free software

  • EU Commission locked into Microsoft

    EU flag with MS Windows logo inside circle of starsThe European Commission has recently renewed its commitment to a proprietary desktop and secret file formats, the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) writes. The Commission is refusing to make a serious effort to break free from vendor lock-in and is ignoring all available alternatives. In doing so, the EU’s civil service fails to practice what it preaches.

    In April, the Commission signed two contracts with Microsoft: firstly, an agreement for “high-level services” worth €44 million and secondly a framework agreement on software licensing conditions. The actual licences are provided by Hewlett-Packard under a separate contract from 2012 that itself is worth €50 million. The contracts cover the Commission itself and 54 other EU organisations.

    “We are extremely disappointed about the lack of progress here,” says FSFE president Karsten Gerloff. “The Commission has not even looked for viable alternatives. Its lazy approach to software procurement leaves the Commission open to allegations of inertia and worse.”

    The Commission recently admitted publicly for the first time (PDF) that it is in “effective captivity” to Microsoft. Documents obtained by the FSFE reveal that the Commission has made no serious effort to find solutions based on open standards. As a consequence, a large part of Europe’s IT sector is essentially prevented from doing business with the Commission.

    In a strategy paper (PDF) which the Commission released in response to official questions from Amelia Andersdotter MEP, the EC lays out a three-track approach for its office automation platform for the coming years. This strategy will only deepen the Commission’s reliance on closed proprietary file formats and programs.

    “The Commission should be setting a positive example for public administrations across Europe,” comments FSFE’s Gerloff. “Instead, it shirks its responsibility as a public administrations, and simply claims that such alternatives don’t exist. Even the most basic market analysis would have told the Commission that there’s a vibrant free software industry in Europe that it could have relied on.”

    Many public sector organisations in Europe are successfully using free software and implementing open standards. Examples include the German city of Munich with its internationally recognised Limux project and (believe it or not! Ed.) the UK government, which has made great strides in using free software and open standards to obtain better value for money in IT procurement.

    However, the FSFE says it will continue to work with the Commission in spite of this setback and will help it to improve its software the way it buys software, such as by relying on specifications and standards rather than brand names, by using open invitations to tender instead of talking to a single vendor and by incorporating future exit costs into the price of any new solution. These practices are fast becoming the norm across Europe’s public sector. The EC should practice what it preaches and adopt these practices for its own IT procurement.

    This post originally appeared on Bristol Wireless.

  • GNU licences now adapted to Swiss legal language

    According to www.opensource.ch, reading the original text of open source licences is very challenging. Swiss IT legal specialist Wolfgang Straub has made a new translation into German of three major open source licences, the GNU GPL, GNU LGPL and GNU Affero GPL and aligned them with Swiss legal language. In addition, he is also providing an introduction to the law on open source licences and various checklists for download free of charge at www.opensource.ch.

    The licences of the Free Software Foundation (FSF) have been amongst the most frequently used open source licences for many years. In 2007 the FSF published version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GPL), the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) and the GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL). The Berne-based IT legal specialist Wolfgang Straub has now made a new translation of the text of these three licences.

    Linguistically, the initial German translations of the GNU GPL and the GNU LGPL by Peter Gerwinski are based as closely as possible on the original English text. They are based upon German legal language. Wolfgang Straub has made a new translation of the licences and adapted them to Swiss legal language. The wording and presentation are aimed at the best possible comprehensibility. The new translations are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 licence and are available for download free of charge at the Swiss Open Source Portal www.opensource.ch as PDF and ODF files.

    Wolfgang Straub is the author of several publications on Swiss information technology law. He is also the author of the book “Softwareschutz – Urheberrecht, Patentrecht, Open Source” (Software Protection – Copyright, Patent Law, Open Source) published by Dike Verlag in 2011. The chapter on open source software is now available free of charge for download (PDF). It contains a systematic overview of legal matters concerning open source licences, a bibliography and various checklists for practical use.

  • LibreOffice 4.2.5 released

    The release of LibreOffice 4.2.5, codenamed “Fresh”, has been announced by The Document Foundation. This is the fifth minor release of this free and open source office suite. However, for more conservative users, The Document Foundation suggests they continue using LibreOffice 4.1.6 “Stable”.

    image of LibreOffice Mime type icons
    LibreOffice for all your office suite needs: word processing, spreadsheets, presentations, database, drawing and formulas

    More than 800 contributors have helped develop both LibreOffice 4.2.5 and LibreOffice 4.1.6 since the launch of the LibreOffice project in September 2010. “This is a wonderful
    achievement”, said Thorsten Behrens, Chairman of The Document Foundation. “We have managed to attract at least three new contributors per month for 46 months in a row, with an average of more than 200 new contributors per year.”

