[luau] Senate Concurrent Resolution #109

[kimo at ohananet.com]

Warren Togami wrote:
> It is important that we not push for any legislation MANDATING the use
> of Open Source Software for the reasons stated in my earlier post.
> Instead this resolution is about educating government about Open Source
> Software so that in the future they will understand the implications of
> OSS, and it can compete fairly in the market against commercial
> solutions.
> 
> Asking for special treatment would not be fair competition, and any such
> bill would be swiftly defeated anywhere in America.  We fight honest and
> fair, because we have nothing to hide.


Hey folks,

i got this from TechRepublic http://www.techrepublic.com mailing list a couple
of weeks ago.  Oregon could become the first state to MANDATE the use of Open
Source.  

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-991462.html

California is also considering a similar bill:
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-949241.html

Warren, you raise some good points about NOT mandating the use of Open Source.
 I think California has a good catch-22 concept in that it requires open-source
code and relaxed licensing for software before the products would be considered
for government applications.  most open source products meet this requirement,
while proprietary products do not.  hopefully, this forces M$ to ease up on
their licensing policies.

just my two penikalas.

malama pono,
kimo

iRay, LLC :: OhanaNet
kimo at ohananet.com

http://www.ohananet.com