September 28, 2011 - 14:30PM
The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the Sixth Meeting of the IGF, in Nairobi, Kenya. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the session, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
>> Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to Kenya. I'm from Kenya. I represent the fair open source software community in Kenya. We are on the list for the formation for Africa on the liaison in Africa. I'm also the chairman of the professional part of Kenya. We have an open source community of doing several initiatives in the promotional business not just in Kenya, but also Africa. 12 years ago, I set up a social enterprise based on free software in Bangalore in south India. Today, about 70 programs and PMDs work there from one organizations and three businesses. I have been focusing on research organization called center.
>> Hello, everybody. I am one of the first administrators. I have several cascades. I live in France. I work for one of the biggest European software companies. I'm from ‑‑ my point is pretty mixed on Africa and Europe on open source.
>> SATISH BABU: I am Satish Babu. I am with ICFOSS, India. It is based out of south of India. My background is basically ‑‑ I come from the development center and also the industry I was an entrepreneur for about 20 years. Right now I'm with the government. Thank you.
>> Hello. I am with F123 consulting which is the company behind F123 initiative which is a project to bring open source free and open source software based assisted technologies, software for persons with disability all over the world.
>> Well, thank you. Let us just see in the room how many of you are using open source on a daily basis. So you're teaching to the convert basically. But I would like us now to start exploring first what are the main business mods we're seeing today for first entrepreneurship even though everyone in the room knows the free in open source software discussions is not talking about they usually say free beer. We still have some people who have some resistance to the idea of using free and open source softwares because they believe that it will erode the capacity to build businesses and to grow the IT Eco systems. So, if you come from one of Europe's largest companies and had discussions with and you you've spoken a little bit about the turnover and how the company is growing. So, if you can share a limb about the business mods and what you are seeing in the markets within Europe today and then some implications for Africa. Thanks.
>> Maybe I'm gonna begin by a little survey how many people work for open source company in this room? What is the model? Service or edition for those work in the open source company.
>> Within a service model.
>> Okay. So I have the chance to have worked for several companies in France dealing with open source. And each of these companies uses, um, different models. So, if I have to display them, I would say there is five mods, five open source models. The first one and maybe the oldest one has maybe a community model. I am willing to give service to clients with only ‑‑ with community open source software. The second one is the service one. The service one is close to the community mod, but, um, it's aged maybe to package software and to make it on your global solution. This approach looks like edition. And it was companies because they use some kind of ‑‑ excuse me. I'm a limit bit sick and I was spoke French and then it was going to be translated. (speaking French)
>> Okay. So basically he's saying that their model is to along for the most advanced technologies on the market today. Open source as well as others and then to repackage them so that hey have got reality best solution, which is a mixed solution.
>> (speaks French)
>> Okay. So I think everybody is aware of the premium model where you come out with a solution, which is offered for free at beginning so that you have maximum subscriptions. Now, if when you were talking about the mixed model, did you mean mixed in use of proprietary software or if you can expand a little on that.
>> (speaking French)
>> I forgot don't speak French. Actually, he's saying that you see mixing of open source and proprietary solutions usually in middle ware that people who are developing solutions for middle ware like to do that blank of solution a lot. Okay.
>> (speak French)
>> So you're talking about government working with the open source community as well as the private sector to develop solutions which are tailored for a particular government service.
>> (speak French)
>> Okay. Yeah. Good. So let's turn now to, um, I think I'll turn to Sunil because he wants to put up his slides. So Sunil ‑‑ no, no, no. Satish wants to put up his sliced. So let's turn over to you. I have been able to introduce yourself company many centuries ago. I she it's grown immensely. What is happening in India that is allowing that to happen and for people around the room that actually build their open source enterprises, do you have any advice?
>> Sunil: Perhaps what are the business mods available that are using free and open source software. And the answer in my mind is actually quite simple. Every model that is available to those using proprietary software are also available to those using free and open source software and it is only more business options that are available to them. For example, apple takes an open source or free software stack and then builds the proprietary layer around it and thanks to the cope center license of the BSD license, they're able to then license their work and the proprietary license. So, anybody using 42 software to build the business is actually more empowered than somebody who operates under the constraint of proprietary software. The problem is in India is even though we call ourselves the Silicon Valley of [INAUDIBLE], there is little property produced in India. If I ask people in the room how many of you use Indian software, most of you will look completely blank at me and that's because the Indian software business doesn't use intellectual property at all. It is just a labor charge business model. The copyright, the tricks Crips associated to the intellectual output of programmers in Bangalore does not belong to those programmers and does not belong to those companies. It belongs to the people that have given the contract. So having said that, if in the Indian economy would like to make its business model a little more sticky. If we have the jobs that flow into our economy, then it is almost impossible for us to build our complete solution based purely on our own indigence IP. We must use free software as a launchpad to either produce even more significant free software or like Apple using proprietary technologies.
>> Now, in case we have almost all of the above, basically we have one free consuming, which is a firm that uses the visibility and the credibility that we gain by distributing an accessible operating system for blind and visually gain persons to get revenues for project management, for customization for technical support and so forth. And an assistance to policy makers and then they have 1, 2, 3 software, which is another company that is specifically for sending licenses. So, we sell licenses in two situations. One if the client wants a high quality speech synthesizer that is more naturally sounding than the open source alternative and therefore, we have to buy a license for that. And, ah, and the second reason if the client wants a technical support updating. So basically becomes a subscription mod.
