Ideas from the ‘Foundations of Open’ Local Summit

Presenters’ submissions

Idea from Local 2020 Summit: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

Openness for Government – a national imperative

Pia Waugh

Openness as a default position for ICT innovation and development provides many clear opportunities and advantages. Clear leadership and assistance is necessary from the Australian Government so individuals and organisations from all sectors can make informed decisions how openness can benefit them.

Open Standards help ensure interoperability and sustainable access to information. Open development models provide greater capacity for industry collaboration and higher return on investments through a shared load.

Open Source provides an enormous wealth of mature, robust and trusted software from which Australian businesses, government and education can strategically source solutions. It provides key business benefits on which the ICT sector can build on the efforts of a global technology community to create new, innovative and globally competitive solutions.

Our recommendations to the Government are as follows:

1. An Open Source resource(s) for public, business, education, government use
   The greatest issue around Open Source is market education. ICT users are unable to make an educated decision about appropriate technologies or ICT methodologies to leverage if they don’t know the breadth of options. Open Source is vastly misunderstood in the market and this means potential productivity gains and innovation opportunities are lost daily.
2. More Open Source in education curriculum (school, TAFE, University)
   Students skilled in understanding concepts are far more adaptable (and valuable) thanstudents that only understand specific products. To help this Open Source could accompanyother software in schools for word processing, graphics and music. Open Source alsoprovides a plethora of technologies to assist students in learning basic technical skills. Thisis vital because if Australian students only know existing products they struggle to beleaders in a digital economy and global market. Open Source skills are also vital in meetingthe rapidly growing skills demand of the Open Source industry.
3. Open Standards – practical commitment
   The Australian Government have a policy commitment to Open Standards however practically do not yet fully comply to this policy as data and systems published on proprietary standards are still widespread. This creates digital lock-out for citizens and a sustainability problem. A more practical commitment to using Open Standards is necessary. 
4. Clear policy and procurement guidelines
   The AGIMO Open Source Guide for Government was an excellent document, however it needs updating to make it more practical, with new case studies and support options for Government. This would assist agencies in leveraging Open Source that is fit for purpose and clear value for money.  
5. Investment into Open Source R&D
   A recent study in Europe found that “increasing the FLOSS share of software investment from 20% to 40% would lead to a 0.1% increase in annual EU GDP growth excluding benefits within the ICT industry itself – i.e. over Euro 10 billion annually”. This needs to be investigated in Australia, as well as trends in other countries (like the UK) where software created in research are Open Sourced and done collaboratively to increase the value of the research to society and industry more broadly. 

Idea from Local 2020 Summit: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT

Computing Assistance Support & Education

Darrell D. Burkey, President Computing Assistance Support & Education

Further to my presentation at ‘Foundations of Open’ I would like to submit the following summary of our experiences that demonstrate the tremendous outcomes that arise from cooperative approaches of organisations in the community development sector in meeting their Information and Communication Technology needs and to enhance the effectiveness of the services they provide:

