Switzerland passes law requiring #OpenSource software in the public sector. "All public bodies must disclose the source code of software developed by or for them, unless precluded by third-party rights or security concerns" Well done @maemst, great work!

https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/open-source-observatory-osor/news/new-open-source-law-switzerland

New Open Source law in Switzerland

Switzerland has enacted the "Federal Law on the Use of Electronic Means for the Fulfilment of Governmental Tasks" (EMBAG), establishing a mandatory requirement for open source software within public sector bodies.

Joinup
@webmink @maemst lets hope that the "third-party rights or security concerns" doesn't end up doing the heavy lifting 🤞
@nCrazed @webmink @maemst In the 80s we introduced a policy at NASA similar to this law and unfortunately that’s what happened. Unless there are strong incentives to select OSS these laws will make little difference.

@nCrazed @webmink @maemst Dropped into this thread to find this and it was the very first reply.

This is a loophole so huge you could drive a dump truck through it.

My Champagne, alas, will stay in the fridge for now.

@nCrazed @webmink @maemst Wouldn't "security concerns" just be security through obscurity in this context, which is a well known antipattern? So "third-party rights" is the sole remaining good argument.
@webmink @maemst This is fantastic news. Especially as it will hopefully motivate projects to design for a much broader, more inclusive audience, not just tech heavy users that want to 'scratch their own itch'
@webmink lol it's all produced by third parties.
@webmink we need this in Germany
@ErikUden @webmink
just btw:
Germany is the country who asked wikidata, us and others how much we need.
Then before elections they promised "60mio. for Open Source".
Then a honk of a 4% party got our financial minister and ruled out all the others and in the end we got 3.5 …
Anyway HOPE!
@sl007 I will personally cause the annihilation of the FDP  
@ErikUden @webmink I'm afraid it is not as powerful a law. The "unless protected" opens wide doors to closed software
@ppezziardi @ErikUden @webmink
It will be interesting how this is interpreted. You could argue this exception is necessary to allow the use of previously copyrighted programs and libraries, but anything new they actually have developed in the future, should be open source.
@duckwhistle @ErikUden @webmink it's already their property of developed with public money. Making it open source does not bring magic benefits like a contributive community imho..
@ppezziardi @ErikUden @webmink
Not magic no. But how many tiers of government are there, and how many instances of the lower tiers?
How many people are working for the public sector that could benefit from a repository they just have access to, without multiple councils having to approve sharing something they spent their budget on? There is opportunity here, if it's taken advantage of.
@duckwhistle @ErikUden @webmink yes, but I definitely think that you have to add an organisational shift beyond the decree, to foster the communities around shared software
France is quite ambitious with lasuite.numerique.gouv.fr btw
@ppezziardi @ErikUden @webmink firefoxs translation into english for that website is just beutiful.
@duckwhistle @ErikUden @webmink this AI module could benefit the LaSuite program, aka funding and contributions in kind
@ErikUden @webmink should be like this as a matter of course in every civilised country.
@webmink @maemst Not sure if really want to read that code 😱☠️ Aside from that, let's hope this doesn't remain a papiertiger 🙂
@webmink @maemst wait, when did this happen? Was it not passed last year?
@alexander_schoch @webmink Yes, the law was passed in 2023, but it was enforced on 1 January 2024.
@maemst @webmink Damn, that's really cool. I've been advocating for "public money, public code" at https://thealternative.ch for years now, and I didn't hear about this **for a full year**.
TheAlternative

TheAlternative

@webmink @maemst This law does de facto not require anything. It does not obligate any public body to ensure that the source code of software developed for or by them may be disclosed. It does not even obligate them to preference such software. All it does is instruct them to disclose if nothing prevents it. Weak sauce.

@webmink @maemst

UnlessThis generally means everyone is just going to say "well we can't release it due to security concerns" and nothing will change. I hope Switzerland will not have this issue and will truly embrace #OpenSource, or better yet, #FreeSoftware, and encourage more European countries to do so quickly.

@webmink @maemst let's hope they fulfil

In several south american countries this is also by law, yet you can see universities deploying things in background that use proprietary software and they just don't tell about it. You notice it because you are inside x3

@maemst @webmink sadly only for #custom-made solutions made with #PublicMiney.

They don't ban procurement or use of #COTS solutions that are #CCSS and not #FLOSS...

@webmink @maemst — Could someone in-the-know help me understand if "public money, public code" also applies to investigators receiving public funds in the form of research grants?
Open by default: It’s the law | ti&m

Switzerland introduces open source and open government data law. The aim is to ensure openness, innovation and digital sustainability in government.

@webmink @maemst Something tells me this is inclined towards source-available software rather than OSS. (I could be wrong, and I'd be happier if it were OSS, contrary to my notion.)
@webmink @maemst "unless precluded by third-party rights". I hope I'm wrong, but this sounds like a broad way to avoid this rule.

Sounds good. I am in favor of open source be a requirement for all software acquisitions by the public sector. More companies should follow that.

Now I understand that it may not be feasible to do an immediate switch in all cases. So to take that into account you can instead of a hard rule make the rule that any call for tenders must apply a 3x price penalty when comparing offers which include any closed source software components.

My reasoning behind that is that to me 2x the initial price seems like a sensible estimate on the future cost of eliminating your dependency on the closed source software once the contract ends or that software is retired.

@webmink @maemst i totally agree on this. Let me also add that this requirement, the access to the source code, makes total sense even in the private sector in order to have total control of what is running inside your company.