Awhile ago I read that the government of the UK had adopted a policy to adopt open source software "when it delivers best value for money" and government agencies """should where possible avoid being "locked into proprietary software""" . I found their policy at: http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/policydocs/policydocs_document.asp?docnum=905 and this BBC article discussed this issue: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7910110.stm
So it would appear that the government of the UK is making progress in "being open" to open source. Does anyone have any experiences that show that this policy is actually being followed? Bob Bruce ________________________________________From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Landon Blake Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:56 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Examples of Opposition to Open Source/Open FileFormats in the United States It looks like I might have ruffled a few feathers with my earlier post about the lack of support for open source software in the United States. I was making a generalization, and didn't mean to criticize or downplay the efforts of advocates and government employees that are promoting open source software. I hope their advocacy continues, and I will do what I can to support it. I thought I would take a minute to post one or two articles that highlight the type of opposition/attitude that I was talking about. The first one isn't directly related to geospatial software, but it is related to the use of open source software and open file formats by government agencies in the United States. It has to do with the adoption of ODF (the file format used by Open Office). See the section on Massachusetts in this wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_adoption Here is an article about legislation proposed in 2006 to do the same thing in Minnesota: http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/open_source/showArticle.jht ml?articleID=184429732 These articles are old, and there may have been updates and new legal decisions that I am not aware of. You could check to ODF Alliance site for updates: http://www.odfalliance.org/mail_list.php There is no question in my mind that Microsoft opposed the adoption of ODF by state governments in the United States. If you don't think this is true, I've got a bridge I want to sell you. :] My second example involves the Autodesk suit against the Open Design Alliance. You can read an article about that here: http://www.stress-free.co.nz/autodesk_sues_the_open_design_alliance Autodesk may have legitimate concerns about trademark violation, but I'll bet they would love to sink the Open Design Alliance ship. The majority of CAD data produced in the surveying/engineering arena is stored in the DWG format, and Autodesk knows this. Controlling that format and programmer's access to it is a key component of Autodesk's business model. It looks like the legal battle was still on as recently as July 7, 2009: http://www.opendesign.com/node/398 Autodesk is certainly entitled to protect is intellectual property, but in my mind this is a big obstacle to data sharing among the geospatial communities in the US, especially as you move to the engineering/survey side of things. Let's not kid ourselves. There is a lot of money to be made selling software in the United States, and people will do their best to influence our legal and commercial systems to serve their own needs. One thing I love about open source software development is the sense of sharing and community. This is a definite contrast. I think OSGeo (and all of us as individual software developers) should be aware of this opposition to open source and open technology standards, and should do our best to counteract it. A lot of the general public doesn't understand the issues involved, or understand how governments funded by their tax dollars might benefit from open source software. We need to be the voice the people aren't going to hear from Autodesk or ESRI. Landon Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
