= Record fine against Microsoft upheld by European Court of Justice =
[Read online: http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20120627-01.en.html ]
The European Court of Justice has ordered Microsoft to finally pay a
record fine for using its near-monopoly on the desktop to keep rivals
out of the workgroup server market. Four years ago, the European
Commission slapped the software giant with a fine of 899 million Euros
for its anticompetitive behaviour. In today's ruling, the ECJ ruled that
this unprecedented fine was largely justified.
For a decade, the Free Software Foundation Europe has participated in
the case[1], also on behalf of the Samba team, which provides a Free
Software workgroup server competing with Microsoft's proprietary
product.
1. http://fsfe.org/projects/ms-vs-eu/ms-vs-eu.en.html
"Microsoft remains a convicted monopolist, and was reduced to
negotiating the terms of its punishment," says Karsten Gerloff,
President of the Free Software Foundation Europe. "The court has reduced
the fine by less than five percent. The European Commission was right in
being tough on Microsoft. We have worked hard to support the Commission
in this case, and are extremely proud of the victory we've achieved. We
are grateful to the Samba team and all the others who invested so much
effort along with us, and hope that the Commission will continue to push
for an open, competitive IT market."
The case shows that Microsoft has used patents as an excuse not to
reveal their mundane changes to public protocols. The court recognised
that the company was wrong to refuse to give access to the
interoperability information unless a party took a license for patents
too. This is an example of how software patents are a real and present
damage to competition even if used out of court.
"We have successfully asserted the rights of Free Software developers
like the Samba Team to access interoperability information, but
Microsoft refused our legitimate demands until the very end," says Carlo
Piana, General Counsel for the Free Software Foundation Europe. "Today's
decision establishes that we were right once again. Receiving the
interoperability information was our right, not a concession by
Microsoft."
The threat to competition has not gone away. Microsoft still attempts to
bring ever larger parts of the technology market under its control, and
other companies such as Apple are following its lead. The company still
uses patents to put rivals under pressure and profit from their work[2].
It also uses new approaches to restrict device owners from installing
software of their choice[3]on their hardware. To counter these threats
Free Software Foundation Europe will continue to work for a free
information society, and for the interests of Free Software users and
developers everywhere.
2. https://fsfe.org/projects/swpat/letter-20101222.en.html
3.
http://fsfe.org/campaigns/generalpurposecomputing/secure-boot-analysis.en.h…
== Background ==
After the 2004 Decision of the European Commission was upheld by the
General Court of the European Court of Justice, in 2007 Microsoft
finally complied fully with the provision to release timely and accurate
interoperability informations with competitors under so-called
"Reasonable And Non Discriminatory (RAND)" conditions.
After Microsoft did not fulfill the Commission's requirements, the
Commission finally set the fine for noncompliance to EUR 899 million,
assessing that up and until October 2007 Microsoft fell short of its
obligations to offer RAND conditions.
Microsoft contested this assessment and appealed to the European Court
of Justice. The company claimed that because the information contained
in the release was covered by patents and thus innovative, it was
entitled to charge rivals substantial amount of money for access to this
information. Not having received sufficient guidance, it was within its
rights to set a high price for interoperability information, and in good
faith charge running royalties even for the "trade secret" part, which
unbundled from the license for patents upon express request from the
Commission.
FSFE and the Samba Team (which is a licensee of the interoperability
information, or "WSPP", through the Protocol Freedom Information
Foundation) intervened in the case to deny that the information was
"innovative". The only value attached to the information was to allow a
drop-in replacements of network services to be created through the
discovery of trivial details of the protocols, whereas the general
concepts, structure and engineering decisions were both well understood
and not ground-breaking if taken individually, nor was innovative the
idea of combining them novel or innovative. The Court upheld the finding
of the Commission, finding that: "Microsoft in practice continued to
refuse Free Software developers all access to the interoperability
information, which was not something that the letter recognised it could
legitimately do."
=== Contact ===
Karsten Gerloff
President
gerloff(a)fsfeurope.org
+49 176 9690 4298
If you wish to receive further updates, subscribe to our press release
mailing list at http://fsfe.org/press[4].
4. http://fsfe.org/press
== 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/
= FSFE to Advance Fair Public IT Procurements in Finland =
[Read online: http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20120619-01.en.html ]
The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) has started an initiative to
advance fair public procurements in Finland. The initiative concentrates
on IT related procurement notices that require brand instead of defining
functionalities required by the procurer. To date FSFE has skimmed over
300 procurement notices, and of those taken into closer analysis, 14
have been found to clearly violate the Finnish procurement law. These
violating notices explicitly asked for tenders of specific brands of
software manufacturers or products and thus discriminate all other
brands and manufacturers, effectively stopping free competition.
"We want to raise awareness about this kind of misconduct." says project
manager and FSFE Finnish team coordinator Otto Kekäläinen. "The point
of procurement law is to increase fair competition and get better
software for lower prices, bringing more value for the tax payer's
money. It is imperative that we get 100% of the IT deparments in public
bodies to follow the law, so Free Software companies can compete on fair
terms" he continues.