>> I noticed none of the business people are actually focusing on what the turnover is yet. So, Evans, if you ‑‑
>> Coming from a business perspective with a decision from Kenya which is a grouping of business people doing business using software and offering solutions. They wanted to implement at a space with money in the system and they've been wanting to implement for quite some sometime. But it wasn't in the budget. Every time ITP people submitted a budget, it was coming to a frame under a million. But at some point, they realized they couldn't implement the same using the software and the company was not implementing for them, which is a consuming company really. They were able to do that for like 10% of the cost for less than 50 million. And that is ‑‑ it's a perfect example of a business model where you found services and a bit of customization and support to the large enterprises instead of charging for licenses. Yeah.
>> SATISH BABU: I will come to this issue about enterprises and get limits and difficulty. But for me, most people here are already exposed to it. So I really cannot breach. The whole concept of access development includes the areas and structure, technology, gender and the group subject. Now, if you're thinking about first enterprises, I would suspect that you have to also look at model, which is coded with our own value systems. Some of the values you have taken into account by first base entities. First can also be promoted by the government. The enterprises can look at some of these things. You are aware before which sitting in India, it looks very important and interesting for this. You have technology and it also means the best kind of software I have not ‑‑ for example, the legal integrated and legalization mechanisms and the fact you are not tied town to anything to that and the fact we can make copy and redistribute, you are not bound by a single window. Of course the most visible things of open source is economically. Everybody knows it's cheap. Some of the studies of total cost, total cost of ownership was [INAUDIBLE]. Despite those things, it is economically a way to go, but finally the most important thing is also the model operated. We're aware that it's a good thing to do and it's a good thing to help communities. It's a good thing to have ‑‑ say for example, communities of disabled creating their own software. And also in the third world, we have computers and software. As far as open source goes, I would say from our kind of experience, this is taken out. Whenever you have three open sources, we find it is much more clean compared to many of the other options. Now, if you look at several options that have got to the enterprise, we have model with development and RND. I mentioned this because right now we are around RND on an open source platform, which is android. I will come to android because I think it will play a role. In some cases, a subset it was. We have a mod called BME. Now, BME is actually like the place where I come from, there is no rule. We have people living villages who are educated and have the capacity to contribute. I not been able to work in companies. So the whole open source community looks at this. Even people, for example, women who are children, young children don't want to come to a city and they want to be at home in the village. Ask you have sorts and levels in the open source guided by the open source values and the software and the technology. So we have proposed to model. They're sitting in different places and they have a company and enterprise. You're not talking about Indias, but financially enterprises. India open sourcing, there's no cost being in different places. All the software is kind of free. So, this is the kind of proposed in 2003, but then the whole conversation happened in north Dublin and mainstream industry created problems for us. Right now given the portion two of this to begin. And I would just like to mention android is an interesting platform because it actually converted into several things. It is a mobile computing platform. It is open source and it allows a very fixable programming. I am excited bite fact you can do many things that you could not do otherwise. Even just an example, for the disabled, for the blind, for the blind and deaf, you are experimenting with multiple things. That's a gesture. Aware of this on that screen. You will be able to do that. That is available, but [INAUDIBLE] you have started working on this. This is possible because this is open source. If android was not open source, we wouldn't have been able to do this. So I see ‑‑ now, this is to state it on record. They have come out two weeks back.
Android is evil. Now, I would not kind of go to [INAUDIBLE]. Of course, he was speaking half jokingly. He goes book it some of the other companies and Android has a really big step forward. Android is also open source platform. There is a lot of scope. Thank you.
>> Let's have a first round of questions now before we take the conversation back and we look at it in terms of, um, IGF‑type of issues and open source. So, ah, I see that we've been joined by quite a number of people. So far everybody here seems to be using open source on a daily basis and I'm sure it is beyond just Firefox. So, um, let's hear from you what your views are as we take this set of issues forward. Hands? Yes?
>> My name is Jute. I come from Africa here in Nairobi. One of the questions I wanted to find out is what effort is being done by, you know, people like Evans and to propagate open source in African countries and especially in schools because what I see is a lot of emphasis especially in schools on proprietary software as opposed to open source and I feel that there has to be a concerted effort to encourage open source as well as proprietary so young ‑‑ right from ‑‑ right from the stage when children are in school, they know about all these different kinds of software. And we'd be able to make a choice as to what pad form they want to work w I don't know what effort is being done about that. I saw a number of lands. They have disappeared. Yes.
>> Thank you, Dorothy. My question is again for events. I would like to know if I really understood what you said about the Kenyan government. I was using [INAUDIBLE] first for the government.
>> Hello. I am ‑‑ my question ‑‑ I would like ton more about how you have been engaging with government basically in terms doving if on a day to day basis and not Edward Casey or agreeing to the floss need and concept and practices, but actually going into practice. So that would be ‑‑
>> DOROTHY GORDON: Let's go around and start with Fernando to comment on that. I think the Brazilian government has actually come out very clearly with an open source policy, but does it work?
