On Wed, 27 Dec 2006, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
The bill does favor a specific type of software: one that is licensed
under a FOSS license. You're making a distinction on the software
based on an arbitrary classification, being the license in which it
comes in. You're effectively legislating prejudice for FOSS.
The license is NOT arbitrary. It is meritorious just as the technical
capabilities of the software are meritorious. The benefits are real, and
have economic (and of course non-economic) value too.
Case in point: If government chose to procure a DBMS (Database
Management System), should the choice be dictated by the type of
license if a sub-par FOSS licensed DBMS came up against a
technologically superior proprietary licensed DBMS?
Then they are NOT equal. The question is: which one MEETS REQUIREMENTS? If
the FOSS DBMS is sub-par because it does not meet requirements, then it is
out of the game.
As per my other post, I am not averse to explicitly prohibiting
FOSS promiseware. And I am AGAINST non-consideration of technical merit.
The FOSS bill, by the way, does not disregard or supplant the RFPs, nor
does it disregard technical merit. There is NOTHING in the bill that does
so.
---
Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to
do what we ought. -- Pope John Paul II
--[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
