After the terrible, cowardly acts by terrorists in the UK, something
that we all deplore, there has come the request from the Police to
escrow the private keys used in dual key encryption. Apparently, much
of the information held on the computers that the Police seized were
encrypted, frustrating Police efforts to easily read that information.
Now there are public calls by the Police to allow them to engage in key
escrow so that when they have to break into a computer they have the
private key and do not have to use brute force or whatever method they
currently use, (is there any other method?)
I would like to discuss this with the membership of this list and
fellows at the FSFE. Is it permissible to allow key escrow by the
authorities? Is this type of encryption too powerful to be in the hands
of enemies of the state who take innocent lives? What are the limits on
privacy? On public authorities invasion of privacy? How can we address
the public need for information with the private need for privacy?
Jeremiah Foster
http://www.devmodul.com
jeremiah.foster(a)devmodul.com
Tel/Mobil: +46 (0)730 930 506
Hi all,
I have seen that several people asked about the EUPL and FSFE's
position on it on this list. My apologies for not responding earlier,
the WIPO activities last week kept me quite busy. [*]
About the EUPL, I am sure you will understand that this is politically
sensitive, but the following sums up our position on the issue:
We welcome the interest of the European Commission in Free Software,
which we have always supported as much as we could -- both politically
and by our participation in the framework programmes.
Generally, writing new licenses for Free Software is a well-meaning,
but ill-advised activity that usually diminishes the usefulness of the
software released under it, in the worst case to the point of becoming
useless: This is in particular true when they end up being GPL
incompatible and thus cannot intercombine with the vast majority of
Free Software that already exists.
The last version of the EUPL we were presented with was a copyleft,
GPL incompatible Free Software license. We are therefore sceptical
about its usefulness and would rather propose to cooperate on the
further evolution of the GNU General Public License (GPL) for which
the FSFE would be the European contact point and will gladly work with
the Commission.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Georg
[*] See https://www.fsfe.org/Members/gerloff/blog/
--
Georg C. F. Greve <greve(a)fsfeurope.org>
Free Software Foundation Europe (http://fsfeurope.org)
Join the Fellowship and protect your freedom! (http://www.fsfe.org)
Hello,
i'm using free software and GNU/Linux for a long time and i think the work
from FSF(E) is really important and it's important to have a complete free
Operating System too.
But what i don't understand is why should every software be free or why
non-free software shouldn't exist? I have read a lot of things,
www.gnu.org/philosophy and the german book "Freie Software zwichen Privat-
und Gemeineigentum" but i couldn't find a answere of my question. There are
a lot of arguments about the advantage of free software but no real
arguments why non-free software is always bad.
If i understand it, many people argue with the influence of software on our
life. But other things has also great influence on our life. For example
before email and instant messaging, the phone was (and maybe is today too)
the most used way to communicate. But no one has access to the "source code"
of this communication and can change it, copy it and so on. Is the phone
therefor a bad thing?
Basically what i want to say is, maybe software isn't always that
important, maybe there are scopes were software is just a tool or just
entertainment. Is it really bad if this software is not free? Sure you can
argue that's always good to have control over your PC and can change a tool
to do the job you want. But i think this is a argument pro free software and
not again non-free software.
I think free software has many advantages, in the first place for Hacker and
"computer-freaks", what i mean is for people who use the computer to create
new things and tweak it the way they like it. But today many people uses the
computer just as a tool or as a toy. They aren't interested how it works,
like they don't want to have the plan for their power drill, TV or phone.
They just want to do their job and thats it.
What do you think. Are there situations were the question about the license
is not that important? Or is it always important that every software is
free, and why do you think it is?
Thanks,
Markus
--
5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse f�r Mail, Message, More +++
Hello,
I'm searching for a PCMCIA card reader for the FSFE CryptoCard. Does
someone already use such a card reader? Of course the card reader should
work with free driver and it would be great if the driver is already
part of the default linux kernel.
Can someone recommend a PCMCIA card reader?
