Transcript of SFP#27: Policy and EU: Open Source hearing in the German Bundestag
This is a transcript created with the Free Software tool Whisper. For more information and feedback reach out to podcast@fsfe.org
WEBVTT 00:00.000 --> 00:04.640 Before we start with the podcast, we would like to say thank you to all of you who support 00:04.640 --> 00:07.740 the FSFE's work of money. 00:07.740 --> 00:12.760 Working for software freedom and producing podcasts costs money. 00:12.760 --> 00:18.200 Please consider supporting us with our nation under FSFE.org, slash donate and in the 00:18.200 --> 00:19.200 show notes. 00:30.000 --> 00:36.840 Welcome to the software freedom podcast. 00:36.840 --> 00:40.560 This podcast is presented to you by the free software foundation Europe. 00:40.560 --> 00:47.040 We are a charity that empowers users to take control of technology. 00:47.040 --> 00:51.080 I'm Bonnie Merring and our guest for this episode is Alexander Sandar. 00:51.080 --> 00:57.480 Alex is the senior policy consultant for the FSFE and in his work for the FSFE, he monitors 00:57.480 --> 01:03.840 the current happenings in the European Union and pushes for the recognition of free software. 01:03.840 --> 01:08.680 Today we will talk about the open source hearing in the digital committee of the German 01:08.680 --> 01:10.640 Bundestag. 01:10.640 --> 01:17.520 The hearing took place in the beginning of December on the 4th of December to be precise and 01:17.520 --> 01:22.800 Alex was invited there as an expert for the FSFE foundation Europe. 01:22.800 --> 01:26.600 So what they discussed, we will now talk more about with Alex. 01:26.720 --> 01:32.760 Hi Alex, nice to have you here again for our free software policy update. 01:32.760 --> 01:33.680 Yeah, thanks a lot. 01:33.680 --> 01:37.400 Thanks for the invitation and yeah, happy to be back. 01:37.400 --> 01:38.840 Yeah, thank you for making the time. 01:38.840 --> 01:40.920 It's always nice to hear here. 01:40.920 --> 01:49.640 So you were invited as an expert for the open source hearing in the digital 01:49.640 --> 01:51.880 committee of the German Bundestag. 01:51.880 --> 01:54.480 Can you tell me a bit more about this? 01:54.480 --> 01:56.040 Can you tell us the background? 01:56.040 --> 01:57.040 How this happened? 01:57.040 --> 01:59.000 Was there some previous contact? 01:59.000 --> 02:05.200 And also can you tell me who actually organized the meeting and what was on the agenda? 02:05.200 --> 02:06.880 Yeah, absolutely. 02:06.880 --> 02:08.960 A lot of questions. 02:08.960 --> 02:15.960 I'll start with the coalition treaty of the Ampelregierung, which was the government 02:15.960 --> 02:19.000 of Germany in the last years. 02:19.000 --> 02:23.720 And they agreed in their coalition treaty to basically follow the principle of public 02:23.720 --> 02:29.160 money public code, so our initiative where we asked governments, public bodies, public 02:29.160 --> 02:36.160 institutions to release free software whenever they invest in software. 02:36.160 --> 02:41.840 And this demand was more or less put into the coalition treaty and then the government 02:41.840 --> 02:43.840 should have worked on this. 02:43.840 --> 02:51.760 And part of this work is that then also the Bundestag, which is the parliament in Germany, 02:51.760 --> 02:57.320 discusses these topics and comes up with proposals, ideas, and what they want to do in 02:57.320 --> 02:58.320 this. 02:58.320 --> 03:03.120 So, and therefore it's pretty common, then whatever, there is a law-making process or 03:03.120 --> 03:07.920 there's a topic where a government wants to work on or parliament works, wants to work 03:07.920 --> 03:13.720 on that they before they start the work, that they come up with a hearing in order to 03:13.720 --> 03:17.120 get some input from experts. 03:17.120 --> 03:18.720 So, and this is what happened here. 03:18.720 --> 03:25.360 So we gave them input as experts, but unfortunately, as you said, the hearing took place just a 03:25.360 --> 03:32.760 few days ago or in this regard, maybe so already weeks ago, and there is no government anymore. 03:32.760 --> 03:39.720 So here we see that there was already something which was not that normal, not that common 03:39.720 --> 03:42.200 when you normally talk about hearings. 03:42.200 --> 03:48.680 So the thing is, the last government and they didn't really work that much on open source. 