Slashdot Mirror

Reminds me of this correspondence between a Peruvian congressman and M$ http://www.gnu.org.pe/resmseng.html regarding Bill Number 1609, Free Software in Public Administration

That's exactly the one I was talking about.

But wasn't Peru firmly in the anti-Microsoft camp a few years ago, when they passed a law that all government computers should run open source software?

Reminds me of this correspondence between a Peruvian congressman and M$ http://www.gnu.org.pe/resmseng.html regarding Bill Number 1609, Free Software in Public Administration

When did the "Linux community" get so vitriolic and spiteful?

There is no vitriol in the parent's post. The term 'enemy' is only as emotionally charged as the listener wishes it to be. As it's easier to hate an 'enemy' than to understand and accept an opposing point of view, this is probably not the best choice of words in a constructive dialogue.

This isn't some ideological war that is being fought, and shame on you for trying to make it into one.

The parent is simply making an observation. Free Software is an ideology just as capitalism is an ideology. While not mutually exclusive (hence efforts being made to monetize Free Software both on the part of "Open Source" startups and established commercial vendors), these two ideologies do conflict in several areas.

Microsoft is [an] enemy?

<executivesummary>

While an organization as large and diverse as Microsoft will never be entirely focused on activities that impede or overtly threaten the F/OSS community, it has interests that are not and may never be compatible with those of the Free Software community. For that reason, MSFT is directly and indirectly engaged in activities that hurt and threaten the F/OSS community, not out of malice or even by choice, but in simply fulfilling obligations to its shareholders. It's just business :).

</executivesummary>

Here's why. And the article wasn't about open source. It was about open standards.

The priority of the administration has to be 'getting the job done'.

I disagree. Mantaining control over the technology used should be part of 'getting the job done'

In a letter sent in reply to Microsoft, a congressman of Peru pointed out some priorities for their administration:

• Free access to public information by the citizen.
• Permanence of public data.
• Security of the State and citizens.
• To guarantee the free access of citizens to public information, it is indespensable that the encoding of data is not tied to a single provider. The use of standard and open formats gives a guarantee of this free access, if necessary through the creation of compatible free software.

http://www.gnu.org.pe/resmseng.html

A) I was reading at -1. The "this was a mistake and we cleared it up" post had not showed up when I started posting.

B) It is not relevant that the revoking was by mistake. Eventually, it can be done on purpose, too. And that is the problem.

C) No, they did not knew exactly who to ask, and at least when the FreeBSD foundation report was done they did not receive any answer. It's irrelevant for the discussion of this piece, IMHO, that they eventually cleared up the situation. Had the climate at Sun WRT FreeBSD been different, Sun could stall this and caused a lot of damage. And they still can, at any time, because Java is not Free Software.

D) I am not raving and nor is RMS, which is whom I was referring to. Java is not Free Software. If you are considering Free Software (as a lot of governments are doing nowadays with a lot of good reasons to do so... see http://www.gnu.org.pe/resmseng.html) you should not consider Java as a good option for software development (unless Kaffe [or other Free JVM] + GNUClassPath is good enough for you). And this was my conclusion in the end of my post.

E) As an aftertought, disclaimer, etc: I started to post my piece as soon as I saw the blurb (when I woke up this morning) and it had only 9 posts at -1. When I finally organized those three short paragraphs, and clicked Submit, it had 20+ posts, with some (3?) of those under the "A case of bad communication by phkamp (524380) (#11273654)" post. I took good 10-15 minutes to write this answer up, because I don't troll. I believe that RMS is right and that proprietary software is a legalized scam. And I really like J2EE (technically) as a platform but I really dislike the power that Sun exerts over it and the MS-like lock-in that it represents.

--
And this is not a sig.

It's really difficult to do such down here. To change the Constitution is kind of hard. We have a lawsuit called ADI ("Ação direta de inconstitucionalidade" -- inconstitutionality direct strike) that can be entered directly in our Supreme Court by any of our 30+ political parties, by our General Independent Counsel, or by any interested party (me for instance), and has been used a lot to strike unconstitutional laws passed by our Congress.

But beyond that, our current political climate is pro-FreeSoftware, anti-USofAn-monopolies, anti-MS, very, very strongly. The country and the politicians (mostly) agree with Peru's Congressman Edgar Villanueva (see here) arguments in favor of Free Software as a mean to save money in dollars that escape our borders when they go to MS, as a mean to protect our national security because we don't know the possible backdoors in proprietary-closed-sourced-software, as a mean to generate jobs in services, as a mean to generate know-how inside the country, etc.

And, on top of it, many many techs like me are ready to get "in arms" in the case DMCA-shit/Software-patenting-shit creeps into our legislation -- we're watching it!

http://www.gnu.org.pe/resmseng.html

Positively brilliant!

I wonder if there was any input from Peruvian Congressman Dr. Edgar David Villanueva Nunez, the guy that wrote the letter to Microsoft, justifying the Free Software in Public Administration bill.

Also, coincidentally, Richard Stallman gave a video-talk in Brazil just 12 days ago.

Free Software and OpenSource are roughly the same thing, but there's no mention of freedom in that article. I just hope they understand the long term benefits of Software Libre.

