[1x1.gif]
   danbricklin.com/log
   [1x1.gif]
   [1]Dan's Log Home
   [1x1.gif]
   [2]Archive
   [1x1.gif]
   Starting December 20, 2004
   More of why podcasting is good, Audio recordings and transparency, Eric Kriss at
   MSC about Open Formats and Microsoft, Boomer blog and my lights, NH Inaugural
   Ball, Open source seminars coming up, Cleaning up my office and why, Panel
   recording is now on ITConversations, Open Source Panel last week
   20Dec04-21Jan05
   2004_12_20.htm
    [3]< Newer    [4]Older >
                                      [1x1.gif]
   Friday, January 21, 2005  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   More of why podcasting is good [[5]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   Following up on my last post about audio recording and transparency, I had some
   thoughts while listening to a Gillmor Gang podcast on the flight back from
   California. (Travel this week has given me time to listen to a few hours of
   podcasts exercising, waiting, flying, etc.) The edition I was listening to was
   from [6]January 14 with guest Adam Bosworth of Google who is a database expert. I
   really like this series of "shows" (The Gillmor Gang). During this one it hit me
   why: It's done as a deep, serious show aimed at a professional in the area
   covered (in this case the IT world), it's not dumbed down, it's actually "smarted
   up".
   The Eric Kriss announcement saga (as I chronicled it in my [7]post) showed that
   the news reports, and reports on them, were filtered, transformed, shortened, and
   simplified, losing a lot and evoking a different response in the listener than if
   they were exposed to the source. The reporting was by people who weren't
   practitioners steeped in the fine points and history of the field. They were
   reporters trained to ask questions and distill out a "story" and put it "in
   context" outside of the source as an "observer". That's their "product". On
   Groklaw, Pamela Jones and many of her readers strive to amass all the source
   documents and further ferret out and sift through as many related facts as
   possible. It is up to readers to figure out how to use it (who then often feed
   back that usage, proposing many "stories").
   What I like about the ITConversations type of podcasts is the depth, the aiming
   at a narrow audience who cares about the subject and wants to learn directly from
   people who know a lot about it. The Gillmor Gang is special in that the "regular"
   participants are all very knowledgeable in various parts of the field, and in
   what is going on in it at various companies. They ask probing questions and give
   opinions and anecdotes that draw out the conversation with the guest(s). Those
   guests are carefully chosen people who are involved at a high level in topics.
   They aren't just spokespeople but often the thinkers who know the subject very
   deeply from experience and who appreciate the opportunity to speak seriously and
   at a professional level. I feel that I'm learning, and the long format, with
   rambling into topics through the probing, and the informal nature of it being a
   "conversation" among topic insiders unafraid to use jargon and others unafraid to
   ask for clarification, is very engaging.
   I feel that if I were a devotee of almost any other topic, just about all of
   which have depth (from knitting machines to nuclear safety), this format (as
   podcasting) would work. Regular broadcast "radio" wouldn't work for many reasons
   on many of these topics. The fact that I can back up my MP3 player and listen to
   a passage again, or stop for a few minutes or days and then start up again a
   minute or two before where I stopped to help remember context, lends itself to
   this sometimes information-dense material. The material is often very technical
   and you need to hear some things said more than once, the material is also
   thought provoking so my mind wanders, I listen in places that sometimes have
   distractions, and finally the shows are long and I sometimes need to break up my
   listening into chunks. Another thing: With podcasts, you know that almost
   everybody listens from the start, with no dropping in (unless someone else sent
   them directly to a section knowing it stood on its own). No need to always have
   something when they tune the dial to catch them, no fear that you'd lose an
   audience to another channel since they can fast-forward if a sub-topic is boring.
   These conditions are killers to a traditional radio program which just streams by
   without stop, and which by nature of the scarcity of available "airtime" can only
   go after topics with deep understanding to a wide audience, like sports or
   politics, or be presented in a way understandable to a more general population.
   Physical media, like CDs or tapes, are not timely enough and the distribution is
   too expensive for the wide range of topics and "shows" you'd need to get to that
   depth. Broadband and downloading don't have those problems.
