Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML - Linux

This is a discussion on Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML - Linux ; "Activists in the Boycott Novell forum have exposed the more than 5,500 page document in PDF, HTML, Microsoft spreadsheet, and various other formats on their website. Even though OOXML was certified as an ISO standard under turbulent and unsteady circumstances, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML

  1. Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML

    "Activists in the Boycott Novell forum have exposed the more than 5,500 page
    document in PDF, HTML, Microsoft spreadsheet, and various other formats on
    their website. Even though OOXML was certified as an ISO standard under
    turbulent and unsteady circumstances, ISO has been keeping the comprehensive
    documentation under wraps"

    http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/onli..._iso_concerned

    Interesting - threats of copyright abuse, etc. (Not piracy?)

    I won't pass an opinion, since on this I simply don't know what I'm talking
    about.
    HOWEVER, let me say that I WAS under the impression that this document is
    supposed to be a STANDARD, and an OPEN standard at that?
    It's name is Office Open XML, I thought?

    Can somebody (anybody!) explain to me what the hell is the use of a Standard,
    and particularly an Open one, that I'm not allowed to see????

    In short, what the hell is going on here?


  2. Re: Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML

    bbgruff espoused:
    > "Activists in the Boycott Novell forum have exposed the more than 5,500 page
    > document in PDF, HTML, Microsoft spreadsheet, and various other formats on
    > their website. Even though OOXML was certified as an ISO standard under
    > turbulent and unsteady circumstances, ISO has been keeping the comprehensive
    > documentation under wraps"


    This cannot be a legitimate use of process. Heads must surely begin to
    roll soon.

    >
    > http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/onli..._iso_concerned
    >
    > Interesting - threats of copyright abuse, etc. (Not piracy?)
    >
    > I won't pass an opinion, since on this I simply don't know what I'm talking
    > about.
    > HOWEVER, let me say that I WAS under the impression that this document is
    > supposed to be a STANDARD, and an OPEN standard at that?
    > It's name is Office Open XML, I thought?
    >
    > Can somebody (anybody!) explain to me what the hell is the use of a Standard,
    > and particularly an Open one, that I'm not allowed to see????
    >
    > In short, what the hell is going on here?
    >


    In short, corruption.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  3. Re: Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML

    After takin' a swig o' grog, bbgruff belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    > "Activists in the Boycott Novell forum have exposed the more than 5,500 page
    > document in PDF, HTML, Microsoft spreadsheet, and various other formats on
    > their website. Even though OOXML was certified as an ISO standard under
    > turbulent and unsteady circumstances, ISO has been keeping the comprehensive
    > documentation under wraps"
    >
    > http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/onli..._iso_concerned
    >
    > Interesting - threats of copyright abuse, etc. (Not piracy?)


    The Boycott Novell activists describe the documentation exposure as a
    reaction to the "systematic abuse and the demise of ISO." Alex Brown,
    who was partly responsible for the OOXML process at ISO, describes
    the exposure in his weblog as a "brazen act of copyright violation."

    Brown goes on to say that "the boobies have even been so good as to
    boast about the bandwidth requirements their crimes have occasioned"
    and ends with the words, "Even now, I can hear those Geneva lawyers
    licking their lips over this one..." Boycott Novell webmaster Roy
    Schestovitz is not fazed by the possible legalities. He adds, "Feel
    free to pass around (or even ridicule) those ~60 megabytes of
    lock-in, which Microsoft won't let you see." He is not alone in this
    opinion: the numerous ongoing updates are tagged with the
    authors' names.

    > HOWEVER, let me say that I WAS under the impression that this document is
    > supposed to be a STANDARD, and an OPEN standard at that?
    > It's name is Office Open XML, I thought?
    >
    > Can somebody (anybody!) explain to me what the hell is the use of a Standard,
    > and particularly an Open one, that I'm not allowed to see????
    >
    > In short, what the hell is going on here?


    Well, one thing is that standards bodies and similar groups (e.g. the
    IEEE) tend to charge some cool cash for copies of their documents.
    (Certifications are also a nice income for "standards bodies").

    Brown goes on to say that "the boobies have even been so good as to
    boast about the bandwidth requirements their crimes have occasioned"

    Ha, hyperbole worthy of Hadron. But I thought at least some of this
    stuff had already been posted publicly. What gives?

