X-Git-Url: https://pere.pagekite.me/gitweb/homepage.git/blobdiff_plain/0148f50dce3e3bfbf35c68cfe2618be18663ac2b..463fa3b15e58d12069ee128f45558dca24dade56:/blog/archive/2012/04/04.rss diff --git a/blog/archive/2012/04/04.rss b/blog/archive/2012/04/04.rss index f2c2a5e92e..5428bad936 100644 --- a/blog/archive/2012/04/04.rss +++ b/blog/archive/2012/04/04.rss @@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ programvare i Norge</a> der i år. Kommer du?</p> Skolelinux</a> there are a lot of people doing the hard work of setting together all the pieces. This time I present to you Andreas Mundt, who have been part of the technical development team several -years. We was also a key contributor in getting GOsa and Kerberos set +years. He was also a key contributor in getting GOsa and Kerberos set up in the recently released <a href="http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Documentation/Squeeze">Debian Edu Squeeze</a> version.</p> @@ -385,6 +385,57 @@ komplett oppgave tilgjengelig. På tide å holde et øye med <a href="http://www.duo.uio.no/sok/search.html?q=skolelinux">Skolelinux-søket</a> til DUO...</p> + + + + + RAND terms - non-reasonable and discriminatory + http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/RAND_terms___non_reasonable_and_discriminatory.html + http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/RAND_terms___non_reasonable_and_discriminatory.html + Thu, 19 Apr 2012 22:20:00 +0200 + <p>Here in Norway, the +<a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad.html?id=339"> Ministry of +Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs</a> is behind +a <a href="http://standard.difi.no/forvaltningsstandarder">directory of +standards</a> that are recommended or mandatory for use by the +government. When the directory was created, the people behind it made +an effort to ensure that everyone would be able to implement the +standards and compete on equal terms to supply software and solutions +to the government. Free software and non-free software could compete +on the same level.</p> + +<p>But recently, some standards with RAND +(<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing">Reasonable +And Non-Discriminatory</a>) terms have made their way into the +directory. And while this might not sound too bad, the fact is that +standard specifications with RAND terms often block free software from +implementing them. The reasonable part of RAND mean that the cost per +user/unit is low,and the non-discriminatory part mean that everyone +willing to pay will get a license. Both sound great in theory. In +practice, to get such license one need to be able to count users, and +be able to pay a small amount of money per unit or user. By +definition, users of free software do not need to register their use. +So counting users or units is not possible for free software projects. +And given that people will use the software without handing any money +to the author, it is not really economically possible for a free +software author to pay a small amount of money to license the rights +to implement a standard when the income available is zero. The result +in these situations is that free software are locked out from +implementing standards with RAND terms.</p> + +<p>Because of this, when I see someone claiming the terms of a +standard is reasonable and non-discriminatory, all I can think of is +how this really is non-reasonable and discriminatory. Because free +software developers are working in a global marked, it does not really +help to know that software patents are not supposed to be enforceable +in Norway. The patent regimes in other countries affect us even here. +I really hope the people behind the standard directory will pay more +attention to these issues in the future.</p> + +<p>You can find more on the issues with RAND, FRAND and RAND-Z terms +from Simon Phipps +(<a href="http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/11/rand-not-so-reasonable/">RAND: +Not So Reasonable?</a>).</p>