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.
117 lines
6.3 KiB
117 lines
6.3 KiB
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
|
|
<html newsdate="2018-02-15"> |
|
<version>1</version> |
|
|
|
|
|
<head> |
|
<title>European Free Software Policy Meeting 2018: more joint activities important for Free Software in Europe</title> |
|
</head> |
|
<body> |
|
|
|
<h1>European Free Software Policy Meeting 2018: more joint activities important for Free Software in Europe</h1> |
|
|
|
<p> |
|
Following the <a href="/news/2017/news-20170214-02.html">well-established tradition</a> |
|
of gathering active Free Software groups before FOSDEM kicks off, the |
|
FSFE once again partnered up with <a href="http://www.openforumeurope.org/">OpenForum Europe</a> |
|
for the third edition of European Free Software Policy Meeting in Brussels, |
|
the heart of European decision-making.</p> |
|
|
|
<div class="captioned" style="width:80%; margin: 1.5em auto;"> |
|
<img src="graphics/pmpc-eu-foss.jpg" /> |
|
</div> |
|
|
|
<p>This time the purpose of the meeting was to shed light on topics important |
|
for Free Software in public policy all over Europe, not only within the |
|
European Union; and to exchange experience for any policy action within |
|
different regions in case similar concerns for Free Software pop up. Practice |
|
shows that they often do, and this is why it is important to be informed |
|
about similar actions in other parts of Europe, in order to be able to |
|
address corresponding concerns in a timely and effective manner.</p> |
|
|
|
<p>17 different groups were represented at the European Free Software Policy |
|
Meeting 2018: from national Free Software groups to public sector representatives, |
|
and international organisations. Our participants deemed to be a diverse |
|
group, yet similar in the challenges we face on both national and European |
|
level.</p> |
|
|
|
<h2>Common challenges for Free Software in Europe and beyond</h2> |
|
|
|
|
|
<p><strong>EU Copyright reform</strong>: Article 13 of the current copyright |
|
directive proposal <a href="https://savecodeshare.eu/">can seriously hamper</a> |
|
collaborative software development, and especially Free Software, imposing |
|
the use of mandatory upload filters, and illegal monitoring of their users. |
|
As a result of this proposal code repositories can be arbitrarily removed online. |
|
The directive proposal is currently being discussed by co-legislators in |
|
the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, which both |
|
are struggling to reach an agreement on <a href="/news/2017/news-20171130-01.html">controversial</a> |
|
Article 13. Action within the Member States to "#savecodeshare" is needed |
|
more than ever, in order to make sure that decision-makers understand the |
|
repercussions of Article 13 for Free Software.</p> |
|
|
|
<p><strong>Software patents</strong>: while the EU legislation to |
|
impose patents on software was rejected back in 2005, patentability of |
|
software insinuates itself into policy discussions through other means. |
|
In particular, the Unitary Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) may in practice |
|
impose the patentability of software in the EU. By now 15 Member States |
|
have ratified the UPCA, without such Member States as post-Brexit UK and |
|
Germany whose support is necessary in order for the Unitary Patent Court |
|
system to start to function. A <a href="http://www.nounitarysoftwarepatents.uk/">petition</a> |
|
against UPCA ratification was run in the UK, however, there is a need for |
|
remaining Member States to be aware of the practical ramifications of UPCA |
|
for innovation and especially software business in Europe.</p> |
|
|
|
<p><strong>Open Standards</strong>: standardisation policies are still |
|
being infiltrated by closed standards <a href="/activities/msooxml/msooxml.html">disguised as "open"</a>, |
|
and tricky patent licensing practices that are only called "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" |
|
(<a href="/freesoftware/standards/why-frand-is-bad-for-free-software.html">FRAND</a>) |
|
in the name of greater innovation. In fact, these practices only dilute |
|
the discourse. It is time the term <a href="/freesoftware/standards/standards.html>">"open standards"</a> |
|
is used in accordance with the Free Software definition defined through |
|
<a href="/freesoftware/freesoftware.html">4 freedoms</a>, |
|
and appropriate Free Software licences as approved by |
|
<a href="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html">Free Software Foundation</a> |
|
and <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical">Open Source Initiative</a>. |
|
Otherwise, we will continue facing misconceptions about (un)equal treatment |
|
of Free Software in public procurement, where Free Software can be de facto |
|
excluded as a result of policies prescribing business models.</p> |
|
|
|
<p><strong>Public Money, Public Code</strong>: "All publicly funded |
|
newly-established software should be made publicly available under Free |
|
Software licence". This is the <a href="https://publiccode.eu/">demand</a> |
|
that the FSFE together with ca 116 other organisations and Free Software |
|
projects, as well as more than 16 000 individuals are asking from politicians. |
|
The campaign is aimed at gathering evidence about public expenditure on |
|
software and other IT services in public sector, to provide information that is |
|
easily understandable for decision-makers, and to equip Free Software activists |
|
all over the world with tools to <a href="/activities/elections/index.html">ask their politicians</a> |
|
during national elections to make sure that software paid with taxpayers money |
|
is made freely available to the public.</p> |
|
|
|
|
|
<h2>Ways to move forward</h2> |
|
|
|
<p>The meeting once again proved that there is a need to continuously |
|
exchange ideas, update each other on concerns and victories for Free Software, |
|
and experience we gather while pursuing our mutual goals to maintain the |
|
ecosystem for Free Software to flourish. More collaboration and staying |
|
informed is necessary in order to establish the "smart network" of Free |
|
Software activists all over Europe and beyond, where more joint activities |
|
can take place. We will continue to build on that resource to share information, |
|
and update each other on activities crucial for Free Software, and to |
|
establish meaningful collaborations to address common challenges for Free |
|
Software.</p> |
|
|
|
|
|
</body> |
|
<tags> |
|
<tag key="policy">Policy</tag> |
|
<tag key="pmpc">Public Code</tag> |
|
<tag key="openstandards">Open Standards</tag> |
|
<tag key="public-administration">Public Administration</tag> |
|
<tag key="front-page"/> |
|
</tags> |
|
<author id="malaja" /> |
|
</html>
|
|
|