Once upon a time, the desert was a place of peace and beauty. Then Las Vegas happened.
“Openness” in technology means different things to different people in different settings, because different settings attract different participants with different goals. What should it mean to governments?
Last December the U.S. Federal Trade Commission petitioned the Supreme Court to hear why the FTC believes Rambus Incorporated needs to be punished. Nineteen friends of the court and I agree
The surprise appearance at the Democratic convention of the legendary senator from Massachusetts supplied more than an emotional moment for the faithful. It also allowed a living witness to the idealism of the past to inspire those in the present to envision a future where great deeds could be done again.
A new non-profit called the Digital Rights Organization has been founded to promote “free and open standards.” Its first public act was to issue a declaration calling on governments everywhere to protect the standards upon which our human rights depend.
In advance of the Ballot Resolution Meeting in Geneva charged with resolving open issues with OOXML, pundits speculated how Convenor Alex Brown would grapple with the seemingly impossible task. Alex gave some indications of his strategy at his blog, and also offered this: “This will be no love-in.” He was right.
The progress of ODF in the marketplace has all the prerequisites for a great book: billions of dollars at stake, global maneuvering by some of the world’s most powerful companies, legions of lobbyists, and more. So why not a book? You can find the first chapter of that book in this issue, and more at the Standards Blog.
The consideration of Microsoft’s OOXML specification as an ISO/IEC standard has been marred by reports of multiple abuses and gambits, including the last minute upgrading of memberships in SC 34, the ISO/IEC JTC 1 committee with control over the process. After the voting period closed, life should have gotten back to normal. It didn’t.
China has long been the scene of piracy for software such as Microsoft Office. Recently, though, the Chinese government has begun cracking down on illegal copying of copyrighted works. That sounded like good news for Microsoft — until the Chinese government signaled its intention to promote local efforts to replace, rather than copy, Microsoft’s dominant Office suite, using a new home grown standard called UOF.
One of the big bombshells of the month just ended was the announcement by Microsoft that it believed that 235 of its patents were infringed by Linux, OpenOffice, and other important open source software. But in the inverted world of modern patent strategy, what were they really saying, and what could they really do?