Open-source is often described as any software whose source code is open to the public for usage, modification, improvement, and redistribution. The power of open-source lies in the term itself -- it can’t be trademarked, because it is too open to be defined and used by a single company or individual. Many have tried to own it and failed.
For a little history: The term “open-source” evolved from free software, which first appeared in 1983, when people thought that access to computer software should be a lot easier and less costly. Later, in 1998, the term open-source arose, since the term “free software” was deemed only as “free to distribute.”
With the establishment of the Open-Source Initiative by Eric S. Raymond and Bruce Perens, open-source expanded into a development philosophy with a set of specific guidelines.
Today, the term open-source applies not only to software but to a broad array of products whose basic formula is openness to being tested, used, modified, and redistributed by the public. (Example: Ever heard of OpenCola? Its recipe is available here.)
The open-source approach has helped numerous products to improve and be used by many, free of charge. The biggest and most solid example among these is Linux, which is, if you ask me, the most stable operating system on the planet. It has evolved as it is today because of the many nameless people who tinkered with it.
Open-source has allowed individuals and organizations to improve products to suit their needs. It calls for a never-ending cycle of modifications and improvements, each of which makes a product appeal to broader chunks of the population. Its rise has become prevalent to the extent that some think that it will result in an open-source culture, where fixed ownership ceases to exist and where anyone or any organization can take something, modify it, and bring it back into the community.
Some fear that open-source could end capitalism as we know it. As always, there are pros and cons, but we should leave it to the experts to decide whether some form of copyright could be granted to the originators of a product.
Open-source has reportedly led to savings amounting to $60 billion a year to consumers. That’s enough to feed a small country for a whole year, and then some.
But for open-source to be truly compelling and relevant, its power should not stop at providing free cola, but go further to feed, educate, care, and help groups and individuals to rise above their impoverished situations; it should be an open-source of love and charity. Its power should be used to save the world. For every dollar saved, an equivalent, if not a fractional amount, should be donated to help the less fortunate. After all, we are only truly free if we are free from need. Savings from using an open-source approach can be applied to that greater goal.
— Enrico Pagtakhan works as a technology support specialist for Intercontinental Hotels Group Baguio, Philippines. He has had more than 15 years of IT experience.
Ya exactly that's what I'm talking about. They are clearly violating the simple rule of Open Source. I do not know whether its legal for me to write out the names of those companies or apps but I personally have experienced two or 3 may be where the full source code is not visible even after making the payment for the vendor for support and everything they required.
Some fear that open-source could end capitalism as we know it. As always, there are pros and cons, but we should leave it to the experts to decide whether some form of copyright could be granted to the originators of a product.
Some open-source advocates might argue that "leaving things to the experts,"as a general philosophy, is the real problem. Who are the experts in this situation?
As far as ending capitalism, that's not likely. Red Hat Linux, a for-profit company that sells and services Linux, is a great example of why. Linux is released under a license that allows it to be sold... just not sold exclusively. So, basically, it's legal to sell snow to an Eskimo if you can find an Eskimo who will pay you for it. It's not just legal to interfere with someone else who wants to give snow away for free.
Let me start by saying fascinating.fascinating post!!! Great work!!!
My main question is how relevant is copyright today? Extending what you said here-
"Some fear that open-source could end capitalism as we know it. As always, there are pros and cons, but we should leave it to the experts to decide whether some form of copyright could be granted to the originators of a product."
Maybe we need to look into how relevant and how much impact Copyright(or the lack of ) would cause on a product.If a product is good,it sells(and also attracts imitators) but that's just part of the game-The more successful a product the more imitators/competitors it will have.
In todays super-fast extremely competitive world,how many companies have the time (and resources) to take a copyright violator to court???except for the entrenched big names -Nobody.
And if we take into account the fact that most innovation today comes from smaller upstarts /startups;the relevance for Copyright fades dramatically.
I'm confused by you claim; if a peice of software is open source, that is, covered by an open source license like GPL, then the source code is legally required to be available. This isn't a wishy-washy definition, it's a legal requirement. So if there are projects that, as you claim, are not releasing their source code, I'd love to hear about them. As would the lawyers who have persued cases against those that violate these contracts.
