|
|
| The EU Commission's Digital Agenda Plan |
 |
|
Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:16 PM EDT
|
The EU Commission has just announced its 5-year plan for IT, which they call its Digital Agenda:The Agenda outlines seven priority areas for action: creating a digital Single Market, greater interoperability, boosting internet trust and security, much faster internet access, more investment in research and development, enhancing digital literacy skills and inclusion, and applying information and communications technologies to address challenges facing society like climate change and the ageing population. Examples of benefits include easier electronic payments and invoicing, rapid deployment of telemedicine and energy efficient lighting. In these seven areas, the Digital Agenda foresees some 100 follow-up actions, of which 31 would be legislative.
What interests us at Groklaw the most on that list of seven areas is interoperability, I'd wager, and here's the goal they set for that:Improve ICT standard-setting and interoperability
To allow people to create, combine and innovate we need ICT products and services to be open and interoperable. I can't help but think of Microsoft's recent bragging about not being fully interoperable with Google Docs. I think they're not yet on the interoperability train that is already leaving the station, and I hope they hop on board before it's too late. Meanwhile, ECIS has issued a statement, commending the EU Commission on its Digital Agenda, particularly the part about interoperability:We're
pleased the European Commission has given broad support to
interoperability, and gratified it believes government acquisition of
software should adhere to open standards.
Here is the ECIS statement in full:ECIS commends European Commission for its Digital Agenda
BRUSSELS, 19 May, 2010 - ECIS is gratified that the European
Commission's “Digital Agenda” released today sets a timetable for
making sure that government-purchased software adheres to open
standards, so it will work smoothly and easily together, thus ensuring
citizens have open access to their governments.
The European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS) is also
pleased that the Commission frowns on software that is hemmed in by
closed, proprietary standards.
“As our name suggests, interoperability is a central tenet of our
group,” said Thomas Vinje, counsel and spokesman for ECIS. “We're
pleased the European Commission has given broad support to
interoperability, and gratified it believes government acquisition of
software should adhere to open standards.”
The broad-ranging Digital Agenda focuses in part on the importance of
making software work together. Among its conclusions are that because
all technology is inherently standards-based, “Interoperability
between these standards is the only way to make our lives and doing
business easier – smoothing the way to a truly digital society.”
The Digital Agenda says member states should by 2013 carry out goals
enunciated in April by EU Telecommunication Ministers during their
meeting in Spain, whose Granada Declaration calls for the “systematic
promotion of open standards and interoperable systems” for governments
across the European Union.
“That approach assures that governments will avoid granting a monopoly
to a proprietary software company, which can then charge citizens for
the software they need to access and interact with their governments,”
said Vinje.
Open standards permit inter-operation without the necessity of paying
special fees. For example, the common electric plug is designed to an
open standard. Anyone may build an electric plug without paying a
royalty to design prongs to the right size and shape for a power
point. In software, two of the best-known open standards are those
that created the Internet and those that created the World Wide Web.
Anyone may write software that works on the Internet or the Web,
without paying special fees.
“These open standards have transformed the way we do business,” said
Vinje of the Web and the Internet. They are clear examples of the way
that open standards promote creativity and competition.
“Open standards will help create such things as health records that
will be readable anywhere in the European Union, using a variety of
software from a number of providers,” said Vinje. “They set the stage
for economic growth. We're gratified that the Commission is backing
this approach."
Open standards are distinct from “open source.” Using the latter, a
group or company makes public the underlying source code of its
program. Open standards are aimed at allowing pieces of software to
work seamlessly together. Proprietary software business models based
on open standards and open source business models both allow a high
degree of interoperability and consumer choice. ECIS strongly
believes that in adopting measures to implement the Digital Agenda,
the EU should take care in ensuring that one particular model is not
favoured over another, as long as the aims of openness and
interoperability are met.
