×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Open Source, Open Standards Under Attack In Europe

Soulskill posted about 4 years ago | from the you-can-take-our-source-but-you'll-never-take-our-freedom dept.

Open Source 164

Glyn Moody writes "A battle for the soul of European IT is taking place behind closed doors in Brussels. At stake is the key Digital Agenda for Europe, due to be unveiled in a month's time. David Hammerstein, ex-Member of European Parliament for the Greens, tweeted last week: 'SOS to everyone as sources confirm that Kroes is about to eliminate "open standards" policy from EU digital agenda; Kroes has been under intense lobbying pressure from Microsoft to get rid of interoperability and open source goals of EU.' This is confirmed by the French magazine PC Inpact (Google translation), which also managed to obtain a copy of the draft Digital Agenda (DOC). It's currently supportive of both open source and open standards — but for how much longer?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

164 comments

War (2, Funny)

Aphoxema (1088507) | about 4 years ago | (#31662770)

This is terribly exciting and I'm not even sure why...

Re:War (1)

HeckRuler (1369601) | about 4 years ago | (#31663010)

You heard the man, time for WAR! Blood for the blood-god. Tear out their eyes and rip their throats as open as the GNU

Re:War (1)

Aphoxema (1088507) | about 4 years ago | (#31663270)

You heard the man, time for WAR! Blood for the blood-god. Tear out their eyes and rip their throats as open as the GNU

It has begun.

Re:War (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31663272)

It's not "war". It's about non-violent totalitarianism, plain and simple. That's what the EU has always been about, and what it will always be about. It's about Germany and France controlling the rest of Europe, without having to resort to destructive wars like in the past. And for the most part, they've succeeded. Germany and France now dictate economic policy for countries like Greece, they dictate social policy, and now they dictate technological policies.

Re:War (2, Insightful)

Aphoxema (1088507) | about 4 years ago | (#31663348)

It's not "war". It's about non-violent totalitarianism, plain and simple. That's what the EU has always been about, and what it will always be about. It's about Germany and France controlling the rest of Europe, without having to resort to destructive wars like in the past. And for the most part, they've succeeded. Germany and France now dictate economic policy for countries like Greece, they dictate social policy, and now they dictate technological policies.

Sounds like a war to me.

Re:War (4, Insightful)

MartinSchou (1360093) | about 4 years ago | (#31664940)

I'm sure Alabama feels the same way? They're having dictated social, educational, health, economic etc politics from DC.

While it is rather difficult to leave the EU, it's not impossible, whereas secession is apparently against the constitution of the US.

Re:War (2, Informative)

Shark (78448) | about 4 years ago | (#31665900)

Secession might be, but interposition is what Jefferson came up with as a solution. There are several examples in US history of it getting the job done too. Tom Woods has a pretty good historical speech on the topic if you care to youtube for it.

Re:War (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31665760)

It's not "war". It's about non-violent totalitarianism, plain and simple. That's what the EU has always been about, and what it will always be about. It's about Germany and France controlling the rest of Europe, without having to resort to destructive wars like in the past. And for the most part, they've succeeded. Germany and France now dictate economic policy for countries like Greece, they dictate social policy, and now they dictate technological policies.

Sounds like a troll to me.

There, fixed that for you. Don't feed them.

Re:War (0, Troll)

ducomputergeek (595742) | about 4 years ago | (#31665840)

Think about this: look at the vision of Europe laid out by Hitler in Mein Kampf then look at Europe today. Not to Godwin or anything, it's worth just taking a an objective look. While the finer details maybe different, the general picture is eerily similar. Makes one wonder just who really won WWII sixty years later...

Re:War (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31667040)

OK, ducomputergeek and the person who modded this insightful: What is the "vision of Europe" laid out by Hitler? I've read the book and I thought it was boring rambling without any real vision...

Re:War (2, Interesting)

the_womble (580291) | about 4 years ago | (#31667054)

I think dropping the bit about murdering all the Jews and gypsies and enslaving almost everyone else is a fairly significant difference, even if some bits of economic policy are similar.

Re:War (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31666570)

Dictate?

