juhuslikud mõtted

Microsoft has released the Microsoft Office binary file formats (doc, xls, ppt) under Microsoft Open Specification Promise, which effectively says: “We will never assert our patent claims against you for making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing or distributing implementations of the covered specifications.”

Indeed, these file formats are pretty complicated (it takes more than 200 pages to spec the Word .doc file format; Joel Spolsky explains why). But releasing them into the open means that the makers of OpenOffice and other alternatives will have a legal way of properly supporting these formats — and that they will probably get a lot of user pressure to implement this support.

This move also seems to support a statement I’ve made some time ago: that opening up is the only way for Microsoft to retain their market dominance in the long term.

Having the binary document formats “locked up” by Microsoft gave OpenOffice.org an easy way to tell their users: “Do not save your files as .doc, .xls, and .ppt, but go with the standards-based open file formats instead.” Well, by opening up the formats the Borg has taken this excuse — and one very strong argument in favour of supporting the OpenDocument standards — away from its competitors.

Ennevanasti kuulus kunst rahvale. Ning ma ei pea siinkohal silmas mitte Nõukogude kultuuripoliitikat, vaid muistendeid, rahvalaule ja koopamaalinguid.

Hulk aega hiljem leiutati trükimasin ning Inglismaal võeti kirjastajate survel vastu maailma esimene autoriõiguse seadus, Anne statuut. Kunst hakkas kuuluma rahale.

Veel veidi hiljem mõeldi välja Internet ning mõnedel inimestel tekkis idee, et tegelikult võiks iga teose autor ise otsustada, kes ja kuidas tema teoseid kasutada, levitada, täiendada ja teiste teostega ühendada tohib. Kunst kuulub kunstnikule.

Seda eesmärki on võimalik saavutada Creative Commons ja Open Source litsentside abil.

Neid teemasid käsitlesin eile Väimelas E-ülikooli koolitusseminaril. Slaidid kah:

| View | Upload your own

Benjamin Horst, an open source enthusiast and a long-time OpenOffice.org user, is running a fundraiser to publish a full-page ad (or a few if he manages to raise enough for reruns) in New York’s Metro newspaper. At the time I write this post, they’re less than $100 short of the first ad, so if you’ve got a few bucks to share, please do so. And if you don’t, then you can help just by sharing the word.

I can already imagine some hardcore capitalist types grinning and saying “Free software ain’t free at all, you see?”. Now there are at least three answers to that.

First, free software is about freedom, not price. And freedom has always been expensive. Slaves were fed and housed by their masters, but for some strange reason even those who didn’t get beaten or molested tried to save up and buy themselves free.

Second, there is no such thing as free lunch. Free software is another business model — one that is built not around direct monetary compensation to a single (individual or corporate) developer, but numerous contributions from the community to the community. These contributions vary according to the abilities of contributors: while a large software house could donate a few patents or several man-years worth of coding work, an individual user can help by reporting a bug or kicking in $10 to help get the ad published. Most of free software — including OpenOffice.org — is free to use, distribute, and modify. You are not required to contribute anything. But you can help if you want to.

And last but not least, if you don’t have the money (or willingness) to pay several hundreds of dollars or euros for a proprietary office suite, then you effectively have three options: resorting to pen and paper, installing a pirated copy, or using free software. The first is terribly ineffective and the second is illegal. The choice is yours.