Are you ready to share your code?

Find opportunities — and win them.

Federal CIO Tony Scott has released a draft policy aimed at sharing more of the custom code developed for the government in-house and by contractors as Open Source Software. Sound policy? That's what he wants to know.

The Office of Management and Budget has released a draft policy to improve how custom code developed for the government – including code developed by contractors – is acquired and distributed.

The draft policy has two primary requirements:

New custom code whose development is paid for by the government be made available for reuse across federal agencies.

A portion of the new custom code will be released to the public as Open Source Software.

The draft policy was released via a blog post by federal CIO Tony Scott.

According to reporting by our sister site, FCW.com, the move is in line with an overall push toward more open source and the sharing of code. 

The government is looking for ways to reduce costs by avoiding duplicative custom software development and purchases.

The draft policy is open for comment through April 11.

In his blog, Scott says he is particularly interested in comments about the releases of some code as Open Source Software.

And there is a pilot program proposed where 20 percent of newly developed custom code would be released as Open Source.

A couple things stand out in my mind. First, they are talking custom code, but it isn’t really defined. It is one thing if the development is completely from scratch, but what if it is commercial software that is being customized? Is there a line where customization becomes custom?

I also wonder how contractors will protect intellectual property. Will contractors gravitate more toward productizing their software development so that it is no longer consider custom?

Or, over time, will they try to pull more customers toward commercial products?

It is an interesting policy initiative, and it makes good sense on many levels. If the government is paying for it, why not share it?

On the other hand, doesn’t it undermine a contractor’s ability to differentiate what they do?

Perhaps this could also be a good point of negotiation. A contractor could lower its rates in exchange for keeping the intellectual property.

Questions, questions, questions.

NEXT STORY: Veris Group hires new EVP of BD