1. Non-profit organisations have specific Information and Communications Technology needs that CASE has been addressing for the past ten years. As a cooperative organisation owned by the community development sector itself,  we have demonstrated the effectiveness of providing services in a centralised manner specific to the needs of our members. This approach translates to savings in the order of millions of dollars as service duplication is eliminated and technological solutions are implemented in a cost-effective manner.
   We encourage Government to provide funding to peak body organisations using cooperative based business models to ensure non-profit organisations are not disadvantaged in the area of ICT infrastructure development. This investment will ensure that community based organisations will have access to a variety of technological solutions and technical advocacy to support the important social services they provide to all Australians.
2. CASE is concerned over the issue of the ‘Digital Divide’ which we believe is better described as social inequity regarding access to ICT. We encourage Government to explore and support the use of free and open source software that is capable of providing up to date software and operating systems on older equipment as one option to address this issue such as has been successfully implemented by groups like ComputerBank Victoria. We offer the caution that computer recycling projects may be ‘false value’ if not implemented carefully and with the understanding that they are certainly not suitable as a quick fix to complex social issues or in all situations.
3. Of major concern to CASE is the high cost of data access under the model of charging currently in use which is based on volume of data transferred. Broadband technology that delivers new and creative uses of online resources are useless in an environment where citizens can only afford a few minutes of time online before they have exhausted their monthly quota. We encourage Government to take on the challenge of removing the restrictions to economic and social development caused by this inequity by supporting organisations willing to explore new charging methodologies that more accurately reflect the actual costs of providing data.
4. CASE is concerned that online infrastructures are accessible only via 500+ commercial Internet Service Providers, each struggling to provide services in an environment where they are forced to compete with their own wholesale supplier. It is long overdue that Telstra consumer and wholesale operations are separated to address this situation. CASE believes there is  now strong evidence that this situation is damaging the Australian economy and restricting opportunities to build social capital. We recommend that Government investigate this matter and support solutions to correct this issue as a matter of extreme urgency.

Idea from Local 2020 Summit: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

Free and Open Source Software

Dr Andrew Tridgell, Samba Team

Over the last decade FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) has progressed from being something that only hobbyists are interested in to now being a major part of the IT industry. Free software now powers many of the worlds largest computing systems, is essential for much of the core infrastructure of the Internet and is at the heart of a huge number of consumer devices.

The rise of the use of FOSS in the IT industry is without doubt a revolutionary force that will have a huge impact on the way that society interacts with computers into the future. The question that I would like addressed by the Australia 2020 summit is what can be done to ensure that Australia can benefit to the maximum degree possible from this change in the IT world.

In my own view the keys areas that need to be looked at for Australia to take full advantage of FOSS are:

• patent and copyright reform
• encouraging the use of FOSS in schools
• open source licensing of software developed with public funds
• platform neutrality of government generated documents and IT
• resources

The overall aim should be the removal of impediments to the use of FOSS in Australia.

In the area of patent reform, the key is to fix the serious problems in the patent system which currently punish innovation by open source and proprietary developers alike. We must solve the problem of independent invention, ensuring that it is recognised as a positive, rather than being punished as it is now. We must remove the threat of patent trolls, and prevent the manipulation of the patent system to the detriment of society. This is no small task.

Copyright law also needs serious reform, especially in preventing the abuse of copyright law in an anti-competitive fashion through a misapplication of DMCA-like laws and the use of DRM technologies. The sections of the IT industry which have sought to manipulate these laws for their own anti-competitive and anti-consumer ends need to be stood up to, ensuring that consumer interests are not squashed by corporate greed.

We need to break the Microsoft hegemony in Australian schools, by supporting schools that choose to deploy FOSS solutions. That can be achieved by creating a national center to support the use of FOSS in schools.

We must ensure that software that is developed using taxpayer funds is not lost to commercial interests, but is instead made available to all Australians through the use of appropriate FOSS licenses. This will help to reduce duplicate software development efforts, and ensure that the maximum benefit for all Australians is achieved.

We must ensure that Australian governments do not perpetuate vendor lock-in, by ensuring that government generated documents are usable on all computing platforms, not just those of a single vendor. Similarly we must ensure that government web sites use standards based technologies that are available on all platforms, including FOSS platforms.

Idea from Local 2020 Summit: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

Open Access to Crown Copyright

Jessica Coates, Project Manager, Creative Commons Clinic

It is widely acknowledged that open access to Crown copyright material is important not only as an element of open democracy, but is  “a key driver of social, cultural and economic development”.  With the emergence of digital technologies that enable dissemination of government material at low cost, copyright law is now the last significant barrier to truly open government. Reports and initiatives from the United Kingdom , the Netherlands , the European Union , the OECD , the United States  and New Zealand  recognise the economic advantages of enabling re-use of government information through the use of standardised licensing schemes such as Creative Commons (http://creativecommons.org).