>> Ah, well, it's a qualified success. The key advantage to our project specifically F1, 2, 3 has relative to it's competition is that we allow government that have made promises such as, ah, we signed the U.S. convention on the rights of persons with disability or we assigned there or that sore we want to meet the millennium development goals and none of that can be done if you. To, you know, depend on the budgets we have in our countries. And use technologies that are used normally in wealthier technologies. If you don't do anything scalable, you will have to reinvent problem basically. So, what you tell them for the same resource that you can reach a thousand people with conventional solution. With us, you can reach anywhere between 10,000 and 50,000. So, we dramatically changed the formula for them. And I think that's key because suddenly instead in the case of our project, which is focused on burns with disabilities instead of them being limited toy what few NGOs in the allergy cities and dependent on donations quite often and helping 20 to 50 people in each end, they can dream and they can plan on having an accessible computer or more on every single public in the country. Because the differential is huge. A conventional solution for a mind person about $1,100 just for the software. Where ours goes anywhere from $20 to first.
>> DOROTHY GORDON: Fernando, you can give those figures again?
>> $1,500. It is proprietary screen redding software for blind people. And 10 to 15 dollars for the license for us. I think ‑‑ the other thing that's quite essential is that we as, ah, believers and the doctors of free and open source software present a complete package to the end user, to the consumer, to the clients. So, we don't only ‑‑ we have individuals that want to be helped and we don't tell them hey, here's the software. Do the best you can. Good luck. Goodbye. We can have a complete solution. We have documentation that is create. We have software that is open source. We have opened next year distance learning platform. The platform is done. It's mod, but we're developing content. So, when they come to us and say, hey, Fernando, we like your answer and suddenly we're going to be able to reach 15 times the number of people we were able to reach with the same budget. But people know,000 use the proprietary software. How can they train all these people. You know, you need a scalable solution to do that. So you your ticket to a better night's sleepers and the trainers go ahead and spread out throughout the country, but the way to do that efficiently is using in some cases distance learning, technology and at other times, we're including as much guidance and documentation in your software with creative comments licenses. So, I think that's one of the important visions or [INAUDIBLE] is having a complete package.
>> Thank you. I have documents.which can from Province, which is the first government in the world to declare affirmative software. 10 years of software freedom. Number 2, I am ‑‑ with the experience of [INAUDIBLE] forces not just technology, but about cost. There are significant dangers if you're going to enter on those points of entry. For example, cost. Tomorrow there is nothing to stop something free of us. So, very left. So, what we have done actually to start civil society. This is actually a really great strategy and we have actually sensitized society in 2001 itself. The whole first event that we had, everybody lied to the media and said what is this software? We had to at this point saying this is free software. This is why it's important the whole model input they started with that being the base, then the argument of cost and technology they do it, but if you remember the bay, the significant danger and significant risk that purely this year of technology and their own cost was able to compete. You have a very vibrant collect in the world. You have a group with about something like 5,000 schools. All the government are 100% coverability. Then we did not start this technology process a technology transformation. We started with the teachers. They came to us and said they liked this concept. They liked interesting this technology. Society technology came later after the initial level and the base has been created there in terms of mind shift. That mind share is what actually has good stay all these years. Once that is there, no new government that's coming can dislodge. So what I would like to retreat is the fact that please do not consider our limit force to the technology. These are very important factors, but they're not the most important. Civil society is very important if you get to civil society on your side, the school or the government is actually not so difficult. But if not, you will complete today or tomorrow. They will come up with three offerings. They will come up with them till we catch them. You in.
>> Sorry. I wanted to compliment what Satish said. I think it's crucial as much as possible rely on strategy and on education of people of the clients. And I want to give an example because there's a lot of people here that I'm sure are concerned with human rights issues that are concerned with a long‑term costs and flexibility, you know, all these aspects that we can sell to different companies or governments or foundations. The case I wrote about I call it case study. I wrote it more in the form of an article. But it's the case of the AOL, America online was sued by people in the late '90s. They were sued because the entire system was not accessible and people were not able to payment professionally or socially. They were being blocked by the fact this was not accessible. You are considering a country that is rather wealthy, NGOs and companies that are in the cutting edge in many case and even in this very ideal quote/unquote environment you still had the situation where even after 10 years of having a legislation protecting the rights of persons with disabilities, somebody had to sue somebody else to get access to their rights. Now, why don't we compare that to e‑mail. E‑mail is not only accessible and was accessible in the 1990s in a wealth economy like the U.S., it was accessible to the blind and everywhere else, Brazil, in India, in Napal. And what's the essential difference between one and the other. It was not accessible in Brazil because we have such amazing governments. Well, let's not get into that, but, it's not because our NGOs are way ahead and our legal system is so incredible or our companies are sensitive to the needs of persons with disabilities. No. The essential difference between AOL instant messaging and e‑mail is an open protocol. So here you have a case where you don't have ‑‑ you don't need perfect legislation, well funded NGOs, sensitive and wise government or companies that are restricting market share gains in order to served needs of a small minority or what they consider a small minority and you still have a disability. I think it's important for us to present to organizations, political parties, um, the fact that open source as a graduate concept including open file formatting, open protocols and creative comments documentation and artistics, licenses that they have a very concrete area to human rights. When the Eco system is not available openly available, you don't depend on any single software vendor.
