The European Union and Plans to Curb Free Software

[Sef]

I found the article through reddit (http://reddit.com), which redirected to a blog (http://blog.javier-carrete.com/2010/10/wikileaks-publishes-documents-on-plan.html). The Wikileaks site says it is down for maintainance now, so I cannot read the article itself now. I will post a link to there when possible.

A part of the wiki article from the blog:

"The web site specializes in publishing secret reports and leaked documents on religious, corporate or governmental, Wikileaks has posted a file showing a plan to curb the free software in Europe.

This file shows that Jonathan Zuck, president of Association for Competitive Technology (ACT) –an organization with close ties to Microsoft–, and founder of Americans for Technology Leadership, had influenced the change of working documents of the European Union."

[MisterGaribaldi]

Nice catch, Wikileaks!

It's going to be interesting to see where this one goes. On the other hand, who knows what's going to happen in this country. Guess we'll have to wait until the other shoe drops.

[Dustin2128]

Nice catch, Wikileaks!

It's going to be interesting to see where this one goes. On the other hand, who knows what's going to happen in this country. Guess we'll have to wait until the other shoe drops.
in the states? Microsoft being totally dominant, they'll attempt to destroy state use of free software until the bitter end.

This is quite disturbing; I had always thought that the EU was a major proponent of free software. *sigh* guess we'll have to wait another 10-15 years for the total collapse of microsoft's business model.

[MisterGaribaldi]

I have to admit I'm a bit surprised. Given both the in-roads made in Europe by the FSF and OSS movements as well as Europe's general poor economy of late, you'd think they'd be running to embrace something that's far more liberating and cheaper.

C'est la vie.

[PythonPower]

This is quite disturbing; I had always thought that the EU was a major proponent of free software.

The article doesn't say anything to the contrary as far as I can tell.

[beew]

Then these people(I can't think of a way to describe them which would not be censored in this polite forum) have lost whatever feeble moral highground they may have in regard to software piracy. If they try to suppress/limit/kill the free option pirating paid softwares would become almost an act of resistance and using only pirated Windows if at all would be the principled thing to do.

[alexfish]

The article doesn't say anything to the contrary as far as I can tell.

Some interesting reading


http://www.april.org/en/acta-us-and-european-commission-launch-attack-free-software




From
EU 2020
Realizing the full potential of Free Software to build a
vibrant knowledge economy and society
Contribution to the European Commission's consultation
on the European Union's strategy for 2020
During the last few years, patenting and copyright policies have been questioned, and information
commons have become a trending topic thanks to remarkable thinkers and academics. Among the
most famous of them are two Nobel economics prize laureates, Joseph Stiglitz (2001) and Paul
Krugman (2008, who both established the nuisance innovation patents represent for innovation;
but also Koichiro Matsuura, former Executive Director of UNESCO, who stated that the sharing of
knowledge is a multiplier of growth1; and in 2009 Elinor Ostrom was awarded the Nobel economics
prize for her theory on the management of commons.
Meanwhile, the European Union adopted several directives hardening patent and copyright
enforcement policy (EUCD, IPRED) and examined the extension of patentability to software...
Association April wishes to contribute to the reflection of the European Commission regarding the
Union's strategy for 2020. This contribution aims at highlighting the unique aptitudes of the EU for
Free Software2, and the asset it represents for Europe in return. It proposes a series of
recommendations to achieve the objectives of this strategy by realizing the full potential of Free
Software.
About April
Pioneer of free software in France, April has been since 1996 a major player in the democratization
and the spread of Free Software and open standards to the general public, professionals and
institutions in the French*speaking world. In the digital era that is ours, it also aims to inform the
public on the dangers of an exclusive appropriation of information and knowledge by private
interests. The association is made up of more than 4,800 individuals, 278 companies, 147
associations, 5 local government bodies and 6 educational organizations, all sharing the values of
freedom.
1 OpEd by Koichiro Matsuura, Le Figaro (FR), 27 September 2006:
http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/20060927.FIG000000201_le_partage_du_savoir_est_un_ multiplicateur_de_c
roissance.html
2 EU institutions tend to use “Free/Libre/Open Source Software” or “FLOSS”.