The government is the single biggest owner of intellectual property in Australia. While limited online access is provided to this material, currently the vast majority is available only under standard ‘all rights reserved’ copyright, which prohibits almost all reproduction, communication or practical re-use. Where large amounts of publicly-funded creative, educational and scientific materials are subject to government copyright, there exists an enormous opportunity to unlock this material for re-use in the name of innovation and education.

For the Australian government, the task now is to identify best-practice models to manage the release of materials held by government and publicly-funded institutes. As it currently stands, the lack of coordination in the Australian government’s approach to management of its copyright materials has resulted in a complex and unwieldy system for accessing publicly funded materials. In its 2006 survey of the Queensland Government  the Queensland Spatial Information Council (QSIC) identified the following characteristics of government licensing practices:

• The majority of government agencies do not use any formal licensing for documents shared online; those that do, vary in their legal frameworks significantly
• This complexity increases confusion and cost for clients, the community and the information custodians, and makes it difficult for parties to know if they are complying with their legal obligations
• Incompatibility between licences also creates a substantial barrier to Government agencies dealing with each other, with the result that it is often easier to get the same information from outside Government.

QSIC also concluded that, taking privacy, security and business concerns into account, approximately 85 percent of government material was suitable for release under Creative Commons licences.

To maximise outcomes for the Australian economy and community, the following reforms should be introduced:

1. A Government-wide policy that sets, at a minimum, open access for non-commercial purposes as a default standard for all Crown copyright material.
2. A coordinated approach to information management across government that applies best-practice standards to all Commonwealth, and preferably State, agencies.
3. The implementation of licensing policies to permit re-use of material available on large databases of publicly owned material, such as those maintained by Comlaw and the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
4. Following the example of the United States’ National Institute of Health , the introduction of policies requiring open access to the copyright outputs of research funded by major government research bodies.

Idea from Local 2020 Summit: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

A National Spatial Data Policy Agenda

David Hocking, CEO ASIBA

The implementation of a National Spatial Data Policy Agenda will:

1. Establish a national mechanism for discoverability of spatial data. Discoverability is necessary to effectively deliver spatial data when and where it is needed, especially in emergencies but increasingly for general use, and would unlock enormous opportunities for innovation and creativity with the use of these data.
2. Open up to the wider community public sector data, which will provide transparency in decision-making, and free up a valuable resource for scientific, creative and commercial purposes.
3. Reduce the incidence and cost of duplication across agencies by clearly articulating a policy for creating spatial databases and identify the point of truth responsibilities (that is the agency or individual who is responsible for authorising the data to the desired level of quality).
4. Develop a national pricing model that minimises or eliminates the practice of pricing data at more than the cost of access, a practice which represents a considerable barrier to most users. Cost free access is the most user-friendly option. But government custodians do need funding to manage their data. Policy directives supported by adequate funding are needed.
5. Improve the quality of spatial data at the point of truth to improve accuracy and value of spatial data. Currently, we have cumbersome methods of passing corrections back to custodians. This can take months or may not be possible at all. Frequent users then have the problem of storing yet another version of the data. This is very inefficient for the nation.
6. Enhance the opportunities for innovation within the wider community, research, academic and private sectors. Low cost and ease of access will dramatically increase use and creative endeavour.
7. Allow for growth of the private sector of the spatial information industry by reducing data costs that can serve to inhibit investment in innovation and the development of products and services for export.
8. Position Australian companies to export services and products.

Key aspects of a world class spatial policy framework include the establishment of:

1.   an Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure
2. a National Digital Elevation Framework,
3. a Fully Integrated Positioning Framework
4. and a mechanism that will deliver a coordinated approach to policy.

