parent
79f44ac0f0
commit
4790775e28
|
@ -1,6 +1,11 @@
|
|||
2004-07-28 Jonathan R. Grant < jg at jguk . org>
|
||||
* projects/ms-vs-eu/fsfe-statement.html: English spelling revisions.
|
||||
Some missing hyphens added.
|
||||
|
||||
* projects/ms-vs-eu/ms-vs-eu.en.xhtml: English spelling revisions.
|
||||
|
||||
2004-07-28 Jonathan R. Grant < jg at jguk . org>
|
||||
* help/web.en.xhtml: add hyphen to co-ordination
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
* documents/whyweexist.en.xhtml: "organizatory" word does not exist
|
||||
From context it I can see it should be "organisational", I have made
|
||||
|
@ -20,7 +25,6 @@
|
|||
is refering to specifically the U.S. DMCA and not both "american"
|
||||
continents.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
* news/article2001-12-17-01.en.xhtml: The term "proprietarizations" is
|
||||
not in my dictionaries, or dictionary.com. It is perhaps an american
|
||||
created word I believe. I revised it from ["value added"
|
||||
|
@ -29,7 +33,6 @@
|
|||
|
||||
I have not revised the PDF's containing the U.S. style spellings.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
* about/members.en.xhtml:
|
||||
* about/legal/template-constitution.en.xhtml:
|
||||
* about/legal/constitution.en.xhtml:
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -103,7 +103,7 @@
|
|||
|
||||
<p>10. One of the main objections of the EU Commission is Microsoft's
|
||||
refusal to disclose information about the network protocols
|
||||
(interfaces) necessary to achieve full interoperability with (a)
|
||||
(interfaces) necessary to achieve full inter-operability with (a)
|
||||
Microsoft's Active Directory Services, (b) Microsoft's version of the
|
||||
Kerberos protocol, (c) Microsoft's Encrypted File System, (d)
|
||||
Microsoft's Group Policies, and (e) Microsoft's Common Internet File
|
||||
|
@ -123,12 +123,12 @@
|
|||
Microsoft's protocols are designed in a highly interdependent way:
|
||||
Each (proprietary) protocol depends on the correct implementation of
|
||||
another (proprietary) protocol to work properly. Full functionality
|
||||
and interoperability can only be achieved when <em>all</em> protocols
|
||||
and inter-operability can only be achieved when <em>all</em> protocols
|
||||
are known..</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>13. There are exceptions where Microsoft did disclose some of its
|
||||
protocols (see <a href="#SambaInterview">Appendix C.3</a>). Some of
|
||||
these cases occured where a lack of interoperability would have
|
||||
these cases occurred where a lack of inter-operability would have
|
||||
resulted in a loss for Microsoft. In some other cases, Microsoft
|
||||
needed third-party help in order to fix a serious security hole in
|
||||
one of its products..</p>
|
||||
|
@ -176,34 +176,34 @@
|
|||
|
||||
<p>20. In ¶¶ 10-18, 39, 51-53, 62-70, and 94-97 of its
|
||||
Response to the Second Statement of Objections, Microsoft states that
|
||||
third-parties did succeed in achieving interoperability with
|
||||
third-parties did succeed in achieving inter-operability with
|
||||
Microsoft's server products, that the work needed to achieve this
|
||||
degree of interoperability was inevitable.</p>
|
||||
degree of inter-operability was inevitable.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>21. As the developers of Samba can confirm (see <a
|
||||
href="#Samba">Appendix Samba</a>), the documentation provided by
|
||||
Microsoft was by no means sufficient to achieve this degree of
|
||||
interoperability. Most of the information was obtained by
|
||||
inter-operability. Most of the information was obtained by
|
||||
reverse-engineering. As a rough estimate, about 100 man-years of work
|
||||
could have been saved if the protocols had been sufficiently
|
||||
documented.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>22. Furthermore, as even Microsoft admits in ¶¶ 10-17 of
|
||||
its Response to the Second Statement of Objections, existing products
|
||||
of competitors (including Samba) do not interoperate seamlessly with
|
||||
of competitors (including Samba) do not inter-operate seamlessly with
|
||||
Microsoft's server products.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>3.4 Degrees of Interoperability</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>23. According to Microsoft, this reduced ("loose")
|
||||
degree of interoperability is inevitable between the products of
|
||||
degree of inter-operability is inevitable between the products of
|
||||
different vendors due to differences in design.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>24. There is a prominent example which demonstrates that full
