Software Freedom Day: Taking open source to the streets

Thousands of open source advocates and enthusiasts from around the world are expected to take the message of free and open source software to the streets on September 15 for the fourth annual Software Freedom Day.

On Software Freedom Day, teams of enthusiasts hold local events to educate their local communities, supported by the parent organisation, Software Freedom International, and sponsors such as Canonical and the Free Software Foundation. It's an advocacy event whose the primary motive is outreach -- promoting free and open source software to local communities.

The event is growing. The inaugural 2004 Software Freedom Day had around 12 teams. Pia Waugh, president of Software Freedom International, says, "We had about 180 teams last year, and this year we are expecting about 250."

Events on the day vary from team to team. Activities usually include informational seminars, software demonstrations and training, and product giveaways. Some teams have been known to dress up in Tux costumes to gain attention and direct people to the action.

Running a Software Freedom Day event is beneficial to Linux and other open source user groups, as the impact can last beyond the actual day.

At Mawson Lakes, a suburb of Adelaide in Australia, Paul Schulz' 2006 Software Freedom Day event brought together different enthusiast groups. The most notable result has been the continuing interaction between local Linux user groups and Air-Stream, an Adelaide-based community wireless initiative. Their cooperation recently included a speaker interchange between the LUGs and Air-Stream. Several new LUGs have also been formed in the area due to the interest sparked from last year's event, and the organizers say they have seen a greater level of open source involvement in the local community center.

Another lasting effect can be seen in neighboring New Zealand, where past Software Freedom Day events in Christchurch have paved the way for a Linux and Free Software training programme. "Since we found a more permanent home for our SFD events, in a suburban library ICT teaching centre, we have been able to maintain the positive relationship through monthly Ubuntu and free software live CD-based evening classes," says Rik Tindall, a member of the 2006 Christchurch team. "Many new users have seen this series advertised, and come along for CDs, tuition, and installation help. Thus we also gained a regular schedule and base for training our SFD volunteers. From SFD, the profile of FOSS in the community has therefore been doubly lifted."

Best Event Photo 2006The training programme is so popular that there is also a need to cater for children. Tindall says, "This experience has also identified the need for a creche-like facility on SFD, for the many small children that attend a library with parents or grandparents on any weekend. We will prepare a section of our teaching suite accordingly, as a 'penguin creche,' with several games and puzzle packages ready."

By Melissa Draper

Software Freedom Day 2007 Sep 15h --Bigger than Ever

September 15th marks Software Freedom Day, the world's largest celebration and outreach effort about why transparent and sustainable technologies like Free & Open Source Software are so important. Community groups in more than 80 countries organize local activities and programs on Software Freedom Day to educate the wider public about free software: what it is, how it works and its relationship to human rights and sustainability. We already have over 140 teams around the world registered: join them in spreading the word! Registrations for Software Freedom Day teams that want to receive a free SFD team pack close in two weeks, so register now!

"Software Freedom is about creating a digital platform for trust and longevity, particular in a future where more and more of our lives are dependent upon technology" explains Pia Waugh, President of Software Freedom International, the organization behind Software Freedom Day. "It is important we can participate in and trust the software we use in the same way we need to be able to participate and trust in a political system. Ultimately our basic freedoms are only as free as the tools we use, and thus our commitment to Software Freedom."

Support for this year's Software Freedom Day event is fantastic with Google, Mindtouch and the Free Software Foundation coming on board as sponsors as well as long term sponsors the Danish Unix User Group and Canonical. The event also has support from The Open CD, OsCommRes and the International Open Source Network.

"Software Freedom Day is a fantastic event that demonstrates the global reach of open source software." says Jane Silber, COO of Canonical. "We at Canonical are proud to sponsor the event and encourage everyone in the Ubuntu community, as well as the open source community writ large, to participate in this important global event."