Thanks
Bjoern
--
,= ,-_-. =. Bjoern Schiessle (http://www.schiessle.org)
((_/)o o(\_))
`-'(. .)`-' If art interprets our dreams, the computer
\_/ executes them in the guise of programs.
Hello,
first let me say thank you for all the replays.
> Easy. Show me a situation where non-free software is good (note: by good
> I don't mean technically better but that the fact that it is non-Free is
> good), and there you will have the exception that breaks the "always".
>
> So far I haven't found any situation where loosing one of the four
> freedoms is good, but I can be proved wrong. Can you help me?
yes your are right. I think that its never good to lose freedom, too.
But my question is more if non-free software is always bad or are there
situations were you could say "It's bad that i don't have all the freedoms,
but i just need the tool do get a job done and if it does the job it's ok"
For example if i get an PDF which can displayed only by the
acrobat reader. Should i say "the reader is bad because it's non-free" and
don't read the PDF or should i just use the acrobat reader to read this one
document? I think you could tell very few people to do the first thing.
Basically i see people who use the PC like a microwave or a washing machine
if it does it job than it's ok. It would be hard to convince people to not
"clean the
suit" just because you don't like the license of the "washing machine" and
at the
moment there is no free "washing machine". I think thats one of the reasons
because Debian still keep their non-free archive. They could creat a
complete free
OS without non-free, but the decided that maybe someone have to "clean the
suit" and than a non-free "washing machine" is better than no "washing
machine"
at all.
I think about people who just want to start the PC and play some games. I
think
you can't convince him to install GNU/Linux just because of the license. If
he can't
play the games on GNU/Linux he will not switch. He just want to have some
hours
fun. Is this bad?
Or people who just want a better typewriter, he buy a PC with windows and MS
Office
or StarOffice and write his letter. Why sould he switch to GNU/Linux and
maybe have
problems to print because of a missing or bad printing driver or have
problems to
open and edit the files from the fellows. For him the PC is just a tool,
like the old
mechanically typewriter. It does it job and thats all he want. Is this bad?
I agree that free software is always better and there is no argument which
makes
non-free software better because of the non-free license. But what i ask is:
Is the
license always the most important thinks or are there situations were other
thinks
are just more important?
--
5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse f�r Mail, Message, More +++
--
5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse f�r Mail, Message, More +++
Hello,
the third part of the "Intersessional Intergovernmental Meeting on a
Development Agenda for WIPO" conference series in Geneva will take
place during July 20-22.
Like during the las two meetings, I will closely follow the course of
the negotiations in my Weblog:
http://www.fsfe.org/Members/gerloff/blog/
best regards,
Karsten Gerloff
--
Weblog: <www.fsfe.org/Members/gerloff/blog/>
Website: <www.nearlyfreespeech.org>
Join the Fellowship and protect your Freedom! <www.fsfe.org>
Please don't send doc, xls docs. Use txt, html, pdf instead.
Considering the feedback here we decided for LGPL (for the C++ API) and GPL
(for the pure-data external), which is what we originally wanted. You can find
the work here:
http://freesound.iua.upf.edu/mootcher.php
:::sam:::
1. WSIS/WSA Contributory Conference in Vienna, Austria
2. Round table in Venice, Italy
3. Podium discussion about software patents in Kiel, Germany
4. ChaosControl conference in Vienna, Austria
5. WIPO meeting in Geneve, Switzerland
6. GNU/Linuxtag in Karlsruhe, Germany
7. Karlsruhe Memorandum on software patents
8. Europython in Göteborg, Sweden
9. 1ere Conference Nationale de Logiciels Libres, Aleppo, Syria
10. Lobbying against software patents
11. Karsten Gerloff finished internship with FSFE
1. WSIS/WSA Contributory Conference in Vienna, Austria
Beginning of June, the World Summit Award (WSA) contributory conference
to the United Nations World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)
took place in Vienna, Austria. Speakers included Austrian Chancellor
Wolfgang Schüssel, Professor Joseph Weizenbaum from MIT, John Perry
Barlow and FSFE's president, Georg Greve.
