EU: Majority for AI Act – and safeguards for Free Software

The European Parliament today voted in favour of the AI Act with 499 votes in favour, 28 against, and 93 abstentions. Free Software is given safeguards, these rules must now be defended in the trilogue and transferred to the Cyber Resilience Act and the Product Liability Directive.

With a large majority, the plenary of the EU Parliament today confirmed the compromises of the lead committees from May. The AI Act contains a far-reaching exemption from this regulation for non-profit organisations as well as small Free Software projects up to the size of micro-enterprises. The position of the EU Parliament must now be defended in the upcoming trilogue, in which the final text will be negotiated together with the Council and the Commission.

"With today's decision, the EU Parliament has demonstrated how Free Software can be regulated in a meaningful way. Developers must be protected, but at the same time those who significantly benefit on the market with the use of Free Software must also be responsible. This principle must now also be anchored in the Cyber Resilience Act and the Product Liability Directive", explains Alexander Sander, Senior Policy Consultant of the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE)

More information on the negotiations on the Cyber Resilience Act and the Product Liability Directive can be found here.

Support FSFE

Germany: dPhoenix on the road to failure?

A Free Software office and collaboration suite for the public sector is one of the projects with which the German government aims to fulfil the goals of the coalition agreement. But a closer look at the project raises questions: Where is the source code? Who is responsible? What happens to the public money involved? We asked the relevant ministry.

Back in 2020, the north German IT service provider Dataport started the first pilots of its dPhoenixSuite as an alternative to Microsoft’s proprietary office and collaboration suite. The dPhoenixSuite integrates Free Software components such as Nextcloud, Matrix, Jitsi, Collabora, and UCS. The suite is already being offered on a small scale as a cloud service to German adminstrations, taking a stand where the German IT Planning Council is calling for a sovereign working environment for administrations, with Free Software solutions as a priority. But Dataport seems to fall short of this expectation.

The current issue 07/23 of Linux Magazin comes with a detailed and critical analysis by Markus Feilner, which covers both the history and the problems of Dataport’s “Projekt Phoenix” and its relation to the “Sovereign Workplace” (“Souveräner Arbeitsplatz”), a long promised reference implementation under the responsibility of the German Federal Ministry of the Interior and Community (BMI), coordinated by the recently founded Centre for Digital Sovereignty of Public Administration (ZenDiS). Some of the major problems Feilner reveals are the missing dPhoenixSuite source code, a lack of understanding of Free Software and of collaboration within the Free Software community, a tendency to open-wash by claiming to be “based on open source”, unclear responsibilities, and an opaque relationship to the BMI’s “Sovereign Workplace” project.

We have been promoting the concept of “Public Money? Public Code!” since 2017, and we welcome and encourage every step towards Free Software in public administrations. However, the recent news developments around Dataport and the Sovereign Workplace are reason to be wary, especially of any attempts to open-wash.

Therefore, we have today sent a list of questions to the BMI, expecting that the answers will make the situation around the dPhoenixSuite and the Souvereign Workplace transparent.

Questions for the Federal Ministry of the Interior and Community (BMI):

1. Dataport advertises its dPhoenixSuite as an “open source solution”. So far, however, only the source code of the underlying Free Software (also known as Open Source) components is available under Free Software licences. The code of the complete, integrated suite cannot be obtained from Dataport upon request.

   1. When will the full source code of the Sovereign Workplace be published on OpenCoDE?
   2. Will the code be published under a Free Software license, and if yes, under which one?
   3. Is the Sovereign Workplace based on the same code stack as the dPhoenixSuite?
   4. What part of the Sovereign Workplace code comes from dPhoenixSuite? In which parts do they differ and why?
   5. Will it be possible for everyone to compile the Sovereign Workplace from the source code and run it on one’s own infrastructure as soon as it is published on OpenCoDE? Will an elaborate documentation to the code be available
   6. Are there plans do further develop the Sovereign Workplace in collaboration with the community of the underlying Free Software projects after the code has been published?
   7. Will further development using OpenCoDE take place openly according to the tried and tested principles of “coding in the open” and “release early, release often”, establishing and involving a community?

2. According to public news and information from Dataport, the dPhoenixSuite is based on the Sovereign Workplace, which is to be published on OpenCoDE before the end of 2023. According to the BMI, the Sovereign Workplace is based on dPhoenixSuite.

   1. Which of the two statements is correct? How do the two different statements come about?
   2. Which contracts with reference to the Sovereign Workplace exist between the BMI or ZenDiS on the one hand and Dataport on the other?
   3. Is the Sovereign Workplace rather a fork of dPhoenixSuite or a reference implementation? Once the source code has been published on OpenCoDE, will the Sovereign Workplace be further developed independently of dPhoenixSuite or will it remain coupled to dPhoenixSuite?
   4. Can you provide us with an organisation chart of the Sovereign Workplace project with all the authorities, offices, public bodies and responsible persons involved? If this is not possible: Which authorities, offices, public bodies and responsible persons are involved in the Sovereign Workplace project (in each case with details of their role and responsibility within the project)?
   5. Who is responsible for the Sovereign Workplace project in the BMI?
   6. What competences does the CIO have in coordinating the project and in coordinating with Dataport?
   7. Where and by whom is the cooperation between Dataport and BMI/ZenDiS on the Sovereign Workplace and the Phoenix project controlled and coordinated?
   8. Where and under whose leadership are the components of the Sovereign Workplace that are not adopted from the Free Software community (for example gluecode and integration scripts) developed?
   9. How many people develop code for the Sovereign Workplace at the BMI or ZenDiS? Is this code also made available to Dataport for the dPhoenixSuite?
   10. Are there any requirements from BMI/ZenDiS to Dataport for the development of the dPhoenixSuite? If yes: Are these fulfilled?
   11. Has the BMI exerted any influence on Dataport to publish the complete dPhoenixSuite as Free Software

3. Funding

   1. What public funding has been spent on the Sovereign Workplace so far?
   2. What funding is available for the project for the current year?
   3. What annual funding is needed until 2025 to further develop the Sovereign Workplace?
   4. Did Dataport receive any funding from the BMI/ZenDiS for the development of dPhoenixSuite or contributions to the Sovereign Workplace?

We expect that the BMI’s response will give the public a better understanding of what is going on around the Sovereign Workplace and the dPhoenixSuite. We will stay tuned to this issue and report back as soon as we receive a response.

Free Software and “Public Money? Public Code!”

Free Software gives everyone the right to use, study, share and improve applications for any purpose. These freedoms ensure that similar applications do not have to be programmed from scratch every time and, thanks to transparent processes, others do not have to reinvent the wheel. In large projects, expertise and costs can be shared and applications paid for by the general public are available to all. This promotes innovation and saves tax payers money in the medium to long term. Dependencies on vendors are minimised and security issues can be fixed more easily. The Free Software Foundation Europe, together with over 200 organisations and administrations, is therefore calling for “Public Money? Public Code!” - If it is public money, it should be public code as well. More information on the initiative on the “Public Money? Public Code!” website.

Support FSFE

AI Act and Interoperability+++Router Freedom Survey+++Podcasts, YH4F & Ada

The June issue brings updates on the Interoperable Europe Act and the AI Regulation, and the publication of the conclusions of our European Router Freedom survey. We were invited to two podcast episodes and were the focus of Edri's 'Member of the spotlight'. Check out a study on net neutrality regulation and read a lovely story about Ada arriving in rural India.

Table of contents

1. EU Policy: Interoperable Europe Act
2. EU Parliament wants to protect Free Software in AI regulation
3. Survey: European citizens demand Router Freedom
4. Router Freedom as priority for the future of Net Neutrality regulation
5. Making the telecom sector more sustainable with Free Software
6. Two podcast episodes to listen to
7. 'Youth Hacking 4 Freedom' projects
8. ‘Ada & Zangemann' travels to rural Rajasthan
9. EDRI’s Member in the Spotlight
10. Chaos Communication Camp and more events
11. Get Involved - Join our local groups!
12. Quote of the month
13. Follow us in the Fediverse... and elsewhere
14. Contribute to our Newsletter

EU Policy: InteroperableEurope Act

In May, the Committee of the Regions failed to recognise the importance that Free Software has for interoperability and thus for digitalisation and innovation while the European Parliament's responsible committees voted by a large majority to protect Free Software in the AI regulation. The Committee of the Regions adopted its opinion on interoperability through the Interoperable Europe Act, failing to substantially improve the original text and bring up more solid and necessary measures on the role of Free Software, forgetting a ’Free Software first’ approach.

Read more about this

EU Parliament wants to protect Free Software in AI regulation

The European Parliament's lead committees on AI legislation, the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), voted by a large majority in favour of protecting Free Software in the AI Regulation. Non-profit organisations and small Free Software projects up to the size of micro-enterprises will be largely exempted from this regulation.

Read more about this

Survey: European citizens demand Router Freedom

In the most comprehensive survey to date, end-users from all over Europe shared their experience about ISPs’ commercial practices regarding terminal equipment and how Router Freedom is affected. The responses have highlighted several obstacles to Router Freedom, such as lack of freedom of choice, provider lock-in and promotion of equipment running exclusively proprietary software. Read more about it

Router Freedom as priority for the future of Net Neutrality regulation

The EU Commission has published a study on the future of Net Neutrality regulation, confirming Router Freedom as a priority for the future implementation of Open Internet in Europe. (Recommendation 2, p. 91). The study referred to work done by the FSFE (p.11), supporting the conclusions we at the FSFE have been advocating in recent years. In particular, national regulators should prioritize end-users’ rights and safeguard freedom of terminal equipment for all network types, including fiber (FTTH).

Making the telecom sector more sustainable with Free Software

As part of the book ‘Shaping Digital Transformation for a sustainable society’, that puts together 28 contributions from the second Bits & Bäume conference on digitization and sustainability, Lucas Lasota and Erik Albers explain how Free Software is key for a more sustainable telecom sector by empowering end-users to have more control over devices, especially regarding software and hardware artificial obsolescence.

Two podcast episodes to listen to

• Learn about the Public Money, Public Code! Initiative. Johannes Näder was invited to explain it and why Free Software is important for our digital sovereignty at the eGovernment Podcast.

  🎧 Listen to it

• In ’Episode 510: Thinking in Decades’ of the LinuxUnplugged podcast, Matthias Kirschner talks about Free Software, the FSFE and the ‘Ada & Zangemann’ book.

  🎧Listen to it

'Youth Hacking 4 Freedom' projects

The second edition of the Youth Hacking 4 Freedom contest is in its last weeks. We cannot wait to see what the participants have developed. Meanwhile, this month we talk with Konrad, who created a learning platform for the amateur radio service exam.

Check out the rest of the projects from the first edition. Want to know more about this cool competition? Watch Bonnie Mehring explaining it in German at LIT 2023

'Ada & Zangemann’ travels to rural Rajasthan

The story 'Ada & Zangemann' has travelled from LibrePlanet in Boston to India! Check out this blog post explaining a storytelling session about software and ice cream in rural Rajasthan.

Get your own copy in German, online or at your favourite book store. The English version is currently available in the US from the publisher and at the FSF online store and can be pre-ordered in the rest of the world.

'EDRI’s Member in the Spotlight interview

Since 2018 the FSFE has been part of the EDRi, the European network defending rights and freedoms online. In their May newsletter we had the chance to present ourselves and our work. Read the interview.

Chaos Communication Camp and more events

Come and camp with us in the Chaos Communication Camp, from 15 to 19 August 2023. The Free Software Foundation Europe is part of this year's 'Bits & Bäume' village. And if you're interested in applying, please submit your talk or workshop proposal to the official Call for Participation by June 9.

Over 180 participants had the opportunity to learn about and discuss Free Software in more than 20 sessions during the last edition of FOSS-North. In case you missed the event, here is a short overview of some of the topics that were discussed

Our team and our community participate in many Free Software events. Check our events page to be up to date about what is going on. Subscribe to our feeds to stay current about events and do not forget to sign up for our local group and country mailings to receive updates about what is going on in your region.

'Get Involved - Join our local groups!

Connect with our community by joining the local group meetings! Our community is organised in local groups, country teams, and thematic groups. Some of these are casual and have ongoing discussions in chats. Others are task-oriented and plan their own campaigns. Some meet face-to-face and others meet online. Whether you are a long-time Free Software enthusiast or a newcomer, our groups are waiting for you!

Quote of the Month

"I believe that Free Software can help us change our society fundamentally for the better and I believe the best way to do so is together with other volunteers from all over Europe!

Follow us in the Fediverse… and elsewhere

We want to reach to our whole society and get our messages and demands heard by those who are not part of the Free Software Community. That is why you can find us both in federated and decentralized social networks but also in proprietary ones. You can find us in Mastodon and Twitter, in LinkedIn and in PeerTube and Youtube. In this last one we have reached 1000 followers, hopefully helping people to learn more about software freedom who have not heard about it before.

Contribute to our Newsletter

We would love to hear from you. If you have any thoughts, pictures, or news to share, please send them to us at newsletter@fsfe.org. You can also support us, contribute to our work, and join our community. We would like to thank our community and all the volunteers, supporters, and donors who make our work possible, with a special mention to our translators who make it possible for you to read this newsletter in your mother tongue.

Your editor, Ana Galán

Support FSFE

Interoperable Europe Act: Committee of the Regions fails to substantially promote Free Software

The Committee of the Regions approved its opinion on the Interoperable Europe Act. The EU representative body has failed to recognise the importance that Free Software has for interoperability and thus for digitalisation and innovation. This underlines the relevance of Free Software Community's participation in the planned Interoperable Board.

With the EU's objective of establishing a legal framework on interoperability through the Interoperable Europe Act, today the Committee of the Regions has adopted its opinion in plenary. While the opinion has feebly mentioned the role of Free Software in achieving cross-border interoperability and avoiding vendor lock-in in its policy recommendations, the Committee of the Regions has failed in substantially improving the original text and bringing up more solid and necessary measures. It lacks to introduce a “Free Software first” approach and the involvement of stakeholders in the Interoperable Europe Board, an intended body that shall decide on upcoming steps arising from this legislation.