Registrations of teams participating in SFD will continue right up to the event however teams who wish to receive a free SFD team pack, including stickers, t-shirts, CDs and balloons must register before the 31st July! So get in quick! There is also an online shop where anyone can purchase t-shirts and packs of The Open CD. Teams get a 50% discount on all prices marked. Teams that have difficult circumstances can write to the Software Freedom International Board with special requests for additional goodies.

Already this year's event is looking bigger and better than ever before, so what will you do to help take Software Freedom to the world. After all, freedom isn't just for geeks.

[ Thanks to Pia Waugh for this article. ]

FOSS-ed for Windows

While there is a trend in the industry moving towards GNU/Linux and Free and Open Source Software - FOSS - Microsoft Windows is still a dominating force. Many applications have been developed around it and many continue to do so. Most of this software is also proprietary and includes heavy license fees. Proprietary software may cost anything from a few hundred dollars to millions of dollars for licensing fees alone. As a developing country, most individuals and even companies cannot afford such prices and resort to using illegal copies of software. Pirated software may cost only a fraction of the actual price but the implications can be far greater.

So are there viable alternatives to be used in the Windows environment? The answer is YES! Alternatives that don't have exorbitant licensing fees and will not result in intellectual property violation lawsuits being slapped against you! Alternatives that do not involve high maintenance costs either, are customisable, regularly and quickly provide security fixes in response to feedback and also have community driven support. What are these wonderful viable alternatives? It's Free and Open Source Software that run on Windows too! A large and wonderful catalog of FOSS applications exist for Windows users today. From Web browsers and mail clients to graphics software and content management systems, it's all out there ready to download and use! If you want to know more come check out FOSS-ed for Windows: THE event for all you decision makers to find out how YOU can benefit from FOSS while still continuing to use Windows.

Who should attend:

• Enterprise Users
• System Administrators

Objective:

• Learn about available FOSS applications and solutions in the Windows platform

Why should you go for this?

• Avoid penalty fees and lawsuits
• Cost benefits : Reduce high costs involved in purchasing and maintaining commercial enterprise software
• Customise : Tailor software to suit your specific needs
• Security : Bug fixes are turned out regularly and quickly in response to feedback
• Support : Large knowledge base available along with support contracts if necessary

When: 26th, 27th and 28th of June 2007

Where: 22nd Floor of the HNB Towers

Registration Fees:

Full:
Rs. 4500/= for two day conference
Rs. 1000/= for 3rd day of tutorials

Student:
Rs. 200/= for two day conference
Rs. 100/= for 3rd day of tutorials

Payment Points:

Sahana Lab, UCSC
WSO2, 7th Floor, BOC Merchant Tower, St. Michael's Road, Colombo 3

Cheques should be addressed to : Lanka Software Foundation

Agenda

Day 1

0800 – 0830	Registration
0830 – 0840	Opening Ceremony
0830 – 0900	Welcome Address	Dr. Sanjiva Weerawarana
Session 1: Front Office
0900 – 0945	OpenOffice	Eranga Jayasundara Srimal Jayawardena
0945 – 1030	Adobe Photoshop Alternatives – GIMP	Rajkumar Ganeshan
1030 – 1100	Break
Session 2: Security
1100 – 1145	FOSS Desktop Security Tools	Suchetha Wijenayake
1145 – 1230	Server-side Security for Antivirus and Antispam	Buddhika Siddhisena
1230 – 1330	Lunch
Session 3: Email and Collaboration
1330 – 1415	Thunderbird, Evolution and Firefox	Mifan Careem
1415 – 1500	FOSS Messaging and Collaborative Alternatives	Srimal Jayawardena
1500 – 1530	Break
Session 4: Network Services
1530 – 1615	FOSS File Server	Deependra Ariyadewa
1615 – 1700	Free Instant Messaging via Jabber	Suchetha Wijenayake

