= FSFE in Samba case: Microsoft's defiance backfired =
[Read online: http://fsfe.org/news/2011/news-20110525-01.en.html ]
Luxembourg, May 25 - FSFE played a key role at a Microsoft hearing
before the European Union's General Court on Tuesday, helping explain
the intricacies of Free Software servers.
The hearing was called to consider Microsoft's challenge to a EUR 899
million fine imposed by the European Commission in 2008. Microsoft had
failed to carry out remedies imposed for its violation of EU antitrust
law. A ruling is expected for later in the year.
Microsoft was required to provide interoperability information that
would enable others to hook up to its products so they could compete
with its workgroup servers. Key among those was the Samba team, which is
the only surviving competitor in the workgroup server market. Only after
a European Union court acted in 2007 to uphold nearly all of the
Commission's 2004 decision did Microsoft finally meet the Commission's
requirement to comply.
"In order to compete, the Samba team only needed the mundane information
about how Microsoft computers talk to each other," said Tridgell. "There
is nothing innovative here. All the innovative bits are either already
published by Microsoft's own researchers, or are contained in the
Microsoft program source code – and we have no interest in seeing
that. The innovation certainly isn't in the protocol specifications."
Tridgell appeared before a panel headed by Chamber President Nicholas
James Forwood of Britain, which also included judges Franklin Dehousse
of Belgium and Juraj Schwarcz of Slovakia. Microsoft, the Commission,
and outside intervenors on both sides were also represented. FSFE and
the Samba team were represented by lawyer Carlo Piana.
The problems date back to the Commission's 2004 decision that Microsoft
should release interoperability information. After that, the company
played for time and waited three years to comply with the Commission's
demands. Explaining the significance of Samba for a competitive software
market, Chamber President Forwood said: “Samba is the funnel through
which the effects on the market will be produced.”
Microsoft contended that the information it had to provide was valuable
and innovative, and originally sought to charge high prices for it.
Tridgell demonstrated that the valuable information had already been
revealed by Microsoft in research papers and other public fora. By
contrast, the information that Samba team needed to interoperate with
computers running Microsoft Windows was neither original nor innovative.
“Microsoft didn't keep this information secret because it was
valuable; the information was only valuable because it was kept
secret,” Piana told the Court on behalf of FSFE. He said it let
Microsoft preserve its dominant position, because no other software was
able to talk to the company's systems. “The company used these three
years to further entrench its dominant position in the market.”
“Microsoft is acting like a gambler who doubled up on a losing bet,
and now wants his money back,” said Nicholas Kahn, the representative
of the European Commission. By waiting three years before complying with
the Commission's decision while the clock on the fine was ticking,
Microsoft set the stakes very high – and finally lost.
“In this case, Europe's competition regulators have shown their bite.
We hope that the court will uphold the fine and make it clear that
companies in Europe have to play by the rules,” said Karsten Gerloff,
President of the Free Software Foundation Europe. “FSFE does many
things to help foster the growth of Free Software. We're proud to help
make the case for Free Software in a forum such as this, where we
believe we are providing a public service.”
Workgroup servers handle tasks used in small groups – printing,
signing in, and allocating permission to access particular files. The
Samba project not only provides an alternative to Microsoft's workgroup
server. It has come up with an alternative that is better in many
respects. For example, the Samba team used the trivial information
provided by Microsoft to build an innovative system that runs on very
small, cheap computers -- something that Microsoft's software cannot do.
“The hearing established that Free Software is central to restoring
competition in the workgroup server market,” says Piana. “Everyone
agreed to this, including the judges. This case matters because it
highlights that interoperability is more important than a company's
interest in keeping its dominant position.”
== About the Free Software Foundation Europe ==
The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) is a non-profit
non-governmental organisation active in many European countries and
involved in many global activities. Access to software determines
participation in a digital society. To secure equal participation in
the information age, as well as freedom of competition, the Free
Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) pursues and is dedicated to the
furthering of Free Software, defined by the freedoms to use, study,
modify and copy. Founded in 2001, creating awareness for these issues,
securing Free Software politically and legally, and giving people
Freedom by supporting development of Free Software are central issues
of the FSFE.
http://fsfe.org/
Contact: Karsten Gerloff, President, +49-176-96904298
= German Government: Lack of knowledge or deliberately offending Free
Software? =
[Permant URL http://fsfe.org/news/2011/news-20110511-01.en.html ]
Berlin 11. May 2011. In the case of the Foreign Office turning away from
Free Software, the German Government is entangling itself in
contradictions. The reaction of the Government to an inquiry by "Bündnis
90/Grüne" has led to more pending questions than answers.
"Many replies show that the government either doesn't understand
important aspects of Free Software or is deliberately offending Free
Software in general as well as Free Software companies in particular"
says Matthias Kirschner, Germany coordinator of Free Software Foundation
Europe (FSFE).