|
||||
("tight") interoperability is possible even between totally
|
||||
("tight") inter-operability is possible even between totally
|
||||
different systems of independent vendors: the Internet. The existence
|
||||
of the open RfC standards allows, for instance, email clients and
|
||||
servers of different vendors to interoperate seamlessly. The same
|
||||
servers of different vendors to inter-operate seamlessly. The same
|
||||
holds for the World Wide Web and a large variety of IP-based
|
||||
services.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -217,7 +217,7 @@
|
|||
will confirm, Microsoft's software is not particularly technically
|
||||
advanced. Other people can write software that is just as good, and
|
||||
already do. The only benefit the complainants would get from knowing
|
||||
Microsoft's interface specifications is interoperability.</p>
|
||||
Microsoft's interface specifications is inter-operability.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>27. Once in a while, Microsoft innovates. But Microsoft benefits
|
||||
from the innovations of its competitors, including the Free Software
|
||||
|
@ -240,7 +240,7 @@
|
|||
|
||||
<p>29. In ¶¶ 26 and 125-131, Microsoft claims that bundling
|
||||
of the Windows Media Player with the operating system is justified
|
||||
because mulitmedia software is a logical feature of an operating
|
||||
because multimedia software is a logical feature of an operating
|
||||
system.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>30. If this were the case, the software would have appeared as a
|
||||
|
@ -274,7 +274,7 @@
|
|||
require a licensing scheme which is incompatible with that of free
|
||||
software (see <a href="#Settlement">Appendix E</a>). Thus,
|
||||
Microsoft's settlement in the USA still excludes free software from
|
||||
access to the interfaces needed to achieve interoperability.</p>
|
||||
access to the interfaces needed to achieve inter-operability.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>6.2 Interoperability</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -367,7 +367,7 @@
|
|||
software (called "open-source software" or
|
||||
"OSS" by the author) poses a threat to Microsoft. In
|
||||
particular it contains the suggestion to compete with free software
|
||||
by destroying interoperability:</p>
|
||||
by destroying inter-operability:</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<blockquote>
|
||||
"By extending [...] protocols and developing new protocols,
|
||||
|
@ -376,7 +376,7 @@
|
|||
|
||||
<p>One instance of the method suggested here is Microsoft's refusal
|
||||
to disclose the information necessary to achieve client/server and
|
||||
server/server interoperability as described in the Second Statement
|
||||
server/server inter-operability as described in the Second Statement
|
||||
of Objections, ¶¶ 37-61.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p><a href="halloween1.html">Click here for a local copy of the
|
||||
|
@ -454,12 +454,12 @@
|
|||
system based computers over computer networks for nearly ten years
|
||||
now. During this time we have had some interactions with Microsoft
|
||||
management and engineers to attempt to obtain the information we
|
||||
need to successfully create an interoperable product with Microsoft
|
||||
need to successfully create an inter-operable product with Microsoft
|
||||
Windows operating systems.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Interoperating with Windows</h4>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Writing software code to interoperate successfully with Windows
|
||||
<p>Writing software code to inter-operate successfully with Windows
|
||||
computers is a very difficult task. Note this is very different from
|
||||
writing software code that runs on Windows computers. In public
|
||||
relations exercises Microsoft likes to claim that all the API's
|
||||
|
@ -506,7 +506,7 @@
|
|||
monopoly run by the Bell company. Imagine the Bell company had
|
||||
documented the method of sending voice signals over their telephone
|
||||
lines, but not the dialing and switching protocols used to initiate
|
||||
and route telephone calls. Groups attempting to make interoperable
|
||||
and route telephone calls. Groups attempting to make inter-operable
|
||||
telephones would then either be forced to spend significant time and
|
||||
effort reverse engineering these Bell proprietary protocols, or to
|
||||
license them from the Bell company. Like Microsoft, Bell would claim
|
||||
|
@ -523,7 +523,7 @@
|
|||
|
||||
<p>In addition, Microsoft does not stand still in extending and
|
||||
adding to these proprietary protocols in order to make the