full pdf


[PDF]
EU 2020 Realizing the full potential of Free Software to build a ... (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CB4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fec.europa.eu%2Fdgs%2Fsecretariat_ general%2Feu2020%2Fdocs%2Fapril_en.pdf&rct=j&q=european%20uniun%20to%20ban%20freesoftware&ei=2NyxTMvuHJSR4ga3srGbBg&usg=AFQjCNHT-WuMPcYjzuXka5ysYgmoPv4dZg&cad=rja)

[koenn]

This file shows that Jonathan Zuck, president of Association for Competitive Technology (ACT) –an organization with close ties to Microsoft–, and founder of Americans for Technology Leadership, had influenced the change of working documents of the European Union."

interesting heads-up,
although your thread title is rather misleading -
the article in question is more about lobbyist trying to influence the EU's plans, that the EU's plans as such

[Dr. C]

Thanks to the OP for posting these articles.


Some interesting reading


http://www.april.org/en/acta-us-and-european-commission-launch-attack-free-software




From
EU 2020
Realizing the full potential of Free Software to build a
vibrant knowledge economy and society
Contribution to the European Commission's consultation
on the European Union's strategy for 2020
During the last few years, patenting and copyright policies have been questioned, and information
commons have become a trending topic thanks to remarkable thinkers and academics. Among the
most famous of them are two Nobel economics prize laureates, Joseph Stiglitz (2001) and Paul
Krugman (2008, who both established the nuisance innovation patents represent for innovation;
but also Koichiro Matsuura, former Executive Director of UNESCO, who stated that the sharing of
knowledge is a multiplier of growth1; and in 2009 Elinor Ostrom was awarded the Nobel economics
prize for her theory on the management of commons.
Meanwhile, the European Union adopted several directives hardening patent and copyright
enforcement policy (EUCD, IPRED) and examined the extension of patentability to software...
Association April wishes to contribute to the reflection of the European Commission regarding the
Union's strategy for 2020. This contribution aims at highlighting the unique aptitudes of the EU for
Free Software2, and the asset it represents for Europe in return. It proposes a series of
recommendations to achieve the objectives of this strategy by realizing the full potential of Free
Software.
About April
Pioneer of free software in France, April has been since 1996 a major player in the democratization
and the spread of Free Software and open standards to the general public, professionals and
institutions in the French*speaking world. In the digital era that is ours, it also aims to inform the
public on the dangers of an exclusive appropriation of information and knowledge by private
interests. The association is made up of more than 4,800 individuals, 278 companies, 147
associations, 5 local government bodies and 6 educational organizations, all sharing the values of
freedom.
1 OpEd by Koichiro Matsuura, Le Figaro (FR), 27 September 2006:
http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/20060927.FIG000000201_le_partage_du_savoir_est_un_ multiplicateur_de_c
roissance.html
2 EU institutions tend to use “Free/Libre/Open Source Software” or “FLOSS”.


full pdf


[PDF]
EU 2020 Realizing the full potential of Free Software to build a ... (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CB4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fec.europa.eu%2Fdgs%2Fsecretariat_ general%2Feu2020%2Fdocs%2Fapril_en.pdf&rct=j&q=european%20uniun%20to%20ban%20freesoftware&ei=2NyxTMvuHJSR4ga3srGbBg&usg=AFQjCNHT-WuMPcYjzuXka5ysYgmoPv4dZg&cad=rja)

The DRM Provisions of ACTA have been weakened considerably since the August draft. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5352/125/. http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/ACTA-Consolidated-Text-20101002.pdf. So the efforts in favor of FLOSS are not falling entirely on deaf ears.

[koenn]

I have to admit I'm a bit surprised. Given both the in-roads made in Europe by the FSF and OSS movements as well as Europe's general poor economy of late, you'd think they'd be running to embrace something that's far more liberating and cheaper.


If the EU is looking at Open Source, it's probably more out of a concern to standardize on open standards to facilitate the exchange of information and future-proof its data (and make recommendations to member states to do the same) than to save a couple of euro's, although that might be an interesting side effect.


while we're at it, I've heard the economy in the US isn't doing so hot either. You'd think the land of the free would be running to embrace something that's far more liberating and cheaper

[bash]

Everyone might come down a notch or two. First and most importantly this is not "the EU", but just a draft (of many) to panel that is part of an expert group that the EU commission has set up on the topic of open-source. I understand the general sensitivity of many here when it comes to MS and open-source, but this is far from final and not some sort of binding directive that will have be put into national law of the member states. Think more of it as a general "thoughts on open-source" paper.