03:48.680 --> 03:54.480 So they did some things, for example, they followed up with the Center for Digital Democracy, 03:54.480 --> 04:01.160 which is hosting, for example, open code to a code sharing platform for software tools for 04:01.160 --> 04:09.040 the public administrations, but also the standards, so the Center for Digital Soranity creates 04:09.040 --> 04:15.000 the so-called open desk, so office solution for public institutions. 04:15.000 --> 04:21.800 However, not that much happened in between, but the parliamentarians still wanted to have 04:21.800 --> 04:24.640 this hearing since they wanted to debate this. 04:24.640 --> 04:30.320 And here we have to say that the pressure from the committee itself to host this hearing, 04:30.320 --> 04:35.320 no matter if there's a government or not, was the moment that they decided to look we 04:35.320 --> 04:41.040 want to still discuss this, even if we won't act in this term anymore. 04:41.040 --> 04:45.840 So basically the hearing then happened because of a fight of the parliamentarians, and this 04:45.840 --> 04:53.200 is also how the process then works, the parliamentarians who sit in this committee, which is basically, 04:53.200 --> 04:57.960 if you like, a plenary for a specific topic, this is a committee in the parliament, so you 04:57.960 --> 05:02.080 have the plenary in the parliament, and then you have many committees. 05:02.080 --> 05:08.400 One on digital, for example, one on economics, the other one on security, and so on, and 05:08.400 --> 05:09.800 so forth. 05:09.800 --> 05:14.320 And in this digital committee there, they wanted to discuss the topic of open source, and then 05:14.320 --> 05:18.800 they agreed on, so even if we didn't have the time to work on this during our term, as 05:18.800 --> 05:24.160 we agreed in the coalition treaty, we still want to run this hearing in order to maybe also 05:24.160 --> 05:29.200 prepare the next government, so that the knowledge, at least, is already out there. 05:29.200 --> 05:35.160 So basically the idea of the hearing is to invite experts to gather ideas, and then out 05:35.160 --> 05:41.160 of this input from the experts, and then also other stakeholders that come externally, law-making 05:41.160 --> 05:42.800 process starts. 05:42.800 --> 05:50.680 So and this happened in the hearing, and they invited basically nine experts from economics, 05:50.680 --> 05:56.360 from civil society, that was our ticket, so to say, from research, but also from public 05:56.360 --> 05:58.640 administrations themselves. 05:58.640 --> 06:05.040 And these nine experts presented their positions towards the hearing, how they think, how 06:05.040 --> 06:09.720 the government, how the next government should work on the topic of open source. 06:09.720 --> 06:14.160 This was what happened there in the hearing, and that's why it happened that way and at 06:14.160 --> 06:15.160 this time. 06:15.160 --> 06:16.680 All right. 06:16.680 --> 06:26.200 So even so it now does not really have an effect for the current amperage, which is not, 06:26.200 --> 06:32.960 or which by the time we were released as podcasts, will not be the government of Germany anymore 06:32.960 --> 06:38.680 because it will be after the 16th of December when the German Bundeskanzler will ask the 06:38.680 --> 06:39.680 Vertrauensfrage. 06:39.680 --> 06:43.800 I'm not sure how to say this in English, how do you say it in English? 06:43.800 --> 06:47.960 I think this is a pretty German word, so you can go with this, I guess, so, but it's basically 06:47.960 --> 06:54.560 the attitude to shut down the government, officially, into open and pass away for new elections. 06:54.560 --> 07:02.160 So there is definitely no room for this government to work on this topic, but the members of 07:02.160 --> 07:08.200 the parliament and the institution, the parliament itself, will keep record of this hearing and 07:08.200 --> 07:13.720 the next government will definitely learn about this hearing if they don't learn by themselves. 07:13.720 --> 07:17.640 We will tell them that it happened and that they should listen to what was said because 07:17.640 --> 07:23.520 the hearing itself was very interesting and also from the topics that have been. 07:23.520 --> 07:25.840 Yeah, we will come to this in a second. 07:25.840 --> 07:26.840 Yeah, okay, sure. 07:27.320 --> 07:33.560 Okay, okay, I just want to lay down the foundation so that we are, because not all of our listeners 07:33.560 --> 07:37.920 are from Germany and this is a very German process, I can't imagine. 