|
||||
interoperability task more difficult as time goes on.</p>
|
||||
inter-operability task more difficult as time goes on.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>File and Print services background</h4>
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -563,7 +563,7 @@
|
|||
importantly, they reserve the right to make changes at any time and
|
||||
without notice, as indeed they have done in the past. This makes the
|
||||
CIFS protocol specification very different and far less useful than
|
||||
the protocols standardized by the Internet Engineering Task Force
|
||||
the protocols standardised by the Internet Engineering Task Force
|
||||
(IETF, <a href="http://www.ietf.org">http://www.ietf.org</a> which
|
||||
are true industry collaborations.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -591,7 +591,7 @@
|
|||
already had methods to provide authentication and encryption, based
|
||||
on public standards (the DES encryption algorithm). Microsoft chose
|
||||
to ignore this work and use a proprietary method instead, thus
|
||||
making interoperability much more difficult without large amounts
|
||||
making inter-operability much more difficult without large amounts
|
||||
of protocol examination and on-the-wire determination.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>With the release of Windows NT, the bar was raised to create a
|
||||
|
@ -637,8 +637,8 @@
|
|||
DCE/RPC protocol.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>These IDL descriptions are <em>key</em> for providing
|
||||
interoperability with Microsoft clients. If these IDL descriptions
|
||||
were published, open and equal interoperability with Microsoft
|
||||
inter-operability with Microsoft clients. If these IDL descriptions
|
||||
were published, open and equal inter-operability with Microsoft
|
||||
products would be greatly enhanced (although still not perfect).</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Knowing this, the Samba Team requested these IDL definitions from
|
||||
|
@ -659,7 +659,7 @@
|
|||
the creation of Samba. Contact with Microsoft engineering staff is
|
||||
generally cordial and helpful, although they are not allowed by
|
||||
management to tell us the protocol details we really need to know in
|
||||
order to fully interoperate. The reports we receive from companies
|
||||
order to fully inter-operate. The reports we receive from companies
|
||||
using Samba who are exposed to Microsoft marketing is that of extreme
|
||||
hostility, to the extent of threatening retaliation if use of Samba
|
||||
is discussed publicly in press releases. These reports are similar to
|
||||
|
@ -823,7 +823,7 @@
|
|||
<p>By Dr. Peter Gerwinski, FSF Europe.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>In January 2002, I asked the developers of Samba and Samba-TNG
|
||||
about their cooperation with Microsoft concerning interoperability
|
||||
about their co-operation with Microsoft concerning inter-operability
|
||||
of their respective products. This article is a summary of their
|
||||
answers.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -840,7 +840,7 @@
|
|||
system can add itself to an Active Directory domain.</li>
|
||||
|
||||
<li>The small amount of documentation from Microsoft on the CIFS/SMB
|
||||
protocol is completely inadequate for an interoperable
|
||||
protocol is completely inadequate for an inter-operable
|
||||
implementation. Without this documentation other vendors,
|
||||
including the Samba Team, are forced to spend an enormous amount
|
||||
of time on network reverse-engineering of basic elements of the
|
||||
|
@ -856,12 +856,12 @@
|
|||
what they are referring to is the API documentation, which is
|
||||
almost completely useless for non-Windows implementations.</li>
|
||||
|
||||
<li>Most of the information needed to achieve interoperability was
|
||||
obtained by network reverse-engeneering.</li>
|
||||
<li>Most of the information needed to achieve inter-operability was
|
||||
obtained by network reverse-engineering.</li>
|
||||
|
||||
<li>In many cases, Microsoft creates complex protocols that make
|
||||
network reverse-engeneering difficult. It considers the
|
||||
protocols its own private property and refuses to cooperate with
|
||||
network reverse-engineering difficult. It considers the
|
||||
protocols its own private property and refuses to co-operate with
|
||||
other vendors on standardisation, especially when non-Windows
|
||||
platforms are involved.</li>
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -881,25 +881,25 @@
|
|||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>In July 1997, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton followed the
