June 01, 2009

The fight over open source 'leeches'

Open source is supposed to be all about community, but as commercial open source becomes the norm, fewer developers are giving back. Is that hurting open source?

Further complicating the case was the origin of the code used by Actiontec: an unnamed Asian OEM that embedded it in the router's integrated circuits. Similarly, Cisco purchased parts from a vendor in China containing embedded code that should have been shared under the GPL -- but wasn't, says SFLC attorney Aaron Williamson. And that led to a suit filed late last year.

It's quite possible that the Asian vendors had never even heard of the GPL, much less thought about complying with it, he says. Still, the ultimate seller bears responsibility for the actions of its suppliers, and when education and persuasion fail, Williamson and his colleagues are prepared to sue for clients who step forward.

He figures that similar issues involving firmware are likely to arise. The Verizon case concluded with a favorable settlement for the developers last year, and Williamson says the Cisco lawsuit is close to a similar outcome.

The provision of the GPL that tripped up Verizon and Cisco is known as "copy left," which requires that users make changes public to code covered by the license. But you won't find that provision in Apache's licenses.

"We feel there are enough enticements without holding a gun to someone's head," says Apache Software Foundation president Justin Erenkrantz. The Apache license, he says, "is hard to violate because it basically says you can do whatever you want as long as you don't use our name." IBM, for example, can't claim its HTTP server is Apache, but it can note it is "powered or based" on Apache.

Why many enterprises are open source vampires
Given the forgiving terms of the license, it's not surprising that Apache doesn't have many problems with violations, but Erenkrantz goes further, praising Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Yahoo, and even Google -- often labeled a freeloader -- for making significant contributions. He's not alone in letting Google off the hook. Matt Asay puts it this way: "A year ago I was a vocal critic of Google, but they've come around."

Asay, though, doesn't give everyone a pass. "Enterprise IT is the biggest consumer of open source software, and it gives almost nothing back to the community," he said in an interview. Particularly galling to him is the fact that the worst offenders generally aren't technology companies that might reasonably worry about giving away a competitive advantage, but mainstream enterprises that don't have such an excuse.

Why not comply? "I spoke at a CTO breakfast and asked that question," Asay recalls. "Some said it was hard to get approval from their company legal team, which worried about liability issues. Others simply didn't see the benefit."

No benefit? Open source projects -- and there are more than 100,000 on SourceForge alone -- may or may not use a license that "requires" a user to contribute back, but those who don't contribute back lose a key advantage of the model: collective support for new code. Companies that go it alone have to spend time and development money making fixes to "forks" that could be handled by others -- a powerful incentive to play by the rules.

Even so, the culture of collaboration, which is really the ideal of open source, doesn't run very deep in most companies. Institutions, as Woods pointed out, simply aren't wired that way -- yet.

Read more about open source in InfoWorld's Open Source Channel.

Bill Snyder is a contributing editor to InfoWorld. He also writes the Tech's Bottom Line blog.
Close

On Twitter now

Open source initiatives

Powered by Twitter
additional resources
White Paper - How to Improve Delivery of Advanced Web Applications

White Paper

Virtual Workforce: The Key to Expanding The Business While Cutting Costs

Get the independent advice and expertise you need to support a virtual workforce.

Go inside:
The three-step approach to making a virtual workforce a reality.
The four flavors of client virtualization technologies.
The three key initiatives that solve IT challenges.
Download now »
White Paper: Successfully Secure Your Wireless LAN With Wi-Fi firewalls.

White Paper

Addressing Linux Threats Leveraging Fewer Resources

The increase in Linux popularity has increased the frequency and sophistication of malware attacks. Read this 2 page white paper now to learn how you can protect your Linux environment with real-time protection that is certified by all major Linux vendors.

Download now »
White Paper - The 2009 Handbook of Application Delivery

White Paper

The 2009 Handbook of Application Delivery

Ensuring acceptable application delivery will become even more difficult over the next few years. As a result, IT organizations need to ensure that the approach that they take to resolving the current application delivery challenges can scale to support the emerging challenges. This handbook elaborates on the key tasks associated with planning, optimization, management and control and provides decision criteria to help IT organizations choose appropriate solutions.

Download now »
White Paper - Is Your Backup System Outdated?

White Paper

Mid-range Storage Considerations

A common misconception is that mid-range storage requirements are dramatically different than that of a larger enterprise. Mid-range storage users may require less capacity, but they have similar functionality and management requirements. This ESG paper examines mid-range storage needs and reviews a new solution that adjusts size while retaining value, performance and functionality.

Download now »
jimmyed2000 1-Jun-09 9:02am
So who are all of these open source developers and contributors? I disagree with Matt Asay on this topic. How many hobbyists need a CMS? Not many. I would think that almost all of the contributions that Alfresco gets are made by IT professionals working for enterprise organizations. Those organizations are paying those IT professionals. So indirectly all of their contributions come from enterprises - it's just not a direct contribution. James http://jamesdixon.wordpress.com
ian807 1-Jun-09 9:21am
And what were open source developers *expecting* to happen? Open source has always looked to me to be just another way for corporations to extract free labor from the young and naive. Corporations are not benign entities famed for upholding their end of a perceived social contract. They are self-serving, nothing else. To them, open source is just a resource. If they are not forced to uphold an obligation to return something, they won't, unless it immediately profits them to do so. Vaguer promises of future benefits motivate only college sophomores, not corporate executives. Bottom line? Open source projects were fun for the "Living in Mom's basement" crowd, but it's time to grow up.
rdm 1-Jun-09 9:23am
I understand people wanting others to participate in their activities, but demonizing people for being "leeches" seems, to me, to be totally wrong-headed. If you do not want people to be happily using your software without feeling the need for anything else... Seriously, if you are unhappy because people are using your free software, you need to re-think what you are doing. Meanwhile, if *your* software project is in danger of dying, I very much doubt that this would be because of your satisfied users. I am not prepared to solve other people's business issues for them, but as a starting point, you might think about what you would do if you had some highly successful marketing but were selling no products.

Sign up to receive InfoWorld Resource Alerts

Subscribe to the Technology: Open Source Newsletter

The one-stop resource center for IT professionals.

©1994-2010 Infoworld, Inc.