07:37.920 --> 07:44.680 I guess it is also similar in other countries, but for now, we just lay some of the foundation. 07:44.680 --> 07:50.640 In this committee, there were only coalition members, so there were also other parliamentarians. 07:51.480 --> 07:55.680 No, it's, it's pretty much like, it's, it's organized like a tiny plenary. 07:55.680 --> 08:01.200 So basically in the committee, you have less people than in a plenary, but every group is reflected 08:01.200 --> 08:07.920 in the same amount of people or in the same percentage, like if it would have been a plenary meeting. 08:07.920 --> 08:15.080 So if you have 300 people in a plenary, you have 30 people in the committee and then you just, 08:15.080 --> 08:19.760 like, delete everywhere zero and that's the amount of them members that are then in this 08:19.760 --> 08:21.680 committee to break it down. 08:21.680 --> 08:27.680 So it's something like a small plenary session, but on a very specific topic in this case 08:27.680 --> 08:28.680 digital. 08:28.680 --> 08:34.000 So other members of other parties who are not currently part of the German government 08:34.000 --> 08:40.200 are also in this hearing, they also learn about exactly. 08:40.200 --> 08:42.400 So these are members of the parliament. 08:42.400 --> 08:44.600 So these are, this is not the government, right? 08:44.600 --> 08:51.720 So the parliament is disconnected from the parliament, so you find coalition groups. 08:51.720 --> 08:58.120 So you find the groups that elected basically the government, but they are not the government. 08:58.120 --> 09:04.800 So even if you talk to, in this regard, or in this, in this case, to social democrats, 09:04.800 --> 09:09.800 liberals, or Greens, then you talk to the members of the parliament and not to the members 09:09.800 --> 09:13.200 of the government. 09:13.200 --> 09:18.560 However, the majorities in the parliament are then at these three groups in this example, 09:18.560 --> 09:23.200 and it's likely that they will vote in the direction of the government, but even if the 09:23.200 --> 09:28.800 government proposes a law and brings it to the parliament, members of the parliament 09:28.800 --> 09:30.000 modified this. 09:30.000 --> 09:36.080 So even if a law is proposed by the government, this is normally modified during the parliamentarian 09:36.080 --> 09:40.680 process, but with the majorities of these coalition parties. 09:40.680 --> 09:42.880 So this is the normal workflow. 09:42.880 --> 09:47.640 In this case, so if the government would still have been there, this would have meant that 09:47.640 --> 09:54.320 then based on our input, for us, it would have been important that these coalition parties 09:54.320 --> 09:56.800 follow up based on what we have said. 09:56.800 --> 10:02.120 Because there are none, basically we reached out to one could say everyone who is there. 10:02.120 --> 10:08.440 So basically the next government, so the next parties that formed the government, this 10:08.440 --> 10:13.280 was basically the people we tried to address in this hearing, and this is basically pretty 10:13.280 --> 10:18.280 much more or less everyone that was there in the parliament. 10:18.280 --> 10:19.280 All right. 10:19.280 --> 10:22.560 Thank you very much for the foundation and the background. 10:22.560 --> 10:25.240 And what was actually just Gus in this hearing? 10:25.240 --> 10:29.640 So what was the position that the FSFE brought in and what was the position Althas brought 10:29.640 --> 10:32.320 in there? 10:32.320 --> 10:40.440 So basically every expert had the chance to submit a written statement beforehand. 10:40.440 --> 10:43.360 So before the hearing started, and this is what we did. 10:43.360 --> 10:48.600 So we wrote down, I think it was something like 12 to 15 pages, where we explained our 10:48.600 --> 10:55.760 general views on the topic of open source in particular related to governmental actions. 10:55.760 --> 10:59.000 So what the government should do or what the parliament should do in this regard. 10:59.000 --> 11:05.760 So in terms of lawmaking, of implementation, of practical regulation and stuff like this. 11:05.760 --> 11:13.720 And in the hearing itself, we had the chance to present the position in five minute statements. 