You don't depend on Microsoft or Dora or Pine. If one of them is accessible to me because the protocol is oh I can use another. So, there you have a situation where you are able to have faster competition without having to guess what's going to be the fashionable technology of tomorrow because nobody can do that. But if you have a requirement that every company used open protocols, if you have procurement rules in government that requires anybody selling to the government to have 4 months protocols and source, then you are insuring not just today, but strategically you are insuring future rights for a number of minorities.
>> Thanks. I think you really defined what needs to be done at governmental level. This works on open standards is quite fundamental to the work of the IGF as well. But going back to the business of it ‑‑
>> [INAUDIBLE] (speaking French)
>> Yes. He's going to talk about the issues of engagement with the governance.
>> (speaking French)
He's going to talk about some of the associations ‑‑ oh, sorry. She going to talk any some of the associations that here's linked w you also heard about FOSSFA. He will talk about the force business persons in Africa.
>> [INAUDIBLE] (speaking French)
>> He's also going to talk about the association for the use of open source softwares which is a Franco form organization.
>> (speaking French)
>> Okay. The object of shalla is to bring open hours is solution both to government as well as to the private sector as well as people locally.
>> (speaking French)
>> (speaking French)
>> Okay. So he started and got involved with an organization which goes beyond because what he saw is they were focusing just on the [INAUDIBLE] level. So he wants to get involved even at a very early age.
>> (speaking French)
>> Okay. So they have about 300 children who are participating it's in the class. I think that you would say they're about 80 years old. So, ah there are 8‑year‑old children in togo and have open source software even that the level within schooling.
>> (speaking French)
>> Okay. Yeah. So he's saying that while, ah, you can't force governments to make the change and he really shares fernando and Satish's Vee on some of the work that needs to be done in terms of promoting open source, um, he just wanted to mention that it does make a difference when a government has got an open source policy. Very clever declared and mondif Awhich is the largest open source company in France survives because of the Brazilian market that it has.
>> (speak French)
>> Okay. So he says there's a project with orange labs, which is the research and development, which is doing some research and development with France telecon.
>> (speaking French)
>> Okay. So they have this, um, ah, they have this initiative which is emerging, you know. They're creating micro services and the pilot is take place in sinna going to as well. Okay. So, he's saying that he agrees completely with Satish on the research and development, but research and development has only got one object and that is to produce a usable product as something that is going to make an impact on the market. Thank you. So, I think, Sunil, there's a lot of food for they here. Nobody has addressed yet, um, the differentials in marketing budget between the open source community and some of the proprietary vendors. I think Satish made a little illusion to it because he said in the education space, you often see proprietary vendors make available the technology for free so thatin that that the future generation will be locked into the product when they get on to the employment market. I mean, persuasion, advocacy, he's talked about mind share, governments, government policy on open source. You are also ‑‑ location and location you are Carol eyewitness. Government India and policy.
>> In the early days when I was associated with another source, it was the international network. We think this is around 2004 that free software policies at the national level were too ambitious, but we were proven wrong. The center for strategic and international studies annually prepares the compilation of free software policies and the latest count is almost at 300. Such policies do exist and Kenya has one such policy. Trying to understand the Indian policy position, I think it's best to characterize it as a policy to have no policy because if there is no stated policy, then it is an opportunity to negotiate with everybody. So the state bias Microsoft operating system and office suite for there are 3. When they match, that they get the operating system and the office suite at exact light same price. So sometimes having no policy is useful policy. The next possible option is not to have a free software policy, but have an open standard. That usually takes the form of an garment in framework and enterpriseds, tushure. It is usually a laundry list of set of principals based upon which the government will adopt standards. And that is usually the right way to give the level playing field. That's the policy option that many governments refer and India has also recently published an open source standards and half the [INAUDIBLE]. Perhaps the alternative group even Aboarding the term open standards is to insist on electronic accessibility policies, national electronic policies. Electronic accessibility depends on open standards as Fernando told us. So, it is a pseudoopen standards policy. And it's hugely important in countries like India where it is not just six persons of the population is disabled, but also 30 to 35% is unletterd. For those importance as Ltect to boys is usually important. We have only 12 million persons on broadbank, but 650 million people on telephone lines. There is good tect to voice and voice to tex. There was an E‑government that was built for computers and can also be used in a non‑smart form. So, electronic accessibility even though the entry point is disability, it has a huge relevance for everybody developing countries and also developing. All of us in this room only temporarily able as we age, it is going to be completely satisfying to take accessibility in a very serious way. Not to say that there are no clashes. When the state of Massachusetts and the U.S. mandated OEF, the people that had the disability groups because at that time, it was not as accessible as the Microsoft standard. So, it isn't as if there are zero tensions between the various agendas that we need to satisfy when trying to come up with a useful policy recommendations. And possible another space is curriculum renorm which, people have talked B. I'm not so sure in all market just be software in educational context be sufficient. Does that mean that instead of only being employable by proprietary software, now the student is only employable by free software enterpries. There is definitely a very important case and I will touch upon two points that haven't been made in the panel so far. The first is expose tour software. You're expect students of literature to write books and therefore, we give them access to books in the library. We expect student of software engineering to produce the right software, but we don't usually allow theme read software and open source software is the ideal way they get to read software. But also hoping they will make the economy anding success 8 entrepreneurs, they have build a reputation for them. And contact open source projects is a wonderful transparamedic accountable way for a young entrepreneur to build a reputation. But again, it's not very clear there are ‑‑ when we push free software free culture, sometimes other baggage comes with it. If we look at all the [INAUDIBLE] in India, almost all the chapters are completelydominating. There is one woman who arrives for one meeting and the men ask her for her phone number. How is free software and open culture that make its so unblendly to women. This I don't understand. Perhaps we need a lot more thinking. Thank you.
