\documentclass[letterpaper]{article}
\usepackage{bulletin-new}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{ellipsis}
\begin{document}
\twocolumn[\masthead{bulletin-logo.eps}{Bulletin}{Issue 22}{June 2013}]
% Table of contents
\setcounter{secnumdepth}{-1} % no numbering on sections in the TOC
\noindent
\colorbox{Myblue}{%
  \begin{tabular}{p{1.5in}p{0.12in}}
    \Large\textbf{Contents} \\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{Friends don't let friends use Windows 8}} & {1}\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{Why call it the\\Swindle?}} & {2}\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{Video streaming at\\LibrePlanet 2013}} & {4}\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{You can't make a good software idea patent}} & {5}\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{FSF polo shirts, plus\\internship opportunities}} & {6}\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{FOSS Bangladesh}} & {7}\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{Stop the Hollyweb}} & {8}\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{A short recap of RMS's\\recent adventures}} & {10}\
      \\
      \raggedright\normalsize{{Licensing \& Compliance Lab update}} & {11}\
      \\
  \end{tabular}
}


% START: Friends don't let friends use Windows 8
\section{Friends don't let friends use Windows 8}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by Libby Reinish\\Campaigns Manager}}

\cap{A}s FSF members, you know that there are a million reasons to use GNU/Linux. There are the ethical reasons along with the practical ones, and of course there's the vibrant community of free software users around the world. So why isn't GNU/Linux the \#1 operating system out there? Mainly because of a lack of knowledge and a lack of experience. There are probably hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people who are interested in GNU/Linux but have never tried it and don't know where to start when it comes to changing operating systems. The good news is that we can change these curious bystanders into die-hard free software users; all we need is your help.



\begin{figure}[htb]
  \begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=2in]{closewindows-final.eps}
  \end{center}
\end{figure}


Windows 8 was released last fall. Right now, a lot of people who've been using Windows 7 are wondering if they should switch to its expensive new replacement. To many, it seems like the only option. What's worse, Microsoft is leading the way in implementing Secure Boot, which makes it harder to upgrade Windows 8 machines to free operating systems. And that's nothing compared to Restricted Boot, which makes certain machines---like tablets---completely impossible to upgrade. Restricted boot is not good for software freedom, but it gives us a good opportunity to highlight the problems with nonfree operating systems and get people excited about switching to GNU/Linux.

More than 8,500 people receive this Bulletin and tens of thousands more will read this article on \protect\url{fsf.org}. If each of you were to help one person install GNU/Linux for the first time, it would transform the free software movement. So this summer, talk to that friend who seems fascinated by all the mysterious stuff you're typing into your terminal. Help a friend who can't afford a new computer rejuvenate their current, virus-laden one. Rescue someone with a Windows 7 computer who is distraught at the prospect of switching to Windows 8. Better yet, find five of these people and host an install party. Make sure to show these friends our infographic at \protect\url{upgradefromwindows.org}. It's is a great tool to help get people excited about ditching Windows and upgrading to GNU/Linux.

As free software advocates, we can write FAQs and pamphlets til the cows come home, but when it comes to installing GNU/Linux for the first time, there is no substitute for in-person assistance from a friend.

Friends don't let friends use Windows 8! Sign our pledge to help someone upgrade to GNU/Linux at \protect\url{upgradefromwindows.org}. Then,\\write to \protect\url{campaigns@fsf.org} and tell us how it went. We'll choose a success story to include in the next Bulletin.

Software freedom for all is just an install party away. Happy hacking. 
\ender
% END: Friends don't let friends use Windows 8



\noindent
\colorbox{Myblue}{\parbox[l]{2.0in}{%
  {\bf\large \begin{center}The Free Software Supporter\end{center}}
 \vspace{1pt}
  \hrule
  \vspace{1pt}
{\bf \begin{center} Receive our monthly email newsletter: \protect\url{fsf.org/fss}.\end{center} }
}}
  \vspace{-0.2mm}
% START: Why call it the\\Swindle?
\section{Why call it the\\Swindle?}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by Richard Stallman\\President}}

