Source files of fsfe.org, pdfreaders.org, freeyourandroid.org, ilovefs.org, drm.info, and test.fsfe.org. Contribute: https://fsfe.org/contribute/web/ https://fsfe.org
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

news-20160624-01.en.xhtml 3.1KB

12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061
  1. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
  2. <html newsdate="2016-06-24">
  3. <head>
  4. <title>FSFE's answers to the European Commission's Public Consultation:
  5. Revision of the European Interoperability Framework</title>
  6. </head>
  7. <body>
  8. <h1>FSFE's answers to the European Commission's Public Consultation:
  9. Revision of the European Interoperability Framework</h1>
  10. <p newsteaser="yes">The European Commission is
  11. <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/isa/consultations/impact-assessment-for-the-revision-of-the-eis-eifl_en.htm">asking
  12. for public input with regard to its plans to renew the European
  13. Interoperability Framework</a> (EIF). The EIF aims to promote enhanced
  14. interoperability in the EU public sector. The document, originally intended
  15. as a set of non-binding guidelines for the EU public administration, is
  16. going through its third revision since its initial adoption in 2004. The
  17. FSFE has prepared its <a href="https://fsfe.org/activities/os/eif-v3.en.html">comments
  18. for the draft of the revised guidelines</a>.</p>
  19. <p>The FSFE sees some improvement compared to
  20. <a href="https://fsfe.org/news/2010/news-20101216-01.en.html">the previous
  21. revision</a>, in particular concerning the preferred use of Open Standards (called
  22. "open specifications" in the draft revision) in European public services.</p>
  23. <p>However, we need to address several shortcomings. The statement that
  24. FRAND (allegedly "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory") licensing terms
  25. for standards "will foster competition" (according to the Commission) is
  26. just plain wrong. FRAND licenses are highly anti-competitive in nature
  27. and it is a well-established fact that
  28. <a href="https://fsfe.org/activities/os/why-frand-is-bad-for-free-software.en.html">they
  29. make it impossible for a standard to be implemented in Free Software</a>.</p>
  30. <p>The draft also ignores the proven relationship between interoperability
  31. and Free Software. Most, if not all, national interoperability frameworks
  32. across Europe have based their success on substantial adoptions of Free
  33. Software and Open Standards in public services. So much so it is to all
  34. effects impossible to implement an interoperability framework without Free
  35. Software. For more information, please see
  36. <strong><a href="https://fsfe.org/activities/os/eif-v3.en.html">our full comments on the revision of the EIF</a></strong>.</p>
  37. <p>The FSFE encourages you to <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/isa/consultations/impact-assessment-for-the-revision-of-the-eis-eifl_en.htm">provide
  38. your own input to the ongoing consultation</a>. Replies can be submitted
  39. by individuals, companies, academic institutions, and public administrations
  40. before <strong>29 June</strong>. Feel free to reuse the arguments laid out
  41. above for your own submission and tell the Commission how Free Software
  42. and Open Standards are quintessential for interoperability.</p>
  43. </body>
  44. <tags>
  45. <tag>front-page</tag>
  46. <tag>EIF</tag>
  47. <tag content="Open Standards">OpenStandards</tag>
  48. <tag content="Policy">Policy</tag>
  49. <tag content="European Commission">EuropeanCommission</tag>
  50. <tag content="Digital Single Market">Digital Single Market</tag>
  51. </tags>
  52. </html>