Greece joined the EU and later adopted the Euro voluntarily. They knew that it would mean that other European countries would have a say in their internal affairs too but that they'd also benefit from it. And they have and still do. Other European countries are generously lending them money but since the Greeks made a number of mistakes which lead to their current situation, it's only fair that those lending them money, also tell them not to fuck up anymore.

Re:War (5, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | about 4 years ago | (#31663752)

It is terribly exciting and worrisome at the same time. Microsoft has dominated the world with Windows and by leveraging the OS, they are dominating is many other areas as well. They are unquestionably an abusive monopoly. With software patents and other intellectual property types creating road blocks and toll roads to innovation and less expensive solutions.

Open standards is one way to make sure things are fair to ensure that competition is alive and well. Microsoft cannot compete with others using open standards and expect to win every time. (I would have no problem if they conformed to open standards and actually offered a better product.) But instead of competing on the basis of quality, they lobby for laws and policies to change in their favor.

Microsoft is a corrupt company catering to corrupt politicians. I hope many EU leaders start to take offence to Microsoft's tactics and push back hard.

Desperation? (3, Insightful)

TheSovereign (1317091) | about 4 years ago | (#31662838)

Is it me or does Microsoft seem to be getting more and more desperate for control?

Re:Desperation? (-1, Flamebait)

timmarhy (659436) | about 4 years ago | (#31663126)

yes it's just you. MS have control now, they own the desktop.

this idea that linux is somehow got them worried is just the linux crowd beating off, it's even more obvious with titles like "the battle for the soul of IT". what a crock of shit.

Re:Desperation? (2, Insightful)

alexborges (313924) | about 4 years ago | (#31663178)

Yeah? So why do they want to pressure governments into rejecting open standards as the base line for building IT infrastructure?

Re:Desperation? (2)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#31663246)

Because they want to make money just like the corporations who will sell the software based on those open standards?

Re:Desperation? (5, Interesting)

that this is not und (1026860) | about 4 years ago | (#31666298)

Because they want to make money just like the corporations who will sell the software based on those open standards?

Apparently by competing with said corporations in the halls of the bureaucrats, rather than in the open market.

Shame on you, Microsoft. You used to say 'I'm sorry that we have to have a Washington presence. We thrived during our first 16 years without any of this.' [brainyquote.com] Now you're buying governments just like Larry Ellison does.

Re:Desperation? (2, Insightful)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | about 4 years ago | (#31663284)

Because if there's another format, then they'll have to support it. If they can get everyone to agree on DOCX or MSPF*, then they don't have to do any more programming...

(and now to get modded up)

...because the more programming they do, the more likely it is that they'll fuck it up.

*MS proprietary format

Re:Desperation? (3, Insightful)

alexborges (313924) | about 4 years ago | (#31663498)

No bro, I do not concur. You see, if they can get anyone to actively reject other formats, then they can make their docx shit a defacto standard, and from that position, secure their monopolistic power in the IT office space.

If they let governments choose standards they would HAVE to comply with, they only need to use them (it would cost them close to nil, it would be payed the first three days of any government contract), but the competition could then actually compete with them.

And THATS what they are afraid of.

Well they don't. (3, Interesting)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 4 years ago | (#31663768)

You don't understand the mind of a MS apologist. Bill Gates does not need a reality distortion field like Steve Jobs has. Each MS apologists comes with one pre-installed. No reality can enter their world.

The guy you are responding hasn't read the article because he can't. He sees nothing. It is not even a void. A void is an absence, to him there is not even nothing to not exist.

They pretend Bing is going to kick googles ass, then just a few months later when MS itself says they lost, they ignore it. They ignore everything that doesn't suit them because it doesn't fit into how their world works.

And really, you got to feel sorry for them. At least Jobs fanboys get Apple goodies. What do MS apologists get? The zune. Whee! But don't worry, version X+1 will fix it all. Like windows mobile 7. No multi-tasking (unlike promised) and no copy&past. But don't worry, this is not actually a problem. A true MS apologists can smoothly go from claiming that WM7 is superior because it has multi-tasking to how it is superior because it doesn't.

You got to admire an apologists who can claim in a story were MS is trying to chance favoring opensource and claim they are not worried about it in the same post. Amazing. I for one applaud him. Or pity. Or ridicule. My English is not that good, which is the one where you point and go "HAHA"?

