I think that people might be being a little hard on the term 'Open Source'. As I 
understand 
the history of it, it was a term of art devised by people like Raymond, Perens, etc. 
to replace 
Stallman's prefered 'Free Software' (which was deemed to have the wrong connotations 
for 
businessmen). Since this group of developers coined the term in the first place, or at 
least 
brought it into popular use, we might agree to allow them some authority in its usage. 
Especially since the words 'open source' really don't have any clear *literal* meaning 
(pace 
Jay Blanchard, who claimed that there was a 'bone-headed mistake' in the definition).

It is possible to pick out various strands to the open source model; having to do not 
just with 
the copyright arrangements, but also with software development and business processes. 
And like any term of art which was devised primarily for PR reasons (eg: '.NET', 'New 
Labour'), it represents these strands in a vague way. But I don't think that this is 
any reason 
to redefine it to mean simply software which is distributed with the source code (or 
some 
more exact definition along these lines).

Perhaps people might want to use 'Shared Source' for this latter kind of idea, along 
with 
Microsoft:

<quote>Microsoft's Shared Source Initiative is a source licensing framework that makes 
source code broadly available while preserving the intellectual property rights that 
sustain a 
strong software business</quote>

Of course, this definition exposes Microsoft's background assumption that selling 
software is 
always necessary for software businesses. But (to respond to Tony Leotta's posting) I 
think 
that part of the Open Source idea is that there is a business model involved in 
selling 
services around a product instead of selling the product itself. I gues the thought is 
that 
making a piece of software open source radically increases its exposure both to users 
and to 
developers. The latter then help to improve the quality of software, and the former 
pay you 
for integrators, consultants, etc. More to say here, of course, but this isn't an 
obviously dumb 
idea, is it?

Best, Ewan

Ewan McEachran
Softsteel Solutions Ltd.
--
http://cms-list.org/
trim your replies for good karma.

Reply via email to