\cap{I} go out of my way to call nasty things by names that criticize them.
I call Apple's user-subjugating computers the ``iThings,'' and Amazon's
abusive e-reader the ``Swindle.'' Sometimes I refer to Microsoft's
operating system as ``Losedows''; I referred to Microsoft's first
operating system as ``MS-Dog.''\footnote{Take action against these products:\\\protect\url{u.fsf.org/ithings}, \protect\url{u.fsf.org/swindle},\\\protect\url{u.fsf.org/ebookslist},\\\protect\url{upgradefromwindows.org}} Of course, I do this to vent my
feelings and have fun. But this fun is more than personal; it serves
an important purpose. Mocking our enemies recruits the power of humor
into our cause.

Twisting a name is disrespectful. If we respected the makers of these
products, we would use the names that they chose  \dots\   and that's
exactly the point. These noxious products deserve our contempt, not
our respect. Every proprietary program subjects its users to some
entity's power, but nowadays most of them go beyond that to spy on
users, restrict them and even push them around: the trend is for
products to get nastier. These products deserve to be wiped out.
Those with DRM ought to be illegal.



\begin{figure}[htb]
  \begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=2in]{ibad.eps}
  \end{center}
\end{figure}


When we mention them, we should show that we condemn them, and what
easier way than by twisting their names? If we don't do that, it is
all too easy to mention them and fail to present the condemnation.
When the product comes up in the middle of some other topic, for
instance, explaining at greater length that the product is bad might
seem like a long digression.

To mention these products by name and fail to condemn them has the
effect of legitimizing them, which is the opposite of what they
call for.

Companies choose names for products as part of a marketing plan. They
choose names they think people will be likely to repeat, then invest
millions of dollars in marketing campaigns to make people repeat and
think about those names --- usually these marketing campaigns are
intended to convince people to admire the products based on their
superficial attractions and overlook the harm they do.

Every time we call these products by the names the companies use, we
contribute to their marketing campaigns. Repeating those names is
active support for the products; twisting them denies the products our
support.

Other terminology besides product names can raise a similar issue.
For instance, DRM refers to building technology products to restrict
their users for the benefit of someone else. This inexcusable
practice deserves our burning hatred until we wipe it out. Naturally,
those responsible gave it a name that frames the issue from their
point of view: ``Digital Rights Management.'' This name is the basis of
a public relations campaign that aims to win support from entities
ranging from governments to the W3C.\footnote{\protect\url{u.fsf.org/drm}}

To use their term is to take their side. If that's not the side
you're on, why give it your implicit support?

We take the users' side, and from the users' point of view, what these
malfeatures manage are not rights but restrictions. So we call them
``Digital Restrictions Management.''

Neither of those terms is neutral: choose a term, and you choose a
side. Please choose the users' side and please let it show.

Once, a man in the audience at my speech claimed that the name
``Digital Rights Management'' was the official name of ``DRM,'' the only
possible correct name, because it was the first name. He argued that
as a consequence it was wrong for us to say ``Digital Restrictions
Management.''

Those who make a product or carry out a business practice typically
choose a name for it before we even know it exists. If their temporal
precedence obligated us to use their name, they would have an
additional automatic advantage, on top of their money, their media
influence and their technological position. We would have to fight
them with our mouths tied behind our backs.

Some people feel a distaste for twisting names and say it sounds
``juvenile'' or ``unprofessional.'' What they mean is, it doesn't sound
humorless and stodgy --- and that's a good thing, because we would not
have laughter on our side if we tried to sound ``professional.''
Fighting oppression is far more serious than professional work, so
we've got to add comic relief. It calls for real maturity, which
includes some childishness, not ``acting like an adult.''

If you don't like our choice of name parodies, you can invent your
own. The more, the merrier. Of course, there are other ways to
express condemnation. If you want to sound ``professional,'' you can
show it in other ways. They can get the point across, but they
require more time and effort, especially if you don't make use of
mockery. Take care this does not this lead you to skimp; don't let
the pressure against such ``digression'' push you into insufficiently
criticizing the nasty things you mention, because that would have the
effect of legitimizing them.
\ender
% END: Why call it the\\Swindle?


