Deb Nicholson

Where do non-profit boards come from? Who serves on them and why? More importantly, if you are on a board or you are setting up a board, how do you make sure you get great people who will serve your mission and keep your organization healthy and growing? While there's no one grand plan that fits every organization, there is a large body of knowledge on this topic. Board members are at their best when they feel supported and have a clear sense of purpose. This talk will go through the different kinds of non-profit boards, long-term strategies for success and some ways to course correct when it feels like things could be better.

When you want to see your community grow, running a local event is a great idea. Luckily, many FOSS projects have been down this path, so you won't need to start from scratch. This talk covers the process of running a successful community event, from finding great folks to plan with -- to follow-up for the next event.

When you love your community, you want to see it grow and become stronger. And if you are also lucky enough to have a little extra time and enthusiasm? Well, then it might be time to run an event. Many FOSS projects have been down this path, so you won't need to start from scratch. This talk will cover:

• Setting the scope for your event
• How to find folks to work with
• Creating a plan for success
• Making sure attendees have a great time

Once you have a solid plan in place, running a community event can be very rewarding. Attendees will walk away with a sense of where to start and a strategy for finding the resources they'll need to put on an inspiring community event.

It is impossible to bring every idea, every innovation, and every improvement you can think of to fruition. Doing a little less allows you to honor the finite amount of time each person can give to your cause or project or workplace. But how do you start cutting those todo's down to a manageable level?

Groups of passionate people are fantastic at generating more ideas and tasks then they can possibly collectively execute on and open source communities are no exception. It is impossible to bring every idea, every innovation, and every improvement you can think of to fruition. It may sound counter-intuitive, but skipping things, scaling down and doing less can help you be more effective. A project that consistently over-commits itself will eventually alienate people, so it makes sense to cut those todo's down to a manageable level, but how do you start? This talk will cover:

• How to figure out what to trim and what not to trim
• When to pull back and how to do it gracefully
• How to preemptively choose to do less

Doing a little less allows you to honor the finite amount of time each person can give to your cause or project or workplace. Tasks that are done with ample time can be done with more care and are less prone to error. People who aren't constantly feeling like they're up against impossible deadlines will be happier, well-rested people that are more likely to stay involved for longer. Let's do less!

Free and open source software is made up of a truly global community of tinkerers, collaborators and innovators. In this conversation, Deb Nicholson and Hong Phuc Dang will look at the global state of open source policy and talk about why no particular country -- especially the US -- should be centered. So, let's make sure the conversation about the future of open source is a truly global one!

Sure, lots of tech came from the US; Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon but a large proportion of the story of free and open source software didn't happen in the US. In fact, most of the exciting parts of the work to encourage people to adopt, build and adapt open source are happening in other places. In this conversation, Deb Nicholson and Hong Phuc Dang will look at the global state of open source policy and talk about why no particular country -- especially the US -- should be centered. They'll cover:

* Public code strategies and adoption of open source tools in different jurisdictions
* Policy initiatives that foster free and open source software production
* Local FOSS adoption blueprints that could be replicated around the world

Open source is a global community of tinkerers, collaborators and innovators. It's time to share the spotlight more equitably. Solutions for small cities, or minority language groups or vulnerable populations could come from anywhere and be applied around the world. The discussions around public code and adoption aren't even happening in the US yet, and code without hearty adoption isn't enough. So, let's make sure the conversation about the future of open source is a truly global one!

Other people: Hong Phuc Dang

The software that is the easiest to build -- the software that is the easiest to fund the development of -- tends to serve those who are already extremely well-served. So, how do we bridge the gap between what society needs and what many people with money want to fund? Free and open source software platforms can get us part of the way there, but without some big changes, it won't be enough. Let's talk structure!

