Comments on: Ethical Questions over Apps.gov http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/ Business and Technology with Common Sense Thu, 24 May 2012 21:21:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4-beta4-20883 By: Aaron Brazell http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47778 Aaron Brazell Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:22:47 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47778 <blockquote>I don't want to derail the conversation either</blockquote> Then don't derail the conversation. As far as I know, none of you are lawyers. I'm not going to have this conversation.

I don’t want to derail the conversation either

Then don’t derail the conversation. As far as I know, none of you are lawyers. I’m not going to have this conversation.

]]> By: Alex, aka Socialbutterfly http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47777 Alex, aka Socialbutterfly Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:14:43 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47777 I don't want to derail the conversation either, but Nicholas does have a point. I had to do a complete image research report for a client on how government agencies (specifically health agencies) use and can use images. It's a bit more complicated than just a "blanket" free use of images--and more surprisingly, many government agencies don't actually have specific image policies, which in an increasing 2.0, care and share world, is something that needs to be addressed. In terms of GSA, they already approved flickr. However, I'd like to see if a government-supported creative commons type of license will come out. Whitehouse.gov currently uses the creative commons license and a few others play by its rules, but agencies are yet to adopt it pending leadership from GSA. I hear it's in the works though. I don’t want to derail the conversation either, but Nicholas does have a point. I had to do a complete image research report for a client on how government agencies (specifically health agencies) use and can use images. It’s a bit more complicated than just a “blanket” free use of images–and more surprisingly, many government agencies don’t actually have specific image policies, which in an increasing 2.0, care and share world, is something that needs to be addressed.

In terms of GSA, they already approved flickr. However, I’d like to see if a government-supported creative commons type of license will come out. Whitehouse.gov currently uses the creative commons license and a few others play by its rules, but agencies are yet to adopt it pending leadership from GSA. I hear it’s in the works though.

]]> By: Search Craigslist http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47776 Search Craigslist Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:44:41 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47776 I know it's fashionable to slate the AppStore approval process these days, and in most cases, Apple deserves it. Sometimes there is absolutely no rationale in blocking an app. I am very excited about the Apps.gov initiative but I think that unlike with the AppStore, the approval process must be transparent and open to public. I know it’s fashionable to slate the AppStore approval process these days, and in most cases, Apple deserves it. Sometimes there is absolutely no rationale in blocking an app.

I am very excited about the Apps.gov initiative but I think that unlike with the AppStore, the approval process must be transparent and open to public.

]]> By: Addison PSF http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47775 Addison PSF Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:49:16 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47775 Wow, that is crazy. I want to know which companies are going to get the deals, because this could send some stocks upwards because I am sure the government will pay a hefty price for whatever service they get. lol Wow, that is crazy. I want to know which companies are going to get the deals, because this could send some stocks upwards because I am sure the government will pay a hefty price for whatever service they get. lol

]]> By: jay http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47774 jay Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:47:49 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47774 I'm with Kelcy on this, Cloud apps are by 'definition' not intended to be installed... I’m with Kelcy on this,
Cloud apps are by ‘definition’ not intended to be installed…

]]> By: Kelcy http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47773 Kelcy Fri, 18 Sep 2009 00:21:06 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47773 I understand that Twitter is a service. However, so is Facebook and other social media apps. Are you telling me that they are going to be installed directly within the GSA cloud yet Twitter will be outside the cloud? That is certainly news to me and not listed anywhere in apps.gov or in speeches given about apps.gov. I understand that Twitter is a service. However, so is Facebook and other social media apps. Are you telling me that they are going to be installed directly within the GSA cloud yet Twitter will be outside the cloud? That is certainly news to me and not listed anywhere in apps.gov or in speeches given about apps.gov.

]]> By: Aaron Brazell http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47772 Aaron Brazell Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:57:16 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47772 It wouldn't be included. It's not an app to be installed or used in the way that the cloud-based apps are. Twitter is a service, not an app. It wouldn’t be included. It’s not an app to be installed or used in the way that the cloud-based apps are. Twitter is a service, not an app.