Nonetheless there were changes made by an MS associated lobbyist. Which brings me to my second point: This a normal political process. Normal that MS influences stuff? No. With normal I mean that, at least in large parts of Europe and in the EU, and generally also for most sort of expert groups, in order to reach a final paper, you go through a lot (yes A LOT - more than you want to know) revisions and drafts to reach a final version. And during that time it is expected from every party in the expert group to actively participate and add to the drafts, and, depending on the process, often external "input" is also welcome. So an MS lobby group writing up their favourite version and submitting it in a draft, is neither unusual nor surprising. I would be more concerned if they wouldn't try. You can rest assured that after the open-source lobbyists on the panel see the draft, they will edit and submit it again as another draft with more favourable language for open-source. This is just the standard process of everyone trying to submit a draft that supports their point. At the end some sort of compromise will be reached, that will neither say "MS are teh evil, open source is the only way!!1!" nor "All Linux users live in their parents basement, all hail MS".

Also note that Lobbyist and their associations have to be accredited with the EU in order to participate officially in such sort of things. A process that requires detailing major donors and financial supporters. So I wouldn't be too surprised if everyone on the expert group knew quite well who that lobby group represented.

All in all the alarmist tone is not needed.

[Dustin2128]

You'd think the land of the free would be running to embrace something that's far more liberating and cheaper
I see you're from Belgium.

[alexfish]

doubt if coming down a notch or two is part of what this thread is about


everyone has a right to express views or comment on any subject within the bounds of this forum


having done some reading (first)


highlighting


"As Declaration 12 was just adopted by the European Parliament, it is not possible anymore for the European Commission to ignore the legitimate demands of the citizens and of their representatives", concludes Tangui Morlier President of April. "April is calling for the EU Commission to leave the ACTA negotiation table: the freedom to use digital tools or interoperability shall not be discussed in secret, by circumventing democracy, but needs to be debated/discussed democratically".


I presume this type of closed door “discussed in secret “ can only lead to person or person's
making comment's or assumptions, hence , could be perceived as alarmist


rightly stated “yes A LOT - more than you want to know”

[spoons]

I'm not really surprised - politicans can't really be corrupt, because that would suggest they understand what they're doing in the first place.

[koenn]

I see you're from Belgium.
yes, so ?

[zekopeko]

I have to admit I'm a bit surprised. Given both the in-roads made in Europe by the FSF and OSS movements as well as Europe's general poor economy of late, you'd think they'd be running to embrace something that's far more liberating and cheaper.

C'est la vie.

You mean the FSFE as in Europe. They are two separate, independent entities that share a part of their name.

Also this reddit comment (http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/dozlx/wikileaks_publishes_documents_on_plan_to_curb/c11u2he) might be relevant to your statement on Europe and FOSS.

[zekopeko]

Looks like this draft is very old (if you go by the date in the URL):

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/European_Commission_OSS_Strategy_Draft,_Mar_2009

[Dustin2128]

yes, so ?

Never mind ;)

[NCLI]

everyone might come down a notch or two. First and most importantly this is not "the eu", but just a draft (of many) to panel that is part of an expert group that the eu commission has set up on the topic of open-source. <snip>
+1

[Dr. C]

Everyone might come down a notch or two. First and most importantly this is not "the EU", but just a draft (of many) to panel that is part of an expert group that the EU commission has set up on the topic of open-source. I understand the general sensitivity of many here when it comes to MS and open-source, but this is far from final and not some sort of binding directive that will have be put into national law of the member states. Think more of it as a general "thoughts on open-source" paper.

