Re: Fwd: proposition relative aux logiciels libres (II) (fwd)

[Nicolas Pettiaux]

Le Lundi 4 Février 2002 13:29, Alessandro Rubini a écrit :

Than your very much for your comments. 

I'll meet the person who is behind the proposal this friday. 

Could you please send me a copy of the Italian law proposal (even in italian 
if not in French or English). THis could help me in the discussion with the 
person to who other European initiatives.

Andrea Monti and Roberto Di Cosmo will be in Belgium on Feb 19 and 20 and 
will most probably meet this person to could be able to let him 
know/understand the details of the Italian proposition.

Best regards,

Nicolas

> > FYI (sorry in French)
>
> Thanks. I can mostly understand written French but can't write it
> myself.
>
>
> In Italy we are discussing a proposal in the same lines, so I'm
> summarizing here what we came up with. Sorry if I'm not completely
> on-target with the comments, but language problems (and some
> disinformation on my side) apply.
>
> > 1. Est-ce que ce texte n'entre pas en conflit avec la directive
> > européenne sur la libre concurrence ?
>
> Actually, it depends on the language used. If the law makes technical
> requirements (not political ones), then there's no problem with free
> competition.  A law may require that public offices prefer software
> products with such-and-such features, and everyone can participate in
> the poll. Sure some software companies are not used to offer such
> features (allowing copy and modification), but this isn't relevant.
>
> Obviously, public offices can still choose closed products, but the
> law may require the officer in charge to support the choice with a
> well-documented explanation of why the free alternatives aren't
> considered suitable.
>
> > Comme tu le disais, ne serait-il pas
> > plus correct de l'orienter vers les interfaces et formats ouverts ?
>
> This is a different issue, although definitely one easier to push for.
> Actually, the Italian proposal will probably go in that direction as
> well.  To be fair, we already have a "directive" about using
> accessible formats in public web sites, signed by a public
> institution, but it's mostly disattended.  Obviously, the same can
> happen with the new law, especially in Italy (where you have so many
> laws and so inconsistent ones that you really *can't* adhere to all,
> so people is used to break laws as soon as they make some real
> action).  [This is my personal opinion, but I stand by it and can
> support it with real data if needed]
>
> > 2. On fait un descriptif simple du logiciel Libre mais certaines licences
> > qui semblent libres tombent aussi dans cette définition. Ne serait-il pas
> > simple de faire une liste des licences ?
>
> We chose *not* to name licenses, we rather try to define the technical
> requirements of such software. While this may fail (as companies can
> find ways around this definition), at least it doesn't mark the text
> as "pro-gnu and thus against-microsoft".  Let companies choose their
> own licenses, as long as they fit the requirements.
>
> Even if they work around the definition, it still would be better than
> nothing (and having such text approved is not as unlikely as a text
> that explicitly talks gnu and gpl and bsd).
>
> If companies work around the definition and draft semi-free licenses
> that still meet the requirement, well... better have semi-free stuff
> in public offices than completely-proprietary ones.  I personally
> think the most important step in our movement is breaking the general
> idea that there is no other way than completely proprietary ("so the
> poor programmer can feed his family").
>
> Once the barrier is broken, people will know that there's a variety of
> possible licenses, and learns to check what license accompanies each
> product.  At that point Free Software won't look a disruptive
> movement, but just one of the normal ways to distribute software. When
> this happens, the various licesenses will compete on the same level.
>
> > 3. Est-ce que dans le processus démocratique Belge, il ne serait plus
> > facile de faire passer au niveau fédéral (sans commencer une guerre de
> > région) ?
>
> I don't know. It mainly depends on who is interested in this kind of
> topic. I'd invest energies both at national and EU level.  We are
> doing it in Italy because there's people interested to work on this at
> our political level.  The EU is moving towards Free Software (see the
> IST programme) but at a different speed (and with a better overall
> quality of analysis than we can ever hope on a national level --
> again, I speak for my own country, which is a real disaster).
>
> Please forgive the length, hope is helps at least a little.
>
> /alessandro
>
> _______________________________________________
> FSF Europe legal mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-law

-- 
Nicolas Pettiaux
Avenue du Pérou 29
B-1000 Brussels