    --
    Are we running light with overbyte?

  4. Re: Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML

    Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > Well, one thing is that standards bodies and similar groups (e.g. the
    > IEEE) tend to charge some cool cash for copies of their documents.
    > (Certifications are also a nice income for "standards bodies").


    On what basis?
    Costs of reproduction and distribution?
    By contrast, a few moments ago, I looked up and downloaded (from somebody
    called OASIS) a PDF document of 706 pages with the title:-
    "Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) v1.0"

    No cost (to me), available to all, and THEY seem to be standing the cost of
    server bandwidth.

    > Brown goes on to say that "the boobies


    "boobies"?

    > have even been so good as to
    > boast about the bandwidth requirements


    They have provided ISO with bandwidth, for free?

    > their crimes have occasioned"


    Crimes?
    Can you provide a link to the court proceedings for me please?





  5. Re: Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    ____/ Mark Kent on Thursday 09 October 2008 13:38 : \____

    > bbgruff espoused:
    >> "Activists in the Boycott Novell forum have exposed the more than 5,500 page
    >> document in PDF, HTML, Microsoft spreadsheet, and various other formats on
    >> their website. Even though OOXML was certified as an ISO standard under
    >> turbulent and unsteady circumstances, ISO has been keeping the comprehensive
    >> documentation under wraps"

    >
    > This cannot be a legitimate use of process. Heads must surely begin to
    > roll soon.
    >
    >>
    >>

    http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/onli..._iso_concerned
    >>
    >> Interesting - threats of copyright abuse, etc. (Not piracy?)
    >>
    >> I won't pass an opinion, since on this I simply don't know what I'm talking
    >> about.
    >> HOWEVER, let me say that I WAS under the impression that this document is
    >> supposed to be a STANDARD, and an OPEN standard at that?
    >> It's name is Office Open XML, I thought?
    >>
    >> Can somebody (anybody!) explain to me what the hell is the use of a
    >> Standard, and particularly an Open one, that I'm not allowed to see????
    >>
    >> In short, what the hell is going on here?
    >>

    >
    > In short, corruption.


    "[A]mazing that corruption is excepted by the entire developed world. stunning
    that it has met with resistance only with some developing nations and maybe
    the european union. what should have been an overwhelming anger by all
    nations . the notion that developed nation are immune to corruption is bogus.
    microsoft did it in full view, without any hesitation. microsoft should be
    nailed for this."
    --Ashok Pai


    "Microsoft corrupted many members of ISO in order to win approval for its
    phony ‘open’ document format, OOXML. This was so governments that keep their
    documents in a Microsoft-only format can pretend that they are using ‘open
    standards.’ The government of South Africa has filed an appeal against the
    decision, citing the irregularities in the process."

    --Richard Stallman, June 2008


    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Download Othello: http://othellomaster.com
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkjuF8sACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6WOACgjIRPHJokeu q4W1Jr3RwGeH9t
    rUkAnicyHreyv/eBG0ngR4i0+IebDjQq
    =XgCE
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  6. Re: Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML

    In article <6l6blhFalriqU1@mid.individual.net>,
    bbgruff wrote:
    > I won't pass an opinion, since on this I simply don't know what I'm
    > talking about. HOWEVER, let me say that I WAS under the impression
    > that this document is supposed to be a STANDARD, and an OPEN standard
    > at that? It's name is Office Open XML, I thought?
    >
    > Can somebody (anybody!) explain to me what the hell is the use of a
    > Standard, and particularly an Open one, that I'm not allowed to
    > see????
    >
    > In short, what the hell is going on here?


    The standardization process goes something like this (this is not
    necessarily how any particular standards body works--this is a general
    overview of standardization in general):

    1. A proposed standard enters the process. For this one, the proposed
    standard was identical to ECMA 376 (which you can download for free
    from the ECMA site).

    2. During the standardization process, changes are proposed to the
    proposal.

    3. People meet and work out what changes will go into
    the proposal and what changes will not. A new draft may
    be produced, or the changes may just be in the form of
    editing instructions to apply to the last draft. (I believe
    ISO used the latter method for OOXML. I don't know if that
    is the method they always use, or if the committee in charge
    of a particular standardization effort decides how they want
    to do it).

