Oregon's Open Source Bill Passess Committee Hearing

Cooper Stevenson writes "Oregon's Open Source Bill HB 2892 made it through the first General Government Committee hearing and is now scheduled for a work session. From here the committee will vote on the bill and, if it passes, will go to the Ways and Means Committee where it is expected to pass to the House floor for a vote. You may find the audio feed and the opponent's written testimony here. We are scanning and posting written testimony (especially the proponents for which there is plenty) as quickly as possible so check back in periodically."

Comments

Re:you missed a few things

[NiceGeek]

Hmmm....have you tried following the link?

Re:you missed a few things

[Michael.Forman]

All I know is I saw some kid outside sitting outside talking to it.

I heard it say that it's just a bill, yes it's only a bill, and as I stated before it's sitting on Capitol Hill. It went on to describe a long, long journey followed by a long, long wait and I believe it summarized its feeling by saying that it hoped and prayed that it will, but today it is still just a bill.

My assumption is that it wants to become a law, undoubtedly motivated by their fancier ribbons.

The full story can be found here.

Michael.

Re:you missed a few things

[Anonymous Coward]

Man I wish I hadn't used up my last mod point a few seconds ago.

--MBCook

I'd be suprised if it passed

[bigsexyjoe]

Oregon's House Bill HB-2892, if passed into law, is projected to save the Oregon taxpayer upwards of 20-30 million in savings annually.

Translation: Software companies are going to lose money if it passes and will lobby like hell against it. It would be a horrible precendent for the software companies if this passes.

Remember: If it sounds to good to be true, it probably is.

Response content vs file size

[BusterB]

I thought that it was interesting that all of the Oregon proponents either submitted HTML or LaTeX generated PDFs, both of which were extremely fast-loading and good looking. The BSA's response looked like scanned-in faxes turned into a PDF, and the other opponents' responses were likewise bloated PDFs.

What does this say about the quality of the software used to create these responses, assuming that the authors all used the sorts of software they endorse?

Re:you missed a few things

[the_other_one]

Bill's goal is to assimilate Oregon.

Re:you missed a few things

[Naikrovek]

not the point. if all the news is kept off of site, what point is there reading this site? none.

One Good Arguement, and a Parallel

[MBCook]

Both the BSA and Software Choice (how's that for an oxymoron. Like the "center for reproductive freedom" or "tolerance", but that's another rant) do make one good point. This bill won't have software chosen based solely on it's merrits, because it requires OSS software to be looked at first. They have a good point that doing so it's open competition.

Or they would, if it wasn't for the fact that OSS can't promote it's self in the way that commercial software can. OSS can't invite you to your weekend in Tahiti to learn about your "options". OSS can't send you muffin baskets. OSS can't even give you your own suit who has nothing better to do than answer your every questions and seek out you and other customers.

There is a simple coralarry (sp?) here. This seems just like political elections to me. Many candidates can't afford to drop $1,000,000 to buy the mayor's office, or a senate seat, or whatever. So the government gives a small ammount to help them out doesn't it? There are laws demanding equal air time so that the candidates without that large bankroll have a chance right? What's the difference? How is this any different. There are laws to help small businesses get government contractors instead of it always going to the biggest company with the most money to blow on getting the contract. What's the difference between that and this? There are just laws to make sure that those who can't always speak out for themselves (often for financial reasons) still have a chance.

That said, does anyone else find it interesting how hard they're fighting this? They remind me of that Iraqi propaganda guy, the one who still says Saddam is winning. If their software is so superior, why do they need to fight this? OSS will just be found to be insufficant and the govt. will go for their stuff. I think it's clear who's on the run here. They're affraid that they can't win stictly on the merrits of their software; they're affraid the govt. might realize that their software is vastly overpriced for it's small benefits (in many cases), and not worth the extra money.

If their software is clearly superior for the task, despite the fact it's not free, they will win, and they don't need to worry. If it's just not worth the money for the extra features, or it's way overpriced, they should be scared and should fight this. Which one are they doing? Why not spend their money on making their product better? Why not not spend it and pass the savings on to customers (including the govt.)?

Why not accept that this might not be 1990 anymore, and that better things might exist that aren't commercial software. Why not adapt or die?