This mechanism should include all stakeholder groups to ensure that a national policy framework reflects the widest use of publically held spatial data. The Australian Government should institute a National Spatial Advisory Committee similar to that envisaged for infrastructure, to advise on:

1.   Spatial data standards
2. Fundamental data sets
3. Quality auditing
4. Point of truth agencies
5. Creative Commons licensing arrangements
6. Access and pricing arrangements
7. Copyright and privacy arrangements and policy
8. National consistency and interoperability standards and arrangements
9. A framework for a fully integrated global navigation satellite systems infrastructure and infrastructure for utilizing the other emerging forms of positioning systems

The US Department of the Interior recently established an advisory committee that includes representation from varied interests including the private sector, non-profit sector, academia and government. The body reports to the Federal Geographic Data Committee, which is chaired by the Secretary of the Interior.

Idea from Local 2020 Summit: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

IPv6 Now – IPv6 for Australia’s Future  

Tony Hill, Internet Society of Australia

Better infrastructure in the clever country with IPv6  

Australia’s infrastructure will face even more difficult challenges unless we take advantage of IPv6,  particularly for water and energy. For instance, critical energy and resource conservation measures will require large increases in the scope of control systems. There is an urgent need for greater national IP capability to use in reducing our global footprint in this way, but the capacity of our  
current IP system is nearly exhausted.

Why IPv6 is vital for Australia

IPv6 – Internet Protocol version 6 – was developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF –  www.ietf.org) to deal with a looming shortage of IPv4 addresses. IPv6 has greatly expanded address capability. In Australia we now use the older IPv4. The address space pools for IPv4 are  currently expected to run out around 2010 or 2011. This lack is already blocking the building of new large networks. Australia’s major trading and strategic partners, including Japan, South Korea,  China, USA and Europe, are in transition to IPv6.

Australia has a clear choice on IPv6

We can adopt a cautious policy of “wait and see” so that we only start transition to IPv6 when forced to by global IPv4 addresses run out. This could delay the inevitable for a few years, but when the transition becomes necessary, it will be sudden, and very expensive In the interim, as networks grow, network address translation will need to be implemented at ever more levels; difficult, costly and performance-destroying.  

Or we can proceed to implement two policy strands in planning an advanced Australia using IPv6:  

• We could develop IPv6 in new networks and infrastructure projects. The Australian Government proposes a fibre to the node/premises (FTTx) network to supply more than 98% of people with bandwidth of 12 mb/s or more. Another policy proposes that every high school student have a laptop. These very welcome initiatives will establish and enhance our place in the international digital economy. But for Australia to take best advantage of the policies of our major trading and strategic partners, these initiatives should include full IPv6 capability.  
• Australia could also develop IPv6 use as a key Platform for Innovation. This would create significant business opportunities for Australia’s ICT (and many other) sectors because well  developed ICT applications enable significant downstream benefits. There are many  beneficial innovations available with IPv6 that are directly relevant to Australia, such as  these that only scratch the surface:
• Building management – for energy minimisation  
  • Sensor networks – for environmental monitoring and water management
  • Supply chains – traditional and e-business  
  • Emergency services – interoperability  
  • Business and consumer electronics – embedded systems  
  • Transport industry – vehicle and container telemetry  

Key priorities for Australia  

• Skills – development of IPv6 skills at all levels from technical to strategic planning  
• Transition planning – national coordination of transition planning efforts  
• Infrastructure projects – incorporate IPv6 capability into all relevant infrastructure  
• Supportive government policies – involve government in leading national IPv6 innovation through: 
  • Gear government to be part of the innovation, working with industry and research to  develop strategic IPv6 opportunities  
  • Speed up government transition to IPv6  
  • Incorporate IPv6 into infrastructure projects, such as the FTTx network, laptops for schools,  etc  
  • Support the NICTIA 10 Year Strategic Vision with ‘whole of government’ coordination, to  maximise the ICT sector’s capacity to innovate  
  • Funding for national coordination of IPv6 transition, including international interoperability trials in e-business and e-government  
  • Fund strategic awareness and skills development programs toboost industry into IPv6 capability  

Idea from Local 2020 Summit participant: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

Access to live broadcast television services by educational institutions.

George Bray

What kinds of differences could the developing digital economy make right across the education lifecycle?

