Openbits: Free & Open Bits

Icona

Hi ha moltes Societats del Coneixement possibles. Aquí apostem per una d’oberta i lliure.

Towards An Urban Community Informatics (via Gurstein’s Community Informatics)

Much of Community Informatics research and writing either explicitly or implicitly is based on rural notions and models of community. This is for many reasons: partly because rural populations tend to be the least served in many parts of the world, partly because many models of “community’” are based on the kind of small self-contained communities that are found in rural areas. However, there is in practice a flourishing “urban community informat … Read More

via Gurstein's Community Informatics

Filed under: ciutats, Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, Economia, Hactivisme i Evangelització TIC, Urbanisme, , , ,

Guifi.net i la manifestació “Som una nació. Nosaltres decidim”

El passat 10 de Juliol varem estar currant tot el dia, una vintena de membres de guifi.net a donar cobertura Internet via wifi obert i lliure al milió i pico de persones de la manifestació contra la retallada a l’estatut i de reafirmacio nacional.

Lema de la manifestació: “Sóm una nació. Nosaltres decidim”
Lema que podriem traslladar a: “Som una societat. Nosaltres ens comuniquem lliurement”, que podria ser perfectament un lema de guifi.net

Aqui un emocionant  video al canal guifi.net-media de Blip.TV:

El Video comença amb la imatge del cartell que varem posar al llarg del recorregut de la manifestació.

:-D

Més informació, comentaris dels protagonistes i fotos del “making off” de com es munten telecomunicacions de baix cost en dos dies per donar cobertura wi-fi a millions de persones. Una demostració mes de que l’oligopolistic i mal regulat mercat de les telecomunicacions ens fa pagar el guts i les ganes i que brilla per la ineficiencia al donar banda ambla a la ciutadania (perdó, als consumidors):

Post a la web de guifi.net:

http://guifi.net/node/31246

Reportatge fotogràfic a la web de guifi.net:

http://guifi.net/image/tid/247

Una foto al node del lloc de sortida de la capçalera de la mani, on surtim uns quants:

http://guifi.net/node/31284

Fotos amb l’etiqueta “somunanacio” al flickr, moltes d’elles pujades a través de la connexió internet posada a disposició dels manifestants per omnium/guifi.net:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/somunanacio/

Filed under: Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, Hactivisme i Evangelització TIC, Internet, Llibertat, Política, Xarxes i telecomunicacions, , , ,

APIs (accès) sobre les dades públiques ja!

Aplicacions per a distribuir, visualitzar i analitzar dades sobre les ciutats i els territoris, obertes a qualsevol curiós analista…

Bones pràctiques:

CivicApps.org.

Open Gov Data.

Un post sobre el tema:

http://www.ogov.eu/open-government-data-ogd-el-futuro-esta-aqui/

Reflexions des de la practica professional:

Tinc molta experiència en curiosejar grans repositoris de dades, tant d’administracions locals com de empreses en les que he estat.

A diferencia dels responsables dels diferents repositoris i bades de dades, o dels informàtics que les administren quan veig una base de dades de registres administratius –per exemple, a un ajuntament, que és on ara treballo: el cadastre, el padró continu de població, padro del IBI, padró de llicències d’activitat, padró de llicències d’obra, base de dades de registre de les peticions dels ciutadans, base de dades de serveis socials, de la policia local..–, jo acostumo a mirar-les amb mentalitat analítico-estadística, més enllà de la primera funció d’aquestes bases de dades: gestionar tributs, relacions amb els ciutadans, etc..

A mes, a la majoria d’ajuntaments la majoria d’aquestes bbdd estan relacionades (creuades) a partir de la referència cadastral!!. Cosa que descoenixen (quasi) tots els analistes sobre la realitat urbana i de les ciutats. És a dir, podem creuar qualsevol camp o dada d’una d’aquestes bbdd amb les altres. Podem saber, posem pel cas, per a quins temes demanen els habitants de nacionalitat asiàtica d’un determinat bloc de pisos, illa, barri.. I posar-ho tot sobre els mapes georeferenciats de base cadastral (o altra cartografia: google maps, earth..)