In rebuttal of letter from Microsoft Peru by Peruan Congressman Dr. Edgar Villanueva contends that :

It is also necessary to make it clear that the aim of the Bill we are discussing is not directly related to the amount of direct savings that can by made by using free software in state institutions. That is in any case a marginal aggregate value, but in no way is it the chief focus of the Bill. The basic principles which inspire the Bill are linked to the basic guarantees of a state of law, such as:

Free access to public information by the citizen.

Permanence of public data.

Security of the State and citizens.

So cost in economic terms is marginal for this gentleman. Linux Journal interviewed him.

This is just as wrong as if a country mandated 80% Microsoft. Mandate open file formats and protocols, but don't mandate people or agencies MUST use a specific type of software

Not at all, it makes a lot of sense for a government to mandate Free Software, just as it makes sense for a government to mandate the use of open standards. Open standards will only get an organisation so far -- they will be able to switch to different software should they need to, and interoperate with other clients with ease -- and should be mandated across the board IMO. Free Software gives governments several extra advantages that are crucial to good accountable government:

o Since they have access to the source code, they can be sure that no company is doing naughty things on their systems

o Since the source code is available, it allows them to bring in local businesses to develop the codebase for them, promoting many home businesses rather than single (usually foreign) businesses

o Since they are likely to be developing the software for in-house changes, they are providing a lot back because of licenses like the GPL

For a very good appraisal of why governments should use Free Software, read a Peruvian Congressman's letter to Microsoft.

and in other news... every other city on the planet is using Microsoft.

No, that's not true. A couple of other cities running Linux:

• Turku, Finland (Linux continues onward march in land of its birth)
• Largo, Florida, US (Secretaries use Linux, taxpayers save millions)

By the way, a lot is happening in developing countries. On May 22nd, I had the opportunity to attend the publication seminar of the interesting Free as in Education research report by Niranjan Rajani, sponsored by the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Other writers published in the study are Cesar Brod (Brazil), Frederick Noronha (India) and Nico Coetzee (South Africa). Also attending the seminar, among many others, was Edgar Villanueva (Congressman, Peru), who sent the famous response letter to Microsoft, giving a talk on "Legal and Other Experiences in Promoting FLOSS in Peru".

But cities are not the only ones interested in Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS), of course. For example, what do you like the government of South Africa open source software web site at http://www.oss.gov.za/? Their Government OSS Strategy Document (in PDF format) could be interesting reading.

. Forcing anyone to use Open Source software

Why is this? Citizens and Legislators see the benefit (cost, Freedom, security) in Freedom Software. We absolutely should mandate Government use it. Our favourite Free Software legislator, JAG (a must read article here), has it to a tee, this isnt SIMPLY about cost its about long term liberation.

People who frequent slashdot aren't all NeoLibertarians, I see more value in collectivism than individualism. "Personal Freedoms", the paper-mache-sacred-cow of the American Right (very often) goes way to far and makes all Gommint action Baaaahhhd. You and I are our Government, this government makes DECISIONS for us. California's law would simply codify the principles of Freedom Software as being determining factors in Software Purchase. This abstract construct about Licensing and Proprietary -- even the idea of Freedom w/r/t software -- is not a self-evident natural thing. We decide what it is. We created it. Now, California would like to amend the way that government bodies conceive-of this thing (licensing/intellectual property(copyright)).

We are not talking about Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms. So basically, what Im saying is, Conservatives: Please tone down the reactionary propaganda. Free thinking reasonable people use the Government as a body to make decisions, Legislation is the embodiment of the will of the citizenry. Free Software reflects the desire of The People, why *SHOULDNT* they mandate the government us it?

How about this?

have you read this letter?

I won't dive deeply into the arguments,

Don't worry, someone's done a pretty good job of describing the arguments for you...

Jay (=

Actually, if you had dared to read the documents, the AdTI paper (at least the first incarnation -- I just read the comments on the changes a few days ago, but I didn't read the new incarnation) reeks of bad phrasing, factual mistakes, etc.

It even happens to say (matching word by word) what Microsoft spokespersons have already said... so even though the tone of the rebuttal was not the best one (to learn, read the rebuttal of Microsofts letter to Dr. Edgar Villanueva) it was good enough for the shamefull piece of crap that the AdTI paper was (in both incarnations).

I'm part of a similar initiative in Argentina (I'm not Peruvian) which is closely related, so I can tell you the story from here.

The Argentinian Free Software Law proposal has been around for more than a year now. You can read about it at http://www.grulic.org.ar/proposicion. It was written by a congressman and improved by a bunch of geeks on a mailing list who offered him (idelogical) support.

At some time in the middle, the Peruvian LUG found about it, liked it, and tried to find a Congressman there to do something similar (in fact, both law proposals are identical). They found Congressman Villanueva Nuñez.

Our group has contact with the Peruvians, and some people from here have travelled there to offer ideas, and even helped with the writing of this letter (yes, it takes some mistycism about it away but is true: geeks participated in the writing of the letter).

Hope that feeds your curiosity. You have lots of info at the site i noted above, and at the Peruvian LUG (slashdotted right now).

