Towards a development of libre softwares thanks to public funds.

Example: French local communities' initiative with the ADULLACT.

1. A specific context.

Wheras some people would like to « calm things down », we notice that conflict between « treacherous computing », according to Stallman, and libre software shows a specific face when we approach borders of public spheres, where political decisions and public money are at stake. This is the context where drama is played.

For his part, proprietary software uses legal strategies and brandishes security scarecrows in order to discourage libre software development and adoption. For their part, polical spheres, when they are in favor of libre software, content themselves with proposing to generalize its use, and recommend preference to libresoftwares.

Between the devil and the deep blue sea, libre software movement is victim of states' schizophrenia, which states show on one hand friendship towards libre software movement because it serves as a vehicle for a certain public utilities spirit, but on the other hand they provide unknowingly legal arguments preventing its development from performing. To schematize : drinking at the spring is incited by people, whereas they are also drying up this spring.

2. We are entering into non-P world¹ :

For twenty five centuries, our intellectual universe has been dominated by Platonic thinking : the original is better than the reproduction. However, it is true that we have access to Ideas thanks to our mind, to mathematical ideas for instance.

But we are entering into a new world. We are entering into that world where the reproduction is identical to the original. The quickness with which a thing becomes common is just simply prodigious. Printing had succeeded in pulling apart those who had the capacity to write from those who could read. Nowadays, thanks to Internet, each one can write to be read by everybody, a priori without censorship, without editor, without printer and without bookseller : technique gave us back the capacity to write, after having given us the capacity to read. We could have believed that television was going to us give on a long-term basis pictures to read, pictures that somebody else wrote. But anyone can make pictures andvirtual digital edited systems haven't stopped replacing analogical systems among professionals that they are already among individuals. Also, reading aids only arrive a few months before writing aids. Engravers stick very close to readers.

We can imagine a sudden brake as we enter into this world: civilization of opened knowledge can well close and a long night will begin, what I perceive like an awful barbarity, a technological tyranny in front of which Tocqueville's and Orwell's fears will be only childishnesses. We can prevent the entrance into non-P worldfrom happening. It is probably possible to put a brutal brake on exchanges in order to assure the original to keep on being better than the reproduction, in order to keep on assuring dividends on the exclusive power to deliver reproductionsinstead of selling added value. We can keep on only selling rights to listen to this symphony once, coupons to watch this film twice, tickets to use this software for six months. We can set up algorithmes about quality degradation of reproductions and protect this plan of action thanks to laws.

I agree with those who think that, from now on, the gap between law and common practice is too important. Propietary software has besides used in its time illegal reproduction like a fearsome marketing tool: you had a software bought by the company or the administration at your disposal at home... But sow the wind and reap the wirlwind. Law can well prohibit free diffusion, the habit is got into. And above all, digital aspects go in direction of free diffusion. Who knows if musicians will not soon compose their music straight for P2P. Without doing something illegal, users, from now on producers, will exchange the music they play, the books they write, the pictures they make (besides, the first librefilm is already at the planning stage). The same movement is appearing in the fields of software for a long time.

We could say it is an usual issue of economy : when we notice that compact discs are sold ten times more expensive than their marginal cost of production, it is hardly surprising that black market is growing. But we must take into account that, and it is surprising, we are talking about a gigantic widespread exchange of digital products rather than a black market.

3. Mathematics case :

Whereas we understand with difficulty the world into which we are entering, nevertheless we have a past example contributing towards an understanding.

We forgot it, but mathematics were proprietary at the beginning. Pythagoreans had not to disclose theorems on pain of death. And mysteries of arithmetic and antique geometry were jealously kept in temples, reserved only for the initiated.

And we suddenly realized that these mysteries were free. They grew thanks to volunteers. Descartes and Fermat were mathematics hackers :-). Then with public money. Because added value was not present in the knowledge but in the use of this knowledge. Universities shared the knowledge. However, there was an economic model : technicians, mathematics teachers live on libre mathematics for a long time. We can diffuse, reproduce, improve if it is possible, a theorem of mathematics, but it is very impolite to say Pythagoras' theorem is from us...It is very impolite to appropriate something owned by everybody, but invented by someone, as a discovered treasure which must be profitable to everybody.

