blog/tags/standard/index.html

   1 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
   2           "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
   3 <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" dir="ltr">
   4   <head>
   5     <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
   6     <title>Petter Reinholdtsen: Entries Tagged standard</title>
   7     <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/style.css" />
   8     <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/vim.css" />
   9     <link rel="alternate" title="RSS Feed" href="standard.rss" type="application/rss+xml" />
  10   </head>
  11   <body>
  12     <div class="title">
  13  <h1>
  14      <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/">Petter Reinholdtsen</a>
  15
  16  </h1>
  17
  18 </div>
  19
  20
  21     <h3>Entries tagged "standard".</h3>
  22
  23     <div class="entry">
  24       <div class="title">
  25         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/NUUGs_h_ringsuttalelse_til_DIFIs_forslag_om___kaste_ut_ODF_fra_statens_standardkatalog.html">NUUGs høringsuttalelse til DIFIs forslag om å kaste ut ODF fra statens standardkatalog</a>
  26       </div>
  27       <div class="date">
  28          1st October 2012
  29       </div>
  30       <div class="body">
  31         <p>Som jeg
  32 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/DIFI_foresl_r___kaste_ut_ODF_og_ta_inn_OOXML_fra_statens_standardkatalog.html">skrev
  33 i juni</a> har DIFI foreslått å fjerne krav om å bruke ODF til
  34 utveksling av redigerbare dokumenter med det offentlige, og
  35 derigjennom tvinge innbyggerne til å forholde seg til formatene til MS
  36 Office når en kommuniserer med det offentlige.</p>
  37
  38 <p>I går kveld fikk vi i <a href="http://www.nuug.no/">NUUG</a>
  39 fullført vår høringsuttalelse og sendt den inn til DIFI.  Du finner
  40 <a href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/201209-forskrift-standardkatalog">uttalelsen
  41 på wikien</a>.  Ta en titt.  Fristen for å sende inn uttalelse var i
  42 går søndag, men en får kanskje sitt innspill med hvis en sender i
  43 dag.</p>
  44
  45       </div>
  46       <div class="tags">
  47
  48
  49         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
  50
  51
  52       </div>
  53     </div>
  54     <div class="padding"></div>
  55
  56     <div class="entry">
  57       <div class="title">
  58         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Free_software_forced_Microsoft_to_open_Office__and_don_t_forget_Officeshots_.html">Free software forced Microsoft to open Office (and don't forget Officeshots)</a>
  59       </div>
  60       <div class="date">
  61         23rd August 2012
  62       </div>
  63       <div class="body">
  64         <p>I came across a great comment from Simon Phipps today, about how
  65 <a href="http://www.infoworld.com/d/open-source-software/how-microsoft-was-forced-open-office-200233">Microsoft
  66 have been forced to open Office</a>, and it made me remember and
  67 revisit the great site
  68 <a href="http://www.officeshots.org/">officeshots</a> which allow you
  69 to check out how different programs present the ODF file format.  I
  70 recommend both to those of my readers interested in ODF. :)</p>
  71
  72       </div>
  73       <div class="tags">
  74
  75
  76         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
  77
  78
  79       </div>
  80     </div>
  81     <div class="padding"></div>
  82
  83     <div class="entry">
  84       <div class="title">
  85         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/OOXML_og_standardisering.html">OOXML og standardisering</a>
  86       </div>
  87       <div class="date">
  88         25th July 2012
  89       </div>
  90       <div class="body">
  91         <p>DIFI har
  92 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/DIFI_foresl_r___kaste_ut_ODF_og_ta_inn_OOXML_fra_statens_standardkatalog.html">en
  93 høring gående</a> om ny versjon av statens standardkatalog, med frist
  94 2012-09-30, der det foreslås å fjerne ODF fra katalogen og ta inn ISO
  95 OOXML.  I den anledning minnes jeg
  96 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/IKT-politikk/Refkat_v2.pdf">notatet
  97 FAD skrev</a> da versjon 2 av standardkatalogen var under
  98 utarbeidelse, da FAD og DIFI fortsatt forsto poenget med og verdien av
  99 frie og åpne standarder.</p>
 100
 101 <p>Det er mange som tror at OOXML er ett spesifikt format, men det
 102 brukes ofte som fellesbetegnelse for både formatet spesifisert av
 103 ECMA, ISO, og formatet produsert av Microsoft Office (aka docx), som
 104 dessverre ikke er det samme formatet.  Fra en av de som implementerte
 105 støtte for docx-formatet i KDE fikk jeg høre at ISO-spesifikasjonen
 106 var en nyttig referanse, men at det var mange avvik som gjorde at en
 107 ikke kunne gå ut ifra at Microsoft Office produserte dokumenter i
 108 henhold til ISO-spesifikasjonen.</p>
 109
 110 <p>ISOs OOXML-spesifikasjon har (eller hadde, usikker på om
 111 kommentaren er oppdatert) i følge
 112 <a href="http://surguy.net/articles/ooxml-validation-and-technical-review.xml">Inigo
 113 Surguy</a> feil i mer enn 10% av eksemplene, noe som i tillegg gjør
 114 det vanskelig å bruke spesifikasjonen til å implementere støtte for
 115 ISO OOXML.  Jeg har ingen erfaring med å validere OOXML-dokumenter
 116 selv, men ser at
 117 <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=5124">Microsoft
 118 har laget en validator</a> som jeg ikke kan teste da den kun er
 119 tilgjengelig på MS Windows.  Finner også en annen kalt
 120 <a href="http://code.google.com/p/officeotron/">Office-O-Tron</A> som
 121 er oppdatert i fjor.  Lurer på om de validerer at dokumenter er i
 122 formatet til Microsoft office, eller om de validerer at de er i
 123 henhold til formatene spesifisert av ECMA og ISO. Det hadde også vært
 124 interessant å se om docx-dokumentene publisert av det offentlige er
 125 gyldige ISO OOXML-dokumenter.</p>
 126
 127       </div>
 128       <div class="tags">
 129
 130
 131         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 132
 133
 134       </div>
 135     </div>
 136     <div class="padding"></div>
 137
 138     <div class="entry">
 139       <div class="title">
 140         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Mer_oppf_lging_fra_MPEG_LA_om_avtale_med_dem_for___kringkaste_og_publisere_H_264_video.html">Mer oppfølging fra MPEG-LA om avtale med dem for å kringkaste og publisere H.264-video</a>
 141       </div>
 142       <div class="date">
 143          5th July 2012
 144       </div>
 145       <div class="body">
 146         <p>I føljetongen om H.264
 147 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/MPEG_LA_mener_NRK_m__ha_avtale_med_dem_for___kringkaste_og_publisere_H_264_video.html">forlot
 148 jeg leserne i undring</a> om hvor pakken fra MPEG-LA tok veien, og om
 149 hvilke selskaper i Norge som har avtale med MPEG-LA.  Da Ryan hos
 150 MPEG-LA dro på ferie sendte jeg min melding videre til hans kollega,
 151 og dagen etter fikk jeg følgende svar derfra:</p>
 152
 153 <p><blockquote>
 154 <p>Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 18:32:34 +0000
 155 <br>From: Sidney Wolf &lt;SWolf (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 156 <br>To: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;pere (at) hungry.com&gt;
 157 <br>Cc: Ryan Rodriguez &lt;RRodriguez (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 158 <br>Subject: RE: Do NRK have a license agreement with MPEG-LA?</p>
 159
 160 <p>Dear Mr. Reinholdtsen,</p>
 161
 162 <p>Thank you for your message. As you know, Ryan is currently our of the
 163 office, so it will be my pleasure to assist you.</p>
 164
 165 <p>Per your request, attached please find an electronic copy of the
 166 AVC Patent Portfolio License. Please note that the electronic copy of
 167 the License is provided as a convenience and for informational
 168 purposes only. When concluding the Licenses, only the hard copies
 169 provided by MPEG LA may be used.</p>
 170
 171 <p>To your question, MPEG LA lists our Licensees on our website
 172 according to each program.  The lists are in alphabetical order, so it
 173 is very easy to search.</p>
 174
 175 <p>I hope that this was helpful. If we can be of additional
 176 assistance, please let me know.</p>
 177
 178 <p>Kind regards,</p>
 179
 180 <p>Sidney A. Wolf
 181 <br>Manager, Global Licensing
 182 <br>MPEG LA</p>
 183 </blockquote></p>
 184
 185 <p>Selv om et epostvedlegg er nyttig for mottakeren, så håpet jeg å få
 186 et dokument jeg kunne dele med alle leserne av bloggen min, og ikke et
 187 som må deles på individuell basis.  Opphavsretten krever godkjenning
 188 fra rettighetsinnehaver før en kan gjøre slikt, så dermed fulgte jeg
 189 opp med et spørsmål om dette var greit.</p>
 190
 191 <p><blockquote>
 192 <p>Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 20:25:06 +0200
 193 <br>From: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;pere (at) hungry.com&gt;
 194 <br>To: Sidney Wolf &lt;SWolf (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 195 <br>Cc: Ryan Rodriguez &lt;RRodriguez (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 196 <br>Subject: Re: Do NRK have a license agreement with MPEG-LA?</p>
 197
 198 <p>Thank you for your reply.</p>
 199
 200 <p>[Sidney Wolf]
 201 <br>&gt; Per your request, attached please find an electronic copy of the AVC
 202 <br>&gt; Patent Portfolio License. Please note that the electronic copy of
 203 <br>&gt; the License is provided as a convenience and for informational
 204 <br>&gt; purposes only. When concluding the Licenses, only the hard copies
 205 <br>&gt; provided by MPEG LA may be used.</p>
 206
 207 <p>This is useful for me to learn, but the reason I asked for the
 208 Internet address of the licensing document was to ensure I could
 209 publish a link to it when I discuss the topic of H.264 licensing here
 210 in Norway, and allow others to verify my observations.  I can not do
 211 the same with an email attachment.  Thus I would like to ask you if it
 212 is OK with MPEG LA that I publish this document on the Internet for
 213 others to read?</p>
 214
 215 <p>&gt; To your question, MPEG LA lists our Licensees on our website
 216 <br>&gt; according to each program. The lists are in alphabetical order, so
 217 <br>&gt; it is very easy to search.</p>
 218
 219 <p>I am afraid this do not help me locate Norwegian companies in the
 220 list of Licensees.  I do not know the name of all companies and
 221 organisations in Norway, and thus do not know how to locate the
 222 Norwegian ones on that list.</p>
 223
 224 <p>&gt; I hope that this was helpful. If we can be of additional assistance,
 225 <br>&gt; please let me know.</p>
 226
 227 <p>Absoutely helpful to learn more about how MPEG LA handle licensing.</p>
 228
 229 <p>--
 230 <br>Happy hacking
 231 <br>Petter Reinholdtsen</p>
 232 </blockquote></p>
 233
 234 <p>Jeg håpet også at det skulle være mulig å få vite hvilke av de
 235 mange hundre som har avtale med MPEG-LA om bruk av H.264 som holdt til
 236 i Norge.  Begge mine håp falt i grus med svaret fra MPEG-LA.
 237
 238 <p><blockquote>
 239 <p>Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 17:42:39 +0000
 240 <br>From: Sidney Wolf &lt;SWolf (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 241 <br>To: 'Petter Reinholdtsen' &lt;pere (at) hungry.com&gt;
 242 <br>Cc: Ryan Rodriguez &lt;RRodriguez (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 243 <br>Subject: RE: Do NRK have a license agreement with MPEG-LA?</p>
 244
 245 <p>Dear Mr. Reinholdtsen,</p>
 246
 247 <p>Thank you for your reply.</p>
 248
 249 <p>We appreciate the additional explanation you have provided and for
 250 asking our permission to publish the electronic copy of the License in
 251 advance of doing so.  Typically, MPEG LA prefers to distribute the
 252 electronic copies of our Licenses to interested parties. Therefore,
 253 please feel free to send interested parties to the AVC portion of our
 254 website, http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Intro.aspx for
 255 their further reference.</p>
 256
 257 <p>As previously mentioned, MPEG LA maintains a list of Licensees in good
 258 standing on our website according to each program. Due to the large
 259 volume of Licensees, it would be administratively impractical to
 260 provide this level of detail to interested parties.  Therefore, I am
 261 afraid we are not in a position to assist you with your request.</p>
 262
 263 <p>Kind regards,</p>
 264
 265 <p>Sidney A. Wolf
 266 <br>Manager, Global Licensing
 267 <br>MPEG LA</p>
 268 </blockquote></p>
 269
 270 <p>Men takket være epostvedlegget kunne jeg søke på Google etter
 271 setningen "WHEREAS, a video standard commonly referred to as AVC has
 272 been defined and is referred to in this Agreement as the “AVC
 273 Standard” (as more fully defined herein below)" som finnes i avtalen,
 274 og lokalisere en kopi fra 2007 av
 275 <a href="http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1342960/000119312509050004/dex1024.htm">lisensavtalen
 276 mellom MPEG-LA og DivX, Inc.</a>, slik at mine lesere kan se hvordan
 277 avtalen så ut da.  Jeg har ikke sammenlignet tekstene for å se om noe
 278 har endret seg siden den tid, men satser på at teksten er representativ.</p>
 279
 280 <p>Jeg aner fortsatt ikke hvor FedEx tok veien med pakken fra
 281 MPEG-LA.</p>
 282
 283 <p>Update 2012-07-06: Jeg er visst ikke den første som forsøker å få
 284 klarhet i problemstillinger rundt H.264, og kom nettopp over en veldig
 285 interessant bloggpost fra 2010 hos LibreVideo med tittelen
 286 "<a href="http://www.librevideo.org/blog/2010/06/14/mpeg-la-answers-some-questions-about-avch-264-licensing/">MPEG-LA
 287 answers some questions about AVC/H.264 licensing</a>.  Anbefales!</p>
 288
 289       </div>
 290       <div class="tags">
 291
 292
 293         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 294
 295
 296       </div>
 297     </div>
 298     <div class="padding"></div>
 299
 300     <div class="entry">
 301       <div class="title">
 302         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/DIFI_foresl_r___kaste_ut_ODF_og_ta_inn_OOXML_fra_statens_standardkatalog.html">DIFI foreslår å kaste ut ODF og ta inn OOXML fra statens standardkatalog</a>
 303       </div>
 304       <div class="date">
 305         29th June 2012
 306       </div>
 307       <div class="body">
 308         <p>DIFI har nettopp annonsert høring om revisjon av
 309 <a href="http://www.standard.difi.no/forvaltningsstandarder">standardkatalogen</a>,
 310 og endelig har Microsoft fått viljen sin.  Se
 311 <a href="http://www.standard.difi.no/hoyring/forslag-om-endring-av-forskrift-om-it-standarder-i-offentlig-forvaltning">høringssiden</a>
 312 for hele teksten.</p>
 313
 314 <p>Her er forslaget i sin helhet:</p>
 315
 316 <p><blockquote>
 317 <p>3.2 Revisjon av krav til redigerbare dokumenter</p>
 318
 319 <p>I første versjon av referansekatalogen i 2007 ble det satt krav om
 320 Open Document Format (ODF), versjon 1.1 (OASIS, 1.2.2007) for
 321 redigerbare dokumenter. Kravet var obligatorisk for stat og sterkt
 322 anbefalt for kommunal sektor. I 2009 ble kravet gjort obligatorisk for
 323 hele offentlig sektor i
 324 <a href="http://www.lovdata.no/for/sf/fa/xa-20090925-1222.html">forskrift
 325 om IT-standarder i forvaltningen</a>. Anvendelsesområdet for kravet
 326 har vært begrenset til publisering av dokumenter som skal bearbeides
 327 videre (§ 4 nr. 1 andre ledd). I 2011 ble anvendelsesområdet utvidet
 328 til å omfatte utveksling av dokumenter beregnet for redigering som
 329 vedlegg til e-post (§4 nr.  2).</p>
 330
 331 <p>Office Open XML ISO/IEC 29500:2011 (OOXML) er et dokumentformat
 332 opprinnelig utviklet av Microsoft med tilsvarende anvendelsesområde
 333 som ODF. Formatet er blant annet tatt i bruk i nyere versjoner av
 334 kontorstøtteprogamvaren MS Office.  Difi har foretatt en
 335 <a href="http://www.standard.difi.no/filearchive/revisjonsvurdering-standarder-for-redigerbare-dokumenter-v1-0.pdf">revisjonsvurdering</a>
 336 av krav som stilles til redigerbare dokumenter i Forskrift om
 337 IT-standarder i forvaltningen, og anbefaler at kravet til ODF
 338 fjernes. Dette innebærer at det ikke stilles krav til dokumentformater
 339 for redigerbare dokumenter ved publisering på offentlige virksomheters
 340 nettsider og for redigerbare vedlegg til e-post som sendes fra
 341 offentlige virksomheter til innbyggere og næringsliv. Offentlige
 342 virksomheter vil dermed stå fritt til å publisere eller sende
 343 redigerbare dokumenter i det format som ivaretar brukernes behov
 344 best.</p>
 345
 346 <p>Forslaget innebærer at krav til ODF utgår § 4 nr. 1 tredje ledd og
 347 § 4 nr. 2 første ledd</p>
 348
 349 <P>Imidlertid bør det stilles strengere krav til hvilke formater
 350 offentlige virksomheter plikter å motta redigerbare dokumenter. Vi
 351 mener at det ikke bør skilles mellom mottak av redigerbare dokumenter
 352 som sendes i ODF eller OOXML3, som begge er åpne standarder. Dette
 353 medfører at innbyggere og næringsliv skal kunne basere sitt valg av
 354 programvare på egne behov og ikke på de valg offentlige virksomheter
 355 tar. Kravet vil omfatte hele offentlig sektor, herunder
 356 utdanningssektoren, hvor det kanskje er størst bruk av ODF. Kravet er
 357 foreslått som ny § 4 nr.2 andre ledd</p>
 358 </blockquote></p>
 359
 360 <P>De satser vel på at det hele blir glemt over sommeren, og at de
 361 fleste har glemt Standard Norge og ISOs fallitt fra da OOXML ble
 362 jukset igjennom som ISO-standard.  Jeg håper mine lesere sender inn
 363 høringsuttalelser til høringen.</p>
 364
 365 <p>Anbefaler alle å friske opp sine argumenter ved å lese
 366 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/The_reply_from_Edgar_Villanueva_to_Microsoft_in_Peru.html">svaret
 367 fra senator Edgar Villanueva til Microsoft i Peru</a>.  Det er en
 368 klassisk tekst som er like gyldig i dag som da det ble skrevet.</p>
 369
 370
 371       </div>
 372       <div class="tags">
 373
 374
 375         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 376
 377
 378       </div>
 379     </div>
 380     <div class="padding"></div>
 381
 382     <div class="entry">
 383       <div class="title">
 384         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Departementenes_servicesenter_har_ingen_avtale_om_bruk_av_H_264_med_MPEG_LA.html">Departementenes servicesenter har ingen avtale om bruk av H.264 med MPEG-LA</a>
 385       </div>
 386       <div class="date">
 387         29th June 2012
 388       </div>
 389       <div class="body">
 390         <p>Da fikk jeg nettopp svar fra
 391 <a href="http://www.dss.dep.no/">Departementenes servicesenter</a>
 392 (DSS) på
 393 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Trenger_en_avtale_med_MPEG_LA_for___publisere_og_kringkaste_H_264_video_.html">mitt