La potencialitat analítica per a pendre el pols “on time” de la ciutat és espectacular. Pero no hi ha tècnics amb aquest avisió tant evident a algú amb firmació sociològico-estadística…. I no hi ha temps, ni recursos, que cal dirigir a “la gestió” concreta i diària…

Doncs això té una solució bastant  fàcil: obrir les dades (amb les tècniques adiens d’anonimització, perfectament eficients) a la ciutadania, empreses i investigadors. El que ha desencadenat la web 2.0. no és precisament la interconnexió de dades d’aplicacions i webs que o tenen res a veure, a traves de interfaços de programació: APIs, Mashups… Aqui està el secret, i no en les aplicacions de xarxes online… El secret es interconectar dades, fer-les interoperables

I perque “obrir dades publiques” i “agregar-les amb dades dels usuaris (empreses, ciutadans). Doncs per mooooltes raons:

1) Obrir la capacitat analitica, distribuint-la entre tots el susuaris. Si l’administració en reb el feedback dels centenars de potencials analistes s’estalviarà millions d’euros en consultors i estudis, molts d’ells mediocres.

2) Crear mes qualitat democràtica. No cal dis res mes: els ciutadans tenen dret a accesdir a les dades publiques per a tenir mes criteri i per evitar usus aprofitats de les dades que es registren sobre la seva activitat (quasi sempre a partir de necessitats impositives).

3) Crear mes mercat i activitat econòmica justament en base a desmercantilitzar el coneixment (les dades que en son la base). A mes dades, mes coneixment, mes possibilitats d’afegir valor a partir d’ells

Hi ha coses que em semblen tant de calaix que em costa de creure que es facin tant lentamet.

UNA ADENDA DINAL: Algunes dades de empreses “privades” també s’han de obrir…

Per cert, entre els datatsets que obligaria a obrir per llei estan tots els de les empreses que tenen la concessió administrativa de gestió de serveis publics: teleoperadores, companyies de mòbils, gestors d’autopistes, campanyies energètiques i de vols, etc….

El mercat per a que funcioni, te que ser TRANSPARENT en la informació, tant els membres de l’oferta (empreses) com de la demanda (clients) han de coneixer els moviments de tots els actors. De primes de econòmiques, un dels 5 axiomes bàsics per a poder parlar de mercat…

I es que una “nova finestra” d’oportunitats s’obrirà si ens pujem al carro (ja imparable) del Open Public Data. Mai com ara el poder depenia tant de la informació (de la seva clausura, vull dir). Mai com ara l’obertura de les dades (com del coneixement) pot ser tant emancipador…

Filed under: ciutats, Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, DataMining i Datawarehouse, Gestió i anàlisi de BBDD, Hactivisme i Evangelització TIC, Openess (en sentit ampli), Poder i llibertat, Urbanisme i xarxes, urbanlab, , , ,

Call for papers: Special issue of the Journal of the Association for Information

Tematiques i bibliografia per a l’estudi del funcionament empiric dels projectes de software lliure. Numero especial del JAIS, a seguir.

En negreta algunes afirmacions que comparteixo plenament. Les ensenyances i els exits del software lliure i el treball distribuit en base a comunitats son un model en el que es poden fixar qualsevol organitcació social. Són una autèntica revolució en l’organització social, un fenòmen de “nuevo cuño” que es interessantissim d’estudiar des de les ciències socials.

Call for papers: Special issue of the Journal of the Association for Information Systems (JAIS) on Empirical Research on Free/Libre Open Source Software

We would also appreciate your sharing the call with students or colleagues who you think might be interested. Thanks!

Important dates

Deadline for articles 15 October 2009
Initial decisions by 15 January 2010
Revisions due 15 April 2010
Final decision by 15 July 2010

Call for papers: Special issue of the
Journal of the Association for Information Systems (JAIS)
Empirical Research on Free/Libre Open Source Software

Over the past decade, the Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) phenomenon has revolutionized the ways in which organizations and individuals create, distribute, acquire and use information systems and services, making it an increasingly important topic of research for information systems researchers. FLOSS has moved from a curiosity to the mainstream: it has become a useful instrument for educators and researchers, an important aspect of e-government and information society initiative and a consideration in all technology business plans (e.g., Fitzgerald 2006).