That last part means that Microsoft could implement an open international standard like ODF if it wanted to, despite being a proprietary software business. So far, it doesn't do so in a way that really works, and the only obstacle I know of, as reflected in their remarks about Google Docs, is a lack of a desire to actually do so.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: designerfx on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:28 PM EDT |
| and typoes. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: designerfx on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:29 PM EDT |
| try to include the link if it is the first comment in a thread [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- MS v. Lucent: Doesn't already apply to SCO? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 04:15 PM EDT
- Where to Watch Google I/O Online - Authored by: hans on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 05:01 PM EDT
- Follow notes on Google Wave.... Google needs to combine the Wave with EVO... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 06:36 PM EDT
- Re - Class action vs google collecting WiFi data? Throw the suing "bums" out of court ASAP. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 07:58 AM EDT
- Worst Week For Album Sales Since 1991 - Authored by: hans on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 10:29 AM EDT
- Ballmer: Microsoft wasted time on Vista - Authored by: DannyB on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 11:46 AM EDT
- What the blogospher adds.... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 01:28 PM EDT
- VP8-- MS support -- a question - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 04:22 PM EDT
- MPEG-LA answers - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 07:11 PM EDT
- Jobs drops hint on Google open video codec - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 01:12 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: designerfx on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:30 PM EDT |
| hat trick. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- No COMES? No bonus love - hatricks just don't cut it no more (n/t) - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 07:46 PM EDT
- Take everything you think you know about displays and throw it out the window - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 10:28 PM EDT
- Bored? 99 pages of why Facebook CEO Zuckerman is accused of securities fraud - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 11:08 PM EDT
- Novell up for sale - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 03:39 AM EDT
- The Atlantic re Google and the News - Authored by: joef on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 10:10 AM EDT
- A group of investors argued heatedly about the value of open versus closed technolog - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 12:32 PM EDT
- bilski - Authored by: designerfx on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 02:51 PM EDT
- Power Hour Trademark Fight - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 09:53 PM EDT
- Private 'Law' Gone Bad - Coffee shop stops live music after copyright licensing debate - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 11:17 PM EDT
- It's Christmas in the UK! Open Source, digital freedom, more ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 02:47 AM EDT
- possible Bilski release date? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 04:02 AM EDT
- XKCD - Infrastructures - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 04:26 AM EDT
- Scientists create first 'synthetic cell' - Authored by: JamesK on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 07:42 AM EDT
- Play a game of Classic Pacman - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 11:21 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:34 PM EDT |
I think it is a laudable plan. However, I personally would
like M$ to be left at the station. I do enjoy trains rides
and I know with M$ being on the same train, M$ would insist on being both the
engineer and conductor at the same time,
and I most likely would not get where it is that I want to go.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:40 PM EDT |
| The EU Digital Agenda doesn't contain anything about limiting
software
patentability while the European Patent Office stands
by its policy to grant
tons of them and the Federal Court of Justice
of Germany declared all software
patentable in its
country. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:47 PM EDT |
...what “Interoperability between (...) standards"
is.
Until
such time as I see that explained,I consider the
ECIS document an attempt to
deceit.
bjd
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:55 PM EDT |
"I think they're not yet on the interoperability train that is already
leaving the station, and I hope they hop on board before it's too late."
I think it's more than that. Microsoft is not yet on board because they hope
that the train will never actually leave the station if they don't get on board.
("But it CAN'T leave if WE'RE not on board...")
In other words, it's not that Microsoft is indecisive (or clueless), it's that
they want to influence events.
MSS2[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- spots ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 04:31 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 03:58 PM EDT |
"I can't help but think of Microsoft's recent bragging about not being
fully interoperable with Google Docs. I think they're not yet on the
interoperability train that is already leaving the station, and I hope they hop
on board before it's too late"
I beg to differ. I hope they don't catch the train and leave us in peace.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tiger99 on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 05:11 PM EDT |
| Bad example! With the exception of the UK, which uses a BS1363 plug (actually I
think there is a new standard, but it is backwards compatible in every respect),
the EU uses a number of different standards, which are only barely compatible
with one another. The plug you would buy nowadays will go into any socket, just,
but is not necessarily always fit to carry high current without overheating, as
certain combinations of plug and socket do not make as good contavt as others.