 394 spørsmål om avtale rundt bruk av H.264</a>.  De har ingen avtale med
 395 MPEG LA eller dets representanter.  Her er svaret.
 396
 397 <p><blockquote>
 398
 399 <p>Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 07:04:42 +0000
 400 <br>From: Nielsen Mette Haga &lt;Mette-Haga.Nielsen (at) dss.dep.no&gt;
 401 <br>To: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;petter.reinholdtsen (at) ...&gt;
 402 <br>CC: Postmottak &lt;Postmottak (at) dss.dep.no&gt;
 403 <br>Subject: SV: Innsynsbegjæring om MPEG/H.264-relaterte avtaler</p>
 404
 405 <p>DSS har ikke inngått noen egen lisensavtale med MPEG-LA eller noen som
 406 representerer MPEG-LA i Norge. Videoløsningen på regjeringen.no er
 407 levert av Smartcom:tv. Lisensforholdet rundt H.264 er ikke omtalt i
 408 vår avtale med Smartcom.</p>
 409
 410 <p>Vennlig hilsen</p>
 411
 412 <p>Mette Haga Nielsen
 413 <br>Fung. seksjonssjef</p>
 414
 415 <p>Departementenes servicesenter</p>
 416
 417 <p>Informasjonsforvaltning
 418
 419 <p>Mobil 93 09 83 51
 420 <br>E-post mette-haga.nielsen (at) dss.dep.no</p>
 421 </blockquote></p>
 422
 423 <p>Hvis den norske regjeringen representert ved DSS ikke har slik
 424 avtale, så kan en kanskje konkludere med at det ikke trengs?  Jeg er
 425 ikke trygg på at det er god juridisk grunn å stå på, men det er i det
 426 minste interessant å vite at hverken NRK eller DSS har funnet det
 427 nødvendig å ha avtale om bruk av H.264.</p>
 428
 429 <p>Det forklarer ikke hvordan de kan ignorere bruksvilkårene knyttet
 430 til bruk av opphavsrettsbeskyttet materiale de bruker til
 431 videoproduksjon, med mindre slike vilkår kan ignoreres av selskaper og
 432 privatpersoner i Norge.  Har de lov til å bryte vilkårene, eller har
 433 de brutt dem og så langt sluppet unna med det?  Jeg aner ikke.</p>
 434
 435       </div>
 436       <div class="tags">
 437
 438
 439         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 440
 441
 442       </div>
 443     </div>
 444     <div class="padding"></div>
 445
 446     <div class="entry">
 447       <div class="title">
 448         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/MPEG_LA_mener_NRK_m__ha_avtale_med_dem_for___kringkaste_og_publisere_H_264_video.html">MPEG-LA mener NRK må ha avtale med dem for å kringkaste og publisere H.264-video</a>
 449       </div>
 450       <div class="date">
 451         28th June 2012
 452       </div>
 453       <div class="body">
 454         <p>Etter at NRK
 455 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/NRK_nekter___finne_og_utlevere_eventuell_avtale_med_MPEG_LA.html">nektet
 456 å spore opp eventuell avtale med MPEG-LA</a> eller andre om bruk av
 457 MPEG/H.264-video etter at jeg <a
 458 href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Trenger_en_avtale_med_MPEG_LA_for___publisere_og_kringkaste_H_264_video_.html">ba
 459 om innsyn i slike avtaler</a>, tenkte jeg at i stedet for å forsøke å
 460 få NRK til å finne en slik avtale, så burde det være like enkelt å
 461 spørre MPEG-LA om de hadde avtale med NRK.  Spørsmålet ble sendt før
 462 jeg fikk tips fra Kieran Kunhya om hvor listen over lisensinnehavere
 463 "in Good Standing" befant seg.  MPEG-LA svarte meg i dag, og kan
 464 fortelle at NRK ikke har noen avtale med dem, så da er i det minste det
 465 slått fast.  Ikke overraskende mener MPEG-LA at det trengs en avtale
 466 med MPEG-LA for å streame H.264, men deres rammer er jo
 467 rettstilstanden i USA og ikke Norge.  Jeg tar dermed den delen av
 468 svaret med en klype salt.  Jeg er dermed fortsatt ikke klok på om det
 469 trengs en avtale, og hvis det trengs en avtale her i Norge, heller
 470 ikke sikker på om NRK har en avtale med noen andre enn MPEG-LA som
 471 gjør at de ikke trenger avtale direkte med MPEG-LA.  Jeg håper NRKs
 472 jurister har vurdert dette, og at det er mulig å få tilgang til
 473 vurderingen uansett om de trenger en avtale eller ikke.</p>
 474
 475 <p>Her er epostutvekslingen med MPEG-LA så langt.  Håper ikke
 476 utvekslingen fører til NRK plutselig får en litt uventet pakke fra
 477 MPEG-LA.</p>
 478
 479 <p><blockquote>
 480 <p>Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:29:37 +0200
 481 <br>From: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;pere (at) hungry.com&gt;
 482 <br>To: licensing-web (at) mpegla.com
 483 <br>Subject: Do NRK have a license agreement with MPEG-LA?</p>
 484
 485 <p>Hi.  I have a small question for you, that I hope it is OK that I
 486 ask.</p>
 487
 488 <p>Is there any license agreements between MPEG-LA and NRK, &lt;URL:
 489 <a href="http://www.nrk.no/">http://www.nrk.no/</a> &gt;, the
 490 Norwegian national broadcasting cooperation?  I am not sure if they
 491 need one, and am just curious if such agreeement exist.</p>
 492
 493 <p>The postal address is</p>
 494
 495 <p><blockquote>
 496   NRK
 497   <br>Postbox 8500, Majorstuen
 498   <br>0340 Oslo
 499   <br>Norway
 500 </blockquote></p>
 501
 502 <p>if it make it easier for you to locate such agreement.</p>
 503
 504 <p>Can you tell me how many entities in Norway have an agreement with
 505 MPEG-LA, and the name of these entities?</p>
 506
 507 <p>--
 508 <br>Happy hacking
 509 <br>Petter Reinholdtsen
 510 </blockquote></p>
 511
 512 <p>I dag, to dager senere, fikk jeg følgende svar:</p>
 513
 514 <p><blockquote>
 515 <p>Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:11:17 +0000
 516 <br>From: Ryan Rodriguez &lt;RRodriguez (at) mpegla.com>
 517 <br>To: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;pere (at) hungry.com>
 518 <br>CC: MD Administration &lt;MDAdministration (at) mpegla.com>
 519 <br>Subject: RE: Do NRK have a license agreement with MPEG-LA?</p>
 520
 521 <p>Dear Mr. Reinholdtsen,</p>
 522
 523 <p>Thank you for your message and for your interest in MPEG LA. We
 524 appreciate hearing from you and I will be happy to assist you.</p>
 525
 526 <p>To begin, I will assume that you are referring to AVC/H.264
 527 technology in your message below, as this technology is commonly used
 528 in the transmission of video content.  In that case, please allow me
 529 to briefly summarize the coverage provided by our AVC Patent Portfolio
 530 License.</p>
 531
 532 <P>Our AVC License provides coverage for end products and video
 533 services that make use of AVC/H.264 technology.  Accordingly, the
 534 party offering such end products and video to End Users concludes the
 535 AVC License and is responsible for paying the applicable royalties
 536 associated with the end products/video they offer.</p>
 537
 538 <p>While the Norwegian Broadcast Corporation (NRK) is not currently a
 539 Licensee to MPEG LA's AVC License (or any other Portfolio License
 540 offered by MPEG LA), if NRK offers AVC Video to End Users for
 541 remuneration (for example, Title-by-Title, Subscription, Free
 542 Television, or Internet Broadcast AVC Video), then NRK will need to
 543 conclude the AVC License and may be responsible for paying applicable
 544 royalties associated with the AVC Video it distributes.</p>
 545
 546 <p>Today I will send you a FedEx package containing a copy of our AVC
 547 License for your review.  You should receive the License document
 548 within the next few days.</p>
 549
 550 <p>Meanwhile, MPEG LA currently has several Norwegian Licensees that
 551 can be found under the "Licensees" header within the respective
 552 portion of our website.  For example, you may find our list of
 553 Licensees in Good Standing to our AVC License in the AVC portion of
 554 our website,
 555 <a href="http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensees.aspx">http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensees.aspx</a></p>
 556
 557 <p>I hope the above information is helpful.  If you have additional
 558 questions or need further assistance with the AVC License, please feel
 559 free to contact me directly.  I look forward to hearing from you again
 560 soon.</p>
 561
 562 <p>Best regards,</p>
 563
 564 <p>Ryan</p>
 565
 566 <p>Ryan M. Rodriguez
 567 <br>Licensing Associate
 568 <br>MPEG LA
 569 <br>5425 Wisconsin Avenue
 570 <br>Suite 801
 571 <br>Chevy Chase, MD 20815
 572 <br>U.S.A.
 573 <br>Phone:  +1 (301) 986-6660 x211
 574 <br>Fax:    +1 (301) 986-8575
 575 <br>Email: rrodriguez (at) mpegla.com</p>
 576
 577 </blockquote></p>
 578
 579 <p>Meldingen om utsendt FedEx-pakke var så merkelig at jeg
 580 øyeblikkelig sendte svar tilbake og spurte hva i alle dager han mente,
 581 da han jo ikke hadde fått noen postadresse som nådde meg.</p>
 582
 583 <p><blockquote>
 584
 585 <p>Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:36:15 +0200
 586 <br>From: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;pere (at) hungry.com&gt;
 587 <br>To: Ryan Rodriguez &lt;RRodriguez (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 588 <br>Cc: MD Administration &lt;MDAdministration (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 589 <br>Subject: Re: Do NRK have a license agreement with MPEG-LA?</p>
 590
 591 <p>[Ryan Rodriguez]
 592 <br>&gt; Dear Mr. Reinholdtsen,</p>
 593
 594 <p>Thank you for your quick reply.</p>
 595
 596 <p>&gt; Today I will send you a FedEx package containing a copy of our AVC
 597 <br>&gt; License for your review.  You should receive the License document
 598 <br>&gt; within the next few days.</p>
 599
 600 <p>The part about sending a FedEx package confused me, though.  I did not
 601 <br>give you my address, nor am I associated with NRK in any way, so I hope
 602 <br>you did not try to send me a package using the address of NRK.  If you
 603 <br>would send me the Internet address of to the document, it would be more
 604 <br>useful to me to be able to download it as an electronic document.</p>
 605
 606 <p>&gt; Meanwhile, MPEG LA currently has several Norwegian Licensees that can
 607 <br>&gt; be found under the "Licensees" header within the respective portion
 608 <br>&gt; of our website.  For example, you may find our list of Licensees in
 609 <br>&gt; Good Standing to our AVC License in the AVC portion of our website,
 610 <br>&gt; http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensees.aspx</p>
 611
 612 <p>How can I recognize the Norwegian licensees?</p>
 613
 614 <p>--
 615 <br>Happy hacking
 616 <br>Petter Reinholdtsen</p>
 617 </blockquote></p>
 618
 619 <p>Selv om jeg svarte kun noen minutter etter at jeg fikk eposten fra
 620 MPEG-LA, fikk jeg eposten under som automatisk var beskjed på min
 621 siste epost.  Får håpe noen likevel følger opp "FedEx-pakken".  For å
 622 øke sjansen for at noen revurderer utsending av pakke uten mottaker,
 623 videresendte jeg min epost til swolf (at) mpegla.com, så får vi se.
 624 Har ikke hørt noe mer 3 timer senere, så jeg mistenker at ingen leste
 625 min epost tidsnok.</p>
 626
 627 <p><blockquote>
 628
 629 <p>Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:36:20 +0000
 630 <br>From: Ryan Rodriguez &lt;RRodriguez (at) mpegla.com&gt;
 631 <br>To: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;pere (at) hungry.com&gt;
 632 <br>Subject: Automatic reply: Do NRK have a license agreement with MPEG-LA?</p>
 633
 634 <p>Thank you for your message.</p>
 635
 636 <p>I will be out of the office until Thursday, July 5 and will respond
 637 to all messages upon my return.  If this is a matter that requires
 638 immediate attention, please contact Sidney Wolf (swolf (at)
 639 mpegla.com)</p>
 640
 641 <p>Best regards,</p>
 642
 643 <p>Ryan</p>
 644
 645 <p>Ryan M. Rodriguez
 646 <br>Licensing Associate
 647 <br>MPEG LA</p>
 648
 649 </blockquote></p>
 650
 651 <p>Litt klokere, men fortsatt ikke klok på mitt opprinnelige spørsmål,
 652 som er om en trenger avtale med MPEG-LA for å publisere eller
 653 kringkaste H.264-video i Norge.</p>
 654
 655       </div>
 656       <div class="tags">
 657
 658
 659         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 660
 661
 662       </div>
 663     </div>
 664     <div class="padding"></div>
 665
 666     <div class="entry">
 667       <div class="title">
 668         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/NRK_nekter___finne_og_utlevere_eventuell_avtale_med_MPEG_LA.html">NRK nekter å finne og utlevere eventuell avtale med MPEG-LA</a>
 669       </div>
 670       <div class="date">
 671         25th June 2012
 672       </div>
 673       <div class="body">
 674         <p>Jeg fikk nettopp svar fra NRK på
 675 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Trenger_en_avtale_med_MPEG_LA_for___publisere_og_kringkaste_H_264_video_.html">min
 676 forespørsel om kopi av avtale</a> med MPEG-LA eller andre om bruk av
 677 MPEG og/eller H.264.  Svaret har fått saksreferanse 2011/371 (mon tro
 678 hva slags sak fra 2011 dette er?) hos NRK og lyder som følger:</p>
 679
 680 <p><blockquote>
 681
 682 <p><strong>Svar på innsynsbegjæring i MPEG / H.264-relaterte
 683 avtaler</strong></p>
 684
 685 <p>Viser til innsynsbegjæring av 19. juni 2012. Kravet om innsyn
 686 gjelder avtale som gjør at NRK «ikke er begrenset av de generelle
 687 bruksvilkårene som gjelder for utstyr som bruker MPEG og/eller
 688 H.264».</p>
 689
 690 <p>I henhold til offentleglova § 28 annet ledd må innsynskravet gjelde
 691 en bestemt sak eller i rimelig utstrekning saker av en bestemt
 692 sak. Det er på det rene at det aktuelle innsynskravet ikke gjelder en
 693 bestemt sak. Spørsmålet som reiser seg er om identifiseringsgraden er
 694 tilstrekkelig. I Justisdepartementets «Rettleiar til offentleglova»
 695 står følgende:</p>
 696
 697 <p>«Kravet om at innsynskravet må gjelde ei bestemt sak er til hinder
 698 for at eit innsynskrav kan gjelde alle saker av ein bestemt art, utan
 699 at den enkelte saka blir identifisert.  Ein kan med andre ord i
 700 utgangspunktet ikkje krevje innsyn i til dømes alle saker om
 701 utsleppsløyve hos Statens forureiningstilsyn frå dei siste tre åra,
 702 med mindre ein identifiserer kvar enkelt sak, til dømes med tilvising
 703 til dato, partar eller liknande.»</p>
 704
 705 <p>Vedrørende denne begrensningen har Justisdepartementet uttalt
 706 følgende (Lovavdelingens uttalelser JDLOV-2010-3295):</p>
 707
 708 <p><em>«Bakgrunnen for avgrensinga av kva innsynskravet kan gjelde,
 709 er fyrst og fremst at meir generelle innsynskrav, utan noka form for
 710 identifikasjon av kva ein eigentleg ynskjer, ville vere svært
 711 vanskelege å handsame for forvaltninga.»</em></p>
 712
 713 <p>I samme sak uttaler Lovavdelingen følgende:</p>
 714
 715 <p><em>«Det følgjer vidare av offentleglova § 28 andre ledd at det `i
 716 rimeleg utstrekning' kan krevjast innsyn i `saker av ein bestemt
 717 art'. Vilkåret om at eit innsynskrav berre `i rimeleg utstrekning' kan
 718 gjelde saker av ein bestemt art, er i hovudsak knytt til kor
 719 arbeidskrevjande det vil vere å finne fram til dei aktuelle
 720 dokumenta. I tillegg reknar vi med at vilkåret kan gje grunnlag for å
 721 nekte innsyn i tilfelle der innsynskravet er så omfattande (gjeld så
 722 mange dokument) at arbeidsmengda som ville gått med til å handsame
 723 det, er større enn det ein `i rimeleg utstrekning' kan krevje (sjølv
 724 om det nok skal mykje til).»</em></p>
 725
 726 <p>NRK har ikke noen egen sammenstilling over avtaler innenfor
 727 bestemte områder som omtales i innsynsbegjæringen. De måtte søkes på
 728 vanlig måte. I tillegg finnes ikke noen automatisert måte å finne
 729 avtaler som «ikke er begrenset av de generelle bruksvilkårene som
 730 gjelder for utstyr som bruker MPEG og/eller H.264». En slik
 731 gjennomgang av avtaler måtte gjøres manuelt av en person med
 732 spesialistkunnskap. Dette vil kreve at NRK avsetter omfattende
 733 ressurser for å finne frem relevante avtaler og for deretter å vurdere
 734 om de dekkes av det innsynsbegjæringen omfattes.</p>
 735
 736 <p>På bakgrunn av dette nekter NRK innsyn, med den begrunnelsen at
 737 innsynskravet er så omfattende at arbeidsmengden for å håndtere kravet
 738 vil være langt større enn det som i rimelig utstrekning kan kreves i
 739 henhold til offentleglova § 28 annet ledd.</p>
 740
 741 <p>Avslag på deres innsynsbegjæring kan påklages til Kultur- og
 742 kirkedepartementet innen tre uker fra det tidspunkt avslaget kommer
 743 frem til mottakeren, i henhold til reglene i offentleglova § 32,
 744 jf. forvaltningsloven kapittel VI. Klagen skal stiles til Kultur- og
 745 kirkedepartementet, og sendes til NRK.</p>
 746
 747 <p>NRK er imidlertid etter Offentleglova forpliktet å gi ut journaler,
 748 slik at en eventuell søknad om innsyn kan tydeligere identifisere
 749 hvilke dokumenter som det ønskes innsyn i. NRKs offentlige journaler
 750 for inneværende og forrige måned ligger ute på
 751 NRK.no/innsyn. Journaler som går lengre tilbake i tid, kan sendes ut
 752 på forespørsel til innsyn (at) nrk.no.</p>
 753
 754 <p>Med hilsen
 755 <br>Dokumentarkivet i NRK
 756 <br>v/ Elin Brandsrud
 757 <br>Tel. direkte: 23 04 29 29
 758 <br>Post: RBM3, Postboks 8500 Majorstuen, 0340 Oslo
 759 <br>innsyn (at) nrk.no</p>
 760
 761 </blockquote></p>
 762
 763 <p>Svaret kom
 764 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/images/2012-06-25-video-mpegla-nrk.pdf">i
 765 PDF-form som vedlegg på epost</a>.  Jeg er litt usikker på hvordan jeg
 766 best går videre for å bli klok, men jeg har jo i hvert fall tre uker
 767 på å vurdere om jeg skal klage.  Enten må nok forespørselen
 768 reformuleres eller så må jeg vel klage.  Synes jo det er merkelig at
 769 NRK ikke har bedre kontroll med hvilke avtaler de har inngått.  Det
 770 burde jo være noen i ledelsen som vet om de har signert en avtale med
 771 MPEG-LA eller ikke...</p>
 772
 773 <p>Oppdatering 2012-06-25 20:20: Et google-søk på "2011/371 nrk"
 774 sendte meg til postjournalen for
 775 <a href="http://nrk.no/contentfile/file/1.8212365!offentligjournal19062012.pdf">2012-06-19</a>
 776 og
 777 <a href="http://nrk.no/contentfile/file/1.8214156!offentligjournal20062012.pdf">2012-06-20</a>
 778 hos NRK som viser mine forespørsler og viser at sakens tittel hos NRK
 779 er "Graphic Systems Regions MA 2378/10E".  Videre søk etter "Graphic
 780 Systems Regions" viser at dette er saken til et anbud om
 781 "<a href="http://no.mercell.com/m/mts/Tender/27179412.aspx">a graphics
 782 system for 12 or 13 sites broadcasting regional news</a>" hos Mercell
 783 Sourcing Service, også omtalt på
 784 <a href="http://www.publictenders.net/tender/595705">Public
 785 Tenders</a> og
 786 <a href="http://www.doffin.no/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=JAN155521">Doffin</a>.
 787 Jeg er dog usikker på hvordan dette er relatert til min
 788 forespørsel.</p>
 789
 790 <p>Oppdatering 2012-06-25 22:40: Ble tipset av Kieran Kunhya, fra
 791 miljøet rundt
 792 <a href="http://code.google.com/p/open-broadcast-encoder/">Open
 793 Broadcast Encoder</a>, at listen over de som har lisensavtale med
 794 MPEG-LA er
 795 <a href="http://www.mpeg-la.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensees.aspx">tilgjengelig
 796 på web</a>.  Veldig fint å oppdage hvor den finnes, da jeg må ha lett
 797 etter feil ting da jeg forsøke å finne den.  Der står ikke NRK, men
 798 flere andre "Broadcasting Company"-oppføringer.  Lurer på om det betyr
 799 at NRK ikke trenger avtale, eller noe helt annet?</p>
 800
 801       </div>
 802       <div class="tags">
 803
 804
 805         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 806
 807
 808       </div>
 809     </div>
 810     <div class="padding"></div>
 811
 812     <div class="entry">
 813       <div class="title">
 814         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Trenger_en_avtale_med_MPEG_LA_for___publisere_og_kringkaste_H_264_video_.html">Trenger en avtale med MPEG-LA for å publisere og kringkaste H.264-video?</a>
 815       </div>
 816       <div class="date">
 817         21st June 2012
 818       </div>
 819       <div class="body">
 820         <p>Trengs det avtale med MPEG-LA for å ha lovlig rett til å
 821 distribuere og kringkaste video i MPEG4 eller med videokodingen H.264?
 822 <a href="http://webmink.com/essays/h-264/">H.264 og MPEG4 er jo ikke en
 823 fri og åpen standard</a> i henhold til
 824 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Fri_og__pen_standard__slik_Digistan_ser_det.html">definisjonen
 825 til Digistan</a>, så i enkelte land er det ingen tvil om at du må ha
 826 en slik avtale, men jeg må innrømme at jeg ikke vet om det også
 827 gjelder Norge.  Det ser uansett ut til å være en juridisk interessant
 828 problemstilling.  Men jeg tenkte her om dagen som så, at hvis det er
 829 nødvendig, så har store aktører som
 830 <a href="http://www.nrk.no/">NRK</a> og
 831 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/">regjeringen</a> skaffet seg en
 832 slik avtale.  Jeg har derfor sendt forespørsel til begge (for
 833 regjeringen sin del er det Departementenes Servicesenter som gjør
 834 jobben), og bedt om kopi av eventuelle avtaler de har om bruk av MPEG
 835 og/eller H.264 med MPEG-LA eller andre aktører som opererer på vegne
 836 av MPEG-LA.  Her er kopi av eposten jeg har sendt til
 837 <a href="http://www.dss.dep.no/">Departementenes Servicesenter</a>.