]]> By: Kelcy http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47771 Kelcy Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:55:51 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47771 Interestingly enough, Twitter is not part of apps.gov. GSA has negotiated terms of service with vendors for government use of that application in order to be included on the social media list https://forum.webcontent.gov/?page=TOS_FAQs . While they say that list will grow, it does not yet include Twitter. Interestingly enough, Twitter is not part of apps.gov. GSA has negotiated terms of service with vendors for government use of that application in order to be included on the social media list https://forum.webcontent.gov/?page=TOS_FAQs . While they say that list will grow, it does not yet include Twitter.

]]> By: Joe "Giuseppe" Zuccaro http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47770 Joe "Giuseppe" Zuccaro Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:09:26 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47770 Aaron, thanks for succinctly bringing this to our attention. It hopefully won't be difficult to make the process of listing apps more transparent. Aaron,

thanks for succinctly bringing this to our attention.

It hopefully won’t be difficult to make the process of listing apps more transparent.

]]> By: jay http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47769 jay Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:44:28 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47769 This "endorsement" happens all the time, they're called procurement contracts. There was a public request for information and a RFP as well that came from GSA. I can understand how some services may be too small to have successfully replied (or even known) but it's hard to argue that GSA shouldn't then be able to put contracts in place for any services, simply because not all participated in the open process. This “endorsement” happens all the time, they’re called procurement contracts.
There was a public request for information and a RFP as well that came from GSA.

I can understand how some services may be too small to have successfully replied (or even known) but it’s hard to argue that GSA shouldn’t then be able to put contracts in place for any services, simply because not all participated in the open process.

]]> By: Nicholas Tolson http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47768 Nicholas Tolson Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:44:26 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47768 As I said in my email to you, it's not as cut-and-dried as you think it is. I won't derail the conversation any more. Maybe a good topic or a future post, but I hear you don't care about such topics, so maybe not. :) As I said in my email to you, it’s not as cut-and-dried as you think it is. I won’t derail the conversation any more. Maybe a good topic or a future post, but I hear you don’t care about such topics, so maybe not. :)

]]> By: jay http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47767 jay Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:41:51 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47767 If you read through the site, you can see that the free services (facebook, twitter, youtube, etc.) are on there because some of the terms were previously incompatible with Government strictures. "Purchasing" them via Apps.gov makes the Federal relationship explicit and helps agencies at their designated rep (which keeps multiple Departments within an Agency from maintaining their fragmentation). If you read through the site, you can see that the free services (facebook, twitter, youtube, etc.) are on there because some of the terms were previously incompatible with Government strictures.

“Purchasing” them via Apps.gov makes the Federal relationship explicit and helps agencies at their designated rep (which keeps multiple Departments within an Agency from maintaining their fragmentation).

]]> By: Aaron Brazell http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47766 Aaron Brazell Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:33:08 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47766 Images from the U.S. Government are public domain as a matter of law. As taxpayers, we own them. See <a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/17/1/105">17 U.S.C. § 105</a>. Images from the U.S. Government are public domain as a matter of law. As taxpayers, we own them.

See 17 U.S.C. § 105.

]]> By: Dennis McDonald http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47765 Dennis McDonald Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:16:00 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47765 Perhaps the GSA could state that the just because an application is listed is not an endorsement of its appropriateness for any particular application. Or maybe the GSA could establish user groups (using some of the listed tools, of course) to enable Federal users of the tools to discuss their experience with individual tools? I agree with you there are ethics and disclosure issues aplenty here and that this GSA effort could, if someone wanted to, evolve into a bureaucracy-ridden system that emphasized selection criteria, performance requirements, review boards, etc. etc. etc. - precisely the things that some in GSA would like to avoid. Dennis D. McDonald Alexandria Virginia web: http://www,ddmcd.com twitter: http://twitter.com/ddmcd Perhaps the GSA could state that the just because an application is listed is not an endorsement of its appropriateness for any particular application.