Day 2

0830 – 0900	Registration
0900 – 1030	Keynote – Brian Behlendorf
1030 – 1100	Break
Session 5: Databases and Content Management
1100 – 1145	MySQL and PostgreSQL	Kanchana Welagedara
1145 – 1230	Content Management with Drupal	Anuradha Ratnaweera
1230 – 1330	Lunch
1330 – 1415	Case Study 1: Embedded Wireless Authentication Gateway Case Study 2: TBD	Gayan Suranga De Silva TBD
1415 – 1500	Lightning Talks	Suchetha Wijenayake Mifan Careem
1500 – 1530	Break
1530 – 1700	Panel – Switching to FOSS and Getting Real with IPR	Dr. Sanjiva Weerawarana

Day 3

0830 – 0900	Registration
0900 – 1030	Tutorial 1 – Free Media - VLC, VirtualDub, IceCast MPlayer		Suchetha Wijenayake
1030 – 1100	Break
1100 – 1230	Tutorial 2 – Adobe Alternatives		Chamil Thanthrimudalige
1230 – 1330	Lunch
1330 – 1500	Tutorial 3 – LAMP on Windows		Kanchana Welagedara
1500 – 1530	Break
1530 – 1700	The Open CD Project – An overview of what's inside		Suchetha Wijenayake

For more details please check out the brochure and the poster for the event.

Microsoft takes on the free world

(Fortune Magazine) -- Free software is great, and corporate America loves it. It's often high-quality stuff that can be downloaded free off the Internet and then copied at will. It's versatile - it can be customized to perform almost any large-scale computing task - and it's blessedly crash-resistant.

A broad community of developers, from individuals to large companies like IBM, is constantly working to improve it and introduce new features. No wonder the business world has embraced it so enthusiastically: More than half the companies in the Fortune 500 are thought to be using the free operating system Linux in their data centers.

But now there's a shadow hanging over Linux and other free software, and it's being cast by Microsoft (Charts, Fortune 500). The Redmond behemoth asserts that one reason free software is of such high quality is that it violates more than 200 of Microsoft's patents. And as a mature company facing unfavorable market trends and fearsome competitors like Google (Charts, Fortune 500), Microsoft is pulling no punches: It wants royalties. If the company gets its way, free software won't be free anymore.

The conflict pits Microsoft and its dogged CEO, Steve Ballmer, against the "free world" - people who believe software is pure knowledge. The leader of that faction is Richard Matthew Stallman, a computer visionary with the look and the intransigence of an Old Testament prophet.

Caught in the middle are big corporate Linux users like Wal-Mart, AIG, and Goldman Sachs. Free-worlders say that if Microsoft prevails, the whole quirky ecosystem that produced Linux and other free and open-source software (FOSS) will be undermined.

Microsoft counters that it is a matter of principle. "We live in a world where we honor, and support the honoring of, intellectual property," says Ballmer in an interview. FOSS patrons are going to have to "play by the same rules as the rest of the business," he insists. "What's fair is fair."

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith and licensing chief Horacio Gutierrez sat down with Fortune recently to map out their strategy for getting FOSS users to pay royalties. Revealing the precise figure for the first time, they state that FOSS infringes on no fewer than 235 Microsoft patents.

It's a breathtaking number. (By comparison, for instance, Verizon's (Charts, Fortune 500) patent suit against Vonage (Charts), which now threatens to bankrupt the latter, was based on just seven patents, of which only three were found to be infringing.) "This is not a case of some accidental, unknowing infringement," Gutierrez asserts. "There is an overwhelming number of patents being infringed."

The free world appears to be uncowed by Microsoft's claims. Its master legal strategist is Eben Moglen, longtime counsel to the Free Software Foundation and the head of the Software Freedom Law Center, which counsels FOSS projects on how to protect themselves from patent aggression. (He's also a professor on leave from Columbia Law School, where he teaches cyberlaw and the history of political economy.)

