Re: [Fsfe-uk] Draft PR on swpat directive

[ian]

On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 08:59, Simon Waters wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Bernhard Kaindl wrote:
> >
> > I think(and I think most politicians would agree with me) that free
> > software still makes a relatively small part of the software economy
> > when compared to the millions of SMEs in europe. 

Well, I'm banking my SME on just the opposite. Our business growth is
much greater in free software and associated services etc to the extent
I think it will be our main income by next year. Its more profitable and
at the moment there is little competition but I expect that to change.

> And I might still
> > need them to have a job tomorrow.

You might not have one if you stick with licensed stuff. Staying the
same can be as big a risk as change.

> I think this is the wrong focus for free software discussion. The issue
> is what part does free software have in the economy, not the software
> economy.
> 
> Since it forms the mainstay of the Internet (most email, most websites,
> most DNS, most IP stacks (even if some had licences that let them be
> owned) etc), and the Internet is seen by many as a powerful factor
> supporting economic growth, free software probably plays a much larger
> part in the economy, than most people (including many here) realise.

Also with the rate of adoption worldwide now by governments, it seems to
me that its inevitable that the core applications will all move to free
software. Operating systems and office productivity tools as a minimum.
Once that happens why stop there? Its why the OO.o project is important.
It provides a stepping stone to move away from Office and then away from
Windows. French admin, in Paris are just moving 8000 desktops, Munich
and now 9 other German Cities, Japan, South Korea and China, South
Africa Brazil. Ok, it might take 5-10 years and that is too long term
for politicians but I'll hopefully still be in business ;-)

> Sure it's monetary part in the software economy is hard to assess, the
> effect is obviously much larger than the monetary value, but that is to
> be expected given the nature of the beast.

Its all monetary value in the end. Freedom translates to more efficient
production and lower costs. MS are already being forced to bring prices
down where FLOSS is strong. The main market for proprietary licensed
software will be specialist niches that don't interest developers. You
will see more and more governments and large corporates like Sun and IBM
funding free software projects.

> The analogy would be mathematics. Why do we teach mathematics to all
> school children? Very few people become mathematicians, most of those
> become mathematics teachers. So mathematics plays a very small part in
> the economy and we clearly should do more to protect other subjects with
> clearer economic gains like metal working, by allocating them the time
> wasted on mathematics, right?

No, many people use mathematics and similar logic structures. Virtually
everyone uses the basics everyday. If you want a transferrable
discipline that helps select people with a certain talent for thinking
in a particular way it might as well be maths as say Latin. 

> I think patents are bad for software SMEs as well as free software.

Yes, because you are likely to get held to ransom by someone with a
little bit more clout than you have. I'm already giving evidence in a
government court case to over turn a patent that should never have been
granted and which has cost the tax payer millions and probably
bankrupted a couple of small businesses.

>  And
> I don't think specific exemptions for free software were workable.
> Although I think this specific topic is dead for the moment by
> procedural issues.
> 
> The general point remains that free software is good for business in
> general, even if it's effects on the software business are harder to
> assess. I suspect it is very good for the non-shrinkwrap market (the
> majority) who get to enjoy free operating systems, free databases and
> widgets, and not so good for the shrinkwrap software businesses (the
> minority, who charge for operating systems, databases, and widgets).

yes. and most of that business is US not EU so its better for the EU
economy to let it wither ;-)

> Millions(?) of software SMEs in Europe, hmm, I think that might be
> pushing it. I assume Europe has about 5 times as many companies as the
> UK, of which a lot are one man businesses, so I'd assume Europe probably
> has fewer than a million software companies, possibly far fewer. Anyone
> know the true figure.

When we were at the finals of the year 2000 Small Business of the Year
award, there were 10 companies and we were the only IT based company.
Compared to the SME sector in general, those with software products
likely to be worthy of patent must be tiny. Sage is about the biggest UK
software interest I can think of. There are a few small education
software suppliers but these have to be kept afloat by the Gov putting
£100m a year into E-learning credits. Just think what £100m a year would
do in free software investment for education.

> Thinking through those of my friends and family met through non-IT
> related work, only 3 are fulltime in software, one embedded software for
> consumer products (Japanese owned), one niche database market where
> hardware integration is key (US owned), one financial products (US
> owned). Even amongst people I know through IT work only a handful make
> money primarily by writing shrinkwrap software.
> 
> Everyone seems to be becoming a programmer, but most are selling things
> in which the software is but a part.

Don't think in the whole scheme of things there are that many full time
professional programmers.
-- 
ian <address@hidden>