% START: Video streaming at\\LibrePlanet 2013
\section{Video streaming at\\LibrePlanet 2013}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by Nico Cesar\\Senior System Administrator}}

\cap{A}bout 150 people came to Cambridge's Harvard Science Center for this year's LibrePlanet Conference, but there were many more who weren't able to make it. We want everyone to be able to participate in LibrePlanet, including people from countries other than the US, so we set up a video streaming system for the conference. We had the invaluable assistance of streaming video expert George Chriss, who arrived from New York early to help prepare the system.\footnote{George is the creator of \protect\url{openmeetings.org}, a free software video platform designed to enable transparency and accessibility in government meetings and other gatherings.}

George brought an Elphel 353 camera to stream video of the sessions in one of the Science Center's large lecture halls. Along with it he provided a custom-built case containing a router and a computer running gNewSense, a free GNU/Linux distribution. The other lecture hall used George's Canon FS22 camcorder with analog output and a USB adapter called EasyCAP 60+, which makes it simple to capture video in GNU/Linux.



\begin{figure}[htb]
  \begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=2in]{libreplanet.eps}
  \end{center}
\end{figure}


The conference's three remaining rooms were each equipped with a regular webcam and a Lenovo X60 ThinkPad laptop running the free GNU/Linux distribution Trisquel. We had X60s on hand because we are in the process of flashing them with coreboot, a free software BIOS replacement.\footnote{\protect\url{coreboot.org}}

GStreamer was the program used for video capture and transmission to our streaming server. On the server side we used Icecast, a very popular free streaming program. The video stream was displayed on LibrePlanet's MediaWiki, \protect\url{libreplanet.org}, using the HTML5 video tag, and we used the free formats Ogg Vorbis and Theora for audio and video encoding. Soon, we plan to host archived recordings of the streams. The FSF would like to see all videos on the Web available this way---free software-compatible and without Digital Restrictions Management---so anyone can use them as they please.

\subsubsection*{Lessons learned}

Real-time encoding for streaming has high CPU demands, and our X60s are not very powerful. Luckily, GStreamer is versatile and we were able to adapt to the computing resources we had, but in the future we'd like to use a higher-end computer to do the processing. It's important to us that this computer work with coreboot.

This brings us to the challenge of finding and configuring a coreboot-compatible laptop that has at least four processor cores. Any volunteer who would like to participate in this effort would be much appreciated. Please contact \protect\url{sysadmin@fsf.org} if you'd like to help.
\ender
% END: Video streaming at\\LibrePlanet 2013


% START: You can't make a good software idea patent
\section{You can't make a good software idea patent}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by Joshua Gay\\Licensing and \\Compliance Manager}}

\cap{L}ately there have been many calls to reform the US patent
system in the hopes of alleviating some of the problems caused by software
idea patents.

People are outraged about ``patent assertion entities'' (more commonly known as ``patent
trolls'') as well as by the awesome amounts of money technology corporations
are spending on unnecessary patent litigation. There is also justified public concern that the hostile patent environment makes it harder to innovate. This discontent has triggered a reaction in government; some in Congress are looking
to adjust the rules and costs of patent litigation with the SHIELD
act and the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has been gathering public input as part of an
attempt to reform their patent application review process. In June, the White House released a report, ``Patent Assertion and
U.S. Innovation'' and President Obama announced five executive actions
intended to add ``greater transparency to the patent system and level the
playing field for innovators.''

With this surge of interest in reforming the patent system, the FSF
has joined the conversation, arguing that rather than reform, our goal should be the elimination of the threat of software idea patents.

Last August the FSF's copyright and licensing associate, Donald, published our criticism of the SHIELD act.\footnote{\protect\url{u.fsf.org/shieldact}} Many
of our concerns with the reform being attempted in Congress apply
equally well to the kinds of reform that the USPTO is trying to
make.

