At the end of last week, the White House published a draft for a Source Code Policy https://sourcecode.cio.gov/SourceCodePolicy.pdf. The policy requires every public agency to publish their custom-build software as Free Software for other public agencies as well as the general public to use, study, share and improve the software. As we want to push for similar policies in the EU, I would be very interested in your feedback.
The Source Code Policy is intended for efficient use of US taxpayers' money and reuse of existing custom-made software across the public sector. It is said to reduce vendor lock-in of the public sector, and decrease duplicate costs for the same code which in return will increase transparency of public agencies. The custom-build software will also be published to the general public either as public domain, or as Free Software so others can improve and reuse the software.
The policy in general does not require that already existing custom—developed software be retroactively made available as Free Software if it was developed by third party developers (though it is strongly encouraged to the extent permissible under existing contracts). However, it is encouraged to be retroactively applicable for the existing custom-build software developed by agency employees in the course of their official duties.
As a result, the draft predicts that the policy will contribute to economic growth and innovation, as the public will be able to use and improve the software which was funded with public money.
Until 11 April 2016 the public can comment the draft https://sourcecode.cio.gov/. So please sent us any comments asap.
On 16/03/2016 14:41, Matthias Kirschner wrote:
At the end of last week, the White House published a draft for a Source Code Policy https://sourcecode.cio.gov/SourceCodePolicy.pdf. The policy requires every public agency to publish their custom-build software as Free Software for other public agencies as well as the general public to use, study, share and improve the software. As we want to push for similar policies in the EU, I would be very interested in your feedback.
[...]
The policy in general does not require that already existing custom—developed software be retroactively made available as Free Software if it was developed by third party developers (though it is strongly encouraged to the extent permissible under existing contracts). However, it is encouraged to be retroactively applicable for the existing custom-build software developed by agency employees in the course of their official duties.
Nice, that echoes the recent french CADA decision that recognizes software source code as a "publicly discloseable document", that just was validated by an administrative court:
http://www.april.org/le-tribunal-administratif-valide-lavis-de-la-cada-les-c... (sorry no translation yet)
On the 1st of April (no, that's not a joke), the tax administration will release the source code of the tax calculation software they wrote, and even organize a hackathon around it.
http://www.nextinpact.com/news/98981-le-fisc-ouvrira-code-source-son-calcula...
François.
* François Revol revol@free.fr [2016-03-16 15:34:10 +0100]:
Nice, that echoes the recent french CADA decision that recognizes software source code as a "publicly discloseable document", that just was validated by an administrative court:
http://www.april.org/le-tribunal-administratif-valide-lavis-de-la-cada-les-c... (sorry no translation yet)
Thank you for that information!
On the 1st of April (no, that's not a joke), the tax administration will release the source code of the tax calculation software they wrote, and even organize a hackathon around it.
http://www.nextinpact.com/news/98981-le-fisc-ouvrira-code-source-son-calcula...
Best Regards, Matthias
Dear Fellows,
Op 16-03-16 om 14:41 schreef Matthias Kirschner:
So please sent us any comments asap.
Would asking he US government to include this law in a trade agreement like TTIP help make the EC become enhousiastic about it? ;-)
Best regards,
Hi,
I finally got around to reading the draft. Apart from using unfavorable terms, I am really excited about this draft in general. Finally, there is a commitment that applies to contractors as well, not just to government works themselves.
However, the draft often says "as much as possible" and "as soon as possible". I am a bit afraid that this gives government offices too much leeway and some will weasel out of their obligations. There are some minimum requirements in the right direction, but I think they need to go further. Why not say "as much as possible" for everything that is already developed, but making all software developed in the future 100% Free Software? Government contracts are highly attractive, so publishing those works as Free Software shouldn't be an issue whatsoever.
Also, a list of acceptable licenses might be a good idea. Maybe they can just refer to the FSF on that [1][2][3]. It would just be nice if the government didn't use some obscure license or even use their own vanity license. They could also just include a short list with AGPL, GPL, LGPL, and Apache 2.0. I can't think of any other licenses anyone would need for software.
Happy hacking! Florian
[1] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/ [2] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.html [3] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#SoftwareLicenses