Q: What's the difference between an M-16 and /.?

A: An M-16 only repeats 100x/min.

But while we're back (still?)on the topic, has anyone translated the original FUD letter from the M$ Peru guy (might be mirrored, which the honorable Sr. Nunez so elquently rebutted, into English?

Q: What's the difference between an M-16 and /.?

A: An M-16 only repeats 100x/min.

But while we're back (still?)on the topic, has anyone translated the original FUD letter from the M$ Peru guy (might be mirrored, which the honorable Sr. Nunez so elquently rebutted, into English?

[...] do certain elements of the government get an exemption if they can show no 'free' software exists to fulfill a specific need?

The peruvian bill is based on the proposed draft (also used by congressman Dragan of Argentina for his own proposed bill), created in open-source fashion by an international group of interested people interacting thorugh the "proposición" mailing list. As such, it contains provisions for a transition period and clear rules for exceptions. In short, the State can use proprietary software for a limited timeframe if all the following criteria are met:

1. no free software exists that fulfills the need (which must be properly documented an published for public scrutiny)
2. the need is so urgent than it just can't wait for the development of a free solution
3. the software provides a means of rendering all its data in an open electronic format
4. a security assessment of the risk of using the software for that particular purpose and in that particular environment is published for public scrutiny

Since the first initiative from Congressman Villanueva and with the support of the users community there had been a forum, you can check it here, and activism activities like this (which was very funny btw ;) Now we have another initiative, this time another congressman have joined Mr. Villanueva and there's a new version of the law project (which is better than the first one) also there's another initiative from another congress man, which points on the same target.

So things are going good by now, we'll keep u notified how it goes ;)

Since the first initiative from Congressman Villanueva and with the support of the users community there had been a forum, you can check it here, and activism activities like this (which was very funny btw ;) Now we have another initiative, this time another congressman have joined Mr. Villanueva and there's a new version of the law project (which is better than the first one) also there's another initiative from another congress man, which points on the same target.

So things are going good by now, we'll keep u notified how it goes ;)

Hi,

Peruvian Congressman Villanueva has proposed this law (in Spanish. Use the Fish) that will change the way Peru buys its software. The origin of the Law and it's "travel" within the Peruvian Congress is in this timetable

Congressman Villanueva's Law will ask for any software to be bought by the Government of Peru to provide data in open formats. It will also ask for the source code and the hability to modify the code, to adapt it to the necessities of the Peruvian Republic.

The idea behind this is (liberal translation from Spanish):

"We, the Governemnt, cannot allow any company -foreing or domestic- to ship software that can hide spyware. We, the Government, cannot allow a private company to own the data that belongs to the People of Peru. We, the Government, have special needs and obligations: provide the best 'bung for the buck', allow any Peruvian to audit the source code of our applications to make sure there's nothing hidden that endangers Peru, and to make sure that the data is available even if we change the software supplier. Any software that do not abides by this law will not be used by any Peruvian Government agency".

Also, check what Microsoft Peru had to say about it. And what Congressman Villanueva answered to them.

Go, Peru!

Hi,

Peruvian Congressman Villanueva has proposed this law (in Spanish. Use the Fish) that will change the way Peru buys its software. The origin of the Law and it's "travel" within the Peruvian Congress is in this timetable

Congressman Villanueva's Law will ask for any software to be bought by the Government of Peru to provide data in open formats. It will also ask for the source code and the hability to modify the code, to adapt it to the necessities of the Peruvian Republic.

The idea behind this is (liberal translation from Spanish):

"We, the Governemnt, cannot allow any company -foreing or domestic- to ship software that can hide spyware. We, the Government, cannot allow a private company to own the data that belongs to the People of Peru. We, the Government, have special needs and obligations: provide the best 'bung for the buck', allow any Peruvian to audit the source code of our applications to make sure there's nothing hidden that endangers Peru, and to make sure that the data is available even if we change the software supplier. Any software that do not abides by this law will not be used by any Peruvian Government agency".

Also, check what Microsoft Peru had to say about it. And what Congressman Villanueva answered to them.

Go, Peru!

Hi,

Peruvian Congressman Villanueva has proposed this law (in Spanish. Use the Fish) that will change the way Peru buys its software. The origin of the Law and it's "travel" within the Peruvian Congress is in this timetable

Congressman Villanueva's Law will ask for any software to be bought by the Government of Peru to provide data in open formats. It will also ask for the source code and the hability to modify the code, to adapt it to the necessities of the Peruvian Republic.

The idea behind this is (liberal translation from Spanish):

"We, the Governemnt, cannot allow any company -foreing or domestic- to ship software that can hide spyware. We, the Government, cannot allow a private company to own the data that belongs to the People of Peru. We, the Government, have special needs and obligations: provide the best 'bung for the buck', allow any Peruvian to audit the source code of our applications to make sure there's nothing hidden that endangers Peru, and to make sure that the data is available even if we change the software supplier. Any software that do not abides by this law will not be used by any Peruvian Government agency".

Also, check what Microsoft Peru had to say about it. And what Congressman Villanueva answered to them.

Go, Peru!