Summary: Enabling research and education sites to embrace live digital television as a learning resource across all campuses means at all points of their lifecycle our students will have access to the diversity of culture, news and opinion as a staple.

Abstract: Author describes an issue relating to the interpretation of the Broadcast Act limiting educational institutions from sharing live free-to-air broadcasts on a closed educational network. Describes the benefits to all educational institutions were they to have retransmission rights to any free-to-air terrestrial or satellite channels.

The Problem: Universities cannot share their television resources due to unclear interpretations of the Broadcast Act.

At present, many of Australia’s educational institutions are connected by the AARNet high speed network. Many of them are beginning to use live broadcast TV services on the PCs at their campus as an educational resource. They each have to equip themselves for the channels they can receive, and the benefit of those services can only extend to the institutions’ network boundary.

The Benefits: All participants on high-speed educational networks can receive, reticulate and record all free-to-air channels.

The enabling of live broadcast television services on the enterprise networks of educational institutions makes way for analysis and comparison of content from all areas of the country. Language students gain a great benefit by exposure to current live media, via their computers. Researchers have breaking news and archive material on their desktop. The potential effect of this benefit extends to all users at all connected PCs at all R&E institutions nationally. They gain access to 200+ channels.

The Solution:

Amend the Broadcast Act to clearly define the fair use of broadcast material nationally for all educational institutions. Amend the role of Screen Rights to measure/clear international sources.

Clarify that educational organisations have clearance to use any free- to-air live broadcast services and to share them nationally within the academic realm for purposes of study, archive and analysis. As part of their participation in Australian society, any broadcaster supplying  free-to-air (unencrypted) services anywhere within our shores would be bound to allow national open access to their material for educational use.

Idea from Local 2020 Summit participant: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

Open Foundations in Education

Kevin Karp, StudentNet 

Background

• Primary and Secondary Schools need to be able to participate in modern networked environments to be able to access educational resources involving both content and functions (eg collaboration).
• School education needs to make further use of multi-media rich content resources and teaching materials available through the worldwide internet.
• Schools need to be able to openly share information between each other regarding staff, curriculums, syllabuses and lesson content.
• Parents need to be able to re-locate their children between schools and achieve a greater degree of transference of their child’s record of existing performance and achievement levels from one school to another – even if this involves crossing a state border.

Ideas

• Physical Infra-structure and facilities be made available for the schools sector to improve network speeds and bandwidth traffic loads.
• Investigation be made of XML based technologies to be utilised to facilitate the open transfer of school records between co-operating schools including staff, student, curriculum and syllabus data. An international example of this approach is the Schools Interoperability Framework (SIF).
• Should feasibility be established for definition of schools related XML schemas (such as those in SIF) then supporting infra-structure be established to support the inter-operable cross-transfer of school data between schools. In SIF terms this may involve the establishment of a Zone Integration Server (ZIS), or equivalent, and distribution of relevant SIF agents.

References:

Post Secondary Electronic Standards Council: www.pesc.org

Schools Interoperability Framework Association: www.sifinfo.org

Idea from Local 2020 Summit participant: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

Seizing Open Opportunities for Innovation

Patrick McCormick, The Nous Group  

Australia has an opportunity to realise long term economic and social benefits by building an innovation platform attuned to creative 21st century knowledge workers. Digital knowledge, Internet connectivity and globalisation conspire to overcome our nation’s historic economic disadvantages of scale and distance but only if individuals and businesses can innovate and collaborate effectively.   

In a networked digitised environment intellectual property (IP) is easily shared, re-used and modified for wider commercial and social purpose with little or no marginal cost of production or distribution. This digital transformation has triggered both more exclusive, restrictive IP protection and more inclusive, open sharing of IP, each with different risks, benefits and business models.  The challenge is not to choose a single policy framework but rather to enable a range of options and experimentation to effectively align exclusive or inclusive rights to the innovative production of public and private goods. 