 838 Forespørselen til NRK er veldig lik.</p>
 839
 840 <p><blockquote>
 841
 842 <p>Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:18:33 +0200
 843 <br>From: Petter Reinholdtsen
 844 <br>To: postmottak@dss.dep.no
 845 <br>Subject: Innsynsbegjæring om MPEG/H.264-relaterte avtaler
 846
 847 <p>Hei.  Jeg ber herved om innsyn og kopi av dokumenter i DSS relatert
 848 til avtaler rundt bruk av videoformatene MPEG og H.264.  Jeg er
 849 spesielt interessert i å vite om DSS har lisensavtale med MPEG-LA
 850 eller noen som representerer MPEG-LA i Norge.</p>
 851
 852 <p>MPEG og H.264 er videoformater som brukes både til kringkasting
 853 (f.eks. i bakkenett og kabel-TV) og videopublisering på web, deriblant
 854 via Adobe Flash.  MPEG-LA, &lt;URL:
 855 <a href="http://www.mpeg-la.com/">http://www.mpeg-la.com/</a> &gt;, er
 856 en organisasjon som har fått oppgaven, av de kjente rettighetshavere
 857 av immaterielle rettigheter knyttet til MPEG og H.264, å selge
 858 bruksrett for MPEG og H.264.</p>
 859
 860 <p>Via regjeringen.no kringkastes med MPEG og H.264-baserte
 861 videoformater, og dette ser ut til å være organisert av DSS.  Jeg
 862 antar dermed at DSS har avtale med en eller annen aktør om dette.</p>
 863
 864 <p>F.eks. har Adobe Premiere Pro har følgende klausul i følge &lt;URL:
 865 <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20000101-264.html">http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20000101-264.html</a>
 866 &gt;:</p>
 867
 868 <p><blockquote>
 869
 870   <p>6.17. AVC DISTRIBUTION. The following notice applies to software
 871   containing AVC import and export functionality: THIS PRODUCT IS
 872   LICENSED UNDER THE AVC PATENT PORTFOLIO LICENSE FOR THE PERSONAL AND
 873   NON-COMMERCIAL USE OF A CONSUMER TO (a) ENCODE VIDEO IN COMPLIANCE
 874   WITH THE AVC STANDARD ("AVC VIDEO") AND/OR (b) DECODE AVC VIDEO THAT
 875   WAS ENCODED BY A CONSUMER ENGAGED IN A PERSONAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL
 876   ACTIVITY AND/OR AVC VIDEO THAT WAS OBTAINED FROM A VIDEO PROVIDER
 877   LICENSED TO PROVIDE AVC VIDEO. NO LICENSE IS GRANTED OR SHALL BE
 878   IMPLIED FOR ANY OTHER USE. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED
 879   FROM MPEG LA L.L.C. SEE
 880   <a href="http://www.mpegla.com">http://www.mpegla.com</a>.</p>
 881
 882 </blockquote></p>
 883
 884 <p>Her er det kun "non-commercial" og "personal and non-commercial"
 885 aktivitet som er tillatt uten ekstra avtale med MPEG-LA.</p>
 886
 887 <p>Et annet tilsvarende eksempel er Apple Final Cut Pro, som har
 888 følgende klausul i følge &lt;URL:
 889 <a href="http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/finalcutstudio2.pdf">http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/finalcutstudio2.pdf</a>
 890 &gt;:</p>
 891
 892 <p><blockquote>
 893
 894   <p>15. Merknad om H.264/AVC. Hvis Apple-programvaren inneholder
 895   funksjonalitet for AVC-koding og/eller AVC-dekoding, krever
 896   kommersiell bruk ekstra lisensiering og følgende gjelder:
 897   AVC-FUNKSJONALITETEN I DETTE PRODUKTET KAN KUN ANVENDES AV
 898   FORBRUKERE OG KUN FOR PERSONLIG OG IKKE- KOMMERSIELL BRUK TIL (i)
 899   KODING AV VIDEO I OVERENSSTEMMELSE MED AVC-STANDARDEN ("AVC-VIDEO")
 900   OG/ELLER (ii) DEKODING AV AVC-VIDEO SOM ER KODET AV EN FORBRUKER TIL
 901   PERSONLIG OG IKKE-KOMMERSIELL BRUK OG/ELLER DEKODING AV AVC-VIDEO
 902   FRA EN VIDEOLEVERANDØR SOM HAR LISENS TIL Å TILBY
 903   AVC-VIDEO. INFORMASJON OM ANNEN BRUK OG LISENSIERING KAN INNHENTES
 904   FRA MPEG LA L.L.C. SE HTTP://WWW.MPEGLA.COM.</p>
 905 </blockquote></p>
 906
 907 <p>Tilsvarende gjelder for andre programvarepakker, kamera, etc som
 908 bruker MPEG og H.264, at en må ha en avtale med MPEG-LA for å ha lov
 909 til å bruke programmet/utstyret hvis en skal lage noe annet enn
 910 private filmer og i ikke-kommersiell virksomhet.</p>
 911
 912 <p>Jeg er altså interessert i kopi av avtaler DSS har som gjør at en
 913 ikke er begrenset av de generelle bruksvilkårene som gjelder for
 914 utstyr som bruker MPEG og/eller H.264.</p>
 915 </blockquote></p>
 916
 917 <p>Nå venter jeg spent på svaret.  Jeg planlegger å blogge om svaret
 918 her.</p>
 919
 920       </div>
 921       <div class="tags">
 922
 923
 924         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 925
 926
 927       </div>
 928     </div>
 929     <div class="padding"></div>
 930
 931     <div class="entry">
 932       <div class="title">
 933         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/The_cost_of_ODF_and_OOXML.html">The cost of ODF and OOXML</a>
 934       </div>
 935       <div class="date">
 936         26th May 2012
 937       </div>
 938       <div class="body">
 939         <p>I just come across a blog post from Glyn Moody reporting the
 940 claimed cost from Microsoft on requiring ODF to be used by the UK
 941 government.  I just sent him an email to let him know that his
 942 assumption are most likely wrong.  Sharing it here in case some of my
 943 blog readers have seem the same numbers float around in the UK.</p>
 944
 945 <p><blockquote> <p>Hi.  I just noted your
 946 <a href="http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2012/04/does-microsoft-office-lock-in-cost-the-uk-government-500-million/index.htm">http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2012/04/does-microsoft-office-lock-in-cost-the-uk-government-500-million/index.htm</a>
 947 comment:</p>
 948
 949 <p><blockquote>"They're all in Danish, not unreasonably, but even
 950 with the help of Google Translate I can't find any figures about the
 951 savings of "moving to a flexible two standard" as claimed by the
 952 Microsoft email. But I assume it is backed up somewhere, so let's take
 953 it, and the £500 million figure for the UK, on trust."
 954 </blockquote></p>
 955
 956 <p>I can tell you that the Danish reports are inflated.  I believe it is
 957 the same reports that were used in the Norwegian debate around 2007,
 958 and Gisle Hannemyr (a well known IT commentator in Norway) had a look
 959 at the content.  In short, the reason it is claimed that using ODF
 960 will be so costly, is based on the assumption that this mean every
 961 existing document need to be converted from one of the MS Office
 962 formats to ODF, transferred to the receiver, and converted back from
 963 ODF to one of the MS Office formats, and that the conversion will cost
 964 10 minutes of work time for both the sender and the receiver.  In
 965 reality the sender would have a tool capable of saving to ODF, and the
 966 receiver would have a tool capable of reading it, and the time spent
 967 would at most be a few seconds for saving and loading, not 20 minutes
 968 of wasted effort.</p>
 969
 970 <p>Microsoft claimed all these costs were saved by allowing people to
 971 transfer the original files from MS Office instead of spending 10
 972 minutes converting to ODF. :)</p>
 973
 974 <p>See
 975 <a href="http://hannemyr.com/no/ms12_vl02.php">http://hannemyr.com/no/ms12_vl02.php</a>
 976 and
 977 <a href="http://hannemyr.com/no/ms12.php">http://hannemyr.com/no/ms12.php</a>
 978 for background information.  Norwegian only, sorry. :)</p>
 979 </blockquote></p>
 980
 981       </div>
 982       <div class="tags">
 983
 984
 985         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 986
 987
 988       </div>
 989     </div>
 990     <div class="padding"></div>
 991
 992     <div class="entry">
 993       <div class="title">
 994         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/OpenOffice_org_fungerer_da_fint_for_blinde_.html">OpenOffice.org fungerer da fint for blinde?</a>
 995       </div>
 996       <div class="date">
 997         21st May 2012
 998       </div>
 999       <div class="body">
1000         <p>De siste dagene har høringsuttalelsene om DIFIs forslag til
1001 standardkatalog v3.1 blitt
1002 <a href="http://www.standard.difi.no/hoyring/hoyring-om-nye-anbefalte-it-standarder?tab=comments">publisert
1003 på DIFIs nettside</a>, og jeg kunne der glede meg over at
1004 <a href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/201204-standardkatalog-v3.1">NUUGs</a>
1005 uttalelse er kommet med.  En uttalelse som overrasker og forvirrer meg
1006 er
1007 <a href="http://www.standard.difi.no/filearchive/norges-blindeforbund.pdf">den
1008 fra Norges Blindeforbund</a>, som 5 år etter at Klaus Knopper sammen
1009 med sin blinde kone blant annet
1010 <a href="http://www.nuug.no/aktiviteter/20071211-accessibility/">demonstrerte
1011 høyttalende OpenOffice.org på nynorsk for blinde</a> på et NUUG-møte.</p>
1012
1013 <p><a href="https://www.blindeforbundet.no/">Norges Blindeforbund</a>
1014 skriver følgende, som for meg virker å være formulert på sviktende
1015 grunnlag:</p>
1016
1017 <p><blockquote>
1018 <p>Bruk av fri programvare
1019
1020 <p>I FRIPROGSENTERET, RAPPORT 2009-02: Universell utforming
1021 <a href="http://www.kunnskapsbazaren.no/filer/Friprogsenteret-Rapport-Universell_utforming.pdf">http://www.kunnskapsbazaren.no/filer/Friprogsenteret-Rapport-Universell_utforming.pdf</a>
1022 sies det "Det finnes i dag ikke mange fri programvare-rammeverk eller
1023 generelle løsninger som støtter tilgjengelighet eller som er
1024 universelt utformet."</p>
1025
1026 <p>Til tross for at det gjennom prinsippene i fri programvare åpnes
1027 for større frihet til selv å påvirke programvareløsninger i retning av
1028 universell utforming viser praksis at virkeligheten er en annen.
1029 Mange av de mest alminnelige frie programvarepakkene mangler delvis
1030 eller fullstendig tilgjengelighet for mennesker med nedsatt
1031 syn. Eksempler på dette er OpenOffice og LibreOffice m.fl.</p>
1032
1033 <p>En annen utfordring ved bruk av fri programvare kan være manglende
1034 kundestøtte og muligheter til opplæring i bruk av løsningen. Svaksynte
1035 og blinde har et høyere behov for denne typen støtte enn andre brukere
1036 ettersom mange av dem har behov for tilleggsprogramvare som skal
1037 fungere sammen med den opprinnelige programvaren, og ettersom man ikke
1038 har de samme muligheter for overblikk over grensesnittet som en seende
1039 bruker. I tillegg til dette kommer de mer tilgjengelighetstekniske
1040 utfordringene som ofte må løses i samarbeid med
1041 programvareleverandør/produsent.</p>
1042
1043 <p>Fri programvare er ikke på samme måte underlagt lovgivning gjennom
1044 for eksempel diskriminerings og tilgjengelighetsloven ettersom det
1045 ikke alltid finnes en produsent/tilbyder av tjenesten eller produktet.</p>
1046
1047 <p>Norges Blindeforbund krever at universell utforming og
1048 brukskvalitet tas med som viktige hensyn i utredninger som ligger til
1049 grunn for valg av standarder som primært leder brukeren mot fri
1050 programvare. Et eksempel på dette er bruk av dokumentformatet ODF som
1051 leder brukeren i retning av OpenOffice, som er helt eller delvis
1052 utilgjengelig for svaksynte og blinde – noe avhengig av plattform og
1053 hjelpemiddelprogramvare.</p>
1054
1055 </blockquote></p>
1056
1057 <p>Jeg håper noen involvert i OpenOffice.org og/eller LibreOffice tar
1058 kontakt med Norges Blindeforbund og oppklarer det som for meg virker å
1059 være en misforståelse, i og med at OpenOffice.org så vidt jeg vet
1060 fungerer fint også for blinde.</p>
1061
1062 <p>Jeg ble minnet på problemstillingen da jeg leste Slashdot-saken om
1063 "<a href="http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/05/21/1417221/the-state-of-linux-accessibility">The
1064 State of Linux Accessibility</a>", som også hevder at Linux fungerer
1065 utmerket for blinde.</p>
1066
1067       </div>
1068       <div class="tags">
1069
1070
1071         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
1072
1073
1074       </div>
1075     </div>
1076     <div class="padding"></div>
1077
1078     <div class="entry">
1079       <div class="title">
1080         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/NUUGs_leverer_h_ringsuttalelse_om_v3_1_av_statens_referansekatalog.html">NUUGs leverer høringsuttalelse om v3.1 av statens referansekatalog</a>
1081       </div>
1082       <div class="date">
1083         27th April 2012
1084       </div>
1085       <div class="body">
1086         <p>NUUG-styremedlem Hans-Petter Fjeld
1087 <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/110394259537201279374/posts/AGzRmAuFdW1">meldte
1088 nettopp</a> at han har sendt inn <a href="http://www.nuug.no/">NUUG</a>s
1089 høringsuttalelse angående Difi sin standardkatalog v3.1.  Jeg er veldig
1090 glad for at så mange bidro og sikret at vår stemme blir hørt i denne
1091 høringen.  Anbefaler alle å lese våre
1092 <a href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/201204-standardkatalog-v3.1">to
1093 sider med innspill</a>.</p>
1094
1095       </div>
1096       <div class="tags">
1097
1098
1099         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
1100
1101
1102       </div>
1103     </div>
1104     <div class="padding"></div>
1105
1106     <div class="entry">
1107       <div class="title">
1108         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/HTC_One_X___Your_video___What_do_you_mean_.html">HTC One X - Your video?  What do you mean?</a>
1109       </div>
1110       <div class="date">
1111         26th April 2012
1112       </div>
1113       <div class="body">
1114         <p>In <a href="http://www.idg.no/computerworld/article243690.ece">an
1115 article today</a> published by Computerworld Norway, the photographer
1116 <a href="http://www.urke.com/eirik/">Eirik Helland Urke</a> reports
1117 that the video editor application included with
1118 <a href="http://www.htc.com/www/smartphones/htc-one-x/#specs">HTC One
1119 X</a> have some quite surprising terms of use.  The article is mostly
1120 based on the twitter message from mister Urke, stating:
1121
1122 <p><blockquote>
1123 "<a href="http://twitter.com/urke/status/194062269724897280">Drøy
1124 brukeravtale: HTC kan bruke MINE redigerte videoer kommersielt. Selv
1125 kan jeg KUN bruke dem privat.</a>"
1126 </blockquote></p>
1127
1128 <p>I quickly translated it to this English message:</p>
1129
1130 <p><blockquote>
1131 "Arrogant user agreement: HTC can use MY edited videos
1132 commercially.  Although I can ONLY use them privately."
1133 </blockquote></p>
1134
1135 <p>I've been unable to find the text of the license term myself, but
1136 suspect it is a variation of the MPEG-LA terms I
1137 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Terms_of_use_for_video_produced_by_a_Canon_IXUS_130_digital_camera.html">discovered
1138 with my Canon IXUS 130</a>.  The HTC One X specification specifies that
1139 the recording format of the phone is .amr for audio and .mp3 for
1140 video.  AMR is
1141 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_Multi-Rate_audio_codec#Licensing_and_patent_issues">Adaptive
1142 Multi-Rate audio codec</a> with patents which according to the
1143 Wikipedia article require an license agreement with
1144 <a href="http://www.voiceage.com/">VoiceAge</a>.  MP4 is
1145 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing">MPEG4 with
1146 H.264</a>, which according to Wikipedia require a licence agreement
1147 with <a href="http://www.mpegla.com/">MPEG-LA</a>.</p>
1148
1149 <p>I know why I prefer
1150 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">free and open
1151 standards</a> also for video.</p>
1152
1153       </div>
1154       <div class="tags">
1155
1156
1157         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
1158
1159
1160       </div>
1161     </div>
1162     <div class="padding"></div>
1163
1164     <div class="entry">
1165       <div class="title">
1166         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/RAND_terms___non_reasonable_and_discriminatory.html">RAND terms - non-reasonable and discriminatory</a>
1167       </div>
1168       <div class="date">
1169         19th April 2012
1170       </div>
1171       <div class="body">
1172         <p>Here in Norway, the
1173 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad.html?id=339"> Ministry of
1174 Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs</a> is behind
1175 a <a href="http://standard.difi.no/forvaltningsstandarder">directory of
1176 standards</a> that are recommended or mandatory for use by the
1177 government.  When the directory was created, the people behind it made
1178 an effort to ensure that everyone would be able to implement the
1179 standards and compete on equal terms to supply software and solutions
1180 to the government.  Free software and non-free software could compete
1181 on the same level.</p>
1182
1183 <p>But recently, some standards with RAND
1184 (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing">Reasonable
1185 And Non-Discriminatory</a>) terms have made their way into the
1186 directory.  And while this might not sound too bad, the fact is that
1187 standard specifications with RAND terms often block free software from
1188 implementing them.  The reasonable part of RAND mean that the cost per
1189 user/unit is low,and the non-discriminatory part mean that everyone
1190 willing to pay will get a license.  Both sound great in theory.  In
1191 practice, to get such license one need to be able to count users, and
1192 be able to pay a small amount of money per unit or user.  By
1193 definition, users of free software do not need to register their use.
1194 So counting users or units is not possible for free software projects.
1195 And given that people will use the software without handing any money
1196 to the author, it is not really economically possible for a free
1197 software author to pay a small amount of money to license the rights
1198 to implement a standard when the income available is zero.  The result
1199 in these situations is that free software are locked out from
1200 implementing standards with RAND terms.</p>
1201
1202 <p>Because of this, when I see someone claiming the terms of a
1203 standard is reasonable and non-discriminatory, all I can think of is
1204 how this really is non-reasonable and discriminatory.  Because free
1205 software developers are working in a global market, it does not really
1206 help to know that software patents are not supposed to be enforceable
1207 in Norway.  The patent regimes in other countries affect us even here.
1208 I really hope the people behind the standard directory will pay more
1209 attention to these issues in the future.</p>
1210
1211 <p>You can find more on the issues with RAND, FRAND and RAND-Z terms
1212 from Simon Phipps
1213 (<a href="http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/11/rand-not-so-reasonable/">RAND:
1214 Not So Reasonable?</a>).</p>
1215
1216 <p>Update 2012-04-21: Just came across a
1217 <a href="http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2012/04/of-microsoft-netscape-patents-and-open-standards/index.htm">blog
1218 post from Glyn Moody</a> over at Computer World UK warning about the
1219 same issue, and urging people to speak out to the UK government.  I
1220 can only urge Norwegian users to do the same for
1221 <a href="http://www.standard.difi.no/hoyring/hoyring-om-nye-anbefalte-it-standarder">the
1222 hearing taking place at the moment</a> (respond before 2012-04-27).
1223 It proposes to require video conferencing standards including
1224 specifications with RAND terms.</p>
1225
1226       </div>
1227       <div class="tags">
1228
1229
1230         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
1231
1232
1233       </div>
1234     </div>
1235     <div class="padding"></div>
1236
1237     <div class="entry">
1238       <div class="title">
1239         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/The_video_format_most_supported_in_web_browsers_.html">The video format most supported in web browsers?</a>
1240       </div>
1241       <div class="date">
1242         16th January 2011
1243       </div>
1244       <div class="body">
1245         <p>The video format struggle on the web continues, and the three
1246 contenders seem to be Ogg Theora, H.264 and WebM.  Most video sites
1247 seem to use H.264, while others use Ogg Theora.  Interestingly enough,
1248 the comments I see give me the feeling that a lot of people believe
1249 H.264 is the most supported video format in browsers, but according to
1250 the Wikipedia article on
1251 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5_video">HTML5 video</a>,
1252 this is not true.  Check out the nice table of supprted formats in
1253 different browsers there.  The format supported by most browsers is
1254 Ogg Theora, supported by released versions of Mozilla Firefox, Google
1255 Chrome, Chromium, Opera, Konqueror, Epiphany, Origyn Web Browser and
1256 BOLT browser, while not supported by Internet Explorer nor Safari.
1257 The runner up is WebM supported by released versions of Google Chrome
1258 Chromium Opera and Origyn Web Browser, and test versions of Mozilla
1259 Firefox.  H.264 is supported by released versions of Safari, Origyn
1260 Web Browser and BOLT browser, and the test version of Internet
1261 Explorer.  Those wanting Ogg Theora support in Internet Explorer and
1262 Safari can install plugins to get it.</p>
1263
1264 <p>To me, the simple conclusion from this is that to reach most users
1265 without any extra software installed, one uses Ogg Theora with the
1266 HTML5 video tag.   Of course to reach all those without a browser
1267 handling HTML5, one need fallback mechanisms.  In
1268 <a href="http://www.nuug.no/">NUUG</a>, we provide first fallback to a
1269 plugin capable of playing MPEG1 video, and those without such support
1270 we have a second fallback to the Cortado java applet playing Ogg
1271 Theora.  This seem to work quite well, as can be seen in an <a
1272 href="http://www.nuug.no/aktiviteter/20110111-semantic-web/">example
1273 from last week</a>.</p>
1274
1275 <p>The reason Ogg Theora is the most supported format, and H.264 is
1276 the least supported is simple.  Implementing and using H.264
1277 require royalty payment to MPEG-LA, and the terms of use from MPEG-LA
1278 are incompatible with free software licensing.  If you believed H.264
1279 was without royalties and license terms, check out
1280 "<a href="http://webmink.com/essays/h-264/">H.264 – Not The Kind Of
1281 Free That Matters</a>" by Simon Phipps.</p>
1282
1283 <p>A incomplete list of sites providing video in Ogg Theora is
1284 available from
1285 <a href="http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/List_of_Theora_videos">the
1286 Xiph.org wiki</a>, if you want to have a look.  I'm not aware of a
1287 similar list for WebM nor H.264.</p>
1288
1289 <p>Update 2011-01-16 09:40: A question from Tollef on IRC made me
1290 realise that I failed to make it clear enough this text is about the
1291 &lt;video&gt; tag support in browsers and not the video support
1292 provided by external plugins like the Flash plugins.</p>
1293
1294       </div>
1295       <div class="tags">
1296
1297
1298         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
1299
1300
1301       </div>
1302     </div>
1303     <div class="padding"></div>
1304
1305     <div class="entry">
1306       <div class="title">
1307         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Chrome_plan_to_drop_H_264_support_for_HTML5__lt_video_gt_.html">Chrome plan to drop H.264 support for HTML5 &lt;video&gt;</a>
1308       </div>
1309       <div class="date">
1310         12th January 2011
1311       </div>
1312       <div class="body">
1313         <p>Today I discovered
1314 <a href="http://www.digi.no/860070/google-dropper-h264-stotten-i-chrome">via
1315 digi.no</a> that the Chrome developers, in a surprising announcement,
1316 <a href="http://blog.chromium.org/2011/01/html-video-codec-support-in-chrome.html">yesterday
1317 announced</a> plans to drop H.264 support for HTML5 &lt;video&gt; in
1318 the browser.  The argument used is that H.264 is not a "completely
1319 open" codec technology.  If you believe H.264 was free for everyone
1320 to use, I recommend having a look at the essay
1321 "<a href="http://webmink.com/essays/h-264/">H.264 – Not The Kind Of
1322 Free That Matters</a>".  It is not free of cost for creators of video
1323 tools, nor those of us that want to publish on the Internet, and the
1324 terms provided by MPEG-LA excludes free software projects from
1325 licensing the patents needed for H.264.  Some background information
1326 on the Google announcement is available from
1327 <a href="http://www.osnews.com/story/24243/Google_To_Drop_H264_Support_from_Chrome">OSnews</a>.