We want to provide useful, intuitive, non-invasive software that all people can use, whether they personally have money for fancy customizations or not. But the software that is the easiest to build -- the software that is the easiest to fund the development of -- tends to serve those who are already extremely well-served. A technology community that primarily serves privileged people, while leaving all other users behind is not one we should expect people to spend their unpaid or volunteer time on. And for certain reprehensible functions, no one should be building the software at all, under any license. So, how do we bridge the gap between what society needs and what many people with money want to fund?

This talk will cover:

* Non-profits, fundraising and community-building
* Small businesses, co-ops and other niches
* Possible changes to the broader landscape 

If we want to build a better world, we will have to move beyond quick fixes and silver bullets. Free and open source software platforms can get us part of the way there, but without some big changes, it won't be enough. We need to build ethical structures for the creation of ethical software.

Free software will not win by "merely" replacing proprietary software. We need to lead with a vision of how the world could be. A voluntary community, one where people participate by choice, does not have to replicate the power structures, gate-keeping or casual cruelty of the systems it seeks to replace. We could make free software the most empowering place to build software. Free software tools could enable new ways of crafting user experiences that proprietary software providers seem unwilling to offer. Free software could tranform the relationship between users and developers, so that users feel like partners instead of sales metrics. Free software communities should be seeking to outdo proprietary software's methods and social norms in every possible way. This talk will focus on: * The people we're building free software **for** * The people we're building free software **with** * The people who aren't here **yet** We've made a great start by empowering many technical and semi-technical users, but we can't stop there. (What kind of utopia only has coders in it?) Let's build a kinder and more practical free software movement to empower all kinds of people!

There are lots of ideas out there about how to run a free and open source software project... but not all strategies were created equal. Sometimes governance "just happens" but more often than not, projects end up with some things that work and some that don't. Transparency, clear expectations and compassion go a long way towards helping you find people who support your vision but can still bring new ideas to the table when it comes time to talk implementation. Your project's governance should reflect your values and empower individuals to succeed within its structure. Specific topics that will be covered: * How to bring in people who share your vision * Why transparency matters * Sharing expectations early and often * Which legal decisions to sort out early Maintaining and scaling your project is easier when you've laid a good foundation. The wider community is mature enough that we can learn from what's already been done and set up new projects for success. This talk will cover some of the big red flags you'll want to avoid as well as some of the structural details that will help avoid issues later on.

Free software will not win by "merely" replacing proprietary software. We need to lead with a vision of how the world could be. A voluntary community, one where people participate by choice, does not have to replicate the power structures, gatekeeping, or casual cruelty of the systems it seeks to replace. We could make free software the most empowering place to build software. Free software tools could enable new ways of crafting user experiences that proprietary software providers seem unwilling to offer. Free software could transform the relationship between users and developers, so that users feel like partners instead of sales metrics. Free software communities should be seeking to outdo proprietary software's methods and social norms in every possible way.

We've made a great start by empowering many technical and semi-technical users, but we can't stop there. (What kind of utopia only has coders in it?) Let's build a kinder and more practical free software movement to empower all kinds of people!

Companies and communities have different goals, different structures and different challenges. This talk will discuss the differences between companies and communities that can lead to friction, confusion and missed opportunities. With one speaker from the company side and one from the community side, we plan to explore this occasionally prickly relationship from both directions.

Companies and communities have different goals, different structures and different challenges. That said, many of the largest and most successful free and open source software projects rely on a combination of both -- to create new code, address bugs and plan for the future of their codebase. A little more understanding could go a long way towards a more harmonious and efficient working relationship. With one speaker from the company side and one from the community side, we plan to explore this occasionally prickly relationship from both directions.

This talk will discuss the differences between companies and communities that can lead to friction, confusion and missed opportunities. In order to build a sustainable future for free and open source software, we're going to need to get more comfortable with each other. Attendees will walk away with tactics for fostering better understanding, suggestions for initiatives that can be put into practice in their own projects and some inspiration for what these two entities could accomplish if they were committed to working together on the future of FOSS.