Exclusive IP rights under traditional copyright and patent schemes must remain an option to extract monopolistic value from ideas and products. However service centric business models built upon inclusive, open IP licensing schemes, increasingly common in software and publishing, should also be legitimised in order to effectively compete in the marketplace.  Success stories under such licenses, such as the Linux operating system, the Firefox browser and the Apache web server, fuel new thinking about market efficiencies and are characterised by highly collaborative, modular production. The public sector should take a lead role in establishing a broad and interoperable IP ecosystem with a diverse array of licensing options. 

To optimise innovative and collaborative production and ensure continued global competitiveness in knowledge intensive industries the Australian Government should start by fostering open IP in three key ways: 

1. Open information and knowledge – allow information produced by the public sector to be easily accessible and freely available to citizens and businesses for reuse, including commercialisation with appropriate exceptions such as law enforcement, security and privacy.  Placing government produced IP in the public domain, such as maps and data, can unlock public and private value – U.S. property appraisal data makes www.zillow.com a more innovative service for home buyers than www.suburbview.com 
2. Open standards and protocols – require when practical that technology (particularly software) developed by or purchased by the Government adhere to open standards to support interoperability and ensure the long term integrity and accessibility of public sector information and knowledge.  Proprietary document and data formats threaten to make the concept of enclosure literal in that a vendor may no longer provide software to access content within an outdated digital format or even provide the format blueprint required to unlock the information. 
3. Open source technology and intellectual property – develop internal capability and understanding to utilise open source technology for Government applications and fund open source intellectual property in research initiatives (based upon business case analysis).  MIT Press was surprised that despite being available for free as a PDF under the Creative Commons license, Professor Eric Von Hippel’s book, “Democratising Innovation,” quickly became their best selling book ever.

Idea from Local 2020 Summit participant: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

Australia’s Open Source Industry is poised for massive growth.

Donna Benjamin
Director – Open Source Industry Australia
http://www.osia.net.au

Australia’s Open Source Industry is poised for massive growth. Increasing demand for open source skills draws attention to a deficit our education system is not addressing. Misconceptions are the key barrier preventing broad local adoption of, and contribution to, Open Source Software. [1]

Commoditisation of information technology software infrastructure democratises productivity and competition. Open Source Software is levelling the international platform for Information and Communications Technologies [ICT].

Open Source is no longer an emerging technology. It is here now. OSIA[2] believes it’s in Australia’s best interest to not only adopt Open Source software, but actively contribute to the Open Source economy of ideas and innovation. Each of the 10 areas of focus for the 2020 Summit depend on the new reality of a global interconnected information economy. Google and Wikipedia were built with Open Source Software because it was the only way it could be done. Open Source Software enables us to compete, connect and communicate.

Google has demonstrated the benefits of Open Source for their ICT platforms. Recognising the value of contributing back to the development community they are now investing in and facilitating the next generation of open source software developers with the Summer of Code and Highly Open Participation initiatives.

Australia must show leadership in the development of an ICT platform for Asia and Oceania. We need to invest in ICT education. We must stem the ebb and increase the flow of young people into a culture of participation and contribution to ICT rather than rely on training them to be consumers of technology created by others. The Open Source development process plays to Australia’s strengths in software construction and marketing, and bypasses our weaknesses.

Innovation depends on building on what came before by improving it, by making it better. This is why Open Source is so successful. There are no barriers to innovation in the open source ecosphere. There is an open market for improvements, and users are not only welcome, but invited to contribute to improve the product to meet their own suggestion only meets a niche, users have the freedom to customise for their own use cases. In this context there is no market too small to be effectively serviced. This is critical for Australia. How often are we told our market is too small to warrant investing in the customisations we need to address local needs? Technology innovation in source code is
generating change so fast it’s literally changing the nature of the world. Access to that code is critical for all of us. We should harness the power of change by taking part and driving it forward, not taking a back seat.

