was loud and clear, and its worth quoting here:

“Many authorities have found themselves unintentionally locked into proprietary technology for decades. After a certain point that original choice becomes so ingrained that alternatives risk being systematically ignored, no matter what the potential benefits. This is a waste of public money that most public bodies can no longer afford.”
“It is even worse when such decisions result in the waste of private money on top: That happens where public authorities’ decisions force citizens to buy specific products (rather than any product compliant with an applicable standard) in order to make use of a public service. This could be your kid’s school insisting on the use of a specific word processor or your tax department’s online forms requiring a specific web browser.”

She thinks that public bodies should “opt for the least constraining solution”, and points to the Dutch “comply or explain” policy as an example. In the Netherlands, public bodies have to either procure software that relies on Open Standards, or give a very good reason for not doing so.

Open Standards means no constraints on implementation

On Open Standards, her message was clearer than I had dared to hope. Kroes said that “truly open” standards “do not come with any constraints for implementers”. That’s important, because Microsoft and others have been trying to convince the Commission that a standard is open even if it can’t be implemented in Free Software. With just this half-sentence, Kroes tells them to buzz off. Very enjoyable.

It’s an open question whether this will actually be the position of version 2 of the European Interoperability Framework (EIFv2), which Kroes said would be published this year. FSFE has documented the loss of interoperability in the subsequent drafts. As it turns out, a lot of the EC officials that I spoke to had read our analysis with interest.

In any case, Kroes’ speech is a welcome response to FSFE’s criticism when the Digital Agenda was published. It’s also what we’ve been hoping for. From the Agenda’s text, it’s not obvious how hard the Commission will push for Open Standards. Kroes’ speech was a welcome clarification. She very publicly backed the idea of Open Standards, and of citizens’ freedom to chose the software they want to use.

An interoperability directive?

Kroes mentioned a possible directive on software interoperability.  This would be a great initiative. Lobbying pressure would be intense, and we would have to work very hard to make sure it results in good rules, rather than another useless piece of paper.  But then things could hardly be worse than today, and you have to agree with Kroes that “the Commission should not need to run an epic antitrust case every time software lacks interoperability”.

As good as it gets, for now

Am I totally satisfied with her speech? Of course not. There was no indication that the Commission would finally start to seriously migrate to Free Software, and use Open Standards. (I hear that instead, they’re busy setting up Microsoft SharePoint.) There was no clear commitment to a strong definition of Open Standards in EIFv2.

But I’m not only an idealist, I’m also a realist. And realistically, her speech was the best that we’ll hear from a European Commissioner any time soon.

So we at FSFE are taking Neelie Kroes very seriously when she says that “I expect interested parties to mostly turn to me to demand progress [on the Digital Agenda] – and rightly so.” This is an offer to get involved, and we’ll take her up on it.

Wow, what an honour: FSFE receives Theodor-Heuss-Medal

Posted by gerloff on 0

Last Saturday was a great day for FSFE. We received the Theodor Heuss Medal for our “extraordinary work for equitable participation in the information society”! This is a huge honour for FSFE, and it was great to be there, in front of an audience of hundreds of people, to accept this award.

t-h-medalweb
(c) 2010 Daniel Laidig. CC-BY

The medal highlights a conviction that is at the core of FSFE: That in these days where technology is everywhere, freedom is not possible without Free Software; and that in turn, Free Software is the basis for a free society. We need to work, struggle and fight to gain and defend our freedom to be the masters of the technology we use, rather than its slaves.

The topic of this year’s award was “The social market economy in the times of globalisation”.  According to the foundation’s chairman, FSFE was chosen for the award because we “contribute to work out new rules for the social, political and legal framework” of the information society, and because we help to establish rules for “good global governance”.

I had the honour of representing FSFE there, together with people like Matthias Kirschner, Georg Greve and Bernhard Reiter. But the medal belongs to the hundreds of people who, with their work and their sharp minds, are the foundation of FSFE’s success. Thank you all! There were many German politicians in the audience, such as the former president Richard von Weizsäcker, the minister of justice Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger and Gesine Schwan, a former candidate for the presidency.