Other people: Nithya Ruff

There are lots of ideas out there about how to run a free and open source software project... but not all strategies were created equal. Sometimes governance "just happens" but more often than not, projects end up with some things that work and some that don't. Transparency, clear expectations and compassion go a long way towards helping you find people who support your vision but can still bring new ideas to the table when it comes time to talk implementation. Your project's governance should reflect your values and empower individuals to succeed within its structure.

Maintaining and scaling your project is easier when you've laid a good foundation. The community is mature enough that we can learn from what's already been done and set up new projects for success. This talk will cover some of the big red flags you'll want to avoid as well as some of the structural details that will help avoid issues later on.

There are lots of ideas out there about how to run a free and open source software project... but not all strategies were created equal. Sometimes governance "just happens" but more often than not, projects end up with some things that work and some that (really) don't. Unfortunately, by the time they regret some of the bad ideas they're baked into the project and harder to change. This talk will cover some of the big red flags you'll want to avoid as well as some of the less obvious stuff that most people discover "the hard way."

Figuring out when your idea is cohesive enough to bring people in but not so detailed that you're basically looking for clones of yourself, is a delicate dance. Transparency goes a long way towards helping you find people who support your vision but can still bring new ideas to the table when it comes time to talk implementation. Laying down a few rules or sharing some expectations early on can help you avoid a world of hurt and confusion later on. And of course, there are a few nitty gritty details (like licensing and naming) that are worth paying a little bit of special attention to in the beginning.

Maintaining and scaling your project is easier when you've laid a good foundation. Join me for whirlwind tour of what not to do, what to do instead and maybe what you can do to fix what you've already done. The FOSS community has more than enough good, bad and ugly governance stories that you should at least make be able your own brand new mistakes.

What kind of world do we want to see blockchain make? Upsides like increased transparency, distributed control and the elimination of duplicative administrative work are appealing, but where are the potential downsides? We no longer live in a world where we can put off a conversation about the social impact of our work. Old industries used to call negative effects of their work "externalities" and it would sometimes take decades to discover the negative social effects and environmental destruction that had been wreaked by a new technological process.

What kind of world do we want to see blockchain make? Upsides like increased transparency, distributed control and the elimination of duplicative administrative work are appealing, but where are the potential downsides? We no longer live in a world where we can put off a conversation about the social impact of our work. Old industries used to call negative effects of their work "externalities" and it would sometimes take decades to discover the negative social effects and environmental destruction that had been wreaked by a new technological process.

Software is collaborative and fast which means early technical decisions have a huge impact on the way we grow. Is the heavy amount of computing power required for bitcoin widening the global wealth gap in a way that best resembles a fictional dystopia? Is the decentralization promised only available to certain kinds of players because of certification gate-keeping or network effects that rely on huge amounts of existing capital?

Given the power and ubiquity of software, nothing is truly "external" to our work. Once we identify the ways that blockchain could potentially be used to build a nightmarish dystopia, what do we do? How can we ensure that the power and potential to improve lives is as evenly distributed as possible?

As free software activists, do we focus on our own project-based communities or should we be looking outside? If free software is to succeed (forever!) I believe we need to do both. Maintaining our ideals as we take free software to new places, introduce it to new people, and bend it to new purposes depends on our willingness to grow both individually and collectively. Change is never simple so I hope that we will be gentle with each other as we try new things and work to build an even bigger movement.

There's a lot of pressure from the US (and some of it's allies) to "harmonize" with American ideas about patents and copyrights. The response by different nations has been wildly different -- some have chosen to play along while others have chosen to resist. What makes sense for one country won't make sense for another and it's all in the details. This talk examines existing legal patterns, the state of local economies and varying trade relationships in an effort to survey what kinds of resistance are possible or effective.

There's a lot of pressure from the US (and some of it's allies) to "harmonize" with American ideas about patents and copyrights. The response by different nations has been wildly different -- some have chosen to play along while others have chosen to resist. What makes sense for one country won't make sense for another and it's all in the details. This talk examines existing legal patterns, the state of local economies and varying trade relationships in an effort to survey what kinds of resistance are possible or effective.