The apparent success of FLOSS development has challenged the conventional wisdom of the software and business communities about the best ways to develop and acquire software. The research literature on software development and on distributed work more generally emphasizes the difficulties of distributed software development (e.g., Herbsleb et al. 2000), but the apparent success of FLOSS development presents an intriguing counter-example. Characterized by a globally distributed developer force and a rapid and reliable software development process, effective FLOSS development teams somehow profit from the advantages and overcome the challenges of distributed work (Alhoet al. 1998). Traditional organizations have taken note of these successesand have sought ways of leveraging FLOSS methods for their own distributedteams. More broadly, FLOSS development provides a commonly referred to model for open collaboration, increasingly seen as a viable approach to community-based development of systems and information resources more generally. Thus, while in many ways unique, the distributed and self-organizing natureof FLOSS teams represents a mode of work that is increasingly common in many organizations.

As well, FLOSS development is an important phenomena deserving of study foritself (Feller 2001). FLOSS is an important commercial phenomenon involving all kinds of software development firms, large, small and startup. Millions of users depend on FLOSS systems such as Linux or Firefox, and the Internet is heavily dependent on FLOSS tools. These systems are an integral partof the infrastructure of modern society, making it critical to understand more fully how they are developed. Furthermore, FLOSS is an increasingly important venue for students learning about software development. However, researchers are just beginning to understand how people in these communities coordinate software development and the work practices necessary to their success.

Part of the challenge to researchers is that FLOSS is a complex phenomenon that requires an interdisciplinary understanding of its engineering, technical, economic, legal and socio-cultural dynamics. It is similar to many other phenomena (e.g., virtual teams, user innovation, distributed software engineering, voluntary organizations, social movements), without being exactly like any, making it difficult to identify and to apply relevant theories.Indeed, the term FLOSS includes groups with a wide diversity of participants and practices, with varying degrees of effectiveness, but the dimensionsof this space are still unclear. Empirically, the study of FLOSS is blessed with an abundance of certain kinds of “trace” data, generated throughthe everyday actions of developers. However, these data are limited to particular aspects of FLOSS work and are often difficult to connect to constructs of theoretical interest. As a result, research on FLOSS is in critical need of careful conceptualization and theorizing, with particular attentionto delineating the boundaries of theories in useful taxonomies of project types.

The growing research literature on FLOSS has addressed a variety of questions. First, numerous explanations have been proposed for why individuals decide to contribute to projects without pay (e.g., Bessen 2002; Franck et al.2002; Hann et al. 2002; Hertel et al. 2003; Markus et al. 2000). These authors have mentioned factors such as increasing the usefulness of the software (Hann et al. 2004), personal interest (Hann et al. 2004), ideological commitment, development of skills (Ljungberg 2000) with potential career impact (Hann et al. 2004) or enhancement of reputation (Markus et al. 2000). Further work in this area will need to distinguish between motivations for different kinds of projects and for developers with vastly different levels of commitment and contribution to a project and develop richer datasets of actual developer beliefs, intentions and behaviours. A methodological concern is developing valid samples of participants given the highly skewed distributions of activity.

Second, researchers have investigated the processes of FLOSS development (e.g., Raymond 1998; Stewart et al. 2002). Many of these studies have been done at the project level, e.g., using available data about project-level measures to predict success. These studies are often limited by the available data, which may only weakly reflect theoretical constructs of interest. Afew studies have been done at the level of individual developers, though many of the same concerns apply. For example, co-membership in projects can be viewed as a social network (e.g., Méndez-Durón et al. 2009), but strong theory is needed to interpret the network. On the other hand, since data are available longitudinally, there is an opportunity to perform strongertests of theory (e.g, Subramaniam et al. 2009). Fewer studies have grappled with the details of work practices within projects, in part because data about these practices are more difficult to identify, collect and analyze. Mainly Logs of email and other kinds of linguistic interactions are generally available, but are quite time consuming to analyze. As well, such studies reveal only the public face of developers’ actions, leaving their private work hidden. Still, detailed studies of FLOSS practices could be quite revealing for understanding this form of distributed work.

