<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On 23 June 2014 17:26, Bret Busby <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bret@busby.net" target="_blank">bret@busby.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
What is the purpose of the application?<br>
<br>
Is it to simply challenge the methodology of the AEC in counting senate<br>
votes?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It's important to note that this is *not* the purpose or effect of what I am doing.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm raising money to appeal against a decision made by the AEC. That decision was to refuse a freedom of information request I made. My request was to release source code written in-house at the AEC that's used to count votes in Senate elections.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Importantly, even if this material is released it still will not be "open source" in the relevant sense. People will have a right to see it but not to use it, create derivative versions etc. Copyright in the source code will still be held by the government, presumably on an "all rights reserved" basis.</div>
<div><br></div><div>However, the code will be available to anyone who requests it and should be published on the AEC website (because of what are known as the Information Publication Scheme provisions of the FOI Act). It won't be released under an NDA - but nor will it be open source. This is something of a murky middle ground where people are allowed to see and study copies but not make any actual use of them.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If successful however I hope there will be some broader consequences. I believe this is the first instance where source code has been the subject of a disputed FOI request. If successful this should lead to broader availability of source code written within government departments. It should mean government agencies think more carefully about source code, and perhaps consider releasing it under open source licences. Certainly moves towards CC licencing of government content can be traced back to FOI.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I also hope it will put to rest those concerns that making source code available can result in "security issues" for important systems. We know this isn't true, but it was still raised in argument against release of the code.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I think there are broad benefits in terms of promoting openness of source code written within government. This isn't quite at the stage yet where it's about open source licensing, but I think it's a step along the road.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Of course others are free to disagree. I understand and appreciate that disputing a government decision may not be something LA wants to be involved with. But I wanted to make clear precisely what that means and does not mean.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Regards</div><div><br></div><div>Michael</div></div></div></div>