"In the rare circumstances where a brand may be referred to in a
procurement notice, it must be followed by 'or equivalent'" adds Martin
von Willebrand, the attorney engaged to the project. "The Finnish law
and the underlying EU directive are very clear on this."
- In case the procurement law is violated, FSFE contacts the violating
authorities to raise awareness on procurement law and best practices.
In addition to pointing out the specific violation the notice
contains, the letters also includes a six item list of recommendations
to ensure proper competition:Define the procurement by functionalities
and standards. Do not request specific products or require certain
brands. This allows competing vendors to take part.
- Procure for long enough periods, eg. 4 to 6 years, so that there is
enough time to plan and execute a change of vendor. Buying new systems
from the old vendor just because there is not time to migrate is
normally not an acceptable excuse.
- Base price comparison on the entire life span costs. Specifically
include exit costs that arise at the end of the life span, when the
vendor changes.
- Make sure that the procured system is modular and adheres to Open
Standards, so that there is always the option to change the vendor for
a module or that completely new modules can be taken into use and that
they can access the existing data.
- Ensure unlimited right to modify the software and have it delivered as
source code, so that there is independece from single vendors. The
original vendor does not have to waive their copyright.
- By favoring Free Software (also knows as "open source") all above
mentioned requirements are easy to fulfill.
In the letter FSFE asks the authorities to release corrected notices,
with all the violations fixed. Just if no improvements can be seen, FSFE
will later separately consider facilitating court cases or publishing
the identified violations and the names of the officials that have
prepared or approved the violations.
The project started in December 2011 and will continue until the
proportion of illegal procurment notices drops to insignificance.
FSFE works for the public good. Its activities can be supported by
signing up at fsfe.org/support[1]
1. http://fsfe.org/support
== Contact ==
=== Finland ===
Otto Kekäläinen
FSFE Coordinator, Finland
ottofsfe.org
=== +358 44 566 2204International ===
Karsten Gerloff
FSFE President
gerlofffsfe.org
+49 176 9690 4298If you wish to receive further updates, subscribe to
our press release mailing list at http://fsfe.org/press[2].
2. http://fsfe.org/press
== 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/
= FSFE Newsletter - June 2012 =
[Read online: http://fsfe.org/news/nl/nl-201206.en.html ]
== Free Software, Open Source, FOSS, FLOSS Same same but different
==
There are two major terms connected to software that can be freely used,
studied, shared and improved: Free Software and Open Source. You can
also find different combinations and translations of those terms like
FOSS, Libre Software, FLOSS and so on. Reading articles about Free
Software or listening to people involved in Free Software often raises
the question: Why do they use one term or another and how they differ
from each other?
Long time FSFE volunteer Björn Schiessle wrote a good article[1]about
this topic, how to deal with the different terminology.
1.
http://blog.schiessle.org/2012/05/11/free-software-open-source-foss-floss-s…
== State neglected web standards, company now faces EUR 5600 in fines ==
In Slovakia, the state has mandated electronic means as the only way of
fulfilling certain statutory obligations. However the dedicated web
solution excludes some citizens from participating as it is not
interoperable and runs only on the non-free software from one vendor. In
absence of any non-electronic option, this means that the state mandates
the use of a certain product from a certain vendor. People who did not
own the copy, had to buy one. A Slovak textile importer deemed that the
state should not force him to use a certain software for its business
and fulfilled its legal obligation by paper. Now the company faces EUR
5600 in fines.
Current FSFE intern Martin Husovec decided this is not just and made it
his internship project to change it: he is working on the case, reading
court files, wrote FSFE's press release[2], and an executive summary of
the EURA case[3]. He is motivated to ensure that no one is forced to use
certain non-free software in Slovakia just to fulfil the law, and will
keep you updated[4].
2. http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20120509-01.en.html
3. http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20120509-02.en.html
4. http://fsfe.org/news/news.en.html
== Will the UK be lobbied into the FRAND trap? ==
Free Software could be blocked from the UK's public sector use if the
new policy allow"FRAND" terms[5]within British standards. As recently
revealed by Freedom of Information Requests[6]: Intensive lobbying
efforts have focused on pressuring the Cabinet Office to back down on a
strong definition of Open Standards over the past few months.
5. http://fsfe.org/projects/os/why-frand-is-bad-for-free-software.en.html
6. http://www.freedomofinformationrequests.co.uk/
FSFE is trying to counter this development. In May the FSFE asked North-
West UK businesses to tell Government that Open Standards matter[7], and
we will continue to work on the case.
7. http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20120528-01.en.html
== Democratic elections with non-free software? ==
In France, the FSFE has raised its concerns (French)[8]on the online
voting process implemented for French electors registered abroad. FSFE
strongly criticised the complete lack of precautions, the opacity of the
voting process, and the request to use proprietary software to vote.
8. https://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20120525-01.html
== Something completely different ==
- "My cooking can't be a copy of your cooking." Richard Stallman wrote a
new article"Network Services Aren't Free or Nonfree; They Raise Other
Issues"[9].