Third, researchers have examined the implications of FLOSS from economic and policy perspectives. For example, some authors have examined the implications of free software for commercial software companies or the implicationsof intellectual property laws for FLOSS (e.g., Di Bona et al. 1999; Kogut et al. 2001; Lerner et al. 2001). Lamastra (2009) found that FLOSS solutions developed by a sample of Italian companies were more innovative than the non-FLOSS solutions. Overall though, the nature and implications of participation of firms in FLOSS development are still open topics for research. Finally, a few authors have examined the use of FLOSS and its implementation in organizations. For example, Fitzgerald et al. (2003) examined the broad implementation of FLOSS in an Irish hospital. Implementation studies seem like a particularly promising area for information systems researchers, though such studies face a challenge to explicitly theorize about the relationship between the distinctive properties of FLOSS and the processes of implementation and use.

Example topics for the special issue

The research reviewed above, while extensive, is still just a starting point for understanding the phenomenon of FLOSS development and use. Papers areinvited for the special issue on any topic related to FLOSS development and use. Papers should be theory-driven or theory-building, with clear implications for further research and practice. Example topics include:

Social science: Understanding organizational and psychological issues in FLOSS
•    Diversity and international participation in FLOSS projects
•    Learning, knowledge sharing, collaboration, control or conflict in FLOSS projects
•    Dynamics of FLOSS project communities, building and sustaining
•    FLOSS historical foundations
•    FLOSS and social networks
•    FLOSS and social inclusion
•    Economic analysis of FLOSS
•    Knowledge management, e-learning and FLOSS

FLOSS systems development:
•    FLOSS and distributed development
•    Lessons from FLOSS for conventional development
•    Open sourcing vs. offshoring of development
•    FLOSS and standards
•    Mining and analyzing FLOSS project repositories
•    Documentation of FLOSS projects

Emerging perspectives: Lessons from FLOSS applied to other fields
•    Diffusion and adoption of FLOSS innovations
•    FLOSS and alternative intellectual property regimes
•    FLOSS, Open Science and “Open Knowledge”
•    Licensing, intellectual property and other legal issues in FLOSS
•    FLOSS and innovation
•    Economics of FLOSS

Studies of FLOSS deployment: Current studies and future issues
•    Case studies of FLOSS deployment, migration models, success and failure
•    FLOSS in the public sector (e.g., government, education, health care)
•    FLOSS in vertical domains and the ‘secondary’ software sector (e.g.,automotive, telecommunications, medical devices)
•    FLOSS-compatible IT governance architectures
•    FLOSS applications catalog (functionality, evaluation, platforms, support providers, training needs)
•    FLOSS education and training
•    FLOSS, e-government and transformational government
•    FLOSS business models and strategies

We particularly hope to receive papers that cut across these dimensions anduse the phenomenon of FLOSS to theorize about the evolving nature of technology-supported distributed work.

References

Alho, K., and Sulonen, R. “Supporting virtual software projects on the Web,” in: Workshop on Coordinating Distributed Software Development Projects, 7th International Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE ’98), Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1998.

Bessen, J. “Open Source Software: Free Provision of Complex Public Goods,” in: Research on Innovation, 2002.

Di Bona, C., Ockman, S., and Stone, M. (eds.) Open Sources: Voices from theOpen Source Revolution. O’Reilly & Associates, Sebastopol, CA, 1999.

Feller, J. “Thoughts on Studying Open Source Software Communities,” in:Realigning Research and Practice in Information Systems Development: The Social and Organizational Perspective, N.L. Russo, B. Fitzgerald and J.I. DeGross (eds.), Kluwer, 2001, pp. 379–388.

Fitzgerald, B. “The transformation of Open Source Software,” MIS Quarterly (30:4) 2006.

Fitzgerald, B., and Kenny, T. “Open source software in the trenches: Lessons from a large-scale OSS implementation,” International Conference on Information Systems, 2003.

Franck, E., and Jungwirth, C. “Reconciling investors and donators: The governance structure of open source,” No. 8, Lehrstuhl für Unternehmensführung und -politik, Universität Zürich.

