Oregon Bill Would Require Open Source Consideration

VeniDormi writes "I just found out that House Bill 2892 was introduced in the Oregon House of Representatives by Representative Phil Barnhart. The summary: 'Requires state government to consider using open source software when acquiring new software. Sets other requirements for acquiring software.' Rep. Barnhart has a few comments on the bill." A NewsForge story has more information, including some words from Rep. Barnhart.

Re:How does MS feel about this?

[Anonymous Coward]

...quality of M$'s products.

I think they are looking at things from a pure financial viewpoint rather than quality. Living out here on the Left Coast (Northern Nevada, to be exact), we hear quite a bit about the horrible shape Oregon is in financially. They actually shortened their public school systems' operating schedules due to budget shortages. Joe Taxpayer wouldn't vote for the pittance of a state sales tax the legislature was considering that would have prevented this.

Re:I would gladly welcome this in my state

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed.

Blagojevich seems hell-bent on cutting, cutting, cutting -- and seems equally willing to let the Chicago Sun-Times to set official policy. (There was an editorial in the Sun-Times on Monday about Illinois employees cashing out their vacation days, and the next day -- Tuesday -- the Governor implemented an Executive Order denying state workers the ability to do this. This makes the governor look even more clueless than he apparently is.)

Anyway, I work for an Illinois agency where the IT manager is determined to get rid of everything -- everything -- non-Microsoft. At one time we had a nice mix of technologies -- and managed to keep costs and training costs at a minimum. Now, we're a 100% Microsoft shop, paying $$$ for software, licensing, and even more for training. A bill like this would at least give folks like me a bit more of a voice when suggesting software and licensing alternatives to top-level management.

Just remember...

[circusnews]

This is a bill, a proposal for a new law, not a law. I would encourage every Oregon resident reading this to write your state senitors/reps [circusnews.com] and encourage them to support this bill. Letters from out of state can also be helpful, even if they are not counted as highly.

State of Oregon: government agencies

[Anonymous Coward]

I work in IT for one of the largest State of Oregon agencies, as a state employee (not contractor). They repeatedly shoot down any suggestions of open source software for any reason that we may present. It is always the same argument: "not ready for prime time", "no support", "too many bugs". We have regularly submitted articles, reports, analisys, and documentation to the contrary. They won't have it. Unless it is "IBM" or "Novell" they don't want it.

Darn economy. Come on jobs, come back to Oregon so I can get back to the private sector...

Re:The BSA should be happy!

[manyoso]

To those of you who are posting asking, "Why do they need to write a law to 'consider'" ... you are missing the real power of the law which is located in the very last section. This proposed law *mandates* as a requirement of Oregon State that the software (whether Open Source or proprietary) adhere to open and transparent formats for data storage. In other words, Microsoft Office will not be allowed unless Microsoft *chooses* to alter Office to save files in an open/transparent way.

This is entirely upto Microsoft and is completely fair in the sense that the State of Oregon is saying that open formats are a *requirement* of all software purchased for state goverment.

READ THE BILL!

Re:I write code for government agencies

[manyoso]

You have failed to read the bill.

The proposed law would create a new _requirement_ for all of those RFP's: the software _must_ use open formats that are transparent for data storage if they are even to be considered!

Most of the proprietary apps I know use proprietary formats for data storage... this would lead to a huge boon of either Open Source software in State government OR require the proprietary developers to use open formats!

READ THE BILL!

Re:State of Oregon: government agencies

[WetCat]

Suggest them [ibm.com]
something from IBM Linux solutions. Why not?
Or something from [novell.com]
Novell that works from Linux platform

Re:How does MS feel about this?

[Anonymous Coward]

be up to the white supremecists in Portland to defend the state.

While Oregon certainly does have a larger-than-average share of white supremecists (the only state in the nation to be formed with a Constitution specifically excluding blacks from entering the state), I seriously doubt many of them live in Portland, the liberal capital of the state.

QCAD is GPL

[tjwhaynes]

Eg; I work for a company that writes and sells computer dispatching and records systems to cops and firemen. I see no CAD systems on sourceforge. They simply dont exist, and wont because much of the code req

Guess you haven't tried QCAD [qcad.org] then. Or maybe it doesn't exist :-)

Cheers,
Toby Haynes

Re:QCAD is GPL

[Didion Sprague]

I think they're referring to 'Computer Aided Dispatch' -- not 'CAD' in the traditional, drawing sense.

911 emergency operators use CAD interfaces to assist with real-time law enforcment routing and dispatch.

And finally, the bill's lead author speaks

[Mr. Firewall]

Hey, Ben -- chill out dude.

Yes, I wrote that bill at Phil Barnhart's request, with some very good help from Jeremy Hogan and Walt Pennington (who are hereby gratefully acknowledged) but I deliberately took myself out of the limelight when I wrote the press release -- and you'll notice that Jeremy and Walt aren't getting any credit at all for their contributions.

The story of how I came to write it is an interesting one that will supposedly show up on desktoplinux.com tomorrow.

I've been lurking here all day, just to see what people would say about this and I'm gratified that most of the comments are positive. Plus some VERY good jokes about Washington invading Oregon! But we're not worried 'bout those mean ol' Cougars and Dawgs with all of their claws and fangs coming down here and hurting us -- we Oregonians are well protected with...

... uh...

... ducks... and beavers... yeah, cute little Ducks and Beavers... they'll defend us, right?

We're not really worried about opposition coming from Micro$oft Corp. on this one. First of all, they have virtually no corporate presence in Oregon and secondly, I think we've caught them by surprise. Most of the key committee members have already heard our side of the story, and the only thing Micro$oft can do now is what they did in Maryland: Plaster the Speaker of the House with lots of money and liquor to get the bill diverted to a different committee. But now that I've mentioned that here, it will be a lot more difficult for M$ to get away with.

I'd love to write a long post explaining why we put certain things in the Bill and left certain other things out, but I won't. Basically it boils down to crafting a bill THIS year that we think has a chance of actually passing. Yes, it's watered down -- on purpose. As an IT admin myself, I don't want to anger a bunch of State IT people by telling them how to do their jobs -- so the Bill has lots of loopholes and "wiggle room" so that they hopefully won't object to it very strenuously. In the meantime the IT folks who WANT to implement Open Source will be able to do so without fear of losing their jobs.

That's a pretty good start. If it becomes law (not likely this time around) and too many state IT admins thumb their noses at it... well, the Legislature doesn't like to be ignored and they can sure as heck make it stronger down the road.

Stay tuned. This is going to be a lot of fun.

Ken Barber, aka "Mr. Firewall"