1328 A good read. :)</p>
1329
1330 <p>Personally, I believe it is great that Google is taking a stand to
1331 promote equal terms for everyone when it comes to video publishing on
1332 the Internet.  This can only be done by publishing using free and open
1333 standards, which is only possible if the web browsers provide support
1334 for these free and open standards.  At the moment there seem to be two
1335 camps in the web browser world when it come to video support.  Some
1336 browsers support H.264, and others support
1337 <a href="http://www.theora.org/">Ogg Theora</a> and
1338 <a href="http://www.webmproject.org/">WebM</a>
1339 (<a href="http://www.diracvideo.org/">Dirac</a> is not really an option
1340 yet), forcing those of us that want to publish video on the Internet
1341 and which can not accept the terms of use presented by MPEG-LA for
1342 H.264 to not reach all potential viewers.
1343 Wikipedia keep <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5_video">an
1344 updated summary</a> of the current browser support.</p>
1345
1346 <p>Not surprising, several people would prefer Google to keep
1347 promoting H.264, and John Gruber
1348 <a href="http://daringfireball.net/2011/01/simple_questions">presents
1349 the mind set</a> of these people quite well.  His rhetorical questions
1350 provoked a reply from Thom Holwerda with another set of questions
1351 <a href="http://www.osnews.com/story/24245/10_Questions_for_John_Gruber_Regarding_H_264_WebM">presenting
1352 the issues with H.264</a>. Both are worth a read.</p>
1353
1354 <p>Some argue that if Google is dropping H.264 because it isn't free,
1355 they should also drop support for the Adobe Flash plugin.  This
1356 argument was covered by Simon Phipps in
1357 <a href="http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2011/01/google-and-h264---far-from-hypocritical/index.htm">todays
1358 blog post</a>, which I find to put the issue in context.  To me it
1359 make perfect sense to drop native H.264 support for HTML5 in the
1360 browser while still allowing plugins.</p>
1361
1362 <p>I suspect the reason this announcement make so many people protest,
1363 is that all the users and promoters of H.264 suddenly get an uneasy
1364 feeling that they might be backing the wrong horse.  A lot of TV
1365 broadcasters have been moving to H.264 the last few years, and a lot
1366 of money has been invested in hardware based on the belief that they
1367 could use the same video format for both broadcasting and web
1368 publishing.  Suddenly this belief is shaken.</p>
1369
1370 <p>An interesting question is why Google is doing this.  While the
1371 presented argument might be true enough, I believe Google would only
1372 present the argument if the change make sense from a business
1373 perspective.  One reason might be that they are currently negotiating
1374 with MPEG-LA over royalties or usage terms, and giving MPEG-LA the
1375 feeling that dropping H.264 completely from Chroome, Youtube and
1376 Google Video would improve the negotiation position of Google.
1377 Another reason might be that Google want to save money by not having
1378 to pay the video tax to MPEG-LA at all, and thus want to move to a
1379 video format not requiring royalties at all.  A third reason might be
1380 that the Chrome development team simply want to avoid the
1381 Chrome/Chromium split to get more help with the development of Chrome.
1382 I guess time will tell.</p>
1383
1384 <p>Update 2011-01-15: The Google Chrome team provided
1385 <a href="http://blog.chromium.org/2011/01/more-about-chrome-html-video-codec.html">more
1386 background and information on the move</a> it a blog post yesterday.</p>
1387
1388       </div>
1389       <div class="tags">
1390
1391
1392         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
1393
1394
1395       </div>
1396     </div>
1397     <div class="padding"></div>
1398
1399     <div class="entry">
1400       <div class="title">
1401         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/What_standards_are_Free_and_Open_as_defined_by_Digistan_.html">What standards are Free and Open as defined by Digistan?</a>
1402       </div>
1403       <div class="date">
1404         30th December 2010
1405       </div>
1406       <div class="body">
1407         <p>After trying to
1408 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Is_Ogg_Theora_a_free_and_open_standard_.html">compare
1409 Ogg Theora</a> to
1410 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">the Digistan
1411 definition</a> of a free and open standard, I concluded that this need
1412 to be done for more standards and started on a framework for doing
1413 this.  As a start, I want to get the status for all the standards in
1414 the Norwegian reference directory, which include UTF-8, HTML, PDF, ODF,
1415 JPEG, PNG, SVG and others.  But to be able to complete this in a
1416 reasonable time frame, I will need help.</p>
1417
1418 <p>If you want to help out with this work, please visit
1419 <a href="http://wiki.nuug.no/grupper/standard/digistan-analyse">the
1420 wiki pages I have set up for this</a>, and let me know that you want
1421 to help out.  The IRC channel #nuug on irc.freenode.net is a good
1422 place to coordinate this for now, as it is the IRC channel for the
1423 NUUG association where I have created the framework (I am the leader
1424 of the Norwegian Unix User Group).</p>
1425
1426 <p>The framework is still forming, and a lot is left to do.  Do not be
1427 scared by the sketchy form of the current pages. :)</p>
1428
1429       </div>
1430       <div class="tags">
1431
1432
1433         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
1434
1435
1436       </div>
1437     </div>
1438     <div class="padding"></div>
1439
1440     <div class="entry">
1441       <div class="title">
1442         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/The_many_definitions_of_a_open_standard.html">The many definitions of a open standard</a>
1443       </div>
1444       <div class="date">
1445         27th December 2010
1446       </div>
1447       <div class="body">
1448         <p>One of the reasons I like the Digistan definition of
1449 "<a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">Free and
1450 Open Standard</a>" is that this is a new term, and thus the meaning of
1451 the term has been decided by Digistan.  The term "Open Standard" has
1452 become so misunderstood that it is no longer very useful when talking
1453 about standards.  One end up discussing which definition is the best
1454 one and with such frame the only one gaining are the proponents of
1455 de-facto standards and proprietary solutions.</p>
1456
1457 <p>But to give us an idea about the diversity of definitions of open
1458 standards, here are a few that I know about.  This list is not
1459 complete, but can be a starting point for those that want to do a
1460 complete survey.  More definitions are available on the
1461 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_standard">wikipedia
1462 page</a>.</p>
1463
1464 <p>First off is my favourite, the definition from the European
1465 Interoperability Framework version 1.0.  Really sad to notice that BSA
1466 and others has succeeded in getting it removed from version 2.0 of the
1467 framework by stacking the committee drafting the new version with
1468 their own people.  Anyway, the definition is still available and it
1469 include the key properties needed to make sure everyone can use a
1470 specification on equal terms.</p>
1471
1472 <blockquote>
1473
1474 <p>The following are the minimal characteristics that a specification
1475 and its attendant documents must have in order to be considered an
1476 open standard:</p>
1477
1478 <ul>
1479
1480 <li>The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit
1481 organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an
1482 open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties
1483 (consensus or majority decision etc.).</li>
1484
1485 <li>The standard has been published and the standard specification
1486 document is available either freely or at a nominal charge. It must be
1487 permissible to all to copy, distribute and use it for no fee or at a
1488 nominal fee.</li>
1489
1490 <li>The intellectual property - i.e. patents possibly present - of
1491 (parts of) the standard is made irrevocably available on a royalty-
1492 free basis.</li>
1493
1494 <li>There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.</li>
1495
1496 </ul>
1497 </blockquote>
1498
1499 <p>Another one originates from my friends over at
1500 <a href="http://www.dkuug.dk/">DKUUG</a>, who coined and gathered
1501 support for <a href="http://www.aaben-standard.dk/">this
1502 definition</a> in 2004.  It even made it into the Danish parlament as
1503 <a href="http://www.ft.dk/dokumenter/tingdok.aspx?/samling/20051/beslutningsforslag/B103/som_fremsat.htm">their
1504 definition of a open standard</a>.  Another from a different part of
1505 the Danish government is available from the wikipedia page.</p>
1506
1507 <blockquote>
1508
1509 <p>En åben standard opfylder følgende krav:</p>
1510
1511 <ol>
1512
1513 <li>Veldokumenteret med den fuldstændige specifikation offentligt
1514 tilgængelig.</li>
1515
1516 <li>Frit implementerbar uden økonomiske, politiske eller juridiske
1517 begrænsninger på implementation og anvendelse.</li>
1518
1519 <li>Standardiseret og vedligeholdt i et åbent forum (en såkaldt
1520 "standardiseringsorganisation") via en åben proces.</li>
1521
1522 </ol>
1523
1524 </blockquote>
1525
1526 <p>Then there is <a href="http://www.fsfe.org/projects/os/def.html">the
1527 definition</a> from Free Software Foundation Europe.</p>
1528
1529 <blockquote>
1530
1531 <p>An Open Standard refers to a format or protocol that is</p>
1532
1533 <ol>
1534
1535 <li>subject to full public assessment and use without constraints in a
1536 manner equally available to all parties;</li>
1537
1538 <li>without any components or extensions that have dependencies on
1539 formats or protocols that do not meet the definition of an Open
1540 Standard themselves;</li>
1541
1542 <li>free from legal or technical clauses that limit its utilisation by
1543 any party or in any business model;</li>
1544
1545 <li>managed and further developed independently of any single vendor
1546 in a process open to the equal participation of competitors and third
1547 parties;</li>
1548
1549 <li>available in multiple complete implementations by competing
1550 vendors, or as a complete implementation equally available to all
1551 parties.</li>
1552
1553 </ol>
1554
1555 </blockquote>
1556
1557 <p>A long time ago, SUN Microsystems, now bought by Oracle, created
1558 its
1559 <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/dennisding/resource/Open%20Standard%20Definition.pdf">Open
1560 Standards Checklist</a> with a fairly detailed description.</p>
1561
1562 <blockquote>
1563 <p>Creation and Management of an Open Standard
1564
1565 <ul>
1566
1567 <li>Its development and management process must be collaborative and
1568   democratic:
1569
1570          <ul>
1571
1572          <li>Participation must be accessible to all those who wish to
1573             participate and can meet fair and reasonable criteria
1574             imposed by the organization under which it is developed
1575             and managed.</li>
1576
1577          <li>The processes must be documented and, through a known
1578             method, can be changed through input from all
1579             participants.</li>
1580
1581          <li>The process must be based on formal and binding commitments for
1582             the disclosure and licensing of intellectual property rights.</li>
1583
1584          <li>Development and management should strive for consensus,
1585             and an appeals process must be clearly outlined.</li>
1586
1587          <li>The standard specification must be open to extensive
1588             public review at least once in its life-cycle, with
1589             comments duly discussed and acted upon, if required.</li>
1590
1591          </ul>
1592
1593 </li>
1594
1595 </ul>
1596
1597 <p>Use and Licensing of an Open Standard</p>
1598 <ul>
1599
1600 <li>The standard must describe an interface, not an implementation,
1601   and the industry must be capable of creating multiple, competing
1602   implementations to the interface described in the standard without
1603   undue or restrictive constraints.  Interfaces include APIs,
1604   protocols, schemas, data formats and their encoding.</li>
1605
1606 <li> The standard must not contain any proprietary "hooks" that create
1607   a technical or economic barriers</li>
1608
1609 <li>Faithful implementations of the standard must
1610   interoperate. Interoperability means the ability of a computer
1611   program to communicate and exchange information with other computer
1612   programs and mutually to use the information which has been
1613   exchanged. This includes the ability to use, convert, or exchange
1614   file formats, protocols, schemas, interface information or
1615   conventions, so as to permit the computer program to work with other
1616   computer programs and users in all the ways in which they are
1617   intended to function.</li>
1618
1619 <li>It must be permissible for anyone to copy, distribute and read the
1620   standard for a nominal fee, or even no fee. If there is a fee, it
1621   must be low enough to not preclude widespread use.</li>
1622
1623 <li>It must be possible for anyone to obtain free (no royalties or
1624   fees; also known as "royalty free"), worldwide, non-exclusive and
1625   perpetual licenses to all essential patent claims to make, use and
1626   sell products based on the standard.  The only exceptions are
1627   terminations per the reciprocity and defensive suspension terms
1628   outlined below. Essential patent claims include pending, unpublished
1629   patents, published patents, and patent applications. The license is
1630   only for the exact scope of the standard in question.
1631
1632       <ul>
1633
1634       <li> May be conditioned only on reciprocal licenses to any of
1635         licensees' patent claims essential to practice that standard
1636         (also known as a reciprocity clause)</li>
1637
1638       <li> May be terminated as to any licensee who sues the licensor
1639         or any other licensee for infringement of patent claims
1640         essential to practice that standard (also known as a
1641         "defensive suspension" clause)</li>
1642
1643       <li> The same licensing terms are available to every potential
1644         licensor</li>
1645
1646       </ul>
1647 </li>
1648
1649 <li>The licensing terms of an open standards must not preclude
1650   implementations of that standard under open source licensing terms
1651   or restricted licensing terms</li>
1652
1653 </ul>
1654
1655 </blockquote>
1656
1657 <p>It is said that one of the nice things about standards is that
1658 there are so many of them.  As you can see, the same holds true for
1659 open standard definitions.  Most of the definitions have a lot in
1660 common, and it is not really controversial what properties a open
1661 standard should have, but the diversity of definitions have made it
1662 possible for those that want to avoid a level marked field and real
1663 competition to downplay the significance of open standards.  I hope we
1664 can turn this tide by focusing on the advantages of Free and Open
1665 Standards.</p>
1666
1667       </div>
1668       <div class="tags">
1669
1670
1671         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
1672
1673
1674       </div>
1675     </div>
1676     <div class="padding"></div>
1677
1678     <div class="entry">
1679       <div class="title">
1680         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Is_Ogg_Theora_a_free_and_open_standard_.html">Is Ogg Theora a free and open standard?</a>
1681       </div>
1682       <div class="date">
1683         25th December 2010
1684       </div>
1685       <div class="body">
1686         <p><a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">The
1687 Digistan definition</a> of a free and open standard reads like this:</p>
1688
1689 <blockquote>
1690
1691 <p>The Digital Standards Organization defines free and open standard
1692 as follows:</p>
1693
1694 <ol>
1695
1696 <li>A free and open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages
1697 in its life-cycle. Immunity from vendor capture makes it possible to
1698 freely use, improve upon, trust, and extend a standard over time.</li>
1699
1700 <li>The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit
1701 organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an
1702 open decision-making procedure available to all interested
1703 parties.</li>
1704
1705 <li>The standard has been published and the standard specification
1706 document is available freely. It must be permissible to all to copy,
1707 distribute, and use it freely.</li>
1708
1709 <li>The patents possibly present on (parts of) the standard are made
1710 irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.</li>
1711
1712 <li>There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.</li>
1713
1714 </ol>
1715
1716 <p>The economic outcome of a free and open standard, which can be
1717 measured, is that it enables perfect competition between suppliers of
1718 products based on the standard.</p>
1719 </blockquote>
1720
1721 <p>For a while now I have tried to figure out of Ogg Theora is a free
1722 and open standard according to this definition.  Here is a short
1723 writeup of what I have been able to gather so far.  I brought up the
1724 topic on the Xiph advocacy mailing list
1725 <a href="http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/advocacy/2009-July/001632.html">in
1726 July 2009</a>, for those that want to see some background information.
1727 According to Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves and Monty Montgomery on that list
1728 the Ogg Theora specification fulfils the Digistan definition.</p>
1729
1730 <p><strong>Free from vendor capture?</strong></p>
1731
1732 <p>As far as I can see, there is no single vendor that can control the
1733 Ogg Theora specification.  It can be argued that the
1734 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/">Xiph foundation</A> is such vendor, but
1735 given that it is a non-profit foundation with the expressed goal
1736 making free and open protocols and standards available, it is not
1737 obvious that this is a real risk.  One issue with the Xiph
1738 foundation is that its inner working (as in board member list, or who
1739 control the foundation) are not easily available on the web.  I've
1740 been unable to find out who is in the foundation board, and have not
1741 seen any accounting information documenting how money is handled nor
1742 where is is spent in the foundation.  It is thus not obvious for an
1743 external observer who control The Xiph foundation, and for all I know
1744 it is possible for a single vendor to take control over the
1745 specification.  But it seem unlikely.</p>
1746
1747 <p><strong>Maintained by open not-for-profit organisation?</strong></p>
1748
1749 <p>Assuming that the Xiph foundation is the organisation its web pages
1750 claim it to be, this point is fulfilled.  If Xiph foundation is
1751 controlled by a single vendor, it isn't, but I have not found any
1752 documentation indicating this.</p>
1753
1754 <p>According to
1755 <a href="http://media.hiof.no/diverse/fad/rapport_4.pdf">a report</a>
1756 prepared by Audun Vaaler og Børre Ludvigsen for the Norwegian
1757 government, the Xiph foundation is a non-commercial organisation and
1758 the development process is open, transparent and non-Discrimatory.
1759 Until proven otherwise, I believe it make most sense to believe the
1760 report is correct.</p>
1761
1762 <p><strong>Specification freely available?</strong></p>
1763
1764 <p>The specification for the <a href="http://www.xiph.org/ogg/doc/">Ogg
1765 container format</a> and both the
1766 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/vorbis/doc/">Vorbis</a> and
1767 <a href="http://theora.org/doc/">Theora</a> codeces are available on
1768 the web.  This are the terms in the Vorbis and Theora specification:
1769
1770 <blockquote>
1771
1772 Anyone may freely use and distribute the Ogg and [Vorbis/Theora]
1773 specifications, whether in private, public, or corporate
1774 capacity. However, the Xiph.Org Foundation and the Ogg project reserve
1775 the right to set the Ogg [Vorbis/Theora] specification and certify
1776 specification compliance.
1777
1778 </blockquote>
1779
1780 <p>The Ogg container format is specified in IETF
1781 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/ogg/doc/rfc3533.txt">RFC 3533</a>, and
1782 this is the term:<p>
1783
1784 <blockquote>
1785
1786 <p>This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
1787 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
1788 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and
1789 distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind,
1790 provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
1791 included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
1792 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
1793 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
1794 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing
1795 Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined
1796 in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to
1797 translate it into languages other than English.</p>
1798
1799 <p>The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
1800 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.</p>
1801 </blockquote>
1802
1803 <p>All these terms seem to allow unlimited distribution and use, an
1804 this term seem to be fulfilled.  There might be a problem with the
1805 missing permission to distribute modified versions of the text, and
1806 thus reuse it in other specifications.  Not quite sure if that is a
1807 requirement for the Digistan definition.</p>
1808
1809 <p><strong>Royalty-free?</strong></p>
1810
1811 <p>There are no known patent claims requiring royalties for the Ogg
1812 Theora format.
1813 <a href="http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=65782">MPEG-LA</a>
1814 and
1815 <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/04/30/237238/Steve-Jobs-Hints-At-Theora-Lawsuit">Steve
1816 Jobs</a> in Apple claim to know about some patent claims (submarine
1817 patents) against the Theora format, but no-one else seem to believe
1818 them.  Both Opera Software and the Mozilla Foundation have looked into
1819 this and decided to implement Ogg Theora support in their browsers
1820 without paying any royalties.  For now the claims from MPEG-LA and
1821 Steve Jobs seem more like FUD to scare people to use the H.264 codec
1822 than any real problem with Ogg Theora.</p>
1823
1824 <p><strong>No constraints on re-use?</strong></p>
1825
1826 <p>I am not aware of any constraints on re-use.</p>
1827
1828 <p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p>
1829
1830 <p>3 of 5 requirements seem obviously fulfilled, and the remaining 2
1831 depend on the governing structure of the Xiph foundation.  Given the
1832 background report used by the Norwegian government, I believe it is
1833 safe to assume the last two requirements are fulfilled too, but it
1834 would be nice if the Xiph foundation web site made it easier to verify
1835 this.</p>
1836
1837 <p>It would be nice to see other analysis of other specifications to
1838 see if they are free and open standards.</p>
1839
1840       </div>
1841       <div class="tags">
1842
1843
1844         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
1845
1846
1847       </div>
1848     </div>
1849     <div class="padding"></div>
1850
1851     <div class="entry">
1852       <div class="title">
1853         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/The_reply_from_Edgar_Villanueva_to_Microsoft_in_Peru.html">The reply from Edgar Villanueva to Microsoft in Peru</a>
1854       </div>
1855       <div class="date">
1856         25th December 2010
1857       </div>
1858       <div class="body">
1859         <p>A few days ago
1860 <a href="http://www.idg.no/computerworld/article189879.ece">an
1861 article</a> in the Norwegian Computerworld magazine about how version
1862 2.0 of
1863 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Interoperability_Framework">European
1864 Interoperability Framework</a> has been successfully lobbied by the
1865 proprietary software industry to remove the focus on free software.