Lately, Richard Stallman has given talks with legal scholars
around the country. These talks focus on his proposal of a legal safe harbor from software idea patents, which would protect people from litigation for violating patents on software written for general purpose computers.\footnote{Learn about this innovative proposal at \protect\url{u.fsf.org/protection}} In early April, RMS spoke at Loyola University Chicago School of Law at the ``Patents, Innovation \& Freedom to Use Ideas'' conference and at the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara Law School, where he gave a keynote address alongside Google's senior vice president and general counsel, Kent Walker.

In January, the FSF tried to increase our presence in the patent reform debate by submitting an application to present at a USPTO
round table event in New York City. Unfortunately, the USPTO rejected our application due to ``overwhelming demand.'' Disturbingly,
the scarcity of speaking slots seemed to be a conscious choice rather than an error in planning; despite the large number of organizations interested in a seat at the USPTO's ``round table,'' the half-day conference
was held in a small New York University classroom.

In April, I attended a Harvard Law School conference on patent and
copyright law, where many of the ideas being discussed by the USPTO ---
specifically, that improvements to the patent review process would lead to better-quality software idea patents --- were echoed by Federal district and circuit court judges and a former White House adviser, Quentin Palfrey.

These ideas are ungrounded and potentially counterproductive. Last August, we wrote that the SHIELD act is trying to ``patch a broken system without questioning whether
that system is harmful to begin with. This carries the unfortunate
consequence of possibly prolonging the damage wrought by software
patents. Any reform to reduce the risk of `bad' patents risks
entrenching a false notion of `good' software patents.''

I hope that others will join us and help move the conversation to one that
focuses on eliminating the threat of software idea patents, rather than reforming a system that preserves them. To push
for the kind of reform that is currently fashionable is to send the USPTO on a
wild-goose chase in search of the elusive good software idea patent.

The problem is, it just doesn't exist.
\ender
% END: You can't make a good software idea patent


% START: FSF polo shirts, plus\\internship opportunities
\section{FSF polo shirts, plus\\internship opportunities}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by Chrissie Himes\\Operations Assistant}}

\cap{I}n the past year, GNU Press has launched myriad new items at \protect\url{shop.fsf.org}, including the updated Emacs manual, GNU and FSF logo cybertools, Emacs reference mugs, GPLv3 pins, and ``GNU/Linux Inside'' stickers. Now, by very popular request via the FSF Ideas page, GNU Press is releasing FSF logo polo shirts this summer. Support free software and abide by your office's dress code by sporting one of these stylish maroon polos.

To be notified of the latest news from the FSF shop, please join the GNU Press mailing list at \protect\url{u.fsf.org/gnupresslist}. If you have any suggestions for GNU Press, don't hesitate to add them to our Ideas page at \protect\url{u.fsf.org/ideas}.



\begin{figure}[htb]
  \begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=2in]{fsfpolo2.eps}
  \end{center}

\caption{\textsf{\small{Our new polo shirt, in FSF maroon with white stitched logo from \protect\url{shop.fsf.org}.}}}
\end{figure}


\subsubsection*{Internships}

Throughout the year, the FSF offers internships in system administration, licensing, and campaigns. The next round of internships begin with the start of the school season in September and last for three months. You can read about our internships at \protect\url{u.fsf.org/internships}.

Even if you are not able to commit to an internship, we are always looking for volunteers of all skill levels to help us out with small tasks and larger projects. Volunteer roles include passing out FSF materials at events, updating the Free Software directory, stuffing envelopes, writing a an article about an important free software issue, and helping to answer users' questions about licensing and software. If you're interested in volunteering, check out the volunteer page at \protect\url{fsf.org/volunteer}, send a message to \protect\url{sales@fsf.org}, or stop by our office if you can make it to Boston.
\ender
% END: FSF polo shirts, plus\\internship opportunities



\noindent
\colorbox{Myblue}{\parbox[l]{2.0in}{%
  {\bf\large \begin{center}Get 10\% off!\end{center}}
 \vspace{1pt}
  \hrule
  \vspace{1pt}
{\bf \begin{center}Visit \protect\url{shop.fsf.org} and use coupon code \protect\url{BulletinJun13}!\end{center} }
}}
  \vspace{-0.2mm}
% START: FOSS Bangladesh
\section{FOSS Bangladesh}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by Zak Rogoff\\Campaigns Manager}}

\cap{F}OSS Bangladesh is a prominent free software organization in the South Asian nation of Bangladesh.\footnote{\protect\url{fossbd.org}} I spoke with Ring Joardar, the organization's general secretary, about FOSS Bangladesh's accomplishments and the challenges it faces.