   Listening to Halley Suitt [8]interviewing Dan Gillmor and thinking about this
   topic, I also see how this long, informal format lends itself to getting to know
   a person. Since airtime isn't scarce, you can do a 30 or 60 minute interview with
   long answers, not the 10 or 20 minutes (including commercials) common in a TV
   interview. No need to edit out the personal "fluff" to just present the
   sensational "news". Isn't that one of the reasons Terry Gross' [9]Fresh Air is so
   popular, with one person interviewed for 30 to 50 minutes with no breaks? The
   Fresh Air "[10]about" page explains how it's special by saying: "The show gives
   interviews as much time as needed..". The "getting to know someone" aspect of
   podcasting fits in with blogging, and relates to the "objectivity" question. Once
   you know someone, you don't need to have a "McReporter", each supposedly just as
   "objective" as the next. You understand more of their biases and tendencies and
   can put what they say or write in a context.
   So, another rant about how special and different podcasting is.
   Wednesday, January 19, 2005  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   Audio recordings and transparency [[11]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   Dan Gillmor has an important post about "[12]The End of Objectivity" and how the
   goal of "being objective" as a journalist should be replaced by "...four other
   notions that may add up to the same thing. They are pillars of good journalism:
   thoroughness, accuracy, fairness and transparency". For transparency he suggests
   providing links to source material. In a [13]later post, he points to David
   Berlind's [14]latest efforts where David (of ZDNet) includes a link to the full
   MP3 of an interview with an executive quoted in the article, including the time
   codes for each quote so you can see if he represented the executive correctly.
   This is really good stuff.
   I've noticed something that happened with the reports about Eric Kriss'
   announcement last week about Open Formats and Microsoft. (Actually, while Eric
   made the announcement, I've seen that there were others in government and at
   Microsoft who worked real hard on this and should also get credit. As a very
   senior official, though, he should get credit for championing this, too.) The
   early reports were from news postings by reporters trying to tell a quick story
   (I know how quick -- I went home to post and some of their stories beat me by
   quite a bit and they probably went through editors). They didn't have all the
   background that I did to work with and had to put things in the context of other
   presentations at the meeting that weren't meant to be juxtaposed but that were.
   Those early reports got picked up by [15]an article on SourceLicense.com that was
   then [16]picked up by Slashdot. Reading the responses on Slashdot you can see
   people were trying to figure things out based on feelings and reactions to
   reports of the short reports. Most people didn't seem to understand what was
   really going on. It seems that Eric Kriss himself [17]posted there on Slashdot to
   ask for a correction of where the article said that Open Formats were replacing
   Open Standards, not extending them (a correction was made).
   I had made a recording of the talk (with my little iRiver iFP-890 flash MP3
   player) while sitting on stage (I introduced Eric). I transcribed part of the
   recording and [18]posted that transcript along with some of my own comments here
   on my blog. I emailed Pamela Jones over at Groklaw.net and gave her permission to
   quote me liberally. (Since this was an "informal" announcement, after the talk I
   asked Secretary Kriss if this was OK and he said yes.) PJ [19]posted my material
   with lots of links to background material. This resulted in lots of what I think
   was better understanding in the comments than on Slashdot (though someone on
   Slashdot did point to PJ's post), but many people still didn't get what was going
   on nor Eric's sincerity towards openness.
   PJ emailed me and Eric Kriss and asked permission to post my entire recording on
   Groklaw. We both agreed. She then transcribed the rest of it to make a complete
   transcript and [20]posted that transcript along with the MP3 and a more open Ogg
   Vorbis sound format copy that she made. Her own comments, having now heard him
   speak, had greater feeling than her earlier post. Comments posted by others had a
   lot more heartfelt thanks to Eric than before, even though the written content
   wasn't that much different. The discussion, I feel, got down to the real issues
   being discussed and not just a reaction to what it was all generally about and
   how it related to their personal soapboxes. People responded in the more
   personal, helpful tone of a friendly give-and-take, not just the discussions of
   people in the third person often seen with such announcements. Wow, a real
   "conversation" with a very senior public official. Hearing the voice and "being
   there" with the recording seemed to open the relationship in a way similar to
   "knowing" a blogger through reading their blog over time. Things are more human
   this way. Maybe people will do fewer personal attacks when they feel they know
   the subject through experiencing the interaction that led to the story being
   written about (as in David Berlind's piece). Maybe podcasting will make things
   more personal (I'm getting to "know" the (Steve) [21]Gillmor Gang people better
   by listening to them so frequently on their podcasts). Knowledgeable, civil
   discourse is good for our society.
