Convegno: IP-TV 2.0 – 15 Ottobre 2008

events, software, video, web2.0 No Comments »

Dal produttore al consumatore? Il ruolo di standard aperti e software libero per portare la scelta della Web TV nel salotto degli italiani

Specialisti del settore presentano progetti e discutono sulla convergenza di PC e TV, attraverso la nuova IPTV aperta e Media Centers, ed il ruolo di standard aperti e software libero per massimizzare sia la libertà degli utenti, che la piena maturazione della potenziale domanda di banda e servizi remoti.

Durante il convegno verranno eseguite dimostrazioni di Media Center FLOSS, nonchè presentato e distribuito un approfondito studio comparativo internazionale sullo Stato dell’arte nei Media Centers FLOSS (software libero e aperto).

QUANDO: mercoledì 15 Ottobre 2008 – Orario 10.00-13.30 e 14.30-18.00

Un rinfresco sarà offerto a pranzo

DOVE: Università di Roma La Sapienza – Centro Congressi – Via Salaria, 113 (mappa)

PROGRAMMA
ChairpersonVideo-32x32.pngArturo Di Corinto
Docente di Comunicazione Mediata dal Computer – Scienze della Comunicazione
Università di Roma La Sapienza
Introduction:Video-32x32.png Presentation-Software-32x32.png Presentation-Download-32x32.pngRufo Guerreschi
Telematics Freedom Foundation e Parco Telematico dell’Audiovisivo
Video-32x32.png Rich-Text-Editor-32x32.pngVideo: FLOSS Media Center Remix
Showcase dell’Interfaccia Utente di alcuni Media Center presenti nella Tabella Comparativa
Mario Morcellini - Sapienza, Università di Roma
Preside della Facoltà di Scienze della Comunicazione
Video-32x32.png Presentation-Software-32x32.png Presentation-Download-32x32.pngRobert CastrucciISIMM
“Coda lunga, convergenza, gate-keepers e liberalizzazione della TV via internet”
Video-32x32.png Presentation-Software-32x32.png Presentation-Download-32x32.png Rich-Text-Editor-32x32.pngShane Coughlan – Free Software Foundation Europe
“Significato delle ultime licenze libere ed open source GNU GPLv3 per il mercato della IPTV e media centers” (in inglese)
Video-32x32.pngMichele MezzaRAI Strategie Tecnologiche, Vice Direttore
“Open IPTV per la diffusione e valorizzazione del patrimonio audiovisivo pubblico”
Video-32x32.pngInvitato Speciale:
Giulia Rodano
– Assessore della Cultura, Spettacolo e Sport della Regione Lazio
Video-32x32.pngSessione di Domande della Sala e Risposte
Video-32x32.pngGiacomo Mazzone – European Broadcasting Union
“Libero accesso dal salotto di casa agli archivi audiovisivi pubblici nazionali europei”
Video-32x32.pngLuigi Capriotti – XBMC Live
“Dimostrazione dei Media Center open source XBMC Atlantis e XBMC Live”
Video-32x32.png Video-32x32.pngJoe Born – CEO Neuros Technology
“Perche Neuros OSD2? Open Electronics”
Video-32x32.pngSessione di Domande della Sala e Risposte
– PRANZO (un rinfresco sarà offerto a pranzo) –
Video-32x32.pngAndrea Barsotti – Tiscali IPTV
“IPTV 2.0: Walled Garden o Open Garden?”
Video-32x32.png Presentation-Software-32x32.png Presentation-Download-32x32.pngAlessandra Poggiani – Direttore Generale LaitSpa, docente di Marketing della Comunicazione Interattiva alla Sapienza
“Le opportunità della IPTV aperta per l’informazione e i servizi ai cittadini delle amministrazioni pubbliche”
Video-32x32.pngRossella Lehnus – Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico e Comunicazione
“Nuove misure per garantire la net neutrality”
Video-32x32.pngSessione di Domande della Sala e Risposte
Video-32x32.pngSergio Bellucci – Associazione Demote
“Quadro legislativo e liberalizzazione della TV via Internet”
Video-32x32.pngFabrizio Caffarelli – TVBlob
“TVBlob Box: Open Internet TV Box”
Video-32x32.pngGianpiero Gamaleri – Università degli Studi Roma Tre
Ordinario di Sociologia della Comunicazione, docente di impresa televisiva e multimediale
Video-32x32.pngShane Coughlan – Free Software Foundation Europe
Video-32x32.png Video-32x32.png Rich-Text-Editor-32x32.pngDave Mathews – Boxee
“Dimostrazione di BOXEE: Media Center open-source, online e sociale”

How to prevent software patent holders to stop Free Software take-over

floss, general, license, patents, software, TFF, TFF news 1 Comment »

The thousands of generic software patents held by large software giants, and other dedicated private entities, are increasingly becoming a huge and unfair barrier for new software companies, development communities and products to achieve wide market adoption.
In fact, as a software product competes with a product made by one of those large patent holders, they will sue or threaten to sue developers and/or large organization and corporate users for the infringement of their patents.

