Hi fellows!
As some of you might know already, Georg Greve has been contacted by Adobe, because of pdfreaders.org In general Adobe "welcomes" pdfreaders.org, as it "confirms PDF's status as an open standard" - which is good news. But of course they think that there is still room for "improvement", see Georg's comments below.
This seems like a good opportunity to start talking with Adobe, in fact they have proposed a conference call, between different representives of Adobe and FSFE. This will be held soon and will involve at least Georg Greve (as President of FSFE) and myself from "our" side.
This means a couple of things: 1) don't contact Adobe on any matter by yourself. We will discuss all issues with them via phone; talking about issues now can only impact the talks negatively. 2) let us know what you expect from the conference call and what you think would be important to discuss 3) I will write an email to the developers of the pdfreaders and ask them what they think should be mentionened in the conference call. Can someone give the E-Mail-Addresses? It would be important for the E-Mail not get posted on public list...
No matter how the conference call goes, you can be sure: if Adobe thinks we are important, we most definitely are :D
Regards, Hannes
[greve@fsfeurope]:
Critical points are apparently:
a) they feel that ISO status of PDF is not yet sufficiently well represented
b) they fear that people will expect 100% compliance from Free Software readers, and are afraid that a "less than perfect" experience will be blamed by users on PDF, and thus fall back on Adobe.
On point a) I am sure working with them will be very useful.
On point b) I am thinking that this might actually work in our favour, and might bring Adobe closer to the Free Software world. Also we can use this to leverage more support for PDF implementations.
A statement that certain features are not available in some readers due to RAND conditions may seem like it shows that Adobe is the better solution, but it might also have the effect to identify and mark certain features as "not Open Standard" and ultimately increase the pressure on Adobe to move away from RAND.
One concrete thing that could be done is to bring the development teams of the Free Software PDF readers to the conference that the PDF/A center is apparently holding sometime later this year.
Maybe we can get the site to the state that Adobe feels the site is acceptable to them, get them to invite the Free Software PDF reader authors to Berlin, and do a joint press release on this. ;)
Hi Hannes,
From Hannes Hauswedell, 2009-02-18:
Hi fellows!
As some of you might know already, Georg Greve has been contacted by Adobe, because of pdfreaders.org In general Adobe "welcomes" pdfreaders.org, as it "confirms PDF's status as an open standard" - which is good news. But of course they think that there is still room for "improvement", see Georg's comments below.
I was very glad to see the announcement from Georg and think this is a great opportunity to resolve the remaining obstacles preventing PDF to be recognised as an open standard by all parties.
This seems like a good opportunity to start talking with Adobe, in fact they have proposed a conference call, between different representives of Adobe and FSFE. This will be held soon and will involve at least Georg Greve (as President of FSFE) and myself from "our" side.
Your participation in the conference call is much appreciated and I can only assume you will do a great job convincing the Adobes ;-)
This means a couple of things:
- don't contact Adobe on any matter by yourself. We will discuss all
issues with them via phone; talking about issues now can only impact the talks negatively.
Would asking Leonard Rosenthol for comments on the Open Standard page draft be a problem in this regard?
- let us know what you expect from the conference call and what you think
would be important to discuss
While I haven't found any website confirming that PDF is available through RAND agreements, which discriminate against Free Software through financial requirements, I assume that Georg and RMS are right when they claim such. That should be an important aspect to discuss.
Furthermore, Jose mentioned that there are patent holders other than Adobe that make claims to patent ownership of certain features in PDF. It would be nice if Adobe could make a pledge to support Free Software implementations of the PDF standard with their own patent portfolio (i.e. if any Free Software project is threatened with litigations for implementing the PDF standard, Adobe will help counter the threat with their own patents.)
- I will write an email to the developers of the pdfreaders and ask them
what they think should be mentionened in the conference call. Can someone give the E-Mail-Addresses? It would be important for the E-Mail not get posted on public list...
I made a list of contact addresses for every project that was uploaded to team svn. I'll send you a copy privately.
No matter how the conference call goes, you can be sure: if Adobe thinks we are important, we most definitely are :D
It's great to see pdfreaders.org having such an impact. I'd say we all have done a wonderful job on this ;-)
all the best, /Stian
Stian Rødven Eide schrieb:
No matter how the conference call goes, you can be sure: if Adobe thinks we are important, we most definitely are :D
It's great to see pdfreaders.org having such an impact. I'd say we all have done a wonderful job on this ;-)
Indeed!