1866 Nothing very surprising there, given
1867 <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/29/2115235/Open-Source-Open-Standards-Under-Attack-In-Europe">earlier
1868 reports</a> on how Microsoft and others have stacked the committees in
1869 this work.  But I find this very sad.   The definition of
1870 <a href="http://www.nuug.no/dokumenter/standard-presse-def-200506.txt">an
1871 open standard from version 1</a> was very good, and something I
1872 believe should be used also in the future, alongside
1873 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">the
1874 definition from Digistan</A>.  Version 2 have removed the open
1875 standard definition from its content.</p>
1876
1877 <p>Anyway, the news reminded me of the great reply sent by Dr. Edgar
1878 Villanueva, congressman in Peru at the time, to Microsoft as a reply
1879 to Microsofts attack on his proposal regarding the use of free software
1880 in the public sector in Peru.  As the text was not available from a
1881 few of the URLs where it used to be available, I copy it here from
1882 <a href="http://gnuwin.epfl.ch/articles/en/reponseperou/villanueva_to_ms.html">my
1883 source</a> to ensure it is available also in the future.  Some
1884 background information about that story is available in
1885 <a href="http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6099">an article</a> from
1886 Linux Journal in 2002.</p>
1887
1888 <blockquote>
1889 <p>Lima, 8th of April, 2002<br>
1890 To: Señor JUAN ALBERTO GONZÁLEZ<br>
1891 General Manager of Microsoft Perú</p>
1892
1893 <p>Dear Sir:</p>
1894
1895 <p>First of all, I thank you for your letter of March 25, 2002 in which you state the official position of Microsoft relative to Bill Number 1609, Free Software in Public Administration, which is indubitably inspired by the desire for Peru to find a suitable place in the global technological context. In the same spirit, and convinced that we will find the best solutions through an exchange of clear and open ideas, I will take this opportunity to reply to the commentaries included in your letter.</p>
1896
1897 <p>While acknowledging that opinions such as yours constitute a significant contribution, it would have been even more worthwhile for me if, rather than formulating objections of a general nature (which we will analyze in detail later) you had gathered solid arguments for the advantages that proprietary software could bring to the Peruvian State, and to its citizens in general, since this would have allowed a more enlightening exchange in respect of each of our positions.</p>
1898
1899 <p>With the aim of creating an orderly debate, we will assume that what you call "open source software" is what the Bill defines as "free software", since there exists software for which the source code is distributed together with the program, but which does not fall within the definition established by the Bill; and that what you call "commercial software" is what the Bill defines as "proprietary" or "unfree", given that there exists free software which is sold in the market for a price like any other good or service.</p>
1900
1901 <p>It is also necessary to make it clear that the aim of the Bill we are discussing is not directly related to the amount of direct savings that can by made by using free software in state institutions. That is in any case a marginal aggregate value, but in no way is it the chief focus of the Bill. The basic principles which inspire the Bill are linked to the basic guarantees of a state of law, such as:</p>
1902
1903 <p>
1904 <ul>
1905 <li>Free access to public information by the citizen. </li>
1906 <li>Permanence of public data. </li>
1907 <li>Security of the State and citizens.</li>
1908 </ul>
1909 </p>
1910
1911 <p>To guarantee the free access of citizens to public information, it is indispensable that the encoding of data is not tied to a single provider. The use of standard and open formats gives a guarantee of this free access, if necessary through the creation of compatible free software.</p>
1912
1913 <p>To guarantee the permanence of public data, it is necessary that the usability and maintenance of the software does not depend on the goodwill of the suppliers, or on the monopoly conditions imposed by them. For this reason the State needs systems the development of which can be guaranteed due to the availability of the source code.</p>
1914
1915 <p>To guarantee national security or the security of the State, it is indispensable to be able to rely on systems without elements which allow control from a distance or the undesired transmission of information to third parties. Systems with source code freely accessible to the public are required to allow their inspection by the State itself, by the citizens, and by a large number of independent experts throughout the world. Our proposal brings further security, since the knowledge of the source code will eliminate the growing number of programs with *spy code*. </p>
1916
1917 <p>In the same way, our proposal strengthens the security of the citizens, both in their role as legitimate owners of information managed by the state, and in their role as consumers. In this second case, by allowing the growth of a widespread availability of free software not containing *spy code* able to put at risk privacy and individual freedoms.</p>
1918
1919 <p>In this sense, the Bill is limited to establishing the conditions under which the state bodies will obtain software in the future, that is, in a way compatible with these basic principles.</p>
1920
1921
1922 <p>From reading the Bill it will be clear that once passed:<br>
1923 <li>the law does not forbid the production of proprietary software</li>
1924 <li>the law does not forbid the sale of proprietary software</li>
1925 <li>the law does not specify which concrete software to use</li>
1926 <li>the law does not dictate the supplier from whom software will be bought</li>
1927 <li>the law does not limit the terms under which a software product can be licensed.</li>
1928
1929 </p>
1930
1931 <p>What the Bill does express clearly, is that, for software to be acceptable for the state it is not enough that it is technically capable of fulfilling a task, but that further the contractual conditions must satisfy a series of requirements regarding the license, without which the State cannot guarantee the citizen adequate processing of his data, watching over its integrity, confidentiality, and accessibility throughout time, as these are very critical aspects for its normal functioning.</p>
1932
1933 <p>We agree, Mr. Gonzalez, that information and communication technology have a significant impact on the quality of life of the citizens (whether it be positive or negative). We surely also agree that the basic values I have pointed out above are fundamental in a democratic state like Peru. So we are very interested to know of any other way of guaranteeing these principles, other than through the use of free software in the terms defined by the Bill.</p>
1934
1935 <p>As for the observations you have made, we will now go on to analyze them in detail:</p>
1936
1937 <p>Firstly, you point out that: "1. The bill makes it compulsory for all public bodies to use only free software, that is to say open source software, which breaches the principles of equality before the law, that of non-discrimination and the right of free private enterprise, freedom of industry and of contract, protected by the constitution."</p>
1938
1939 <p>This understanding is in error. The Bill in no way affects the rights you list; it limits itself entirely to establishing conditions for the use of software on the part of state institutions, without in any way meddling in private sector transactions. It is a well established principle that the State does not enjoy the wide spectrum of contractual freedom of the private sector, as it is limited in its actions precisely by the requirement for transparency of public acts; and in this sense, the preservation of the greater common interest must prevail when legislating on the matter.</p>
1940
1941 <p>The Bill protects equality under the law, since no natural or legal person is excluded from the right of offering these goods to the State under the conditions defined in the Bill and without more limitations than those established by the Law of State Contracts and Purchasing (T.U.O. by Supreme Decree No. 012-2001-PCM).</p>
1942
1943 <p>The Bill does not introduce any discrimination whatever, since it only establishes *how* the goods have to be provided (which is a state power) and not *who* has to provide them (which would effectively be discriminatory, if restrictions based on national origin, race religion, ideology, sexual preference etc. were imposed). On the contrary, the Bill is decidedly antidiscriminatory. This is so because by defining with no room for doubt the conditions for the provision of software, it prevents state bodies from using software which has a license including discriminatory conditions.</p>
1944
1945 <p>It should be obvious from the preceding two paragraphs that the Bill does not harm free private enterprise, since the latter can always choose under what conditions it will produce software; some of these will be acceptable to the State, and others will not be since they contradict the guarantee of the basic principles listed above. This free initiative is of course compatible with the freedom of industry and freedom of contract (in the limited form in which the State can exercise the latter). Any private subject can produce software under the conditions which the State requires, or can refrain from doing so. Nobody is forced to adopt a model of production, but if they wish to provide software to the State, they must provide the mechanisms which guarantee the basic principles, and which are those described in the Bill.</p>
1946
1947 <p>By way of an example: nothing in the text of the Bill would prevent your company offering the State bodies an office "suite", under the conditions defined in the Bill and setting the price that you consider satisfactory. If you did not, it would not be due to restrictions imposed by the law, but to business decisions relative to the method of commercializing your products, decisions with which the State is not involved.</p>
1948
1949 <p>To continue; you note that:" 2. The bill, by making the use of open source software compulsory, would establish discriminatory and non competitive practices in the contracting and purchasing by public bodies..."</p>
1950
1951 <p>This statement is just a reiteration of the previous one, and so the response can be found above. However, let us concern ourselves for a moment with your comment regarding "non-competitive ... practices."</p>
1952
1953 <p>Of course, in defining any kind of purchase, the buyer sets conditions which relate to the proposed use of the good or service. From the start, this excludes certain manufacturers from the possibility of competing, but does not exclude them "a priori", but rather based on a series of principles determined by the autonomous will of the purchaser, and so the process takes place in conformance with the law. And in the Bill it is established that *no one* is excluded from competing as far as he guarantees the fulfillment of the basic principles.</p>
1954
1955 <p>Furthermore, the Bill *stimulates* competition, since it tends to generate a supply of software with better conditions of usability, and to better existing work, in a model of continuous improvement.</p>
1956
1957 <p>On the other hand, the central aspect of competivity is the chance to provide better choices to the consumer. Now, it is impossible to ignore the fact that marketing does not play a neutral role when the product is offered on the market (since accepting the opposite would lead one to suppose that firms' expenses in marketing lack any sense), and that therefore a significant expense under this heading can influence the decisions of the purchaser. This influence of marketing is in large measure reduced by the bill that we are backing, since the choice within the framework proposed is based on the *technical merits* of the product and not on the effort put into commercialization by the producer; in this sense, competitiveness is increased, since the smallest software producer can compete on equal terms with the most powerful corporations.</p>
1958
1959 <p>It is necessary to stress that there is no position more anti-competitive than that of the big software producers, which frequently abuse their dominant position, since in innumerable cases they propose as a solution to problems raised by users: "update your software to the new version" (at the user's expense, naturally); furthermore, it is common to find arbitrary cessation of technical help for products, which, in the provider's judgment alone, are "old"; and so, to receive any kind of technical assistance, the user finds himself forced to migrate to new versions (with non-trivial costs, especially as changes in hardware platform are often involved). And as the whole infrastructure is based on proprietary data formats, the user stays "trapped" in the need to continue using products from the same supplier, or to make the huge effort to change to another environment (probably also proprietary).</p>
1960
1961 <p>You add: "3. So, by compelling the State to favor a business model based entirely on open source, the bill would only discourage the local and international manufacturing companies, which are the ones which really undertake important expenditures, create a significant number of direct and indirect jobs, as well as contributing to the GNP, as opposed to a model of open source software which tends to have an ever weaker economic impact, since it mainly creates jobs in the service sector."</p>
1962
1963 <p>I do not agree with your statement. Partly because of what you yourself point out in paragraph 6 of your letter, regarding the relative weight of services in the context of software use. This contradiction alone would invalidate your position. The service model, adopted by a large number of companies in the software industry, is much larger in economic terms, and with a tendency to increase, than the licensing of programs.</p>
1964
1965 <p>On the other hand, the private sector of the economy has the widest possible freedom to choose the economic model which best suits its interests, even if this freedom of choice is often obscured subliminally by the disproportionate expenditure on marketing by the producers of proprietary software.</p>
1966
1967 <p>In addition, a reading of your opinion would lead to the conclusion that the State market is crucial and essential for the proprietary software industry, to such a point that the choice made by the State in this bill would completely eliminate the market for these firms. If that is true, we can deduce that the State must be subsidizing the proprietary software industry. In the unlikely event that this were true, the State would have the right to apply the subsidies in the area it considered of greatest social value; it is undeniable, in this improbable hypothesis, that if the State decided to subsidize software, it would have to do so choosing the free over the proprietary, considering its social effect and the rational use of taxpayers money.</p>
1968
1969 <p>In respect of the jobs generated by proprietary software in countries like ours, these mainly concern technical tasks of little aggregate value; at the local level, the technicians who provide support for proprietary software produced by transnational companies do not have the possibility of fixing bugs, not necessarily for lack of technical capability or of talent, but because they do not have access to the source code to fix it. With free software one creates more technically qualified employment and a framework of free competence where success is only tied to the ability to offer good technical support and quality of service, one stimulates the market, and one increases the shared fund of knowledge, opening up alternatives to generate services of greater total value and a higher quality level, to the benefit of all involved: producers, service organizations, and consumers.</p>
1970
1971 <p>It is a common phenomenon in developing countries that local software industries obtain the majority of their takings in the service sector, or in the creation of "ad hoc" software. Therefore, any negative impact that the application of the Bill might have in this sector will be more than compensated by a growth in demand for services (as long as these are carried out to high quality standards). If the transnational software companies decide not to compete under these new rules of the game, it is likely that they will undergo some decrease in takings in terms of payment for licenses; however, considering that these firms continue to allege that much of the software used by the State has been illegally copied, one can see that the impact will not be very serious. Certainly, in any case their fortune will be determined by market laws, changes in which cannot be avoided; many firms traditionally associated with proprietary software have already set out on the road (supported by copious expense) of providing services associated with free software, which shows that the models are not mutually exclusive.</p>
1972
1973 <p>With this bill the State is deciding that it needs to preserve certain fundamental values. And it is deciding this based on its sovereign power, without affecting any of the constitutional guarantees. If these values could be guaranteed without having to choose a particular economic model, the effects of the law would be even more beneficial. In any case, it should be clear that the State does not choose an economic model; if it happens that there only exists one economic model capable of providing software which provides the basic guarantee of these principles, this is because of historical circumstances, not because of an arbitrary choice of a given model.</p>
1974
1975 <p>Your letter continues: "4. The bill imposes the use of open source software without considering the dangers that this can bring from the point of view of security, guarantee, and possible violation of the intellectual property rights of third parties."</p>
1976
1977 <p>Alluding in an abstract way to "the dangers this can bring", without specifically mentioning a single one of these supposed dangers, shows at the least some lack of knowledge of the topic. So, allow me to enlighten you on these points.</p>
1978
1979 <p>On security:</p>
1980
1981 <p>National security has already been mentioned in general terms in the initial discussion of the basic principles of the bill. In more specific terms, relative to the security of the software itself, it is well known that all software (whether proprietary or free) contains errors or "bugs" (in programmers' slang). But it is also well known that the bugs in free software are fewer, and are fixed much more quickly, than in proprietary software. It is not in vain that numerous public bodies responsible for the IT security of state systems in developed countries require the use of free software for the same conditions of security and efficiency.</p>
1982
1983 <p>What is impossible to prove is that proprietary software is more secure than free, without the public and open inspection of the scientific community and users in general. This demonstration is impossible because the model of proprietary software itself prevents this analysis, so that any guarantee of security is based only on promises of good intentions (biased, by any reckoning) made by the producer itself, or its contractors.</p>
1984
1985 <p>It should be remembered that in many cases, the licensing conditions include Non-Disclosure clauses which prevent the user from publicly revealing security flaws found in the licensed proprietary product.</p>
1986
1987 <p>In respect of the guarantee:</p>
1988
1989 <p>As you know perfectly well, or could find out by reading the "End User License Agreement" of the products you license, in the great majority of cases the guarantees are limited to replacement of the storage medium in case of defects, but in no case is compensation given for direct or indirect damages, loss of profits, etc... If as a result of a security bug in one of your products, not fixed in time by yourselves, an attacker managed to compromise crucial State systems, what guarantees, reparations and compensation would your company make in accordance with your licensing conditions? The guarantees of proprietary software, inasmuch as programs are delivered ``AS IS'', that is, in the state in which they are, with no additional responsibility of the provider in respect of function, in no way differ from those normal with free software.</p>
1990
1991 <p>On Intellectual Property:</p>
1992
1993 <p>Questions of intellectual property fall outside the scope of this bill, since they are covered by specific other laws. The model of free software in no way implies ignorance of these laws, and in fact the great majority of free software is covered by copyright. In reality, the inclusion of this question in your observations shows your confusion in respect of the legal framework in which free software is developed. The inclusion of the intellectual property of others in works claimed as one's own is not a practice that has been noted in the free software community; whereas, unfortunately, it has been in the area of proprietary software. As an example, the condemnation by the Commercial Court of Nanterre, France, on 27th September 2001 of Microsoft Corp. to a penalty of 3 million francs in damages and interest, for violation of intellectual property (piracy, to use the unfortunate term that your firm commonly uses in its publicity).</p>
1994
1995 <p>You go on to say that: "The bill uses the concept of open source software incorrectly, since it does not necessarily imply that the software is free or of zero cost, and so arrives at mistaken conclusions regarding State savings, with no cost-benefit analysis to validate its position."</p>
1996
1997 <p>This observation is wrong; in principle, freedom and lack of cost are orthogonal concepts: there is software which is proprietary and charged for (for example, MS Office), software which is proprietary and free of charge (MS Internet Explorer), software which is free and charged for (Red Hat, SuSE etc GNU/Linux distributions), software which is free and not charged for (Apache, Open Office, Mozilla), and even software which can be licensed in a range of combinations (MySQL).</p>
1998
1999 <p>Certainly free software is not necessarily free of charge. And the text of the bill does not state that it has to be so, as you will have noted after reading it. The definitions included in the Bill state clearly *what* should be considered free software, at no point referring to freedom from charges. Although the possibility of savings in payments for proprietary software licenses are mentioned, the foundations of the bill clearly refer to the fundamental guarantees to be preserved and to the stimulus to local technological development. Given that a democratic State must support these principles, it has no other choice than to use software with publicly available source code, and to exchange information only in standard formats.</p>
2000
2001 <p>If the State does not use software with these characteristics, it will be weakening basic republican principles. Luckily, free software also implies lower total costs; however, even given the hypothesis (easily disproved) that it was more expensive than proprietary software, the simple existence of an effective free software tool for a particular IT function would oblige the State to use it; not by command of this Bill, but because of the basic principles we enumerated at the start, and which arise from the very essence of the lawful democratic State.</p>
2002
2003 <p>You continue: "6. It is wrong to think that Open Source Software is free of charge. Research by the Gartner Group (an important investigator of the technological market recognized at world level) has shown that the cost of purchase of software (operating system and applications) is only 8% of the total cost which firms and institutions take on for a rational and truly beneficial use of the technology. The other 92% consists of: installation costs, enabling, support, maintenance, administration, and down-time."</p>
2004
2005 <p>This argument repeats that already given in paragraph 5 and partly contradicts paragraph 3. For the sake of brevity we refer to the comments on those paragraphs. However, allow me to point out that your conclusion is logically false: even if according to Gartner Group the cost of software is on average only 8% of the total cost of use, this does not in any way deny the existence of software which is free of charge, that is, with a licensing cost of zero.</p>
2006
2007 <p>In addition, in this paragraph you correctly point out that the service components and losses due to down-time make up the largest part of the total cost of software use, which, as you will note, contradicts your statement regarding the small value of services suggested in paragraph 3. Now the use of free software contributes significantly to reduce the remaining life-cycle costs. This reduction in the costs of installation, support etc. can be noted in several areas: in the first place, the competitive service model of free software, support and maintenance for which can be freely contracted out to a range of suppliers competing on the grounds of quality and low cost. This is true for installation, enabling, and support, and in large part for maintenance. In the second place, due to the reproductive characteristics of the model, maintenance carried out for an application is easily replicable, without incurring large costs (that is, without paying more than once for the same thing) since modifications, if one wishes, can be incorporated in the common fund of knowledge. Thirdly, the huge costs caused by non-functioning software ("blue screens of death", malicious code such as virus, worms, and trojans, exceptions, general protection faults and other well-known problems) are reduced considerably by using more stable software; and it is well known that one of the most notable virtues of free software is its stability.</p>
