Talk:Open Source
Gail Frederick 10/31/2004
Here's a link to the "Motivations and Rewards of Open Source" project team:
http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/CSEP590TU-wiki/index.php/Student_Projects:OpenSource_Motivation
Lin Huang
10/30/2004
I just want to bring to your attention, maybe just me. I found extremely hard to locate where the discussion shouold be. I just found out this morning, there is another link place to register the project and team member: http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/CSEP590TU-wiki/index.php/Project_Teams (I don't even remember how I land to that place at first place).
Check upon there as well to see. I am involved in project "Commercial Softward Open Source" project, specifically on sub topic: is there a middle ground between open source software and commercial software.
Maybe this discussion is about another project as related to "Open Source"?
Hope this help. Lin
Jeff West I found an interesting article on the effect rewarding people has on their creativity: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/motivation.html. Through various experiments, the author managed to convince me that people tend to be more creative when they see the creative work itself as a motivator instead of some reward (i.e. money) as a motivator. Perhaps it would be interesting to note how many open source programmers view coding as a hobby which they enjoy simply for the sake of coding. In addition, there are still ways to get rewards for open source programming (the ability to "show off" to others in the open-source community and gain a sense of self-worth, the "support-sale" product model, using open-source to advertise your abilities as a contractor).
Contents
Open Source Project
Alexis O'Connor There are many interesting articles available regarding the pros and cons of the open source software business model. I would like to work in a group to do our policy brief on some issue regarding open source software. Please let me know if you would like to work together.
Open Source as Better Software?
I'm interested in arguments surrounding open source, too. I'd like to explore these topics (among others):
- open source software is of improved quality because "more eyes" see the source code.
- open source licensing is more flexible
- open source projects attract better developers.
- "reward" models for open source projects.
I'm interested in working on this topic for the policy brief.
Also Interested
--DiggerCPRD 21:01, 21 Oct 2004 (PDT) I am also interested in the open source topic. All the above topics sound like good starting points and I would like to add some more possibilities which maybe good topics:
1. This sort of "Jump Starting" technology because of the free availablity of open source tools and products that help to facilitate creating technology, and goods either in direct use or prototyping. Examples are the jakarat project providing tools for the web, and eclipse. Trying to quantify how much this is done, and how much it benefits projects.
2. The economic model derived by supporting these open source technologies. Even though the code itself is free. Companies are willing to pay for help, or customization of these products and so the market can be in the service not just the product. Examples are Red Hat, IBM, Cadence, etc.
Open Source Interest
[RLM] I'm also interested in Open Source issues as well as IT and Development issues, which there happens to be one in the North-South section on the pros/cons of open source in developing countries.
Indeed, there are lots of articles on the motivating factors behind Open Sources, which one major question concerns the long-term sustainability of Open Source given its arguably altruistic incentive mechanism. I recently read a law review article (Yochai Benkler's "Coase's Penguin, or, Linux and the Nature of the Firm") which provided a microeconomic analysis concerning motivation and individual OS participants. The citation is 112 Yale L.J. 369, if anyone is interested.
Open Source Project
Lin Huang Just let you know that I am interested in this topic. Would like to join you working on this project. I would like to know pro/con of the open source. Specificially, the long term effect and how that impact on the innovation. What's the driven behind the policy makers when they decide to move into open source. Will software encoutner compatible problems? What about the quality, maintanenace and upgrade? If I got cross any interesting article, will post later. Please post your recommand readings. Thanks
Group Formation
Jeff West Has anybody officially assembled an "Open Source" group? If so, I would like to participate if the group still has room. If not, please let me know if you'd like to officially assemble one.
does open source inspire innovation?
I'm very interested in this open source topic as well. As a software developer turned business student, I think it's very interesting to examine the motivations people have for creating open software, as well as the sustainable and commercial viabilities of such products. I also think it's interesting to question whether open source really inspires innovation, since, as mentioned in class, a lot of open source seems only to be "copycat" software -- imitations of an existing commercial project -- which doesn't seem to exactly qualify as "innovation".
If there is an open source group, and there is room, I would also like to jump in on this front. Thanks! -- Kevin Watt <kwatt@berkeley.edu>
Open Source Issues
I am interested in open source issues. In addition to the price/quality pros/cons of Open Source versus standard commercial development - I would like to understand better what real legal risks there are for contributing to open source projects if you work for a commercial software company - or what restrictions there are for using/looking at open source if you work on commercial software. Can you jeopradize the open source or your commercial company if you work on both? Right now at MSFT I don't know for sure but I believe our policy for employees is don't look at open source so you don't get contaminated, don't contribute to open source. I'd like to understand legally what the copyright risks are if a person looks at open source and then works on a commercial software project, and what risks open source has if people who work at software companies contribute to the open source. I think this is an interesting part of the open source issue - as right now open source has a legal cloud over it for IP infrignement - and commercial software developers have a cloud over them (me included) in knowing what we can look at in the open source world. I'd like to explore the MSFT policy for employees on open source (reading and writing), and see if it is rational given the legal facts surrounding the open source licenses. I think this could be a section of a brief on open source.
Iking: The concern is "tainting", and it's not just a concern regarding open source; if, for instance, you were exposed to source code from some other commercial product, and MS shipped a product containing similar features/behavior, a claim might be raised that you employed their IP in your work. It's particularly concerning with GPL because of the broad and ill-defined scope of GPL's influence. Any commercial software developer who is not consciously an open-source shop needs to take precautions such as these to avoid its IPR being compromised. In the past, I've asked for and received permission to work with open source code (tools), but they were NOT licensed under the GPL, but one of the other open source licenses (I don't recall which one).
General Public License
Richard Michaelson To the person above, I'm not sure where I read this or heard about this, but in order to explore the legal risks of looking/using Open Source stuff, you might want to start with Free Software Foundation's general public license (Linux falls here), which requires any code using(?) code previously under GPL to remain free (hence, why your choice of the word "contaminate" is apt). Something to keep in mind, the terms "use" and "free" and maybe other terms may have a special meaning within the legalese community.
Open Source licensing
Iking: One of the papers for next Thursday talks about the flaws of current open source licenses. How about designing a "better" license? We'd need to consider the goals of software and of the open source software philosophy, and take into account initial acquisition, distribution, derivative works, patent indemnification, and all those other landmines littering the current OSS field. How might such a license be written to provide incentive for innovation, both in the authors of the licensed work and its consumers? This could easily incorporate several other ideas being discussed.