>> Eve, you want to come in?
>> YVES MIEZAN: I want to start with the last question, which is the one my colleagues are already talking about here. The kid with Kennia, we may not have a more business policy, but we do have some very good things in Kenya. The problem we have is 400 lows that we V. for instance, we have a procurement with Kenya called the public procurement in 2005. And within that load, there's some authority create good called the public procurement. IIt's been [INAUDIBLE] with a VPON to try to make them and force load because there is a way to make sure that was followed both in the level of the load. When that load says it's a government agency that's procuring anything, maybe it's a computer or anything. They're not supposed to specify any fixed or company names or remods or anything like that. They just have [INAUDIBLE] and you cannot say you want to tell somebody to supply Toyotas. You select what it is you want to do. But for a long times, you have things being floated quite openly. We have situations where you see them watching in the paper and they want to buy computers, but they tend ‑‑ they ask for somebody, for people to tend supplies on the computers. And we thought that was very wrong. The load specifically says that nobody should mention any trademarks or trade names for that matter. And those are also extended into the software section. They want somebody to supply 100 computers from Mikevo soft to windows or load it with Microsoft office. We thought that was also wrong because the loads specify they should not mention those names and the reason the load says that is so the plain field can be left alone for everybody to participate in the procurement process. We thought if they follow the load, the spirit of the load, then people supply open source software and we'll have the opportunity and we have a lot of opportunity and people who are sitting inthe procurement will get to know there's an alternative to the softwares. We've been getting them on this, but they have not, um, they have not really enforced it and we are still carrying things in the environment to get them to do that. Neigh had one of the arguments ‑‑ yes. For the questions we're talking about that, somebody else made the effort you have in Kenya to increase use of force in schools. I also represent a foundation which is originate and we provide schools and computers but also with education and training. This computers are normally loaded with basically software. We also give training to the teachers. This one is in Kenya and we'll give them to the schools with these computers as a software and we have actually traind that. We tend to do that and hopefully know about Kenya and basically this is for the students who can come up and know what is an alternative to those. Basically being able to choose open source software. I'm also a forceful project called integration and trainers. They have a full line administration and the trainers are coming for what it is and training institutions and our hope is they'll go back and train and stop and train [INAUDIBLE] what it is in the institutions so that the opportunities will come and also have free and open to be useful in the market. We also getting talks with Kenya institute of education which is the body that is, ah, that is involved with creating the curriculum for secondary and primary schools. We are hoping we can show them the first IT curriculum for schools was successary and [INAUDIBLE] schools. We have talks that we're getting that continuous. Some of those ask me government of Kenya is using software and the answer is yes just like I would say everybody here and everybody else and other place uses software. Anybody who uses [INAUDIBLE] is obviously using a free software. But some departments and the government of Kenya. They have the Kenya authority and the major bodies that Kenya and supply agency. They use free open source. They have management systems. A lost government of Kenya web sites are running in groups and have money consistence. A lot of security that is implemented by not just government, but even the rest. They're implementing a lost solutions for security based on the field of open software solutions. We also have a lot of servers running Linux. The government is using a lot of fear of business.
>> Thanks. Let's have another round of questions and I also want to acknowledge Raul from UNDB who's joined us and I will ask him to make a few comments in a few minutes. We have ‑‑ okay. Let's do it this way so that I remember. I think they have their hands up first. So we'll go 1, 2, 3, 4. And on this side, anybody? 5. Okay. So after these five, we'll have Raul come in. Please give your name and your designation.
>> Here is. My name is Mark Blackman. Very interesting discussion. I am worried a bit that it is already obslead. The future not really going to be about software sits upon your computer anymore. We're moving to this Cloud base world and that world, the kinds of adaptations that have been made bite panelists to make adaptations to enhance accessibility even if that Cloud service doesn't mean you can twist that servein in the same way you can Phoenix open source software that hits on your hardware. In that world where large multi‑nationals like Google can essentially build upon GPL software, fut up on their servers, use that software, but using a loophole in the GPL don't have to give anything back to the community. Is that really good for the open source community? Are we having the wrong conversation right now? And do we need to start thinking more about the future and where that's headed?
>> I am coming from Europe and I was interviewed ‑‑
>> that's a very big place to come from. Where do you come from in Europe, please?
>> From Germany. You can imagine the open source is quite well discussed topic. But I was really intod with this very first example of a company in aftionia who use software for millions of use. It was a Danish company who invested in aftonnia and this company is still there and still in aftonnia. And in open source world, if you just complete with others based on service revenue, this is really tough. I was really interested in you're recommendation for Kenya and African countries who compete on a global market how to stop European German companies in use the software or moving to some other countries where the service revenue is even lower or what is the recommendation for substantial rules for the middle class and African countries.