   Friday, January 14, 2005  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   Eric Kriss at MSC about Open Formats and Microsoft [[22]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   This morning was a long Massachusetts Software Council meeting. I don't have time
   to cover it now, but there is one part I want to get out right away.
   Massachusetts Secretary of Administration and Finance, Eric Kriss, gave a short
   speech. I've mentioned him here multiple times, starting [23]October 8, 2003. He
   is very high in state government (reporting directly to the Governor), but has
   been in the software industry at one point and reportedly has programmed in PL/1
   and Perl. He announced some additions to their Open Standards initiative. They
   are defining "Open Formats", which include formats that don't need to have a
   formal standards body and could come from a private entity. And, as a surprise,
   they seem to be coming to an agreement with Microsoft where Microsoft is going to
   reduce their restrictions on some Microsoft Office file formats to fit under the
   definitions.
   Side view of Eric Kriss talking into podium mike   View over shoulder of press
   person of Eric
   Eric Kriss speaking, talking to a newspaper reporter
   [1x1.gif]
   This is important, I believe, because it shows that the State is signaling that
   centralized bodies aren't needed for creating standards that they will accept,
   that proprietary software companies' formats may be accepted (or any group's),
   but that the important thing is the ability to have open access to those data
   files and be able to get all the data out at any time in the future. When you
   have a stack of components, it's OK to have proprietary ones, as long as they are
   legally replaceable without special permission. This means, of course, that it's
   OK to make any component through nonproprietary software, too. This is another
   step in Massachusetts' effort to level the playing field so that Open Source can
   be adopted on its merits when appropriate, but without doing it by locking out
   proprietary products.
   If Microsoft really does this, I think it's a step in the right direction that is
   good for society (and for Microsoft, too).
   The issue stems from the license Microsoft has had for the Office file formats
   patents ([24]here is a link, though the contents of that page may change when
   they change the license, I assume). It was not unencumbered enough for many
   governments (nor most Open Source people), and they have been complaining to
   Microsoft for some time.
   Here is some of what I heard him say (these are my notes, nothing official):
   ...We're ready to extend the concept of Open Standards to the next step or stage.
   And I'm making an informal announcement to you. We're looking as always to
   comments -- feedback -- because it's been terrific. One of the best assets that
   we have is all of you and the tremendous amount of brainpower that resides in
   this room and in the greater community, the software industry in Massachusetts.
   But we are planning to extend the definition of Open Standards to what we are now
   going to be calling "Open Formats"...
   ...In our definition, "Open Formats" are specifications for data file formats
   that are based on an underlying Open Standard developed by an open community and
   affirmed by a standards body or de facto format standards controlled by other
   entities that are fully documented and available for public use under perpetual,
   royalty free, and nondiscriminatory terms.
   ... An example of an Open Format that we have already characterized is TXT text
   files and PDF document formats.
   ...It should be reasonably obvious for a lay person who looks at the concept of
   Public Documents that we've got to keep them independent and free forever because
   it is an overriding imperative of the American democratic system. That we cannot
   have our public documents locked up in some kind of proprietary format or locked
   up in a format that you need to get a proprietary system to use sometime in the
   future. So, one of the things that we're incredibly focused on is insuring that
   the public records remain independent of underlying systems and applications
   insuring their accessibility over very long periods of time. In the IT business a
   long period of time is about 18 months, in government it's about 300 years, so we
   have slightly different perspective.
   Open Formats insure also that there are minimal restrictions imposed on the use
   of applications needed to access those records and files. And finally, Open
   Formats support the integrity of public records when we're going to need to do a
   file conversion as required probably in the course of normal technological
   evolution. So that if we have something in the format of 2005 and it's going to
   need to be converted in 2038 into something that we've never thought of yet we
   need to be able to do that without losing the integrity in the ... of
   information...
   ...The Commonwealth will only certify an Open Format designation when minimal
   legal restrictions exist on the reading and dissemination of government
   records...