They can get around this easily too. Build a package AROUND OSS. If they do this, then they ARE OSS (arguable, at least for the bill's purpose) so they get considered first. But because they built AROUND the OSS product (and didn't modify it) then they aren't required to release all their stuff for free under the GPL. It's just like if a CD ripping program used MPG123 (or some other OSS if that isn't) to encode things. If it just calls the external program (which is shipped with the program) then they can still sell it but not open their thing. Make a userfriendly FRONT-END. That would be adapting. Still get money, get to use the law in their favor to get ahead of the competition, and it's better software. Plus they can charge less because they don't have to make the underlying parts. Everyone wins, right?

Re:One Good Arguement, and a Parallel

[ChristTrekker]

This seems just like political elections to me. Many candidates can't afford to drop $1,000,000 to buy the mayor's office, or a senate seat, or whatever. So the government gives a small ammount to help them out doesn't it? There are laws demanding equal air time so that the candidates without that large bankroll have a chance right?

Political parties/campaigns should not be financed by government. You can promote your viewpoint all you want, but as soon as you commandeer my money to help you, it's theft. Instead, government should pass laws the level the real playing field (ballot access laws, voting method laws) rather than adding "positive handicaps" in an unfair contest. Just let the people make a fair and honest vote when they get in the booth, and I'll be happy. Tilting the whole thing in favor of a "two-party system" and then giving the little guys money to keep quiet about it is not my idea of fair.

Re:One Good Arguement, and a Parallel

[MBCook]

I agree with you totally, that's just how the law is now (as I understand it) so that's the parallel that I drew.

Re:you missed a few things

[Anonymous Coward]

There you go, my last mod point

What a weak argument

[Klaruz]

Open Source Software Procurement Preferences
A small number of state legislators have introduced legislation that would require state governments to consider open source software when acquiring new software, and provide justification for using proprietary software products, including Microsoft's. Proposed legislation in Oregon (House Bill 2892) and Texas (Senate Bill 1579) seeks to establish a procurement bias for open source software, which would hurt competition and innovation in the software industry. Similar legislation will likely be introduced in other states as well. For more information on the procurement debate, visit the Initiative for Software Choice.

How is this going to hurt competition and innovation? If anything it'll help.

Before the bill:

"We bought software by microsoft, if it doesn't work, too bad."

After:
"We went with closed microsoft product xxxx because opensource product yyyy isn't good enough in the following areas."

Or:
"We went with open source product xxxx because microsoft product yyyy isn't good enough in the following areas."

Seems like the last point would encourage competition and innovation on microsoft or any other orginizations part.

Re:you missed a few things

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa!

I'm getting modded as "off topic".

This is an attempt to be FUNNY!

Gen-Xers should realize that this is a song from School House Rock. Not to be modded as off topic rather as Funny.

Jeez. That's what I get for crackin' wise with a bunch of 18-year old moderators.

Michael. (posting anonymously to prevent the continued distruction of his karma)

It's only a vorb.

[Futurepower(R)]

From the headline of the Slashdot story: "... Open Source Bill Passess ..."

From the parent comment: "What does 'passess' mean?"

Slashdot editors hav important matters on their minds, and cannot be botherd with unimportant things like the spelling of verbs.

This bill still has a long way to go

[Pettifogger]

I spent a session working in the Oregon Legislature. This bill still has a long, long way to go. Even if it gets to the floor this time, it's still going to have to go over to the Senate, which is going to go through the whole process over there, joint committee, and so on.

I don't think a lot of people know that the Legislature here only meets in odd-numbered years and that they start in January and usually wrap everything up in July, hopefully by the 4th. This bill is coming out a little late, and it'll probably be rushed at the end of the session. Here's where it gets interesting- lots of strange, strange things happen late in the session when everyone wants to leave. Bills get killed, sometimes they're deliberately allowed to die for "lack of time" and all sorts of other weird stuff happens. So just watch and wait.

