Apparently no country will fine Microsoft enough to change their ways.

Groklaw reports that Microsoft has been fined €280.5 million, the first time the EU Commission has ever had to do so. Neelie Kroes, EC rep, on the EU’s recent Microsoft fine:

“[…] it’s not the height of the level of the fine at a certain moment, but it is to give a clear signal to Microsoft that they have to deliver, that they have to stop their abuse of this situation.”

while trying to explain how a 3 million pound per day fine will give a clear signal to Microsoft which takes in 14 million pounds a day from Microsoft Windows client licenses alone. Microsoft is appealing the decision.

Ubuntu GNU/Linux tells you who their friends are.

Ubuntu will always be free, and will not have restrictive licenses associated with it.” (so you don’t think I’m making this up: Opera press release, Ubuntu GNU/Linux press release on the web, Ubuntu GNU/Linux press release PDF file).

Here, “free” really means gratis (free as in cost, not free as in freedom) because Opera is proprietary software. Users are not free to inspect or modify Opera (possibly not even share verbatim copies of Opera with their friends and neighbors non-commercially). The second part of the sentence (how Ubuntu GNU/Linux “will not have restrictive licenses associated with it”) is so obviously contradictory it’s laughable on its face.

It’s actions like this that help people better understand where Ubuntu GNU/Linux’s priorities are.

I’ll be interested to see how they reconcile this should they ever make a GNUbuntu; an all free software variant of their Ubuntu GNU/Linux distribution.

Update (2006-07-29): The Ubuntu GNU/Linux “Fridge” has an article on how Opera 9 installable “with a couple of clicks”. So, you can lose your freedom with just a couple of clicks. To show that Ubuntu’s representatives actually mean gratis, consider the next line:

Over the years the makers of Opera (also called Opera) have been very supportive of the GNU/Linux community.

Several versions of their browser have been available for us freedom lovers, especially for users on Apple’s PowerPC chips and even a .deb package for Debian on Sparc.

Opera has consistently used our community as a market by distributing their proprietary software for numerous GNU/Linux architectures. This isn’t celebrating freedom, it’s exploiting our community.

Security in secrecy?

The BBC reports on a self-described “security” firm report which suggests running MacOS X instead of Microsoft Windows because so much “malware” runs on Microsoft Windows. Apparently, the question of software freedom was never considered.

MacOS X is not entirely free software. It’s a combination of free software and non-free software. There are many portions of that OS which are not free for users to inspect, share, or modify. Hence, by default, they are not trustworthy.

This logic seems to have escaped Sophos and the BBC doesn’t dare to question it when Sophos reaches their conclusion to recommend one master over another.

Furthermore, consider these tips from the BBC “Staying Safe Online” sidebar:

Use reputable anti-spyware programs such as AdAware or Spybot

Both of these programs are proprietary; how they work is a secret to be kept from the user, like with all proprietary programs. What they do on one’s Microsoft Windows installation is unknown except to the proprietor. By relying on them to tell the user that their computer is “safe”, the user is led to believe that one uninspectable, unsharable, and unmodifiable program can undo the ill effects of another uninspectable, unsharable, and unmodifiable program such as the programs which make up non-free operating systems.

Do not open e-mail messages that look suspicious

This is recommended because Outlook and Outlook Express, two proprietary email clients, will act on email that is being shown to the user without the user’s express permission to execute anything. In fact, Outlook Express, the more popular of the two proprietary clients has been known to act on email before the user selected it. In other words, these programs were written badly and ought to be fixed. But users are prohibited from fixing the programs themselves or getting anyone else to fix them.

One can avoid this problem by switching email programs to something that respects user’s freedoms, like Thunderbird if you want a graphical email reader or mutt for command-line users. But running these on top of a proprietary OS doesn’t completely solve the problem, although it is a significant step in the right direction.

SilenceIsDeath.org offers a nice service, but can’t be trusted.

Chris Brunner claims

Silence is Defeat doesn’t log your activity!

As far as Brunner knows, this is true. But verification is a non-trivial task. If you’re interested in copyright infringement, Silence is Defeat (SiD) looks an awful lot like a new chokepoint—the point the copyright holders can target (either the admins of that system or their ISP) for copyright infringement claims. Why trust them with your illicit activities?

But let’s assume SiD keeps no logs. Do you know who SiD’s ISP is? What reason do you have to trust them?

As for not even your ISP will know what you’re doing, your ISP could have a record of you establishing an SSH connection to SiD’s machines which could be handy if someone is trying to put together a slightly better picture of what went down.

Hiring a third party to assist in copyright infringement isn’t going to make the infringement invisible. Using SSH isn’t going to hide as much about your activities as you’d like.

I accept and appreciate that SiD wants to assist others in free expression and introducing others to the open source movement (even though I’d prefer pointing people to the ethically-minded free software movement instead of a movement that focuses on technological efficiency aimed at a business audience). However, I’m not convinced that enough of the people involved whom SiD depends on to work are trustworthy.

Perhaps it’s just a matter of time until someone tries doing something illegal with their SiD account at work. Their work machine is probably running some proprietary OS on which (unbeknownst to them) a keylogger is also running, silently recording mouse movement and keyboard activity. Suddenly even more information comes to light, and from a wholly unexpected place—the former employer.

Why you want free software advocates doing work on GNOME

This blog entry is instructive and helpful—you really don’t want your ostensibly free software work being done in such a way that it requires non-free software to reproduce or extend.

We identify this for Java, we’ve seen it come up again with regard to software patents. Why are we reluctant to see how non-free fonts are a problem?

The FSF has given some font issues some consideration, although not as much as they’ve given to other licensing matters.