Florian Mueller has written the book No Lobbyists as Such – The War Over Software Patents in the European Union its available online and licensed under Creative Commons. It’s the perfect book for those of us who have not followed the process from the start and are daunted by the task of having to learn about the whole process by ourselves.
(via Free the Mind)
Eben Moglen began his presentation by putting recent news in new perspective. He spoke of the retirement of Bill Gates in a way that I found intriguing.
When a CEO states that he resigns there is a period of calming the market. Therefore when Gates says he will step down in two years this should not be seen as a long time. Two years it is the minimum timeframe that will not spook the market. The important issue is that the resignation comes 6 months from the shipping the most important product in 10 years.
Also we can put this into another perspective the FSF is on schedule with the most important product in 15 years. The update of to the GPLv3. The process going to version three is open and public. Philosophically it reflects the rule-making process put forward by Habermas where the idea is that those affected by the rules should be part of the decision making process.
When discussing the substantial changes Eben explain why the GPLv3 has been adapted to meet the needs of issues such as distribution via torrents, the developments within patents and the increase in DRM.
On the latter he explained that companies feel that they should be allowed to have rights (digital) and want to protect them. Many of these feel that RMS is attempting to change their vocabulary (from Rights to Restrictions). But this is not about attempting to use a software license to address non-software problems. The license (and its implementation) is about the software and the four freedoms. DRM is about the attempt to prevent users from practicing the 4 freedoms.
In closing before an extended Q&A session Eben returned to the issue of Microsoft. The falling revenues and the stepping down of Bill Gates will have the effect that one of strongest voices against Free Software will be silenced (almost). In the future arguing for Free Software will therefore not meet the strong resistance it is accustomed to.
The conference begins with Georg Greve explaining the organisation of FSF with its idea of sister organisations of FSF USA, FSF Europe, FSF Asia and FSF Latin America.
This was followed by Richard Stallman explaining what the GPLv3 would entail. He begins by stating very clearly that the most important thing to remember about any version of the GPL is that it is a free software license. Additionally the goal of the FSF is the liberation of cyberspace. This goal will be carried out by maintaining and defending four freedoms.
Software following the four freedoms is Free Software. If any freedom is substantially missing then it is proprietary software. The problem with this is that proprietary software is about the subjugation of users.
It is easy to write a license which says you are free to do what you want. But this is not the best way to liberate all the users. This is because people will modify and then distribute it as proprietary software. Copyleft is the method of preventing this practice. Copyleft is copyright flipped over. Copyright subjugates users. Copyleft prevents the middlemen from enclosing the code and making it proprietary.
Stallman then went through the highlights of important changes which are being discussed in the GPLv3.
This talk was followed by Ciaran Oâ??Riordan who gave a short talk of the public process before it was time for lunch.
I replaced my iPod yesterday after the total collapse of my last one. Today I read about the iSweatshops. The iPods are assembled in China by mainly female workers. The workforceâ?¦
â?¦resides in “iPod cities” with as many as 200,000 employees. Outsiders are forbidden, and 15-hour workdays are the norm. As you might expect, the wages are low, even for China. (Foreign Policy).
Tomorrow I will fly to Barcelona to participate in the GPLv3 conference besides being an event that I am looking forward to, the privilege of visiting foreign cities is one I value. Recently the discussion on environmental damage caused by flights has taken speed â?? especially with the rapid rise of cheap tickets which increases our â??unnecessaryâ?? flights.
Monbiot writes: â??Flying kills. We all know it, and we all do it.“
Monbiot is referring to the environmental effects of flying. He claims (convincingly) that while most of our reliance on fuels causing carbon emissions can be reduced without a too serious limitation to our freedom â?? this does not apply to flying. Reducing carbon emissions caused by flying means reducing the number of flights we take.
Both these arguments (iSweatshops & flying) have something important in common. They both bring into question things I appreciate. The question that must be posed from this information is â?? what shall I do about it?
When bringing this information to people he meets Monbiot writes of the listeners response: â??They just want to enjoy themselves. Who am I to spoil their fun? The moral dissonance is deafening.â??
The first impulse may be the ostrich approach â?? by sticking oneâ??s neck into the sand the bad news can be ignored. This approach should not be ignored â?? it works surprisingly well and is applied successfully by many. I tried this for a while â?? unfortunately it eventually wears thin. Another approach is self-denial. A no-excuses approach to technology and flights. This entails limiting everything to the bare necessities â?? without allowing for rationalisations. This involves denying oneself of many of the things that I appreciate â?? not an easy approach.