No, not Bill Gates (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31665218)

"Bill Gates does not need a reality distortion field like Steve Jobs has"

Bill Gates has very little to do with the running of MS these days.

Re:Desperation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31663260)

Yes, they are desperate. That is why they fight so hard to kill harmless Open Standards policies and harass consumer groups.

Re:Desperation? (3, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about 4 years ago | (#31663814)

It's you. They've always been desperate for control. It was the thing that motivated them to build IE, they didn't want to let someone else control the internet. .Net was initially motivated by the same thing: it was going to be a kind of cloud computing thing, where all applications in the world ran on Microsoft's cloud. Which is why it was called .net in the first place, and why it compiles to byte-code instead of machine code, even though it only is ever run on one architecture and one operating system (yeah, Mono, but that wasn't in Microsoft's plans).

On the other hand, Microsoft HAS gotten more involved in politics, and that may be what you are observing. They've gotten involved more and more ever since the anti-trust case. I read an article a decade ago discussing how Microsoft realized that to stay out of problems with the government, it helps to 'donate'. They are very equal opportunity givers, giving both to Republican and Democrat, [opensecrets.org] depending on who they think is more likely to win.

Re:Desperation? (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | about 4 years ago | (#31665464)

please do explain to me how byte code gives them more control than machine code ? especially with mono around ? and how the ARM in phones is the same as x86 ?

Re:Desperation? (2, Informative)

phantomfive (622387) | about 4 years ago | (#31665842)

Well, it doesn't particularly, but I think you misunderstood my comment, I probably wasn't clear enough. Java was created with the idea of running on every platform then in existence, and Sun made an effort to make that happen. .Net on the other hand, was conceptualized as something that would run on the cloud (before the word cloud was used in this context), with the idea that it wouldn't matter what hardware the cloud was running on, as long as Microsoft's system was somewhere in there.

However, the cloud concept never got developed, and .net ended up being a system that ran only on one platform, making it pointless to run as bytecode at all. I tried to find a Slashdot article from this time period, but this is the closest I could get. [slashdot.org] Best quote from the article:

Gates indicated that the company's software Promised Land will be a new version of its Windows operating system code-named Longhorn, which is still at least two years off.

Re:Desperation? (3, Informative)

Yaa 101 (664725) | about 4 years ago | (#31664432)

Not too long ago I was modded troll for saying: while you buy their products, they buy your political leaders.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1571214&cid=31359062 [slashdot.org]

It is still true!

Re:Desperation? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 4 years ago | (#31667030)

It's probably not important, but I think the reason you got modded troll in the other post is because the first sentence is nigh incomprehensible, and that made it sound like you were trolling. Your current post is a lot more clear. Whenever I got modded troll (at least when it's unfairly, heh), I figure it's because people didn't understand what I was saying, so I examine my post and try to figure out what made them think it was a troll. Sometimes it's just that people don't have the background knowledge to understand what you are talking about, so you need to explain a little more, but always try to write clearly.

In AD 2010 (1, Funny)

PenisLands (930247) | about 4 years ago | (#31662862)

War was beginning.

Re:In AD 2010 (1)

boarder8925 (714555) | about 4 years ago | (#31663028)

I laughed when I first saw this meme eight fucking years ago. Can't people let this die?

It won't die anytime soon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31665752)

Just look at how many Republicans are still angry about 9/11 or how many Jews are still pissed about the Holocaust or how many Southerns are mad about the Civil War.

Zero Wing has lots of life left in it.

objection (3, Informative)

Trepidity (597) | about 4 years ago | (#31662888)

IT, whether European or otherwise, has no soul

Re:objection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31663012)

IT does have a soul!
You don't know it! You're not God!

Re:objection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31663188)

IT does have a soul!
You don't know it! You're not God!

Let's check, shall we? Does it float on water like a piece of wood?

Re:objection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31663960)

I disagree. IT bought Microsoft's soul a long time ago.

Re:objection (1)

juliusbeezer (1558233) | about 4 years ago | (#31665480)

I think European IT has less soul (or at any rate less coherence in its culture) than does the US flava. And dibs where dibs are due: when the Americans put their mind to something (like IT) they really can be rather competent. But there's a lot of German hackers out there who would not agree that they lack soul. And logiciel libre can have une certaine elegance.