Moglen contends that software is a mathematical algorithm and, as such, not patentable. (The Supreme Court has never expressly ruled on the question.) In any case, the fact that Microsoft might possess many relevant patents doesn't impress him. "Numbers aren't where the action is," he says. "The action is in very tight qualitative analysis of individual situations." Patents can be invalidated in court on numerous grounds, he observes. Others can easily be "invented around." Still others might be valid, yet not infringed under the particular circumstances.

Moglen's hand got stronger just last month when the Supreme Court stated in a unanimous opinion that patents have been issued too readily for the past two decades, and lots are probably invalid. For a variety of technical reasons, many dispassionate observers suspect that software patents are especially vulnerable to court challenge.

Furthermore, FOSS has powerful corporate patrons and allies. In 2005, six of them - IBM (Charts, Fortune 500), Sony, Philips, Novell, Red Hat (Charts) and NEC - set up the Open Invention Network to acquire a portfolio of patents that might pose problems for companies like Microsoft, which are known to pose a patent threat to Linux.

So if Microsoft ever sued Linux distributor Red Hat for patent infringement, for instance, OIN might sue Microsoft in retaliation, trying to enjoin distribution of Windows. It's a cold war, and what keeps the peace is the threat of mutually assured destruction: patent Armageddon - an unending series of suits and countersuits that would hobble the industry and its customers.

"It's a tinderbox," Moglen says. "As the commercial confrontation between [free software] and software-that's-a-product becomes more fierce, patent law's going to be the terrain on which a big piece of the war's going to be fought. Waterloo is here somewhere."

Brad Smith, 48, became Microsoft's senior vice president and general counsel in 2002, the year the company settled most of its U.S. antitrust litigation. A strawberry-blond Princeton graduate with a law degree from Columbia, Smith is a polished, thoughtful and credible advocate whom some have described as the face of the kinder, gentler, post-monopoly Microsoft. But that's not really an apt description of Smith; he projects intensity, determination, a hint of Ivy League hauteur, and ambition.

We're sitting at a circular table in Smith's office in Building 34 on the Redmond campus, with a view of rolling green lawns splashed with pink-blossomed plum trees. In the 1970s and 1980s, Smith recounts, software companies relied mainly on "trade secrets" doctrine and copyright law to protect their products. Patents weren't a big factor, since most lawyers assumed that software wasn't patentable.

But in the 1990s, all that changed. Courts were interpreting copyright law to provide less protection to software than companies had hoped, while trade-secrets doctrine was becoming unworkable because the demands of a networked world required that "the secret" - the program's source code - be revealed to ever more sets of eyes.

At the same time courts began signaling that software could be patented after all. (A copyright is typically obtained on an entire computer program. It prohibits exact duplication of the code but may not bar less literal copying. Patents are obtained on innovative ways of doing things, and thus a single program might implicate hundreds of them.)

In response, companies began stocking up on software patents, with traditional hardware outfits like IBM leading the way, since they already had staffs of patent attorneys working at their engineers' elbows. Microsoft lagged far behind.

As with the Internet, though, Microsoft came late to the party, then crashed it with a vengeance. In 2002, the year Smith became general counsel, the company applied for 1,411 patents. By 2004 it had more than doubled that number, submitting 3,780.

In 2003, Microsoft executives sat down to assess what the company should do with all those patents. There were three choices. First, it could do nothing, effectively donating them to the development community. Obviously that "wasn't very attractive in terms of our shareholders," Smith says.

Alternatively, it could start suing other companies to stop them from using its patents. That was a nonstarter too, Smith says: "It was going to get in the way of everything we were trying to accomplish in terms of [improving] our connections with other companies, the promotion of interoperability, and the desires of customers."

So Microsoft took the third choice, which was to begin licensing its patents to other companies in exchange for either royalties or access to their patents (a "cross-licensing" deal). In December 2003, Microsoft's new licensing unit opened for business, and soon the company had signed cross-licensing pacts with such tech firms as Sun, Toshiba, SAP and Siemens.

At the same time, Smith was having Microsoft's lawyers figure out how many of its patents were being infringed by free and open-source software. Gutierrez refuses to identify specific patents or explain how they're being infringed, lest FOSS advocates start filing challenges to them.