4. The trap of public computing :

At the moment, proprietary computing is in a monopoly situation which makes fear a slowing down of inventions, whereas libre software movement allows to share what we do the best, in order to do better, without reinventing the wheel, and to transfer computing economy towards services.

In administrations and above all in local communities, the situation makes this conflict unbearable. (We could say the same thing about small and medium companies). The externalization, the renunciation of internal development, made public computing very dependent. The challenge of e-administration is going to lead us quickly, if we don't pay attention, from the fracture to the bill. On computerizing their structures thanks to great programs entrusted to somebody else, and on turning out in a disorganised manner, administrations are going to spend a fortune without reaching their goal. This is one the scenarios thought by the « rapport de la Coste » in France. We can say there are three possible scenarios: 1) the e-administration keeps on with propietary softwares and make off with the takings. More and more, private services more efficient are taking the place of the administration. 2) the e-administration is cut down to avoid scenario 1. The state is unable to meet the demand for services expressed by citizens and private services more efficient are, more and more, taking the place of the administration. 3) The third scenario is the only solution : make use of and developat the same time libre softwares.

5. Libre software must be developed together:

Indeed, we could think libre software use is going to resolve the issue. It is wrong. Because libre software does not develop by itself. In French, we say it does not grow on trees. It is possible to find it. But it is not realized by itself. Libresoftware use can allow to realize that there are softwares we can reproduce freely. But it does not create libre softwares spontaneously. Specially in the ground of professional softwares. I do not know many hackers who have a passion for the writing of a computer-assisted cemetery management, an administrative mail workflow or an on-line system of public market transfer. Even if markets are quickly moving towards services.

Because we can use libre softwares and, at the same time, do not understand their philosophy. And I prefer those who write html thanks to Word than those who write some *.doc thanks to OpenOffice :-). Indeed, we can use libre softwares and do nothing to allow their development. Proprietary softwares have good times ahead within an administration which does not impose free formats. Because, in this context we will be able to use libresoftwares, but why would they expand?

Sometimes, local communities or administrations make softwares developed. They rarely do this development under free licence. Mentioning this famous excuse we do not find...As if libre software programers were developing with lunar languages, Martien algorithmes, and an exotic computing. More often than not they make these softwares developed thanks to propietary development, and also they finance a product which will be resold to other local communities or administrations by the company that developed this product. Public money paid this development. But it will pay it hundred times ! Some software developments are realized thanks to Public Fund and the public structures which developed these projects take advantage, somehow or other, of a guaranteed income from the sale of these products to other local communities or administrations.

6. Public money must only pay the development once :

It would be enough if we suddenly realize that developments financed thanks to Public Fund must only give birth to libre softwares so that suddenly everything change.

Libre software for each development financed thanks to Public Fund !

In public spheres, the dimensions of demand is huge. The number of word-processing packages, the number of spreadsheets, the number of servers is huge in this ground. But professional softwares are also very numerous and exchange systems between administrations of different level are very numerous. Is it really impossible for users, instead of expecting professional libre softwares to be, to form a league in order to make developed, or to develop, the softwares they need ?

And what we do for ourselves, we must give it to the others !

And what we need, before looking for it on the market, we must ask the others if they have developed a common solution.

7. ADULLACT's bet in France :

In France, local communities, regions, departments, urban areas, towns and villages set up an association : the ADULLACT in order to buid, develop and promote a public patrimony of libre softwares. Specially in the ground of professional softwares where they don't expand spontaneously

We won't expect this dream to realize any longer, we are going to realize it. And what we will produce, the world will be able to use it.

At the moment, we are setting up a system « à la sourceforge », so that everybody will be able to take part in our projects. The city of Paris released its Internet portal basically the day we founded the ADULLACT, at the end of September 2002. Local communities which adhere to the ADULLACT are starting to give developments they realized in-house. Town Council's decisions about GPL-ing are growing in number.

The great sharing started !

We are going to mobilize soon local communities' programers so that they work together, thanks to Internet, at a distance, and from all the french territory, in order to develop together what they need. It is likely that academics also work on this public libre software patrimony constitution. May be citizens are going to give us what they did, and take part to our movement.

Richard Stallman summarizes libre software philosophy thanks to liberté, égalité, fraternité.

It is France's moto !

François ELIE

Président de l'Adullac

Angoulême, February 2003