11:13.720 --> 11:19.120 So we had the chance to say for five minutes, whatever we want to do or whatever we want 11:19.120 --> 11:20.120 to say. 11:20.120 --> 11:21.720 And this was true for every expert. 11:21.720 --> 11:28.200 And then after this first initial round of presenting positions, the members of the committee 11:28.200 --> 11:32.760 had the chance to ask the experts questions that come up for them. 11:32.760 --> 11:40.960 So basically it was this is why it's called hearing a possibility for members to ask experts 11:40.960 --> 11:44.080 on specific things that they want to learn. 11:44.080 --> 11:48.800 So and yeah, obviously we were not aware of potential questions. 11:48.800 --> 11:53.320 So that's why we are experts, we can answer everything. 11:53.320 --> 12:00.240 And so basically this is this is then true for all the nine people that have been invited. 12:00.240 --> 12:06.400 And positions were basically pretty pro open source. 12:06.400 --> 12:15.200 So even the representatives of their proprietary vendors agreed on the need for open source and 12:15.200 --> 12:22.640 the values of open source, however, they also fought for making a point for proprietary 12:22.640 --> 12:23.640 software. 12:23.640 --> 12:28.760 But there was basically only one expert who got in this direction and was a representative 12:28.760 --> 12:33.200 of small and medium enterprises here in Germany. 12:33.200 --> 12:40.880 And but other experts were clearly going in our direction, this basically one could say 12:40.880 --> 12:45.760 following our public money public code demand, asking for investments in open source, asking 12:45.760 --> 12:51.400 for migration into open source, asking to get rid of the vendor log in and to pass the 12:51.400 --> 12:54.000 way to more digital sovereignty. 12:54.000 --> 12:58.720 And for us, it was important in our position to make clear that digital sovereignty for 12:58.720 --> 13:02.800 example is only possible if you also use free software. 13:02.800 --> 13:07.720 So there won't be digital sovereignty without free software. 13:07.720 --> 13:10.040 So this is a connection we wanted to make. 13:10.040 --> 13:16.040 Also we wanted to underline that only interoperability is possible with free software that contributes 13:16.040 --> 13:21.400 to the goal that administration can work together that they can collaborate. 13:21.400 --> 13:26.280 And by this on the medium and long run can also share costs and expertise. 13:26.280 --> 13:30.600 So the arguments you pretty much know from our public money public code campaign. 13:30.600 --> 13:38.400 And another point we made and there it was basically one could say kind of like a unique 13:38.400 --> 13:43.920 point we brought in or a point that we're not that much discussed by others is the topic 13:43.920 --> 13:50.840 of open washing and this is something we have already seen during the Corona crisis very 13:50.840 --> 13:51.840 prominently. 13:51.840 --> 13:54.600 We also wrote blog posts back in the days on this. 13:54.600 --> 14:01.040 So that there are companies out there pretending to be free software pretending to be open source. 14:01.040 --> 14:07.480 But basically they are not so we all know free software open source software also has always 14:07.480 --> 14:12.000 have to for freedoms to use study share and improve. 14:12.000 --> 14:17.400 And whenever one of these freedoms or more of these freedoms is cut, then we can't talk 14:17.400 --> 14:19.680 about open source of free software. 14:19.680 --> 14:27.200 So we often see this for example that you have for example a limitation in the use case. 14:27.200 --> 14:32.720 So you are only allowed to use this software for 10 persons for example, right? 14:32.720 --> 14:38.080 And this would be a case where we say look this is open washing here is somebody who pretends 14:38.080 --> 14:41.960 to be open source, but he's limiting one of the freedoms. 14:41.960 --> 14:44.520 And by thus comparable to green washing. 14:44.520 --> 14:47.000 So this is where we got the term from. 14:47.000 --> 14:51.520 And something similar happens at the moment in the software or in specifically in the open 14:51.520 --> 14:57.240 source world that there are proprietary vendors who see that there's a market that in particular 14:57.240 --> 15:01.960 governments want to have more open source and to be still on this market. 