[Wylug-discuss] HMRC want to see me. Can you help?

[Robert Burrell Donkin]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Neil Wilson <neil at aldur.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>  This is my first post here so be gentle please!
>
>  I've been referrred by John Leach, who reckons you guys may be able to
>  help me. Essentially HMRC have asked me to go see them at the
>  beginning of May to talk about Free Software and Open Source.
>  Currently they have a policy goal of automating the submission of tax
>  records and to that end they have asked the software industry to
>  provide 'free' versions of their accounts software to allow smaller
>  operations to do their returns at no cost. This is in addition to the
>  current free CD and web tools that they offer. The note then
>  degenerated into a debate about how crippled these pieces of software
>  should be (including payroll software that can do the calculations but
>  can't print payslips!).
>
>  My response was to suggest to HMRC that they release their current
>  code under a Free Software licence or even Crown Copyright so that
>  those of us who write Free Software don't have to build yet another
>  payroll calculation engine from scratch and consider the needs of Free
>  Software when pursuing this policy. And the meeting was a response to
>  my suggestions.

IMHO it's important to be clear that copyright and licensing are
separate issues

AIUI FSF insist on copyright assignment (followed by relicense to the
contributor) so that individual contributors do not need to be party
to any enforcement action. HMRC is more than capable of legal action
by itself so there is no compelling reason for the crown not to retain
copyright. the apache software foundation model (contributors retains
copyright but grants liberal license to the foundation) would probably
work better.

the choice of license (academic or reciprocal, as per rosen) is more
difficult. an academic license would allow a commercial, value added
ecosystem to develop. a reciprocal license would ensure that HMRC had
access to all improvements. so probably a tradeoff to be made.

need to consider canonical (eg apache) verses distributed (eg linux
kernel) development models. HMRC may be biased towards canonical so
blended hybrid might be best (canonical core to ensure correctness
plus distributed for modules which build on top of base function).

HMRC would also need to consider their development model. moving to
open development is often quite a culture shock. closed development
open source would be an option but this usually prevents the growth of
a viable ecology around the code. again, a blended hybrid approach
might work: develop core in private but develop modules in public.

>  Now this may very well be the normal civil service consultation
>  process where they listen to you earnestly while politely ignoring
>  you. Or it may be a way of getting HMRC to embrace the idea of Free
>  code as well as free tools. (I suspect it will be more about web
>  software and Linux servers than desktop.)

i've heard that there are a number of groups with government genuinely
interested

>  In the meantime have any of you any suggestions of how I should pitch
>  Free Software and Open Source at HMRC.? All help appreciated.

IIRC there are already quite a number of UK groups interested in open
source within academia and government. i might (but no promises) be
able to put you in touch with people who can give you an inside
perspective if there's enough time and that would be helpful...

- robert