Theodor Heuss, for whom the medal is named, was the first president of the Federal Republic of Germany (aka West Germany). The foundation is non-partisan, but based on Heuss’ liberal ideals.

The German TV channel Phoenix will broadcast an edited recording of Saturday’s ceremony today at ca. 17:00. There’s a live stream available, though unfortunately only in H.264 and Quicktime. The exact timing might change a bit, so check the page every now and then.

The handover ceremony
(c) 2010 Daniel Laidig. CC-BY

Software patents: Stifling innovation with threats and bluster

Posted by gerloff on 0

On Friday, FSFE’s Hugo Roy posted an open letter to Apple CEO Steve Jobs, asking him why Apple was claiming to like Open Standards while using H.264 as a standard for video compression on Apple’s devices. Jobs replied, saying that “[a] patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other open source codecs now.” The news spread like wildfire.

This episode provides a good example of how software patents harm innovation and why they are ultimately incompatible with Free Software. Any program – Free Software or not – is threatened by patents. They hinder rather than encourage the development of new technologies. They add legal risk and therefore cost to software development. At the same time, they inhibit compatibility and interoperability.

Continue »

USTR may see some sense on Free Software

Posted by gerloff on 0

In February, I asked whether Free Software is a reason for trade war. A US lobby group, the IIPA, was pressing the US government to punish countries that make use of Free Software by giving them tougher trade deals.

Now the US Trade Representative has just published the 2010 Special 301 report [pdf] (USTR). It looks like the Free Software community’s attention to the issue has had an effect. The lobby group’s demands in this respect appear not to have been included in the report.

The report sorts countries into the categories of “Watch List” (bad) and “Priority Watch List” (worse). Countries in both categories may face trade retaliation from the US if they don’t comply with the whishes of the US government on copyright, patents and trademarks.

Here is where the countries ended up that were attacked by the lobby group:

  • Indonesia: Priority Watch List. “Serious market access barriers remain” – but the report doesn’t get more specific than this. Indonesia was added to the Priority Watch List in 2009.
  • India: Priority Watch List. No apparent reference to Free Software. India has been on the Priority Watch List since before 2009.
  • Thailand: Priority Watch list. No apparent reference to software. Thailand has been on the Priority Watch List since before 2009.
  • Vietnam: Watch List. “The United States encourages Vietnam to continue considering regulations to protect against unfair commercial use” – it’s unclear whether that’s a twisted way of reflecting the IIPA’s complaints.  Vietnam has been on the  Watch List since before 2009.
  • Philippines: Watch list. No apparent reference to software. The Philippines have been on the Watch List since before 2009.

We can conclude that this particular demand by the IIPA went too far even for the US Trade Representative.

Is the absence of bad news the same as good news? Hardly.  The whole process is still designed to use the overwhelming trade power of the US to force the intellectual monopoly rights held there down everyone else’s throat. In areas such as pharmaceuticals, the report makes a horrible read.

Fore more and broader context on this year’s Special 301 report, go see what Michael Geist and KEI have to say.

Open Standards and Interoperability – Two cheers for EU ICT ministers

Posted by gerloff on 0

The EU’s member states have just thrown their weight behind the principles of Open Standards and interoperability. At a meeting of the ministers for telecommunication and information society in Granada, Spain, the ministers of the 27 EU member states yesterday issued the Granada Ministerial Declaration on the European Digital Agenda [pdf].

This is not a legally binding document for the European Commission. But it’s a very strong directive from the member states to the European Commission.

Unlike some other documents we’ve seen from the European Commission lately, – such as the revised European Interoperability Framework (FSFE keeps track of the changes here)- this one has some very valuable things to say:

The European Union should:

[…]

  •  19. Respond to the Malmo Declaration on eGovernment [pdf] by developing more effective and efficient interoperable public services that emphasise open and transparent government and active participation, that promote the reuse of public sector information and thus potentially very important new user-driven service innovations, that increase the efficiency of government and lead to a measurable reduction in administrative burdens on citizens and businesses as well as contribute to a low-carbon economy.