    4. Eventually, you end up with something that gets approved.

    5. Someone then has to take the final draft, edit in any minor
    changes that were approved after that final draft was produced,
    and then circulate this among the groups that were involved, so
    they can check to make sure the final document is an accurate
    reflection of what was standardized.

    6. When that finishes, and any little glitches are found and
    ironed out, the final, official, standard is published for all.

    The ISO OOXML standard is at stage 5 of this. It was sent to the
    National Bodies a couple of weeks ago, so they can check to make sure
    that the editing instructions that were approved were correctly applied.

    This is, of course, completely normal. It happens with pretty much
    every standard.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  7. Re: Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML

    On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:58:18 +0100, bbgruff wrote:


    >> Brown goes on to say that "the boobies

    >
    > "boobies"?


    The SOB stole my term for Linux zealots.

    He must be reading COLA.

    >> have even been so good as to
    >> boast about the bandwidth requirements

    >
    > They have provided ISO with bandwidth, for free?


    No.
    He is saying that Schestowitz and company have bragged about how posting
    the document overloaded all the servers it was posted on, including Roy's.
    Roy bragged about this in several places, all of which have been
    documented.


    >> their crimes have occasioned"

    >
    > Crimes?
    > Can you provide a link to the court proceedings for me please?


    I believe he is saying that the document was posted and cracked without
    permission. I believe it *might* have been password protected.

    I believe Schestowitz was smart enough to take it down off his own sites.
    He was not the only one to post it however, but if it was indeed posted
    without permission, he may find himself in some hot water.


    Honestly, I fail to see what makes this so important?
    Evidently others feel the same way because I haven't seen a word about it
    anywhere else but geek places.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  8. Re: Roy, Boycott Novell, and OOXML


    "Tim Smith" wrote in message
    news:reply_in_group-5ED3F6.09435009102008@news.supernews.com...
    > In article <6l6blhFalriqU1@mid.individual.net>,
    > bbgruff wrote:
    >> I won't pass an opinion, since on this I simply don't know what I'm
    >> talking about. HOWEVER, let me say that I WAS under the impression
    >> that this document is supposed to be a STANDARD, and an OPEN standard
    >> at that? It's name is Office Open XML, I thought?
    >>
    >> Can somebody (anybody!) explain to me what the hell is the use of a
    >> Standard, and particularly an Open one, that I'm not allowed to
    >> see????
    >>
    >> In short, what the hell is going on here?

    >
    > The standardization process goes something like this (this is not
    > necessarily how any particular standards body works--this is a general
    > overview of standardization in general):
    >
    > 1. A proposed standard enters the process. For this one, the proposed
    > standard was identical to ECMA 376 (which you can download for free
    > from the ECMA site).
    >
    > 2. During the standardization process, changes are proposed to the
    > proposal.
    >
    > 3. People meet and work out what changes will go into
    > the proposal and what changes will not. A new draft may
    > be produced, or the changes may just be in the form of
    > editing instructions to apply to the last draft. (I believe
    > ISO used the latter method for OOXML. I don't know if that
    > is the method they always use, or if the committee in charge
    > of a particular standardization effort decides how they want
    > to do it).
    >
    > 4. Eventually, you end up with something that gets approved.
    >
    > 5. Someone then has to take the final draft, edit in any minor
    > changes that were approved after that final draft was produced,
    > and then circulate this among the groups that were involved, so
    > they can check to make sure the final document is an accurate
    > reflection of what was standardized.
    >
    > 6. When that finishes, and any little glitches are found and
    > ironed out, the final, official, standard is published for all.
    >
    > The ISO OOXML standard is at stage 5 of this. It was sent to the
    > National Bodies a couple of weeks ago, so they can check to make sure
    > that the editing instructions that were approved were correctly applied.
    >
    > This is, of course, completely normal. It happens with pretty much
    > every standard.
    >

    And the work is a copyrighted document that is controlled by the ISO. Only
    they are allowed to reproduce and publish it and they control its
    distribution. If you put a copy on your website, they are entitled to sue
    you just like the RIAA, etc..


+ Reply to Thread