Saturday, August 30, 2003

Washington Post: (aug 20)US goverment prevents open source meeting. Posted here Saturday, August 30, 2003 at 4:31:22 PM     This is important eveidence about the way government is aligned with large business and against open initiatives. It is part of the move toards extending copyright and general extension of property privelages. Open-source software has been embraced by some companies that are building businesses around it. But it is the bane of others, including the industry's most powerful player, Microsoft Corp. The world's largest software maker is lobbying furiously in state, national and international capitals against laws that would promote the consideration or use of open-source software. So alarmed agents of Microsoft sprang into high gear in June after a surprising quote appeared in Nature magazine from an official of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The official said that the Switzerland-based group of about 180 nations, which promotes intellectual-property rights and standards around the globe, was intrigued by the growth of the open-source movement and welcomed the idea of a meeting devoted to open-source's place in the intellectual-property landscape. The proposal for the meeting had come in a letter from nearly 60 technologists, economists and academics from around the world, and was organized by James Love, who runs the Ralph Nader-affiliated Consumer Project on Technology. Love and others argue that in some areas, such as pharmaceuticals or software that powers critical infrastructure or educational tools, developing nations in particular would benefit from less restrictive or alternative copyright, patent or trademark systems. In short order, lobbyists from Microsoft-funded trade groups were pushing officials at the State Department and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to squelch the meeting. One lobbyist, Emery Simon with the Business Software Alliance, said his group objected to the suggestion in the proposal that overly broad or restrictive intellectual-property rights might in some cases stunt technological innovation and economic growth. Simon insists that his group does not oppose open-source software, or discussion of the issue, but fights to defend the notion that a strong system of proprietary rights offers the best avenue for the development of groundbreaking software by giving its inventors economic incentive to do so. And he said that the BSA's governing board, composed of several companies in addition to Microsoft, unanimously opposed the letter and the meeting. The U.S. government, which wields considerable clout in WIPO, might not have needed prodding from Microsoft to demand that the idea of an open-source meeting be quashed. Lois Boland, director of international relations for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, said that open-source software runs counter to the mission of WIPO, which is to promote intellectual-property rights. "To hold a meeting which has as its purpose to disclaim or waive such rights seems to us to be contrary to the goals of WIPO," she said. She added that the WIPO official who embraced the meeting had done so without proper consultation with the member states, and that WIPO's budget already is strained and cannot accommodate another meeting next year.   Pasted from <> ********

Guardian: Judgement on Blair after Kelley. A potent analysis in a large frame. Posted here Saturday, August 30, 2003 at 4:05:03 PM       excerpt What the Hutton inquiry has shown so clearly is the nature of the Blair regime. This is in no sense of the word as we have understood it a prime minister with a government. This is a royal court in which Blair is the monarch whose actual role is very difficult to pin down. He has a variety of intimates, who have no official position whatever. And so, we learn from Hoon's performance, that we had a war without the minister of state for defence knowing almost anything about it. ********

Mini essay: Doug on science and religion, sparation of church and state Posted here Saturday, August 30, 2003 at 3:47:26 PM       Let's keep going. Further on the religious nature of the west, which is decidedly structured around divine providentialism, from biblical tradtions, and sciecne arises as part of that, with assumptins in tact. There is not a break incosmologies or implications for society. . Take, for example, the very idea of "evolution", which indicates a line of unfolding that is preformed, given in the beginning. Hence all we need is points along the way, we do not have to establish the line.   The shift from Baconian event observation to newtonian deductionism, hence avoiding the problem of induction, was done in a specifically religious environment with explicitly religious arguments. From a broader perspective, science will turn out to be every bit as religious as others. Hence separation of church and state is only "separation" from a privileged point of view. We must do better if our analytic frame is to hold the contradictions. ********