Software Policy for the Future – Executive Summary, December 2004
Side 1
Software Policy for the Future - Executive Summary
Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and software play an increasingly important role in society. In the Norwegian government’s programme for modernisation of the public sector, ICT is the enabling tool. Exchanging documents and services over the Internet is more and more common; e-mail, internet banking and shopping online are already common services, and through the Personal Internet Portal, public information and case work will have a digital interface to the citizens. It is therefore essential that the Government defines a comprehensive software policy. The following points illustrate why it is important to work actively with software policy: Choice of software is about controlling the information flow of everyday life. Many internet banks, broadcasters like NRK and TV2 – and also the Government’s direct broadcast of press conferences – require the use of software from Microsoft for easy access to the services. If information is locked to specific formats, the gate to the information society becomes narrow, and the democratic access to information limited. We can say that software has become the gatekeeper for information. The software market can be described through a phenomenon called the network effect. In short, this means that the market works in favour of the product used by the majority. This can lead to virtual monopolies in the different segments of the software industry. The public sector is both the most important customer and the regulating authority for the software industry. As its choices influence all the citizens of the information society, the public sector has a special responsibility to make the right choices. An expert group, appointed by the Norwegian Board of Technology, point to the fact that a good software policy should be democratic, efficient and oriented towards the future. Two technological strategies that might promote these aims are open standards and open source software. It is important to distinguish between these two strategies. Open standards Open standards for software are rules and guidelines for storing and exchanging data that can promote both democratic access and efficient competition. These guidelines should be accessible for little or no cost, so that they can be made available for everybody. It is important to point out that even though a company complies to open standards, it does not have to reveal all the product specifications. Open standards make allowance for business secrets, and ensure that data and information can be exchanged independently of the software supplier. A standard most people can relate to is the GSM standard for mobile telephones. Because a standard exists, it is possible for many different suppliers to manufacture phones that can be used in all GSM networks. The consumers can change phones and service providers at any time, and it is also possible to use the same phone in different countries. HTML is an open standard for documents on the web that can be attributed much of the credit for the spread and usability of the Internet and the World Wide Web. If a similar standard existed for word processing documents, the consumers would be able to change both their operating system and word processing editor without worrying about problems with document exchange. It is important that an open standard is maintained by a non-commercial organisation or by an organisation with an international mandate. A commercial standardising organisation could all too easily use its defining power to gain a competitive advantage for itself or powerful allies, for example by changing the standard on short notice.
Software Policy for the Future – Executive Summary, December 2004
Side 2
ICT policy in Norway has only to a small degree dealt with software or areas like open standards or open source software. In practice, public software systems and data exchange are dominated by proprietary formats. Other countries in Europe have more active policies in this area. Both Denmark and Great Britain have a clear and expressed preference towards open standards in the public sector. The expert group appointed by the Norwegian Board of Technology is of the opinion that open standards are an important democratic tool, because they promote freedom of speech and accessibility through free exchange of information. The group recommends that the Norwegian authorities express an active preference towards open standards and suggests that the following actions are taken: Make public documents that are exchanged or archived accessible in open formats (e.g. HTML, XML or PDF), if necessary in addition to proprietary formats. Demand that public broadcasters use open standards. Consider whether all software purchased by the public sector should comply to open standards. The government and local authorities should request software that supports open standards and consider open source software in public requests for proposals. Software paid by and developed for the public sector should be owned by the public. Consider engaging in active negotiations with some of the dominating software suppliers to make them open up their formats. Improve the purchasing competence in the public sector. Choosing software and awarding software development contracts are important in order to promote use of open standards, and it is essential to be aware of which alternatives exist and what the consequences of decisions may be. Open Source Software Open source software is characterised by being open for everyone to review, change, reuse in other software or distribute to anyone. Using open source software can be described as a future oriented strategy, as it stimulates an innovative culture of knowledge sharing and decentralised development. This type of knowledge sharing must be seen as a long term good for society. The expert group appointed by the Norwegian Board of Technology recommends a less aggressive strategy for open source software than for open standards. Some stimulation of suppliers of software based on open source code, as competition to the dominating actors in the market, could have a stimulating effect on both innovation and price policy. The group therefore recommends that Norway follows the examples of UK and Denmark, and implements Government pilots on open source software. Such pilot projects can give valuable experience and knowledge, in particular related to cost of ownership, user requirements and functionality.