But he does break down the total number allegedly violated - 235 - into categories. He says that the Linux kernel - the deepest layer of the free operating system, which interacts most directly with the computer hardware - violates 42 Microsoft patents. The Linux graphical user interfaces - essentially, the way design elements like menus and toolbars are set up - run afoul of another 65, he claims. The Open Office suite of programs, which is analogous to Microsoft Office, infringes 45 more. E-mail programs infringe 15, while other assorted FOSS programs allegedly transgress 68.

Now that Microsoft had identified the infringements, it could try to seek royalties। But from whom? FOSS isn't made by a company but by a loose-knit community of hundreds of individuals and companies। One possibility was to approach the big commercial Linux distributors like Red Hat and Novell that give away the software but sell subscription support services। However, distributors were prohibited from paying patent royalties by something whose very existence may surprise many readers: FOSS's own licensing terms.

Yes, free software is a more sophisticated concept than many people think, and it is subject to a legally enforceable license of its own. That license was written by free-software inventor Richard Stallman, who anticipated 20 years ago all the threats free software faces today. Foremost among those threats, Stallman understood, were patents.

A gifted developer and prickly, uncompromising individual, Stallman, 54, quit his job at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab in 1984 to found what he considered to be a social movement guided by ethical principles. He set forth those goals in the GNU Manifesto, where GNU (pronounced with a hard "g" and rhyming with "canoe") was an acronym for "GNU's Not Unix." (It's a "recursive" acronym, an inside joke that programmers get. Trust us.) Free software would guarantee users "freedoms" that were ordinarily forbidden by proprietary software licenses, including the ability to see the source code, alter it, copy it and redistribute it.

But while many people assume that Stallman simply ignored intellectual-property law, he actually mastered it and enlisted it in the quest to achieve his goals. He demanded that all contributors to GNU projects assign their copyrights to the Free Software Foundation, which Stallman set up and controlled. That meant that anyone who distributed free software covered by those copyrights had to abide by a license Stallman wrote, called the GNU General Public License (GPL).

The GPL has teeth: Lawyers for the Free Software Foundation have been able to force developers who incorporated free software into proprietary products to open up their source code, for instance.

By 1991, Stallman and his collaborators had conjured an entire free operating system, which is today known as Linux. Though large portions were created by Stallman's GNU developers, the kernel was the work of an independent project led by the then 20-year-old Finnish student Linus Torvalds, after whom the system is now named. (Stallman insists that "GNU/Linux" is the proper name, and he refuses to give interviews to reporters unless they promise to call it that in every reference. In part for that reason, he was not interviewed for this article.)

Businesses loved free software. But they had no use for Stallman's noble sentiments, and neither did the many developers who began to write free software specifically for businesses. They chafed at some of the requirements in Stallman's GPL, so they devised their own licenses, called open-source licenses. Those often gave them a freedom Stallman forbade: the freedom to keep secret any improvements they made in free software, turning them back into proprietary code. (Stallman has scoffed that such licenses confer the freedom to sell oneself into slavery.) Popularly, "open-source software" became an umbrella term for all FOSS, but, again, Stallman bars reporters from using it that way as a condition of being interviewed.

Thus there is a schism in the free world between the more business-oriented advocates of open-source software - who simply think that community authorship makes for better, cheaper software - and the more ideological champions of free software proper, who see themselves as advancing a social movement.

While the open-sourcers have produced lots of good applications, crucial portions of Linux remain governed by Stallman's GPL. For our purposes, the key aspect of the GPL is that it expressly forbids what Microsoft general counsel Smith wanted to do: cut patent royalty deals with distributors of Linux.

"Any free program is threatened constantly by software patents," Stallman wrote in a 1991 revision to the GPL. "We have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all." This restriction became known as the "liberty or death" clause.