2008
2009 <p>You further state that: "7. One of the arguments behind the bill is the supposed freedom from costs of open-source software, compared with the costs of commercial software, without taking into account the fact that there exist types of volume licensing which can be highly advantageous for the State, as has happened in other countries."</p>
2010
2011 <p>I have already pointed out that what is in question is not the cost of the software but the principles of freedom of information, accessibility, and security. These arguments have been covered extensively in the preceding paragraphs to which I would refer you.</p>
2012
2013 <p>On the other hand, there certainly exist types of volume licensing (although unfortunately proprietary software does not satisfy the basic principles). But as you correctly pointed out in the immediately preceding paragraph of your letter, they only manage to reduce the impact of a component which makes up no more than 8% of the total.</p>
2014
2015 <p>You continue: "8. In addition, the alternative adopted by the bill (I) is clearly more expensive, due to the high costs of software migration, and (II) puts at risk compatibility and interoperability of the IT platforms within the State, and between the State and the private sector, given the hundreds of versions of open source software on the market."</p>
2016
2017 <p>Let us analyze your statement in two parts. Your first argument, that migration implies high costs, is in reality an argument in favor of the Bill. Because the more time goes by, the more difficult migration to another technology will become; and at the same time, the security risks associated with proprietary software will continue to increase. In this way, the use of proprietary systems and formats will make the State ever more dependent on specific suppliers. Once a policy of using free software has been established (which certainly, does imply some cost) then on the contrary migration from one system to another becomes very simple, since all data is stored in open formats. On the other hand, migration to an open software context implies no more costs than migration between two different proprietary software contexts, which invalidates your argument completely.</p>
2018
2019 <p>The second argument refers to "problems in interoperability of the IT platforms within the State, and between the State and the private sector" This statement implies a certain lack of knowledge of the way in which free software is built, which does not maximize the dependence of the user on a particular platform, as normally happens in the realm of proprietary software. Even when there are multiple free software distributions, and numerous programs which can be used for the same function, interoperability is guaranteed as much by the use of standard formats, as required by the bill, as by the possibility of creating interoperable software given the availability of the source code.</p>
2020
2021 <p>You then say that: "9. The majority of open source code does not offer adequate levels of service nor the guarantee from recognized manufacturers of high productivity on the part of the users, which has led various public organizations to retract their decision to go with an open source software solution and to use commercial software in its place."</p>
2022
2023 <p>This observation is without foundation. In respect of the guarantee, your argument was rebutted in the response to paragraph 4. In respect of support services, it is possible to use free software without them (just as also happens with proprietary software), but anyone who does need them can obtain support separately, whether from local firms or from international corporations, again just as in the case of proprietary software.</p>
2024
2025 <p>On the other hand, it would contribute greatly to our analysis if you could inform us about free software projects *established* in public bodies which have already been abandoned in favor of proprietary software. We know of a good number of cases where the opposite has taken place, but not know of any where what you describe has taken place.</p>
2026
2027 <p>You continue by observing that: "10. The bill discourages the creativity of the Peruvian software industry, which invoices 40 million US$/year, exports 4 million US$ (10th in ranking among non-traditional exports, more than handicrafts) and is a source of highly qualified employment. With a law that encourages the use of open source, software programmers lose their intellectual property rights and their main source of payment."</p>
2028
2029 <p>It is clear enough that nobody is forced to commercialize their code as free software. The only thing to take into account is that if it is not free software, it cannot be sold to the public sector. This is not in any case the main market for the national software industry. We covered some questions referring to the influence of the Bill on the generation of employment which would be both highly technically qualified and in better conditions for competition above, so it seems unnecessary to insist on this point.</p>
2030
2031 <p>What follows in your statement is incorrect. On the one hand, no author of free software loses his intellectual property rights, unless he expressly wishes to place his work in the public domain. The free software movement has always been very respectful of intellectual property, and has generated widespread public recognition of its authors. Names like those of Richard Stallman, Linus Torvalds, Guido van Rossum, Larry Wall, Miguel de Icaza, Andrew Tridgell, Theo de Raadt, Andrea Arcangeli, Bruce Perens, Darren Reed, Alan Cox, Eric Raymond, and many others, are recognized world-wide for their contributions to the development of software that is used today by millions of people throughout the world. On the other hand, to say that the rewards for authors rights make up the main source of payment of Peruvian programmers is in any case a guess, in particular since there is no proof to this effect, nor a demonstration of how the use of free software by the State would influence these payments.</p>
2032
2033 <p>You go on to say that: "11. Open source software, since it can be distributed without charge, does not allow the generation of income for its developers through exports. In this way, the multiplier effect of the sale of software to other countries is weakened, and so in turn is the growth of the industry, while Government rules ought on the contrary to stimulate local industry."</p>
2034
2035 <p>This statement shows once again complete ignorance of the mechanisms of and market for free software. It tries to claim that the market of sale of non- exclusive rights for use (sale of licenses) is the only possible one for the software industry, when you yourself pointed out several paragraphs above that it is not even the most important one. The incentives that the bill offers for the growth of a supply of better qualified professionals, together with the increase in experience that working on a large scale with free software within the State will bring for Peruvian technicians, will place them in a highly competitive position to offer their services abroad.</p>
2036
2037 <p>You then state that: "12. In the Forum, the use of open source software in education was discussed, without mentioning the complete collapse of this initiative in a country like Mexico, where precisely the State employees who founded the project now state that open source software did not make it possible to offer a learning experience to pupils in the schools, did not take into account the capability at a national level to give adequate support to the platform, and that the software did not and does not allow for the levels of platform integration that now exist in schools."</p>
2038
2039 <p>In fact Mexico has gone into reverse with the Red Escolar (Schools Network) project. This is due precisely to the fact that the driving forces behind the Mexican project used license costs as their main argument, instead of the other reasons specified in our project, which are far more essential. Because of this conceptual mistake, and as a result of the lack of effective support from the SEP (Secretary of State for Public Education), the assumption was made that to implant free software in schools it would be enough to drop their software budget and send them a CD ROM with Gnu/Linux instead. Of course this failed, and it couldn't have been otherwise, just as school laboratories fail when they use proprietary software and have no budget for implementation and maintenance. That's exactly why our bill is not limited to making the use of free software mandatory, but recognizes the need to create a viable migration plan, in which the State undertakes the technical transition in an orderly way in order to then enjoy the advantages of free software.</p>
2040
2041 <p>You end with a rhetorical question: "13. If open source software satisfies all the requirements of State bodies, why do you need a law to adopt it? Shouldn't it be the market which decides freely which products give most benefits or value?"</p>
2042
2043 <p>We agree that in the private sector of the economy, it must be the market that decides which products to use, and no state interference is permissible there. However, in the case of the public sector, the reasoning is not the same: as we have already established, the state archives, handles, and transmits information which does not belong to it, but which is entrusted to it by citizens, who have no alternative under the rule of law. As a counterpart to this legal requirement, the State must take extreme measures to safeguard the integrity, confidentiality, and accessibility of this information. The use of proprietary software raises serious doubts as to whether these requirements can be fulfilled, lacks conclusive evidence in this respect, and so is not suitable for use in the public sector.</p>
2044
2045 <p>The need for a law is based, firstly, on the realization of the fundamental principles listed above in the specific area of software; secondly, on the fact that the State is not an ideal homogeneous entity, but made up of multiple bodies with varying degrees of autonomy in decision making. Given that it is inappropriate to use proprietary software, the fact of establishing these rules in law will prevent the personal discretion of any state employee from putting at risk the information which belongs to citizens. And above all, because it constitutes an up-to-date reaffirmation in relation to the means of management and communication of information used today, it is based on the republican principle of openness to the public.</p>
2046
2047 <p>In conformance with this universally accepted principle, the citizen has the right to know all information held by the State and not covered by well- founded declarations of secrecy based on law. Now, software deals with information and is itself information. Information in a special form, capable of being interpreted by a machine in order to execute actions, but crucial information all the same because the citizen has a legitimate right to know, for example, how his vote is computed or his taxes calculated. And for that he must have free access to the source code and be able to prove to his satisfaction the programs used for electoral computations or calculation of his taxes.</p>
2048
2049 <p>I wish you the greatest respect, and would like to repeat that my office will always be open for you to expound your point of view to whatever level of detail you consider suitable.</p>
2050
2051 <p>Cordially,<br>
2052 DR. EDGAR DAVID VILLANUEVA NUÑEZ<br>
2053 Congressman of the Republic of Perú.</p>
2054 </blockquote>
2055
2056       </div>
2057       <div class="tags">
2058
2059
2060         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2061
2062
2063       </div>
2064     </div>
2065     <div class="padding"></div>
2066
2067     <div class="entry">
2068       <div class="title">
2069         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Officeshots_still_going_strong.html">Officeshots still going strong</a>
2070       </div>
2071       <div class="date">
2072         25th December 2010
2073       </div>
2074       <div class="body">
2075         <p>Half a year ago I
2076 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Officeshots_taking_shape.html">wrote
2077 a bit</a> about <a href="http://www.officeshots.org/">OfficeShots</a>,
2078 a web service to allow anyone to test how ODF documents are handled by
2079 the different programs reading and writing the ODF format.</p>
2080
2081 <p>I just had a look at the service, and it seem to be going strong.
2082 Very interesting to see the results reported in the gallery, how
2083 different Office implementations handle different ODF features.  Sad
2084 to see that KOffice was not doing it very well, and happy to see that
2085 LibreOffice has been tested already (but sadly not listed as a option
2086 for OfficeShots users yet).  I am glad to see that the ODF community
2087 got such a great test tool available.</p>
2088
2089       </div>
2090       <div class="tags">
2091
2092
2093         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2094
2095
2096       </div>
2097     </div>
2098     <div class="padding"></div>
2099
2100     <div class="entry">
2101       <div class="title">
2102         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Best___ikke_fortelle_noen_at_streaming_er_nedlasting___.html">Best å ikke fortelle noen at streaming er nedlasting...</a>
2103       </div>
2104       <div class="date">
2105         30th October 2010
2106       </div>
2107       <div class="body">
2108         <p>I dag la jeg inn en kommentar på en sak hos NRKBeta
2109 <a href="http://nrkbeta.no/2010/10/27/bakom-blindpassasjer-del-1/">om
2110 hvordan TV-serien Blindpassasjer ble laget</a> i forbindelse med at
2111 filmene NRK la ut ikke var tilgjengelig i et
2112 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">fritt og
2113 åpent format</a>.  Dette var det jeg skrev publiserte der 07:39.</p>
2114
2115 <p><blockquote>
2116 <p>"Vi fikk en kommentar rundt måten streamet innhold er beskyttet fra
2117 nedlasting.  Mange av oss som kan mer enn gjennomsnittet om systemer
2118 som dette, vet at det stort sett er mulig å lure ut ting med den
2119 nødvendige forkunnskapen."</p>
2120
2121 <p>Haha.  Å streame innhold er det samme som å laste ned innhold, så å
2122 beskytte en stream mot nedlasting er ikke mulig.  Å skrive noe slikt
2123 er å forlede leseren.</p>
2124
2125 <p>Med den bakgrunn blir forklaringen om at noen rettighetshavere kun
2126 vil tillate streaming men ikke nedlasting meningsløs.</p>
2127
2128 <p>Anbefaler forresten å lese
2129 <a href="http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/10/drm-is-toxic-to-culture/index.htm">http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/10/drm-is-toxic-to-culture/index.htm</a>
2130 om hva som ville være konsekvensen hvis digitale avspillingssperrer
2131 (DRM) fungerte.  Det gjør de naturligvis ikke teknisk - det er jo
2132 derfor de må ha totalitære juridiske beskyttelsesmekanismer på plass,
2133 men det er skremmende hva samfunnet tillater og NRK er med på å bygge
2134 opp under.</p>
2135 </blockquote></p>
2136
2137 <p>Ca. 20 minutter senere får jeg følgende epost fra Anders Hofseth i
2138 NRKBeta:</p>
2139
2140 <p><blockquote>
2141 <p>From: Anders Hofseth &lt;XXX@gmail.com>
2142 <br>To: "pere@hungry.com" &lt;pere@hungry.com>
2143 <br>Cc: Eirik Solheim &lt;XXX@gmail.com>, Jon Ståle Carlsen &lt;XXX@gmail.com>, Henrik Lied &lt;XXX@gmail.com>
2144 <br>Subject: Re: [NRKbeta] Kommentar: "Bakom Blindpassasjer: del 1"
2145 <br>Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:58:44 +0200</p>
2146
2147 <p>Hei Petter.
2148 <br>Det du forsøker dra igang er egentlig en interessant diskusjon,
2149 men om vi skal kjøre den i kommentarfeltet her, vil vi kunne bli bedt
2150 om å fjerne blindpassasjer fra nett- tv og det vil heller ikke bli
2151 særlig lett å klarere ut noe annet arkivmateriale på lang tid.</p>
2152
2153 <p>Dette er en situasjon NRKbeta ikke ønsker, så kommentaren er
2154 fjernet og den delen av diskusjonen er avsluttet på nrkbeta, vi antar
2155 konsekvensene vi beskriver ikke er noe du ønsker heller...</p>
2156
2157 <p>Med hilsen,
2158 <br>-anders</p>
2159
2160 <p>Ring meg om noe er uklart: 95XXXXXXX</p>
2161 </blockquote></p>
2162
2163 <p>Ble så fascinert over denne holdningen, at jeg forfattet og sendte
2164 over følgende svar.  I og med at debatten er fjernet fra NRK Betas
2165 kommentarfelt, så velger jeg å publisere her på bloggen min i stedet.
2166 Har fjernet epostadresser og telefonnummer til de involverte, for å
2167 unngå at de tiltrekker seg uønskede direkte kontaktforsøk.</p>
2168
2169 <p><blockquote>
2170 <p>From: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;pere@hungry.com>
2171 <br>To: Anders Hofseth &lt;XXX@gmail.com>
2172 <br>Cc: Eirik Solheim &lt;XXX@gmail.com>,
2173 <br>        Jon Ståle Carlsen &lt;XXX@gmail.com>,
2174 <br>        Henrik Lied &lt;XXX@gmail.com>
2175 <br>Subject: Re: [NRKbeta] Kommentar: "Bakom Blindpassasjer: del 1"
2176 <br>Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 08:24:34 +0200</p>
2177
2178 <p>[Anders Hofseth]
2179 <br>> Hei Petter.</p>
2180
2181 <p>Hei.</p>
2182
2183 <p>> Det du forsøker dra igang er egentlig en interessant diskusjon, men
2184 <br>> om vi skal kjøre den i kommentarfeltet her, vil vi kunne bli bedt om
2185 <br>> å fjerne blindpassasjer fra nett- tv og det vil heller ikke bli
2186 <br>> særlig lett å klarere ut noe annet arkivmateriale på lang tid.</p>
2187
2188 <p>Godt å se at du er enig i at dette er en interessant diskusjon.  Den
2189 vil nok fortsette en stund til.  :)</p>
2190
2191 <p>Må innrømme at jeg synes det er merkelig å lese at dere i NRK med
2192 vitende og vilje ønsker å forlede rettighetshaverne for å kunne
2193 fortsette å legge ut arkivmateriale.</p>
2194
2195 <p>Kommentarer og diskusjoner i bloggene til NRK Beta påvirker jo ikke
2196 faktum, som er at streaming er det samme som nedlasting, og at innhold
2197 som er lagt ut på nett kan lagres lokalt for avspilling når en ønsker
2198 det.</p>
2199
2200 <p>Det du sier er jo at klarering av arkivmateriale for publisering på
2201 web krever at en holder faktum skjult fra debattfeltet på NRKBeta.
2202 Det er ikke et argument som holder vann. :)</p>
2203
2204 <p>> Dette er en situasjon NRKbeta ikke ønsker, så kommentaren er fjernet
2205 <br>> og den delen av diskusjonen er avsluttet på nrkbeta, vi antar
2206 <br>> konsekvensene vi beskriver ikke er noe du ønsker heller...</p>
2207
2208 <p>Personlig ønsker jeg at NRK skal slutte å stikke hodet i sanden og
2209 heller være åpne på hvordan virkeligheten fungerer, samt ta opp kampen
2210 mot de som vil låse kulturen inne.  Jeg synes det er en skam at NRK
2211 godtar å forlede publikum.  Ville heller at NRK krever at innhold som
2212 skal sendes skal være uten bruksbegresninger og kan publiseres i
2213 formater som heller ikke har bruksbegresninger (bruksbegresningene til
2214 H.264 burde få varselbjellene i NRK til å ringe).</p>
2215
2216 <p>At NRK er med på DRM-tåkeleggingen og at det kommer feilaktive
2217 påstander om at "streaming beskytter mot nedlasting" som bare er egnet
2218 til å bygge opp om en myte som er skadelig for samfunnet som helhet.</p>
2219
2220 <p>Anbefaler &lt;URL:<a href="http://webmink.com/2010/09/03/h-264-and-foss/">http://webmink.com/2010/09/03/h-264-and-foss/</a>> og en
2221 titt på
2222 &lt;URL: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Terms_of_use_for_video_produced_by_a_Canon_IXUS_130_digital_camera.html">http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Terms_of_use_for_video_produced_by_a_Canon_IXUS_130_digital_camera.html</a> >.
2223 for å se hva slags bruksbegresninger H.264 innebærer.</p>
2224
2225 <p>Hvis dette innebærer at NRK må være åpne med at arkivmaterialet ikke
2226 kan brukes før rettighetshaverene også innser at de er med på å skade
2227 samfunnets kultur og kollektive hukommelse, så får en i hvert fall
2228 synliggjort konsekvensene og antagelig mer flammer på en debatt som er
2229 langt på overtid.</p>
2230
2231 <p>> Ring meg om noe er uklart: XXX</p>
2232
2233 <p>Intet uklart, men ikke imponert over måten dere håndterer debatten på.
2234 Hadde du i stedet kommet med et tilsvar i kommentarfeltet der en
2235 gjorde det klart at blindpassasjer-blogpostingen ikke var riktig sted
2236 for videre diskusjon hadde dere i mine øyne kommet fra det med
2237 ryggraden på plass.</p>
2238
2239 <p>PS: Interessant å se at NRK-ansatte ikke bruker NRK-epostadresser.</p>
2240
2241 <p>Som en liten avslutning, her er noen litt morsomme innslag om temaet.
2242 &lt;URL: <a href="http://www.archive.org/details/CopyingIsNotTheft">http://www.archive.org/details/CopyingIsNotTheft</a> > og
2243 &lt;URL: <a href="http://patentabsurdity.com/">http://patentabsurdity.com/</a> > hadde vært noe å kringkaste på
2244 NRK1. :)</p>
2245
2246 <p>Vennlig hilsen,
2247 <br>--
2248 <br>Petter Reinholdtsen</p>
2249
2250       </div>
2251       <div class="tags">
2252
2253
2254         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
2255
2256
2257       </div>
2258     </div>
2259     <div class="padding"></div>
2260
2261     <div class="entry">
2262       <div class="title">
2263         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Standardkrav_inn_i_anbudstekster_.html">Standardkrav inn i anbudstekster?</a>
2264       </div>
2265       <div class="date">
2266         17th October 2010
2267       </div>
2268       <div class="body">
2269         <p>Hvis det å følge standarder skal ha noen effekt overfor
2270 leverandører, så må slike krav og ønsker komme inn i anbudstekster når
2271 systemer kjøpes inn.  Har ikke sett noen slike formuleringer i anbud
2272 så langt, men har tenkt litt på hva som bør inn.  Her er noen ideer og
2273 forslag.  Min drøm er at en kan sette krav til slik støtte i
2274 anbudstekster, men så langt er det nok mer sannsynlig at en må nøye
2275 seg med å skrive at det er en fordel om slik støtte er tilstede i
2276 leveranser.</p>
2277
2278 <p>Som systemadministrator på Universitetet er det typisk to områder
2279 som er problematiske for meg.  Det ene er admin-grensesnittene på
2280 tjenermaskiner, som vi ønsker å bruke via ssh.  Det andre er nettsider
2281 som vi ønsker å bruke via en nettleser.  For begge deler er det viktig
2282 at protokollene og formatene som brukes følger standarder våre verktøy
2283 støtter.</p>
2284
2285 <p>De fleste har nå støtte for SSH som overføringsprotkoll for
2286 admin-grensesnittet, men det er ikke tilstrekkelig for å kunne stille
2287 inn f.eks BIOS og RAID-kontroller via ssh-forbindelsen.  Det er flere
2288 aktuelle protokoller for fremvisning av BIOS-oppsett og
2289 oppstartmeldinger, og min anbefaling ville være å kreve
2290 VT100-kompatibel protokoll, for å sikre at flest mulig
2291 terminalemulatorer kan forstå hva som kommer fra admin-grensesnittet
2292 via ssh.  Andre aktuelle alternativer er ANSI-terminalemulering og
2293 VT220.  Kanskje en formulering ala dette i anbudsutlysninger vil
2294 fungere:</p>
2295
2296 <p><blockquote>
2297 BIOS og oppstartmeldinger i administrasjonsgrensesnittet til maskinen
2298 bør/skal være tilgjengelig via SSH-protokollen som definert av IETF
2299 (RFC 4251 mfl.) og følge terminalfremvisningprotokollen VT100 (ref?)
2300 når en kobler seg til oppstart via ssh.
2301 </blockquote></p>
2302
2303 <p>Har ikke lykkes med å finne en god referanse for
2304 VT100-spesifikasjonen.</p>
2305
2306 <p>Når det gjelder nettsider, så er det det HTML, CSS og
2307 JavaScript-spesifikasjonen til W3C som gjelder.</p>
2308
2309 <p><blockquote>
2310 Alle systemets nettsider bør/skal være i henhold til statens
2311 standardkatalogs krav om nettsider og følge HTML-standarden som
2312 definert av W3C, og validere uten feil hos W3Cs HTML-validator
2313 (http://validator.w3.org).  Hvis det brukes CSS så bør/skal denne
2314 validere uten feil hos W3Cs CSS-validator
2315 (http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/).  Eventuelle JavaScript skal
2316 være i henhold til EcmaScript-standarden.  I tillegg til å følge de
2317 overnevnte standardene skal websidene fungere i nettleserne (fyll inn
2318 relevant liste for organisasjonen) Firefox 3.5, Internet Explorer 8,
2319 Opera 9, etc.
2320 </blockquote></p>
2321
2322 <p>Vil et slikt avsnitt være konkret nok til å få leverandørene til å
2323 lage nettsider som følger standardene og fungerer i flere
2324 nettlesere?</p>
2325
2326 <p>Tar svært gjerne imot innspill på dette temaet til aktive (at)
2327 nuug.no, og er spesielt interessert i hva andre skriver i sine anbud
2328 for å oppmuntre leverandører til å følge standardene.  Kanskje NUUG
2329 burde lage et dokument med forslag til standardformuleringer å ta med
2330 i anbudsutlysninger?</p>
2331
2332 <p>Oppdatering 2010-12-03: I følge Wikipedias oppføring om
2333 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI_escape_code">ANSI escape
2334 code</a>, så bruker VT100-terminaler ECMA-48-spesifikasjonen som
2335 basis for sin oppførsel.  Det kan dermed være et alternativ når en
2336 skal spesifisere hvordan seriell-konsoll skal fungere.</p>
2337
2338       </div>
2339       <div class="tags">
2340
2341
2342         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
2343
2344
2345       </div>
2346     </div>
2347     <div class="padding"></div>
2348
2349     <div class="entry">
2350       <div class="title">
2351         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Terms_of_use_for_video_produced_by_a_Canon_IXUS_130_digital_camera.html">Terms of use for video produced by a Canon IXUS 130 digital camera</a>
2352       </div>
2353       <div class="date">
2354          9th September 2010
2355       </div>
2356       <div class="body">
2357         <p>A few days ago I had the mixed pleasure of bying a new digital
2358 camera, a Canon IXUS 130.  It was instructive and very disturbing to
2359 be able to verify that also this camera producer have the nerve to
2360 specify how I can or can not use the videos produced with the camera.