These issues have implications for not only free software activists, but for anyone who is concerned about local sovereignty and freedom of expression. Laws are written for the powerful to help them maintain their power, and resistance is always difficult. But what if we could share not only our code, but our strategies for passing laws, rearranging policy and carving out a safe place for free software and free culture to flourish?

This is a top level survey of the global state of software patents and copyright law. Both local and global policies affect our ability to build things that are needful or locally useful, even when they aren't profitable. Local innovation is our best chance to solve many of our local problems, so let's get to it!

You notice a bug (problem or opportunity for improvement) and then you put a bug (metaphorical insect) into someone's ear. Most people don't like bugs (actual insects) so have you successfully bugged (bothered) them or have you done A Good Thing? When you find yourself with access to someone who could make things better for people who don't feel comfortable speaking up, how do you use this power in a way that contributes to real improvement without eclipsing other people's input? You also want to make sure that you aren't betraying confidences or triggering backlash to yourself or others. It seems like a tricky line to walk, but with a little diplomacy and lot of benefit of the doubt you can make tangible improvements to your corner of the free software community.

You notice a bug (problem or opportunity for improvement) and then you put a bug (metaphorical insect) into someone's ear. Most people don't like bugs (actual insects) so have you successfully bugged (bothered) them or have you done A Good Thing? When you find yourself with access to someone who could make things better for people who don't feel comfortable speaking up, how do you use this power in a way that contributes to real improvement without eclipsing other people's input? You also want to make sure that you aren't betraying confidences or triggering backlash to yourself or others. It seems like a tricky line to walk, but with a little diplomacy and lot of benefit of the doubt you can make tangible improvements to your corner of the free software community.

This talk will cover specific trouble-spots like unwelcoming behavior, the "we always done it this way" disease and how to coax your esteemed project lead (read: occasional control freak) into loosening their grip -- at least a little. It's also helpful to implement some solid "nothing's on fire today" systems for maintaining low temperature group dynamics, a culture of openness and transparency around shared goals. For anyone who cares about the success of free and open source software, this work is critical in both the wider community and inside our individual projects.

So, what things could we stand to fix around here and what are the best strategies for fixing them? The best way to start a bug report is with a description of the expected or desired behavior. Filing great bug reports on the people side that leave you, your project and the wider community in a better place requires just a little additional finesse. Maybe you'll let me put a bug in your ear about it?

Deborah Nicholson and Molly de Blanc want the free software movement to keep growing and one facet of successful movement building is embracing a multi-generational community. The good news is that there is no age requirement for using, promoting and contributing to free software. The bad news is that we aren't always doing a great job of facilitating a diverse, inter-generational movement. We'll take a look at what we're currently doing to bring in young people, how we are treating older people in our communities and where there is room for improvement. Using examples from other movements and inter-generational communities, we'll identify tactics that aren't being used to build the free software community and see what we can collectively port over. We plan to inspire the audience to find ways to recruit and retain young people, inspire older people to participate and maintain an unbroken thread of free software conservatorship. This session is accessible to anyone with a general knowledge of what free software is, and that open contribution communities power many free software projects.

Other people: Molly de Blanc

Citizens of earth, do we really want to police a global unified approach to "intellectual property?" How would a global agreement on what can be owned and what rights ownership should bestow affect coders and inventors? If you've ever spent a sleepless night wondering about the kind of world we are leaving the next generation of innovators... from an international policy perspective then this talk is for you. Confusion and near constant change sounds like a nightmare for international companies or projects, but it just might be that this uncertainty is exactly what holds space for technologies that creatively serve emerging needs or niche populations. Patent maximalism and perfect global harmonization around patents and copyrights certainly has many (often vocal and prolific) proponents. Meanwhile, another conversation is happening around whether the needs of local markets and communal projects with fewer resources might not be better served by a much more multi-faceted approach. This talk takes a look at what's happening technologically in several different markets and what the current level of sympathy (or antipathy) is for globally mandated standards. So, join me for a patent-focused tour around the world and a few ideas about where the global conversation may be headed.