Smith was not to be deterred. Since the GPL covered only distributors of Linux, nothing stopped Smith from seeking royalties directly from end users - many of which are Fortune 500 companies. He would have to proceed carefully, however, because most of those users were also major Microsoft customers.

"It was a conversation that one needed to have in a thoughtful way," says Smith, with obvious understatement. In 2004, Microsoft began having those conversations, and Smith claims they were cordial. "Companies are very sensitive to the importance of protecting intellectual property," he says, "because ultimately they know that their own businesses similarly turn on [such] protection."

Some customers actually entered into direct patent licenses with Microsoft at that point, Smith says, including some "major brand-name companies" in financial services, health care, insurance and information technology. (He says they don't want to be identified, presumably because they fear angering the FOSS community.) Others wanted Microsoft to work out the patent issues directly with the commercial distributors like Red Hat and Novell. (Red Hat has about 65 percent of the paid Linux server market, according to IDC, while Novell has 26 percent.)

Microsoft did approach distributors, bearing both a stick, the unspoken threat of a patent suit and a carrot, the prospect that once patent issues were resolved, more customers would sign up for Linux.

By spring 2006, Red Hat and Microsoft were engaged in serious patent negotiations, according to one source with direct knowledge. Red Hat deputy general counsel Mark Webbink will say only this: "I've spoken with folks from Microsoft for a number of years, and ... we've had discussions about IP and other matters of mutual concern."

In June, Novell CEO Ron Hovsepian reached out to Microsoft and was put in touch with Smith. (He'd heard that Microsoft was talking to other Linux distributors, Smith says.) Hovsepian wanted to find ways to make Linux and Microsoft server products work together better - a top priority for customers as they consolidate their computing onto fewer machines. Smith would not talk about technical collaboration, however, without a commitment to also address Microsoft's patent concerns.

Over the summer Novell and Microsoft hammered out a clever, complicated - and highly controversial - deal. They knew that if Novell paid Microsoft a royalty in exchange for Microsoft's promise not to sue Novell for patent infringement, Novell would be in violation of the GPL, Stallman's farsighted free-software license.

So they came up with a twist: Microsoft and Novell agreed not to sue each other's customers for patent infringement. That would be okay, because it's something that the GPL does not address. On those terms, Novell agreed to give Microsoft a percentage of all its Linux revenue through 2011 (or a minimum of $40 million).

The pact also included a marketing collaboration. Microsoft agreed to pay Novell $240 million for "coupons" that it could then resell to customers (theoretically for a profit), who would, in turn, trade them in for subscriptions to Novell's Linux server software. In addition, Microsoft gave Novell another $108 million as a "balancing payment" in connection with the patent part of the deal.

It might seem counterintuitive that Microsoft would end up paying millions to Novell when Microsoft is the one trying to get royalties for its patents. Microsoft's explanation is that this balancing payment was calculated as it would be in any cross-licensing deal: Novell has valuable network-computing patents that Microsoft products may infringe, and since Microsoft's products bring in so much more revenue than Novell's, Microsoft owed a balance.

But FOSS critics of the deal would later speculate that the real purpose of the payments was to induce Novell to cut a royalty deal on Linux that Novell knew was unnecessary। Says Red Hat's Webbink: "It allowed [Microsoft] to go out and trumpet that, see, we told you Linux infringed, and these guys are now admitting it।"

Microsoft and Novell unveiled their pact on Nov. 2, accompanied by endorsements from big Linux patrons and users like IBM, Hewlett-Packard, AIG, and - most startlingly - an organization called the Open Source Development Lab. The imprimatur of OSDL, a consortium of corporate Linux patrons (which has since merged into the Linux Foundation), carried the implicit blessing of its employee Linus Torvalds - a near-deity in the FOSS community.

(Torvalds has gravitated toward the business-friendly open-source camp of the FOSS world and has openly criticized Stallman's agenda in some contexts. In a March e-mail interview with InformationWeek he wrote: "The Free Software Foundation [Stallman's group] simply doesn't have goals that I can personally sign up to. For example, the FSF considers proprietary software to be something evil and immoral. Me, I just don't care about proprietary software.")