\textbf{Why do you think free software is important in Bangladesh?} Free software is very important and effective for a developing country like Bangladesh, as the IT and software industry here is just starting to bloom.

Free software respects users' rights, which helps build a healthy IT culture. Moreover, free software can help us save a huge amount of foreign currency, because it saves us from paying for maintenance and for licenses that are only valid for a short term.

\textbf{Could you tell us about some of the recurring events that FOSS Bangladesh holds?} In 2011, FOSS Bangladesh officially launched an event with local branding, called Penguin Mela (``Mela'' means festival'' in our local language), to spread GNU/Linux and free software knowledge and culture among college and university students all over Bangladesh. In 2012, we added an installation and support event to promote GNU/Linux and provide end users with cost-free support. So far, we have reached 3,000+ people through these events.

\textbf{Is Bangladesh a receptive\\environment for free software\\advocacy?} It is partially receptive. Most of the IT users and software developers think of ``free'' as in ``free beer,'' not as in ``free speech.'' Many IT users simply stick with using unauthorized copies of proprietary software, because they cost nothing and often have better hardware compatibility. 

The IT training institutes in Bangladesh do not provide courses on free software. But hopefully the situation is changing, day by day, with our hard work on end user support and public educational events.



\begin{figure}[htb]
  \begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=2in]{bangladesh-final-1.eps}
  \end{center}

\caption{\textsf{\small{FOSS Bangladesh at Day Against DRM.}}}
\end{figure}


\textbf{What are some challenges and successes that you've had?} One of our campaigns was protesting our national 4G Internet providers, Banglalion and Qubee, for only providing Windows-compatible modems. We put pressure on them by standing silently in front of their exhibition booths at national events. Within seven months they listened to our message and now they provide cross-platform modems.

\textbf{Who should people contact if they want to get involved with FOSS Bangladesh?} If you love our work, you can join us by contacting our public relations secretary at \protect\url{contact@fossbd.org} with an explanation of why you want to work with us.
\ender
% END: FOSS Bangladesh


% START: Stop the Hollyweb
\section{Stop the Hollyweb}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by John Sullivan\\Executive Director}}

\cap{T}he World Wide Web Consortium's (W3C) mission statement includes, ``Web
for All: The social value of the Web is that it enables human
communication, commerce, and opportunities to share knowledge. One of
W3C's primary goals is to make these benefits available to all people,
whatever their hardware, software, network infrastructure, native
language, culture, geographical location, or physical or mental
ability.''\footnote{\protect\url{w3.org/Consortium/mission}}

But the World Wide Web is in real danger of being encircled and
ultimately extinguished by proprietary software. The Free Software
Foundation, through our Defective by Design campaign, is working to
stop the attempted takeover, and we need your
help.\footnote{\protect\url{u.fsf.org/drmhtml}}

The Web is \emph{yours}. In multiple senses, it is powered by free
software. Most Web sites are served and run using free software.
WordPress and Drupal, both distributed under the GNU General Public
License, are premier choices in the field of Web publishing systems.
The standardized technologies underlying the Web must by rule be
implementable without licensing, so free software browsers are on
equal footing with their proprietary counterparts when engaging
anything considered an ``official'' part of the Web.

As a result, this part of the Web experience is fundamentally
consistent with the ethical values of the free software movement. The
nonstandard ``unofficial'' parts of the Web, on the other hand, have
always been hostile territory for free software users and their
values. Countless times, we've been unable to do simple things like
look at restaurant menus or watch funny videos because they required
Adobe Flash. We couldn't stream videos on Netflix or watch the
Olympics because doing so required Silverlight.