- This month's Fellowship interview[10]is with Giacomo Poderi, member of
FSFE's general assembly, has worked as a translator and editor for
FSFE, as well as completing a masters degree in Philosophy. Currently
he is working on a Ph.D in sociology, which looks at the user
experience in Free Software Projects, focusing on the turn-based
strategy game "The Battle for Wesnoth".
- According to joinup[11], software written by or for public authorities
and public organisations in the Basque Country will by default be made
available to others as Free Software starting this July.
- What happens with licenses when the licensor gets insolvent? IfrOSS
wrote a proposal (German)[12]about insolvency questions with Free
Software Licenses, which FSFE also supports.
- Open Standards: "How did we get to a point where we will pay for the
'privilege' of having a vendor take our data and lock it up such that
we have to pay them, again and again, to access it?" asks Jake Edge
from LWN in his article"Who owns your data?"[13]. Will you "rebel" at
next year's Document Freedom Day[14]?
- In the lawsuit Oracle vs. Google FSFE's Carlo Piana[15]and FSF's John
Sullivan[16]published articles covering the topic.
- A selection from the Fellowship blog aggregation[17]:Fellowship
representative Nikos Roussos gave a speech[18]about Free Software
solutions that can be used for self-hosted web services.
- Georg Greve does "not believe that Windows is the future of the Free
Software desktop." Sounds obvious? Is it? Here is his blog article"A
bridge leading nowhere: Outlook-centric groupware"[19].
- Clean, playful, wide use in Free Software, out-of-the-boxiness. Fellow
Karl Beecher argues why to choose Python for teaching[20].
- FSFE's vice-president is hacking on Searduino[21], a software to make
it easy to program C/C++ for Arduino. It is also a simulator for
source level Arduino API so it is possible to directly test executable
code without the Arduino board present, and it can even do more.
- Or are you looking for a good configuration for your tiling window
manager? Fellows shared their configuration files for Awesome[22], and
xmonad[23].
- Beside that Hannes Hauswedell wrote about improving e-mail
privacy[24]by removing header information when using GnuPG and
Thunderbird, and
- Isabel Drost explains how to ruin software projects fast and rapidly.
E.g. by referring developers as resources, not not investing in
tooling, or by other suggestions[25].
- Finally, if you have the problem that one of your presentations is
still too long, she also has suggestions how to shorten it[26].
9.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html
10. http://blogs.fsfe.org/fellowship-interviews/?p=590
11.
https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/news/spains-basque-countrys-administration-shar…
12.
http://www.ifross.org/artikel/vorschlag-des-ifross-insolvenzrechtlichen-fra…
13. https://lwn.net/Articles/496418/
14. http://documentfreedom.org
15. http://piana.eu/java-verdict
16.
https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-statement-on-jurys-partial-verdict-in-oracle-v…
17. http://planet.fsfe.org
18. http://roussos.cc/2012/05/14/liberate-your-cloud-data/
19. http://blogs.fsfe.org/greve/?p=505
20. http://computerfloss.com/2012/05/why-choose-python-for-teaching/
21.
https://sandklef.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/examples-in-manuals-how-to-verify…
22. http://blogs.fsfe.org/h2/2012/05/05/my-awesome-wm-config/
23. http://blogs.fsfe.org/thomaslocke/2012/05/05/my-xmonad-wm-config/
24. http://blogs.fsfe.org/h2/2012/05/12/improving-e-mail-privacy/
25.
http://blog.isabel-drost.de/index.php/archives/389/geecon-failing-software-…
26.
http://blog.isabel-drost.de/index.php/archives/385/presentation-shortening
-
== Get Active: PDFReaders 2.0 Your help is needed! ==
Our petition[27]is signed by 72 organisations, 57 businesses, and 2327
individuals. The Green party filed an oral request in the European
Parliament[28](5 questions) , and in the German Parliament[29](18
questions with introduction). The German agency for IT security is
recommending pdfreaders.org[30]in their new migration guide and
highlights that you should not advertise for non-free software readers.
And 539 public administrations removed the advertisement for non-free
software, which is a success rate of 25%.
27. http://fsfe.org/campaigns/pdfreaders/petition.en.html
28. http://fsfe.org/campaigns/pdfreaders/parliamentary-questions-eu.en.html
29.
http://gruen-digital.de/2012/03/document-freedom-day-kleine-anfrage-laesst-…
30. http://pdfreaders.org
After long discussions and considerations the PDF readers team is now
preparing a major update to PDFReaders.org, adding: a more appealing and
cleaner front-page, with one recommendation for the auto-detected
platform; free pdf reader recommendations for mobile platforms; and free
pdf browser plugin recommendations.
Please have a look at the current reader overview and the TODOs
there[31], and tell us[32]if you know any other free PDF reader that we
have not listed, and which Android reader you would recommend.
31. https://wiki.fsfe.org/PDFreaders/todo2012/Overview-Page
32. mailto:feedback@pdfreaders.org
Thanks to all the Fellows[33]and donors[34]who enable our work,
33. http://fellowship.fsfe.org/join
34. donate/thankgnus.en.html
Matthias Kirschner- FSFE
--
Free Software Foundation Europe <http://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>