   ...What I want to discuss informally today is we've been in a conversation with
   Microsoft for several months with regard to the patent and the license
   surrounding their use of XML to specify specifically DOC files in Microsoft
   Office 2003. They have made representations to us recently they are planning to
   modify that license, and we believe if they do so in the way that we understand
   that they have spoken about, we will leave it obviously to them to describe
   exactly what they are going to do, that it is our expectation that when we do
   issue the next iteration of the standard that in fact the Microsoft what are
   proprietary formats will be deemed to be Open Formats because they will no longer
   have the restrictions on their use that they currently have, that would include
   potentially, and, again, we need to wait for the final designation of this from
   Microsoft, it would include Word Processing ML, which is the wrapper around DOC
   files, Spreadsheet ML, which is the wrapper around XLS files and the form
   template schemas. Obviously, we are going to be talking to other companies and
   other entities that may have restrictions around the use of those formats and we
   hope to either get them removed or have further conversations so that as we all
   move forward together in this wonderful evolution of technology we are going to
   insure that at least in the government we will be able to reference something a
   hundred years from now and it won't get lost forever.
   I am pleased that my state is taking a lead here in making things happen, and
   it's nice to have it without litigation. It seems that governments are using
   their buying leverage to help vendors make their products more interoperable with
   other software. I see that the government is focusing on their own needs, and
   that may be a little too narrow for some other parties (after all, they are
   arguing for access to public records). They shouldn't be the only ones, though,
   pushing for what is needed, so don't fault them for not carrying everything on
   their shoulders.
   It looks like I'm going to be on an Information Technology Advisory Board for the
   State, so I might be able to follow this more closely in the future. Feedback,
   though, should not go to me. Secretary Kriss has asked for it himself. Discuss
   this if you want on web sites like Groklaw and send him a pointer. As he says,
   this is all an evolution, and our feedback is part of that evolution. I'm glad to
   see that Microsoft has chosen to be part of it, too.
   Monday, January 10, 2005  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   Boomer blog and my lights [[25]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   I've been helping a friend with her new business. She's an "old media" person who
   is moving into "new media". She was very impressed by the success of the
   grassroots part of the Dean campaign and wanted to learn more about podcasting,
   blogging, etc. She and her cofounders are looking to address us baby boomers and
   the changes in our lives and help us get through them together. I encouraged her
   to start a blog, and last Friday I helped get her set up with Blogger. It's going
   to be interesting to watch them try to figure out how best to apply the new media
   and "many-to-many" elements of community yet still get a business off the ground,
   all while they instinctively reach for old tools (like "Let's sell a video series
   to TV stations" or something).
   The blog is "[26]Boomer Blog". Nancy would love to get feedback.
   As part of thanks for my help, she and a partner have been helping me get my
   video stuff set up, giving me lists of expensive equipment to buy and then
   positioning all the lights, etc., so I look good. It's not as easy as it looks.
   Here's a sample shot from the setup as it stands now (thank you Bill!):
   Dan smiling with bookcase in background   Camera, light in hood with reflector,
   monitor   Black thing with slits in front of light clamped to shelf
   Video capture of Dan with lights on, the setup in front of me, and the light that
   makes the background look that way
   [1x1.gif]
   I'll explain how this all works when I start using it more. Right now I just tape
   practice sessions of my speeches, like the seminar I'm giving tomorrow, so I can
   critique myself. Of course, if I need to do any iChat video conferences now I'll
   look nice and professional!
   Sunday, January 9, 2005  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   NH Inaugural Ball [[27]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   I attended last night's New Hampshire Governor's Inaugural Ball. My sectionmate
   from Harvard Business School, [28]John Lynch, is the new governor. Several
   classmates came from all over the country to attend and I drove up from
   Massachusetts in the sleet and snow. It was a big black-tie affair, with tickets
   $150 a person:
   Lots of tables with people in black tie and gowns standing around
   The ballroom where we sat
   [1x1.gif]
   A bigger room with more people standing around - left side as seen from the back
   Right side
   The main room
   [1x1.gif]
   Lights on a stage with people lined up
   Introducing the Governor and family
   [1x1.gif]
   Here I am in my tux (that's [29]twice in three months):
   Dan smiling
   Black-tie Dan
   [1x1.gif]
   Governor Lynch only gave a short speech -- most of the time was for talking with
   friends. (There was also some music and some people danced.) The talking and
   seeing classmates and their spouses was great, even though the last reunion was
   recent.
