Oregon's Open Source Bill Stalled by Microsoft

Wanker writes "Previously on Slashdot we read about an Oregon bill that would require government agencies to consider Open Source software in addition to whichever software they would normally consider. Unfortunately, House Bill 2892 is getting stalled by "stiff opposition" from such unsurprising places as Microsoft. All you Oregon Slashdotters, it's time to call or write your representatives."

Comments

Huge lobby

[absurdhero]

Considering that Microsoft has one of the biggest lobbying groups,if not the biggest (I don't remember), it really is no surprise. It will take persistance and a unified front to keep MS from blocking it. Unfortunately, politics isn't about what makes sense or what is best for the people. But if enough citizens complain to their representative, they have a better chance of listening.

Good luck Oregon.

Re:Huge lobby

[ziekke]

Its kind of sad that Microsoft bothers with lobbying these types of things, even with a law that states consideration is mandatory, that doesn't mean they wont still go the way of the higher cost. You need to keep in mind, you are given budgets for things, if you do not spend the money in the budget it looks like you don't need all that money. As much as that makes sense and is true, departments that don't spend the full budget lose that extra money. So they find ways to spend the leftover cash. I think its silly that they bothered to instate such a pointless law, all they have to do is say "Yea, we considered it BUT we're still going Microsoft". That will just feed MS adverts "We were chosen even when they were forced to consider open source!" No matter what they spend the money on, the money is still going to them. Gov't knows how to spend their budgets ;)

Re:Your confusion cleared up, instantly.

[Ledskof]

Yeah, in other words, instead of just picking the first thing that comes along, which is ALWAYS commercial software, they would be REQUIRED to consider an OSS alternative.

A few good points:
1. Good chance at finding a cheaper solution for the initial implementation.
2. Good chance at finding a more secure solution.
3. The solution would be maintainable, and free to upgrade to meet future technologies.
4. No source code is hidden from you.
5. If they decide not to use an evaluated OSS solution then the resulting report could greatly benefit that OSS projects future.
6. If the OSS solution is decided on, it will bring this OSS project further into the public for other's to consider using.
7. The more OSS solutions that organizations are aware of and implement, the more organizations that will be aware of and implement them as a compounding result.
etc
8. Future change: If something is free, you aren't held back from changing because of all the money you already dumped into it. And you most likely wouldn't get involved in a platform that was designed to lock you into it with no escape (microsoft), so you'd have a better chance at changing in the future as well.

Someone else list bad points; I'm going to bed.

Facts about HB 2892

[po8]

As someone who has done actual research on Oregon HB 2892 (reading the bill and talking to its sponsor), I'd like to try to clear up some misconceptions with a short FAQ:

Q: What did HB 2892 do?
A: Two things: Require state agencies to (1) consider open source in procurement, and (2) procure only software that supports open formats for data storage and interchange.

Q: Why the past tense in the previous question?
A: Because it appears that the language of the bill has been compromised to increase its chance of passage. I haven't yet looked for the revised wording.

Q: Why is (1) necessary---can't state agencies consider open source anyhow?
A: According to the bill's sponsor, the nature of state procurement rules makes open source procurement difficult. Because there is no sponsoring organization that will bid contracts for typical open source alternatives, agencies may be bound by law or regulation to ignore them. (1) changes that.

Q: Doesn't the language of (1) force open software on state agencies?
A: No, it forces them to consider it. In a plain reading of the rules, a state agency should be prepared to explain why it selected a particular package over open source alternatives. HB 2892 has no detailed description of the criteria or methods of consideration.

Q: Do state agencies use a lot of open source anyhow?
A: Yes. Agencies that already use open source software generally support the bill: see above.

Q: Is (1) the most important part of the bill?
A: No, both provisions (1) and (2) are important. Perhaps the chief concern of the bill's sponsor, Rep. Barnhart, is legacy systems and lock-in. (1) addresses this issue by encouraging continuously-maintainable systems. (2) addresses the issue by allowing seamless replacement of systems.

Hope this helps.

Re:School districts are bad too

[b17bmbr]

i am a teacher, and i think i can give you some insight. there are several reasons. one, software companies see schools ans students like drug dealers do. they will damn near give away there software because if you get "hooked" on their stuff, when you leave, you only kow there software. and the district level people see the supposed great deal they get. two, in our district, some of the technidiots have gone to microsoft seminars, and come home with all sorts of freebies. it's like freakin halloween. so, they are not going to be the one that suggests OSS when they lose their sugar daddy. three, most school tech people are bottom of the barrell. for instance, i run linux inmy classroom, and the technidiots can't figure out how i can access the internet nor my novell network shares from linux, since "novell doesn't support linux". ipx_configure and ncpmount. districts can't pay going wages. so they get those least able to find jobs in the private sector.

something else, too. they just don't know linux and don't want to. they have no need to save the district money nor do they have any need nor desire to improve their skills. school district jobs are permanent jobs. they don't want to rock the boat. if the district dared move to linux, they'd be out of work or would have to retool their skills. they want neither. i could go on with endless stories but i won't bore you. keep up the fight, and take it to your school board. here's what you do. find just one area that OSS can do more, for less. it shouldn't be too hard. present it to the school board. they have their meetings open to the public. these people are elected. they care about votes. if they can say they saved money and improved __________ (fill inthe blank), let them get the credit, and you'll be more successful. for instance, give them examples where this "linux thing" has been adopted by companies, to show that it is a viable, powerful, etc., solution. i'd love to help.

i have run into lots of problems too. keep up the good fight. the latin phrase goes something like non illegetimum carborundum. don't let the bastards get you down!!! email me if you need assisstance. rmandel AT hartdistrict.org (sorry for the typos, it's 1AM where i'm,at)