Software Policy for the Future – Executive Summary, December 2004
Side 3
In the report we also discuss two other areas related to software: Patents on software and technical barriers. The expert group suggests that there are many reasons why software should not be patented. They point to the fact that software is different from other technologies where patenting is possible: It takes fewer resources to develop new products than for example in the pharmaceutical industry, and when the patent expires after 20 years, most software will be obsolete. Patents are meant to serve both the inventor and the society. The expert group means that patents on software seem to have few beneficial effects for society. On the other hand, several negative effects can be predicted: Patents on software are a threat to open source software, open standards and free competition. Technical barriers are a means to take away legal rights from the consumers. Our expert group suggests that it is important to maintain the right to read digital data that have been legally acquired. The implementation of the Infosoc directive should therefore be reconsidered. Another aspect that should be part of a democratic software policy is transparency. The challenges related to this can be summed up as follows: To ensure openness when software takes over as the executor of laws. To revise the Freedom of information act and the public administration act and their regulations with ICT in mind. To ensure that case working routines in the digital public sector are easy to understand and well enough described for the user to understand his/her role in it. Emphasise digital case working routines that take into account what is required by law when it comes to the user’s rights and the public sector’s duties. Finally, the report discusses software in education and research. Software in schools and universities should contribute to giving the students insight in information technology, and thus help them become active participants in the information society, both as users and developers. In addition to this, software in education should be as neutral as possible, so that the individual teaching institution or student is not locked to a specific supplier. Skolelinux is a project based on open source software that originated in Norway. Our expert group suggests that more use of Linux in education can contribute to making Norwegian school children more flexible, innovative and competent data users, and recommends that the official support for Skolelinux is extended. Developing countries with limited ICT industry and infrastructure are especially vulnerable to supplier lock in. Norway should engage in development and collaboration projects based on open source software. Based on Skolelinux and experiences from FAIR and the UN-organisation GRID, Norway can initiate collaboration with developing countries based on common development of open source software.
Software Policy for the Future – Executive Summary, December 2004
Side 4
Note from the minority of the expert group (Lars Sørgard) During the work on the report the expert group could not reach agreement on some of the recommendations. The minority of the group (Lars Sørgard) disagrees with the majority’s main conclusions and has reservations about the content of the report which leads to these conclusions (in particular in chapter 4 and chapter 5). 1 Sørgard takes the view that strong recommendations from the Government on the use of open standards may have unfortunate effects. It could be problematic for today’s users because a substantial part of the software used in the public sector today does not comply with open standards. Moreover, a strong preference mandate on public procurement can be unfortunate in the long run, because it may hinder future use of innovative software that is not based on open standards. Even though Sørgard advises against a strong preference policy on open standards, he agrees on a number of the suggestions made by the majority: There may be good reasons for the public sector to put pressure on software suppliers to make them release source code for some types of software. There may also be reasons to support actions to encourage the development of open standards. The termination of the Government’s purchasing agreement with Microsoft from 2002 is an example of an action that could stimulate different parts of the public sector to think about alternatives, and consider solutions that do not necessarily involve Microsoft. Skolelinux is another positive action that contributes to increased knowledge of alternative solutions in future generations. This can lay the foundation for alternatives to Microsoft to emerge. All public documents that are published on the Internet should be made available on open formats (like PDF, HTML and XML). Public broadcasters like NRK and TV2, and other web sites, should be easily available on open multi media formats (like MPEG or MP3). This will show that alternative solutions exist, and make these solutions more viable. The Norwegian Board of Technology is an independent, advisory body for technology assessment. It was established by a Royal Decree of April 30th 1999, following an initiative of the Parliament. The Software Policy project started in April 2003, and the expert group has consisted of: Dag Wiese Schartum, University of Oslo Mikael Snaprud, Agder University College Lars Sørgard, the Norwegian Competition Authority Håkon Wium Lie, Opera Software Tanja Storsul, University of Oslo Grethe Helene Viksaas, Basefarm as Einar J. Aas, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology Magne Espedal, University of Bergen An interim policy brief was issued in February 2004, based on the work of our expert group. The project has also hosted a public hearing (September 3rd 2003) and a conference on Information Society
1
For a full overview of the views of the minority, see Sørgard, Lars (2004): Markedsdynamikk i dataindustrien, SNF arbeidsnotat 38/04 available at ftp://ftp.snf.no/Arbeidsnotat/2004/A38_04.pdf (in Norwegian).
Software Policy for the Future – Executive Summary, December 2004
Side 5
for all - technologies for a more open society (September 30th 2003) co-arranged with the Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry.
For more information on the project, please contact project manager Christine Hafskjold (christine.hafskjold@teknologiradet.no)