Hann, I.-H., Roberts, J., Slaughter, S., and Fielding, R. “Economic incentives for participating in open source software projects,” the Twenty-Third International Conference on Information Systems, 2002, pp. 365–372.

Hann, I.-H., Roberts, J., and Slaughter, S.A. “Why developers participatein open source software projects: An empirical investigation,” in: Twenty-Fifth International Conference on Information Systems, Washington, DC, 2004, pp. 821–830.

Herbsleb, J.D., Mockus, A., Finholt, T., and Grinter, R.E. “Distance, dependencies, and delay in a global collaboration,” the 2000 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 2000, pp. 319-328.

Hertel, G., Niedner, S., and Herrmann, S. “Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors  to the Linux kernel,” Research Policy (32), Jan 1 2003, pp 1159–1177.

Kogut, B., and Metiu, A. “Open-source software development and distributed innovation,” Oxford Review of Economic Policy (17:2) 2001, pp 248–264.

Lamastra, C.R. “Software innovativeness: A comparison between proprietaryand Free/Open Source solutions offered by Italian SMEs,” R\&D Management (39:2) 2009, pp 153–169.

Lerner, J., and Tirole, J. “The open source movement: Key research questions,” European Economic Review (45) 2001, pp 819–826.

Ljungberg, J. “Open Source Movements as a Model for Organizing,” European Journal of Information Systems (9:4) 2000.

Markus, M.L., Manville, B., and Agres, E.C. “What makes a virtual organization work?,” Sloan Management Review (42:1) 2000, pp 13–26.

Méndez-Durón, R., and García, C.E. “Returns from Social Capital in Open Source Software Networks,” Journal of Evolutionary Economics (19) 2009, pp 277–295

Raymond, E.S. “The cathedral and the bazaar,” First Monday (3:3) 1998.

Stewart, K.J., and Ammeter, T. “An exploratory study of factors influencing the level of vitality and popularity of open source projects,” the Twenty-Third International Conference on Information Systems, 2002, pp. 853–857.

Subramaniam, C., Sen, R., and Nelson, M.L. “Determinants of open source software project success: A longitudinal study,” Decision Support Systems (46:2) 2009, pp 576–585.

Filed under: Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, FoSS,

URGENT: Escriu al teu parlamentari europeu per a que no es permeti bloquejar als usuaris de Internet

Donem suport a aquesta campanya urgent (tenim temps fins el 5 de Maig!):

“Blackout Europe. Defending people’s internet”

Don’t let the EU parliament lock up the Internet! It will be no way back!

Motiu de l’acció de pressió als parlamentaris euopeus: el 5 de Maig sembla que es vol votar una ressolució que permeti a les teleoperadores bloquejar a usuaris, bloquejar l’accès a determinats webs, contnguts… A radere hi ha la lluita contra el P2P, entre altres coses.

Els europarlamentaris ara estaran mes receptius a les pressions de  la comunitat internauta, ja que en poques setmanes hi ha eleccions… ;)

Tallo-i-enganxo el qu trobaràs al blog de coordinació de la campanya de la Opennet Coalition:

Act now!Tomorrow is too late!

WE CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT – WE HAVE VOTED THEM – TELL THE PARLIAMENT TO VOTE NO!

Internet access is not conditional

Everyone who owns a website has an interest in defending the free use of Internet… so has everyone who uses Google or Skype… everyone who expresses their opinions freely, does research of any kind, whether for personal health problems or academic study … everyone who shops online…who dates online…socializes online… listens to music…watches video…

[Més informació...]

Institucions organitzades en la Opennet Coalition, que promouen aquesta campanya:

-La Quadrature du Net
-ScambioEtico
-Free Knowledge Institute
-P2P Foundation
-eXgae (esp)
-Istituto per le Politiche dell’Innovazione
-I SOC-ECC
-Ireland Offline
-Hispalinux (esp)
-Arbeitskreis Vorratsdatenspeicherung
-Asociacion de Internautas (esp)
-IT-Political Association of Denmark
-EDRI
-Open Rights Group
-FFII

Filed under: Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, Hactivisme i Evangelització TIC, Internet, Llibertats digitals, Openess (en sentit ampli), Política, Xarxes i telecomunicacions

Rip. A Remix Manifiesto…. que subscribeixo.

