On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 12:51 +0200, Charles Schulz wrote: > Chad, Ian, > > FYI: The templates that were bundled with the "OpenOffice Premium" thing > contained: > - a map of India that doesn't seem consistent with what India claims to > be its borders (see Kashmir) and that doesn't seem consistent with what > the UN says
So what can be done about that? Not a lot. The best way to combat this is to develop strong mainstream branding that pre-empts such things. > - cliparts with nazi symbols, whose very presence inside a software is > illegal in many countries (not in Hungary though). So anyone distributing in those countries is likely to get into trouble. I don't see that there is really a lot the community can do about it except perhaps expressing disapproval. The really interesting management issue is how to reduce the liklihood of something like this happening in the future. > So the point is that we could have tried to make a more collective work > out of this and we didn't, and I'm not trying to blame somebody. I'm > just pointing out the issue, so Chad, please, try to read careful John's > words and mine's. I wasn't saying that we should try and use this particular work, I'm saying that it there is a market demand for a version of OOo with clip art and other value added etc and there are volunteers willing to put such a thing together, we should not make it difficult for them, rather we should make it very clear that they have the full support of the project and the official brand as long as they don't include illegal material. If they can add value and make money and feed some of it back into the project even better. That would make it very difficult for other people to fork into undesirable off shoots. It would also reduce any motivation for anyone in the main project to do it. > > Maybe, but there really isn't much that can be done about it while the > > code is FLOSS. In this particular case there was the option for the main > > project to adopt the OOo Premium concept and grab the name and concept > > before anyone else could use it. Maybe that is now just a missed > > opportunity (perhaps there is still an option to take it on if we can > > find people willing to do it and back them). Maybe its just necessary to > > learn from it. In the end its down to risk management. Missed > > opportunity is just as much of a risk as preventing people from doing > > something considered risky. That is why innovative companies have skunk > > works etc even in the proprietary world, its to get away from the > > conservative control systems that stifle innovation and growth - Read > > the "Alchemy of Growth" Baghai, Coley and White. There is always going > > to be a trade off with OSS between freedom to develop and proliferate > > and freedom to do harm. Its the nature of the beast. > > > > > >> If open-source is serious about entering the mainstream, we have a duty > >> to educate the masses about 'safe hex'... if you don't know where it's > >> come from, don't let it loose on your PC > >> > > > > So what comprehensive education strategy is there that will teach people > > about licensing, security and the responsibilities that are required to > > operate in a free technology environment? > > > > Ian > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Ian -- www.theINGOTS.org www.schoolforge.org.uk www.opendocumentfellowship.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