|
||||
guidelines as outlined in 90/EC/250 "to obtain information by
|
||||
means other than reverse-engeneering". He has been asking
|
||||
means other than reverse-engineering". He has been asking
|
||||
Microsoft for the necessary information to obtain
|
||||
interoperability for two months. He got no reply. </li>
|
||||
inter-operability for two months. He got no reply. </li>
|
||||
|
||||
<li>In early 2000 he asked Microsoft for the information necessary
|
||||
to obtain interoperability with Windows 2000 Domains. The reply
|
||||
to obtain inter-operability with Windows 2000 Domains. The reply
|
||||
was that this information will definitely not be made available.</li>
|
||||
|
||||
<li>Consequently, most of the information published in the book was
|
||||
obtained by network reverse-engeneering.</li>
|
||||
obtained by network reverse-engineering.</li>
|
||||
|
||||
<li>This network reverse-engeneering brought some security holes in
|
||||
<li>This network reverse-engineering brought some security holes in
|
||||
Windows NT to light which were reported to Microsoft. As a
|
||||
result of the security fixes, the information obtained by
|
||||
network reverse-engeneering was no longer true. In order to find
|
||||
out the new specifications needed to gain back interoperability,
|
||||
network reverse-engineering was no longer true. In order to find
|
||||
out the new specifications needed to gain back inter-operability,
|
||||
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton had <em>again</em> to follow the
|
||||
90/EC/250 guidelines, and finally had <em>again</em> to obtain
|
||||
the information by network reverse-engeneering.</li>
|
||||
the information by network reverse-engineering.</li>
|
||||
|
||||
<li>In one exceptional case, Microsoft itself was in need of an
|
||||
upgrade to Samba and gave the developers some information which
|
||||
|
@ -907,9 +907,9 @@
|
|||
|
||||
<li>The protocols designed by Microsoft are highly dependent on each
|
||||
other. They form five levels of - all undocumented - protocols
|
||||
which are <em>all</em> needed to get seamless interoperation. In
|
||||
which are <em>all</em> needed to get seamless inter-operation. In
|
||||
other words: Microsoft's protocols are designed to make
|
||||
interoperation difficult.</li>
|
||||
inter-operation difficult.</li>
|
||||
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -1079,7 +1079,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
lawyers off my back, let's just call it a rumor, and only use it as a
|
||||
basis for discussion. To be perfectly clear, I am not claiming that
|
||||
the following is true - just that I have heard it from more than one
|
||||
source, and think it accurately characterizes some past behaviors of
|
||||
source, and think it accurately characterises some past behaviors of
|
||||
Microsoft. Perhaps by bringing it into the light, we can ensure that
|
||||
Redmond takes a more thoughtful course. I certainly hope it is
|
||||
wrong.</p>
|
||||
|
@ -1128,7 +1128,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
child pornographers. They want all connections, all packets to be
|
||||
traceable. Say goodbye to TCP/IP and to anonymous connections of any
|
||||
kind. Hello to Hailstorm, tracking everything down to the last mile,
|
||||
and a more business-friendly Internet with prioritized
|
||||
and a more business-friendly Internet with prioritised
|
||||
packet-handling. If this seems like too much infrastructure to
|
||||
change, it isn't. Not if the old protocol has been rendered useless
|
||||
and the new one can be implemented by an upgrade to your router.
|
||||
|
@ -1141,11 +1141,11 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
<p>But won't the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) stop it from
|
||||
happening? No. The entire basis for setting standards on the Internet
|
||||
is to first put the new code in service, and then seek
|
||||
standardization. There are no IETF rules that say 100 million plus
|
||||
standardisation. There are no IETF rules that say 100 million plus
|
||||
computers can't run TCP/MS, and there is no deadline for
|
||||
standardization. Once the right 100 million plus computers are
|
||||
standardisation. Once the right 100 million plus computers are
|
||||
running the new protocol, Microsoft won't have any reason to seek
|
||||
standardization. Why not? It is Possible, for awhile, to run more
|
||||
standardisation. Why not? It is Possible, for awhile, to run more
|
||||
than one protocol at a time. Take as examples of the coexistence of
|
||||
IPX and IP in Netware systems, or AppleTalk and IP in MacOS systems.