The free software community has created a tremendously valuable resource and built an amazing community, now we just need to make sure that it lives on forever. Ideas that have lasting power thrive inside communities that take care of themselves and plan for growth. New members are valued and time is spent to bring them in and teach them the core values that underpin the work. Successful organizations also pay attention to the world around them. They either work to shape changes to their benefit or they adapt to the things they can't affect or don't want to affect. Many communities have created long-lasting endeavors based on shared values and we can too. We have to be willing to arrange our work so that we are always looking to the future. Our tools and our tactics must match our desire to build a movement that will be around for decades -- possibly even centuries -- to come. By constantly and conscientiously passing the torch, we make sure that those who will come after us will be able to joyfully continue the work we've started.

Patents, copyrights and trademark rights have been growing and expanding in scope and application. In most cases, it seems the original intent of spurring innovation or protecting creators has gotten a bit lost, if not completely inverted. Certainly, there must be a way to support inventors without enabling predators and protect creators without empowering trolls. We need to slay our own monsters, instead of leaving them for the next generation. If you've ever wondered why a smell can be trademarked or why math can, no... can't, well... maybe gets patented, then this talk is for you. The kids of tomorrow might not want to sample our music or work with our legacy codebases, but they won't thank us for taking the option off the table. There are many entities that are highly invested in endless copyright, creative trademark enforcement or patent maximalism, but what do they want? More importantly, how can they be stopped? It won't be easy, but there are some things you can do. This talk will cover why it feels so darned difficult to get common sense policies in place. You'll learn about some likely avenues for political disruption, aka lobbying, voting and affecting policy. Consider attending this talk, for the children.

Companies are using more free software than ever, but often with little or no understanding of the licenses or the community norms that are part of the package. When it comes to talking about free software legal tools, we need to control the message. This talk will offer ideas on how we should craft and deliver our message around the adoption of free software legal tools.

Companies are using more free software than ever, but often with little or no understanding of the licenses or the community norms that are part of the package. When it comes to talking about free software legal tools, we need to control the message. If we let other entities fill in the gaps in our outreach strategy, a lot of context and nuance will be lost. A poor or incomplete message hinders our ability to gain more widespread acceptance of free software tools and practices.

Suing collaborators or consciously working to erode well-established community norms for short term gain has no place in the world the free software community is trying to build. Massive, globally useful, customizable software projects aren't merely a side effect of publicly available repositories, they're a product of intentionally cooperative communities with rules and legal safeguards. The FOSS community's message must be, "If you don't respect our legal tools, then you aren't a free or open source software company."

Policy isn't made by coders. Official government policy is made by judges and legislators and company policy is made by engaging with business and legal teams. We need to foster better understanding of our tools and norms amongst policy makers. This talk will offer ideas on how we should craft and deliver our message around the adoption of free software legal tools.

Conflict sucks! The free software community is full of passionate people with many, many differing ideas on how to achieve our shared goals. Disagreements seem inevitable, but what if they could be handled rationally, in a way that left everyone feeling at least OK about the outcome? It's possible. You can learn to cut to the heart of the disagreement, mediate and move forward.

Many of us avoid dealing with tricky situations or let conflict avoidance keep us from accomplishing amazing things together. Conflict can be handled -- without flamethrowers -- and the process will often make your community stronger. It just takes time, a slightly relaxed ego and a willingness to see the best outcome for the most people. This talk covers when to handle conflict, strategies for both one-on-one situations and group situations and tips on how to scale your conflict resolution skills, like a boss.

