Burning over FeedBurner

When I first started reading about this, I thought I stumbled over an “old thread from years ago(Protocols and Implementations)”:http://www.libraryplanet.com/2003/05/28/protocols. But this is all new. Apparently, Dave is upset about FeedBurner and Google.
bq.So now someone at Google “owns” Feedburner and all their feeds. And they could, if they wanted to, change the feeds to another format, overnight, without asking anyone. – “Dave Winer(Why Feedburner is trouble)”:http://www.scripting.com/stories/2007/07/21/whyFeedburnerIsTrouble.html Robert is as well.
bq.But, what really is cooking here is that RSS has been moved to big companies to control. How so? Well, the RSS Advisory board, which includes members from Cisco, Yahoo, Netscape, FeedBurner (er, Google), Microsoft, and Bloglines and this new unofficial board +is+ changing the RSS spec all the time (they are now up to version 2.0.9. UPDATE: which only represents a couple of changes, according to comments left on this post). – “Robert Scoble(Feedburner bad for us?)”:http://scobleizer.com/2007/07/22/feedburner-bad-for-us/ Sam makes a point.
bq.Oh, and as to the recent spec “clarification” that was recently made to the alternate specification that also happens to call itself RSS 2.0? FeedBurner’s CTO voted against it. – “Sam Ruby(Feed Folies, Summer of 2007 Edition)”:http://intertwingly.net/blog/2007/07/23/Feed-Folies-Summer-of-2007-Edition For myself, I would simply point out that “Jenny Levine(Jenny Levine)”:http://wikis.ala.org/readwriteconnect/index.php/User:Jenny_Levine works for something other than a “big company(Dave Winer is angry)”:http://www.scripting.com/2003/06/28.html#daveWinerIsAngry. Other than something to laugh about, RSS politics have gotten really old to me. Especially when there is a “better alternative(That’s All, Then)”:http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2007/07/24/Atom-is-Finished.