Sobre els canvis necessaris en els drets d’autor, els seus abusos, i cap on va –inexorablement– el futur:

RiP: A remix manifesto is a documentary film about copyright and remix culture. You can contribute to the film, and follow the conversation on the social networks below.
http://www.tv3.cat/videos/1168159/enviaAmic

Aquest documental-proclama ha tingut molt i molt ressó internacional, a Holanda, a Canadà… però aquí no passarà el matix,  el van passar pel canal 33 i a la 01:00 de la matinada.

És una magnífica introducció a aquesta “guerra” per als que no esteu massa avesats a la “guerra” (si,si, guerra, verdadera batalla política) sobre els drets de copia, els seus abusos (per part de la industria de distribució de continguts), les seves solucions, i les sortides reformes i alternatives, un un mòn digital i P2P.

Us l’aconsello vivament. Brillant en continguts i en forma (no us espanteu per l’inici, que sembla que vagi de joves exaltats i  residents d’afterhours). Es un video:

a) Amb uns continguts excel·lents (obviament des del bando “bo”: el copyleft, je, je). Ho explica “des d’un bando”· però ho explica de manera excel·lent. Molt pedagogic i exemplificador
b) La realització del video és excel·lent, brillant, molt “pop”, molt “digital”, dinàmica i divertida

A mi em va emocionar, francamen, tot i que el que s’explica ja m’és familiar i conegut en un 95%… De fet, vaig assistir a una xerrada del Laurence Lessig a Barcelona [aquí va una gran reverència, i un parell d'enllaços, a Elàstico, a Wikipedia, a Youtube ] i el seu powerpoint era molt similar conceptualment, a aquest documental, molt tributari de la filosofia copyleft pròpia de CC.

El video es centra en la guerra mes “mediatica” del dret de copia de continguts digitals: la musica. Peró com diu molt be és una guerra que es juga a molts altres camps: el de la ciència, per exemple. I dels que se’n parla també (l’abús de certes polítiques de patents)

Qui tingui continguts i els vulgui rendibilitzar faria molt be d’explorar altres models de negoci… Una frase que m’agrada dir:

“Los contenidos (musica, peliculas, articulos cientificos, invenciones…) no estan en crisis. És el model de negocio, estúpido!!”

La propietat intelectual requereix de una remodelació profunda del marc legal, una remodelació política, que permeti la coexistencia pacifica i ordenada (equilibrada) entre el Copyright i el Copyleft, entre les patents i el domini public. Perque la creativita, la innovació, el coneixement i els continguts experimentaran una expansió exponencial per la segona via.

Altres enllaços:
La web del “A Remix Manifiesto”:
http://www3.nfb.ca/webextension/rip-a-remix-manifesto/
La web on tens el documental per a que l’editis, remesclis, reutilitzis i en facis derivats. Predicant amb l’exemple:
http://www.opensourcecinema.org/

El programa va convidar al president de l’SGAE a la zona mediterrània (ex cantant de la nova cançó)  a que digues la seva sobre el documental. Sense paraules!!. Comparant la propietat d’un enregistrament d’una cançò a la propietat d’una casa, defenent els drets d’autor a 90 i mes anys, per als besnets… Malament, poc brillant, arguments poc intel·ligents, sembla mentida. Hi ha arguments per defensar determinats drets d’autor, pero es que no en saben mes…. AIxí els anirà, a les societats de gestió de drets d’autor (de industria de distribució, millor dit) els queden 3 telenotícies si no canvien el model de negoci. Que poden fer-ho si son llestos….

Filed under: Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, Continguts Digitals, Drets de copia, Economia de xarxes, Hactivisme i Evangelització TIC, Propietat Intel·lectual, , ,

OPEN LETTER TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT. PASSA-HO!

OPEN LETTER TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Dear Member of the European Parliament,

We wish to express our deepest concerns about the future of the Internet in Europe with regard to the latest amendments to the Telecoms Package, which is at this time in the final phase of its Second Reading stage. Several harmful amendments to the Telecoms Package have been adopted on March 31st, in the IMCO Committee of the European Parliament. Most of these amendments weaken or render void any protection to consumers, allow practices which are detrimental to the fundamental rights of the citizens, and give wide and discretionary powers to telecommunication companies.

