I'd suggest reading the damned pdf file someone linked below and, you know, understand it.
No, no, lemme place it right in front of your nose. After ranting and raving about piracy, CD/DVD burning (eh???), and whatnot, here is their recommended action for 2010:
Priority Actions Requested in 2010: IIPA requests that the government of Indonesia take the following actions, which would result in the most significant near term commercial benefits to the copyright industries:
Market Access and Related Issues
Rescind March 2009 MenPAN circular letter endorsing the use and adoption of open source software which threatens to create additional trade barriers and deny fair and equitable market access to software companies.
The circular letter endorses FOSS, it doesn't mandate it. Yet, IIPA wishes Indonesia to recant? Why? What logic, besides outright greed, connects suggesting gov't entities use FOSS with denying fair and equitable market access?
Want more? Look on page 3 of that pdf under the title "Government Procurement Preference Denies U.S. Software Companies a Level Playing Field", and read this little tidbit about 20 times to get it into your head:
"Rather than fostering a system that will allow users to benefit from the best solution available in the market, irrespective of the development model, it encourages a mindset that does not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations. As such, it fails to build respect for intellectual property rights and also limits the ability of government or public-sector customers (e.g., State-owned enterprise) to choose the best solutions to meet the needs of their organizations and the Indonesian people."
1. How does encouraging the use of FOSS "not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations"????
2. How the hell does anyone dump any logic and come to the conclusion, "As such, it fails to build respect for intellectual property rights..."???
3. Keep in the front of your mind this is to the USTR, not some article. This is a plea to enact action between the USTR and Indonesia, not some blog entry. Therefore, stating, in public effing record, that Indonesia is wrong, wrong, wrong for encouraging the use of FOSS (regardless that its use is not mandated) begins to show the true feelings behind this IIPA travesty.
Others have said it better, this is IIPA et. al. crying, "You aren't using our software! That's not fair!!!"
Slashdot Mirror
No, no, lemme place it right in front of your nose. After ranting and raving about piracy, CD/DVD burning (eh???), and whatnot, here is their recommended action for 2010:
The circular letter endorses FOSS, it doesn't mandate it. Yet, IIPA wishes Indonesia to recant? Why? What logic, besides outright greed, connects suggesting gov't entities use FOSS with denying fair and equitable market access?
Want more? Look on page 3 of that pdf under the title "Government Procurement Preference Denies U.S. Software Companies a Level Playing Field", and read this little tidbit about 20 times to get it into your head:
"Rather than fostering a system that will allow users to benefit from the best solution available in the market, irrespective of the development model, it encourages a mindset that does not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations. As such, it fails to build respect for intellectual property rights and also limits the ability of government or public-sector customers (e.g., State-owned enterprise) to choose the best solutions to meet the needs of their organizations and the Indonesian people."
1. How does encouraging the use of FOSS "not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations"????
2. How the hell does anyone dump any logic and come to the conclusion, "As such, it fails to build respect for intellectual property rights..."???
3. Keep in the front of your mind this is to the USTR, not some article. This is a plea to enact action between the USTR and Indonesia, not some blog entry. Therefore, stating, in public effing record, that Indonesia is wrong, wrong, wrong for encouraging the use of FOSS (regardless that its use is not mandated) begins to show the true feelings behind this IIPA travesty.
Others have said it better, this is IIPA et. al. crying, "You aren't using our software! That's not fair!!!"
Still think "bias" is the right term? Come on!