Many believe that with the word OPEN SOURCE the source code is open to anyone and its free of charge, but in reality it is not. I have personally experienced in some of the major Open Source products the source code is not 100% open. Certain set of code are being hidden for privacy even though the client has already paid for the services. So overall Open Source is not that open.
Thanks for the post srfernando, I agree with you, If we can only utilize open source of its right usage, then it would be a great help for third world countries to have a chance to modernized its IT capabilities in a least expensive way.
Open source is a model that promotes self-participation and appears most obvious as a choice candidate for developing countries seeking almost any type of modernization. The business models based on open source offer great potential for developing and transition countries since the development and distribution of open source software follows the principles of ownership, local value addition, empowerment and participation. Thereby, open source provides ample opportunities for the development of a local ICT economy, creation and transfer of ICT knowledge, legal use of software and access of poorer communities to ICTs.
"Perhaps that would prove that if something is fast and cheap, it doesn't have to be all that good to draw customers."
And Open Source can be fast, cheap, AND good.
What I'm saying is that the business plan of closed source uses artificial scarcity, and that being Open Source is not an obstacle to capitalism, it just uses a different business model.
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Social media has been with us for a decade -- but employer policies and the law are anything but firm about the most appropriate usage of this powerful tool.
Businesses often struggle to decide which domain to use. When it comes to purchasing a domain name, you have plenty of extensions to choose from, ranging from .com and .net, to .me, and even .mobi. But which one should you pick?
I've been writing about how the next evolution of the Internet might just be an advertising revolution, and how corporate IT can stay involved as the enablers and providers of the technologies that make this possible.
In the 1970 science fiction thriller Colossus: The Forbin Project, two giant supercomputers from the United States and Soviet Union secretly join forces to take control of the collective nuclear might of the two countries. In the film, the two machines discover each other's existence, communicate back-and-forth, share their collective data, and cut their human creators out of the process. It is the ultimate example of machine-to-machine communications, or M2M.
New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority is conducting a pilot test of digital kiosks to guide subway users to where they want to go more efficiently and at lower cost.
The whole Amazon.reader debate is a double-stupid. It's stupid to think that there's any e-book buyer who doesn't know Amazon's URL, and it was stupider to let ICANN launch the whole free-form TLD initiative to start with.
While NFC's original goal was to enhance mobile commerce applications, it is finding its way into a number of other uses, which is creating both opportunity as well as challenges for IT departments.
Enterprises would like to move to cloud computing but are hesitant because they are concerned about providers’ ability to secure company data. Here are some tips that help to ensure that if breaches occur, the business is not left holding the bag.
Edmunds separates customers into segments based on the info it collects on its site and from partners, and uses that to push out custom content, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
The automotive website uses propensity modeling to target ads and customer registration forms, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
Expert Integrated Systems: Changing the Experience & Economics of IT In this e-book, we take an in-depth look at these expert integrated systems -- what they are, how they work, and how they have the potential to help CIOs achieve dramatic savings while restoring IT's role as business innovator. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
M2M: Rise of the Machines? Not Yet David Weldon In the 1970 science fiction thriller Colossus: The Forbin Project, two giant supercomputers from the United States and Soviet Union secretly join forces to take control of the collective nuclear might of the two countries. In the film, the two machines discover each other's existence, communicate back-and-forth, share their collective data, and cut their human creators out of the process. It is the ultimate example of machine-to-machine communications, or M2M. CLICK FOR MORE
M2M: Rise of the Machines? Not Yet David Weldon In the 1970 science fiction thriller Colossus: The Forbin Project, two giant supercomputers from the United States and Soviet Union secretly join forces to take control of the collective nuclear might of the two countries. In the film, the two machines discover each other's existence, communicate back-and-forth, share their collective data, and cut their human creators out of the process. It is the ultimate example of machine-to-machine communications, or M2M. CLICK FOR MORE
Email This