|
||||
Business will push for the new protocol, and the result will be that
|
||||
|
@ -1156,7 +1156,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
support in the next shipping version of Windows, with the possible
|
||||
bonus of blaming any problems on UNIX code later.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>If business feels a need for the ability to have prioritized
|
||||
<p>If business feels a need for the ability to have prioritised
|
||||
packet Delivery, and government (plus the Recording Industry
|
||||
Association of America) is uncomfortable with the notion of
|
||||
untraceable packets and connections, of course Microsoft is going to
|
||||
|
@ -1197,18 +1197,18 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
Starting at the earlier of the release of Service Pack 1 for Windows
|
||||
XP or 12 months after the submission of this Final Judgment to the
|
||||
Court, Microsoft shall disclose to ISVs, IHVs, IAPs, ICPs, and OEMs,
|
||||
for the sole purpose of interoperating with a Windows Operating
|
||||
for the sole purpose of inter-operating with a Windows Operating
|
||||
System Product, via the Microsoft Developer Network
|
||||
("MSDN") or similar mechanisms, the APIs and related
|
||||
Documentation that are used by Microsoft Middleware to interoperate
|
||||
Documentation that are used by Microsoft Middleware to inter-operate
|
||||
with a Windows Operating System Product.
|
||||
</blockquote>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>The "sole purpose" requirement means that Microsoft does
|
||||
not have to make any such API information available to developers of
|
||||
software like WINE whose purpose it is to make a non-Microsoft OS
|
||||
interoperable with applications written for Windows. This therefore
|
||||
excludes all measures to assist GNU/Linux to interoperate with
|
||||
inter-operable with applications written for Windows. This therefore
|
||||
excludes all measures to assist GNU/Linux to inter-operate with
|
||||
applications written for Windows, which would provide maximum
|
||||
competition in the OS market, which should be the objective of a
|
||||
competition-law remedy.</p>
|
||||
|
@ -1218,12 +1218,12 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
<blockquote>
|
||||
Starting nine months after the submission of this proposed Final
|
||||
Judgment to the Court, Microsoft shall make available for use by
|
||||
third parties, for the sole purpose of interoperating with a Windows
|
||||
third parties, for the sole purpose of inter-operating with a Windows
|
||||
Operating System Product, on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms
|
||||
(consistent with Section III.I), any Communications Protocol that
|
||||
is, on or after the date this Final Judgment is submitted to the
|
||||
Court, (i) implemented in a Windows Operating System Product
|
||||
installed on a client computer, and (ii) used to interoperate
|
||||
installed on a client computer, and (ii) used to inter-operate
|
||||
natively (i.e., without the addition of software code to the client
|
||||
or server operating system products) with Windows 2000 Server or
|
||||
products marketed as its successors installed on a server computer.