    A total of 150 bugs have been fixed in the latest release. Details are available for bugs fixed in both release candidates, RC1 and RC2.

    LibreOffice 4.2.5 and LibreOffice 4.1.6 are both available for download. In addition, extensions and templates to complement the installation of the software and to add specific features are available at http://extensions.libreoffice.org/.

  • Fresh LibreOffice 4.3 bug hunting session announced

    The Document Foundation (TDF), the organisation behind the free and open source LibreOffice productivity suite, has announced the dates for the second bug hunting session for the 4.3 version release of LibreOffice. This will run from 20th to 22nd June. The LibreOffice community has already made a huge collective effort to make LibreOffice 4.3 the best ever, based on automated stress tests and structured tests by Quality Assurance volunteers.

    LibreOffice banner

    Business and private LibreOffice users can now contribute to the quality of this free office suite by testing the 4.3 release candidate (RC) to identify any issues with their preferred configuration.

    Taking part in the bug hunting session Participating is easy. Details of the bug hunting session are on TDF wiki. The list of new features for LibreOffice 4.3 needing testing for bugs and regressions, is also on the wiki.

    Prospective participants will need to have a PC running either Linux, MacOs or Windows and a copy of LibreOffice 4.3 RC1 (which can be downloaded from http://www.libreoffice.org/pre-releases). Previous LibreOffice Quality Assurance experience is not mandatory.

    Experienced volunteers who will be available via the QA mailing list (libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org) and QA IRC channel (irc://irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa) to assist newcomers in filing bugs.

  • Ossmeter to reduce open source evaluation costs

    Q: what has the EU ever done for us?

    A: helped promote free and open source software!

    EU flagSeveral universities and companies are working collaboratively in the Ossmeter research project on a platform for evaluating and comparing open source software. The European Union is funding Ossmeter’s development to the tune of €2.6 mn. (out of total project costs of €3.4 mn. Ed.) and the software that is ultimately developed will be made available online as a free service and released as free software so it can also be deployed as an in-house quality management tool.

    The aim of the project is to reduce the costs of evaluating open source software. Collecting information from associated communication channels such as newsgroups, forums and mailing lists to identify whether user questions are answered in a timely and satisfactory manner, and to estimate the number of experts and users of the software are equally as important as the researchers’ objective, as is a comparison of several open source projects with regard to usage. The platform’s capability will be tested in three use cases.

    Ossmeter is being developed by nine European research and industry organisations:

    The Open Group is the over-all coordinator and the University of York provides the technical coordination.

    For more information on Ossmeter, read Joinup’s original post.

  • New version of Scribus open source DTP package released

    Scribus logoThe developers of the Scribus open source DTP software have probably released the last version of the 1.4.x development branch with the release of version 1.4.4. From now on they want to concentrate solely on the next major release in the form of the 1.6.x series, whose first alpha version (1.5.0) should be made available for testing later in 2014.

    The Scribus version that has just been released contains a script to allow users to align images in frames and it is now possible to use page borders as guides for the snapping of objects. The autoquote script has been rewritten and has more available options. In addition, problems with the spellchecker that resulted in crashes have been resolved. A further new feature is and option for exporting work as PDF/X-1a.

    A new colour palette has been added for geographers, whilst Scribus now comprise a further CMYK colour palette created by the Newspaper Association of America (NAA) for newspaper advertisements.

    All the changes in the new version can be seen in the release notes.

    In addition to the release of the new version, the Scribus team has also announced a new industry partnership. By collaborating with Software Consulting Services (SCS), which was involved in the invention of Quark-XTensions, commercial support will now be available for migration to Scribus. Furthermore, SCS is willing to work on future Scribus development and already offers a plug-in for the import of Layout-8000 geometry files into Scribus.

    Scribus is available for the following platforms: Linux, BSD UNIX, Solaris, OpenIndiana, GNU/Hurd, Mac OS X, OS/2 Warp 4, eComStation and Windows.

  • Introducing Novena open source computer hardware

    German IT news website Heise reports that Andrew “bunnie” Huang has successfully financed his open source Novena Computer hardware, although the crowdfunding campaign is still running until the end of this week.

    Novena is an open source hardware of software platform for hackers who appreciate a development platform that’s as open as possible. Huang originally wanted to fulfil his own wish for a laptop specifically for hackers; due to heavy demand the hardware can be ordered via the crowdfunding project until the end of the week.

    The motherboard is on its third revision although the essential performance characteristics have not changed. Freescale i.MX6 is used as the CPU; this has four Cortex-A9-cores with a frequency of 1.2 GHz. The Vivante GC2000 GPU is used for the graphics. The connections and specifications for the laptop are comparable with other netbooks and are on average as follows: up to 4 GB of RAM (1 SODIMM, DDR3-1066), SATA II interface, USB 2.0 interfaces, HDMI output and Mini-PCI Express. A dual channel LVDS LCD connector can supply a screen resolution of 2048 × 1536 pixels at 60 Hz. The exclusivity of such a “handmade” product is clearly reflected in the price. Huang has stated in the past that this is not a cheap PC system.

    The Novena platform is available in 4 variants. The motherboard on its own costs US $500. The desktop version is available for US $1,195 and the laptop variant for US $1,995. In addition, the Heirloom version is a designer variant for lovers of handmade cases. The work of designer Kurt Mottweiler costs a hefty US $5,000 and this Novena variant comes with a hand-crafted wood and aluminium housing.

    As far as the operating system is concerned, Huang is using Debian GNU/Linux.

  • Euro election hustings: a view from the chair

    ORG logoOn Friday evening the Open Rights Group organised one of a series of nationwide European Digital Rights hustings at St Werburgh’s Community Centre in Bristol. This was a chance for local people to quiz MEP candidates from the South West about their views on digital rights and ask them to sign up to the 10 point Charter of Digital Rights.

    Green European Parliament candidate Audaye Elesedy signs the Charter of Digital Rights at St Werburgh's Community Centre
    Green European Parliament candidate Audaye Elesedy signs the Charter of Digital Rights at St Werburgh’s Community Centre. Picture credit: Brent Longborough

    As Chair of St Werburgh’s and having a keen interest in digital rights, I volunteered my services and was surprised to be asked to chair the event.

    When I arrived, Ed Paton-Williams from the ORG had already shown up and there was little to organise in the room apart from setting up the wifi, a couple of notices with the wifi details and the last minute provision of water for the top table.

    In alphabetical order, the candidates who attended were:

    We were supposed to have been joined by Julia Reed from UKIP, but she pulled out at the last moment. Could this have had something to do with a little Twitter bother?

    After a brief introduction from Ed Paton-Williams and a warm welcome to all to the Centre from me, we were off with candidates’ opening statements. All stuck fairly well to the 2 minutes limit for speaking (and many thanks to Hadleigh for the use of his phone with the stopwatch app! Ed.).

    As chair I got to ask the first question: has the EU done enough to allow open source software to compete with proprietary products such as Microsoft Office?

    Some interesting answers followed: Hadleigh and Jay both raised the cost of licensing for small businesses; Audaye raised the use of open standards such as Open Document Format.

    The meeting was then thrown open to questions from the floor. The first concerned data protection and the UK’s government’s desire to make money from selling data provided by citizens. Once again there were some fascinating answers of which I’m reminded of two points in particular: Jay believed people should be compensated financially for the use of their data, whilst Hadleigh stated that companies shouldn’t be buying people’s data. A point made from the floor was that people are very mistrustful of the way the government uses – and loses – data.

    The next question from the floor raised the matter of TTIP. Some candidates, particularly those with links to business, favoured TTIP’s implementation; Georgina said it should be given a chance. Other, more wary candidates feared the consequences of TTIP’s proposals to allow corporations to take governments to court for changes to the competitive commercial landscape. TTIP was also seen as a big threat to personal control of data. Snowden’s revelation of US spying on the EU during TTIP negotiations were mentioned by Audaye.

    This led neatly into the next matter: surveillance. Georgina thought there was too much scaremongering going on about data collection. It’s there to protect us from paedophiles and terrorism, adding: “States knew perfectly well that surveillance happening… on the internet there’s no such thing as privacy.” Jay responded that we’re struggling with oversight in the UK and that access to communications data shouldn’t be a habitual thing. Hadleigh remarked that the public have to be given a guarantee that they won’t be spied on unless they’ve committed crime. Audaye stressed that Germany has gained a competitive advantage in digital sector because its far stronger privacy culture compared with the UK.

