__/ [ Jim Hubbard ] on Tuesday 05 June 2007 05:25 \__
> Well, it wouldn't actually be Linux legislation (in fact, calling it that
> may just get it killed), but it would have the same effect for Linux as if
> it were designed specifically to advance the Linux OS.
>
> We need to pass legislation that states that ANY company that outputs user
> data in ANY format is required BY LAW to publish that format FULLY and
> OPENLY *BEFORE* implementing it in a new software program. And, that NO
> data storage format may be used without FULL, OPEN disclosure prior to
> implementation in a software program (to cover "updates").
>
> This would keep the data in the hands of those to whom it belongs - the
> users. With open, published data formats - competing companies could
> easily imoprt a user's data from any other application and give the users a
> REAL choice in what program (or operating system) they wish to use.
>
> Then, programs and operating systems would have to compete on
> functionality, usability and cost effectiveness for every consumer.
>
> We need to stop companies from holding user data hostage (and the users
> along with it).
When I first read the subject line I thought you'd propose an accord that
prevents Linux sellers from selling out the programmers. That is needed as
well.
As for lockins, open source companies say that they thrive in conditions of
no lockin. This isn't always true. As for GNU/Linux, there's LSB.
--
~~ Enjoying summertime
Roy S. Schestowitz | Apache: commercial software's days are numbered
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 123 total, 1 running, 119 sleeping, 0 stopped, 3 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
