GeekPAC

For those who think the open format legislation battle is all about one competitor vs. another, you’re wrong. This write-up on the recent KOffice ODF Sprint is a good example of what can happen with a truly open format: collaboration, spontaneous innovation, and multiple implementations of technology that benefit several vendors, not just one. The creativity on display in that report is a direct result of the freedom to implement and make use of an open format.

More info on the KOffice ODF Sprint.

Microsoft has entered a new stage of aggression against open source technology and open formats. On this web site and many others, I have reported on the various shenanigans Microsoft has employed to stop current open formats legislation. And now Microsoft has taken to veiled threats against the free software community with possible patent litigation in the future, stating that various free software projects violate 235 Microsoft patents.

Microsoft has not explicitly threatened to sue anyone, and I kind of think they won’t. However, lost in the hubbub is the potential impact on the US economy should they make good on any veiled threats. It’s also important to note that, even if they don’t sue, their actions to spread misinformation will still have an economic impact. This impact will take the form of more companies with a “no open source policy” and more still that will remove open source software for fear of litigation.

If one takes the view of Linux as a $6 billion annual market and assumes that alternatives to Linux would cost at least double, this means that the global IT market would be on the hook for another $6 billion - which translates to $6 billion in opportunity cost. Of course, if the patents are valid, this is moot, but I suspect most of them are not. Microsoft hasn’t been too helpful in this regard by not releasing which actual patents are at issue.

Related to the open formats issue, another opportunity cost concerns the amount of money companies shovel into Microsoft’s coffers every year to purchase Microsoft Office. If not for this, I’m pretty sure companies could make use of this money on other things, including new business development and other money-generating activities. The market for office software is enormous, and so is the sunk opportunity cost.

As with the open formats issue, Microsoft could choose to be a team player and work with other companies on a patent solution. They have chosen not to. They could reveal which patents are violated now so that the affected companies could, if the patents violations are valid, remove the infringing code. It appears that Microsoft wants the threat of legal action so that they can cow the market. When Microsoft complains about their formats not being accepted in open formats legislation and about patent-infringing open source software, I hope plenty of people point out that the pain is of their own doing.

Was happy to see Andy Updegrove’s Standards Blog with news that Norway is looking to adopt ODF and PDF as mandatory document formats. From his post:

Norway is the latest European country to move closer to mandatory government use of ODF (and PDF).  According to a press release provided in translation to me by an authoritative source, Norway now joins Belgium, Finland, and France (among other nations) in moving towards a final decision to require such use.

See the full post here. Note that nothing is final yet, so there’s still time for shenanigans.

Jeff complains that Digg.com caved to pressure when it agreed to stop censoring posts about everyone’s favorite hexadecimal number.

Um yeah, Jeff. You see, there’s this history of people rebelling when laws become too oppressive and do not represent the wishes of the people. It’s called civil disobedience. Perhaps you should look it up. I guess all of those civil rights leaders should have just taken it on the chin during Jim Crow?