During the reception in the Federal Chancellery of Austria and the
event, Karin Kosina and Georg Greve spoke with many people inside and
outside the Free Software community and gave several radio and video
interviews.
2. Round table in Venice, Italy
Stefano Maffulli was present at a round table on the topic "Art culture
knowledge democracy". Other participants included the Brasilian Minister
of Culture Gilberto Gil, the Italian Creative Commons Public Lead Juan
Carlos De Martin and many more.
3. Podium discussion about software patents in Kiel, Germany
The German Federal Small/Medium Enterprises Association (Bundesverband
mittelständischer Wirtschaft, BVMW) invited Georg Greve to a podium
discussion about software patents in Kiel, Germany where he discussed
the sense of patents on software algorithms with Dr. Gaston Willière,
Director of the European Patent Office (EPO) Computer Directorate and
other panelists from small and medium enterprises: The overall result
was that no proprietary or Free Software commercial enterprise has
anything to gain from software patents.
4. ChaosControl conference in Vienna, Austria
ChaosControl is a yearly conference organised by the faculty of law at
the university of Vienna. This year's topic of the conference was
"information freedom", and Karin Kosina spoke about software patents.
5. WIPO meeting in Geneva, Switzerland
On the occasion of the continued Inter-sessional Inter-governmental
Meeting (IIM/2) on a Development Agenda for WIPO (World Intellectual
Property Organisation), Georg Greve and Karsten Gerloff once more went
to Geneva to support the reform of WIPO. In FSFE's official observer
capacity, Georg Greve issued a statement to "include Free Software in
all its programmes and activities, educating its member states on the
social and economic benefits of the Free Software model." After the
very positive response for doing this during the first meeting,
Karsten Gerloff once more documented the local proceedings in his blog
where you can find more information.
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/wipo/statement-20050620.en.htmlhttp://www.fsfe.org/Members/gerloff/blog/weblog_view
6. GNU/Linuxtag in Karlsruhe, Germany
The GNU/Linuxtag (sic!) is not only the biggest Free Software event in
Europe - it also became a central meeting point for people from Free
Software organisations all over the world. The list of representatives
that were part of the FSFE booth team is impressive: Bernhard Reiter,
Georg Greve, Werner Koch, Joachim Jakobs, Karsten Gerloff, Matthias
Kirschner and Volker Dormeyer (all Germany), Karin Kosina, Reinhard
Müller (both Austria), and Ciaran O'Riordan (Ireland/Belgium) from the
FSFE, Niibe Yutaka, Tanaka Akira, and Ueno Daiki from the Free
Software Initiative Japan, Beatriz Busaniche, Federico Heinz (both
Argentina), and Fernanda G. Weiden (Brasil) from FSF Latin America,
Didier Clerc, Florian Verdet, Mario Fux, and Myriam Schweingruber from
FSFE's Swiss associated organisation Wilhelm Tux, Cornelius Wasmund
and Michael Kallas as volunteers that helped with the booth, Mohammad
Khansari from Iran, Pablo Machón and María Ruiz from Spain and Gareth
Bowker from UK.
Once again, Volker Dormeyer, our volunteer booth coordinator, did an
amazing job by preparing the booth, organising hotel rooms, finding
sponsors for booth hardware and thousands of other things to make this
event as successful as it was.
Several people have posted links to photos from the event on their
Fellowship blog space.
https://www.fsfe.org
7. Karlsruhe Memorandum on software patents
On GNU/Linuxtag, the FSFE started an initiative for a memorandum
against software patents. More than 200 people spontaneously signed
the text, many people already added their signature after it was
posted on the web.
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/swpat/memorandum.en.html
8. Europython in Göteborg, Sweden
At the Europython conference, Hendrik Sandklef held a speech about "Free
Software - Free Society" and Swedish team member Mathias Klang talked
about the Creative Commons project, in which he also is involved. Both
also took part in a panel discussion about software licensing questions.
