On Fri, 8 Dec 2006, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Hmmm... Democratic duties? How does legislating a "mandatory choice"
sound to you? Does that sound democratic at all?
You're MISREPRESENTING what the bill mandates again. It does not make it
impossible to choose software. In fact, it explicitly allows proprietary
software in certain cases. What it DOES do is mandate that software
acquisitions adhere to certain freedoms (both for users and developers).
That is VERY democratic.
4. Give copies of the software that we use, including source code, to the
public on whose behalf we govern, if we choose, so that they can
verify our compliance with the law of the country.
OOPS. This is where I think I draw the line.
I know a lot of licenses that fall under the top 3, and even
proprietary software licenses can be tailored for government use to
fall under the top 3 criteria. But this one is just a tad bit too far
for my taste.
Why should the software be redistributable to the public? Why not just
within government?
Why on earth NOT? Why should it be limited to the government when it can
benefit the people that the government is supposed to serve?
It seems you're more interested in protecting commercial software
monopolies than letting softwar benefit people.
--[Manny [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member: Philippine League for Democratic Telecommunications
Alternative Information and Opinion at http://www.phnix.net
Pro-Life Philippines website -- http://www.prolife.org.ph
--[Open Minds Philippines]--------------------[openminds.linux.org.ph]--
_________________________________________________
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
