Open Source Needs an Arbitration Board
475303
Ziff Davis - Opinion: The ongoing intellectual property fight between Furthermore and Miro shows the need to address possible IP conflicts before they become public or courtroom battles.
310675
Like many, I was pretty shocked by the recent Microsoft-EU deal to settle the long-running investigation into interoperability issues.  This was not so much because of the way Microsoft has used every kind of delaying tactic it could before eventually agreeing (for the nth time) to try harder in the future.  My real dismay was provoked by the gap between appearance and reality â a chasm that I think bodes ill for the future of open source. read more
354087
Without question, open source is one of the most important forces in enterprise IT. Apache is still the reigning champion of Web server software.
138357
Not since SCO has there been a company so reviled by the open source community as Novell following its deal with Microsoft.  Already there are some clear signs of the negative effects of that anger: senior coders have left the company; Novell has posted a loss for the most recent quarter; and there are calls for a boycott of Novell products â to say nothing of imminent changes to the GNU GPL that might well nullify the entire Novell-Microsoft deal.  Some people are rubbing their hands in glee at the thought of Novell crashing and burning completely, but such a development could actually turn out to be one of the worst things to happen to free software.
212571
Linux users don't believe claims by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer that the open-source OS infringes on Microsoft's intellectual property. In fact, Ballmer's comments are making them mad.
261837
For anyone who has been using open source for a while, the current commercial enthusiasm for communities, collaboration, and all things Web 2.0, is rather amusing.  After all, the idea that users are not to be regarded simply as passive and grateful recipients of whatever is handed down to them from on high, but need to be treated as partners and participants who can make valuable contributions to the formulation and development of new products, is central to the way that free software works.  But some companies that are starting to dabble with Web 2.0 ideas are discovering that you have to be careful what you wish for when you solicit this kind of user feedback.  Just ask Michael Dell.
325391
At work we're mostly an OSS shop.  Partly because I have a strong bias towards OSS but cost, reliability, security, etc are all leading factors.  For the last several months now I've been in an interesting position to prove the benefits of OSS in a real-world environment.  We've had to extend a number of OSS tools to fit into our production environment.  These are significant additions and non-trivial.  Open Source allows you to STAND on the shoulders of gods.  For example we've been having a problem with the Jakarta DBCP  connection pool.  It was running out of connections in highly threaded environments and is slow.  Certainly slower than would be necessary.  Long story short.  Last night  ...
221462
Open source is increasingly meaningless if the data it manages isn't open, too.  Should the Open Source Definition be expanded to include data provisions?
357199
Back in February, Ralph Green asked me to speak at the North Texas Linux Users' Group. I discussed Linux administration and then took questions. Some one in the audience asked me about Mono. I gave a cavalier answer having a bias against it. Then someone else in the audience said that I needed to get my facts straight.
260180
Blog: Is version 3 of the GNU General Public License asking for too much?
8226
In what may be the first action of its kind in the U.S., a lawsuit has been filed to enforce an open-source license.
274000
Open source is changing the game by making software free.  About time.
173151
More and more open-source developers these days are employees of companies, paid to work on open-source projects, rather than independent programmers doing it for fun. The change raises issues for projects, programmers and employers alike.A number of corporations are moving into the free software arena, and this has resulted in legions of programmers, paid by companies, moving into free software communities, Simon Phipps, chief open source officer at Sun Microsystems said Friday at FOSS.IN, a conference on free and open-source software in Bangalore, India.This development has thrown up questions about how open-source developers on corporate payrolls can protect their freedom and rights from the demands of their employers, and resist corporate influences that may run counter to the free software community&#39;s interests.At the conference, an employee of an Indian government lab complained that his employment rules require him to turn in to the company any software developed by him, including what is done outside office hours.In this context, Danese Cooper, a member of the board of directors of the Open Source Initiative (OSI), who also advises Intel on its open source strategy, dedicated an entire session Friday at the FOSS.IN conference to outlining strategies employees can use to protect their autonomy from the &quot;corporate elephant&quot; that is both powerful and resistant to change.Historically, companies claimed rights to any software code written by their employees, but there are some changes, for example in California where employee agreements now allow the employee to retain the right to his work outside office hours, according to Cooper.&quot;Corporations are profit-driven, and are required to do well for their shareholders,&quot; Cooper said. To make profits, companies are going to shift their strategies quarterly, and employees may often find that projects they work on are cancelled, she said.&quot;Companies tend to like to think of their employees as interchangeable plug-ins, that can be renewed in different jobs,&quot; according to Cooper who added that this perception is slowly shifting as companies find that they are losing their employees.Companies also tend to want to manage open source projects, rather than facilitate them, to serve their business objectives, Cooper said. They demand, for example, that their staff work on open-source projects that are of interest to the company. Companies have created a pattern of working that lets them predict how much it is going to cost to do, and when it is going to get done, and though they have to change, it is taking them time to do it, she added.It is a lot harder to make money from offering support on open source software than from licensing software, according to Cooper. That is the reason employees should watch out for companies that have only halfheartedly embraced open source, she said. &quot;You see that specially in companies that throw code over the wall without any resource tree,&quot; she added.&quot;The open-source brand has become so powerful that people are trying to wear the brand, without wearing the behavior that goes with it,&quot; Phipps said.Employees are also likely to get caught up in ownership fights on contributions, on whether the contribution should be recognized on behalf of the employee, or the company. Even when employee contributions are recognized, it may be a figurehead rather than all the contributors that are recognized, Cooper said.The best path ahead for open source developers is to get more assertive when identifying the companies they would like to work with, and in negotiating agreements with companies that protect their rights.Employees should assert, for example, the right to blog and continue to participate in the projects they have been involved with, because these activities give them visibility beyond the company they work with, and also helps them if there is a dispute with an employer, Cooper said. &quot;Having a well-read blog is the best defense you can have against any problems you may encounter,&quot; she added.
44789
Blog: Microsoft wants to declare its independence from one of open source's biggest licenses, the GPL.  Here's why it will fail.
116497
It's not so much that there aren't workable business models around Open Source. But life is so much easier when those models can include pieces that people have to pay for as well.
453590
One analyst says a big chunk of the so-called "open source market" is already made up of leading traditional software vendors such as IBM and Oracle, who are following hybrid open source/propietary business models. And "pure play" vendors aren't necessarily that pure, either.
403876
Blog: Those who consider acquiring an open source company must be careful not to upset the associated open source community.  Is there such thing as a hostile takeover in open source?