    Thangam Debonnaire, Labour’s candidate for the Bristol West parliamentary constituency and a former musician, asked about how the EU should make sure copyright law helps creators protect their income. There was general agreement in the responses that Digital Rights/Restrictions Management (DRM) hadn’t really done anything to stop so-called ‘piracy’, (better known to some of us by its correct definition of ‘copyright infringement’. Ed.). Furthermore, artists deserve better compensation from the likes of iTunes and Spotify. The general impression is that this area still needs attention as the music and film industries are still struggling to come to terms with the internet after a couple of decades.

    In one of the final questions, the power of the UK in the EU was raised from the floor. Candidates pointed out that the UK hadn’t really lost any power, but had lost influence due to its attitude. As regards attitude, the behaviour of UKIP in the European Parliament was criticised severely by the candidates. Proceedings in the Parliament were described as generally civilised and polite. However, UKIP’s MEPs were criticised for being rude to their fellow parliamentarians and failing to do any work on the committees on which they are supposed serve.

    The hustings concluded with closing statements from all candidates and a vote of thanks to them from the chair.

    For me it was a baptism of fire, never having chaired a hustings event before. But the candidates were – apart from a minor bit of mudslinging – models of politeness and made my job in the chair a pleasure. There was none of the two speakers talking at once that I witnessed the previous week at Radio 4’s broadcast from Bristol of Any Questions?

    The tenor of the meeting is perhaps summarised by this tweet from local councillor Rob Telford.

    This was echoed by others who said very similar things to me afterwards.

    There are still a few more ORG Digital Rights hustings to come. Details here.

  • FSFE sends open letter to the EU Commission

    FSFE logoThe Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) has written an open letter to the EU Commission today – the international “Day against DRM” – asking the EU to prevent Digital Rights Management (or Digital Restrictions Management as termed by the FSFE. Ed.) technology from being closely integrated into the HTML5 standard.

    The FSFE is concerned about efforts currently in progress at the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), to encourage the integration of DRM technology into web browsers. The W3C oversees many of the key standards on which the World Wide Web is based.

    The full text of the letter is reproduced below.

    To: Commissioner Cecilia Malmstroem (Home Affairs)

    cc: Antonio Tajani (Enterprise)
    Viviane Reding (Justice)
    Joaquin Almunia (Competition)
    Michel Barnier (Internal Market)
    Neelie Kroes (Digital Agenda)

    Dear Commissioner Malmstroem,

    we are writing to you on the occasion of the international Day Against Digital Restrictions Management, which today is being celebrated around the world. We are very concerned about the security of European citizens, and we ask you to take action to protect them.

    The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) is an independent charitable non-profit dedicated to promoting Free Software and freedom in the information society. Today we would like to direct your attention to a very specific threat to the freedom and security of computer users everywhere.

    Both at work and in our personal lives, we conduct a large part of our activity through Web browsers. Ever more of our work and life migrates into the digital domain, and many people use a growing number of web services to work, create, socialise, and express themselves. Businesses and public sector organisations similarly rely on web browsers as crucial tools to perform their everyday tasks.

    Recently, the importance of the Web browser was highlighted when numerous state agencies and IT security companies warned about a long-standing critical security problem in the widely used Microsoft Internet Explorer browser, soon followed by warnings of a vulnerability in the also widely used Adobe Flash Player.

    These incidents were only the most recent ones to highlight the importance of ensuring that such a crucial piece of software as the Web browser is fully under the control of its user. The German Federal Office of Information Security (BSI) issued a list of recommendations for secure Web browsers and their components for use in companies and public bodies on April 14. The BSI notes that due to the way they are used, “Web browsers are exposed to especially high risk from malware”. In the list of recommendations for a secure Web browser, the BSI includes the demand that Web browsers and their components should be completely auditable (Point 1.6).

    Web browsers like Mozilla Firefox or the Chromium browser have succeeded in this regard, providing the public with web browsers that are not only fully auditable, but which can also be freely shared and improved. This is in line with the Open Standards approach which has made it possible for the Internet and the World Wide Web to thrive and grow into its current role as a vital platform for economic activity, social interaction without borders, and unchained creativity.

    The protocols on which the Internet is built, such as the TCP/IP stack and the HTML standard, are fully open and implemented in myriad Free Software products. Free Software powers the vast majority of Web servers, smartphones, embedded devices, and many other applications of technology. The rise of today’s leading Web companies, such as Google, Facebook, and Amazon, would not have been possible without Free Software, and they could not operate without it today. Whatever European companies step up to challenge them are inevitably going to rely on Free Software and Open Standards as well. Free Software and Open Standards are both the foundation of our digital world, and the condicio sine qua non for its future.