>> My name is Pete Resinic. I teach courses on how to use and distribute open source. I am also on the IETF steering group. So, I'm very interested in open protocol standards and I want to follow up with something that both Fernando and Sunil said, which is an answer to what Mark was worried B. I am fill supportive of folks using as much open source software as they can. I think open protocol standards are the much more important thing as an Internet governance issue for us to cons freight on because that does level the plague field for folks who can produce open source software to compete with proprietary software that must use the same protocol standards, the same technical standards as open source folks. And I think doing work in an open standards body where you ‑‑ anybody can come participate where all of the protocols are freely available and anybody working on software proprietary or open source can come? Form those protocol standards is very important and wiring that kind of openness not just in open source software, but in open standards is probably the most important thing.
>> Hello, everybody. I program Nigeria a member of APC. I have a couple of comments and questions. I think that, um, with cloud computing, you have to think about Internet access. The access is a bit problem in developing world. So I think that for now, it is still very advanced. The discussions we're having here for applications that enter the systems open source applications. One thing that I knew that I experienced is because [INAUDIBLE] that, um, open source is hard to use. No matter how explain it, [INAUDIBLE] is hard to use and you will complete that free of charge and would opt to pay for proprietary stuff. I don't know if there is any suggestions to anybody on the panel here has towards to address because I face that quite a bit. And then I think I also have a question for fernando about ‑‑ this is my first time here about F1, 2, 3 and I think it's a good idea because we have installed before and I know how expensive. What I want ton is it so different for the regular proprietary software and, ah, I mean, how much training does an instructor require and if I wanted to get ‑‑
>> I think that's a private business discussion you will have after.
>> Okay. Okay. All right. I think I'm all right. Thank you.
>> I think that the ‑‑ I will try and answer your question because I'm actually quite surprised you should say that. We have done some experiments. The center that's the chief executive. We run open source for the back end and the front end. Every time we have new stuff, they have to use the open source. We use it and they adapt so fast and I have actually had secretaries from my ministry being me for the exposure on the open source and they are able to learn it within hours. So I think the question is how much knowledge, how familiar is the person already with a computing environment, but we have training programs and we can pass them on to you. But really we found that for the normal productivity sweep, it is not a challenge for people to learn. If it is the back end system adminktration, that's a different story. Okay. So I think we've got a lot of interesting issues on the table. Coura, yes. Go ahead.
>> COURA FALL: My name is Coura Fall. I have been working on the planet sector. I'm from Synagog. I guess I follow Mark Blackman about the Cloud and my question is what do you think or how do you think the first community can help to funnel the train of the Cloud competing and insuring that Africa and the developing countries can move the Cloud to grow and to prospect?
>> DOROTHY GORDON: Well, I think this is a good point, Raul, for us to put out line. You're coming from a major playier, multi‑lateral institution that has invested quite a bit in supporting open source. Wait till you see this. We ask the panel to come in and give their last remarks as we have about 20 minutes left for this session. Does anyone else have a burning question? Okay. Good.
>> Thank you, Dorothy, for putting me in the 62.
I wasn't planning to speak, but I have a speech right here. I'm kidding. We'll discussing all things and I think ‑‑ I've been doing this for 20 years. We use open source because if you ever need to be deploying in deploying countries in the 60s that would casteer to e‑mail. It is called open source. It wasn't called open source because open source from 1997. It's a software. It's a means. For us, we need to attack things like poverty, equality, information access. So I think the future of this has to be done on three different points. One is innovation. This is the policy. Think about Einstein. I don't understand it so I cannot develop an atomic bomb. We need innovation and I need a body of people who can actually understand. So, if we have a body that is come up for open source, it is useless. If I cannot read,ity lit rate. It took time to create. We have pig back and create at local level solution. It is very important somebody else [INAUDIBLE] and I had to pay for somebody else to ownoivate for me. They're out of my content so I need to work that innovation. It is part for the developing countries for their own innovation, licenses for their own purposes. The second one is entrepreneurship. Open source is free and there's a business. You get comments from companies like Microsoft on this thing. We have in country X 3,000 companies serving X amounted of dollars for a year and 10,000 jobs on the line.
You want those company asks have no jobs? The answer is no. I don't want that. What I want is to create a similar Eco system of Johns for open source. So much I need entrepreneurs who can do innovation and have an incentive to cater to open source. I create jobs and I multiply that in the economy and we also tackle development issues. They see in the communities. Know what they see up here. Very important. And the last one is something that I foresee as standard. It is called product software. Brazil trying to implement open source, but GPM is all in English. And Brazil actually asks if they is have this in Portuguese. So you can not is [INAUDIBLE] the contract in Portuguese because you have come up with a different license which means what? In simple terms? Government is developing software. It should be public. We cannot access it. There is health delivery of malaria and tuberculosis and that software is [INAUDIBLE]. It should issue shared in all the different ministrys. There is innovation trying to get this available open source against prioritized software. It's going to be efficient. So, if he invests a million dollars in open source, I can still duplicate efforts. I have come up with open source and different companies to do open source. So in which duplicating. If you got this party of the investment, we realize we'll save a lot of money and invest on the building or whatever. So I think those three are important. Thank you very much.
