Responsible Leadership: Tony Stanco and the EGOVOS Problem

NYFairUse
representatives, costumed as the American Founding Fathers, left
the warm comfort of their homes at 4:00 in the morning on March
17th, 2003, to go down to Washington DC. We left for George
Washington University in full colonial regalia in a 15-person
passenger van. The purpose of our trip was to protest the
mismanagement of the EGOVOS conference taking place that
morning.The central issue that galvanized NYFairUse in this situation
is the increasingly irresponsible manner in which free and
open-source software advocates have been putting together
conferences and events. EGOVOS was supposed to be a showcase for
free and open-source software in government, be it local, national
or international. The conference had the potential to open up a
stubbornly closed market by laying out the legal, moral and
practical foundations for the use of free software in everyday
government operation. Instead, it became a platform and photo
opportunity for the Microsoft organization--the inevitable result
when the $40 billion company dedicated to destroying free software
is invited to make a presentations.As expected, Microsoft didn't let their shareholders down.
The few news items that came out of this conference were about
Microsoft's "Shared Source". Microsoft's money buys real loyalty in
the technology press, and in a conference with little media
coverage the only mainstream press was from
E-Week, which ran a full article on
Microsoft's misdirections under the headline, "Microsoft's Matusow:
No Right Way to Create Software". The article did everything it
could to blur the differences between free software and the closed,
anti-competitive methods of monopolists. All of this becomes fodder
for their next $100 million campaign aimed at every CTO in the
nation. Worse than that, it takes food off the table of our free
software consulting industry and the developer community it
supports. Their presence crippled people who sell free software for
a living. It damaged those who could offer the uninitiated (such as
the attendees of the conference) a solid, firsthand presentation of
the benefits of free software. It leaves the public confused about
the benefits of free software in their businesses, jobs and
lives.Bad Leadership versus Good AdvocacyNYFairUse first heard about the problem with EGOVOS through
the NYLXS mailing list, as part of a follow-up on our experiences
with the 2003 Linux World Exposition in New York. At the Expo,
NYLXS member David Sugar voiced his confusion about his product
(the GNU/Bayonne telephony system) losing the award for Best System
Integration Software to Microsoft's Services for Unix. NYLXS had
its annual dinner after the convention, and we spoke with
Linux Journal editor Don Marti about the award
and its implications to our membership. Something didn't seem
right, but Don offered a reasonable explanation for the turn of
events. NYFairUse had an impromptu discussion about the award and
about the rumblings coming from SCO that suggested they might be
preparing lawsuits against the GNU/Linux community for infringing
upon UNIX patents. We decided to keep an eye on upcoming
developments on both fronts. A few days later. David Sugar e-mailed
the NYLXS list about Microsoft's presentation at EGOVOS.We quickly had a broad and lively discussion about the
situation, with the participation of the Washington DC-area LUGs,
developers from California and Canada, members of the Free Software
Foundation, NYFairUse, GNU Enterprise, The Open Office Marketing
List, a few interested journalists, NYLUG and eventually Bruce
Perens (who happens to be a member of the group hosting the EGOVOS
conference, the Cyber Security and Policy Institute). I watched my
e-mail account fill with hundreds of private messages from people
across the east coast, all volunteering to protest Microsoft's
inclusion. NYFairUse had an internal discussion and decided that
the last thing we wanted was an unwieldy demonstration in front of
hundreds of government officials who might be investigating free
software for the first time. We need to reverse the trend of
Microsoft getting a free public relations boost at the expense of
free software developers and advocates, particularly at our own
venues, so we decided that NYFairUse would go in with a focused
message presented by a small and prepared group. We rejected the
calls for a broad and raucous protest: if all the volunteers showed
up we would have outnumbered the actual conference
participants.We had to figure out how to attract attention, raise the
necessary issues, put the open-source "leaders" on notice and still
not turn the conference completely upside down. The answer
NYFairUse came up with was exciting, fun and effective. We are
fortunate to have associates working on Broadway, and they
introduced us to costume designers who dressed us as Colonial
Americans, circa 1776. Suddenly everything came together, and
NYFairUse was ready to move ahead in a constructive manner. The
core of the NYFairUse action included Joe Grastara, Dave Williams,
Cesar Vargas, Sunny Dubbey, Adam Kosmin, Tim Wilcox, Marco
Scoffier, Vincenzo L., Ray Connolly and myself. Dave Williams and
Joe Grastara helped us construct an effective message that became
our pamphlet. Ray arranged for transportation and drove both to and
from the event, a total of twelve hours. Cesar, Sunny, Ray, Tim,
Adam and myself dressed as Founding Fathers. Marco and Vinnie
helped everyone prepare. The entire enterprise was underwritten by
NYLXS. Most of the participants met in Brooklyn and stayed
overnight at my home, where a weekend-long InstallFest was taking
place. Ray, as the driver, got several hours sleep while the rest
of us made final preparations. At 4:00 AM, NYFairUse embarked on
the trip to Washington. We arrived safely at 9:30 in the morning,
fully dressed in costumes and ready to make our case.
