patents

In »Open Source: A capitalistic value engine« Christian Paterson was quoted for opensource.net as follows: Equally, clever engineering that separates commodity – or core – core-functionality with value-added functionality enables companies producing Open Source software to embrace an open and collaborative developer community whilst not providing a completely free lunch for competitors. Of course, if competitors start to feed back into the project because that makes operational sense for them, they effectively become co-investors. That may not stop them from obtaining an advantage, but it helps make the relationship less unidirectional. In this manner, one of the best defence tactics against competitors gaining an unfair advantage is to co-opt them into the project through a genuinely open and meritocratic governance structure. ...

Recently I leafed through a conversation between LWN and Richard Stallman from about two decades ago. Even at that early stage his remarkably confrontational style already stood out. LWN writes in “Interview with Richard M. Stallman |”: Proprietary software is antisocial, so developing it is wrong. In most cases, the user of proprietary software is expected to promise not to share with anyone else. It’s wrong to make that agreement, wrong to keep it if you have made it, and especially wrong to lure someone else into making such a promise. Using part of the proceeds of this antisocial activity for a worthy cause cannot justify it. ...