<incom> NGOs in ICT4D need a serious paradigm shift

[Moses Marimo]

I read with a lot of interest Dapo Ladimeji's article: BEWARE OF GATES
BEARING GIFTS. (http://tinyurl.com/gxb6k). In the Sunday Mirror of 16
July 2006 (http://tinyurl.com/g84gp), I wrote about Software Piracy in
Zimbabwe. Dapo's paper had a different dimension on the issue of
software piracy. He contents that "Microsoft supports piracy as a form
of predatory pricing". I had never thought of it in that light. However,
a few pieces of a jigsaw puzzle seemed to fall into place after reading
this article. We have authorised dealers of international software
companies in Zimbabwe who are encouraging their clients to pirate. For
example, salesman are offering to sell a 5 user or even 1 user license
for a solution that has well over 100 users! Obviously these salesmen
want to catch this client on the next upgrade cycle since a 100 user
license on their platform will not make any business sense. Such
practises are very criminal. I however, don't see any light at the end
of the African Policy tunnel, with regards to stopping criminal
activities from companies like Microsoft by imposing huge penalties like
they do in Europe! What with Bill bearing gifts like that. President
Kikwete, while I admit his speech at a Microsoft forum was one of the
most brilliant I have head from a Head of state on I.C.T matters, I
however feel very sad that such an endorsement will only help prolong
Africa's battle to shake off the dependency syndrome that sometimes
turns the whole continent into mere beggars!

When I say "there is no light at the end of the African Policy tunnel",
I may be sounding pessimistic, but I think this is the reality on the
ground. However, all hope is not lost. A good number of developmental
projects in Africa are being done by NGOs. Thus this sector is crucial
in providing part of the solution to Africa's catch-22 situation.

A good number of NGOs are involved in
I.C.T for Development (ICT4D). The few that I have interacted with,
appear not to mind using pirated software! Such NGOs are compounding the
problem, rather than mitigating. There is need to seriously review the
funding policies for all projects so that such funding does not
indirectly assist monopolies. If a project is using pirated software,
both the project manager and the sponsor are partners in crime!

If most funding can be directed towards implementing open technologies,
then whether African governments are reluctant to caution Microsoft or
not, that elusive light at the end of the tunnel will shine. We will
have students coming out of schools and colleges with appropriate and
relevant ICT skills. I have always said proprietary skills are expensive
for a country since expensive decisions will always come from somebody
trained in proprietary platforms! In fact, supporting the teaching of
proprietary skills in schools is a clever way of stealing Africa's
meagre resources! You are effectively giving with the right hand, and
taking 2* with the left hand! One of the most dangerous forms of vendor
lock-in is in the mind. Microsoft have successfully managed to lock-in
the minds of millions of ICT professionals who are now part of the
monopoly's marketing machine! In stark contrast, FOSS doesn't lock-in
anyone to a particular vendor. In fact, the open source definition
requires that licenses must be technology neutral.

Some of the points/questions I would want to leave with NGO/Donor
organisations in ICT4D are:

      * Are your funding policies taking piracy into consideration,
        knowing very well that piracy is anti-development?
      * Is your funding promoting open technologies? Knowing very well
        that open technologies present the only realistic framework for
        true development!
      * Can you confidently say your funding has achieved the set
        objectives on the ground!
      * Are confident that project implementers have the requisite ICT
        knowledge, especially knowledge on open technologies???

I want to challenge every NGOs on this list to do a serious
introspection and ask yourselves whether you are not assisting
monopolises directly or indirectly.



<Philip Copeman>

In the tollgate model what you do as a vendor is develop a program and
present it to users as a means of doing a business task that they have.
At first your main aim is to get as much traffic onto your "highway" as
possible. You do this with marketing campaigns and by introducing the
product at a very competitive price. 

Once you have high traffic, you put up a tollgate, a software upgrade or
an annual licence fee. The marketing department has the job of deciding
how high we can crank up the price of the revenues without our users
jumping off the road. The users find it difficult to move their data and
their systems and they like the ability to exchange data with others on
the highway. They are reluctant to get off. So it's not surprising that
prices for these packages keep rising.

.......

The masters of the Tollgate model were, and still are, Microsoft.
Starting from 1992, with Windows, they got users onto the toll road.
Early versions of Windows were free. At first windows ran as an
application on top of DOS, but eventually Windows became the ticket to
the tollgate. It was only after the operating system became successful
that the prices started to rise. This however was not enough for a
rapacious revenue machine, so using the advantage of the operating
system they started to chase down all the application vendors. This is
how Lotus 1-2-3 gave way to Excel, Word Perfect to Word, Dbase to
Access, Novell to Windows NT, and Netscape to IE5. This is how a word
processor moved from costing $49 to $500. This is why an operating
system has gone from being almost free to become the most expensive part
of a computer purchase.

</Philip Copeman>

Regards,

Moses