From kde-promo Mon Feb 03 22:29:38 2003 From: Marc Mutz Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 22:29:38 +0000 To: kde-promo Subject: [kde-promo] Re: [Important] When talking about Aegypten or Kroupware on fairs or to the press,... X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-promo&m=104431432816656 MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--Boundary-02=_u1uP+7M/6reWMVY" --Boundary-02=_u1uP+7M/6reWMVY Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: signed data Content-Disposition: inline [v2: the first one apparently didn't make it through (and doesn't need=20 to)] On Saturday 01 February 2003 05:24, Andreas Pour wrote: > Tim Jansen wrote: > > On Friday 31 January 2003 23:26, Mark Bucciarelli wrote: > > > Funding a Free Software project is not part of a free market? > > > > Depending on your point-of-view you could also say that funding a > > free software project is subsidizing it, because you could also get > > it for free... (even if it is not written yet, but sooner or later > > somebody else will fund it) > > Purchasing proprietary software is, in that view, also subsidizing > the proprietary software vendor. Funding Open Source is subsidizing > some competition. Since the government has apent many many years > subsidizing the proprietary software, I think the stronger argument > is that it is *anti-competitive* *not* to fund free software, as its > competitor has already been quite heavily funded. The difference to make here is that, normally, the government is=20 required to send out a public invitation to tender for the particular=20 task at hand and then choose between the bids according to price and=20 trustworthiness of the bidding party. So, in theory, every competitor=20 has the same chances to get the contract, so the tendering procedure=20 ensures that the government doesn't favour one competitor over the=20 other. Again, that's in theory, of course. OTOH, funding or sponsoring means giving money to a project without=20 competitive tendering procedures (or at least raises the chance of this=20 misunderstanding). IOW, the government decides where the money goes and=20 not the competitiors by themselves through mutual competition. In this=20 sense, it's an interference with the free market, b/c the government=20 misuses it's monopoly to foster a particular technology or development=20 model. Regardless of how desireable governmental funding of Free Software is=20 and although _we_ agree that we see software as part of the=20 infrastructure of modern society just as roads are and thus the=20 government has not only the right, but the mandate to care for it.=20 Regardless of that, it's (currently) not the way things are supposed to=20 work according to law. The Aegypten project was done "properly", ie. with an open call for=20 tenders. That the Aegypten consortium won the bid is just a=20 "coincidence". AFAIK, the call didn't include the requirement to=20 integrate the result into the original Free Software project, and it=20 didn't even mandate using KMail! It basically was "write us an Sphinx-enabling extension of a popular=20 =46ree Software mail client that can run on Linux". It was definitely not "let's fund KMail/KDE". It was not "let's support=20 =46ree Software". They did it b/c they want to use Linux on their=20 desktops and a Sphinx compatible MUA was missing. They don't use it b/c=20 it's Free Software (at least not primarily), but because they see a=20 benefit _for themselves_. They can look inside and go and hire someone=20 to change it to their need, probably. Probably b/c it's cheaper. Or=20 because it creates more German jobs than Microsoft products would.=20 Whatever. With Kroupware, it's a little different - and better for KDE. The call=20 was closed to a certain set of people and companies, and it mandated=20 KMail and KDE and it _required_ that the result be merged back into the=20 mainline development. But that is also a risk, b/c it comes close to=20 what is still legally allowed in Germany. So if we want the BSI and=20 other Governmental agencies to keep "funding" KDE and it's parts or=20 indeed Free Software generally, we should take care to not speak=20 lightly of "funding", but always explain that the "funding" was based=20 on proper (public or restricted) calls for tenders and that the=20 Aegypten and Kroupware consortiums properly won the bids. In addition, esp. Intevation tends to care about the fact that Aegypten=20 could have never happened and that just as well the German government=20 could use a modified KMail which would never see the light of KDE CVS=20 again[1]. And IMO (speaking as a KDE developer and apart from the fact=20 that I'm currently employed by Intevation), they (and g10code and KDAB=20 as well) should _really_ get the fame of having made sure that=20 KMail/KDE gets back those governmental improvements and of having=20 "helped" the BSI a tiny bit to write better (for Free Software=20 projects) requirements. I hope to have made my/our point clearer. Marc [1] Or of which we didn't even know a thing, b/c who of us watches the=20 call for tenders of his government, not even speaking of their outcome? =2D-=20 It's one thing to accept a risk to your own data, but quite another to standardize on something that imposes that risk on others, no matter how unlikely you think it is that anything "really bad" will happen, and no matter how desirable the outcome. -- Bart Schaefer, on ietf-822 --Boundary-02=_u1uP+7M/6reWMVY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA+Pu1u3oWD+L2/6DgRAvxoAJ99HzEFgX/OWt5iFLAKasp6I0wa0wCdFJKh KmZvPNFs60tE6Whq2+XReek= =3WEj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_u1uP+7M/6reWMVY-- _______________________________________________ This message is from the kde-promo mailing list. Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on or temporarily stop your subscription.