    HTML5 is the latest revision of the HTML standard. It is hard to think of a standard that is more crucial for the World Wide Web. HTML5 will deliver a number of important improvements, and is set to be the basis of the World Wide Web for the coming years, and to allow for the kind of rich, responsive interactivity that will allow browsers to replace “apps” as controllers for everything from thermostats to automobiles.

    This is why we are very concerned about efforts currently in progress at the World Wide Web Consortium, which oversees many of the key standards on which the Internet and the World Wide Web are based, to encourage use of the Content Decryption Module (CDM) which cannot be audited. The CDM, though not specified in the HTML5 standard itself, is required by the so-called “Encrypted Media Extension” (EME), developed by a W3C working group. This extension’s primary purpose is to satisfy the desire of a limited number of content providers with traditional business models to generate revenue through restrictive distribution practices. With EME, the W3C would be building a bridge to let content providers take control of users’ computers, letting them impose restrictions far in excess of what consumers’ rights and copyright allow.

    The discussion about EME at W3C is largely driven by a few large US-based companies, and except the BBC takes place without significant European involvement. Given these circumstances, the discussion will likely result in a solution that fails to take the needs of European citizens, businesses and governments fully into account.

    Auditing the Content Decryption Module will be difficult, because the source code of this functionality will be a closely held secret of the company which provides it. Performing such an audit and reporting security flaws would also be illegal in the many countries which have adopted so-called “anti-circumvention” laws. Reporting a security problem in CDM would expose the reporter to the risk of prosecution for making a circumvention device.

    In consequence, individuals, companies and organisations (including the European Commission) would likely end up increasing the amount of software with unknowable security problems which it uses in a high-risk setting.

    Integrating DRM facilities into HTML5 is the antithesis of everything that has made the Internet and the World Wide Web successful. It is directly contrary to the interests of the vast majority of Internet users everywhere, and especially in Europe.

    Recommendations

    The discussions within W3C are now at a crucial juncture in this regard. It is still just about possible to prevent the W3C from making it too easy to effectively require the inclusion of such secret, inauditable software in Web browsers.

    • We urge the Commission to engage with the W3C and ensure that the organisation takes these concerns on board as it decides on the adoption of the Encrypted Media Extension (EME).
    • We further ask the Commission to underline its commitment to the security and freedom of Europe’s citizens by pledging not to make use of the Encrypted Media Extension in its own infrastructure, even if EME would be standardised by W3C.
    • At a minimum, the W3C should require covenants from EME participants through which they promise not to take action against entities who report and demonstrate vulnerabilities in EME and the CDM; and covenants to safeguard entities who reverse-engineer and publish details of EME and CDM implementations for the purpose of interoperability, including interoperability with Free Software.

    At FSFE, we look forward to supporting the Commission in taking the appropriate actions to safeguard the interests of Europe’s citizens and companies, and remain at the Commission’s service.

    Sincerely,
    Karsten Gerloff, President Free Software Foundation Europe

  • Bryan Lunduke says: “Linux sucks”

    I’m indebted to Linux.com for alerting me to the video below.

    Bryan Lunduke is social media marketing manager at SUSE (the first Linux distribution your correspondent used daily. Ed.), as well as a writer and commentator.

    The talk was delivered at LinuxFest Northwest in Bellingham, Washington on Saturday 26th April 2014.

    Lunduke takes a good-humoured critical aim at some of the things that make Linux annoying, the development process which is likened to ‘herding millions of cats’, the large amount of forking that goes on, the age of the X.Org display server and the insistence of some distributions, particularly Fedora and Ubuntu on developing their own alternatives – Wayland and Mir respectively – for what is essentially something old, trusted and reliable, like X.Org.

    Fedora and Ubuntu/Canonical come in for plenty of gentle ribbing from Lunduke.

    About halfway through, Lunduke then turns the criticism completely on its head by stating that all the annoyances are actually what make Linux great and why we users love it. Furthermore, he points out that we can criticise our operating system of choice – and have it criticised – without acrimony; at this point Lunduke mentions something about Mac users… 🙂

    Anyway, the video itself is 45 minutes long, but well worth it. I hope you watch it all the way through and enjoy it (you should do if you you’re more than just content with running Linux as an operating system. Ed.). I certainly did.

Posts navigation