Microsoft: Linux is anti-commercial
Summary: References to free software and Linux were removed from a UN document after Microsoft claimed that such software aims to 'make it impossible to make any income on software as a commercial product'
Microsoft asked for references to free software to be removed from a document presented at last week's UN World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) conference, the software giant admitted on Friday.
The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) is unhappy that the document was changed and claims that even though it was on the panel discussing the document, it was not made aware of Microsoft's changes.
The document, known as the Vienna Conclusions, discusses issues around IT and creativity. The original draft of the document discussed how the free software model is changing the way people do business.
"Increasingly, revenue is generated not by selling content and digital works, as they can be freely distributed at almost no cost, but by offering services on top of them. The success of the free software model is one example," stated the original document, according to the FSFE.
But the final version of the document contains no reference to free software. "Increasingly, revenue is generated by offering services on top of contents," states the final version of the document.
Thomas Lutz, the manager of public affairs at Microsoft Austria, asked for this section to be deleted as "it contains only a one-sided perspective on the ICT industry."
"The rationale for this is, that the aim of free software is not to enable a healthy business on software but rather to make it even impossible to make any income on software as a commercial product," he added.
Lutz' comments were posted on a conference blog, but Georg Greve, the president of FSFE, who was involved in drafting that section of the document, claims that no-one on his panel was aware of the blog until last week.
Greve criticised Lutz' comments as "Microsoft propaganda".
"This is so obviously stupid and nonsensical that it seems pointless to comment on it: Just another monopolist trying to uphold their monopoly by preventing freedom of markets — which is what Free Software really aims at," he said, on his blog.
But on Friday Lutz denied that the panel was unaware of these changes and confirmed that his blog postings are accurate.
"The Vienna Conclusions document was created through a democratic feedback process as requested by the committee and stated on the committee blog. Each and every participant of the conference was invited to publish contributions, share feedback and offer changes which facilitated discussion and an open exchange of positions," he told ZDNet UK. "All of our change requests were approved by the committee."
This is not the only change to the document that Microsoft brought about. In a later section of the same document, Lutz asked that a reference to the open source operating system Linux be removed as "this is only one particular — anti-commercial — specificity of the open source landscape."
Microsoft appears to have been stepping up its fight against Linux recently, with comments about open source 'dorks' and claims that Africa does not need free software.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
http://www.fsfe.org/fellows/greve/freedom_bits/microsofts_implementation_of_democracy
But then again, that would be like one-upping MS in badness, and two wrongs still don't make a right.
Better then to use some Gandhi-isms: First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you and then you win.
Perhaps this is just more evidence of them desperately trying to keep any mention of Linux or Free Software away from people's attention. When you consider their recent XML 'standard' has Microsoft Office as its prefix as do most of their forays, or Microsoft Windows etc. is this just a bad attempt at brain-washing? Certainly they give their products the full title every time when in an interview even though they know time is short and abbreviations are readily available.
Expect to see more of these blatant insults to our intelligence as the Open Source business model wipes out the old monopolies and we witness the final years of Microsoft.
Getting this paper doctored is a dirty, nasty trick. It is also exactly what to expect. Never miss an opportunity to do it right back in their face!
By that criteria, HP should just sue dell for anti-competitive behaviour (ie, pricing their equivlient systems cheaper than HP do), Coke could sue Pepsi (and vice versa) and SCO could sue everyone - well, everyone *else* they aren't already suing :)
someone should bomb the microst headquarters
Damn straight.
Instead of going the anti-open source way, they could hv directed some of their efforts to improve their own software. But no, they r real nuts.
The real problem with M$ is that their software is rapidly drifting from the "must have" to merely "nice to have" with regards to open source competitors. And that must keep them awake at night.
On the othe hand they are no fools. I bet they are actively overhauling their business model to incorporate open-source, while at the same time fighting a fierce rear-gard battle in order to buy time.
In other words, they can't afford to speak honestly yet.
Anyway, not content with having laws to protect the consumers, MS is playing hard to control the legislators and make laws which favor themselves. If you think religions interfering with politics is bad, just imagine MS interfering with politics. You don't have to imagine too much - other large corporations do the same.
After a bunch of frustration, I decided to buy SuSE Professional. I paid about $85, and I was able to intall that on about 5 computers (legally). These computers do what I need them to do, so with Linux, a got a better value. In addition, I do not cringe whenever I get ready to download my email. I spend abosulutely $0 on antivirus software as well. With Microsoft, I even have to pay for first time technical support.
Let Micro$oft bitch and moan about how Linux is anti-commercial. I guess I would too if I held a monopoly over the computing industry and suddenly found that I now have to compete. Microsoft makes its money on forced consumption and endless "upgrade" cycles. I get better value and service using Linux, and I will not go back to Micro$oft unless I am somehow forced to.
The truth is they could not speak honestley if there very existance hung on it they are so tied up in lies con jobs and ripoffs