There are 2 approaches to solve this problem:
(1) The problem would be easily solved politically: (a) Put some sanity in the standards for approval of software patent claims; (b) re-proportion the duration of patent holders rights to the average duration of “useful economic life” of a software invention, so as not to prevent the ability of the wider population to and new creators to benefit from the use and remixing of those ideas. Efforts to enact this changes are under way, but it seems that lobbying efforts in the opposite direction are stronger (see for example the extension of copyright duration in the US and the continued awarding of ridiculous software patents).

(2) Another solutions is represented by the creation of a copylefted” patent pool.
Here’s how it would work: A well founded and solid non-profit organization would:
- aggressively solicit the assignment to it of a large number of software patent rights
- it would instantly issue an irrevocable full license to such patents ideas to anyone in the world, except to anyone who will anytime in the future sue, or threaten to sue, anyone over software patent claims.

This article that appeared today shows encouraging signs for the possible success of this strategy.

How to create a user-controlled Google to land FLOSS in the Internet Age

floss, general, internet, license, revolution, software, TFF No Comments »

Sustaining an ecosystem of “truly copylefted” telematics applications through the “Work-for-hire” loophole of FLOSS licenses

– - – Imagine Google decided to aggressively responsiblize and incentivize his employees, consultants and partner companies.
It would offer them very extensive performance bonuses on profits generated by software services, which they could design, develop and manage, by extending both publicly available FLOSS and unreleased Google-derivatived FLOSS.
It would offer them a “Consulting/Partnering Agreements” where it irrevocably stated to hire their services (as “work-for-hire”) to modify such source code; as well as to hold full responsibility for the managing and hosting, except for its obligation towards Google to respect a set of specific (mainly) hosting requirements. They would sign concurrently the assignment of all copyrights and other intellectual goods generated from their work on such code to Google.
Google, as the provider of partially-copyrighted source code, branding (and possibly some inevitable liabilities), would get 1-5% of the direct revenue generated by the service. The Partner, in turn, would get 95-99% of the revenue, sustain all consulting and hosting costs, as well as and fully “manage”, and be responsible for, the hosting of such service on behalf of Google.

It would also offer “Software Quality Review Agreements” to the same parties, in order to apply the same decentralization principles to quality and security assurance of its code. All such parties would be offered (under “work-for-hire” terms) a small symbolic amount to: obtain the code, review it and offer their feedback at their will.

Now, let’s imagine instead that all these would done by a foundation (or governmental entities, or a redundant network of national governments), which irrevocably commits to the following:
* any user and anyone in the world could decide at anytime to become a “Partner”
* all source code that is assigned to the foundation, and therefore that running on any of the partner-managed “derived services”, would always be available to anyone willing to sign (online or on paper) one of those 2 agreements.
* Requires that those Partners abide (possibly just above a certain number of “active users”) by severe hosting requirements (similar to the ones we have drafted here) for the running of those services, which concretely and enforceably places all hardware and software, running beyond the point of decryption, under the collective democratic control of its users.
* As the foundation reaches X thousands of active users of services hosted by it or by Partners; it would offer to each of those users to join other willing users in forming the sovereign body of the foundation, though a carefully designed constituent processes.

I am suggesting this may be a good thing, as it would create an ecosystem of developers and users where anyone, though partly limited from such democratically-controlled foundation, could access remotely-accessible software applications under “practically-copylefted” terms
They could start building new applications, as well as derivative works from any publicly-available FLOSS. Those works would never be “released” to anyone and, although still bound to the derivative terms of  GNU GPLv2 or other FLOSS license, would be made accessible to users and everyone under terms that amount practically to those of the current Affero, plus the means to collectively verify the code that is actually running.

Telematics, Global democracy and Media Democracy

democracy, general, media, software, telematics, TFF, TFF news, world 1 Comment »

Telematics, the integrated use of telecommunications and informatics, is the most crucial industry sector for the future of humanity. It is key to the indispensable updating and possible deepening of our democratic systems, through their adequate extension to the global level and to the main systems of public opinion formation. Only such extension, in fact, will avoid that citizens of the world will stand, both powerless and unaware, while largely unaccountable interests lead them to ultimate nuclear, environmental and biological catastrophe.
The patterns of control over network-enabled software that will become legal and predominant over the next few years, will weigh more than anything on a definite slide of humanity towards, either its extinction, or an unprecedented deepening of democracy and freedom.

Telematics can be defined as ways software programs are used to control hardware devices and data networks to provide a communication experience. Software is not only the key element of information networks like the Internet and the Web but, by now and increasingly, of practically all those media that originated as bare telecommunication channels, such as: radio, analog TV, satellite and digital TV, mobile phones.

Paradoxically, over the next few years, the practical nature of certain telematics innovations, especially those enabling remote democratic organizing and audience-controlled mass self communications, and the way our democratic societies will legislate and enforce their access and control, will be the main potential instrument for reviving democracy and therefore substantially reducing the abovementioned risks.

WP Theme & Icons by N.Design Studio
Entries RSS Comments RSS Collegati