By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has decided to transition its internal work environment from Microsoft Office to Open Desk, a European open-source alternative. This decision follows increasing concerns about public bodies’ reliance on US tech companies, especially given the ICC’s tense relationship with the US government. The move is also in response to reported issues, such as the cancellation of the ICC chief prosecutor’s email account by Microsoft. Open Desk is developed by the German Centre for Digital Sovereignty of the Public Administration (Zendis), which is part of an EU initiative focused on developing sovereign digital infrastructure.
Read the original article here
So, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is ditching Microsoft Office and going with a European open-source alternative. Finally, right? It’s like a collective sigh of relief, really. Microsoft’s become such a pain, especially with its Teams platform. You know how slow and clunky it can be? It’s like watching paint dry, except the paint is important work communication.
The move isn’t just about hating on Microsoft, though. It’s about security, cost, and control. Microsoft is a U.S.-based company, and that opens the door to potential data access by the U.S. government, regardless of international laws. When you’re an international court dealing with sensitive information, that’s a huge problem. Then there’s the whole “being a rip-off” thing. Office is expensive, and open-source alternatives offer a viable and often more cost-effective solution.
The good news is that they’re not just switching to any old open-source program. It’s a new initiative, openDesk, developed by the German government. While the article mentions “European,” this project specifically is from Germany. This is a big step, showing a real push for digital independence.
Of course, the immediate question is, “How good is it?” Well, openDesk is essentially built on the foundation of LibreOffice and Collabora Online, a commercial version of LibreOffice. Collabora is an excellent option, and LibreOffice has been around for ages. So, the base functionality is there. Sure, there are always minor hiccups when switching, like compatibility with very complex or specialized document formats. However, the benefits are clear.
A major concern is how to address accountability and responsibility. The open-source model does mean that the developers themselves aren’t directly liable for bugs or security issues. The article brings up the important question of legal ramifications. However, there are many companies out there providing support and maintenance contracts for open-source software, effectively filling the accountability gap. Also, considering the potential for US-government-controlled malware, a well-managed open-source option is a much safer bet.
Besides that, it is about money. No one wants to throw their cash away and be charged for every little thing.
The move seems to reflect the times. There’s a growing desire for Europe to take control of its own digital infrastructure. It’s also a statement about the power of open-source alternatives. Also, in the end, security is an asyntote, and both options (Microsoft and open-source) are vulnerable, but open-source offers greater autonomy.