Palakkad/OpenStandardsPolicyComments - Revision history

Pravs: link to list archive added

2009-07-11T18:33:33Z

link to list archive added

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:03, 12 July 2009
Line 74:		Line 74:

	http://plus.sarovar.org		http://plus.sarovar.org

			[http://lists.sarovar.org/pipermail/plus-discuss/2009-July/000893.html Archive of the email]

Pravs at 18:29, 11 July 2009

2009-07-11T18:29:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:59, 11 July 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
			To: Shri R Chandrashekar, Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,
	To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,

	NASSCOM: chairman at nasscom.in,		NASSCOM: chairman at nasscom.in,
Line 10:		Line 9:
	Subject: Comments on National Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance		Subject: Comments on National Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance

	As members of Palakkad Libre Software Users ~~Group~~ (PLUS		Dear Sir,

			As members of Palakkad Libre Software Users Society (PLUS
	http://plus.sarovar.org), we would like to congratulate the Government		http://plus.sarovar.org), we would like to congratulate the Government
	for coming up with a National Policy on Open Standards for		for coming up with a National Policy on Open Standards for
Line 68:		Line 69:
	comments.		comments.

	Praveen Arimbrathodiyil, Hiran Venugopalan		Praveen Arimbrathodiyil, Hiran Venugopalan, Santhosh Thottingal

	Palakkad Libre Software Users ~~Group~~ (PLUS)		Palakkad Libre Software Users Society (PLUS)

	http://plus.sarovar.org		http://plus.sarovar.org

	~~Please make your changes before 11 July, so that we can send this in time. If anyone wants to add your names, please do it here.~~

Pravs: Protected "Palakkad/OpenStandardsPolicyComments" ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))

2009-07-11T18:21:46Z

Protected "Palakkad/OpenStandardsPolicyComments" ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:51, 11 July 2009
(No difference)

Pravs: final version

2009-07-11T18:21:02Z

final version

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:51, 11 July 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~[DRAFT]~~


	To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,		To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,

Pravs at 18:20, 11 July 2009

2009-07-11T18:20:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:50, 11 July 2009
Line 35:		Line 35:
	this great initiative by adding loop holes into the policy to allow		this great initiative by adding loop holes into the policy to allow
	patent encumbered and single entity controlled namesake open standards		patent encumbered and single entity controlled namesake open standards
	to be showed in. ~~But section~~ 6.4 of the draft version 2.0 is completely negating the nature of the policy itself. When you have more than one standard in the same domain, it not only increase the effort required to implement all		to be showed in. Section 6.4 of the draft version 2.0 is completely negating the nature of the policy itself. When you have more than one standard in the same domain, it not only increase the effort required to implement all
	competing standards, but ensuring perfect interoperability will be		competing standards, but ensuring perfect interoperability will be
	near to impossible as there is going to be some loss of information		near to impossible as there is going to be some loss of information

Pravs at 21:30, 9 July 2009

2009-07-09T21:30:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:00, 10 July 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
			[DRAFT]
	[[DRAFT]]

Pravs at 21:29, 9 July 2009

2009-07-09T21:29:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:59, 10 July 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:

			[[DRAFT]]


	To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,		To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,

Pravs at 21:27, 9 July 2009

2009-07-09T21:27:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:57, 10 July 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,		To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,

	NASSCOM: chairman at nasscom.in,		NASSCOM: chairman at nasscom.in,

	Mait: Vinnie Mehta <vinnie at mait.com>		Mait: Vinnie Mehta <vinnie at mait.com>

	Economic Times: Harsimran Julka <harsimran.julka at gmail.com>		Economic Times: Harsimran Julka <harsimran.julka at gmail.com>

Pravs: Created page with 'To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in, NASSCOM: chairman at nasscom.in, Mait: Vinnie Mehta Economic Times: Harsimran Julka ...'

2009-07-09T21:26:42Z

Created page with 'To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in, NASSCOM: chairman at nasscom.in, Mait: Vinnie Mehta <vinnie at mait.com> Economic Times: Harsimran Julka <harsimran.julka at gmail.com>...'

New page

To: Secretary IT, secretary at mit.gov.in,
NASSCOM: chairman at nasscom.in,
Mait: Vinnie Mehta <vinnie at mait.com>
Economic Times: Harsimran Julka <harsimran.julka at gmail.com>

Subject: Comments on National Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance

As members of Palakkad Libre Software Users Group (PLUS
http://plus.sarovar.org), we would like to congratulate the Government
for coming up with a National Policy on Open Standards for
e-Governance.

Palakkad Libre software Users Society [Formerly Palakkad GNU/Linux User Society] supports FOSS related activities in Palakkad. PLUS is dedicated to promoting computer users' rights to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. PLUS promotes the development and use of free software, particularly the GNU operating system, used widely in its GNU/Linux variant.

We support the Free Software Foundation's mission to preserve, protect and promote the freedom to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer software, and to defend the rights of Free Software users. We support the freedoms of speech, press, and association on the Internet, the right to use encryption software for private communication, and the right to write software unimpeded by private monopolies.

In a country like ours with fairly adavanced Information
and Communications Technology, information exchange between the people
and their representatives plays an even bigger role. If tools needed
for this interaction are controlled by some and not accessible to the
masses it would have an adverse effect on governence. So it is
heartening to see Indian government leading the way with a policy like
this, which will ensure tools for information exchange with
governement are available and affordable to the masses. This will also
ensure Libre Software users will not be left out from this important
role.

But we are concerned about the efforts by some quarters to subvert
this great initiative by adding loop holes into the policy to allow
patent encumbered and single entity controlled namesake open standards
to be showed in. But section 6.4 of the draft version 2.0 is completely negating the nature of the policy itself. When you have more than one standard in the same domain, it not only increase the effort required to implement all
competing standards, but ensuring perfect interoperability will be
near to impossible as there is going to be some loss of information
during conversion (if both were mapped one to one, there would not
have been a need to have one or more additional standards in the first
place). We request the government of India to remove section 6.4 and
preserve the spirit of the policy.

The Second meeting of the Apex Body on Standards for eGovernance held
on 17th June 2009 introduces "Royalty Free / RAND Standard" standards.
We believe it will severely affect our ability to exchange information
with the Goverment. Paying royalties are not only incompatible with
Free/Open Source Software but it is practically impossible to
implement. Free/Open Source Software are not developed/distributed by
a single entity and it is not possible to track every copy of
Free/Open Source Software, even if payment of royalties is desired.
Even Microsoft has realised this with their recent announcement of
Community Promise for The ECMA C# and CLI Standards and earlier Open
Specification Promise for many of their specifications. We strongly
request the Government of India not to accept these provisions as it
would make it impossible for Free/Open Source implementations of any
standard.

Also the definition of Open Source in Appendix A.11 mentions
intellectual property restrictions. Since we don't allow software to
be patented and trademarks does not come into piture in deciding
whether a software is Open Source or not, it would be better to change
it to copyright resrictions (assuming intellectual property is used as
an umbrella for copyright, patents and trademarks, which itself is a
bad idea).

Once again we congratulate the goverment for coming up with this bold
pro-people policy and request the government to incorporate our
comments.

Praveen Arimbrathodiyil, Hiran Venugopalan

Palakkad Libre Software Users Group (PLUS)

http://plus.sarovar.org

Please make your changes before 11 July, so that we can send this in time. If anyone wants to add your names, please do it here.