And worse, very much worse, the plug on an appliance which requires a ground
(earth) will go into an ungrounded socket. The IEC did try to introduce a new
standard around 1973, which woukld have been used everywhere, including the UK,
however it was so ill-conceived and dangerous as to actually be illegal in the
UK, so it failed. Worldwide there are even more, the old UK 5 amp round pin
plugs are used in a few countries, the 15 amp in several more, BS1363 in some,
then there are the US and Australian standards, and more..... I guess that
politics prevents everyone from accepting the UK standard, which is provably the
safest and most robust, especially in its latest version with sleeved pins. But
it is scary to see how certain illegal Chinese imports, fraudulently marked
BS1363, explode during one of the standard laboratory tests. On the other
hand, as long as you procure a properly engineered adaptor, interconnection
between one standard and another should be simple and fairly inexpensive, unlike
interoperability in software. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- True, but - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 05:32 PM EDT
- True, but .... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 05:43 PM EDT
- True, but .... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 07:06 PM EDT
- True, but .... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 07:30 PM EDT
- True, but .... - Authored by: Vic on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 08:21 PM EDT
- True, but .... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 11:10 PM EDT
- No, it's not just politics - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 01:37 AM EDT
- "For example, the common electric plug....." - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 02:54 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 06:49 PM EDT |
"Five-year plan"?
Maybe I'm seeing something that
isn't really there. Or, maybe the apple didn't fall far from the tree.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 19 2010 @ 06:52 PM EDT |
At the foot of the
Press Release page
there is a picture of the Virtuous cycle of the digital economy.
On
p.4 of
"the text of the communication [pdf, 41pp,
320kB] is another version of that picture.
I do not yet understand this
scenario, and will have to pick thru the text to determine
how the cancer,
or tooth decay-like inner parts can be cured by a simple Strasbourg Ring
of Confidence.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ak on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 01:14 AM EDT |
The document does not really define the terms "open" and
"standard". So Microsoft and others can claim that their products are
(not-royalty free) "open" and (industry) "standards" in the
sense of that document.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 01:34 AM EDT |
With the major IT corps of America having for years invested in political
influence to artificially protect their industry (the concept of 'intellectual
property' comes to mind), this must be somewhat bad news.
Now they will have to 'invest' more in Euro-politicians.
For the American politicians, this is bad news too.
There'll be less 'contributions' floating around.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 06:51 AM EDT |
I noticed that ECIS statement did not say anything about
software patents. However, it did say that it's goal is
to allow all people to access without being charged by
proprietary vendors. I wonder, when the EU finally allows
software patents that there will be a provision that
specifically prevents patents from being used as a weapon in
the monopoly wars as far as public interoperability (whatever
that means) goes.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jvillain on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 02:33 PM EDT |
| All of this would be great if it wasn't for the fact that the German courts have
just made software patents the law of the land sending a torpedo into all things
open over there.
Link
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Not so fast - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2010 @ 06:14 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: mashmorgan on Thursday, May 20 2010 @ 10:37 PM EDT |
Thank your PJ. You are an international, looking at stuff
outside the US of A which is nice.
Have u noticed the changes in Germany, India and China though
regarding patents?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 01:26 AM EDT |
Yes, software patents suck, and I'll happily give that one to Bill Gates. What
bugs me also is the transfer speed of the patents, in case Europe opens up. How
many software patents are there in the US, 500,000, or even a few millions? How
does one expect patent bureaus to even understand 0.1% of these, and in what has
to become in retrospect to the years with patents in the US.
The transfer speed of the patents from the US to EU would choke the system from
the start.
Please, for that reason alone, the patents craze in the EU must stop before it
even begins.
.
---
______
IMANAL
.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 08:59 AM EDT |
Microsoft is terrified of having to compete. The only way that they can function
as a company is when they have a monopoly.
---
Wayne
http://madhatter.ca/[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 21 2010 @ 10:01 AM EDT |
Another problem is that they definitely buy into the idea that DRM is a
necessary and integral part of a new Digital Economy or a new Digital Society.
It looks like the latest document doesn't address DRM except indirectly by
advocating international DRM enforcing Intellectual Rights treaties, but they do
explicitly advocate DRM in many of their other documents.
There are "About 2,500 results" for a Google search on
site:ec.europa.eu drm
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 24 2010 @ 04:13 PM EDT |
| typical [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