I never thought that this campaign would reach such an important role in the pdf-game.
Excited greetings,
HennR
Hi Stian,
Your participation in the conference call is much appreciated and I can only assume you will do a great job convincing the Adobes ;-)
Well.. I hope.. Anyway Georg is hopefully going to the big part of talking, since he is the most experienced negotiator ;)
This means a couple of things:
- don't contact Adobe on any matter by yourself. We will discuss all
issues with them via phone; talking about issues now can only impact the talks negatively.
Would asking Leonard Rosenthol for comments on the Open Standard page draft be a problem in this regard?
Yes I think so. I have included Georg in CC, so he can comment on it. My impression was that part of the strategy could be /not/ letting them know exactly what we know and/or what we want before hand.
- let us know what you expect from the conference call and what you
think would be important to discuss
While I haven't found any website confirming that PDF is available through RAND agreements, which discriminate against Free Software through financial requirements, I assume that Georg and RMS are right when they claim such. That should be an important aspect to discuss.
I am not into things that deep so I can't comment on it. But if it is an issue, we should definitely mention it :)
Furthermore, Jose mentioned that there are patent holders other than Adobe that make claims to patent ownership of certain features in PDF. It would be nice if Adobe could make a pledge to support Free Software implementations of the PDF standard with their own patent portfolio (i.e. if any Free Software project is threatened with litigations for implementing the PDF standard, Adobe will help counter the threat with their own patents.)
I don't see how can Adobe can protect Free Software developers if they are sued for patent infringement other than paying their lawyers. But I am not an expert on patent law (maybe they could threaten to "counter-sue") and I don't think that we can get them to do something like that, after all they in reality do not want to lose market-share to other readers...
- I will write an email to the developers of the pdfreaders and ask them
what they think should be mentionened in the conference call. Can someone give the E-Mail-Addresses? It would be important for the E-Mail not get posted on public list...
I made a list of contact addresses for every project that was uploaded to team svn. I'll send you a copy privately.
Thanks. If you know that either of the addresses is a public mailing list, please mark it as such.
No matter how the conference call goes, you can be sure: if Adobe thinks we are important, we most definitely are :D
It's great to see pdfreaders.org having such an impact. I'd say we all have done a wonderful job on this ;-)
Yep :)
all the best, /Stian
Regards, Hannes
From Hannes Hauswedell, 2009-02-19:
I don't see how can Adobe can protect Free Software developers if they are sued for patent infringement other than paying their lawyers. But I am not an expert on patent law (maybe they could threaten to "counter-sue") and I don't think that we can get them to do something like that, after all they in reality do not want to lose market-share to other readers...
That's true, all Adobe can/should do is to threaten to show up with counter- suits whenever a Free Software developer is being prohibited by patents from implementing PDF functions, but they might actually need to do something like that to make PDF a really open standard. I think Sun did something similar for OpenSolaris.
Thanks. If you know that either of the addresses is a public mailing list, please mark it as such.
I didn't think of that before I sent it, but believe you'll see which are mailing lists and not. All of the mailing lists in that document are probably public however.
best, /Stian
Hi all,
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:44:49 +0100 Hannes Hauswedell hannes@fsfe.org wrote:
Would asking Leonard Rosenthol for comments on the Open Standard page draft be a problem in this regard?
hh> Yes I think so. I have included Georg in CC, so he can comment on hh> it. My impression was that part of the strategy could be /not/ hh> letting them know exactly what we know and/or what we want before hh> hand.
That is indeed a wise thing when you want to negotiate.
Otherwise the other party gets two rounds to obtain concession, which pushed you farther from your initial objective. :-)
hh> I am not into things that deep so I can't comment on it. But if it hh> is an issue, we should definitely mention it :)
Thanks to Jose (who sent private email) I have a bit more information about this now. We definitely want to see this clarified.
hh> I don't see how can Adobe can protect Free Software developers if hh> they are sued for patent infringement other than paying their hh> lawyers.
That one is indeed tricky, and most likely out of reach at least for this round of talks.
It's great to see pdfreaders.org having such an impact. I'd say we all have done a wonderful job on this ;-)
hh> Yep :)
Most definitely!
Congratulations to everyone!
Regards, Georg