Section 14.4. Not About Price, but About Choice

14.4. Not About Price, but About Choice

Many people see the movement to FOSS as an ideological movement. It probably is. Every time freedom has been battled for, there has always been some ideology involved. Different people have always tried to get as much freedom as possible for their partisans, usually ignoring others' views of freedom. Eventually, we get to a middle ground, where freedom winsnot necessarily the myopic view held by the partisans on each side, but a more compromised freedom that can be held longer.

The main discussion is not about economics, but about choice. For too long there was no choice but to keep using the software provided by Microsoft. The Internet opened the possibility of another option, one that proved to be cheaper and more reliable, and one that guaranteed more flexibility and customization.

So, why not simply move to this new option? If software livre is all that it is claimed to be, why even in a government where so much uproar has been generated are there still purchases of new hardware, new licenses, and new versions of the old lock-in option? There are many reasons. A huge lobby has been set in motion to slow any adoption of FOSS. Microsoft is not the only one supporting this lobby, but is surely very active in it.

Microsoft started by giving licenses awayor making them a lot cheaperto governments and schools. This is understandable. It reasoned that the issue driving the growing popularity of software livre was economics, so it tried to be even cheaper (by avoiding training and migration costs). Then there was some more intimidation. It is reported that companies which were promoting their plans to migrate to GNU/Linux and OpenOffice in magazines or events would receive visits or letters from antipiracy organizations and, eventually, a friendly visit from the police. Some companies do not allow employees and consultants to talk about what they are doing with FOSS, for fear of this antipiracy raid. There are reports from some inspected companies that officers concentrate only on Windows machines, ignoring GNU/Linux, Macs, Solaris, and so on. Either these systems and their companies are not entitled to receive protection, or maybe it is just that somebody else is asking for the inspection....

Microsoft surely did a lot of talking. Many Microsoft employees have been vocal about software livre, many times through half-true statements and fear, uncertainty, and doubt tactics. Microsoft's country manager for Brazil, Emilio Umeoka, even went so far as to directly criticize Brazil's president, saying that by supporting software livre he was taking the country in the wrong directionan arrogant comment coming from the head representative of a company that was considered guilty in the U.S., Europe, and recently Brazil, of hurting competition and governments through its commercial practices. Recently, even Microsoft's Bill Gates. The intimidations may have gone too far. At the time the software livre movement in Brazil was promoting the fifth edition of one of the world's largest international FOSS advocate gatherings, the FISL, Microsoft decided to sue the highest authority of the Brazilian government's software livre initiative, the president of the National Institute of Technology (NITI) and one of the originators of the celebrated "Telecentros" project, Sergio Amadeu. An important representative of the software livre principles, Sergio has a deep understanding of the issues and knows that software livre is all about freedom. He has been promoting a carefully considered and reasonable strategy that aims to give to the Brazilian government the choice it needs to decide about the country's technology future. By personally suing Sergio Amadeu (or as Microsoft puts it, requesting explanations in court) for what he has said, Microsoft generated an uproar from people all over the world. Because of the weak basis of the suit, Sergio simply stood by what he said and ignored Microsoft's requests for an explanation in court or otherwise. Sergio said he will not be intimidated, because he's sure that he's doing the right thing for the freedom Brazil needs and deserves. Microsoft's actions show that it doesn't understand what is going on in Brazil. The country is reaching for an option. And the price of choice is not measured in the number of licenses you get for free. Software livre is a way to achieve choice.

The huge lobby against software livre does not come only from international vendors. Many software companies in Brazil don't understand how they will compete in the software livre market. They don't understand the business model and don't see the benefits of Yonchai Bentler's "commons-based peer production" model. It is not clear how they will compete nationally and internationally by developing free software. In fact, not only traditional software companies are at a loss: many in the software livre movement still see any ties with business as "evil" or at least as undesirable. Even those that understand that the only way for software livre to survive is to have a strong and viable software ecosystem around freedom are still struggling in how to create this ecosystem. This has to be addressed by the software livre movement, and it is refreshing to see that some of the most influential software livre entrepreneurs are already joining forces to expand their ability to compete and participate in this market.

Besides the strong lobby, there are other, more important reasons why a faster move to software livre solutions is hard, even when there's a will.