And software lobbyists aside (I'm sure they're swarming over on State Street) what makes this even more interesting is the severe budget crunch going on in Oregon. In a nutshell, there's no sales tax and lots of other fees and such are pretty low. This was mostly countered by the income tax, but since Oregon has the highest unemployment in the country, state revenues are in the toilet, programs are being cut, and it seems like there are almost daily protests over at the Capitol. Given that the Legislature is under a lot of pressure because of that, the multi-million dollar question is whether they're going to allow open-source to save some programs or succumb to lobbyist pressure not to. Stay tuned, this is going to be worth watching.

Re:This bill still has a long way to go

[PotatoHead]

I agree with you about the distance this bill has to go.

Interesting observation though about the wealth of Oregon. We are at a weak time right now. I say this bill has a better than usual chance of going somewhere because the money problems are not. (At least for a few years.)

Interesting times for Open Source in Oregon for sure. I will be watching with interest.

Re:This bill still has a long way to go

[MarkGriz]

"It's a long, long wait while I'm sittin' in committee - but I know I'll be a law someday, at least I hope and pray that I will, but today I am still just a bill."

- Bill

Oregon is Poor, Q.E.D

[peripatetic_bum]

Let's cut to the chase. I moved our here and was suprised to learn how poor Oregon is financially compared to some of its neighboring states like washington and california.

If the state can save some money with open source, trust me, they are going to go for it, because right now Oregon's budget is in the pits and it does not look like it is going to get better.

yes, Microsoft and the other can bribe someone and get this bill canned, but let me assure, the seed has been planted. I think we will see this bill fail, but see a couple of initiatve (voter lead) come out of it, that will pass

Re:Oregon is Poor, Q.E.D

[Baloo Ursidae]

Let's cut to the chase. I moved our here and was suprised to learn how poor Oregon is financially compared to some of its neighboring states like washington and california.

I guess you missed hearing that Oregon is full, and before when the Slashdot story ran about someone in California asking about tips moving to Oregon (general response I saw was that you're welcome in Oregon, just remember to leave when you're done visiting). Not that Washington is doing any better, with most of Eastern Washington counties reporting double-digit unemployment figures (and that only counts those that are still drawing checks).

Aside from that, anybody else notice that most of the people speaking in favor of switching to open source preference work for agencies previously screwed in the past?

Re:Oregon is Poor, Q.E.D

[metamathica]

Actually, Oregon is no exception in their budget problems. The states are having some of the worst budget problems in history. Though you can fairly say that California's the biggest state, their budget deficit is much bigger than Oregon's.

Re:Oregon is Poor, Q.E.D

[peripatetic_bum]

Yes. I geuss it because I got a job that started paying well and assumed to did everyone else and then I get out here and everyone's seems dirt poor and making any show of opulence seems kind of cheap, especially on the coast

Re:Oregon is Poor, Q.E.D

[Baloo Ursidae]

Well, if you're going to insult the simple life everyone else has no problems enjoying, I-5, I-84 and US-26 are the main roads out. I'll be happy to help load the moving truck.

Re:Oregon is Poor, Q.E.D

[peripatetic_bum]

ack! that came out all wrong.

i enjoy the fact that opulence looks cheap out here. I was just surprised at the level of poverty as compared to what I thought I knew about oregon (ie advertisements made it seem like it was a bigger boulder,co)

His post isn't offtopic!

[MarkusQ]

I will grant that the joke is a little obscure (follow the link he provided if you don't get it) but it's clearly on-topic.

-- MarkusQ

How hard they're fighting this?

[Baloo Ursidae]

I saw two opposing views that were nearly identical from two agencies with a history of astroturfing (and by the looks of the ISC response, I don't think they even looked at it other than to fill in the blanks of a form letter), and one opinion from the Department of Administrative Services that doesn't seem to realise that spyware is a bad thing (second point under "How this bill changes law.")

Given the opposing response, and knowing Oregon's tendancy try and go against the ignorant, I'd say this has a good chance of passing (even if it won't go through congress anywhere nearly as fast as the 70 MPH speed limit bill, which the Oregon House of Representatives passed today). This shouldn't stop Oregonians from contacting thier congresscritters about this matter.

HB 2892 Effectively Dead as of April 18th

[edward.virtually@pob]

Well, since the powers that be on slashdot rejected this as a story, I'll post it here for anyone who cares and happens to look: HB 2892 is effectively dead already. See this article for the details. Oh well, at least it lasted for two weeks.