15:01.960 --> 15:05.000 They pretend to be open source, but they are not. 15:05.000 --> 15:11.040 And this is something we wanted to make yeah, basically parliamentarians, but also in general 15:11.040 --> 15:16.920 the public aware of and that it is important that if you start procurement procedures that 15:16.920 --> 15:22.600 you really get open source, when you want open source and nothing which only pretends 15:22.600 --> 15:25.000 to be open source. 15:25.000 --> 15:32.080 How are the reactions to the discussion about open washing because like this is a very 15:32.080 --> 15:33.600 new discussion. 15:33.600 --> 15:37.800 So it's not something that a lot of people are already aware of. 15:37.800 --> 15:44.360 And it's something that's also a bit complicated because it's not always quite simple to see 15:44.360 --> 15:49.280 if a product is actually really open source or free software. 15:49.280 --> 15:53.920 So how are the reactions to this from the parliamentarians? 15:53.920 --> 15:56.200 I mean, you are right. 15:56.200 --> 16:04.040 So this is a pretty new topic and so the reaction I would say was not that they specifically 16:04.040 --> 16:10.040 picked up the determine only discuss this, but it was clear that they understood the point 16:10.040 --> 16:18.040 that was for example, yeah, a conversation about how do we release the code towards whom 16:18.040 --> 16:22.600 and who should have access to the code because this is definitely something which we also 16:22.600 --> 16:29.080 see from the German government so that they hide their project, that they hide their code. 16:29.080 --> 16:35.840 And there is definitely a question if this is because of a license or if this is because 16:35.840 --> 16:40.320 of a non open source license that they hide their code. 16:40.320 --> 16:45.680 And here we made a point that we need to investigate and also that we need to make sure 16:45.680 --> 16:48.040 that the code is released. 16:48.040 --> 16:55.440 And we have also seen in the past in particular around the German procurement procedures that 16:55.440 --> 17:01.640 there are already open versions around this is what we addressed and yeah, it was picked 17:01.640 --> 17:07.440 up by another question, but it's also not the case in such hearings that you have a lot 17:07.440 --> 17:13.440 of time to explain or to discuss in details because for the questions back and forth 17:13.440 --> 17:17.280 themselves, you have another line one or two minutes. 17:17.280 --> 17:24.400 So basically you can just put out statements again, but it was clear that the topic was 17:24.400 --> 17:32.200 basically understood and it was also seen in the media afterwards that this was picked 17:32.200 --> 17:35.960 up and that people understood that there might be an issue and that we need to address 17:35.960 --> 17:40.240 this issue and that's I'd say a success for such a hearing. 17:40.240 --> 17:45.960 So but it's very uncommon that you start a really like a in-depth debate then on this 17:45.960 --> 17:51.240 very specific topic also hidden in mind that there have been eight other experts next 17:51.240 --> 17:59.520 to me also with other topics and what I liked a lot is that I had the feeling that parliamentarians 17:59.520 --> 18:05.560 really understood the values of open source that they understood the core idea of open source 18:05.560 --> 18:12.080 or they understood the four freedoms and they understood that the four freedoms are important 18:12.080 --> 18:21.360 also on the question of how does it benefit not only the procurement process itself, but 18:21.360 --> 18:29.680 also we talked about spillover effects just to mention, for example, the education sector. 18:29.680 --> 18:34.760 So that was something we also discussed so that's also very important to have free software 18:34.760 --> 18:40.840 in education so that you are not educated to have a PowerPoint but that you are educated 18:40.840 --> 18:47.400 to run a presentation so that you are not teach the product but rather on how to control 18:47.400 --> 18:54.200 technology and these were more practical discussion points we had on the radar. 18:54.200 --> 18:59.800 But for all of this, open washing definitely plays a role and there was one side question 18:59.800 --> 19:07.800 on this and a couple of remarks in this regard so we can see that this topic is at least 19:07.800 --> 19:12.920 on the radar of these people and that's already success. 