software freedom

Works With U: "Apple, while its products may be prettier and more intuitive than Microsoft's (or so I'm told; I've never really used a Mac, iPod or iPhone myself), is in some respects worse than Redmond when it comes to respecting the fundamentals of software freedom."

ars Technica: "OpenMoko CEO Sean Moss-Pultz, the lone voice of dissent, challenged the conventional wisdom and argued that the diversity of the Linux ecosystem empowers users and is the key to unlocking the true potential of software freedom on mobile devices."

IT Wire: "In a departure from my usual articles aimed at Linux for Learners, I'd like to tell you about the most exciting day of the year which will soon be upon us."

Software Freedom Law Center: "The Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC), provider of pro-bono legal services to protect and advance Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FOSS), today published a guide to effective compliance with the GNU General Public License (GPL) and related licenses."

Practical Technology: "You’d think the electronics vendors who keep breaking the GPL by using the BusyBox Unix utilities would finally learn that they can’t get away with it.

It doesn’t look like they have though. This time the SFLC (Software Freedom Law Center) is taking on Extreme Networks, a major network hardware provider."

After falling victim to a domain and brand hijacking, Shareaza is fighting back at the scammers, assisted by the Software Freedom Law Centre, the EFF and Richard Stallman.

In further great news for BitTorrent fans, Shareaza will introduce improved BitTorrent support into version 3 of the application.

A lot of things have happened since the Shareaza client was hijacked. Through TorrentFreak, the Shareaza development team gives an exclusive update on the current situation:

Dear friends and supporters,

Software Freedom Law Center: "Nonetheless, following the close of the ISO-BRM meeting in Geneva, SFLC's clients and colleagues have continued to express uncertainty as to whether the OSP would adequately apply to implementations licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL).

In response to these requests for clarification, we publicly conclude that the OSP provides no assurance to GPL developers and that it is unsafe to rely upon the OSP for any free software implementation, whether under the GPL or another free software license."

The Software Freedom Law Center, which provides legal representation "to protect and advance free and open source software," has issued an analysis of Microsoft's "Open Specification Promise" and its compatibility with the GNU General Public License.