>> Know thank you very much.I see that [INAUDIBLE] has joined. I will let you co. I think we have a very important issue on the table. Does it make a difference that this discussion is redundant and the question that was posed, you see a little trace of, um, okay. Now that we've in the Cloud, we'll be depeppent on major multi‑nationals for these Cloud base services, but we have national Clouds and I think that is very, very important. Mark, you want to can't on that? I can see you itching.
>> Mark: Of course you K. there's a loophole in the GPL as had exists today which allows a company that is providing a Cloud service like Gmail to build upon all of these wonderful open source inventions and not give anything back because they're not distributing it physically or shea to your lap ton in the same way. So, it could essentially ruin the grand bargain which makes the GPL and open source and at same time, if you want to adapt Gmail to have better accessibility features, university blocked. It's no longer within your control because it's not on your hard drive any longer.
>> Yeah. I think that's a very good time. Let's see. Let us start off from the of the end this time.
>> Just to commend to that, I think the Cloud is basically you could say in Africa, the future takes a bit longer. I'm talking from experience. I am selling software solutions and I'm training and there is a part to sell a Cloud bit security solutions for vulnerability management. And nobody from the smallest guy to the biggest multi‑national in Kenya would want to buy security solution based on the Cloud. They're no longer going to have their secured in house. Their ask a very big problem there when it comes to cloud services. It's good to happen, but before it haps, it's going to be a bit of time. In the mean times, you still find everybody is still going to be using the communications, Microsoft will still be rolling out the Microsoft trophies and they will make money on it and they will make people save money and increase accessibility to people who cannot afford to buy that expensive software. So I think in that regard of the discussion, it is not obsolete. Again what, makes it not obssleet what you are discussing and many times we have confusing open source discussions to have discussions about the product, but many people are confused that is supposed to be a discussion about Linux. It is about a model for developing software. They're using software in the Cloud and technology of the Cloud. We will still ice software. We'll build on capacities to develop on Clouds that you can code ourselves. To do that, we need skills. We need skills and solution we can afford. That is the lady who asked about efforts to support the most to Cloud. As in that as I mentioned the innovation area, we are trying to build capacity by training a system that means Linux skills. We're homing that these are going to be advanced Linux skills for them to be able ‑‑ for them to be able to have Cloud services because at end of the day, at Cloud services, you run the systems and you need capacity to be able to support those schedules. Thank you. Am.
>> Sunil, I think there are a lot more questions still on the table.
>> Sunil: When it comes to Cloud computing, perhaps we have to begin the question is Cloud computing regulated at all? And in the area of privacy, there are examples. The privacy commissioner and judges from different states and U.S. often put together the least improvement they want to implement on facebook or MySpace and, ah, those improvements or recommendation are usually implemented by those companies even though there isn't extensive government usage of these pat forms or the primary rational behind that commissioners action is not states use of this infrastructure. Indeed, the problem highlighted by of Mark and Pete is absolutely the real problem and fernaldo might correct me Byou as far as I understand, Google aps is not really accessible and even the calendar is not really accessible. Perhaps document everything in the software is not very accessible. We need to divide it into two distinct problems especially when it comes to states use of Cloud infrastructure for E‑governance. Recently we heard the inaugural speech of an elected primein minister in Europe was first put on to Youtube. The state standing behind a corporation and acting almost like a sales person and/or anything that corners technology platform standards. It is unavoid able to some degree because the public is still on the internet change rapidly. There are public [INAUDIBLE] or private caface which are the immediate large and private organizations. So, you can't ask the government to go to the MT public park and try to gather an audience. It is only natural the governments will have to move on to platforms like facebook, et cetera. But the two issues of data interoperability and the platform interoperability. With data interoperability, Google has shown some leadership and it is easier on Google Cloud pat forms to follow government or the state to suck out all its dat and hopefully shift it to some other compatible system. But the platform the public facing interfaces, ah, there is indeed still a problem. Policies could be used to insist that these corners make weeks so that it becomes more, ah, so that the end configuration supports and protects public interest. Whether we'll be able to plug all the leaks in the GPL license, I don't know and I don't know that's necessarily the part we need to take. As I said, privacy regulation always [INAUDIBLE] on the Cloud. This is another form of anti‑competent regulation that might be necessary. You may not plug it through the legal route in my mind
>> (speaking French)
>> Well, what he's saferring is he wouldn't like to comment too much on the technical aspect, but speaking about licensing, ah, the open source licenses are based on a certain philosophy and, um, trust and confidence levels. And so, it's, ah, this is where you really ‑‑ this is where he really sees the issues.
>> (speaking French)
>> What he's saying is Google is what it is. He's not going to comment on that. Africa we're soon going to be ‑‑ I think we're over a billion people already, and about 50% of that population is under the age of 15. And it's very important that we develop the skills that allow us to build and create software. And if that wasn't important, we wouldn't be sitting here. That's it.