19:12.920 --> 19:15.400 So it's picked up. 19:15.400 --> 19:25.960 So you already mentioned that you are all feeling or the overall atmosphere was that they are 19:25.960 --> 19:32.760 pro open source and free software or that the parliamentarians who attended this were very 19:32.760 --> 19:37.640 much in favor. Do you have the feeling that this actually changed over the years because you are 19:38.440 --> 19:46.040 in the policy game for quite a long time now? I'm not talking about age again but just 19:46.040 --> 19:55.240 your experience there. Do you have the feeling that it's actually that the understanding of free 19:55.240 --> 20:01.000 software and the understanding of the four freedoms increased over the past years? 20:01.480 --> 20:09.880 Definitely. So there is definitely so we can see a lot of progress and I mean this debate 20:10.440 --> 20:15.880 like it has happened there 10 years ago would have been impossible even five years ago. 20:15.880 --> 20:21.320 It would have not been this in that conversation with members of the parliament and that would 20:21.320 --> 20:28.360 have been way more missed out there than we hear today. So and also you can see it in the law 20:28.440 --> 20:35.560 making process or in the regulation process itself. So you can see more and more documents 20:35.560 --> 20:41.720 that value the use of open source that we want to go more in this direction that we want to have 20:41.720 --> 20:48.360 more and more and more. The only thing that we see is that we are basically at the point that 20:48.360 --> 20:53.400 we have enough papers one could say it's start to implement this it's start to act on this 20:53.400 --> 20:59.240 and this is I think where we lack and this is where we need to create some pressure so that we 20:59.240 --> 21:05.160 not only talk about the advantages but that we also do something in this regard and this means 21:06.600 --> 21:12.200 that we not just create these papers but that we also give for example resources 21:13.240 --> 21:18.040 to these projects and that's also something where I said we need to 21:18.680 --> 21:24.520 rethink our current approach I mean with our public money public court campaign we talk about 21:24.520 --> 21:30.280 procurement and I think procurement is the most important part when it comes to to open source 21:30.280 --> 21:36.920 in public administration. So that's the easiest and most efficient way to get and to support 21:36.920 --> 21:43.160 free and open source software but there's also other things I mean there's a market out there and 21:43.240 --> 21:49.160 I do believe that these people on the market in particular those who only benefit from free software 21:49.160 --> 21:56.440 should also contribute back to the free software ecosystem and here I do believe that we also need 21:56.440 --> 22:03.480 rules and this is something we're also asked the parliamentarians to work on so to come up as 22:03.480 --> 22:09.400 funding for free software not only from the government but also from the market themselves 22:10.120 --> 22:16.440 and here this is something where we need to work on and where we need to create pressure 22:16.440 --> 22:21.880 that there's implementation last time we met we discussed how the European Commission 22:21.880 --> 22:28.120 removed funds needed funds for core infrastructure projects for free software this is the wrong 22:28.120 --> 22:33.160 direction you cannot say on the one hand we want to invest in open source and we want to go in 22:33.160 --> 22:38.680 this direction and then we move these funds on the other hand this is the wrong way and this is 22:38.680 --> 22:44.360 also something where we need to have an eye on it's not only about good words it's also about 22:44.360 --> 22:50.680 resources it's about acting it's about doing at a long term perspective especially 22:51.800 --> 22:57.560 absolutely I mean we made it that they understood our point now we need to make them doing 22:59.640 --> 23:04.680 we have to feeling that something is happening in this direction as well because I would absolutely 23:04.680 --> 23:10.760 agree there's a lot of paper on open source or free software in public procurement and there's a 23:10.760 --> 23:21.000 lot of talk about using free software in the public administration but so far very little is happening 23:23.560 --> 23:29.880 can you like tell me a bit more about your idea or your feeling in this direction and if there's 23:30.600 --> 23:38.120 if there