Amendments relating to traffic network discrimination which allow Internet providers to filter contents and applications and to give priority to certain services, whilst blocking others. The consequences will be catastrophic for citizens’ freedom and for Internet based innovation. Any business operator on the Internet will have no longer the certainty of reaching all of the web surfers of Europe. Conversely, every Internet user will see only the portion of the Web which the provider will allow access to.

Open and non-discriminatory access, which has always been the basis for the growth of the Internet, is threatened by American telecommunications companies AT&T and Verizon, which have pushed a series of amendments. These amendments will create a permanent state of bandwidth scarcity and allow companies to prioritize certain contents, applications and services over others. They will also discourage investments in network infrastructure, preventing competition and innovation. This will seriously threaten fundamental freedom of speech. What’s more, as EU Observer stated (http://euobserver.com/19/27859):

“US President Barack Obama made net neutrality a key issue while on the campaign trail, and at the beginning of March appointed Julius Genachowski, a strong backer of net neutrality, as the country’s top telecommunications regulator. The big US telcos see the writing on the wall, and so the battlefield has shifted across the Atlantic.”

The AT&T amendments have been pushed, at the very least, without regard to their potential to slow innovation in Europe, and to put it at a disadvantage to the USA. The European internal market, which is based significantly on the Internet, will no longer have the benefits of an open and non discriminatory Internet. Yet, those very benefits will still be available to all other countries outside the EU.

In the time of a serious economic crisis, the risk is that the gap between Europe and USA will be artificially created, slowing down the core of the electronic telecommunication infrastructure.

It is our understanding that the European Parliament has not been correctly informed, if even perhaps misinformed, about the aforementioned risks which have emerged more clearly after the stage of first reading.

Already, on the 3rd of April the largest German mobile telecommunication company announced they are blocking Skype, even though Skype is both a key application for voice communication on the Internet and is known to consume a small amount of bandwidth. Therefore it is obvious the decision was not based on any real need of traffic management or Quality of Service.

It shows that traffic management policies and Quality of Service can be used as an excuse to block specific applications. It also demonstrates that purely depending on competition among telecommunication companies is a crude mechanism to guarantee an open Net and emphasizes the necessity for the Universal Service Directive, that guarantees to citizens, business companies and Internet operators unlimited access to services, applications and protocols on the Internet.

Thus, we implore you to consider the matter carefully, since the whole future of the Internet in Europe, and therefore one key element of future European social and economical prosperity, is at stake now.

We cordially invite you to examine the following independent analysis related to the amended articles of Universal Service Directive, Framework Directive and Authorisation Directive, by Monica Horten, PhD researcher in European Communication Policy at University of Westminster, Communication and Media Research Institute.

http://www.iptegrity.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=302&Itemid=9
http://www.iptegrity.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=304&Itemid=9

We hope that you will defend citizens’ fundamental rights and the future economic prosperity of the European market project which is based around fundamental Internet freedoms

Within our coalition we have experts in areas relevant to the Internet and citizens’ rights including filtering, network technologies, digital rights management, privacy and data protection, policy, law, media and software.

The undersigned groups and individuals represent thousands of European citizens and Internet users, in nearly all EU Member States.

P2P Foundation Michel Bawens and Celia Blanco

Filed under: Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, Economia de xarxes, Hactivisme i Evangelització TIC, Internet, Llibertats digitals, Openess (en sentit ampli), Poder i llibertat, Xarxes i telecomunicacions, , , ,

Sharismo: la esencia de la web 2.0 [Post al Blog El Caparazon]

Gràcies al Jose A Salazo he descobert aquest interessant post al blog de El Caparazon, d’una dissenyadora-web, i que en breu comentaré. Però no puc esperar a tenir temps per a fer-ho per a comentar-ho. Aquí les primeres línies del post:

