"At times, Sun is to Microsoft what Novell is to Microsoft."
Looks like a perfect recipe for another round of international controversy at FSFS.in
I'm busy re-loading ammunition.... CK Raju
http://www.*sun*.com/about*sun*/media/analyst/pdfs/LinuxMarketDynamics.pdf
Wonder whether Sun too is a Platinum sponsor here - so that we can have a mini-replay. This time I think roles will have RMS, Eben and some top guns.
I just can't wait anymore.
CK Raju
http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/media/analyst/pdfs/LinuxMarketDynamics.pdf
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:34 AM, CK Raju ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.*sun*.com/about*sun*/media/analyst/pdfs/LinuxMarketDynamics.pdf
Wonder whether Sun too is a Platinum sponsor here - so that we can have a mini-replay. This time I think roles will have RMS, Eben and some top guns.
I just can't wait anymore.
CK Raju
Raju,
Whether you have missed following links ?
http://www.fsf.org/donate/patron/logos/
http://www.fsf.org/donate/patron/logos/L_Novell_R.png/view
I did not see any protest against these links so far. That is why I feel protests at NFM2008 at CUSAT was a public stunt aimed to tarnish its organisers.
The possibility of protest at FSFS.in thus depends on the relation between protesters and the organisers of FSFS.in and may not be on the content you have posted.
- Anil
Yes Anil, I can see them.
They might be donating the money so that we buy the ammunition to finish them - it could be whistleblowers there helping us - why rule out this possibility.
Lets wait. I am digging out more docs from Sun and Microsoft. CK Raju
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:56 AM, achu.kulangara@gmail.com wrote:
Raju,
Whether you have missed following links ?
http://www.fsf.org/donate/patron/logos/
http://www.fsf.org/donate/patron/logos/L_Novell_R.png/view
I did not see any protest against these links so far. That is why I feel protests at NFM2008 at CUSAT was a public stunt aimed to tarnish its organisers.
The possibility of protest at FSFS.in thus depends on the relation between protesters and the organisers of FSFS.in and may not be on the content you have posted.
- Anil
Fsf-friends mailing list Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:56 AM, achu.kulangara@gmail.com wrote:
I did not see any protest against these links so far. That is why I feel protests at NFM2008 at CUSAT was a public stunt aimed to tarnish its organisers.
Ok. [Sorry Anil, for that abrupt reply - mirroring was being initiated, and is underway - I'm back.]
I think we need to remove all prejudices before we discuss on such matters. Anyone could have been in any roles, so let us try and see things from as many angles and resolve to eliminate such hurdles in future.
Here FSF-I's campaign is completely known to the donors - its objectives and goals as well as the means of achieving them. By receiving donations, FSF-I doesn't dilute any of its stand on these objectives or goals or means - they all remain the same. Unlike a political organisation taking bribe and diluting its political objectives or resolving to remain a passive onlooker to destruction, there is no such commitment made by FSF or its other agencies here. There's also no message distributed downstream to the defenders of freedom to dilute or alter their stand on matters concerning such rights - no such call of discipline or ousting from organisational work here. In such a situation, a parallel cannot be drawn.
The actions at CUSAT however could be possibly because of the unawareness of the situation by certain section of novice organisers who may not have any clue about Novell's design and objectives. But the omission that has been made is allowing Novell to continue with its propaganda which is against the slated mission of the Conference, which was on Free Software, not against its principles. Here, we need to agree that ethics had been compromised.
Regards, CK Raju
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:28 AM, CK Raju ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
I did not see any protest against these links so far. That is why I feel protests at NFM2008 at CUSAT was a public stunt aimed to tarnish its organisers.
Here FSF-I's campaign is completely known to the donors - its objectives and goals as well as the means of achieving them. By receiving donations, FSF-I
These arguments cannot really stand water.
All free software movements should follow standard open terms for accepting donations.
A draft should be prepared with relevant clauses. Any sane free software movement should be expected to comply with it. It should be possible for Governments and other organizations to comply with it.
Nothing is so vague as to defy documentation.
Best
A. Mani
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Mani A a.mani.cms@gmail.com wrote:
Here FSF-I's campaign is completely known to the donors - its objectives
and
goals as well as the means of achieving them. By receiving donations,
FSF-I
These arguments cannot really stand water.
All free software movements should follow standard open terms for accepting donations.
A draft should be prepared with relevant clauses. Any sane free software movement should be expected to comply with it. It should be possible for Governments and other organizations to comply with it.
Nothing is so vague as to defy documentation.
"Corporate patrons affiliate themselves with the FSF and the GNU project through financial support. The FSF does not endorse the activities of its corporate patrons."
Details at http://www.fsf.org/donate/patron
The message is quite unambigous. CK Raju
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 9:40 AM, CK Raju ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
A draft should be prepared with relevant clauses. Any sane free
software movement should be expected to comply with it. It should be possible for Governments and other organizations to comply with it.
It would have been more prudent to suggest our activists friends to place similar demands on respective political establishments to come out with such a stand - where they disclose their manifesto too - so that funding corporates are also not fooled.
Sane or insane free software groups have a limitation upto where they could go - especially when many of them are still in their initial learning phase - mistakes are not uncommon - and they are fast learners too. But that's not the case with political establishments.
CK Raju
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 9:40 AM, CK Raju ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
A draft should be prepared with relevant clauses. Any sane free
The message is quite unambigous.
That is part of a manifesto.
My point is that the act of accepting donations should have legal obligations associated.
Best
A. Mani
-
achu.kulangara＠gmail.com -
CK Raju -
Mani A