The government argues that the developments in the Foreign Office
constitute a "turning away from the policy of exclusively using open
source software." At the same time, the government has confirmed that
they will migrate to Microsoft Windows 7 and Office 2010.
"The statements that Free Software would be worse to use, would cause
additional expenses on hardware, and that a lack of warranty would exist
are imaginative perceptions rather than fitting into a serious reply
from the government" said Elmar Geese, president of the "Linux-Verband".
Furthermore the response of the German Government has raised new
questions. The government mentioned that 4.3 million Euro have been
spent on a Free Software federal GNU/Linux distribution which apparently
has never been finished. "We wonder what has happened to that project
and what the money has actually been spent on" said Matthias Kirschner.
The FSFE and the "Linux-Verband" will work on an analysis of the reply
together with those who are interested.
- The reply of the German Federal Government (German)
http://www.von-notz.de/downloads/antwort-ka_bmi_quelloffene-software-aa_03-…
- Some comments in a blog entry (German)
http://blogs.fsfe.org/mk/?p=781
- Public plattform to comment the questions (German)
http://etherpad.fsfe.org/1TyQlboVdF
== About the Free Software Foundation Europe ==
The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) is a non-profit
non-governmental organisation active in many European countries and
involved in many global activities. Access to software determines
participation in a digital society. To secure equal participation in
the information age, as well as freedom of competition, the Free
Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) pursues and is dedicated to the
furthering of Free Software, defined by the freedoms to use, study,
modify and copy. Founded in 2001, creating awareness for these issues,
securing Free Software politically and legally, and giving people
Freedom by supporting development of Free Software are central issues
of the FSFE.
http://fsfe.org/
Contact: Matthias Kirschner, Free Software Foundation Europe,
Linienstr. 141, 10115 Berlin, t +49-30-27595290, m +49-1577-1780003
= FSFE Newsletter - May 2011 =
[Read online: http://fsfe.org/news/nl/nl-201105.en.html ]
== Competition authorities: Free Software protects competition ==
882 software patents, likely related to GNU/Linux, in the hands of
people who could use them to pressure Free Software companies and
developers? Maybe in the hands of Microsoft, which has for years used
nebulous patent claims to extract licensing fees from companies that use
the Linux kernel in their products. This month the German and the US
competition authorities approved the sale of those patents to CPTN, a
consortium consisting of Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, and EMC. But, barring
nasty surprises in the still to be published detailed decision, we
neutralised the danger for Free Software.
Software patents are a very complex matter, and competition authorities
are not used dealing with them. So beginning from December 2010 we
explained to the German competition authorities why the patent sale was
highly problematic. In our first[1] , and second[2] submission we
explained the mechanics that some companies use to compete in the
software market, and how they preserve their monopolies.
1. http://fsfe.org/projects/swpat/letter-20101222.en.html
2. http://fsfe.org/projects/swpat/letter-20110406.en.html
In their press release the authorities have not only highlighted the
importance of Free Software for competition, and that actual patent
lawsuits are anticompetitive but also that threatening with patent
lawsuits, like the fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) strategies from
some non-free software companies, can be anticompetitive.
So for the first time, competition authorities have acknowledged the
essential part of Free Software for competition, and that patent
lawsuits by dominant market participants can be anticompetitive. This
will also be important for future debates, when the behaviour of big
non-free software companies has to be evaluated from a competition law
perspective.
As the devil is in the details, we hope to hear about the exact wording
of the CPTN contracts to evaluate them[3] . Such work is very time
consuming, and we would not be able to keep track of those activities,
without the support of one time donations[4] and regular ones by our
Fellows[5] .
3. http://fsfe.org/projects/swpat/novell-cptn.en.html
4. http://fsfe.org/donate/donate.en.html
5. http://fsfe.org/join.en.html
== Mission is possible ==
To date, 17 percent of the public institutions, we contacted[6] ,
already replied and removed the non-free PDF reader advertisements from
their websites. The current progress of the campaign can be seen on our
buglist[7] . Until now we have only received one negative reply.
However, as about 83 percent of the contacted institutions have not
responded yet, we want to remind them about the letter we have sent, and
ask for a reply. This works only with your help. To take part, follow
the actions from our follow-up guide[8] . In short this is:
6. http://fsfe.org/campaigns/pdfreaders/pdfreaders.en.html
7. http://fsfe.org/campaigns/pdfreaders/buglist.en.html
8. http://fsfe.org/campaigns/pdfreaders/follow-up.en.html
- have a look at organisations in your country which appear as not
having answered yet,
- contact and remind them of FSFE's letter on inadmissibility of
advertising of proprietary software by public institutions, and
- ask them to remove the proprietary software advertising from their
websites.
