Bruce Perens: A Big Change for Open Source

[K-9]

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/12068_3775446_1

[OPENSTEP]

I've only read summaries of this decision myself, but I haven't read the actual court decision. My understanding was that the case was dismissed mostly on the invalidated patent claims; I'm not sure how much it goes into terms of upholding the basis of copyright on open source licenses. I think that might come up in claims, however.

The raccoons on the roof are apparently having breakdancing lessons...rumble rumble...

Has nothing to do with open source licensing, but is just as annoying

The real "big change" for open source, IMHO, isn't any court rulings upholding licensing...I assume given the skill of the lawyers crafting the licenses that they'll hold up in this case and many others. The real issues confronting open source are the influx of corporate dollars into funding OSS projects...and the danger of those companies pumping marketing dollars into competing goals and efforts. I think the days of OSS being a bunch of people cooperating on a project just because "it's cool" or "it's interesting" are gone. Now, for some projects, it's more companies coordinating for economic upsides and tugging at each other to meet different marketing and strategic goals. Love of the source or the coolness is no longer the primary tie that binds. But basement-originated open source still exists and is still very fun for lone wolf engineers and cowboy coders. It's not the code or contributors that are the problem or the big change in open source; it's the governance structures and flow of money exchanging hands that's changed the spirit of open source from tinkering and volunteerism to large apersonal contributors "donating" time as long as a project meets their corporate needs and goals, and as long as that project can be steered towards meeting those goals. Perhaps in some ways the loss of joy in large open source projects is because they've become a victim of their own success.

Rambling over

ed

[pluby]

Ed's comments mirror my views. I don't find the fact that companies use open source as a marketing angle. After all, these companies spend enormous amounts of money and see almost no revenue for these expenditures.

What I find interesting is that NeoOffice has actually bucked that trend and is one of the few large open source projects (OK, we aren't the size of Firefox or Linux, but we do have hundreds of thousands of daily users) that is funded entirely by its users.

Patrick

[ovvldc]

I imagine the reason NeoOffice remains user-funded is because of the relatively low overhead costs. Especially the lack of management types involved (who tend to earn bonuses and promotions based on acquisitions and team size). Also, it is still sufficiently small that you do not need separate management layers.

Best wishes,
Oscar

[MacRat]

Don't forget the marketing costs.

Those OOo booths don't build themselves.

And those marketing people take the top dollar hotel rooms and room service.

[K-9]

I appreciate your comments and thoughts Ed. Racoons? We have all sorts of stuff here too: deer, fox, skunks, and coyotes to name a few.

I find Neo to be a very unique 'anima'l among mac and also open source applications. I really am glad i tried it and gave it a fair shake before settling in as my primary Office suite - using mainly writer for my stuff - work and home.

My thanks to Patrick & Ed and the many helpers here. Trinity is also an exceptional Forum.

[aussie149]

[Lorinda]