Conflict sucks! The FOSS community is full of passionate people with many, many differing ideas on how to achieve our shared goals. Disagreements seem inevitable, but what if they could be handled rationally, in a way that left everyone feeling at least OK about the outcome? It's possible. You can learn to cut to the heart of the disagreement, mediate and move forward.

Many of us avoid dealing with tricky situations or let conflict avoidance keep us from accomplishing amazing things together. Conflict can be handled -- without flamethrowers -- and the process will often make your community stronger. It just takes time, a slightly relaxed ego and a willingness to see the best outcome for the most people. This talk covers when to handle conflict, strategies for both one-on-one situations and group situations and tips on how to scale your conflict resolution skills, like a boss.

We want the free software movement to keep growing and one facet of successful movement building is embracing a multi-generational community. The good news is that there is no age requirement for using, promoting and contributing to free software. The bad news is that we aren't always doing a great job of facilitating a diverse, inter-generational movement. We'll take a look at what we're currently doing to bring in young people, how we are treating older people in our communities and where there is room for improvement.

Using examples from other movements and inter-generational communities, we'll identify tactics that aren't being used to build the free software community and see what we can collectively port over. We plan to inspire the audience to find ways to recruit and retain young people, inspire older people to participate and maintain an unbroken thread of free software conservatorship.

Other people: Molly de Blanc

Your workplace can exert a lot of control over how much free software you use, what you're allowed to work on in your own time and what kinds of tools you become an expert in. New employees don't always negotiate their contracts to make sure they can continue contributing to free software and current employees aren't always successful at advocating for using free software tools, choosing free software technologies or contributing changes back upstream when they do rely on free software. We'll address what's possible, what your legal department is likely to be concerned about and how to be a smooth negotiator at work. Many companies could benefit tremendously from using FLOSS, but free software enthusiasts and institutional gatekeepers are coming from very different perspectives. Free software developers and users tend to be most familiar with free software's benefits when compared to proprietary solutions; user freedom, reusing code, public code review for bugs, increased project capacity and cost. The uninitiated may -- unfortunately -- be most familiar with the risks, some real and some perceived. Employers also benefit from having workers who are passionate about their work, are well-connected to the free software community and are constantly learning about new technologies from their peers outside the company, but new employee contracts rarely recognize this unless you ask. Conversations about contracts, choosing new technologies and sharing an employee's work with another entity are high stakes negotiations. With a solid understanding of what worries and motivates the other parties, you can become a savvy advocate for free software at work. This talk will help you gather information, frame the conversation and make the best possible case for using and contributing to free software at work.

Other people: Richard Fontana

The United States Supreme Court's ruling in the landmark Alice vs. CLS Bank case has finally given the lower courts some tools to overturn vague and poorly written software patents. Larger companies may see fewer lawsuits in the short-term, but we're far from finished. Smaller companies are still at risk and bad actors could use international trade agreements to stop or roll-back recent gains.

The last year's been very interesting for those of us who have been looking on in horror over the last decade as billions of dollars was spent on frivolous and ridiculously broad software patent litigation. The United States Supreme Court's ruling in the landmark Alice vs. CLS Bank case has finally given the lower courts some tools they could use to overturn obvious and vague patents. Many judges have found for the defendant and overturned obvious patents. For entities with the time and money to fight bad patents in court, this is fantastic news. As many as four out of five of the software patents on the books in the US might be found invalid under the new doctrines. For everyone else, this is a mixed bag.

There are still several things we need to pay attention to. Patent suits can still be brought. For entities that can't afford to fight, those disputes will be settled out of court -- without the full impact of the court's updated scope of patentability. Without legislation, it will take twenty years to cycle out the old style of broadly written patents. So, even if the United States Patent and Trade Office fixes their processes immediately we will still have a very long tail to contend with. The new scope of patentability hasn't been fully tested and there may yet turn out to be gaping loopholes that bad actors may use to undo the progress that has been made. Finally, global entities may use international trade agreements to stop or roll-back the progress made against poorly conceived patents in any country that has signed a sweeping treaty with patent language.

