[CAVO] Study on Open Source Voting Systems

[Patrick Masson]

Mr. Fried,

The Open Source Initiative (OSI) <http://opensource.org/>  was recently
forwarded your draft document, "Study on Open Source Voting Systems"
<http://www.sfbos.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=52577>. We
are very excited to see the interest in open source software to serve
the public through voting systems in elections. We applaud you for your
efforts and would be very happy to assist you and San Francisco's Local
Agency Formation Commission if needed. The OSI has a long history of
working with governments, agencies, corporations, education and open
source projects to raise awareness and adoption of open source software
and development in both the public and private sectors.

Upon review of the report, we would like to propose two changes:

1. Page one provides definitions including, "Open source: A term
signifying the source code would be publicly available." This is an
incomplete definition, the "Open Source Definition" can be found here:
http://opensource.org/osd  It would be better to simply state, "Open
source software: A term used to describe software carrying an OSI
Approved Open Source License." You may also want to include in the
document a link to the OSI's list of approved licenses
<http://opensource.org/licenses>. This definition would ensure that all
of the attributes of the Open Source Definition, not just access to the
source code, are included in the definition.  For example, access to
code alone does not mean that the code can be modified, or that those
modifications may be redistributed. By including a reference to the
OSI's approved licenses, you will also help all those involved in
reviewing potential software for use in voting systems can easily and
consistently identify appropriate software that is internationally
recognized as aligning with the Open Source Definition, ensuring the
software freedom you seek: the permission to use, review, revise, and
redistribute. 

2. Page eight states, "Open source software is classified as a GPL;
hence all improved versions of the original software must remain free,
disallowing proprietary companies to adopt the software, make changes,
and sell it on their own terms." Limiting the definition of open source
to only software distributed with the GPL is incorrect. As stated above,
open source software is internationally recognized as software
distributed with any OSI Approved Open Source License, and includes
permissive licenses <http://opensource.org/faq#permissive>. Narrowly
defining open source as only software carrying a GPL or copyleft license
does not reflect the open source software movement.

I would be pleased to provide you with any more information you may need
or answer any questions. Again, the OSI is thrilled to learn of your
work and we truly wish to help in any way we can to support the adoption
of open source software in voting systems and capitalize on the benefits
of open source development and communities.

Thank you for your consideration,
Patrick Masson



-- 
    ||    |      |  ||||    ||    ||    |  ||||    |||    |    |||      
Patrick Masson
General Manager & Director
Open Source Initiative
855 El Camino Real, Ste 13A, #270
Palo Alto, CA 94301
United States
OSI Phone: (415) 857-5398
Direct Phone: (970) 4MASSON
Skype: massonpj
Em: masson at opensource.org
Ws: www.opensource.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/cavo_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20150520/a0bb434b/attachment.html>