In free-software circles, though, the Microsoft-Novell entente was met with apoplectic rage. Novell's most eminent Linux developer quit in protest. Stallman, of course, denounced it. Not only did it make a mockery of free-software principles, but it threatened the community's common-defense strategy.

FOSS developers, who do not have the resources to defend themselves against a Microsoft patent suit, felt safe as long as powerful corporate Linux users shared their cause. But now the big boys could just buy their Linux from a royalty-paying vendor like Novell, getting protection from lawsuits and leaving the little guys to fend for themselves. What the shortsighted corporate types didn't grasp was that without the little-guy developers there might not be any high-quality FOSS for them to use five years down the road.

"We should talk," Stallman's attorney, Moglen, told Smith in a phone call a few days after the announcement. On Nov. 9, they met at the Software Freedom Law Center's tidy offices on Manhattan's Upper West Side. The Free Software Foundation was planning to prevent Microsoft from doing any more deals like the one it made with Novell, Moglen told Smith. It was drafting a new version of the GPL that would plug the loophole that Smith had just exploited.

Moglen had another card to play. In his view, the fact that Microsoft was selling coupons that customers could trade in for Novell Linux subscriptions meant that Microsoft was now a Linux distributor. And that, as Moglen saw it, meant that Microsoft was itself subject to the terms of the GPL. So he'd write a clause saying, in effect, that if Microsoft continued to issue Novell Linux coupons after the revised GPL took effect, it would be waiving its right to bring patent suits not just against Novell customers, but against all Linux users. "I told Brad," he recalls, "'I think you should just walk away from the patent part of the deal now.'"

Smith didn't, and Moglen kept his promise. On March 28, the Free Software Foundation made public revised GPL provisions, which are expected to take effect in July.

Microsoft and Novell both vow to proceed with their deal as planned. Microsoft claims that its mere distribution of coupons won't make it subject to the GPL, as Moglen asserts. But even if Microsoft is right about that, there's no doubt that distributors remain subject to it, and Moglen's revisions will bar them from trying to strike deals like Novell's.

That may be bad news for big corporate customers, which, judging from early reports, like the Novell deal. Presumably at least part of its appeal is that it provides peace of mind about Microsoft's patent claims. In the first six months, such marquee clients as Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, AIG Technologies, HSBC, Wal-Mart, Dell and Reed Elsevier have all acquired Novell Linux coupons from Microsoft.

Microsoft had hoped that the Novell deal would become a model it could use to collect patent royalties from other distributors of free software. In that respect, its "bridge" to the free world appears to have failed. That, in turn, seems to have taken us a step closer to patent Armageddon.

"The only real solution that [the free-software] folks have to offer," Smith says, "is that they first burn down the bridge, and then they burn down the patent system. That to me is not a goal that's likely to be achieved, and not a goal that should be achieved."

When it comes to software patents, though, Moglen thinks that's exactly the goal to be achieved. "The free world says that software is the embodiment of knowledge about technology, which needs to be free in the same way that mathematics is free," he says. "Everybody is allowed to know as much of it as he wants, regardless of whether he can pay for it, and everybody can contribute and everybody can share."

In the meantime, with Microsoft seemingly barred from striking pacts with distributors, only one avenue appears open to it: paying more friendly visits to its Fortune 500 customers, seeking direct licenses.

If push comes to shove, would Microsoft sue its customers for royalties, the way the record industry has?

"That's not a bridge we've crossed," says CEO Ballmer, "and not a bridge I want to cross today on the phone with you."

If Operating Systems Ran The Airlines...

Different operating systems. Different styles. But what if the quirks and styles of the different operating systems were applied to AIRLINES? What if airlines ran things the way operating systems do? This humorous analogy, applying operating system philosophies as if they were airlines, is a long-standing much-circulated amusing story, and I'd credit the author if I knew who wrote it!