[1] Waugh Partners, Australian Open Source Industry & Community Report 2008 (http://census.waughpartners.com.au/census-report-2008-r1.pdf)

[2] OSIA: Open Source Industry Australia (http://www.osia.net.au) is an industry association representing over 120 Australian businesses engaged in developing, supporting and selling Open Source Solutions.

Idea from Local 2020 Summit participant: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra ACT.

POLICY, LAW and TECHNOLOGY

Neale Hooper

Principal Lawyer, Whole of Government Licensing Project, Office of Economic and Statistical Research, Queensland Treasury

Standards – Technology and Information Management

If the potentially major transformative benefits to be derived from “Open” both from the technological and digital knowledge perspectives are to be fully realised then it is essential to establish or identify internationally credible standards and specifications etc. which support the desired outcomes.  The real value and potential of PSI is realised only through its extensive re-use. Open will overcome the present major impediments which prevent this full potential from being realised.

To implement best practice information management, the development of an internationally credible standard for metadata is essential. The ability to search for and locate data online is directly related to the quality of metadata for information products and services.

Standards – Legal – Creative Commons

Open content licences, and in particular Creative Commons licences, at present represent a de facto international legal licensing standard, based on copyright, in the online environment as it has already been established in over 40 countries with that number increasing. The present vast variety of licences applied by various government agencies effectively prevents the mash up of various databases and information forming part of PSI. The incompatibility of licences is currently a major legal impediment to the objectives of Open. The Queensland Government GILF project

(www.qsic.qld.gov.au) indicates that the general adoption of CC licences by government agencies would vastly enhance the interoperability or compatibility of licences (ie the legal rights of reuse) and thus the ability to lawfully engage in mash ups and the creation of various value added or derivative information products. For PSI which has privacy or other restrictive factors associated with it, the government agencies concerned will need to manage any permissible access and reuse under a more restrictive licence or other lawful means.

Government Policy – Intra Government – Agency to Agency dealings- Access and Reuse

The way to realise the full potential of PSI currently locked up by government agencies and authorities in their respective silos is to promote public policies on access and re-use which strongly support data and information sharing across agencies. The default position should be in favour of granting access and reuse rights to other agencies, in the absence of a cogent ground against it. CC licence like arrangements between agencies could be implemented and these would operate on a memorandum of understanding (MOU) basis rather than as a legally enforceable agreement.

This sharing of information across agencies will facilitate better informed decision making by government, including in public policy development on social, economic, cultural, environmental and commercial issues. From an efficiency (both economic and operational) perspective it will reduce duplication of effort across agencies by avoiding reinventing the wheel and the wasting of taxpayers’ monies. The analogy on the technology front is to have a more open architecture (including open source) which enables efficient interfacing and interoperability across agencies’ IT systems.

Government Policy in dealings with External Parties- Access and Reuse

Not only will a policy in favour of Open deliver the above benefits for government agencies but also for the private sector and other levels of government.

Once again, the default policy position should be in favour of government agencies granting to external parties (eg the private sector, the general public and other levels of government), broad access and reuse rights in the absence of a cogent reason why not to do so (eg privacy, statutory constraint).

The GILF project has engaged with the private sector spatial industry body ASIBA , which supports the adoption of CC licences generally by government to facilitate greatly the private sector’s ability to access and reuse government held spatial information. Similarly the use of CC licences by the private sector when supplying data to government would greatly facilitate data sharing and reuse. (Many COAG cross jurisdictional projects, including the National Water Initiative and NISS, would also benefit from using CC or other standard licences).

Private sector economic activity and job creation will be facilitated as a result of implementing Open. Innovation in the knowledge economy will also be greatly enhanced.

Idea from Local 2020 Summit: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowlege, Canberra ACT

Australian Digital Alliance

Laura Simes, Australian Digital Alliance

The Australian Digital Alliance is a non-profit coalition of public and private sector interests formed to promote balanced copyright law and provide an effective voice for a public interest perspective in the copyright debate. ADA members include universities, schools, consumer groups, galleries, museums, IT companies, scientific and other research organisations, libraries and individuals. Members are united in their support of copyright law that balances the interests of rights holders with the interests of users of copyright material.