Es una de las preguntas que acecha a muchos desde el éxito rotundo, primero del P2P, después de la web 2.0….
¿Porqué compartimos? ¿Hemos querido hacerlo siempre? ¿Porqué lo hacemos ahora? ¿Qué ganamos con ello?
Y relacionado con todo ello ¿Cómo fomentar la interiorización de esta actitud, imprescindible para la participación en cualquier comunidad?
En cuanto a los bloggers, a pesar de haber recibido críticas ilustradas o comentarios de trolls ocasionales, muchos seguimos pasando nuestras horas escribiendo materiales, motivándonos en mayor medida cuanto más nos acercamos a las necesidades de quienes nos leen, cuanto más….Compartimos.
Responde a estas preguntas el reciente texto de Isaac Mao,  traducido por Emilio Quintana.
Y no es que sea una idea nueva. Hereda ideas del Conectivismo en aprendizaje, de la Intercreatividad (Berners-Lee), la  Inteligencia colectiva (Lévy), las Multitudes Inteligentes (Rheingold), la Sabiduría de las Multitudes (Surowiecki) o la Arquitectura de la Participación (O’Reilly).

Per a llegir el post sencer: aquí.

Filed under: Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, Continguts Digitals, Openess (en sentit ampli), ,

Enllaçar xarxes P2P no és delicte (El Pais)

Una sentència justa, de fa un parell de mesos, que va en contra dels interessos de la indústria i a favor dels ciutadans i usuaris de Internet. La sentència a la premsa:

http://www.publico.es/152445/tema/zanjado/enlazar/redes/p2p/delito

http://www.elmundo.es/navegante/2008/09/18/tecnologia/1221749937.html

http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internet/Sentencia/firme/enlazar/redes/P2P/delito/elpeputec/20080918elpepunet_8/Tes

Article de El Pais (dret de cita):

La Audiencia Provincial de Madrid ha confirmado hoy en sentencia firme, y por lo tanto no recurrible, que enlazar a redes P2P no es delito. El tribunal confirma una sentencia previa de un juzgado de instrucción sobre las actuaciones que se seguían contra Sharemula, una página webque suministraba enlaces a redes de intercambio de archivos.

Según informa uno de los abogados defensores del caso en su propia web, David Bravo, “la Audiencia confirma las tesis de la defensa señalando que enlazar a las redes de pares [P2P] no constituye una actividad criminal” ya que “es indiferente que se tenga o no ánimo de lucro puesto que si no hay comunicación pública ya no hay delito”.

Bravo extracta partes de la sentencia que dejan claro que enlazar no es lo mismo que alojar. Según la sentencia, Sharemule únicamente proveía enlaces; “ni aloja archivos, ni realiza directamente la descarga, limitándose a facilitar una dirección donde se puede descargar la obra”.

Así, el tribunal entiende que un enlace por sí mismo no vulnera la propiedad intelectual, sino que “constituye únicamente una forma de facilitar al usuario de Internet el acceso a otra página web“.

L’acusació particular estava formada per (los malos malísimos):

SGAE, Microsoft, PROMUSICAE, EGEDA, Columbia Tristar Home Entertainment y Cía, SRC, The Walt Disney Company Iberia, Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment España S.A., Warner Home Video, Lauren Films Video Hogar S.A., Manga Films S.L., Universal Pictures (Spain) S.L., Paramount Home Entertainment (Spain) S.L., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Walt Disney Enterprises Inc., Columbia Pictures Industries Inc., Tristar Pictures, Sony Pictures Classic Inc., Mandalay Entertainment, Metro Goldwin Mayer Studios Inc., Orion Pictures Corporation, Paramount Pictures Corporation, Universal City Studios y Time Warner Entertainment Company L. New Line Productions Inc.”.

Quatre arreplegats, vaja!!

Filed under: Col·laboració, cooperació, p2p, Drets de copia, Hactivisme i Evangelització TIC, Llibertats digitals, ,

La meva bookmark

Flickr Photos

Jo a la feina

Castell-desde-el-cel

Panoramica del Castell

More Photos

RSS Des del meu lector de Feeds

  • S'ha produït un error; probablement el canal ha deixat de funcionar. Torneu-ho a provar d'aquí una estona.

1. Projectes on col·laboro

2. Blogs i Webs d'amics, coneguts i saludats

3. Open Your Mind

4. LLibres, articles, textos de referència

5. Caixa d'eines (tools)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 385 other followers