2361 Even thought I was aware of the issue, the options with new cameras
2362 are limited and I ended up bying the camera anyway.  What is the
2363 problem, you might ask?  It is software patents, MPEG-4, H.264 and the
2364 MPEG-LA that is the problem, and our right to record our experiences
2365 without asking for permissions that is at risk.
2366
2367 <p>On page 27 of the Danish instruction manual, this section is
2368 written:</p>
2369
2370 <blockquote>
2371 <p>This product is licensed under AT&T patents for the MPEG-4 standard
2372 and may be used for encoding MPEG-4 compliant video and/or decoding
2373 MPEG-4 compliant video that was encoded only (1) for a personal and
2374 non-commercial purpose or (2) by a video provider licensed under the
2375 AT&T patents to provide MPEG-4 compliant video.</p>
2376
2377 <p>No license is granted or implied for any other use for MPEG-4
2378 standard.</p>
2379 </blockquote>
2380
2381 <p>In short, the camera producer have chosen to use technology
2382 (MPEG-4/H.264) that is only provided if I used it for personal and
2383 non-commercial purposes, or ask for permission from the organisations
2384 holding the knowledge monopoly (patent) for technology used.</p>
2385
2386 <p>This issue has been brewing for a while, and I recommend you to
2387 read
2388 "<a href="http://www.osnews.com/story/23236/Why_Our_Civilization_s_Video_Art_and_Culture_is_Threatened_by_the_MPEG-LA">Why
2389 Our Civilization's Video Art and Culture is Threatened by the
2390 MPEG-LA</a>" by Eugenia Loli-Queru and
2391 "<a href="http://webmink.com/2010/09/03/h-264-and-foss/">H.264 Is Not
2392 The Sort Of Free That Matters</a>" by Simon Phipps to learn more about
2393 the issue.  The solution is to support the
2394 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">free and
2395 open standards</a> for video, like <a href="http://www.theora.org/">Ogg
2396 Theora</a>, and avoid MPEG-4 and H.264 if you can.</p>
2397
2398       </div>
2399       <div class="tags">
2400
2401
2402         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/fildeling">fildeling</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
2403
2404
2405       </div>
2406     </div>
2407     <div class="padding"></div>
2408
2409     <div class="entry">
2410       <div class="title">
2411         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Officeshots_taking_shape.html">Officeshots taking shape</a>
2412       </div>
2413       <div class="date">
2414         13th June 2010
2415       </div>
2416       <div class="body">
2417         <p>For those of us caring about document exchange and
2418 interoperability, <a href="http://www.officeshots.org/">OfficeShots</a>
2419 is a great service.  It is to ODF documents what
2420 <a href="http://browsershots.org/">BrowserShots</a> is for web
2421 pages.</p>
2422
2423 <p>A while back, I was contacted by Knut Yrvin at the part of Nokia
2424 that used to be Trolltech, who wanted to help the OfficeShots project
2425 and wondered if the University of Oslo where I work would be
2426 interested in supporting the project.  I helped him to navigate his
2427 request to the right people at work, and his request was answered with
2428 a spot in the machine room with power and network connected, and Knut
2429 arranged funding for a machine to fill the spot.  The machine is
2430 administrated by the OfficeShots people, so I do not have daily
2431 contact with its progress, and thus from time to time check back to
2432 see how the project is doing.</p>
2433
2434 <p>Today I had a look, and was happy to see that the Dell box in our
2435 machine room now is the host for several virtual machines running as
2436 OfficeShots factories, and the project is able to render ODF documents
2437 in 17 different document processing implementation on Linux and
2438 Windows.  This is great.</p>
2439
2440       </div>
2441       <div class="tags">
2442
2443
2444         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2445
2446
2447       </div>
2448     </div>
2449     <div class="padding"></div>
2450
2451     <div class="entry">
2452       <div class="title">
2453         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/A_manual_for_standards_wars___.html">A manual for standards wars...</a>
2454       </div>
2455       <div class="date">
2456          6th June 2010
2457       </div>
2458       <div class="body">
2459         <p>Via the
2460 <a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/robweir/antic-atom/~3/QzU4RgoAGMg/weekly-links-10.html">blog
2461 of Rob Weir</a> I came across the very interesting essay named
2462 <a href="http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/shapiro/wars.pdf">The Art of
2463 Standards Wars</a> (PDF 25 pages).  I recommend it for everyone
2464 following the standards wars of today.</p>
2465
2466       </div>
2467       <div class="tags">
2468
2469
2470         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian edu">debian edu</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2471
2472
2473       </div>
2474     </div>
2475     <div class="padding"></div>
2476
2477     <div class="entry">
2478       <div class="title">
2479         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Danmark_g_r_for_ODF_.html">Danmark går for ODF?</a>
2480       </div>
2481       <div class="date">
2482         29th January 2010
2483       </div>
2484       <div class="body">
2485         <p>Ble nettopp gjort oppmerksom på en
2486 <a href="http://www.version2.dk/artikel/13690-breaking-odf-vinder-dokumentformat-krigen ">nyhet fra Version2</a>
2487 fra Danmark, der det hevdes at Folketinget har vedtatt at ODF skal
2488 brukes som dokumentutvekslingsformat i Staten.</p>
2489
2490 <p>Hyggelig lesning, spesielt hvis det viser seg at de av vedtatt
2491 kravlisten for hva som skal aksepteres som referert i kommentarfeltet
2492 til artikkelen og
2493 <a href="http://www.version2.dk/artikel/13693-er-ooxml-doemt-ude-her-er-kravene-til-en-offentlig-dokumentstandard">en
2494 annen artikkel</a> i samme nett-avis.  Liker spesielt godt denne:</p>
2495
2496 <p><blockquote> Det skal demonstreres, at standarden i sin helhed kan
2497 implementeres af alle direkte i sin helhed på flere
2498 platforme.</blockquote></p>
2499
2500 <p>Noe slikt burde være et krav også i Norge.</p>
2501
2502       </div>
2503       <div class="tags">
2504
2505
2506         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2507
2508
2509       </div>
2510     </div>
2511     <div class="padding"></div>
2512
2513     <div class="entry">
2514       <div class="title">
2515         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Relative_popularity_of_document_formats__MS_Office_vs__ODF_.html">Relative popularity of document formats (MS Office vs. ODF)</a>
2516       </div>
2517       <div class="date">
2518         12th August 2009
2519       </div>
2520       <div class="body">
2521         <p>Just for fun, I did a search right now on Google for a few file ODF
2522 and MS Office based formats (not to be mistaken for ISO or ECMA
2523 OOXML), to get an idea of their relative usage.  I searched using
2524 'filetype:odt' and equvalent terms, and got these results:</P>
2525
2526 <table>
2527 <tr><th>Type</th><th>ODF</th><th>MS Office</th></tr>
2528 <tr><td>Tekst</td> <td>odt:282000</td> <td>docx:308000</td></tr>
2529 <tr><td>Presentasjon</td> <td>odp:75600</td> <td>pptx:183000</td></tr>
2530 <tr><td>Regneark</td> <td>ods:26500     </td> <td>xlsx:145000</td></tr>
2531 </table>
2532
2533 <p>Next, I added a 'site:no' limit to get the numbers for Norway, and
2534 got these numbers:</p>
2535
2536 <table>
2537 <tr><th>Type</th><th>ODF</th><th>MS Office</th></tr>
2538 <tr><td>Tekst</td> <td>odt:2480 </td> <td>docx:4460</td></tr>
2539 <tr><td>Presentasjon</td> <td>odp:299   </td> <td>pptx:741</td></tr>
2540 <tr><td>Regneark</td> <td>ods:187       </td> <td>xlsx:372</td></tr>
2541 </table>
2542
2543 <p>I wonder how these numbers change over time.</p>
2544
2545 <p>I am aware of Google returning different results and numbers based
2546 on where the search is done, so I guess these numbers will differ if
2547 they are conduced in another country.  Because of this, I did the same
2548 search from a machine in California, USA, a few minutes after the
2549 search done from a machine here in Norway.</p>
2550
2551
2552 <table>
2553 <tr><th>Type</th><th>ODF</th><th>MS Office</th></tr>
2554 <tr><td>Tekst</td> <td>odt:129000</td> <td>docx:308000</td></tr>
2555 <tr><td>Presentasjon</td> <td>odp:44200</td> <td>pptx:93900</td></tr>
2556 <tr><td>Regneark</td> <td>ods:26500     </td> <td>xlsx:82400</td></tr>
2557 </table>
2558
2559 <p>And with 'site:no':
2560
2561 <table>
2562 <tr><th>Type</th><th>ODF</th><th>MS Office</th></tr>
2563 <tr><td>Tekst</td> <td>odt:2480</td> <td>docx:3410</td></tr>
2564 <tr><td>Presentasjon</td> <td>odp:175</td> <td>pptx:604</td></tr>
2565 <tr><td>Regneark</td> <td>ods:186       </td> <td>xlsx:296</td></tr>
2566 </table>
2567
2568 <p>Interesting difference, not sure what to conclude from these
2569 numbers.</p>
2570
2571       </div>
2572       <div class="tags">
2573
2574
2575         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
2576
2577
2578       </div>
2579     </div>
2580     <div class="padding"></div>
2581
2582     <div class="entry">
2583       <div class="title">
2584         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/ISO_still_hope_to_fix_OOXML.html">ISO still hope to fix OOXML</a>
2585       </div>
2586       <div class="date">
2587          8th August 2009
2588       </div>
2589       <div class="body">
2590         <p>According to <a
2591 href="http://twerner.blogspot.com/2009/08/defects-of-office-open-xml.html">a
2592 blog post from Torsten Werner</a>, the current defect report for ISO
2593 29500 (ISO OOXML) is 809 pages.  His interesting point is that the
2594 defect report is 71 pages more than the full ODF 1.1 specification.
2595 Personally I find it more interesting that ISO still believe ISO OOXML
2596 can be fixed in ISO.  Personally, I believe it is broken beyon repair,
2597 and I completely lack any trust in ISO for being able to get anywhere
2598 close to solving the problems.  I was part of the Norwegian committee
2599 involved in the OOXML fast track process, and was not impressed with
2600 Standard Norway and ISO in how they handled it.</p>
2601
2602 <p>These days I focus on ODF instead, which seem like a specification
2603 with the future ahead of it.  We are working in NUUG to organise a ODF
2604 seminar this autumn.</p>
2605
2606       </div>
2607       <div class="tags">
2608
2609
2610         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2611
2612
2613       </div>
2614     </div>
2615     <div class="padding"></div>
2616
2617     <div class="entry">
2618       <div class="title">
2619         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Regjerningens_oppsummering_av_h_ringen_om_standardkatalogen_versjon_2.html">Regjerningens oppsummering av høringen om standardkatalogen versjon 2</a>
2620       </div>
2621       <div class="date">
2622          9th July 2009
2623       </div>
2624       <div class="body">
2625         <p>For å forstå mer om hvorfor standardkatalogens versjon 2 ble som
2626 den ble, har jeg bedt om kopi fra FAD av dokumentene som ble lagt frem
2627 for regjeringen da de tok sin avgjørelse.  De er nå lagt ut på NUUGs
2628 wiki, direkte tilgjengelig via "<a
2629 href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/200901-standardkatalog-v2?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=kongelig-resolusjon.pdf">Referansekatalogen
2630 v2.0 - Oppsummering av høring</a>" og "<a
2631 href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/200901-standardkatalog-v2?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=kongelig-resolusjon-katalogutkast.pdf">Referansekatalog
2632 for IT-standarder i offentlig sektor Versjon 2.0, dd.mm.åååå -
2633 UTKAST</a>".</p>
2634
2635 <p>Det er tre ting jeg merker meg i oppsummeringen fra
2636 høringsuttalelsen da jeg skummet igjennom den.  Det første er at
2637 forståelsen av hvordan programvarepatenter påvirker fri
2638 programvareutvikling også i Norge når en argumenterer med at
2639 royalty-betaling ikke er et relevant problem i Norge.  Det andre er at
2640 FAD ikke har en prinsipiell forståelse av verdien av en enkelt
2641 standard innenfor hvert område.  Det siste er at påstander i
2642 høringsuttalelsene ikke blir etterprøvd (f.eks. påstanden fra
2643 Microsoft om hvordan Ogg blir standardisert og påstanden fra
2644 politidirektoratet om patentproblemer i Theora).</p>
2645
2646       </div>
2647       <div class="tags">
2648
2649
2650         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
2651
2652
2653       </div>
2654     </div>
2655     <div class="padding"></div>
2656
2657     <div class="entry">
2658       <div class="title">
2659         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Regjerningen_forlater_prinsippet_om_ingen_royalty_betaling_i_standardkatalogen_versjon_2.html">Regjerningen forlater prinsippet om ingen royalty-betaling i standardkatalogen versjon 2</a>
2660       </div>
2661       <div class="date">
2662          6th July 2009
2663       </div>
2664       <div class="body">
2665         <p>Jeg ble glad da regjeringen
2666 <a href="http://www.digi.no/817635/her-er-statens-nye-it-standarder">annonserte</a>
2667 versjon 2 av
2668 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/IKT-politikk/Referansekatalogen_versjon2.pdf">statens
2669 referansekatalog over standarder</a>, men trist da jeg leste hva som
2670 faktisk var vedtatt etter
2671 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad/dok/horinger/horingsdokumenter/2009/horing---referansekatalog-versjon-2.html">høringen</a>.
2672 De fleste av de valgte åpne standardene er gode og vil bidra til at
2673 alle kan delta på like vilkår i å lage løsninger for staten, men
2674 noen av dem blokkerer for de som ikke har anledning til å benytte
2675 spesifikasjoner som krever betaling for bruk (såkalt
2676 royalty-betaling).  Det gjelder spesifikt for H.264 for video og MP3
2677 for lyd.  Så lenge bruk av disse var valgfritt mens Ogg Theora og Ogg
2678 Vorbis var påkrevd, kunne alle som ønsket å spille av video og lyd
2679 fra statens websider gjøre dette uten å måtte bruke programmer der
2680 betaling for bruk var nødvendig.  Når det nå er gjort valgfritt for
2681 de statlige etatene å bruke enten H.264 eller Theora (og MP3 eler
2682 Vorbis), så vil en bli tvunget til å forholde seg til
2683 royalty-belastede standarder for å få tilgang til videoen og
2684 lyden.</p>
2685
2686 <p>Det gjør meg veldig trist at regjeringen har forlatt prinsippet om
2687 at alle standarder som ble valgt til å være påkrevd i katalogen skulle
2688 være uten royalty-betaling.  Jeg håper det ikke betyr at en har mistet
2689 all forståelse for hvilke prinsipper som må følges for å oppnå
2690 likeverdig konkurranse mellom aktørene i IT-bransjen.  NUUG advarte
2691 mot dette i
2692 <a href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/200901-standardkatalog-v2">sin
2693 høringsuttalelse</a>, men ser ut til å ha blitt ignorert.</p>
2694
2695 <p>Oppdatering 2012-06-29: Kom over <ahref="
2696 http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/IKT-politikk/Refkat_v2.pdf">en
2697 rapport til FAD</a> fra da versjon 1 av katalogen ble vedtatt, og der
2698 er det tydelig at problemstillingen var kjent og forstått.</p>
2699
2700       </div>
2701       <div class="tags">
2702
2703
2704         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
2705
2706
2707       </div>
2708     </div>
2709     <div class="padding"></div>
2710
2711     <div class="entry">
2712       <div class="title">
2713         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Microsofts_misvisende_argumentasjon_rundt_multimediaformater.html">Microsofts misvisende argumentasjon rundt multimediaformater</a>
2714       </div>
2715       <div class="date">
2716         26th June 2009
2717       </div>
2718       <div class="body">
2719         <p>I
2720 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/Hoeringer/Refkat_V2/MicrosoftNorge.pdf">Microsoft
2721 sin høringsuttalelse</a> til
2722 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad/dok/horinger/horingsdokumenter/2009/horing---referansekatalog-versjon-2.html?id=549422">forslag
2723 til versjon 2 av statens referansekatalog over standarder</a>, lirer
2724 de av seg følgende FUD-perle:</p>
2725
2726 <p><blockquote>"Vorbis, OGG, Theora og FLAC er alle tekniske
2727   spesifikasjoner overordnet styrt av xiph.org, som er en
2728   ikke-kommersiell organisasjon.  Etablerte og anerkjente
2729   standardiseringsorganisasjoner, som Oasis, W3C og Ecma, har en godt
2730   innarbeidet vedlikeholds- og forvaltningsprosess av en standard.
2731   Det er derimot helt opp til hver enkelt organisasjon å bestemme
2732   hvordan tekniske spesifikasjoner videreutvikles og endres, og disse
2733   spesifikasjonene bør derfor ikke defineres som åpne
2734   standarder."</blockquote></p>
2735
2736 <p>De vokter seg vel for å nevne den anerkjente
2737 standardiseringsorganisasjonen IETF, som er organisasjonen bak HTTP,
2738 IP og det meste av protokoller på Internet, og RFC-standardene som
2739 IETF står bak.  Ogg er spesifisert i
2740 <a href="http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc3533.txt">RFC 3533</a>, og er uten
2741 tvil å anse som en åpen standard.  Vorbis er
2742 <a href="http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc5215.txt">RFC 5215</a>.  Theora er
2743
2744 under standardisering via IETF, med
2745 <a href="http://svn.xiph.org/trunk/theora/doc/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-theora-00.txt">siste
2746 utkast publisert 2006-07-21</a> (riktignok er dermed teksten ikke
2747 skrevet i stein ennå, men det blir neppe endringer som ikke er
2748 bakoverkompatibel).  De kan være inne på noe når det gjelder FLAC da
2749 jeg ikke finner tegn til at <a
2750 href="http://flac.sourceforge.net/format.html">spesifikasjonen
2751 tilgjengelig på web</a> er på tur via noen
2752 standardiseringsorganisasjon, men i og med at folkene bak Ogg, Theora
2753 og Vorbis også har involvert seg i Flac siden 2003, så ser jeg ikke
2754 bort fra at også den organiseres via IETF.  Jeg kjenner personlig lite
2755 til FLAC.</p>
2756
2757 <p>Uredelig argumentasjon bør en holde seg for god til å komme med,
2758 spesielt når det er så enkelt i dagens Internet-hverdag å gå
2759 misvisende påstander etter i sømmene.</p>
2760
2761       </div>
2762       <div class="tags">
2763
2764
2765         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
2766
2767
2768       </div>
2769     </div>
2770     <div class="padding"></div>
2771
2772     <div class="entry">
2773       <div class="title">
2774         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Standarder_fungerer_best_n_r_en_samler_seg_rundt_dem.html">Standarder fungerer best når en samler seg rundt dem</a>
2775       </div>
2776       <div class="date">
2777         19th May 2009
2778       </div>
2779       <div class="body">
2780         <p>En standard er noe man samler seg rundt, ut fra ideen om at en får
2781 fordeler når mange står sammen.  Jo flere som står sammen, jo
2782 bedre.  Når en vet dette, blir det litt merkelig å lese noen av
2783 uttalelsene som er kommet inn til
2784 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad/dok/horinger/horingsdokumenter/2009/horing---referansekatalog-versjon-2/horingsuttalelser.html?id=549423">høringen
2785 om versjon 2 av statens referansekatalog over standarder</a>.  Blant
2786 annet Abelia, NHO og Microsoft tror det er lurt med flere standarder
2787 innenfor samme område.  Det blir som å si at det er fint om Norge
2788 standardiserte både på A4- og Letter-størrelser på arkene, ulik
2789 sporvidde på jernbaneskinnene, meter og fot som lengemål, eller
2790 høyre- og venstrekjøring - slik at en kan konkurrere på hvilken
2791 standard som er best.  De fleste forstår heldigvis at dette ikke
2792 bidrar positivt.</p>
2793
2794       </div>
2795       <div class="tags">
2796
2797
2798         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2799
2800
2801       </div>
2802     </div>
2803     <div class="padding"></div>
2804
2805     <div class="entry">
2806       <div class="title">
2807         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Hvorfor_jeg_ikke_bruker_eFaktura.html">Hvorfor jeg ikke bruker eFaktura</a>
2808       </div>
2809       <div class="date">
2810         23rd April 2009
2811       </div>
2812       <div class="body">
2813         <p>Telenors annonsering om å kreve 35 kroner i gebyr fra alle som
2814 ønsker papirfaktura har satt sinnene i kok, og pressedekningen så
2815 langt snakker om at eldre og folk som ikke behersker data vil få en
2816 urimelig ekstrakostnad.  Jeg tror ikke jeg passer inn i noen av de
2817 kategoriene, men velger å holde meg unna eFaktura - som er det
2818 Telenor ønsker å få folk over på - pga. systemets egenskaper.</p>
2819
2820 <p>Slik jeg har sett eFaktura til forbrukere så langt, så sender
2821 selger en elektronisk beskjed til kundens bank, som legger ut
2822 informasjon om fakturaen i nettbanken for godkjenning.  Personlig
2823 ville jeg sett det som mer naturlig at det gikk en elektronisk beskjed
2824 fra selger til kunde, dvs meg, og at jeg så kunne bruke den videre
2825 mot banken eller andre hvis jeg ønsket dette.  Mine innkjøp og
2826 regninger er jo en sak mellom meg og mine leverandører, ikke en sak
2827 mellom min bank og mine leverandører.  Kun hvis jeg ønsker å betale
2828 fakturaen skal banken involveres.  En faktura bør jo inn i
2829 regnskapet, og jeg ønsker mulighet til å legge det inn der.  Når
2830 fakturaen sendes til banken i stedet for meg, blir det vanskeligere.