Reaching our Audience: Confronting Hostile Guards
Upon our arrival at George Washington University, the
appearance of seven historic American heroes astonished people, and
cameras flashed all around. After we picked up our badges and began
handing out our pamphlets, people flowed out of the main auditorium
to surround us and inquire about who we were and what we were
handing out. We brought 400 pamphlets, and all but a dozen where
given away. Each NYFairUse member became a center of attention. We
managed to talk personally with nearly every member of the
conference accept for Bradley Kuhn, who refused to talk to any of
us for some reason.Our pamphlet strongly condemned the organizers of the
conference for not appropriately representing the free software
movement and for caving in to self-interest over the good of the
community. We explained that they were giving Microsoft a free
public relations opportunity to confuse the issues and to promote
their "Shared Source" disinformation campaign. The conference
itself, although filled with luminaries from the international Free
Software Community, was limited in its attendance. During our
visit, no more than 500 people were at the presentations, but the
numbers might have been closer to 300. The small gathering proved
useful, as NYFairUse was able to contact nearly every participant
directly. We had nearly 100% penetration of the conference,
including both attendees and speakers. Many of us spent several
minutes talking to individuals, and I personally had the pleasure
of speaking about the problem with European Union Minister Philip
Aigrain, whom I had previously met in Bordeaux last year. I also
spent a few minutes talking to Georg Greve of the European FSF,
David Axmark of MySQL, Sarah Brown from Public Knowledge and many
others whose names I failed to get. The same was true for all of
the NYFairUse members.At one point while giving out pamphlets, the security guards
came over. Searching for the leader of the protest, one guard
approached me and asked who was in charge. I waved him off, and he
became very annoyed. He asked me my name, so I smiled and said,
"George...like in Washington, and you're in my University." I
spotted journalist Grant Gross and said, "Look Grant, they're
throwing us out of here!" Grant took out his notepad and the
cameras gathered around. The guard retreated and went to speak with
Tony Stanco. They decided that it was better to let us proceed than
to face the bad press.A few minutes later Tony Stanco came over to talk to me. I
spent a couple of minutes with him, during which he asked me if I
got everything I wanted out of the event. I told him that we'll
know in a few months, if Microsoft still is getting a free ride
courtesy of the Open Source community. Mr. Stanco reassured me that
what we were doing was okay. Having his approval was not
reassuring. I made it clear that it wasn't our intention to have a
blood-letting. Our purpose was to get a message across to the
open-source leadership, explaining what we require of them and what
standards we expect. Mr. Stanco then pointed to the crowd, saying,
"You see these people? You'll never get through to them with
screaming and yelling." I replied, "Maybe -- it depends on the
need. In this case, we don't need to scream. In another situation,
a louder voice might be useful." Mr. Stanco then said, "Have you
ever heard Microsoft talk? They're going to be the best promoters
of Free Software when they open their mouths." I reiterated my
points: Microsoft's presence at the EGOVOS conference takes
attention away from other, more deserving individuals and focuses
it on themselves. Mr. Stanco refused to recognize the situation he
created. He also failed to understand that this was part of a
broader trend the community faces: the increasing encroachment of
Microsoft in venues designed to sell free software to the public.
The public deserves better.By 2:00 PM, we essentially had spoken to everyone at the
conference. We made a lot of contacts, and in addition to handing
out pamphlets, NYFairUse members handed out literature about their
own government and business projects. In fact we took about 30
folders representing the Free Software Chamber of Commerce, our New
York Free Software consultants network. Every folder was given out.
We had a long discussion with the head of Hewlett Packard Research
in Europe, who was very upset with us because he believed we
opposed the commercialization of Free Software. We spent some time
explaining how this was not the case, that we were upset because
someone was giving Microsoft a free pass to the Open Source
movement without making them contribute anything.The NYFairUse PositionPeople often have asked why NYFairUse discriminates against
Microsoft. The truth is that NYFairUse has no such bias. Our
approach to Microsoft is the same as it is toward any company that
warns businesses to avoid the GPL (as if a standard Microsoft EULA
would withstand legal scrutiny). After all, they publish
detrimental lies, such as this one from the current Microsoft web
site:The GPL is designed to prevent commercial
development of software distributed under the license. It does this
largely by requiring licensees to make available, at little or no
cost, the entire source code for any program that incorporates any
amount of GPL code. Given that requirement, commercial developers
cannot recover their research and development investments by
charging reasonable and appropriate fees for their original
software if it uses any GPL code. Free-software developers have
every right to pursue this anti-commercial objective.
Microsoft's concern is the resulting degradation of the
software ecosystem that would be triggered by widespread acceptance
of the GPL, particularly within the governmental and academic
research sectors. This ecosystem has sustained unparalleled
innovation throughout the industry for the past quarter-century.
The principal role of government and universities in the ecosystem
is to undertake basic research and to dispense the findings both
into the societal base of technical knowledge and to private
enterprises and individuals capable of developing these innovations
commercially. Commercial enterprises, in turn, engage in applied
research to develop products that advance the state of technology,
generating jobs, profits and tax revenues that boost the economy
(funding additional basic research in the process). Commercial
enterprises also disseminate innovations directly into the larger
technical-knowledge base.Microsoft uses its monopoly to thwart free software projects,
such as SAMBA when it bans companies from releasing CIFS tools
under the GPL, and when it participates in the Digital Rights
Management scam that will end the practical use of free software
through the Palladium "trusted computing" platform. But it wasn't
Microsoft that we were upset with on this occasion. We are mad at
people such as Tony Stanco, who discriminate against free software
developers and distributors for their own personal advancement. And
we let them know about it.As a footnote, after our trip to George Washington
University, NYFairUse made a trip to Capitol Hill while still
dressed in our costumes. We got big smiles all along the halls of
Congress, especially at Congressman Weiner's office. He's a member
of the the sub-committee on Intellectual Property and the Internet.
We have a handshake deal to install a GNU/Linux system in his
office, so stay tuned.

email: ruben@mrbrklyn.com