MESSAGE
| DATE | 2005-09-04 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] David Sugar Letter
|
"The Free Software Challenge
In Latin America"
By David Sugar
03 June, 2005
Countercurrents.org
In 2002, then-U.S. ambassador to Peru, John Hilton, delivered a
threatening letter to the Peruvian congress using his public office to
act on behalf of a very powerful American private interest. The letter,
which was leaked to the press, stated that Microsoft Corporation and its
chairman Bill Gates dissaproved of Peru debating a proposed law, Special
Bill 1609, which favored the use of free software in public
administration. Hilton warned its passage would harm U.S.-Peru
relations.
This incident was an early salvo in a brewing international conflict. As
nations of the world increasingly turn to free software to cut costs and
promote local development, some powerful North American commercial
interests have responded by bullying. Sometimes they have done so by
proxy, such using public servants like Ambassador Hilton. Sometimes they
have threatening legal action to intimidate outspoken critics such as
Brasil's National Institute of Information and Technology (ITI)
president Sergo Amadeu who compared Microsoft business practices to that
of drug dealers. Sometimes, they have threatend governments directly,
such as last November, when Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer threatened to
sue Asian governments who choose to use free software.
Part of what distinguishes free software (sometimes called open source
or libre software) commercially from proprietary software is a matter of
licensing. While all software is protected under copyright, commercial
proprietary software is often licensed under terms that create
additional restrictions, such as limiting where one can use such
software and who may be allowed to use it. Often proprietary commercial
software includes licenses to explicitly deny users the right or ability
to modify software to fit their needs or access their own data, the
right to speak about the functionality of the software they purchased,
or to resell it to others when they no longer wish to use it. In
contrast, free software expressly asserts and grants these fundamental
rights through licensing, and does so in a way that enables others to
fully reclaim these rights such as by providing source code.
While both free and proprietary commercial software have co-existed
uneasily for a long time in many parts of the world, I believe what has
made certain private North American commercial interests respond
directly in Latin America is that many nations there have chosen to
promote the use of free software specifically in public administration.
There already is a long history for the support and use of such software
in Brasil by the Workers party, starting from the days when they
controlled the state government of Rio Grande Du Sul and instituted
private/public sector partnerships through projects such as procergs.
Most recently the government of President Luiz Lula Da Silva has chosen
to use free software solutions built around GNU/Linux exclusively in a
project to make computers available to the poor, as recommended by MIT
this past March.
Free software in public administration is not just about software for
special government programs such as digital inclusion for the poor. This
is a battle about the purchase and use of all software by national
governments and the terms such software will be provided under. This
about the procurement of servers and database applications used to house
government data. This is also about the software that will be purchased
and used on the desktops of government office workers every day, and
whether they will continue to purchase and use Microsoft Windows and
Microsoft Office under the the terms of a monopoly supplier, or free
software alternatives such as GNU/Linux and OpenOffice.
As Latin American governments increasingly use free software, suppliers
will need to adapt to provide it. Private industries which interact with
government will also be effected to remain compatible, and provide
additional private markets for those vendors. All of these create a
national economic environment that certain companies, such as Microsoft,
would need to change in order to fully participate in.
One reason that free software is being promoted by Latin American
governments is a question of initial cost. In Brasil, they expect to
save over $1 billion dollars annually through the use of free software
and elimination of license fees. Many other Latin American governments
are of course keenly aware of the cost benefits of free software. In
some countries, such as in Peru and Argentina, they have tried passing
special procurement laws to more rapidly increase the adoption of free
software in government. In Venezuela, the use of free software in public
administration is now supported directly by President Hugo Chavez.
While it is true that the total cost of using software is not
represented in the purchase price or license fees alone, most other
factors also tend to favor free software and better explain the
potential for large cost savings through its use. One reason is
commercial free software will often work on existing and older hardware
rather than requiring new hardware to be purchased. Another is that
since proprietary commercial software publishers depend on the number of
licenses they can sell, it is often desirable to require as many
additional software sales to perform a given level of work as possible.
It should therefore come as no surprise that I often find the same
workload that can be done, for example, with a typical GNU/Linux system
may require three or four times as many proprietary servers, which also
represents additional hardware and support costs.
Free software also can result in lower costs through the absence of
monopolies. One cannot achieve a monopoly in free software in part
because there can always be another free software publisher that can
supply the same goods at a lower cost should this occur. This is in fact
one of the main reasons for governments to prefer using free software
instead of proprietary commercial software: When money is spent on
proprietary software, only a small proportion of that money goes towards
funding useful services and software development, as a large part of it
goes as a monopoly rent to the shareholders of the proprietary software
company. On the other hand, in the world of free software, there are no
such monopolies, so money that is spent on free software is good for
creating jobs and hence offers other direct and local economic benefits.
In Latin America money that is spent on proprietary commercial software
serves mainly to make already-rich foreign software publishers even
richer.