Overruled (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31666652)

We, the IT people in Seoul, South Korea believe otherwise...

Importance (1)

Dthief (1700318) | about 4 years ago | (#31662920)

I dont know much about this and am curious why it is so important. Wont open source continue to be open source independent of what the EU decides? Or is this saying that the EU gov'ts will only use open source programs, and that is defined by this document? More info would be appreciated, the article didnt really touch on the importance.

Re:Importance (0, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#31662966)

Glyn Moody is well-known for posting articles that lack much or any substance and getting them posted here at Slashdot is just a way for him to easily drum up page hits.

Re:Importance (3, Informative)

ThePhilips (752041) | about 4 years ago | (#31663034)

BSA tries to ensure that EU bureaucracy would use the software of the companies it represents, in the case mainly Microsoft and namely M$Office. Wanna send a paper to a ministry electronically? Gotta buy the WinWord.

One has to carefully weigh all the factors: bribes one can get off M$ right now + bribes one can get off M$ later vs. ... On second thought, forget about the open thing we have discussed before.

P.S. FSFE take on the case [fsfe.org] .

Re:Importance (0, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#31663114)

Because these "open" standards aren't being predominately developed by multinational corporations that want to sell their own products? You must be profoundly ignorant of the real world if you think these supposed "open" standards aren't steered by and tainted by corporate greed as much as any "proprietary" standard.

Re:Importance (5, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 4 years ago | (#31663506)

Who cares if they are?
This is not some commie no money ideology. This about me not having to pay rent to MS to interact with my government.

Re:Importance (0, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#31663622)

This about me not having to pay rent to MS to interact with my government.

So instead you pay it to IBM? How exactly are you some how better off?

Re:Importance (2, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 4 years ago | (#31663706)

No, I can use free as in beer software or write my own. I can even use an OS not from microsoft with such software!

Re:Importance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31664634)

No, I can use free as in beer software or write my own. I can even use an OS not from microsoft with such software!

Who keeps handing out all this free beer, and why don't they ever appear in my town?

Re:Importance (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31665190)

It`s you. They`ve heard about you and they prefer to avoid you so that they don`t have to institute rationing to ensure sufficient supply. If you ever start to show signs of self control and decorum, they may reconsider. You may think posting anonymously helps, but they know who you are. Heck, after the last incident, everybody in your city knows who you are.

Re:Importance (4, Interesting)

mirix (1649853) | about 4 years ago | (#31663762)

I don't know WTF you're on about. Open. Do you understand what that means? Big companies (or individuals) are free to make pay, gratis, or open source software that works with the standard, and we can use whatever we'd like. It's a win for consumers all around.

The alternative is a proprietary standard is implemented, the owner definitely profits. If you want to implement a alternative program, it's a pain in the ass to reverse engineer compatibility, and generally lags the proprietary version. Less choice for the consumer, not something I'd want enacted in law.

Re:Importance (2, Interesting)

alexborges (313924) | about 4 years ago | (#31663056)

Governments make up for MOST of the IT market if you meassure it in dollars. A government unfriendly, by mandate, to open source solutions, and obvlivious as to why precisely in that market is Open Source so important, is a danger to the comercial viability of open source software.

Re:Importance (5, Informative)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | about 4 years ago | (#31663060)

I dont[sic] know much about this and am curious why it is so important. Wont[sic] open source continue to be open source independent of what the EU decides?

First this is more about open standards than open source software. Some organizations certainly will use them regardless, but lacking a clear directive, the status quo rules, and that tends to be proprietary formats and protocols now dominating the industry and harming interoperability and reducing competition.

Or is this saying that the EU gov'ts will only use open source programs, and that is defined by this document?

Originally this document established a preference for more open formats that are more likely to be usable to later generations and which provide more choice of both IT vendors and clients going forward. This was a recognition of the importance of open and documented protocols and formats. Note, nothing in this was pro or con of any given vendor. Rather it was in favor of open standardization where all vendors could compete instead of just one vendor (read Microsoft). The idea was that it is important for say word processing in EU governments to standardize on a format where any company could create an interoperable solution so governments could take competitive bids on a level playing field.