   We waited as a group in the long receiving line to shake John's hand and posed
   for a picture:
   A group shot with 16 or so people
   The group shot with the Governor
   [1x1.gif]
   It's fun to watch a warm, very friendly politician work (though he spent a lot of
   his life as a business person) as person after person came up to him:
   A blur of people
   The receiving line, with Governor Lynch the second person from the left
   [1x1.gif]
   After most of it was over we were talking in a sitting area near the desert and
   fireplace when John walked over to talk with us for a while. It was like old
   times discussing a case together, but this time it was real: What should a new
   governor do who inherits a $300 million deficit? I don't envy him his task, but
   he's a real nice guy and I hope he succeeds in helping his state.
   A small table with several people sitting around and a few standing looking at
   John
   The new governor (center) talks with his old classmates
   [1x1.gif]
   It is really something when someone you went to school with and sat in a class
   with every day for more than a year makes it big, especially a normal nice guy
   like John. It's just such a proud feeling, and a "small world" feeling.
   Friday, January 7, 2005  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   Open source seminars coming up [[30]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   I'm speaking at some seminars over the next several days. They are sponsored by
   [31]Black Duck Software, a producer of intellectual property management tools for
   software development. The topic of the seminars is "Outlook and Issues for Open
   Source in the Enterprise in 2005". I'll be talking about the compelling case for
   the use of open source software in software development and the new disciplines
   that will become a necessary part of the development process as open source
   achieves its full potential in the enterprise. (That's from the "official"
   notice, but I helped write it, so I don't mind quoting it.) The other speaker is
   Black Duck EVP and lawyer Karen Copenhaver getting into the nitty gritty of
   accounting and legal issues, especially with respect to Sarbanes-Oxley
   compliance. There is also an additional section (after a break) demonstrating the
   tools and services they sell (I'm not involved in doing that). The seminars are
   in Boston on January 11th, New York City on January 13th, and Santa Clara,
   California, on January 18th. From the list of people who have already signed up
   it seems like this is a very hot topic among big business. Open Source and other
   forms of sharing are an important part of software development and we all have to
   learn how to make it work smoothly.
   It seems more and more of what I do is involving open source and various ways of
   sharing and community among "content" producers and users. The ubiquity of the
   Internet in everyone's life is really driving this in a wonderful way.
   Tuesday, January 4, 2005  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   Cleaning up my office and why [[32]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   Happy New Year!
   For those of you who have visited my office, either at Trellix or at Software
   Garden, you know that it's normally pretty cluttered (that's being charitable).
   Well, for various work reasons I needed to get it all straightened up. I spent
   the last week or so working on it. Here are some "before" pictures:
   [d87ceaf0.jpg]   [d89c2af0.jpg]
   Left side of room with piles of papers on boxes full of papers, old Comdex
   handouts, and bank statements; right side of the room with more of the same
   [1x1.gif]
   Here is the "after", so far:
   [d8bacbc0.jpg]   [d8dd9bc0.jpg]
   Clean parts of the room corresponding to the pictures above (no shown: two piles
   still needing work)
   [1x1.gif]
   For me, the big thing is the huge amount of floor space I have back. No more
   tiptoeing avoiding piles or boxes. I also have lots of clear desk space to work
   with -- I felt very cramped working on ListGarden with barely enough room to move
   my mouse. [I go into great detail here to document this for myself and for those
   readers who have worked with me and know how momentous this is, having put up
   with my clutter over the years...]
   Here's some of what I threw out (over 6 garbage cans full):
   [d8f9aa40.jpg]   [d997ba50.jpg]   [d957da40.jpg]
   Boxes, garbage and paper bags filled with paper; old product boxes (I kept some
   of the contents); a few of the many Avery boxes of labels
   [1x1.gif]
   I had dozens and dozens of boxes of Avery labels from my old PageGarden
   development days (it's a laser printer utility for DOS from the late 1980's).