will be more happening in the next period what's your feeling I know it's a guest question 23:38.120 --> 23:45.640 I know we can't say for sure but yeah and particularly in this time since we even do not know 23:45.640 --> 23:53.320 election results it's pretty difficult it depends and this is very clear on the way of the parties 23:53.320 --> 23:59.400 and that will form the next government yeah and here we will again try that we get our sayings in 23:59.400 --> 24:07.160 the coalition treaty and a very concrete point we will have is that we for example have this 24:07.160 --> 24:12.760 agenda for digital sovereignty which I just mentioned earlier that have these tools that they 24:12.760 --> 24:20.600 already work on and that they want to have a yeah office solution which is free software for 24:20.600 --> 24:27.640 the German and maybe even European administrations out there but this needs funding so this needs 24:27.640 --> 24:34.040 resources and here we will definitely ask for resources and make sure that these resources also 24:34.040 --> 24:41.160 only go into free software that's a that's a very concrete and practical thing to do and this is 24:41.160 --> 24:49.560 something which I do believe will be followed up by the next government in some way the question is 24:49.560 --> 24:55.080 how much resources do they give them and how much do they value what they do so there will be 24:55.080 --> 25:02.200 there will be some follow-up so to say and this tenders won't die with the next government 25:02.200 --> 25:09.480 but the question is will it be a real center for digital sovereignty or will it only be 25:10.440 --> 25:18.040 something that has the name to be a center all right so we need to see what's happening in the next 25:18.040 --> 25:22.520 few months yeah we have to fight for this and this is what we will do so basically at the moment 25:22.520 --> 25:29.960 we are already reaching out also based on this hearing and trying to identify those who most 25:29.960 --> 25:37.000 likely will negotiate the next coalition treaties and try to present them our positions make them 25:37.000 --> 25:42.920 aware that we can be asked as experts so if they want to write text or if they want to come up with 25:42.920 --> 25:50.200 new ideas or rules that they can reach out to us and that we help them yeah to find a good 25:50.200 --> 25:55.720 position on this and by thus influence the coalition treaty but then also based on this 25:56.760 --> 26:02.920 what happened in the past and what is needed for the future so that we face them basically 26:02.920 --> 26:08.680 with the real world problems that are out there when it comes to the use of software and then 26:08.680 --> 26:12.920 it's clear we have to go in the direction of resoftware and we continue this path and as you said 26:12.920 --> 26:18.360 it's a long term game so nothing is one nothing is lost but we continue 26:20.600 --> 26:26.840 right so we should definitely keep an eye on this and I think we will talk about this more in the 26:26.840 --> 26:36.120 future yeah maybe one quick remark on this so there's also recording of the whole hearing on our 26:36.120 --> 26:42.600 media.fsc.e.org channel but there's also a version which is only cut to the statements which 26:42.600 --> 26:49.800 I presented for the FSC which is 12 minutes so if you are happened to be a German speaker or 26:49.800 --> 26:56.360 if you know somebody who can translate this to you for free to watch this to get an impression 26:56.360 --> 27:05.880 of the whole hearing but also our takes and can also find the written statement this is also 27:05.880 --> 27:14.440 public yeah if in the moment it's only available in German but we think about translating it into 27:14.440 --> 27:22.520 English since this is yeah also true for pretty much every government and I want to distribute it 27:22.520 --> 27:30.600 over there so we will also use this hearing in order to reach out to other countries other governments 27:30.600 --> 27:38.360 and telling them about our expert position and so the name of the Bundestag definitely gives this 27:38.360 --> 27:44.120 gives the topic some sort of relevance and by thus we can go to others tell them about 27:44.760 --> 27:51.080 this hearing in a best practice story and create momentum maybe even in other countries so it's 27:51.080 --> 27:59.480 not limited on German what we are doing Mr. Singh but we try to