Re:Importance (5, Informative)

chrb (1083577) | about 4 years ago | (#31663278)

The leaked "Digital Agenda" doesn't appear to be so bad.. it mainly aims to promote cross-border interoperable electronic ID, health systems, and open standards in general. This will make it easier for European citizens to trade and physically relocate across borders (the existing systems are different in every country, and moving between countries is a PITA). The reason this kind of stuff is important is that the aims and details will be hammered out at a European level, then implemented as policy by the various counties of Europe. Once a few of the more powerful countries (Germany, France, UK) establish a common framework for digital ID or whatever, it will be required to interact with government online services in those countries, a software ecosystem will develop around these protocols, and the other countries will follow within a few years. The EU will provide funding for development of software platforms that implement these open standards. The potential risk here is that Microsoft and other companies will twist the definition of "open" to include proprietary patented protocols (which are "open" because you are free to license them at some cost), and then they can lobby countries and companies taking part in public sector procurements to choose closed standard solutions, which would obviously be a bad thing for cross-border interoperability. The relevant parts of the document are:

The Digital Agenda outlines a set of crucial policy actions, including legal measures and programmes that must be launched or upgraded to get the Union on track. The actions are clustered in six areas:
(1)Very fast internet access;
(2)A digital single market;
(3)A sustainable digital society;
(4)Trust and security;
(5)Research and innovation;
(6)Open standards and interoperability.

Use CIP support seamless cross-border public services, based on open and internationally recognised standards, and a European eID management infrastructure;

An "EU eHealth Passport" could give citizens secure online access to their personal health data. On such a platform, improved medical services can be developed raising efficiency and patient empowerment. The Commission will work with the competent authorities to equip 15% of Europeans with such passports by 2015. The eHealth Lead Market Initiative1 will promote standardisation and interoperability testing and certification.

Electronic identity (eID) technologies and services are key to trust in electronic transactions and in e-payment systems, including mobile payments. A European framework for eID and authentication, and internationally agreed standards and practices can help the cross-border recognition of eID and increase citizens' trust and confidence. A European eID and authentication framework by [.] is the headline target for this action area.

Promoting more open standards
The headline target for this action area is to reform the EU standardisation regime by 2015 to reflect the rise and growing importance of ICT standards developed by various fora and consortia, in particular as regards the internet.
Another challenge is to ensure that public authorities – including the EU institutions – can make the best use of the full range of existing open standards when procuring hardware, software and IT services, for example to adhere to technology neutrality and to avoid technological lock-in to legacy ICT.
Transparent disclosure rules for intellectual property rights (IPR) and licensing conditions in the context of standard-setting can contribute to lower royalty demands for the use of standards and thus to lower market entry costs for SMEs. This can be achieved without a negative impact on the owners of IPRs. Therefore rules for ex-ante disclosure of essential IPR and licensing terms and conditions will be promoted.
Key actions
Reform the governance system for ICT standards in Europe to recognise ICT fora and consortia standards;
Issue a Recommendation to streamline the use of open standards in public services and public procurement;
Promote appropriate rules for ex-ante disclosure of intellectual property rights and license conditions in standard-setting;
Update the European Interoperability Framework to promote an open approach to technology and interoperability;
Examine the feasibility of measures to promote interoperability with applications based on de facto standards;
Promote the development of open standards for new applications and services by supporting industry-led platforms through EU-funded programmes.

ICT drives value creation and growth across the economy. It represents over 25% of value added in automotive, over 40% in consumer electronics and home appliances and 33% in health and medical equipment. This means that industry is increasingly in need of open and interoperable solutions to exploit ICT across all sectors. Industry-led platforms promoting the development of open standards for new applications and services will be supported as an integral part of EU-funded programmes.

Spin doctor much? (2, Insightful)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#31662940)

That's clearly very positive about open standards and open source. And then, back in November of last year, a draft version of the revised EIF was leaked [.pdf]. It revealed a staggering re-definition of what openness meant by suggesting that “closed” was part of the “openness continuum”:

Except that your claimed new definition doesn't claim that proprietary software is considered "open" and actually spins proprietary software in a very bad light:

and lie at one end of the spectrum while non-documented, proprietary specifications, proprietary software and the reluctance or resistance to reuse solutions, i.e. the "not invented here" syndrome, lie at the other end.

This definition is funny because one can come up with a number of examples of poor or non-existant documentation, NIH syndrome, a resistance to code reuse within OSS.