The Malmo Declaration from November 18, 2009 urges public administrations to use Free Software and Open Standards for their eGovernment services. But the ministers also make it explicit that Open Standards and interoperability are the way to go for the European public sector in general, not just where eGovernment is concerned:

  • 21. Embed innovation and cost effectiveness into eGovernment through the systematic promotion of open standards and interoperable systems, development of EU wide e-authentication schemes and proactive development of e-invoicing, e-procurement (and pre-commercial procurement).

The link to the Digital Agenda that’s being prepared by the European Commission’s DG Information Society under Neelie Kroes could hardly be more explicit. This should give Kroes some badly needed backup in her struggle to keep Open Standards in the Digital Agenda, which is her policy roadmap for the next five years.

But wait, there’s more:

  • 27. Ensure that Internet Governance continues to evolve in line with the principles established in the Tunis Agenda4, such as transparency, multilateralism, democracy and the full involvement of all stakeholders; and that the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) develops as an open place for meeting, policy dialogue and exchange of best practices between governments, civil society and the private sector.

FSFE is part of the IGF and has taken part in WSIS while it lasted. A lot of good work was done there, and we’re glad to see that the European member states value the principles of those fora.

Again, this is not the European Commission speaking, but the member states. The Commission itself has been sending mixed messages. In her parliamentary hearing, Neelie Kroes emphasised the importance of Open Standards. On the other hand, the department in charge of the Commission’s IT infrastructre, DIGIT, has been doing all it can to purge Open Standards (not to mention Free Software) from the revised European Interoperability Framework. There are also indications that Neelie Kroes is being pressured to remove references to Open Standards from theDigital Agenda policy paper which she is about to issue.

The European Union’s member states yesterday made some very sensible demands. The Commission should pay attention.

Votegeek.org.uk: Ask your candidate about Free Software

Posted by gerloff on 0

National elections are looming in the UK. This means that candidates for parliament have their ears pricked for voters’ views.

What better time to ask your candidate what she thinks about Free Software? About Open Standards, or freedom in the digital age? The Digital Economy Bill? Why  the UK is trailing other European countries in terms of Free Software adoption? Why there’s an endless stream of Orwellian proposals coming out of Whitehall?

Now there’s a site that makes it easy to ask your candidates about the technology issues that matter to you. Votegeek.org.uk is up and running! FSFE is proud to support this initiative.

The site offers a listing of candidates by constituency, along with help on how to write an effective letter, and lots of useful links. Go there, get your info, and write to your candidate! Let them know you care about your freedoms just as much as you care about technology. The premise is clear:

Although this website is run by a bunch of Free and Open Source Software enthusiasts it is not here to tell you what to think, it is here to find out what the candidates think. If you think the Digital Economy Bill is a good thing for you then please do write to your candidates asking for their support and post the responses here. Which ever way they respond would be just as interesting as a response to someone with a negative opinion. It would of course be very interesting if a candidate’s views changed depending on how the question was asked!

Help us spread the word using the hashtag #votegeek.

Back on the block and worse than ever: EIFv2

Posted by gerloff on 0

The European Interoperability Framework (EIF) is back from the dark corners of the European Commission, and it’s worse than ever.

This is a key document, helping public bodies across Europe to make their IT systems work together. The EC originally issued this as a recommendation in 2004. This original EIF put a lot of emphasis on Open Standards and Free Software. Now FSFE has seen the latest draft of the document, which still has not been published.

The European Commission started updating the EIF in 2006, and called for public comments in the summer of 2008. Then, the document was still very strong on Open Standards, and gave clear directions to the European member states that wanted their public sector IT to be more efficient and vendor-independent.

Until the  Business Software Alliance (BSA) got its hands on it.

The Business Software Alliance is a lobby group of proprietary software vendors, backed above all by Microsoft. FSFE has prepared an overview page showing how the BSA’s demands are reflected in the latest draft of EIFv2.