Can there be a middle-of-the-road approach? Is awareness better than ignorance? This argument would mean that our knowledge of the harm our choices entail legitimises our actions even if this has no real effect on physical events (better working conditions or environment). As much as I would like this, I cannot believe this is a solid approach to improvement.
The answer? Donâ??t look at me. I believe it is better to be aware than ignorant of the harm I do â?? even if this cannot mitigate the harm.
Its time for the annual summer move – We have rented a small cottage on the local island of Asperö (population 450 people) where we shall be for the next four weeks. The island is small (only about 1 square kilometre) but still manages to have a varied nature â?? including a nature trail through a leafy area, lots of swimming places and a small sweet-water lake.
The best thing about the island is that there are no cars only mopeds built for transport rather than speed.
this type of moped is called â??Flakmoppeâ?? in Swedish which literally translated means loading platform moped â?? sounds much better in Swedish. As you can imagine the pace is much more relaxed on the island. So I am looking forward to a long relaxing summer on the islandâ?¦ even if I do have some short trips (Barcelona & Amsterdam) and some writing (Military Violence, Free Software) planned the main idea is to have a relaxing holiday-time.
When Hannah Arendt wrote about the banality of evil she was criticised for her thesis that people who carry out unspeakable crimes are not be crazy fanatics, but ordinary individuals who simply accept the arguments of their state and voluntarily participate in the evil â?? they are indeed good bureaucrats, simply following orders. Arendtâ??s example was a key administrator in the Nazi death camp system (Adolf Eichmann).
It seems to me that this is the only way in which to understand the statement of Rear Admiral Harris that the Guantanamo suicides on 10th June: “This was not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetric warfare committed against us.” (The Time, June 11). He is the good bureaucrat – dutiful, unquestioning and supportive. Absolutely terrifying.
The three detainees committed suicide by using nooses made of sheets and clothes. One of the men was first detained when he was a juvenile. They had been in prison up to four years, but never charged a crime. This means that they have no way of knowing if and when they will ever be released.
Before June 10th there had been 41 suicide attempts at the camp. About the detainees at Guantanamo Amnesty International writes:
None of the detainees have been granted prisoner of war status or brought before a â??competent tribunalâ?? to determine his status…The US government refuses to clarify their legal status, despite calls from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to do so. Instead, the US government labels them â??enemy combatantsâ?? or â??terroristsâ??, flouting their right to be presumed innocent and illegally presuming justification for the denial of many of their most basic human rights.
Next week (23 June) the documentary Road to Guantanamo will be in the movies the website contains both the trailer and information about the infamous prison. Amnesty International has a broschure to accompany the film: The Road to Guantanamo Action Guide.
The banality of evil is in part the ability of the state to accept compromises such as Guantanamo – yet maintain they care about human rights. In addition to the general public opinion’s ability to forget that the evil is taking place…
My iPod has just made a face at me. Now it only does this
While I remember many years ago when my cat peed on/in my powerbook 100, I spent lots of time carefully drying it out. At the first successful startup the icon (usually a smiling mac) now looked like this.
I was naturally so thankful that my computer worked. Even if it never did smell the same again especially when the harddisk became warm…
Now that I am stuck here with a non-functioning iPod the “cute” unhappy ipod icon seems more like rubbing salt into the situation… So mac doesn’t use the “blue screen of death” but how is this better? The equipment does not work – but look at the cute icon? Bah!
Online helps involves resetting in different ways – I have tried them all. The final method which remains untried is to put my ipod in the freezer for a few hours and then reset.
oh, the joy of tech!
Exciting news! I will be part of a panel at the 3rd International GPLv3 Conference in Barcelona next week. Look at the schedule (highlights below) can you imagine a more interesting two days?