Re:Spin doctor much? (0)

mandelbr0t (1015855) | about 4 years ago | (#31663214)

It's certainly not as clear that the open source people are the "good guys" as it used to be. There are certainly examples of poorly documented, managed and/or tested OSS apps. Infighting among developers causes specifications to become unstable as a power struggle determines what will ultimately prevail. Just because it's open doesn't mean it's good. Likewise, the balance of power is no longer solely with Microsoft. The fact that proprietary solutions will be considered is not a threat to OSS, nor a guarantee that Microsoft will be chosen. Finally, proprietary solutions often use OSS projects if it is beneficial (not GPL, but that's not the issue here).

Re:Spin doctor much? (5, Insightful)

grcumb (781340) | about 4 years ago | (#31664586)

The fact that proprietary solutions will be considered is not a threat to OSS, nor a guarantee that Microsoft will be chosen. Finally, proprietary solutions often use OSS projects if it is beneficial (not GPL, but that's not the issue here).

What does any of this have to do with open standards, which represent the topic of this discussion?

Open standards allow us to ignore these kinds of argument completely, because they essentially guarantee that, no matter what kind of software you choose, I can continue using the software of my choice, provided that the two of us can agree on the standard to be implemented.

I choose my favourite software for my own reasons; you choose yours. Everyone's happy.

Now, if someone were to refuse to follow open standards and instead chose to say, "My way or the highway!" when it came to technical implementation of certain document formats and communications protocols... well, I might be a little miffed. I might even say that this is not fair and that it's ultimately dangerous because it causes public data to be locked into proprietary formats.

Good (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31662946)

The less "open standards" clusterfucks designed by committees of self-righteous idiots the better.

These people always want to tell you how you should do your stuff, but for some reason they seem less concerned with ensuring that you can accomplish your task without a bunch of insane workarounds to compensate for missing features.

Case in point: HTML.

Seriously, most of the "open standards" people i've had teh misfortune of working with have been total fucktards.

Re:Good (2, Insightful)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#31663062)

The less "open standards" clusterfucks designed by committees of self-righteous idiots the better.

And how "open" is a standard really when the only people allowed in the committees are the representatives of multinational corporations? And let's not even get into the fact that if you want to get a copy of this "open" standard you usually have to pay hundreds of dollars.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31663602)

Open means no patents, RF
+ open technical true and fair documentation

Except for Microsoft, there is means patent cartell,
+ tons of paper without any useful documentation

Engineering new jobs (4, Insightful)

gilesjuk (604902) | about 4 years ago | (#31662968)

With the global slump politicians are under pressure to spend money on software, not use open source.

Of course, the layman doesn't always understand that open source software is sold commercially as well.

Under freedom of information laws surely we're entitled to see information in a format anyone can read?

Re:Engineering new jobs (5, Interesting)

moteyalpha (1228680) | about 4 years ago | (#31663152)

There is a point there, what politicians want is a revenue stream to support them. Open source does not provide that. There is an advantage for <strike>slaves</strike> layman in open source or open technology, as they work less to achieve the same effect with open source, but this is counter to the interests of government. I doubt that anything that people say will be heard as the one common interest all political parties have is to keep the revenue stream and companies that sell products can take money from people and give it to them and in return they support monopolies and those who keep them in power.
If open source simply established a trust that sold compiled versions of open source software and used the money to <strike>bribe</strike> pay sales tax and place ads, they could possibly supplant Megalosoft..

Re:Engineering new jobs (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31664352)

Ahem. Tilting over to proprietary software won't create more jobs. It will simply just allow vendors to A) sell more copies, and B) increase the amount of money that *leaves* the economy, since most of it would go to out of EU businesses, as opposed to if local companies handled the open source job opportunities. So common sense would dictate that if what you're suggesting, the proprietary vendors should be given the finger. Unfortunately they can pay for better dinners, and more wine.

Acta related? (4, Insightful)

solune (803114) | about 4 years ago | (#31663110)

I wonder if the ACTA plays into this?

Seems to me open standards would hinder a closed-sourced DRM scheme designed to limit communication.

Re:Acta related? (0, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#31663132)

Seems to me open standards would hinder a closed-sourced DRM scheme designed to limit communication.