Or maybe the GSA could establish user groups (using some of the listed tools, of course) to enable Federal users of the tools to discuss their experience with individual tools?

I agree with you there are ethics and disclosure issues aplenty here and that this GSA effort could, if someone wanted to, evolve into a bureaucracy-ridden system that emphasized selection criteria, performance requirements, review boards, etc. etc. etc. – precisely the things that some in GSA would like to avoid.

Dennis D. McDonald
Alexandria Virginia
web: http://www,ddmcd.com
twitter: http://twitter.com/ddmcd

]]> By: Nicholas Tolson http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47764 Nicholas Tolson Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:11:56 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47764 Sorry for going off-topic, but what about the ethics of using the (presumably not public domain) image from the Apps.gov site in this post? This is an honest question, not an accusation, as I really don't know. I'm one of a handful of people who doesn't have a blog, so I have no frame of reference for what is fair use when it comes to imagery and graphics, etc. Rock on. Sorry for going off-topic, but what about the ethics of using the (presumably not public domain) image from the Apps.gov site in this post? This is an honest question, not an accusation, as I really don’t know. I’m one of a handful of people who doesn’t have a blog, so I have no frame of reference for what is fair use when it comes to imagery and graphics, etc.

Rock on.

]]> By: Craig http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47763 Craig Thu, 17 Sep 2009 18:55:51 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47763 I'm sure like anything else there is plenty of behind the doors deals being made for specific apps to be put at the top or most popular list to be adopted earlier than others. I’m sure like anything else there is plenty of behind the doors deals being made for specific apps to be put at the top or most popular list to be adopted earlier than others.

]]> By: Aaron Brazell http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47762 Aaron Brazell Thu, 17 Sep 2009 18:43:07 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47762 That link certainly explains how free products can be used within GSA. It doesn't explain Apps.gov which, if DISQUS is to be believed, includes companies and products used elsewhere in the system and without agreement for Apps.gov. not that it's bad for the companies listed. It's not. But it creates an anti-competitive environment where the GSA implicitly endorses a product without transparency around how competitors can also be included. For instance, continuing with DISQUS, Automattic's Intense Debate is also listed. But there is no listing for JS-KIT. How would the good folks at JS-KIT get included without knowing where to find obscure info on a different website altogether? That link certainly explains how free products can be used within GSA. It doesn’t explain Apps.gov which, if DISQUS is to be believed, includes companies and products used elsewhere in the system and without agreement for Apps.gov. not that it’s bad for the companies listed. It’s not. But it creates an anti-competitive environment where the GSA implicitly endorses a product without transparency around how competitors can also be included.

For instance, continuing with DISQUS, Automattic’s Intense Debate is also listed. But there is no listing for JS-KIT. How would the good folks at JS-KIT get included without knowing where to find obscure info on a different website altogether?

]]> By: Adriel Hampton http://technosailor.com/2009/09/17/ethical-questions-over-apps-gov/comment-page-1/#comment-47761 Adriel Hampton Thu, 17 Sep 2009 18:38:16 +0000 http://technosailor.com/?p=7778#comment-47761 This is a key issue for apps.gov and similar gov efforts, certainly. Linked from the FAQ, I was able to find an explanation of how providers can get free products listed, and what the standards are (https://forum.webcontent.gov/?page=TOS_FAQs). It's important information, and I guess with multiple agencies involved, there is going to be ongoing discussion of where and how to highlight such information. This is a key issue for apps.gov and similar gov efforts, certainly. Linked from the FAQ, I was able to find an explanation of how providers can get free products listed, and what the standards are (https://forum.webcontent.gov/?page=TOS_FAQs). It’s important information, and I guess with multiple agencies involved, there is going to be ongoing discussion of where and how to highlight such information.

]]>