The definition of the Web does not \emph{disallow} such proprietary warts;
it just says those unfortunate additions aren't actually part of the
Web. Browsers aren't expected to support them out of the box. Separate
programs need to be installed, and users need to be convinced that
doing so is worth it.

While ubiquitous in some ways, these proprietary plugins are also
notorious for crashing systems, for causing compatibility headaches,
for making media inaccessible to screen readers and search engines,
and for increasingly being not worth it.

The fact that companies have had to be responsible for providing
support for their own use of these problematic extensions has served
as some kind of check on any possibility that they would take over the
Web. Being responsible for them means modifying code for multiple
operating systems, and multiple browsers. This job has gotten harder,
as more operating systems are in use now than ever before in the Web's
history, given the (unfortunate) growth of OS X, the (better) growth
of GNU/Linux, and the proliferation of mobile platforms.

If you were a company maintaining a system using one of these plugins,
having to handle all the accompanying angry customer complaints and
software bugs, what would you do? You'd try to get someone else to
take the heat off you, in a way that smoothed the operation without
giving up any of your control. You'd try to convince the primary
organization responsible for safeguarding the Web --- the W3C --- to
take your side and declare these proprietary plugins part of the
official Web \emph{culture}.

That's exactly what Netflix, Apple, Microsoft, and Google are trying
to do, through a proposed addition they call Encrypted Media
Extensions (EME). They are operating in an alliance with Hollywood, to
turn the official Web into the Hollyweb.



\begin{figure}[htb]
  \begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=2in]{hollyweb.eps}
  \end{center}
\end{figure}


In the Hollyweb, proprietary media plugins are used to enforce Digital
Restrictions Management (DRM) schemes. Even though my earlier examples
were restaurants and entertainment, the value of the freedom at stake
here is immense. DRM schemes control every aspect of how computer
users interact with media. They can prevent visually impaired people
from having texts read aloud, they can prevent the hearing impaired
from having subtitles, they can prevent scholars from extracting clips
to critique, they can prevent budding artists from collaging the media
that surrounds them into new forms, and much more.

Given their mission statement, one would reasonably expect anyone
proposing such a system to the W3C to be unceremoniously shown the
door. There is nothing about DRM that is compatible with the ``Web for
All.''

We were shocked to instead find the W3C warmly inviting these efforts
in for dinner. CEO Jeff Jaffe, in response to our delivery of over
22,500 signatures opposing EME, adopted the skewed language of those
who seek endorsement for their plan to restrict Web users: ``Therefore,
while the actual DRM schemes are clearly not open, the Open Web must
accommodate them as best possible, as long as we don't cross the
boundary of standards with patent encumbrances; or standards that
cannot be implemented in open source.''
\footnote{\protect\url{u.fsf.org/jafferesponse}}

The organization responsible for keeping the Web free has declared
that bending over backward to accommodate companies restricting the
freedom of individuals somehow makes the Web more free. Jaffe is
right that EME isn't itself proprietary --- but its sole purpose is to
provide an easy, unified way for proprietary DRM plugins to operate.
EME doesn't ``cross the boundary of standards with patent
encumbrances,'' it just builds a nifty bridge right over it. Endorsing
this kind of shim makes the W3C mission a sham.

We need your help to make the Web not just ``open,'' but as \emph{free} as
the software that powers it. There are multiple ways you can help:

\begin{itemize}
\item Financially support our work on your behalf, by joining as an
associate member or contributing what you can.
\item Make sure you are not financially supporting those working against
you --- cancel your Netflix streaming subscription, and avoid
related Microsoft, Apple, and Google products until they stop
pushing DRM.
\item Make your position known, by signing our petition against the
Hollyweb. While you're at it, join the mailing lists for this
effort in order to stay up-to-date and become part of the momentum
for change.
\end{itemize}