EIFv2 should have been released in late 2008, after the comments from the general public had been integrated.Instead, the EC’s Directorate General for Informatics (DIGIT) apparently dragged it into a dark basement and beat it up beyond recognition. We can only speculate that the BSA was at least holding the flashlight during the process.

In November 2009, a draft of the revision finally leaked on the Internet. A relatively strong definition of Open Standards had been replaced by meaningless waffling about an “openness continuum”. Our overview page shows how closely the BSA’s language and concepts are mirrored in the document we’re looking at now. Massive protests from groups like FSFE, both in public and in private, lead six European countries to reject the text.

Just a few days ago, we received a reworked draft of EIFv2. We were cautiously optimistic: after all, we had pointed out very clearly in November what we thought was wrong with the document. And a number of Member States had made it clear that they were not going to accept the document in this form.

That’s why we’re surprised and disappointed to see that very little has changed. The EC has removed the most blatant formulations such as the “openness continuum”. But there still is no definition of Open Standards in the document. Free Software, formerly prominent as a tool to achieve interoperability in the public sector, has been relegated to a single footnote. The elimination of Free Software from the document could not have been more systematic.

While the document still isn’t publicly available, we have updated our comparison page with the key parts.

The document is still just as bad as the version from last November. This is not only disrespectful of the Member States that rejected the text in November. It also means that the EC is giving away Europe’s international leadership in Open Standards. The original EIF was used by countries such as Japan, South Africa and Egypt to set up their own national rules on interoperability.

In its current state, EIFv2 would do only one thing: Cement the vendor lock-in and network effects that are keeping too many public bodies from migrating to Free Software and Open Standards. FSFE is not the only group with serious concerns about the text. Open Forum Europe has written a strongly worded letter (.pdf) to Member States and the European Commission, calling for the document to be rejected.

Should EIFv2 be adopted in its current form, most citizens will continue to be forced to use proprietary file formats to communicate with their authorities. It will also mean the loss of countless contracts for European small and medium enterprises, with less jobs in Europe as a result.

It’s ironic that this comes so close to Document Freedom Day on March 31, an international day of awareness for Open Standards and open document formats.

The EC’s DG DIGIT has shown that it is unwilling or unable to make the current version of EIFv2 a worthy follow-up to the original EIF from 2004. The current text is beyond repair. Other DGs of the EC should intervene and simply throw the text into the dustbin, take the consultation draft from the summer of 2008, and start again from there.

Europeans and their public authorities would thank the EC for such a decision. If the Commission doesn’t summon that courage on its own, Member States should stand up for the interests of their citizens with a clear “No” to this sham.

What can you do?

You don’t have stand by and let this happen. If you want to take action, your best bet is to write to your national government’s Chief Information Officer (CIO) – most or all EU member states have such an official. If you can’t identify that functionary for your country, please ask in the comments. They’re the ones who will soon (and no, we currently don’t know when) vote on the new text of EIFv2.

Write them an email or letter, or call their office. Be polite, and be prepared. You can argue that

  • with the new text, the European Commission is giving up leadership its international leadership on interoperability. Countries around the world will no longer see the European Union as the world’s leading region on Open Standards.
  • The new text provides hardly any guidance for public bodies in Member States. Where over the last years Member States could look forward to Open Standards making their public sector IT systems work together across borders, the new text will simply lead to Member States each going their own way.
  • Point your CIO to FSFE’s comparison page, and let them know that you’re concerned about the way in which the EC’s DG DIGIT has included the BSA’s position, while neglecting the views of supporters of Free Software and Open Standards. There was a marked lack of transparency in the process.
  • The current revision is only marginally changed from the draft which Member States rejected in November / December 2009. The European Commission’s DG DIGIT has changed some words, but has not revised the concept. This means that it hasn’t respected the concerns of  Member States.
  • Let your government CIO know that March 31 is Document Freedom Day, an international day for Open Standards and open document formats. This shows that there is substantial public attention to the topic, and citizens will hold their governments to account.
  • For all these reasons, ask your government’s CIO to vote “no” on the current draft.

Again: Please be prepared, and be polite. Let us know how it went in the comments!