Nonetheless there were changes made by an MS associated lobbyist. Which brings me to my second point: This a normal political process. Normal that MS influences stuff? No. With normal I mean that, at least in large parts of Europe and in the EU, and generally also for most sort of expert groups, in order to reach a final paper, you go through a lot (yes A LOT - more than you want to know) revisions and drafts to reach a final version. And during that time it is expected from every party in the expert group to actively participate and add to the drafts, and, depending on the process, often external "input" is also welcome. So an MS lobby group writing up their favourite version and submitting it in a draft, is neither unusual nor surprising. I would be more concerned if they wouldn't try. You can rest assured that after the open-source lobbyists on the panel see the draft, they will edit and submit it again as another draft with more favourable language for open-source. This is just the standard process of everyone trying to submit a draft that supports their point. At the end some sort of compromise will be reached, that will neither say "MS are teh evil, open source is the only way!!1!" nor "All Linux users live in their parents basement, all hail MS".

Also note that Lobbyist and their associations have to be accredited with the EU in order to participate officially in such sort of things. A process that requires detailing major donors and financial supporters. So I wouldn't be too surprised if everyone on the expert group knew quite well who that lobby group represented.

All in all the alarmist tone is not needed.

This assumes of course that both sides are equally as well represented at the lobbying table. This may be the case in Europe. Unfortunately in many parts of the world this is not the case. This is after all an international forum. Here in Canada we have a case where a Provincial Government, namely:
Quebec's government broke the law by buying software from Microsoft without considering offers from other vendors, the province's Superior Court has ruled. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/06/03/quebec-microsoft-lawsuit.html

Something tells me that that in the Quebec case the lobbyists from Microsoft were listened to, while other lobbyists were ignored. The alarmist tone is perfectly understandable.

[zekopeko]

This assumes of course that both sides are equally as well represented at the lobbying table. This may be the case in Europe. Unfortunately in many parts of the world this is not the case. This is after all an international forum. Here in Canada we have a case where a Provincial Government, namely: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/06/03/quebec-microsoft-lawsuit.html

Something tells me that that in the Quebec case the lobbyists from Microsoft were listened to, while other lobbyists were ignored. The alarmist tone is perfectly understandable.

Actually it isn't. Attributing one country's failings in the political process to another isn't perfectly understandable. EU != Canada.

The whole story is heavily one-sided and apparently uses an older version of the draft to make a biased point(judging by the URL; Wikileaks is down so nobody can actually read it). Bash pretty much nailed it.

[bash]

having done some reading (first)


highlighting


"As Declaration 12 was just adopted by the European Parliament, it is not possible anymore for the European Commission to ignore the legitimate demands of the citizens and of their representatives", concludes Tangui Morlier President of April. "April is calling for the EU Commission to leave the ACTA negotiation table: the freedom to use digital tools or interoperability shall not be discussed in secret, by circumventing democracy, but needs to be debated/discussed democratically".

Um what? Have read my post or this thread? I replied to the link of the OP that was about a leaked draft submitted to an expert group on open-source set up by the EU Commission. What does that have to do with ACTA? Nothing - ACTA is completely unrelated.

Just had another look at the blog post. The leaked document dates from March 2009, so not quite as actual as the blog post makes it out to be. After a quick searching it turns out that most news outlets ran this story already around that time last year. No idea why the author suddenly brought it up again.

Oh and adding pictures like this (http://***************/_2vGOJWG1vVQ/TLIVdxvSEjI/AAAAAAAAD1o/rRfQq0ErrYg/s144/Jonathan%20Zuck.jpg) to depict the lobbyist in question, doesn't particularly add to journalistic integrity or general credibility.

After a bit of searching I found that whole expert group in question was called "A European Software Strategy for Europe" (Yes that's the name. It's not redundant, just pedantic). The whole thing is actually very open, transparent and well documented. You can find out more about it here, including all the final papers of the different working groups:

http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/ssai/europeansoftwarestrategy-documents_en.html

Each document also includes a list of participating members, which appear to have been quite balanced. The open-source community was represented by the FSFE and Open Forum Europe.

[bash]

Also this reddit comment (http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/dozlx/wikileaks_publishes_documents_on_plan_to_curb/c11u2he) might be relevant to your statement on Europe and FOSS.

Didn't know that. Quite impressive.


My job at a major R&D institute in the EU is funded by FP7 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_Framework_Programme), which has a 51 billion € budget to fund scientific research in Europe.

All the projects coming from this programme I have heard of release their software under FOSS licences (it is an official guideline (http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/ssai/foss-ssai-activities_en.html)).

So, some lobbyist managed to write a couple of paragraphs in a draft, big deal. In the meantime, FOSS is already actively supported and funded by the EU.