Re: [chat] Re: Federal Open Source Legislation Democrats to introduce IT Bill

[Matthew Palmer <mjp16@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10 Jul 2003, Craig Warner wrote:

> (ISC) has condemned South Australian moves to introduce open source
> preference legislation as "hidden protectionism" that discriminates
> against US software companies.

As opposed to the deceptive protectionism practiced by the US, where they
dangle open markets in front of us, then pull it away when we've danced to
their tune for a bit.  Then do it again.

At any rate, US companies can still tender for the job of installing and
supporting the software installed over here - they just can't sit back and
say "pay us $$$ just to install the stuff". Boo Hoo.

Although saying "We will only use OSS" in a piece of legislation does suck
to some degree, it really is the only way to give OSS a decent chance.  If
you say "pick on merit", you can rest assured that the decision makers will
be merited to death in strip clubs and brothels all over the Bahamas by
lock-in software vendors.

And there are some very good reasons to say "only OSS".  Because, even if
it's only halfway decent, the gov't can get it up to speed in-house, which
can't be done with halfway decent lock-in software.


-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
#include <disclaimer.h>
Matthew Palmer, Geek In Residence
http://ieee.uow.edu.au/~mjp16