Again hi to all,
I am happy to read all the comments so far made and as one of the lead
writers / researcher of the bill, I am actually surprised to hear some
comments actually embodies Microsoft's arguments. Let me therefore
answer some of them.
1. *Regarding the comment that FOSS migration will actually make it
costlier for the Philippines (incidentally is one of Microsoft's
main argument in a letter sent to the Peruvian parliament)*: The
Robert Frances Group, a global IT consultancy firm conducted a
study in the US, UK and Australia in 2002. In the outcome of the
study, it was actually found out that due to migration
requirements, corporations planning to migrate to FOSS will
actually have to cough up more money during the first year.
However, it was calculated that as much as 15% (for medium sized
companies) to 35% (for larger scale companies and governments)
will be saved in TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) of FOSS in a span
of three years. The International Open Source Network of the
United Nations Development Program (IOSN-UNDP) stated that
undeniably, TCO (which not only refers to migration but, as the
term implies the total cost of ownership over a span of time) is
the strongest argument to shift to FOSS.
2. There is a difference between human capitalization and operations
capitalization. FOSS migration will be expensive on the "human
capital" side because you will have to train people. But not in
the operations side. Even VAS on FOSS is a lot cheaper than
proprietary software licenses. To train people will be costly, but
will be beneficial in the long run.
3. *Regarding the comment that a law on FOSS is arbitrary
(incidentally Microsoft's argument in a letter sent to the
Argentinian parliament)*: Quite the contrary. Please read section
2 of the bill which explicitly states important provisions of the
Philippine Constitution and the reasons why we should adopt FOSS.
For convenience, I will add them here in my post. They are, to wit:
*
Ensure self-reliance of the State in technology and technology
capabilities, in accordance to _Article XIV, Sec. 10 of the
Constitution_ by ensuring the State has access to source codes
and power over its computing ;
*
Strengthen access of the public to information and government
data in accordance with _Article III, Section 7 of the
Constitution_ by mandating the use of open standards in
government hence ensuring the interoperability of data and
government communication;
*
Promote the preferential use of domestic material and Filipino
labor in information communications technology, in accordance
with _Art XII, Sec. 12 of the Constitution_;
*
Adopt mechanisms to ensure fiscal discipline in the purchase
of software without compromising the state’s security and the
stability and robustness of the country’s ICT infrastructure; and,
* Develop Filipino professionals and scientists in the field of
software technology and ICT by promoting the use and purchase
of free/open source software, in accordance to _Article XII,
Sec. 14 of the Constitution_.
Implementing provisions of the Constitution is never an arbitrary act of
Congress. Whether we have qualms or not, the Philippine Constitution
vests legislative power to Congress which consists of the House and the
Senate. This legislative power, mandated to Congress by the Constitution
actually sets Congress as the highest policy making body of the land.
Congress is in charge of creating decisions directing Philippine policy
and ensuring that the Constitution is followed, and if necessary even to
amend the Constitution. It is never ever arbitrary to follow the
mandates of the Constitution.
4. *Regarding the comment that it is unfair that government adopts
only one FOSS and exclude proprietary solutions.* Now, this is a
trademark M$ argument. They cite the bill of rights of many
countries (which are almost the same even if some countries don't
have a written Constitution), in our case section 1 of Article III
of the Constitution (The bill of rights) pertaining to, drumbeat
please, *equal protection clause*. What can I say? Law 101, equal
protection applies only to equal classes with no substantial
difference. Hence, you can invoke equal protection if the state
promulgates a law that will provide special heavier penalties for
boys over girls. Now, if two classes are substantially different
of each other, the equal protection clause does not apply. For
example, there is no stopping government from promulgating a law
that gives heavier penalties to government officials over ordinary
citizens or, in the interest of its citizen to heavily regulate
one industry over the other. In our particular bill, sad to say
but the equal protection clause does not apply. Governments has
the right to reject projects plainly from sources which in
accordance to its policies are non-beneficial to the people.
Government can give preference to FOSS on the basis of principles
(not necessarily cost) for which Congress, following the mandate
of the Constitution decides on.
5.
6. _As an advice to software development firms,_ if this bill becomes
into law, there in stopping you from transacting with anyone.
However, if you want to transact with government, you have to
alter your business models to fit that of government policies
which are after the benefits not of its own, but of the state.
Opening the source code as a matter of national security and in
helping people gain right to access public information via open
formats and open standards are key issues why government would
refuse to transact with anyone not that does not fit this
criteria. _*This is not arbitrary but an embodiment of the basic
rule governing states -- the welfare of its people*_. We assure
you we have talked with various SMEs and Filipino IT
entrepreneurs. Most are happy to see this bill. After all, lacking
capital, most of them offer FOSS solutions. They earn not on
hiding source codes but in giving VAS (Value Added Service) on
their products. As a matter of fact, Accenture a mutlinational
software development firm in its recent newsletter is discussing
on prospects of the future and how the global software industry is
now focusing on VAS rather than on hiding "trade secrets" such as
their source codes. Free software has everything to do with this
trend in global software industry. VAS is even given priority
especially with the boom of outsourcing. Hence, if your software
industry fails to engage a business with government, like with
everyone else, it is not because of this bill. It is because of
the business decisions your company made. What the bill just did
was concretize the basic principles governing states and create a
bill which its proponents believe embodies those principles.
7. Regarding the wisdom behind the bill, well the right to free
speech entitles anyone to question the wisdom behind laws even way
after they were bills.I would not repost my previous comments and
I believe the wisdom of the law is being discussed by everybody. I
therefore urge you to lobby with Congressmen to reflect your
positions. After all, sad to say this is a numbers game and after
a proprietary software giant offers an e-learning partnership of
199 laptops among Congressional districts (this is true), I
sincerely doubt this bill will become law. After all, beyond
principles and wisdom, pragmatism and materialism guides the
decadence of this country.
_________________________________________________
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
[email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
