Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Debate On Public Procurement of Open Source

Posted by timothy on from the buggy-whips-come-to-mind dept.

An anonymous reader writes "A debate over at TechCentralStation has Jim DeLong arguing against favoring open source in government procurement contracts, and Julian Sanchez arguing for it." Sanchez' piece is especially well argued; I especially like his phrasing here: "it's not clear precisely what a 'hands off' policy means in a context where government is necessarily acting as a player in the market."

2 of 22 comments (clear)

  1. Why GPL? by dirk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have to ask, why is the GPL the only option other than proprietary? Releasing it as public domain, or a BSD style license (which is the license closest to PD) seems a lot more fair than releasing it under the GPL. The GPL is a great license, but it's main purpose is keeping the GPL around. It is great for people who want their stuff never to be closed source, but that isn't what the government is about. If software is created by the government, it is paid for by taxes. That should mean that anyone can use the software (and source) any way they want. If you want to use it in a GPL program, that's great, go for it. But if I want to use it in a closed source program (or even a BSD licensed program), that should be great too. From this perspective, the GPL is less a "free" license, and more of a "political" license. It forces people to do something specific with the code if they choose to reuse it.

    --

    "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
  2. Every article... by rm+-f+DMCA · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ...the Open Source movement, which has some impressive strengths and has produced some significant accomplishments.
    Every article that does not favor OSS, Linux, etc. always includes such a disclaimer. How else to appear unbiased?

    Example:
    You dress nicely, however, you're ugly, dirty, smell bad, need to brush your teeth more, need take a shower at least once a month, and you have an all-around awful personality. But let me repeat, you dress nicely.

    Also, Sanchez points out "...the elephant in the living room, seldom mentioned by OS advocates, is that the programmers must be supported somehow."
    Ummm.... technical support? How about customizing software for a specific customer? Extra features? Many do that. Helping a company set up your product is usually very profitable. Example: Amazon using Red Hat? Sure, they could have downloaded Red Hat onto CDs... but they opted to have Red Hat employees help set everything up, and of course have ongoing technical support.

    Beyond this, a model that depends on free riding by corporations, individuals, and governments is not likely to be sustainable.
    See above paragraph.

    One last little rant: "btw"? How many real writers use abbreviations like that? (He used it while talking about academicians)

    --