[ubuntu-uk] Open Source Procurement Toolkit

[alan c]

On 19/11/11 14:45, Chris Rowson wrote:
> I thought some of you might be interested in this recent guidance released
> by the Cabinet Office on Open Source Software:
> 
> http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/open-source-procurement-toolkit
> 
> It's publicly accessible so you don't need a .gov.uk address to get access,
> and it might be helpful to any of you wanting to work with government
> organisations to provide services.
> 
> The 'All About Open Source' document is particularly interesting because it
> explains why UK.gov can't mandate Open Source software. It's not entirely
> straight forward; I'm not entirely sure, but I think it means to say that
> UK.gov considers 'Open Source' a product (perhaps like Microsoft) rather
> than a feature and so that mandating a specific product is a breach on
> antitrust law? Thoughts?
> 
> The UK Government"s interpretation of European procurement legislation
>> would deem the mandating of open source as a breach of antitrust law. This
>> rests on the current interpretation of whether open source is a product or
>> a feature. European countries, such as Italy, interpret open source as a
>> feature rather than a product.
>> This means that preference for open source is simply preference for a
>> legal feature of a product and, in stating this preference, no commercial
>> vendor has been inappropriately favoured or disfavoured.

I was impressed by the fact that when I looked, the files were only
available in open document format, not even pdf, and certainly not
DOC, as for many other gov downloads.

As I understand it, - and I attended the meeting with the cabinet
office rep hosted by BCS earlier this year and was able to make this
point, [  :-)  ] standards are the responsibility of government -
safety barrier heights, road speeds, sizes of banknotes, whatever. The
way the standards are achieved is more the responsibility of the
detail implementation, say the material used for safety barrier
handrails, or the method of controlling your car speed.

So the existing Cabinet Office ICT strategy of creating mandatory open
standards, with a definition of open standard, is an important first
step.

How the open standard is to be met in a project, say for example,
whether by open office, libre office, abiword, or even a product from
Microsoft whatever, is not really something that can be mandated. For
example if the contract specified Star office, or Microsoft Word, or a
product your uncle was in business making, this specification would be
inappropriate and vulnerable to challenge.  A standard, closed, or
open, is for Government to make, and can be challenged against laws etc.

Even if a product (MS Office?) were to be made 'open source', it would
not necessarily be licenced in a useful way nor capable in producing
anything other than closed standard format documents.

So it is the Open Standard that is useful, rather than the degree of
openness of the code in the product. In a world where everyone expects
to be using only open document formats, then a proprietary product
which does that and pleases paying customers is in a fair competition.
-- 
alan cocks
Ubuntu user