Group items tagged

Licenses in open software have a double purpose: set conditions of use for end users and reflect the values of the community of developers working on open source model.

Firts post of my internet governance blog. Open source can be considered a positive externality, impacting on the spread of internet

Blog which writes about issues relating to open access media and links to actual open/free media. 

A transcript of a presentation given by Richard Stallman at the WSIS. He introduces in a fairly clear way the concept of free/open source software? He proceeds by explaining the concepts of freedom it relates to and how important this concept is in the developement of countries.

This article discusses how Open Source is beginning to overtake proprietary software in leading technological innovation. Open source can be monetised by capitalising on the value created around Open Source.

Open Standards vs Cross Platform - it's starting to sound like politics. Confusing. Misleading. Impractical. Constrained.

A good discussion on Apple's view on Flash, following our class discussion on standards and the iPad not supporting Flash.

Came across this article the other day - basically saying that if Adobe wants to prove that Flash can run on iPhones without any major issues, they can simply use iPhones that have been "jailbroken" (meaning they've been hacked and any app can be downloaded - circumventing the App Store). Adobe could create a Flash app to run on the iPhones and prove its points about security and performance of Flash on mobile devices. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/may/18/apple-adobe-flash-player-solution

This is a blog posting discussing the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) which recently added Indonesia, Brazil and India to its 'Special 301 Watchlist' which marks nations as a threat to intellectual property for encouraging their government departments and companies to use open source software

New Zealand is getting ready for a potential patent reform? Predominantly this bill includes an exclusion of patents on software which is a big development in a digital commercial industry which is rife with conflict over intellectual property. Personally, I feel it is a step in the right direction? But I guess that is the point of view of an end user.

Interview with Jason Lanierm, an apparent "digital guru" who has changed his view of open culture to that which promotes a "digital maoism". He proposes that we need to pay people for the brain work that they do instead of encouraging them to be labourers of sorts. 

Microsoft Corp and I-O Data Device have entered into an agreement that will provide I-O Data's customers with patent coverage for their use of I-O Data's products running Linux and other related open source software.

Find the whole idea vaguely repulsive. See Slashdot: "The Japanese computer manuracturer IO Data is the latest in line to license Microsoft's so-called 'Linux patents,' following the likes of Novell, Samsung, and Amazon. Yes, even the press releases use the word 'Linux' to describe these patents. From the press release: 'Specifically, the patent covenants apply to I-O Data's network-attached storage devices and its routers, which run Linux. Although the details of the agreement have not been disclosed, the parties indicated that Microsoft is being compensated by I-O Data.'" http://bit.ly/bmxIO4

After the Secretary of State in the US Hillary Clinton's speech on Internet freedom, open source source code repository SourceForge.net blocked access to IP addresses originating in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria. Open source software provides important infrastructure to these oppressed and developing nations. I hope the American government can see what a blow this is to the infrastructure and fledgling industries in these countries.

Skype has put the SILK codec, the backbone of its software, freely available to the developers community in order to receive feedback to improve the codec.

Very interesting article on Hollywood vs. downloads and ISPs. 

Really enjoyed this article and its historical account of Hollywood on the defensive to any new emergence of technology is apt. Unlike the open source software movement, this industry fails to understand that the circulation of its content, whether licensed or not, eventually produces indirect benefits. Hollywood defends its position through laws created in a time when the internet was yet to be conceived. The obvious flow on discussion here is that the law simply can't stay abreast of rapid technology changes.

Microsoft shares the same point of view on the limitations of the Flash product as Apple. Again, reliability, security and performance were identified as impediments of supporting the flawed software. Speaking about the mobile era Steve Jobs of Apple says 'low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards...' are areas where Flash is not currently accommodating. It's most interesting to watch powerful market players create pressure for change in the internet space. Adobe can ill afford to ignore these criticisms yet it's now taking opportunity to discredit the motives of the multinationals: "Apple's moves to block Flash and other technologies are designed to protect a business model that locks developers and consumers into a single, proprietary stack," Adobe spokeswoman Holly Campbell said.