|
||||
|
@ -1261,7 +1261,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
that Non-Microsoft Middleware Product);</p>
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
3. an ISV's, IHV's, IAP's, ICP's, or OEM's rights may be
|
||||
conditioned on its not assigning, transferring or sublicensing its
|
||||
conditioned on its not assigning, transferring or sub-licensing its
|
||||
rights under any license granted under this provision;</p>
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
4. the terms of any license granted under this section are in all
|
||||
|
@ -1287,7 +1287,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
"reasonable and nondiscriminatory" licensing, means only
|
||||
certain wealthy developers would be entitled to Microsoft API
|
||||
information. Sub (2) repeats that no license will be given to any
|
||||
information for purposes except interoperability with Microsoft
|
||||
information for purposes except inter-operability with Microsoft
|
||||
OSs. Sub (3) means that Microsoft can use licenses which prohibit
|
||||
implementing any of their APIs in GPL'd software, because they can
|
||||
refuse to permit any relicensing to downstream users, which GPL
|
||||
|
@ -1307,7 +1307,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
layers of Communications Protocols the disclosure of which would
|
||||
compromise the security of anti-piracy, anti-virus, software
|
||||
licensing, digital rights management, encryption or authentication
|
||||
systems, including without limitation, keys, authorization tokens
|
||||
systems, including without limitation, keys, authorisation tokens
|
||||
or enforcement criteria; or (b) any API, interface or other
|
||||
information related to any Microsoft product if lawfully directed
|
||||
not to do so by a governmental agency of competent
|
||||
|
@ -1316,7 +1316,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
2. Prevent Microsoft from conditioning any license of any API,
|
||||
Documentation or Communications Protocol related to anti-piracy
|
||||
systems, anti-virus technologies, license enforcement mechanisms,
|
||||
authentication/authorization security, or third party intellectual
|
||||
authentication/authorisation security, or third party intellectual
|
||||
property protection mechanisms of any Microsoft product to any
|
||||
person or entity on the requirement that the licensee: (a) has no
|
||||
history of software counterfeiting or piracy or willful violation
|
||||
|
@ -1333,7 +1333,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
of the systems and mechanisms identified in this paragraph.</p>
|
||||
</blockquote>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Because the phrase "authentication/authorization
|
||||
<p>Because the phrase "authentication/authorisation
|
||||
security" is so broad, Microsoft can refuse to give any
|
||||
developer of "Middleware" meant to secure inter-operation
|
||||
of free software with .NET any information whatever, or condition
|
||||
|
@ -1361,7 +1361,7 @@ Why the Age of Internet Innocence is Over</a></h2>
|
|||
<timestamp>
|
||||
Last update:
|
||||
<!-- timestamp start -->
|
||||
$Date: 2004-07-23 09:02:47 $ $Author: smaffulli $
|
||||
$Date: 2004-07-29 08:20:40 $ $Author: now3d $
|
||||
<!-- timestamp end -->
|
||||
</timestamp>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ field. Also Free Software, and in particular the GNU/Linux operating
|
|||
system, was cited by Microsoft as its principal competitor, therefore
|
||||
FSF Europe had a direct interest in defending it. In a <a
|
||||
href="application-1.0.pdf">letter</a> to the DG Competition dated 16
|
||||
November 2001, FSFE asked to be heared.</p>
|
||||
November 2001, FSFE asked to be heard.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>The request was accepted and therefore the team members and legals
|
||||
of FSF Europe had access to the confidential information and had the
|
||||
|
@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ the Commission is asking Microsoft to give up copyright on parts of
|
|||
their source code or license to everybody its patents on the protocols
|
||||
and interfaces they have developed or even give up some valuable
|
||||
"trade secrets". An even bigger problem with the
|
||||
Decision is that it allows Microsoft to use socalled "RAND"
|
||||
Decision is that it allows Microsoft to use so-called "RAND"
|
||||
(Reasonable And Not Discriminatory) licenses. As repeated often, the
|
||||
RAND clauses for using patented interfaces or protocols actually
|
||||
discriminate Free Software implementations since, however cheap those
|
||||
|
@ -68,15 +68,15 @@ licenses can be, they add a limit to the free distribution of software
|
|||
(making it non-free).</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>In the end, FSF Europe believes that Microsoft should reveal all
|
||||
information necessary to achieve complete interoperation with its
|
||||
information necessary to achieve complete inter-operation with its
|
||||
systems, be it the Media Player or the Directory Service. To achieve
|
||||
this it is not necessary to disclose source code developed by
|
||||
Microsoft, it is not necessary to reveal "trade secrets" as protocols
|
||||
and interfaces are already 'public' (since they can be reverse
|
||||
engineered) but it is unconvenient to use them. It is extremely
|
||||
engineered) but it is inconvenient to use them. It is extremely
|
||||
important that the DG Competition guards the market and also avoids
|
||||
that software patents are legalised in Europe, so that Free Software
|
||||
implementations of those interfaces will always be possible.</p>
|
||||
implementations of those interfaces will always be possible.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- End page content -->
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue