Sync with source rev. 17721.

1 files changed, 7 insertions, 7 deletions

diff --git a/eut.raw b/eut.raw
index 83d6cc2..def057c 100644
--- a/eut.raw
+++ b/eut.raw
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ The cover illustration is licensed under [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/b
 
 Transformation, layout and visual design are licensed under [LICENCE]. The [http://source.epfsug.biks.dk/eut source code] for the transformation is available on-line.
 
-The 1st edition of the study was published on the Greens/EFA website on 11 December 2014<ref>Web article "Free Software and Open Standards in the European Parliament", available at https://web.archive.org/web/20141230225627/http://www.greens-efa.eu/free-software-and-open-standards-in-the-european-parliament-13245.html</ref>.
+The 1st edition of the study was published on the Greens/EFA website on 11 December 2014<ref>Web article "Free Software and Open Standards in the European Parliament", available at http://www.greens-efa.eu/free-software-and-open-standards-in-the-european-parliament-13245.html</ref>.
 
 More information about the study can be requested from Erik Josefsson, Greens/EFA Group in the European Parliament, Rue Wiertz 60, B-1047 Brussels, Belgium. E-mail: erik.josefsson@europarl.europa.eu
 
@@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ Telecommunication technology cannot exist without standards. This is also quite
 
 Therefore "openness" shall mean that the external communication channels, of all sort, must use standards, which (or the many possible) standard(s) remaining yet to be assessed.
 
-All signs point in the direction that standards involved in a public institution shall be "'''open'''" <ref>For a very large collection of reference in this regard [http://www.opengovstandards.org/ Opengovstandards.org] is probably the best source. Quoting from it "Transparency means that information about the activities of public bodies is created and is available to the public, with limited exceptions, in a timely manner, in open data formats and without restrictions on reuse. Transparency mechanisms must include the disclosure of information in response to requests from the public and proactive publication by public bodies. Key information about private bodies should be available either directly or via public bodies."
+All signs point in the direction that standards involved in a public institution shall be '''open'''<ref>For a very large collection of reference in this regard [http://www.opengovstandards.org/ Opengovstandards.org] is probably the best source. Quoting from it "Transparency means that information about the activities of public bodies is created and is available to the public, with limited exceptions, in a timely manner, in open data formats and without restrictions on reuse. Transparency mechanisms must include the disclosure of information in response to requests from the public and proactive publication by public bodies. Key information about private bodies should be available either directly or via public bodies."
 </ref> Quite in the same direction goes the seminal work of De Nardis and Tam <ref>DeNardis, Dr. Laura and Tam, Eric, Open Documents and Democracy: A Political Basis for Open Document Standards (November 1, 2007). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1028073 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1028073</ref> from which a citation is indeed appropriate:
 
 <blockquote>With regard to standards that directly affect conditions relevant to democracy, the most prominent examples consist of standards that affect citizens' access to information concerning government decisions as well as standards concerning government records. The importance of accountability renders openness of implementation and use similarly important in this context.
@@ -455,7 +455,7 @@ Whether it is advisable or not to adopt a firm stance on Royalty Free standard c
 One clear Royalty Free stance with really far reaching requirements case is the one adopted by the UK Government:
 
 <blockquote>
-Open standard -- definition<ref>{{cite web|last1=UK Cabinet|title=Open Standards principles|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-standards-principles/open-standards-principles#open-standard -- definition|accessdate=11 November 2014|ref=UK-open}}</ref>
+Open standard -- definition<ref>{{cite web|last1=UK Cabinet|title=Open Standards principles|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-standards-principles/open-standards-principles#open-standard---definition|accessdate=11 November 2014|ref=UK-open}}</ref>
 
 Open standards for software interoperability, data and document formats, which exhibit all of the following criteria, are considered consistent with this policy:
 
@@ -495,7 +495,7 @@ These are just samples to show how strong the debate on Open Standards is and wh
 
 === The RFCs ===
 
-"RFCs" (shorthand for "Request For Comments") are specifications which do not qualify as ''de iure'' standards (standards adopted by internationally recognised standard setting bodies after a formal process"), but nonetheless are respected and complied with as if they were formal standards. RFCs which is one of the ways that many of the most used Internet protocols have born and evolve.
+"RFCs" (shorthand for "Request For Comments") are specifications which do not qualify as ''"de iure"'' standards (standards adopted by internationally recognised standard setting bodies after a formal process"), but nonetheless are respected and complied with as if they were formal standards. RFCs which is one of the ways that many of the most used Internet protocols have born and evolve.
 
 RFCs are akin to formal standards, because an authoritative and documented source of normative and explanatory text exists. They have been adopted since the times of the ARPANET project ("Advanced Research Projects Agency Network" the initial network from which Internet originated) <ref>{{cite news | last=Crocker | first=Stephen D. | title=How the Internet Got Its Rules | newspaper=The New York Times | publisher=nytimes.com | date=6 April 2009 | url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/opinion/07crocker.html | accessdate=2014-07-25}}</ref> and evolved over the times. RFCs are now a body of standards collected and organised by the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force)<ref>IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) http://www.ietf.org/</ref> and by the less famous Internet Society<ref>Internet Society http://www.internetsociety.org/</ref>.
 
@@ -505,7 +505,7 @@ IETF's RFCs are generally considered Open Standards, and are commonly understood
 
 == Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) ==
 
-==== Definitions ====
+=== Definitions ===
 
 There are two separate definitions on what is Free and what is Open Source Software.<ref name=piana_eup_juri>For an historical and general overview of Free and Open Source Software we refer to a briefing paper prepared for the Juri Commitee by Carlo Piana, which covers much of the background of Free Software {{cite journal|last1=Piana|first1=Carlo|title=A discussion of the different software licensing regimes|journal=European Parliament, Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Workshop: Legal aspects of free and open source software, Tuesday, 9 July 2013|pages=30-49|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201307/20130708ATT69346/20130708ATT69346EN.pdf|accessdate=7 August 2014}}</ref>
 
@@ -537,7 +537,7 @@ The Open Source Definition (by the Open Source Initiative)<ref name=OSD>Full tex
 
 Although the two definitions are different, it is difficult -- nay impossible -- to find a subset of licenses that qualify under one definition and are outside the other definition, therefore, for our scopes, we will treat Free Software and Open Source Software (i.e., software licensed under either definition) as synonyms.
 
-==== Is that about it? ====
+=== Is that about it? ===
 
 There is no serious contention as to whether Free Software is the golden standard for openness in software.
 
@@ -597,7 +597,7 @@ Copyright and data base protection require more in depth analysis.
 
 === Copyright ===
 
-Copyright is uniformly regulated across Europe, under the general umbrella of the Berne Convention, by the implementation at member states' level the "Copyright Directive" <ref>Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ L 167, 22/06/2001 P. 0010 - 0019)</ref>. Fully analysing the working of copyright is beyond the scope of the research, as it is discussing the slight differences in the single Member States implementations, particularly in terms of exceptions to copyright.
+Copyright is uniformly regulated across Europe, under the general umbrella of the Berne Convention, by the implementation at member states' level the "Copyright Directive" <ref>Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ L 167, 22/06/2001 P. 0010-0019)</ref>. Fully analysing the working of copyright is beyond the scope of the research, as it is discussing the slight differences in the single Member States implementations, particularly in terms of exceptions to copyright.
 
 Law texts are generally recognised as not bearing copyright. However, all preparatory works, studies, briefing papers, analyses and other documents can have a different status according to whom has prepared them and under which arrangement with the Parliament.