UN Summit Tones Down Open-Source Stance

akb writes "CBR is reporting that the latest draft of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Plan of Action has considerably removed language that promoted open source awareness, the creation of intellectual property mechanisms supporting open source and the creation of a UN 'Programmers Without Frontiers' body to support open source software in developing nations. This language was removed from earlier versions to make the document more palatable for business and commercial interests. In recent years commercial software interests, notably Microsoft, have lobbied hard to keep governments from openly preferring open source over proprietary software. Other issues to be debated include the archiving of and access to government information, access to wireless spectrum, government subsidies of Internet access, Internet taxes and international cooperation on information security."

Comments

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

[Daniel Dvorkin]

The new wording is a masterpiece of fake balance. (Do they have Fox News writing their drafts for them?)

In the new draft, these are replaced with a more general description of how governments should "promote awareness among all stakeholders of the possibilities offered by different software models... including proprietary, open-source and free software".

Um, no. Proprietary software vendors do just fine "promoting awareness" of their products on their own. If governments give equal weight to proprietary and free/OSS, in practice that means that governments will be shilling for M$ just as hard as M$'s own PR dept., and free/OSS providers will be out in the cold. I suspect this will be especially true in poor countries -- the ones who would benefit most from a push for free/OSS -- because, let's face it, that's where government workers are most susceptible to outright bribery.

Too bad. It was a nice idea while it lasted.

Re:Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

[_Sprocket_]

First thing's first. Paying jobs. Americans/Canadians/Europeans have the luxury of taking a chance and coding up Open Source for the morality of it. But in other places, food on the table comes first. Closed software puts food on the table -easier-.

Exactly. Because all the jobs for writing that proprietary code are created in the developing country in question. By using a proprietary software package, you are esentially paying coders in your own developing tech job market.

Oh. Wait. No. Most of this development happens off-shore. If your countrymen are being hired to code for these projects, they had to emegrate first to do it - further weaking your own tech market.

it's possible they have a point

[Illissius]

Open source software is a means and not an end, so if better/more cost-effective software can be created through commercial means, then it doesn't at all matter whether or not a competing, inferior product was created through open source. That said, the way things currently stand, there are precious few areas where commercial software has the advantage (off the top of my head, these are games, Mac OS X, and Opera).

Lobbying

[simgod]

I guess if it were a resolution USA would just veto it like all those that told Isreal to respect international law (around 30).

Doesn't really matter does it?

[Interruach]

They want to promote OSS and non-free software equally. Fair enough. The most important thing is open standards, at the end of the day if people want to spend money on something that they can't change that's up to them.
I don't see how this will make a difference anyway. People have heard of linux, bsd, apache, mozilla, openoffice and so on. And once the word is out they'll give it a try. And once other people have tried and found success it becomes a viable option. No-body likes policies dictated from the top down: And even in places where they have a windows-only policy you can still find the occasional linux/*bsd box or mac.

U.N. Irrelevant, Governments Irrelevant

[Crashmarik]

This is really a non issue. Keith Laumer got the right of the matter, Diplomats exist mainly to consume excess hors d'oeuvres. Programmers exist to turn cafeinated beverages into code.

I love hearing that Munich or Massachussets, or Brazil has adopted open standadrs or open source but if they didn't that wouldn't matter either.

Open source succeeds when and where it is better. The way for OSS to get better is for the people involved to concentrate on making it better.

The Open Source movemnet existed long before the first Government Organization realized it was a good idea. If another government never decides to recogniza or adopt it, it won't miss a beat.

What will hurt Open Source is corruption by organizations that don't get it and never will. The UN is inherently about compromise. The GPL is about take it or leave it. Theres not alot room for agreement there.

MS: Your customers want OSS

[Katravax]

Microsoft spends so much time fighting OSS and badmouthing it, but I haven't heard them get a hint on the obvious: Their customers want it. I personally use Windows and have been employed for a decade as a Windows programmer. However, with every passing season, I trust MS less and use OSS more on my own. At some point I will break away from them for one reason: MS has not responded to me as a customer.

MS adds features that their large clients want, so why can't they respond with the source as well? Rather than fighting OSS so much, they should realize they're not losing so much based on the price of the product, but on the license and the source. As a customer that has spent thousands on MS software, I have lately done it grudgingly because I do not yet know enough to migrate everything I do to an open-source OS.

At my office, many new machines go up as Linux or BSD boxes because we fear the recent Windows licensing terms. Rather than making us, their customers, nervous about MS and the impact their licenses have on our business, MS should respond with a soft hand rather than the iron gauntlet. Some licenses we've read even make us nervous to have our own source code on a Windows box. I know I haven't said anything that hasn't been said a million times before, but if my OS vendor of choice -- Microsoft -- would get a clue and be responsive to me and the business I work for, I'd consider the alternatives much less than I do now.