In short, we aren't done yet. The best way to keep moving forward is for the global community to work together. This talk is for anyone who is wondering what the recent decisions mean for small and mid-size entities, how international treaties can impact local policy and what can be done to improve the situation.

The free software community is smart and forward-looking, but sometimes it can be hard to see the big picture when you're part of it. Often the easy choice isn't the best. We've been hearing about this constantly from the DevOps community: "Build systems that don't fail spectacularly in the middle of the night!" Of course, those robust systems are a little harder to build and take a bit more planning to set up. But when you consider "other people's systems" there is no question that the hard work should be done because it will make things better in the long run. The trick is looking at your own systems with that same long-range perspective.

The culture of the 1980's is often depicted as an obsession with neon clothing, valley girl idioms and synthpop. That's an unfortunately shallow portrayal when you consider that the artists and activists of the 1980's were pushing back against the cultural norms portrayed in mass media. They were challenging boundaries about who gets to participate in the creation of art and embracing new technologies to share their ideas. How will our current era of increased free software production and adoption be remembered? Will it be all unconferences and penguin swag or will we be remembered for how we changed the world?

Applying a long-range perspective to the continued growth and success of the world-wide free software movement isn't easy. It will take time and probably money. Can we step outside of our own history and make sure that the community is setting a course for the place we want to end up?

Without buy-in from non-technical users, decentralized web services are destined to fail. It's time for the folks who are building the distros of the future and the folks who are building the web of the future to see what we can offer each other. Come hear what we've done so far at MediaGoblin, where we think the tricky bits will be and then join us in building the computing, sharing, connecting environment of the future!

Let's be honest. Most of the people who currently run a node of a decentralized web service are pretty technical. The rest of the world uses massive centralized services. These large centralized service providers are prone to easy surveillance, hard for users to customize and rife with arbitrary censorship. But people want to connect and share, so if we aren't building free web services for everyone, then we may as well not be building them at all.

GNU/Linux distributions could well be the missing link. If users could install the software to host their own node of MediaGoblin, Diaspora or Pump.io as easily as they choose an application like VLC or Audacity then we might start to see the multi-node network that federated services need to succeed. Of course, there are a few hurdles we'll have to overcome before we can expect easily deployable federation in every distro. Some of the great new innovations from the world of devops (prepare for all the failure) and the magic of containerization (assemble once, deploy everywhere) could help us bridge the gap.

It's time for the folks who are building the distros of the future and the folks who are building the web of the future to see what we can offer each other. The folks at MediaGoblin have been thinking about this for quite a while. Come hear what we've done so far, where we think the tricky bits will be and then join us in building the computing, sharing, connecting environment of the future!

The huge increase in software patent litigation over the last 15 years has produced reams of articles, cost fortunes and even snagged the US President's attention. But when something goes on for long enough, it also produces data -- lots and lots of data. So what have we learned from all the data?

The huge increase in software patent litigation over the last 15 years has produced reams of articles, cost fortunes and even snagged the US President's attention. But when something goes on for long enough, it also produces data -- lots and lots of data. So what have we learned from all the data?

Non-practicing entities are growing and litigation costs increase each year, but that's hardly the whole story. Even as defensive strategies are proliferating, software patent plaintiffs are becoming much more sophisticated. Software patent trolls are expanding their reach internationally and practicing entities are increasingly embracing troll-like behavior. Ms. Nicholson will examine data from academic and industrial sources to see what it all means for Linux, Android, GNU and the rest of the free software community. More data provides more opportunities to defend free software from the pernicious effects of vague and overly broad software patent aggression, as long as we are willing to use it.

Following up on last year's session, we will talk about ways to explain software freedom and more generally advocate for the cause with various audiences. We'll brainstorm specific ideas and talk about organizational approaches going forward. No prior experience is necessary to join this session, especially since a little enthusiasm can go a long way in helping to get the word out!

