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