In trying to create a market for or to promote the use of free software,
many Latin American countries, such as in Peru, have often chosen to do
so through procurement laws, which cover how a government will purchase
goods and services. These laws typically state the terms of purchase
that a government will use. Often they are designed to prevent bribery,
and to make the process of government purchase transparent. This is
often done through the use of competitive bidding. Competitive bidding
allows products created by different manufacturers and publishers to
compete on providing the same service, and by doing so, prevents the
government from being forced to rely on a sole source supplier.
Propriety commercial software, by its very definition and through the
rights it takes away from users, is software which can only come from a
single supplier.
In providing opportunities for Latin American citizens to directly
participate in the development and worldwide commercial software market
locally, free software offers incentives for forming a local software
industry that can then compete on an equal basis with that of any other
advanced country in the world. What we often forget is that software
does not require expensive plants or high capital investment to develop.
Software may only require people who are free to use their skills and
natural talents. Certainly, the nations of Latin America can and do
produce people with such talents and skills. Free software means these
people can practice these skills for their own benefit and the benefit
of their society as a whole without having to look for work in or
migrate to foreign lands. By choosing to procure free software, the
national government can directly encourage this.
If Latin American countries choose to create an economic environment
that accepts participation by free software, existing corporations need
not be excluded. Companies like Microsoft could choose, for example, to
change the way they license their existing products. They are also free
to adapt and offer services based on existing free software already in
the marketplace. Instead of competing in these new markets, some
companies have responded by trying to make it impossible for Latin
American governments to choose and use free software at all. These
companies not only resort to bullying, but also lobby our government to
modify free trade treaties and use international organizations to
include conditions that try to make it impossible for Latin American
nations to choose alternative products or develop local markets.
I have often seen WIPO used in this way to promote the private
commercial interests of wealthy corporations. WIPO is often used to
promote treaties and laws which export both the North American corporate
notion of pharmaceutical and software idea patenting to developing
nations. Private corporations then using these same treaties to then
enforce existing North American patent monopolies, thereby preventing
the development of competitive local industry. Another example of market
control through trade treaties is the "IP rights chapter" of Free Trade
Area of The Americas (FTAA) treaty.
One way I have seen Latin American countries respond to WIPO and other
patent bearing treaties has been by banding together with other
developing nations around the world to help promote a development agenda
for WIPO and bring it into harmony with the wishes of the UN general
assembly. Yet powerful American and European commercial interests have
chosen to use the WIPO chair to explicitly bar NGOs representing the
interests of developing nations from attending or participating in WIPO
discussions on a development agenda, even those organizations already
duly certified and recognized with observer status.
The people of Latin America, of all people, surely must understand well
about what corporate bullies are. Last century many nearby Caribbean
nations were routinely invaded by marines as part of the banana wars to
prop up the interest of specific North American corporations such as
United Fruit. While last century's bullies came with tanks and guns, the
bullies of this new century come now with laws and treaties they wish
Latin Americans to adopt that undermine the heritage and the most basic
rights Latin American citizens enjoy, not for the benefit of Latin
America, but once again for the benefit of private North American
corporate interests. The right to innovate is not a privilege to be
restricted to a tiny minority, is not even a right specific or exclusive
to the question of free software alone, but is a basic and fundamental
right every human being must be free to enjoy.
Some citations and sources...
Wired Magazine; "Microsoft's big stick in Peru"
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,54141,00.html
Can I use myself as a primary source? :)
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6244
GNU.org.pe: Peruvian Congressman's Open Letter to Microsoft
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-05-06-012-26-OS-SM-LL
Lawrence Lessig blog
http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/001983.shtml
"Use Linux and you will be sued, Ballmer tells governments"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/18/ballmer_linux_lawsuits/
PROCERGS: todos os estados deveriam ter uma
http://olinux.uol.com.br/artigos/264/print_preview.html
Lawrence Lessig blog
http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/001983.shtml
"Use Linux and you will be sued, Ballmer tells governments"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/18/ballmer_linux_lawsuits/
PROCERGS: todos os estados deveriam ter uma
http://olinux.uol.com.br/artigos/264/print_preview.html
The use of open source represents annual savings of US$ 1.1 billion for
the Brazilian government.
http://www.brazzil.com/2004/html/articles/apr04/p136apr04.htm
Venezuelas Public Administration to Use Open Source Software
http://venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1457
The WIPO Development Agenda and Why You Should Care About It
http://www.eff.org/IP/WIPO/dev_agenda/
Experts: Central/South American History
http://experts.about.com/q/673/3343542.htm
Brazil: Free Software's Biggest and Best Friend
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=
F40614FD395B0C7A8EDDAA0894DD404482
MIT official advocates open-source on computers for poor in Brazil
http://www.computerworld.com/
softwaretopics/os/story/0,10801,100494,00.html
|
|