The Australian Digital Alliance believes it is important that Australia utilise the enormous potential of digital developments for education, and we recognise the Government’s commitment to this through the ‘digital education revolution’. The availability of high speed broadband across Australia has the potential to reduce many problems of resourcing and access to information faced in Australia due to our dispersed population. Students and researchers in remote areas could be provided with equal access to quality resources and texts that students in metropolitan centres have. If every student has access to a computer and high speed broadband, then all students, regardless of socioeconomic status, can have access to knowledge.

However, the ADA is concerned that overly complex and restrictive provisions in the Copyright Act 1968 continue to impede this potential. We set out some brief examples:

• Libraries, archives and cultural institutions across Australia hold vast collections of rare materials that they can digitise for preservation purposes, and can make available on computers on the premises, but are unable to make available more broadly via the internet due to copyright restrictions.
• Where students or researchers obtain access to electronic journals via an institutional subscription, there will often be limitations to its use. This includes terms and conditions of the license that are more restrictive than the Copyright Act 1968, and exclude fair dealing or private copying exceptions which are allowed under the Act. They can also include digital locks (or Technological Protection Measures) which can prevent use for fair dealing or private copying. An example of this is disabling the ability to print an article, or preventing users from selecting text in the article to copy it (thereby interfering with the ability to copy under fair dealing provisions).

In short, the ADA sees great potential in the digital education revolution, however, without significant copyright reform the ADA believes that students will have access to high speed broadband, but will not have the access to knowledge that should flow from this.

We recommend:

• Amendment of the copyright law to prevent contracting out of the copyright exceptions, and to allow users and institutions to break digital locks (TPMs) where a legal copyright exception applies
• The Australian Government should encourage access to knowledge by making government resources readily available. The material should be available to all users under permissive licenses such as creative commons licenses. 

Idea for Local 2020 Summit: Foundations of Open: Technology and Digital Knowledge, Canberra, ACT

OPEN

Nick Sharp

OPEN what?  Open government.  Open law making.  Open publication of most of the government and academic research done in our name and with our money, no matter whether the government of the day likes it or hates it.  Open source software so we can all benefit from the great skill and intellect used to create it, instead of concentrating power and wealth in ever fewer hands and corporations.

We have The Internet technology and we have the need.  Many more activities need to be open and accessible, so that together we might advance the world instead of letting it slide into catastrophe.

CLOSED is synonymous with arbitrary use, often misuse, of power.  Laws with no apparent justification.  Decisions made behind closed doors to the benefit of the powerful few and the detriment of the many. Shutting out the vast majority from sharing knowledge, especially in the developing world.  Outrageous prices for mediocre and poorly supported proprietary software, based on hidden, flawed standards.

2020 is OPEN.  It is about harnessing the wealth of knowledge and experience of thousands of skilled people in the service of the nation and possibly the world.  It will bring out the wisdom not just of the thousand who attend the final summit, but of the thousands more who have contributed their ideas at prior local 2020 meetings.

OPEN is publishing under Creative Commons so anyone who wants to use the material knows in advance the extent to which they are so permitted.

OPEN is presenting an organisation’s material on its web site, having an easy mechanism for anyone to comment on it, and a process for ensuring that all reasonable comments are noted and where appropriate acted on promptly.

OPEN is using Open Source Software (OSS) throughout government at all tiers, and using non-proprietary international document standards for all material, thus not only saving billions of dollars but also securing total and continuing availability of the material by all.

OPEN is using OSS as well as proprietary software in schools so that students are exposed to all the possibilities instead of becoming welded onto one proprietary option.  And saving many millions of dollars.

OPEN is using OSS in the service of those of our fellow citizens who
are challenged by social, medical and intellectual difficulties.

OPEN is a philosophy and its time is now.

Tagged: DER, foundations summit, ICT, open data, open government, open source, open standards