The W3C standards approval process is a long one. We are in the early
stages of this conflict, and these measures are only the first steps.
The air of defeatism expressed by the leadership of the W3C at this
moment in time is disheartening, but we needn't take it to heart. We
have eliminated DRM in many contexts, and we can do it here too. But
even just forcing companies to continue bearing the full
responsibility and cost for deploying their own DRM systems would be a
huge victory. It would add to the momentum we've seen against plugins
like Flash and Silverlight toward HTML-based media players using free
media formats, while also preserving the moral authority of the Web's
principles. Tell the W3C to stay strong, and say no to the Hollyweb.
\ender
% END: Stop the Hollyweb


% START: A short recap of RMS's\\recent adventures
\section{A short recap of RMS's\\recent adventures}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by Jeanne Rasata\\Assistant to the President}}

\cap{R}ichard M. Stallman continued to maintain a punishing travel schedule this past semester, advocating for free software in places as far south as the Tropic of Capricorn and farther north than the Polar Circle. In spite of the usual month-long end-of-year lull in his engagements, he managed in the past six months to cover over 66,350 miles, to give 47 speeches and attend workshops, meetings and panels in 37 cities across thirteen countries, all while working a full day every day to stay on top of correspondence.



\begin{figure}[htb]
  \begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=2in]{rms-portoalegre.eps}
  \end{center}
\end{figure}


He delivered the keynote speeches at a number of conferences in Brazil, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, the US, Poland, Norway, and Switzerland, and was a guest of honor at the launching of Fundaţia Ceata, a Romanian foundation promoting free software and free culture. His highly anticipated visit to Niort and Poitiers, in western France, happily coincided with the publication of the second edition of the French translation of his biography \emph{Free as in Freedom,} \emph{Richard Stallman et la révolution du logiciel libre},\footnote{Paris: Eyrolles, 2013.} copies of which he was able to autograph after his speeches there.
\ender
% END: A short recap of RMS's\\recent adventures


% START: Licensing \& Compliance Lab update
\section{Licensing \& Compliance Lab update}
\vspace{-0.35cm} 
\textbf{\textit{by Donald Robertson, III\\Copyright and Licensing\\Associate}}

\cap{I}n January, my coworker, Joshua, put together a blog post detailing what
the Licensing \& Compliance Lab accomplished in 2012, and why it would
matter in 2013.\footnote{\protect\url{u.fsf.org/2012into2013}} Now it's time to share the progress
that we have made in the first half of this year.

\subsubsection*{Compliance investigations\\and backlog reduction}

Since our last update we have continued to reduce our backlog,
responding to and resolving almost 200 reports of license violations
and handling over 400 licensing and compliance questions from
clients. In terms of compliance, we have resolved several long-running
cases, bringing violators into compliance with the GNU General Public
License and GNU Free Documentation License. We have already nearly
reached our annual goal for payments from clients and violators for
the services we provide. While we still have a ways to go, our
progress has put us in a great position going forward.



\begin{figure}[htb]
  \begin{center}
    \includegraphics[width=2in]{adapter-ryf.eps}
  \end{center}

\caption{\textsf{\small{ThinkPenguin's wireless adapter is FSF-certified to work without nonfree software.}}}
\end{figure}


\subsubsection*{Hardware certified to Respect Your Freedom}

In April, we awarded Respects Your Freedom hardware certification to the ThinkPenguin TPE-N150USB USB
Wireless N adapter.\footnote{All certified devices: \protect\url{fsf.org/ryf}.} While many wireless cards and adapters using Atheros
chipsets work well with fully free operating systems, ThinkPenguin's
device is the first to carry the promise that it will always remain
free. In June we awarded certification to the long-range version of
the wireless adapter, the TPE-N150USBL, as well as the LulzBot TAZ 3D printer, the latest model by Aleph Objects, Inc.

\subsubsection*{The Free Software\\Directory overhauled}

The FSF has maintained \protect\url{directory.fsf.org} for many years, and there
is currently a long-running effort to revamp this useful tool. In the
first half of 2013, Joshua updated the Directory's back end, making it
easier for volunteers to contribute. He also set up a system to import
package info from the Debian \emph{Main} repository. Thanks to these
efforts, along with weekly meetings with volunteers to update and add
new entries, the Directory has grown to include over 7,000 packages.
\ender
% END: Licensing \& Compliance Lab update


\donate{foo}
\end{document}