create yeah or use this resource 27:59.480 --> 28:05.400 also for other countries so that we can have impact not only in Germany but European right all right 28:07.720 --> 28:13.480 out of the resources are also linked in the show notes and now we have talked quite a lot about 28:14.200 --> 28:19.640 what we need to do in the future what's happening right now what's happened what happened in 28:19.640 --> 28:26.360 this hearing and how this hearing helped us I would like to come to my final question and ask you 28:26.360 --> 28:33.400 what was the most positive thing that you saw about the invite and the hearing itself so 28:34.200 --> 28:40.200 what was that that stood out for you I think there was a moment in the hearing when 28:41.160 --> 28:49.400 the representative of this SME group who is pretty much a favor of proper derives of there 28:49.480 --> 28:54.120 when he got the question by basically a liberal member of the parliament and 28:55.480 --> 29:02.040 basically when he tried to explain why his solutions are also digital serenity 29:02.760 --> 29:10.360 digital serenity got stopped by the MP the liberal MP who asked the question and he just said look 29:10.360 --> 29:16.760 I'm also coming from the SME world and in particular SMEs are pretty innovative and the market 29:16.760 --> 29:22.920 changed and you should go with the market and the market is now open source so and this is I think 29:23.480 --> 29:31.880 something which shows how the market also changed and how also liberals already look at this market 29:31.880 --> 29:39.960 and see that yeah it's a market for open source and that you as a company should rather adapt 29:39.960 --> 29:44.840 if you want to be around in the software market in the future and I think that's something 29:45.400 --> 29:51.240 that many companies should think of when a liberal MP tells them that the market changed 29:53.480 --> 29:58.200 yeah that's quite outstanding I'm really happy now that I asked this question 30:00.120 --> 30:09.000 you know you know what I found so fascinating about this is that the FSFE has been doing 30:09.080 --> 30:16.760 and is still doing incredible work for free software and you would have imagined 10 years ago 30:17.320 --> 30:24.440 that you would sit in a committee like this and be invited as an expert I think this is amazing how 30:24.440 --> 30:30.920 far we have gotten and this is only possible because of the support we receive from all the people 30:30.920 --> 30:38.840 that are out there and that are donating to the FSFE that are being volunteers of ours 30:38.840 --> 30:45.400 this is also something really incredible how far we have gotten over the past years 30:46.600 --> 30:52.600 yeah and in particular I mean it could have happened that we have been invited to a hearing 30:52.600 --> 30:57.240 but it would have only been us with this position and now we have a hearing that the 30:57.240 --> 31:02.440 proprietary person is the only one with this position and all the others are open source and I 31:02.440 --> 31:07.480 think that's the thing that changed and that they listen to us they might have even invited us 31:07.480 --> 31:13.640 in the past but we would have been the one person and this changed into eight persons 31:14.280 --> 31:21.320 and the one not talking about open source is singled out and even told by the MP that he might have 31:21.320 --> 31:29.240 to sing about his position absolutely and he's right so I have to say this liberal MP was right 31:29.640 --> 31:41.880 all right thank you very much Alex for sharing all the background the story and for giving us 31:41.880 --> 31:51.480 more insight was a pleasure to have you same here thanks a lot this was the software freedom podcast 31:51.480 --> 31:57.080 if you liked this episode please recommend it to your friends and rated stay tuned for more inspiring 31:57.080 --> 32:03.560 conversations that implore them explore the importance of software freedom and its impact on our 32:03.560 --> 32:10.520 digitalize this podcast is presented to you by the free software foundation europe and we are a 32:10.520 --> 32:17.880 charity that works on promoting software freedom if you like our work please consider supporting 32:17.880 --> 32:27.880 us with a donation you find more information under fsfe.org slash donate also linked in the show 32:27.880 --> 32:32.440 notes thank you very much and bye bye stay tuned until next time