>> A computation of the Cloud, you have seen it over the last 10 years? I don't think the last word on either GP or the Cloud. And I think into the future, there will be more changes. Either the GP, Mr. or the market and it's going to be static. Things will be going and I think it's a progression. There may be a face difference. But tomorrow it might catch up. So that way I see it because it is always a distinction often between a certain segment of the market and GPL. It's been resolved. Secondly as was mention earlier, it could be the private Clouds, the of all kinds of Clouds and the version of the Cloud which is going by what other licensing they have. So, I go to like different things right now. I think the force is natural for the innovation and look at problems and get local solutions because it is displaced on production. This category system must be emphasized. I would like to retrained forces not just for technology, but allergy grouping of technology and associate aspects including entrepreneurs and a variety of plays including census perhaps. That constitutes because it's open to software. I think that is definitely an important part, but also ‑‑ you also have to force it. You have component of the Eco system. You want to insure that forces a long‑term solution. We'll see public software as in many cases in the search. Medical research in the U.S., U.S. government funds most of the search. You cannot lock up obligations or papers whether it is [INAUDIBLE] in seven years or what else. You have not lock up your findings under such kind of things. Please go open. Is it coming out? Definitely anything funded by public money just remain in the public [INAUDIBLE]. And it is good ton that as a master principal, all of us slob this.
>> Thank you. Thanks. Fernando?
>> Um, to me, this whole thing about the Clouds smells like the paperless office. It's the future. It's the present for the last 30 years. We're still printing like crazy. Yeah. More than before. Exactly. But, you know, basically what I'm saying is I think just like my colleagues have said, the GTL is really the qualification in legal language of principals and ‑‑ and idea s and con cents that we have become more and more aware of it and as we ‑‑ and it's not supposed to substitute for wisdom. You know? It's just giving legal structure to make it practical to be wise, but, ah as we learn the vulnerabilities that were subject ourselves to when we use Cloud, we're going to include those. We are going to qualify that into the gallerybo some other tool. But in no way I think, you know, anything is automatic. And I think we're still learning with the Cloud and vulnerabilities. It's ‑‑ it's a little too obvious to say that the Cloud is a little too optimistic for anything that is mission critical in most countries in Africa and Latin America.
I'm just now going to put something that is critical to me on that Cloud dependent service and be vulnerability to electrical blackouts and all kinds ever communication problems and so forth. And even in the United States. A bunch companies are learning that hey, I cannot be completely dependent on this outside people for something that is mission critca.
We had already some bankrupties where the Cloud company went under and clients lost everything they had stored in that. And that was in the U.S. So I think society is still learning how far to go. It's easy to get into the Cloud if you're doing entertainment and if you're doing facebook. You know? I mean, how critical is it that my status cannot change today because there's a blackout? When we go beyond that and you're really trying ‑‑ figuring out how far to go when there's something critical to the business, then it's a whole different story.
>> DOROTHY GORDON: Well, I can ask you to give us a round of applause because it's been quite an interesting session. There ‑‑ what's very clear is the technology is changing. The situation in our countries are changing, but they're very clear examples of best practice that we can draw on even as we strike to be pragmatic and I think what has impressed me is even as we embrace the philosophy of open source and the open movement on which it is based, ah, there's a great deal of pragmatism when it comes to entrepreneurial level. There was one question which wasn't answered and that is the question about the European companies coming in. What I will comment on is I have actually been very impressed by the lack of interest in, um, European and U.S. open source companies in trying to understand the market in Africa. So I don't think that's our concern that because they're open source companies will be more concerned than all the other companies which are trying to sell solutions on the continent. But what is very clear is, ah, that as Raul commented on open source allows us to build an Eco system of enterprise wherever. Yes, you want to comment? Was that your question?
>> Actually not. I want to comment on comment. That was my question. I definitely agree that innovation and entrepreneurship is the most important thing. My question was what is your recommendation for the, model that will allow actually to build this Eco system. We're competing with service revenue is a challenging thing.
>> Okay. Well, I think.
>> DOROTHY GORDON: Lokay.
I think it will continue to be a challenging thing. Was it 10 days ago a number of our government signed to the open government partnership. And that open government partnership I feel is very much related to all the work that has gone on in terms of public license in terms of open data. All the work that has been done by the creative common group and we're going to see a whole lost change pretty soon. I think as more and more government services come online and in the digital space. So I think that there are a lot of things. Once that happens, that gives a lot of opportunity to new companies to come up because it's just the stent of the business, which is available. In many African countries, almost ‑‑ well, let me not comment on because Africa is a continent, but you have a large proportion which is went framework of the government procurement. So that whole movement is going to be a game changing one. I'm not sure if I answered your question from the expression on your face, but anyway, we'll discuss it largest I was actually make up summing up remarks and I think it is really important that we really explore the open protocol and open standards area that has been raised in this particular meeting. I think it gives us an area where we do not have direct conflicts and everybody can recognize the value of the work that is being done to anyone that is interested in business. Ino vision, Eco system, the social aspect, I think all of these have been stressd and we've been give men is very good business models which I think as Sunil said, a by to everyone, but then we've also been given business models that are specific for the open source community to address. I will just say that I'm very proud. I was telling people just before this session that one of the things I have done is to create million neighbors on using first. It is not very often somebody who heads a training institution that you can point is to somebody and say after our training, less than 6 month later, that person was a million Nair. So to awful you in the room who are using first, I want to say there are huge opportunities there. There are huge opportunities to support our governments whether you're in Brazil or whether you're in Asia or in Europe, America wherever. This is a great business opportunity that at the same time must be used to build capacity to innovate. So thank you very much for a good session. I think we are finished exactly on time. And that doesn't mean we have to leave the room. The new session ‑‑ the next session is starting in 30 minutes and I would encourage all of us to network so that we build the movement even further. Thank you.