If you discover non-free PDF reader advertisement, and is not on our
list, you are encouraged to contact them on your own. For public
institutions use a modified version of our letter[9] , for companies and
non-profits we are working on a template, after volunteers have
convinced organisations like Greenpeace Germany[10] to link to
pdfreaders.org instead.
9. http://fsfe.org/campaigns/pdfreaders/letter.en.html
10. http://www.greenpeace.de/themen/energie/nachrichten/artikel/deutschlands_en…
== Something completely different ==
- Data stored per-user, and under the user's control. That is the aim of
the unhosted web. This project is covered by this month Fellowship
interview with Michiel de Jong[11] . If you want to discuss this in
person with Michiel, he will help as one of our booth volunteers for
one day during Berlin's Linuxtag[12] .
- Free Software for the public sector: We have provided input for the
European Commission on modernising the way in which public bodies buy
software[13] and related services.
- At the moment fellows are starting new Fellowship groups[14] in
Augsburg[15] (Germany) and Manchester[16] (UK). For the Manchester
group our British coordinator Sam Tuke created a good presentation
template about the Fellowship which is now linked from the meeting
howto[17] .
- Noteworthy articles from the Fellowship planet[18] include:
- Timo Jyrinki's article about his presentation of "tuning an old but
free phone"[19] with corresponding videos from FSCONS[20] ,
- Carlo Piana's article "Doors opened at Openoffice"[21] about
Oracle's announcement that they want to make OpenOffice.org a
community developed project,
- and Lena Simon's article about the old myths in a digital society[22]
(German) which also covers some issues we have to explain often.
11. http://losca.blogspot.com/2011/04/tuning-old-but-free-phone-video-now.en.ht…
12. http://www.fscons.org
13. http://piana.eu/it/node/265
14. http://www.stud.uni-potsdam.de/~leena/2011/04/alte-mythen-in-der-digitalen-…
- Groklaw's well deserved pension. Groklaw is shutting down and like our
sister organisation[23] we would like to thank them for their good
work.
- Free Software licensing, Free Software business, software patents, and
other topics from a legal point of view are covered in Matija's Free
Software and law related links. Editions are available for
29.03.-17.04.[24] , 18.04.-24.04.[25] , and 25.04.-29.04.[26] .
15. http://blogs.fsfe.org/fellowship-interviews/?p=299
16. http://wiki.fsfe.org/FellowshipEvents/Linuxtag%20berlin
17. http://fsfe.org/news/2011/news-20110418-01.en.html
18. http://wiki.fsfe.org/groups/
19. http://wiki.fsfe.org/groups/Augsburg
20. http://wiki.fsfe.org/groups/Manchester
21. http://wiki.fsfe.org/MeetingHowTo#General
22. http://planet.fsfe.org
23. http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/farewell-groklaw-and-thanks
24. http://matija.suklje.name/?q=node/239
25. http://matija.suklje.name/?q=node/241
26. http://matija.suklje.name/?q=node/244
== Get Active - Internships at FSFE ==
We are looking for smart, motivated interns to join our team[27] . Apply
for an internship position[28] yourself, or distribute the information
about it. We offer:
27. http://fsfe.org/about/team.en.html
28. http://fsfe.org/contribute/internship.en.html
- a challenging and exciting time with a dynamic NPO working
internationally,
- a close-up view of organisational and community processes,
- a chance to take the initiative and put your ideas into practice, and
- the opportunity to meet and work with Free Software advocates across
Europe.
Beside the current interns Natalia Evdokimova[29] , and Nicolas Jean[30]
, past interns include our Italian coordinator Giacomo Poderi[31] ,
Fellowship representative Hugo Roy[32] , our president Karsten
Gerloff[33] , UK coordinator Sam Tuke[34] , Swedish team member Stian
Rødven Eide[35] , education team coordinator Thomas Jensch[36] , and
your editor[37] , who was FSFE's first intern. So as you can see, the
internship is a good start to get more involved in FSFE.
29. http://fsfe.org/index.en.html
30. http://fsfe.org/about/jean/jean.en.html
31. http://blogs.fsfe.org/poderi/
32. http://fsfe.org/about/roy/roy.en.html
33. http://fsfe.org/about/gerloff/gerloff.en.html
34. http://fsfe.org/about/tuke/tuke.en.html
35. http://blogs.fsfe.org/julipan/
36. http://blogs.fsfe.org/riepernet/
37. http://fsfe.org/about/kirschner/kirschner.en.html
Regards,
Matthias Kirschner - FSFE
--
Free Software Foundation Europe <http://www.fsfe.org>
FSFE News <http://fsfe.org/news/news.en.rss>
Upcoming FSFE Events <http://fsfe.org/events/events.en.rss>
Fellowship Blog Aggregation <http://planet.fsfe.org/en/rss20.xml>
Free Software Discussions <http://fsfe.org/contact/community.en.html>