The role that Free Software plays in the digitalisation of local and regional administrations has shown to be of the great importance, especially during the corona pandemic. Among other, it strengthens digital sovereignty allowing administrations to have control over the software they are using, while it enables that public funds are spent in the most efficient way. For these reasons, over the last years the FSFE has been demanding with its 'Public Money? Public Code!' initiative that publicly financed software should be made publicly available under a Free Software licence. It is now up to the European Parliament to ensure interoperability is introduced by a “Free Software first” approach while including the Free Software community on the path to digitalise European public administrations. First Amendments in this direction have been introduced already, however, the position has to be further improved. Further read.

Support FSFE

Report: The end-user perspective on Router Freedom

In a comprehensive survey, end-users from all over Europe shared their experience about ISPs’ commercial practices regarding terminal equipment and how Router Freedom is affected.

With more than 1600 responses, this overarching survey (EN) shows how Internet Service Providers (ISPs) still hamper consumer freedom of choice, exercise lock-in over internet equipment and promote proprietary devices, negatively affecting consumer welfare, security, privacy and data protection. Besides, participants showed decisive support for Router Freedom. The wealth of information brought by them provided deep insights on limitations against users trying to connect their own legitimate equipment to the internet.

The telecom sector and end-users

“Is there Router Freedom in Europe?” This question was the starting point for the Router Freedom Survey. The interests of end-users reflect the necessity to enable freedom of terminal equipment in Europe. Since 2013, the Free Software Foundation Europe has been working to make this right a reality in Europe. Router Freedom is understood in a broader context as a crucial element of Device Neutrality, and it requires that network operators should allow end-users to run Free Software on their devices. The Router Freedom survey was part of an initiative for civil society engagement during the national implementation processes of the EU reform of telecommunications law.

The lack of comprehensive research on end-user perspective regarding terminal equipment motivated this two-year project. By 22 March 2023, the survey had gathered 1652 responses from consumers from all over Europe. The survey shed light on how end-users feel towards Router Freedom, their understanding of the importance of this right in the context of Net Neutrality principles, privacy, fair competition and digital sustainability. The survey also collected information about the issues and problems faced by end-users when trying to use their private routers for internet connection.

Router Freedom faces challenges in Europe

This survey serves not only civil society and consumer organisations with primary data on end-user experience, but also regulators and policy makers in their regulatory efforts. Participants’ comments were crucial to understand the hurdles and challenges faced by anyone trying to use their own equipment for internet connection. The main findings of the survey include:

• Limitations to freedom of choice. Some ISPs restrict end-users from connecting their routers, modems and fiber terminal equipment (ONT) to the public network. This is observed more intensively in countries where the position of the Network Termination Point (NTP) is not regulated in a configuration favourable to end-users.
• ISP’s lock-in. Besides limiting freedom of choice, some ISPs impose other restrictions that increase switching costs by end-users, charge for the provided equipment and impose fines when end-users use their own equipment. Lock-in is significantly more notable on fiber networks (FTTH) contracts and in countries where Router Freedom is not regulated.
• Provision of proprietary devices. The routers, modems and optical fiber devices (ONT) provided by ISPs are generally proprietary. End-users cannot inspect their firmware or install an alternative operating system. This is especially problematic with FTTH connections, since in the majority of contracts end-users cannot change the ONT imposed by ISPs.
• Security issues. The lack of Router Freedom generates negative consequences for network security. Some ISPs do not provide security updates for their devices. When end-users cannot manage their own routers, they become more exposed to security flaws.
• Unlawful commercial and technical practices. Even where Router Freedom has been established by legislation, ISPs can still hamper end-users’ ability to choose and use their own routers and modems. Some ISPs make it cumbersome to replace the ISP's equipment, take a long time to provide login data or other access credentials, fail to offer technical support for the network or threaten end-users who use personal routers with contract termination or fines.

Router Freedom as a policy demand

More than a technical issue, freedom of terminal equipment is also a policy demand. All over Europe, end-users have manifested their support for regulatory policies safeguarding the right to choose and use routers and modems. More than 90% of participants agreed Router Freedom is key for net neutrality and open internet, security and data protection, fair competition and digital sustainability. Therefore, the outcome of this survey serves as key insight for policy makers regulating Router Freedom and consumer organisations protecting and promoting the rights of end-users.

Router Freedom and Device Neutrality

Router Freedom is the right of consumers of any Internet Service Provider to choose and use a private modem and router instead of equipment provided by the Internet Service Provider. Device Neutrality protects end-users against discriminatory restrictions on Free Software on their devices. With Router Freedom, end-users can install a customized operating system on their equipment and exercise control over the technology. Please consider becoming a FSFE donor; you will help make possible our long-term commitment and professional dedication to defending people’s rights to control technology.

Support FSFE