9. 1ere Conference Nationale de Logiciels Libres, Aleppo, Syria
Karin Kosina opened this follow-up event to the highly successful Free
Software workshop in Damascus earlier this year with an introduction to
Free Software. In addition to a general outline of our philosophy and
vision, the talk focused on Free Software as a way to develop an
independent and sustainable IT industry. She also gave several
interviews for Syrian TV and radio stations. Karin intends to continue
working closely together with Free Software advocates from the region,
and had many interesting discussions regarding potential future
developments in the Middle East.
10. Lobbying against software patents
The Software Patents directive has been heating up and FSFE's full-time
Brussels representative, Ciarán O'Riordan, has been working mostly
inside the European Parliament building this month. Besides meeting the
MEPs to inform them directly, he has been briefing newly arrived
lobbyists to prepare them for their meetings, connecting information
from bodies outside the Parliament with the MEPs, and coordinating
between FSFE and FFII.
Ciaran also made sure every MEP received a copy of the Karlsruhe
Memorandum:
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/swpat/memorandum.en.html
And he would like to thank the FSFE translators team for their work on
making a pre-vote summary available in non-English languages.
11. Karsten Gerloff finished internship with FSFE
After four very busy months, June was the last month for the internship
of Karsten Gerloff, who described his numerous experiences as part of
FSFE in his blog. In these four months, Karsten became an integral part
of the FSFE Team -- his friendly, reliable and energetic personality
earned him great respect and FSFE thanks him for all his good work.
http://www.fsfe.org/Members/gerloff/blog/
If you are a student and can see yourself spend some time becoming part
of an extremely busy and lively, multi-national and distributed
political non-governmental organisation, you will find more details at
http://fsfeurope.org/contribute/internship.en.html
You can find a list of all FSF Europe newsletters on
http://www.fsfeurope.org/news/newsletter.en.html
> From: Ben Finney <ben(a)benfinney.id.au>
>
>>I have a small (big?) question about mixing licenses within a
>>project. We'd like to distribute the project as LGPL or, in its
>>defect, as GPL.
>
> What are your goals for licensing the project? You're asking for
> advice to choose between two licenses, but haven't told us why you
> already prefer one or the other.
We would like to use LGPL if we can (for our API), but as we're building
the PD External with a GPL library we might not be able to do that.
> By PD do you mean "in the public domain", or something else?
Ah, excuse me... I meant PD as in "Pure Data", a modular audio program (
http://www-crca.ucsd.edu/~msp/software.html ). It's 'plugins' are called
'externals'.
>>We want to release a C++ API and, separately, the PD external.
>
> Who is the copyright holder for the C++ API? Is it currently licensed
> to you?
We created the API ourselves however using other libraries (see below).
>>The libraries we're using (for the API) are the following:
>>LibcURL http://curl.haxx.se/ (MIT)
>>TinyXML http://sourceforge.net/projects/tinyxml (ZLIB)
>>LibSnd - http://www.mega-nerd.com/libsndfile/ (LGPL)
>>As said before, the PD external uses flext (flext -
>>http://grrrr.org/ext/flext/, GPL) and the above-mentioned API.
>
> The MIT and ZLIB licenses are compatible; they essentially demand the
> same terms. You can distribute a combination of these works so long as
> you satisfy the terms of both licenses.
>
> A work consisting of work under MIT, ZLIB and LGPL can be distributed
> only by satisfying all license terms; the only way to do this is
> license the whole work under the LGPL or GPL (and satisfy the terms of
> all the constituent licenses).
Yes, we know we either have to release as GPL or LGPL, that's what we
want, but let me rephrase the question:
Our API builds on LibcURL (MIT), TinyXML (zLIB) and LibSnd (LGPL)
=> can we release our API as LGPL?
Our 'pure data plugin' uses above + uses Flext (GPL), thus it can only be
released under the GPL, is that right?
>>Can we release the API as LGPL?
>
> You haven't said what license you currently have for the API. If you
> are the sole copyright holder, you can grant any license you like (or
> none, or several). If you have received it under license, you need to
> satisfy the license terms.
We are the copyright holders. But our API uses other libraries, hence
this mail.
I think the confusion arose from my usage of the abbreviation PD for
Pure Data - apologies for this...
:::sam:::