   They've all yellowed and the adhesive is no longer very good. It really hurt to
   throw out stuff that costs hundreds and hundreds of dollars to replace if I
   bought them now (they were samples provided by Avery to help me do my
   development).
   I also had a large box or two taking up the bottom of the closet filled with
   cables, mostly RS232 serial cables and parallel printer cables as well as lots of
   power cords and VGA cord extenders. I kept a few of the serial cables "just in
   case" and have the rest in a box ready to go in the trash next week. I couldn't
   believe how many different LapLink cables I've bought from Traveling Software,
   each coming with updated software for the latest operating system. Here's a small
   section of the old cables and the rack of bins I replaced my boxes full of
   still-useful cables and paraphernalia with:
   [d917ba40.jpg]   [d9796a40.jpg]
   Box of serial cables and some old Ethernet coax; the new drawers to hold my
   cables and adapters
   [1x1.gif]
   What drove me to finally clean this all up? I want to do some simple videotaping
   in my office for some upcoming projects. I want it to look "professional" and am
   working with a professional video person to set up lights, etc., that I can use
   whenever I want. He's coming over tomorrow and he'll need space to set up light
   stands, etc., and he also asked for a clean, uncluttered background. That was the
   excuse that pushed me over to finally do a pretty complete cleanup job, rather
   than my normal "make enough room for the incoming box" job.
   Scott Kirsner leaked that I'm "...experimenting with digital video..". in The
   Boston Globe [33]last week. Well, actually I'm learning Final Cut Express on my
   Powerbook so that I can edit a demo tape of me speaking (the CRN keynote) and
   whatever I record with my new setup. That's the "digital" part. The rest has been
   lights, cameras, and sound equipment. He kindly made what I told him off the
   record obscure enough.
   Speaking of Scott Kirsner (he writes a weekly column in The Boston Globe, does
   the MITX Fireside Chat interviews I sometimes cover, and is one of the hosts of
   the Nantucket and Future Forward conferences, among other things), I saw his name
   mentioned in the Sunday Boston Globe this week, on the "Special Occasions" page:
   Scott was recently married. Congratulations Scott!
   Thursday, December 23, 2004  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   Panel recording is now on ITConversations [[34]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   A recording of the Open Source panel is now up on ITConversations. It's long: an
   hour and 28 minutes, 40.7MB. The part about experiences with acquisitions is at
   about an hour and 8 minutes into the recording.
   See "[35]Open Source Code: Managing the Opportunity" on ITConversations for links
   to the recordings. Thank you Doug Kaye at ITConversations for making this
   possible.
   Monday, December 20, 2004  [1x1.gif]
   [1x1.gif]
   Open Source Panel last week [[36]link]
   [1x1.gif]
   I participated in the  "Open Source Code: Managing the Opportunity" panel last
   Thursday. It was sponsored by [37]Goulston & Storrs, a law firm with a major
   office in Boston, and the [38]Mass High Tech publication. The event was taped and
   that tape is now in the able hands of Doug Kaye of [39]ITConversations. Within
   the next few days (after I get him some pictures and other material) the
   recording should show up there so that you can listen to it. I like being able to
   say that you can hear the whole thing, so I don't have to be complete in my
   write-ups here. The whole thing was almost an hour and a half long.
   The panel mainly focused on the corporate view of Open Source. Can you, and
   should you, avoid it? (Answer: No.) Will it have an effect on financial concerns
   of the company? (Answer: Yes, sometimes positive, sometimes negative.) What
   should you do? (Answer: Learn about it, work with developers, document what you
   are doing, and learn to manage the process to get the most out of Open Source
   without running into financial stumbling blocks.)
   The most eye-opening parts of the give-and-take (among panelists and with the
   audience) were at least two people in the audience who related experiences
   involving Open Source during company acquisition negotiations. In one case, a
   major, rich, computer company kept a large very long-term holdback of the
   purchase price as a reserve against Open Source issues, much like they'd hold
   back money for questionable long-term receivables. In another case, simple,
   reasonable Open Source questions (like "Do you have any documentation of which
   Open Source code you are using and the licenses covering it?") resulted in a
   multi-month delay of due diligence on a lucrative deal that then lost momentum
   and eventually died hurting the company trying to sell badly. The issues here are
   real and dear to the pocketbooks of investors and shareholders (including
   employees).