UNIX Airways

Everyone brings one piece of the plane along when they come to the airport. They all go out on the runway and put the plane together piece by piece, arguing non-stop about what kind of plane they are supposed to be building.

Air DOS

Everybody pushes the airplane until it glides, then they jump on and let the plane coast until it hits the ground again. Then they push again, jump on again, and so on...

Mac Airlines

All the stewards, captains, baggage handlers, and ticket agents look and act exactly the same. Every time you ask questions about details, you are gently but firmly told that you don't need to know, don't want to know, and everything will be done for you without your ever having to know, so just shut up.

Windows Air

The terminal is pretty and colourful, with friendly stewards, easy baggage check and boarding, and a smooth take-off. After about 10 minutes in the air, the plane explodes with no warning whatsoever.

Windows NT Air

Just like Windows Air, but costs more, uses much bigger planes, and takes out all the other aircraft within a 40-mile radius when it explodes.

Windows XP Air

You turn up at the airport,which is under contract to only allow XP Air planes. All the aircraft are identical, brightly coloured and three times as big as they need to be. The signs are huge and all point the same way. Whichever way you go, someone pops up dressed in a cloak and pointed hat insisting you follow him. Your luggage and clothes are taken off you and replaced with an XP Air suit and suitcase identical to everyone around you as this is included in the exorbitant ticket cost. The aircraft will not take off until you have signed a contract. The inflight entertainment promised turns out to be the same Mickey Mouse cartoon repeated over and over again. You have to phone your travel agent before you can have a meal or drink. You are searched regularly throughout the flight. If you go to the toilet twice or more you get charged for a new ticket. No matter what destination you booked you will always end up crash landing at Whistler in Canada.

Linux Air

Disgruntled employees of all the other OS airlines decide to start their own airline. They build the planes, ticket counters, and pave the runways themselves. They charge a small fee to cover the cost of printing the ticket, but you can also download and print the ticket yourself.

When you board the plane, you are given a seat, four bolts, a wrench and a copy of the seat-HOWTO.html. Once settled, the fully adjustable seat is very comfortable, the plane leaves and arrives on time without a single problem, the in-flight meal is wonderful. You try to tell customers of the other airlines about the great trip, but all they can say is, "You had to do what with the seat?"

More Interesting topics at http://www.zyra.org.uk/os-air.htm

Windows VISTA - Microsoft's Biggest MISTAKE

"David Short, an IBM consultant who works in the Global Services Division and has been beta testing Vista for two years, says users should consider 4GB of RAM if they really want optimum Vista performance. With Vista's minimum requirement of 512MB of RAM, Vista will deliver performance that's 'sub-XP,' he says. (Dell and others recommend 2GB.) One reason: SuperFetch, which fetches applications and data, and feeds them into RAM to make them accessible more quickly. More RAM means more caching."

Guru Meditation Error

Script Failure. Press left mouse button to continue.

Guru Meditation #0021.00004FB0.5 Script Fatal Error

Scripts/playertools.maki

Windows Fedora Ubuntu

I was using XP with Fedora Core and my thirst of using free and open software never seemed to be satisfied. So wanted to install Ubuntu V6.06. I ordered a Free CD from www.ubuntu.com and now it has reached my place.

So here I go..Removed the FC partition just for the fun of doing it and installed Ubuntu. My boot loader had no problems..and here I continue..Installed FC 5 again in a separate partition and oops my FC5 GRUB failed to identify my Ubuntu reisefs file system.

Now what..wrote to several mailing lists and was asked to do many things. Anyway thanx to Ven. Mettavihari I was able to restore the FC5 GRUB from the ubuntu CD.

Ended up in CLI GRUB instead of the GUI FC GRUB. When I said I hate the CLI GRUB Ven. Mettavihari wants me too hack the CLI GRUB to make improvements and its all about freedom.

Now this is what I call real motivation!! :)