Other people: Karen Sandler Christopher Webber

Following up on last year's session, we will talk about ways to explain software freedom and more generally advocate for the cause with various audiences. We'll brainstorm specific ideas and talk about organizational approaches going forward. No prior experience is necessary to join this session, especially since a little enthusiasm can go a long way in helping to get the word out!

Other people: Karen Sandler Christopher Webber

Free software projects need coders, but they also need good writers for documentation, press releases, and blogging; experts on outreach, fundraising, and volunteer management; and friendly packs of translators. A lot of projects don't have these people, and when they do show up, they don't always stick around.

Deb and Molly will lead a discussion on the process of bringing in non-coding contributors. How do you find these folks? And then what can your project do to bring them in and keep them around, happily contributing? We don't have all the answers, but we feel that this is a critical topic for the free software movement's future growth beyond the community of super users.

Other people: Molly de Blanc

Many distributions sorely need writers for documentation, press releases and blogging or experts on outreach, fundraising and volunteer management or a friendly pack of translators, but aren't sure how to get them. In this talk, I'll discuss how to set parameters for non-coding tasks so that everyone is happy. With some basic benchmarks for scheduling, accountability and volunteer empowerment, you'll be able to retain and excite your new non-coding volunteers.

Non-coders do want to contribute to free software, but they need slightly different framing and like all contributors they thrive with the proper care and feeding. Tweaking your volunteer pitch, looking in different places, being open to different communications channels, and finding ways to appreciate folks will help immensely.

Once you've got them, letting your new non-coding contributors get on with what they're good at will help them feel invested. In this talk, I'll discuss how to set parameters for non-coding tasks so that everyone is happy. With some basic benchmarks for scheduling, accountability and volunteer empowerment, you'll be able to retain and excite your new non-coding volunteers. Want more visibility, a better user experience, nicer materials or more well-organized events for your distro? Start bringing in folks with the skills and enthusiasm to make it happen!

Many small and medium free software projects are staffed by volunteers that don't have any money to tempt a patent aggression entity. There's been plenty of talk about patent trolls, but money isn't the only motive for a patent suit. Even if non-practicing entities are eventually curtailed, ill-intentioned practicing entities may not be affected. The free software community will still have to worry about anti-competitive suits, nuisance suits and suits designed to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about the adoption of free software. So, what can we as free software builders, promoters and users do to protect the code we care about?

Some solutions are only effective against non-practicing entities, while others may impact all kinds of bad actors. The strengths and weaknesses of proposed legislation, recent and ongoing campaigns and academic writings will be examined. If legislators and international trade negotiators won't take a stand against anti-competitive patent aggression, then we must do so as a community. Find out about some of the community solutions that are underway and how we can combat the threat of anti-FLOSS plaintiffs together.

Getting rid of the trolls won't be enough. We must also defend ourselves against those who mean to slowly bleed resources out of free software with unjust patent aggression.

Free software provides many excellent advantages for its users, but many people remain unaware or misinformed about its potential. Free software activists can repurpose strategies used in more traditional community organizing to build our movement. This talk addresses some of the larger issues of perception and messaging and then drills down into very specific tactics for growing your free software group or project, with particular emphasis on how to diversify the type of participants you attract, build leaders and inspire loyal contributors. This talk is for project leads, user group organizers and anyone else who considers themselves a free software activist.

Your project is awesome, so where is everybody? "Messaging" may sound like marketing-speak, but the term is from the world of non-profit organizing. How do you attract more people when your goal isn't all about the money? Messaging starts with relatively easy stuff like your elevator pitch and an FAQ and becomes more advanced when you start thinking strategically about fighting negative stereotypes, finding your niche and constantly soliciting feedback. This talk is for people who are interested in refining their message and more effectively sharing their excitement about the free software movement.

Discussion on issues of Free Software with Software Patents

Other people: Benjamin Henrion Ciarán O'Riordan Karen Sandler