Source: "Politika"
What is the purpose of different treatment of pirated software in the private sector, on the one hand, and in the public sector, on the other hand
In the previous month, inspectors from the Tax Administration intensified control of the use of illegal, so-called pirated software. This news has recently been published by all information agencies.
The news itself is a good occasion to face some very unpleasant facts. For example, the fact that the share of pirated software in Serbia is estimated at more than 75 percent and that this estimate is probably fairly accurate. And the fact that this percentage is two and a half or even three times higher than the average percentage in EU Member States. And that we will need to invest a lot of time and effort to reduce that percentage to a “normal” level. And, accordingly, that we have to face the fact that introducing order in this field will have to be put “on the agenda” eventually. The sooner this is done, the better. In this context, the said news published by news agencies certainly is information of general, public importance which merits serious attention. Unfortunately, what makes it worthy of even more attention and absolutely controversial is the “follow-up” which unfolded from it and which can only be described as unbelievable!
Namely, as the Beta agency learned at the Tax Administration, tax inspectors will not control the public sector!
And the following explanation is given for this obvious, blatant selectivity: “We have to perform detailed analysis and to create proper conditions. Only after these preconditions are fulfilled will we be able to control the legality of software in the public sector”.
Interesting, to say the least, is it not?
The theory that we have all necessary assumptions to fight against pirated software in the private sector, but that the same fight in the public sector requires “detailed analysis” and particularly an “agreement with the largest software manufacturers” raises at least two interesting issues.
First, the formulation “in order to address this issue in the future at the national level by signing an agreement with the largest software manufacturers” provides implicit, but undisputable evidence of the fact that relevant authorities have chosen an option which, among other things, implies exclusive use of paid licenses, for example for Microsoft OS and Office, and thus excludes the possibility to choose a system such as Linux, i.e. to opt for one of the so-called open source options, which can be used free of charge in public services. And should the second option, in spite of the controversies resulting from its imperfection and the issue of (in)compatibility, be ruled out so easily? One does not have to be a very competent expert for operating systems to conclude that it should not be rejected.
Taking this into account, it would be good to consider all relevant facts thoroughly, carefully and responsibly before making a definite choice. And to hear what the public, particularly the expert community, has to say. And anyway, is this not supported by the fact that this option is also very seriously considered in some EU Member States, which are much wealthier than Serbia in any case? The idea of selective “bringing of order” itself is even more interesting than such an “easy” choice of licensed systems. Every such action is a good occasion to remind ourselves of the thought that “equality consist in the same treatment of similar things, different treatment of different things in proportion to their difference and the same treatment of others as yourself, i.e. the same treatment of yourself as others”.
Of course, this digression is probably unnecessary, because creators of state actions do not have to deal with Aristotle’s “platitudes”. But this is exactly why, far from being pointless, it is actually necessary to remind them that they, as a part of bureaucracy of this country, must know and respect its Constitution. And Article 21 of the Serbian Constitution stipulates that all persons are equal before the Constitution and the law and that any kind discrimination is prohibited.