Highlights day 1 – 22 June
10:30 – Georg Greve: opening introduction
11:00 – Richard Stallman: Overview of GPL v3 Changes
12:30 – Ciarán O’Riordan: The public consultation process
14:30 – Eben Moglen: The wording of the changes
Highlights day 2 – 23 june
10:30 Panel: Current projects of FSFE
11:30 Panel: Awareness and adoption of GPLv3
12:30 Pablo Machón: GPLv3 and the European software patent struggle
14:30 Panel: The Discussion Committees
15:30 Panel: Enforcing the GPL, thwarting DRM
16:30 Stefano Maffulli: Closing presentation
OK â?? so articles that begin with the title â??The Death ofâ?¦â?? have a tendency to be alarmist. Despite this the recent news that Dr. Martin Luther Kingâ??s estate is about to auction off his papers (10 000 papers) creates thoughts in this direction. (via On the Commons)
The main fear is that the collection of sermons, speeches and papers that King wrote between 1946-1968 (including drafts of â??I Have a Dreamâ??) will be bought by an investor and then sold off in pieces to the highest bidders. The economics of this is totally logical it will raise the most money. The downside is that this amazing collection will be spread making research difficult, and maybe impossible. As part of a collection a small note written by Dr King is a valuable addition. Taken on itâ??s own it is worth little and can be maltreated and eventually lost â?? as history has often shown.
This is indeed a death of memory.
The second part of the death of memory concerns the digitisation of communications. Since the dissemination of computers there has been a dramatic rise in communication and creativity. The general impression is that more and more people are writing and creating different forms of creative works. In addition to this more of our photographs are stored on digital storage devices. What are the implications of the shift to digital storage devices?
Cuneiform writing on clay tablets can still be read today after over 4000 years. Through this we have been able to read the Hammurabi code of law and the Gilgamesh epic and legends. (UPenn Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology). Older books have a relatively long life expectancy in particular those printed on paper made from cloth rags. â??Ordinaryâ?? paper is less enduring and in particular modern paper since the acid remains in paper made between 1850 and 1950 cause this paper to slowly disintegrate (actually a slow burning acid fire) (Wikipedia). Microfilm and Microfiche have a life expectancy of 500+ years but in reality this is substantially lower due to wear and tear by users. Magnetic tape, Videotape, Magnetic disk and Optical disk will last less than 30-40 years.*
Stored digital photos will not be recovered from dumpsters and garage sales (Swapatorium) since they will have become unreadable as well as deteriorated.
All information storage forms require that the reader be able to understand the data. In the case of cuneiform tablets it is necessary to understand the written language. In the case of technologies such as tapes and microfilm it is also necessary to maintain functioning equipment that will be able to read the stored data. In the case of digital equipment it is necessary to save both the hardware and the software.
A good way to begin to understand the magnatude of this problem is to look at the â??Mother Tonguesâ?? chart of the development of computer languages that shows the rise and fall of programming languages.
Who will save the hardware, software and knowledge to be able to auction my collected works stored on several decaying computers? Even if someone eventually would want to read itâ?¦
* Rothenberg, Jeff. ‘Ensuring the Longevity of Digital Documents’, Scientific American (Jan 1995): 24-29.
Yesterday (June, 12) the American Medical Association took an important ethical policy decision against medical participation in interrogations “Physicians must not conduct, directly participate in, or monitor an interrogation with an intent to intervene, because this undermines the physicianâ??s role as healer.â??
The UN has declared that the 26th June is the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture – what are we going to do about it?
There is no single face of torture. Unfortunately there happens to be several examples of the cruelty and heartlessness of men (no gender bias intended). Examples include the statement by Rear-Admiral Harris about the three suicides of prisoners under his responsibility was â??â?¦not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfareâ?¦â?? or the comment of Nick Harvey when faced with the news that after WWII British troops had starved prisoners and tortured them with equipment taken from Gestapo prisons, says â??Itâ??s too late for anyone to be held personally responsible, or held politically to accountâ?¦â??
Ok so issues such as time, energy and emotional baggage tend to get in the way of a more active support. There is however a way of supporting without much effort. This is not a trivialisation – on the contrary it is the promotion of information to raise awareness. Not to let uncomfortable information slip into oblivion.
The group known as Torture Awareness Month has a blogrole going. By going to http://blogagainsttorture.blogspot.com/ and do two things:
All you need to do to join is (1) promise to do a blog post about torture in the month of June, (2) link to Torture Awareness Month somewhere your blog. Do both of these things, and we will link to you from our blogrolls.
Donâ??t forget to go to Torture Awareness Month to learn more about what is, and can be done, to raise awareness against torture. But don’t stop there. The information about torture, its causes, effects and how to work against it.
Some background…
The United Nations has declared the 26 June to be International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. The UN position against torture is based primarily on article 5 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states, â??no one shall be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishmentâ??
This is further qualified by the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the sentiments are echoed in conventions such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which adds that: â??No one shall be subjected without his [or her] free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.â??