   Sides of peoples heads
   My view of the other panelists and moderator
   [1x1.gif]
   Here is a summary of the "Do you have anything to leave people with at the end?"
   answers from each of the panelists:
   [Symb075c00b700c800000000.gif] Ben Howe (investment banker): We are so early in
   understanding the legal trail on Open Source and making it more routine, so it
   will be bumpy. Big buyers (of companies) are catching on that they need to do due
   diligence here, and there is no normal procedure that we've gone through many
   times to fall back upon. You need a great degree of preparation.
   [Symb075c00b700c800000000.gif] Paul Cormier (executive VP of engineering at Red
   Hat): If you are going to work in the OSS area, participate in the community of
   the products you are using.
   [Symb075c00b700c800000000.gif] Karen Copenhaver (executive VP and General Counsel
   of Black Duck Software and IP lawyer): There needs to be a facilitated
   conversation between lawyers, business people, and developers. Lawyers and
   business people can't understand this from a distance. Investors will eventually
   get comfortable with this. It is just another business process that they need to
   manage intelligently from the beginning rather than scurrying around at the end
   justifying what they did in the past.
   [Symb075c00b700c800000000.gif] Dan Bricklin (president of software and consulting
   firm): You can't put your head in the sand and say "we won't use Open Source".
   The question for developers is not just how to be involved in an Open Source
   development project, but also how do you be a part of a normal, for-profit
   business and deal with the Open Source issues. You have to learn that your lawyer
   is your friend, that the lawyer is a part of the development team the same way
   that the Quality Assurance person or the Usability person is part of the team.
   The same way your compiler gives you warning messages about syntax, you are going
   to get warning messages from your lawyer and you are going to need to say "let us
   figure out together how to interface these two products without violating the
   licenses". This is a new part of development and developers need to be trained
   about this.
   Dozens of people in a theater arrangement at a nice conference center
   Part of the audience
   [1x1.gif]
   I'll post when the recording becomes available.
   [1x1.gif]
   [40]Archive   [41]Home   [42]Newer   [43]Older
   © Copyright 1999-2018 by Daniel Bricklin
   All Rights Reserved.
   See disclaimer on home page.

   [1x1.gif]

References

   1. http://danbricklin.com/log/default.htm
   2. http://danbricklin.com/log/archive.htm
   3. http://danbricklin.com/log/2005_01_28.htm
   4. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_11_17.htm
   5. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#podcasting
   6. http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail405.html
   7. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#transparency
   8. http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail404.html
   9. http://freshair.npr.org/
  10. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=13
  11. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#transparency
  12. http://dangillmor.typepad.com/dan_gillmor_on_grassroots/2005/01/the_end_of_obje.html
  13. http://dangillmor.typepad.com/dan_gillmor_on_grassroots/2005/01/pointing_to_the.html
  14. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5539175.html
  15. http://www.sourcelicense.com/?q=node/21
  16. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/15/1420205
  17. http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=136172&cid=11374645
  18. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#openformats
  19. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2005011418070774
  20. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2005011807275883
  21. http://www.itconversations.com/series/gillmorgang.html
  22. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#openformats
  23. http://danbricklin.com/log/2003_10_08.htm#kriss
  24. http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/format/xmlpatentlicense.asp
  25. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#boomerblog
  26. http://boomerstv.com/blog/
  27. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#ball
  28. http://www.nh.gov/governor/
  29. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_10_15.htm#fellow
  30. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#seminar
  31. http://www.blackducksoftware.com/
  32. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#cleaning
  33. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/12/27/its_the_pure_entrepreneur_who_often_leads_the_way/
  34. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#recording
  35. http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail386.html
  36. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_12_20.htm#panel
  37. http://www.goulstonstorrs.com/
  38. http://www.masshightech.com/
  39. http://www.itconversations.com/
  40. http://danbricklin.com/log/archive.htm
  41. http://danbricklin.com/log/default.htm
  42. http://danbricklin.com/log/2005_01_28.htm
  43. http://danbricklin.com/log/2004_11_17.htm