Why? There's nothing stopping someone from taking any open standard format and slapping on a DRM scheme.

Re:Acta related? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 4 years ago | (#31664052)

And then it would no longer fit the open standard. Hmm, almost seems like you should have thought of that.

So are you a troll or a shill?

Supportive? (4, Insightful)

Qubit (100461) | about 4 years ago | (#31663136)

"...which also managed to obtain a copy of the draft Digital Agenda (DOC). It's currently supportive of both open source and open standards — but for how much longer?"

Why am I even surprised that the agenda is in MS-Word's old binary file format? Maybe they're just supportive of open standards for other people, or for hypothetical people in a hypothetical world, perhaps.

Complaints, anyone? (1)

kubajz (964091) | about 4 years ago | (#31663390)

So, as a person living in the EU - any ideas where I should go (preferably online) to complain and raise my voice against this?

Re:Complaints, anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31663446)

Online petitions almost never get anything done, ever. Stop being lazy, and do your part IRL.

I told y'all, I'm right again, dang it! (1)

OldHawk777 (19923) | about 4 years ago | (#31663396)

EU is more like US than y'all think.

The EU Corporate-Welfare government is against you.
The US Corporate-Welfare government is against us.

Government politicians and appointees are well paid (in trade or money) to provide substantial and legal Corporate-Welfare too FuckUS and FuckEU.

It ain't people democracy or merit capitalism in the US, EU, RURU, China.... Yep, life is hard, but you can always eat-shit die before or after the next global-recession (that ain't their darn fault).

Great! (1)

hallucinogen (1263152) | about 4 years ago | (#31663536)

Apparently the European Digital Agenda Commissioner (2010-2014) is a 70 year old woman who according to her webpage [europa.eu] has "an ongoing interest in mental health issues." Seriously? They couldn't find anyone more qualified? How many 70 year old people are there who even know what open source means? I'm not an ageist nor a sexist, but I'm pretty sure about all of my friends would have been more qualified to this particular job.

Re:Great! (5, Informative)

miquels (37972) | about 4 years ago | (#31663970)

Not just any woman.

Rember that Microsoft got fined hundreds of millions ?
Heard about the windows7 browser selection tool ?

That was all her work, actually.Until last year she was the European Competition Commissioner.

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31665502)

Say.... hows that Windows-N version selling, must be in high demand.

Not......!!!

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31665398)

Apparently the European Digital Agenda Commissioner (2010-2014) is a 70 year old woman... How many 70 year old people are there who even know what open source means? I'm ageist and sexist.

fixed.

Europe is in corporate hands (1)

pydev (1683904) | about 4 years ago | (#31664016)

In my experience, Europe, sadly, is more strongly in corporate hands than the US. The EU effectively hands out many billions in subsidies to corporations. (That's in addition to all the agricultural subsidies, which are an evil that is as prevalent in the EU as it is in the US.)

Re:Europe is in corporate hands (1)

dudpixel (1429789) | about 4 years ago | (#31664130)

yes it is a very sad world when companies have more power than the government. I mean, we set up these governments to choose what is best for the people and that is the one thing they do not do. They do what they want and what rich corporations want, and the people get shafted every time. Its not surprising really...but anyone who thinks there is fairness and rightness(?) in the world needs to take a look at this sort of thing.

Is there any government in the world that is not at least partially corrupt? i doubt it. we're all human, and humans are naturally greedy and selfish.

Socialist propaganda to empower the state. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31665164)

Standards should be decided by the free market, of which Microsoft is a very successful part, and not by government bullies with guns, which is exactly what you advocate!

If Hitler had marketed his government's means to power as "open source standards" then you'd be heiling him to this very day!

(Signed: Alex Libman's sock-puppet.)
 

Th1s FPt for GNAA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31666516)

the wind aapeared TO DECLINE FOR my resignation to get involved in from one folder on Distro is done Here be treated by your start a holy war exploited that. A

Confirmation?! (3, Informative)

harlows_monkeys (106428) | about 4 years ago | (#31666828)

The French magazine cited for confirmation doesn't say anything about Microsoft.

So all that leaves is with is that some guy twittered that the bogeyman^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HMicrosoft is coming, and when we look at the latest draft of the Digital Agenda document--its still fine.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...