2831 Hele eFaktura-modellen virker på meg som en umyndiggjøring av meg
2832 som kunde.</p>
2833
2834 <p>I tillegg har jeg ikke vært i stand til å finne
2835 eFaktura-formatets spesifikasjon, og det ser ut til at utsending av
2836 slike krever dyre avtaler med bankene for å få lov til å sende ut
2837 eFaktura til kunder.  Jeg ser vel helst at fakturering på
2838 elektroniske formater kan gjøres f.eks. via epost eller HTTP uten å
2839 måtte betale mellommenn for retten til å lever ut en faktura, og
2840 liker rett og slett ikke dagens faktureringsmodeller.</p>
2841
2842       </div>
2843       <div class="tags">
2844
2845
2846         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2847
2848
2849       </div>
2850     </div>
2851     <div class="padding"></div>
2852
2853     <div class="entry">
2854       <div class="title">
2855         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Standardize_on_protocols_and_formats__not_vendors_and_applications.html">Standardize on protocols and formats, not vendors and applications</a>
2856       </div>
2857       <div class="date">
2858         30th March 2009
2859       </div>
2860       <div class="body">
2861         <p>Where I work at the University of Oslo, one decision stand out as a
2862 very good one to form a long lived computer infrastructure.  It is the
2863 simple one, lost by many in todays computer industry: Standardize on
2864 open network protocols and open exchange/storage formats, not applications.
2865 Applications come and go, while protocols and files tend to stay, and
2866 thus one want to make it easy to change application and vendor, while
2867 avoiding conversion costs and locking users to a specific platform or
2868 application.</p>
2869
2870 <p>This approach make it possible to replace the client applications
2871 independently of the server applications.  One can even allow users to
2872 use several different applications as long as they handle the selected
2873 protocol and format.  In the normal case, only one client application
2874 is recommended and users only get help if they choose to use this
2875 application, but those that want to deviate from the easy path are not
2876 blocked from doing so.</p>
2877
2878 <p>It also allow us to replace the server side without forcing the
2879 users to replace their applications, and thus allow us to select the
2880 best server implementation at any moment, when scale and resouce
2881 requirements change.</p>
2882
2883 <p>I strongly recommend standardizing - on open network protocols and
2884 open formats, but I would never recommend standardizing on a single
2885 application that do not use open network protocol or open formats.</p>
2886
2887       </div>
2888       <div class="tags">
2889
2890
2891         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
2892
2893
2894       </div>
2895     </div>
2896     <div class="padding"></div>
2897
2898     <div class="entry">
2899       <div class="title">
2900         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Hva_er_egentlig_en__pen_standard_.html">Hva er egentlig en åpen standard?</a>
2901       </div>
2902       <div class="date">
2903         28th March 2009
2904       </div>
2905       <div class="body">
2906         <p>Jeg møter alle slags interessante mennesker på min vei, og et møte
2907 jeg lærte mye av var å treffe på en svært kompetent IT-fyr som
2908 benektet ting jeg anser som åpenbart og selvfølgelig når det gjelder
2909 standarder.  Det var interessant, da det fikk meg til å tenke litt
2910 nøyere på hvilke mekanismer som ligger til grunn for at noe oppfattes
2911 som en standard.  Det hele startet med arbeid rundt integrering av NSS
2912 LDAP mot Active Directory, og problemer som oppstår pga. at Active
2913 Directory ikke følger LDAP-spesifikasjonen som dokumentert i RFCer fra
2914 IETF (konkret, AD returnerer kun et subset av attributter hvis det er
2915 mer enn 1500 atributter av en gitt type i et LDAP-objekt, og en må be
2916 om resten i bolker av 1500).  Jeg hevdet måten dette ble gjort på brøt
2917 med LDAP-spesifikasjonen, og henviste til hvor i LDAP-spesifikasjonen
2918 fra IETF det sto at oppførselen til AD ikke fulgte
2919 LDAP-spesifikasjonen.  AD-spesialisten overrasket meg da ved å
2920 fortelle at IETF var ikke de som definerte LDAP-spesifikasjonen, og at
2921 Active Directory ikke brøt den virkelige LDAP-spesifikasjonen som han
2922 mente lå til grunn.  Jeg ble spesielt overrasket over denne
2923 tilnærmingen til problemstillingen, da til og med Microsoft så vidt
2924 jeg kan se anerkjenner IETF som organisasjonen som definerer
2925 LDAP-spesifikasjonen.  Jeg fikk aldri spurt hvem han mente sto bak den
2926 egentlige LDAP-spesifikasjonen, da det var irrelevant for problemet vi
2927 måtte løse (få Linux og AD til å fungere sammen).  Dette møtet
2928 fortalte meg uansett at det ikke er gitt at alle aktører er enige om
2929 hva en standard er, og hva som er kilden til en gitt standard.  Det er
2930 vanskelig å enes om felles standarder før en først enes om hvem som
2931 bestemmer hva en gitt standard innebærer.</p>
2932
2933 <p>Hva er så en standard?  I sin abstrakte form er det noe å samles
2934 om.  På engelsk er en av betydningene fane brukt i krig, du vet, den
2935 type fane en samlet seg rundt på kamplassen i riddertiden.  En
2936 standard definerer altså et felleskap, noen som har noe felles.  Det
2937 er naturligvis mange måter å utgjøre et felleskap på.  En kan
2938 f.eks. enes om å gjøre alt slik som Ole gjør det, og dermed si at Oles
2939 oppførsel er standard.  Hver gang Ole endrer oppførsel endrer også
2940 standarden seg uten noe mer organisering og prosedyre.  En variant av
2941 dette er å gjøre slik som Ole har gjort det i stedet for slik Ole til
2942 enhver til gjør noe.  Dette er ofte litt enklere å forholde seg til,
2943 da en slipper å sjekke med Ole hver gang for å vite hvordan ting skal
2944 gjøres nå, men hvis det Ole gjorde noe dumt den gang en bestemte seg
2945 for å følge Ole, så er det vanskeligere å få endret oppførsel for å
2946 unngå dette dumme.</p>
2947
2948 <p>En kan også ta det et skritt videre, og istedet for å basere seg på
2949 enkeltpersoners oppførsel sette seg ned og bli enige om hvordan en
2950 skal gjøre ting, dvs. lage et felleskap basert på konsensus.  Dette
2951 tar naturligvis litt mer tid (en må diskutere ting i forkant før en
2952 kan sette igang), men det kan bidra til at den oppførselen en
2953 planlegger å benytte seg av er mer gjennomtenkt.  Det ender også
2954 typisk opp med en beskrivelse av ønsket oppførsel som flere kan forstå
2955 - da flere har vært involvert i å utarbeide beskrivelsen.</p>
2956
2957 <p>Dette er dessverre ikke alt som trengs for å forstå hva en åpen
2958 standard er for noe.  Der alle kan se på hvordan folk oppfører seg, og
2959 dermed har valget om de vil oppføre seg likt eller ikke, så er det
2960 endel juridiske faktorer som gjør det hele mer komplisert -
2961 opphavsretten og patentlovgivningen for å være helt konkret.  For å gi
2962 et eksempel. Hvis noen blir enige om å alltid plystre en bestemt
2963 melodi når de møtes, for å identifisere hverandre, så kan
2964 opphavsretten brukes til å styre hvem som får lov til å gjøre dette.
2965 De har standardisert hvordan de kjenner igjen alle som følger denne
2966 standarden, men ikke alle har nødvendigvis lov til å følge den.
2967 Musikk er opphavsrettsbeskyttet, og fremføring av musikk i
2968 offentligheten er opphavsmannens enerett (dvs. et monopol).  Det vil i
2969 sin ytterste konsekvens si at alle som skal plystre en
2970 opphavsrettsbeskyttet melodi i det offentlige rom må ha godkjenning
2971 fra opphavsmannen.  Har en ikke dette, så bryter en loven og kan
2972 straffes.  Det er dermed mulig for opphavsmannen å kontrollere hvem
2973 som får lov til å benytte seg av denne standarden.  En annen variant
2974 er hvis en standard er dokumentert, så er dokumentet som definerer
2975 standarden (spesifikasjonen) beskyttet av opphavsretten, og det er
2976 dermed mulig for rettighetsinnehaver å begrense tilgang til
2977 spesifikasjonen, og slik styre hvem som kan ta i bruk standarden på
2978 den måten.</p>
2979
2980 <p>Der opphavsretten innvilger et monopol på kunstneriske uttrykk med
2981 verkshøyde, innvilger patentlovgivningen monopol på ideer.  Hvis en
2982 slik patentert idé (fortrinnsvis uttrykt i en teknisk innretning, men
2983 det er kompliserende faktorer som gjør at det ikke er et krav) trengs
2984 for å ta i bruk en standard, så vil den som innehar patent kunne styre
2985 hvem som får ta i bruk standarden.  Det er dermed ikke gitt at alle
2986 kan delta i et standard-felleskap, og hvis de kan delta, så er det
2987 ikke sikkert at det er på like vilkår.  F.eks. kan rettighetsinnehaver
2988 sette vilkår som gjør at noen faller utenfor, det være seg av
2989 finansielle, avtalemessige eller prinsipielle årsaker.  Vanlige slike
2990 vilkår er "må betale litt for hver kunde/bruker" som utelukker de som
2991 gir bort en løsning gratis og "må gi fra seg retten til å håndheve
2992 sine egne patentrettigheter ovenfor rettighetshaver" som utelukker
2993 alle som ønsker å beholde den muligheten.</p>
2994
2995 <p>En åpen standard innebærer for meg at alle kan få innsikt i en
2996 komplett beskrivelse av oppførsel som standarden skal dekke, og at
2997 ingen kan nektes å benytte seg av standarden.  Noen mener at det
2998 holder at alle med tilstrekkelig finansiering kan få tilgang til
2999 spesifikasjonen og at en kun har finansielle krav til bruk.
3000 Pga. denne konflikten har et nytt begrep spredt seg de siste årene,
3001 nemlig fri og åpen standard, der en har gjort det klart at alle må ha
3002 komplett og lik tilgang til spesifikasjoner og retten til å gjøre bruk
3003 av en standard for at en standard skal kunne kalles fri og åpen.</p>
3004
3005       </div>
3006       <div class="tags">
3007
3008
3009         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
3010
3011
3012       </div>
3013     </div>
3014     <div class="padding"></div>
3015
3016     <div class="entry">
3017       <div class="title">
3018         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Fri_og__pen_standard__slik_Digistan_ser_det.html">Fri og åpen standard, slik Digistan ser det</a>
3019       </div>
3020       <div class="date">
3021         31st January 2009
3022       </div>
3023       <div class="body">
3024         <p>Det er mange ulike definisjoner om hva en åpen standard er for noe,
3025 og NUUG hadde <a href="http://www.nuug.no/dokumenter/standard-presse-def-200506.txt">en
3026 pressemelding om dette sommeren 2005</a>.  Der ble definisjonen til
3027 <a href="http://www.aaben-standard.dk/">DKUUG</a>,
3028 <a href="http://europa.eu.int/idabc/servlets/Doc?id=19529">EU-kommissionens
3029 European Interoperability Framework ( side 9)</a> og
3030 <a href="http://www.teknologiradet.no/files/7polert_copy.htm">teknologirådet</a> omtalt.</p>
3031
3032 <p>Siden den gang har regjeringens standardiseringsråd dukket opp, og de
3033 ser ut til å har tatt utgangspunkt i EU-kommisjonens definisjon i
3034 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad/kampanjer/standardiseringsradet/arbeidsmetodikk.html?id=476407">sin
3035 arbeidsmetodikk</a>.  Personlig synes jeg det er en god ide, da
3036 kravene som stilles der gjør at alle markedsaktører får like vilkår,
3037 noe som kommer kundene til gode ved hjelp av økt konkurranse.</p>
3038
3039 <p>I sommer kom det en ny definisjon på banen.
3040 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/">Digistan</a> lanserte
3041 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">en
3042 definisjon på en fri og åpen standard</a>.  Jeg liker måten de bryter
3043 ut av diskusjonen om hva som kreves for å kalle noe en åpen standard
3044 ved å legge på et ord og poengtere at en standard som er både åpen og
3045 fri har noen spesielle krav.  Her er den definisjonen etter rask
3046 oversettelse fra engelsk til norsk av meg:</p>
3047
3048 <blockquote>
3049 <p><strong>Definisjonen av en fri og åpen standard</strong></p>
3050
3051 <p>Den digitale standardorganisasjonen definierer fri og åpen standard
3052 som følger:</p>
3053 <ul>
3054 <li>En fri og åpen standard er immun for leverandørinnlåsing i alle
3055 stadier av dens livssyklus.  Immuniteten fra leverandørinnlåsing gjør
3056 det mulig å fritt bruke, forbedre, stole på og utvide en standard over
3057 tid.</li>
3058 <li>Standarden er adoptert og vil bli vedlikeholdt av en ikke-kommersiell
3059 organisasjon, og dens pågående utvikling gjøres med en åpen
3060 beslutningsprosedyre som er tilgjengelig for alle som er interessert i
3061 å delta.</li>
3062 <li>Standarden er publisert og spesifikasjonsdokumentet er fritt
3063 tilgjengelig.  Det må være tillatt for alle å kopiere, distribuere og
3064 bruke den uten begresninger.</li>
3065 <li>Patentene som muligens gjelder (deler av) standarden er gjort
3066 ugjenkallelig tilgjengelig uten krav om betaling.</li>
3067 <li>Det er ingen begresninger i gjenbruk av standarden.</li>
3068 </ul>
3069 <p>Det økonomiske resultatet av en fri og åpen standard, som kan
3070 måles, er at det muliggjør perfekt konkurranse mellom leverandører av
3071 produkter basert på standarden.</p>
3072 </blockquote>
3073
3074 <p>(Tar gjerne imot forbedringer av oversettelsen.)</p>
3075
3076       </div>
3077       <div class="tags">
3078
3079
3080         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
3081
3082
3083       </div>
3084     </div>
3085     <div class="padding"></div>
3086
3087     <div class="entry">
3088       <div class="title">
3089         <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/ODF_bruk_i_staten__ikke_helt_p__plass.html">ODF-bruk i staten, ikke helt på plass</a>
3090       </div>
3091       <div class="date">
3092         22nd January 2009
3093       </div>
3094       <div class="body">
3095         <p>I går publiserte
3096 <a href="http://universitas.no/nyhet/52776/">Universitas</a>,
3097 <a href="http://www.dagensit.no/trender/article1588462.ece">Dagens-IT</a>
3098 og <a href="http://www.idg.no/computerworld/article118622.ece">Computerworld
3099 Norge</a> en sak om at de ansatte ved Universitetet i Oslo ikke følger
3100 regjeringens pålegg om å publisere i HTML, PDF eller ODF.  Det er bra
3101 at det kommer litt fokus på dette, og jeg håper noen journalister tar
3102 en titt på de andre statlige instansene også.</p>
3103
3104 <p>Skulle ønske det var en enkel måte å sjekke om ODF-dokumenter er i
3105 henholdt til ODF-spesifikasjonen, og en måte å teste om programmer som
3106 hevder å støtte ODF forstår alle delene av ODF-spesifikasjonen.
3107 Kjenner kun til ufullstendige løsninger for slikt.</p>
3108
3109       </div>
3110       <div class="tags">
3111
3112
3113         Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
3114
3115
3116       </div>
3117     </div>
3118     <div class="padding"></div>
3119
3120     <p style="text-align: right;"><a href="standard.rss"><img src="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/xml.gif" alt="RSS Feed" width="36" height="14" /></a></p>
3121     <div id="sidebar">
3122
3123
3124
3125 <h2>Archive</h2>
3126 <ul>
3127
3128 <li>2012
3129 <ul>
3130
3131 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/01/">January (7)</a></li>
3132
3133 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/02/">February (10)</a></li>
3134
3135 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/03/">March (17)</a></li>
3136
3137 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/04/">April (12)</a></li>
3138
3139 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/05/">May (12)</a></li>
3140
3141 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/06/">June (20)</a></li>
3142
3143 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/07/">July (17)</a></li>
3144
3145 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/08/">August (6)</a></li>
3146
3147 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/09/">September (9)</a></li>
3148
3149 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2012/10/">October (5)</a></li>
3150
3151 </ul></li>
3152
3153 <li>2011
3154 <ul>
3155
3156 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/01/">January (16)</a></li>
3157
3158 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/02/">February (6)</a></li>
3159
3160 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/03/">March (6)</a></li>
3161
3162 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/04/">April (7)</a></li>
3163
3164 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/05/">May (3)</a></li>
3165
3166 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/06/">June (2)</a></li>
3167
3168 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/07/">July (7)</a></li>
3169
3170 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/08/">August (6)</a></li>
3171
3172 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/09/">September (4)</a></li>
3173
3174 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/10/">October (2)</a></li>
3175
3176 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/11/">November (3)</a></li>
3177
3178 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2011/12/">December (1)</a></li>
3179
3180 </ul></li>
3181
3182 <li>2010
3183 <ul>
3184
3185 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/01/">January (2)</a></li>
3186
3187 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/02/">February (1)</a></li>
3188
3189 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/03/">March (3)</a></li>
3190
3191 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/04/">April (3)</a></li>
3192
3193 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/05/">May (9)</a></li>
3194
3195 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/06/">June (14)</a></li>
3196
3197 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/07/">July (12)</a></li>
3198
3199 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/08/">August (13)</a></li>
3200
3201 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/09/">September (7)</a></li>
3202
3203 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/10/">October (9)</a></li>
3204
3205 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/11/">November (13)</a></li>
3206
3207 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/12/">December (12)</a></li>
3208
3209 </ul></li>
3210
3211 <li>2009
3212 <ul>
3213
3214 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/01/">January (8)</a></li>
3215
3216 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/02/">February (8)</a></li>
3217
3218 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/03/">March (12)</a></li>
3219
3220 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/04/">April (10)</a></li>
3221
3222 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/05/">May (9)</a></li>
3223
3224 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/06/">June (3)</a></li>
3225
3226 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/07/">July (4)</a></li>
3227
3228 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/08/">August (3)</a></li>
3229
3230 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/09/">September (1)</a></li>
3231
3232 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/10/">October (2)</a></li>
3233
3234 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/11/">November (3)</a></li>
3235
3236 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/12/">December (3)</a></li>
3237
3238 </ul></li>
3239
3240 <li>2008
3241 <ul>
3242
3243 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2008/11/">November (5)</a></li>
3244
3245 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2008/12/">December (7)</a></li>
3246
3247 </ul></li>
3248
3249 </ul>
3250
3251
3252
3253 <h2>Tags</h2>
3254 <ul>
3255
3256  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/3d-printer">3d-printer (13)</a></li>
3257
3258  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/amiga">amiga (1)</a></li>
3259
3260  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/aros">aros (1)</a></li>
3261
3262  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bitcoin">bitcoin (2)</a></li>
3263
3264  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bootsystem">bootsystem (12)</a></li>
3265
3266  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bsa">bsa (2)</a></li>
3267
3268  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian (57)</a></li>
3269
3270  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian edu">debian edu (113)</a></li>
3271
3272  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/digistan">digistan (9)</a></li>
3273
3274  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/docbook">docbook (7)</a></li>
3275
3276  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/drivstoffpriser">drivstoffpriser (4)</a></li>
3277
3278  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english (153)</a></li>
3279
3280  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/fiksgatami">fiksgatami (18)</a></li>
3281
3282  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/fildeling">fildeling (12)</a></li>
3283
3284  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/freeculture">freeculture (8)</a></li>
3285
3286  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/frikanalen">frikanalen (8)</a></li>
3287
3288  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/intervju">intervju (31)</a></li>
3289
3290  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/kart">kart (17)</a></li>
3291
3292  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/ldap">ldap (8)</a></li>
3293
3294  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/lenker">lenker (4)</a></li>
3295
3296  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/ltsp">ltsp (1)</a></li>
3297
3298  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia (25)</a></li>
3299
3300  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk (201)</a></li>
3301
3302  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug (145)</a></li>
3303
3304  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/offentlig innsyn">offentlig innsyn (5)</a></li>
3305
3306  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/open311">open311 (2)</a></li>
3307
3308  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett (35)</a></li>
3309
3310  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern (49)</a></li>
3311
3312  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/raid">raid (1)</a></li>
3313
3314  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/reprap">reprap (11)</a></li>
3315
3316  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/rfid">rfid (2)</a></li>
3317
3318  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/robot">robot (4)</a></li>
3319
3320  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/rss">rss (1)</a></li>
3321
3322  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/ruter">ruter (4)</a></li>
3323
3324  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/scraperwiki">scraperwiki (2)</a></li>
3325
3326  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sikkerhet">sikkerhet (23)</a></li>
3327
3328  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sitesummary">sitesummary (4)</a></li>
3329
3330  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/skepsis">skepsis (2)</a></li>
3331
3332  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard (38)</a></li>
3333
3334  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/stavekontroll">stavekontroll (2)</a></li>
3335
3336  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/stortinget">stortinget (4)</a></li>
3337
3338  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/surveillance">surveillance (10)</a></li>
3339
3340  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/valg">valg (7)</a></li>
3341
3342  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video (34)</a></li>
3343
3344  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/vitenskap">vitenskap (3)</a></li>
3345
3346  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web (25)</a></li>
3347
3348 </ul>
3349
3350
3351     </div>
3352     <p style="text-align: right">
3353  Created by <a href="http://steve.org.uk/Software/chronicle">Chronicle v4.4</a>
3354 </p>
3355
3356   </body>
3357 </html>