Free and Open Source Software: Difference between revisions

From The Internet: Issues at the Frontier (course wiki)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(Changing the wiki following discussion with Miriam and Joseph)
Line 7: Line 7:
Free and Open Source Software (F/OSS) does not obey the usual rules of market based economies. Those who contribute to the codebase of large F/OSS projects, for example, are often unpaid amateurs working in their free time. We propose that F/OSS is better understood using the mechanics of "gift economies" rather than market economies. These are economies which value reputation over profit, where value is had in the giving, not in the taking, and where the wealthiest are those who have given away the most. Yet Linux distributors such as [http://www.redhat.com/ RedHat] operate in the market economy even though their products are free, depending on a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_open-source services based business model].
Free and Open Source Software (F/OSS) does not obey the usual rules of market based economies. Those who contribute to the codebase of large F/OSS projects, for example, are often unpaid amateurs working in their free time. We propose that F/OSS is better understood using the mechanics of "gift economies" rather than market economies. These are economies which value reputation over profit, where value is had in the giving, not in the taking, and where the wealthiest are those who have given away the most. Yet Linux distributors such as [http://www.redhat.com/ RedHat] operate in the market economy even though their products are free, depending on a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_open-source services based business model].


We propose that this is an example of a hybrid of gift and market economies. We further propose that F/OSS is an excellent example of the excellent and important work that can come out of an intellectual commons, where co-operative development and sharing allow authors to produce work of outstanding quality.
In our class we will try to track the economies and motivations that move F/OSS forward, from an insider and an outsider perspective. We will focus of three questions regarding the economies of F/OSS:
1. Inside motivations: what makes programmers take part in creating open software without being payed?
2. The connection between F/OSS and money: how do Linux distributions effect motivations? what happens to F/OSS when it comes a part of a hybrid of market and gift economied?
3. What should we do about it - how does the general market economy and law promote or undermine the F/OSS project by influencing these motivations? how the IP regime limits, or doesn't, the commons-based development of software?


The creative potential of the intellectual commons isn't limited to software. Indeed, Youtube mashups and artists such as Girl Talk demonstrate that new artistic works can also be created from the existing body of work. The Internet and computer technology generally enable commons-based creativity in a way never before possible. But the development of such mashups and remixes is running into a legal blockade. The intellectual property regime is perhaps not very amenable to the commons-based development, be it software development or artistic development.
We will note that although the creative potential of the intellectual commons isn't limited to software, in regards to software, the Internet and computer technology generally enable commons-based creativity in a way never before possible and triggers the question whether F/OSS offers a better model for creating software than proprietary mechanisms ("with enough eyes, all bugs are shallow"). We would like to speculate as to why Linux has succeeded as a commons-based development and why art hasn't.  


With that in mind, we propose to discuss how the IP regime limits, or doesn't, the commons-based development of software and art. We would like to speculate as to why Linux has succeeded as a commons-based development and why art hasn't. We would then like to discuss how the artistic commons can thrive despite the current IP regime, or what changes really must be made in order to create a legal framework that encourages commons-based development while protecting a market economy interests as well.


=Fundemental Question=
=Fundemental Question=


Given the intellectual commons as our goal, what do we need to reform, or not, in IP law to better encourage creativity while protecting authors?
How is F/OSS created and how should law be reformed to promote is?


=Guest Wish-list=
=Guest Wish-list=
Line 21: Line 23:
* [http://lessig.org/ Lawrence Lessig]
* [http://lessig.org/ Lawrence Lessig]
* [http://www.benkler.org/ Yochai Benkler]
* [http://www.benkler.org/ Yochai Benkler]
* [http://www.mako.cc/ Mako] - as an insider/outsider.


=Readings=
=Readings=
Line 30: Line 33:


=a cool tech thing=
=a cool tech thing=
maybe using [http://corp.kaltura.com/technology/video_publishing Katlura] to create a joint class mashup?
maybe using [http://corp.kaltura.com/technology/video_publishing Katlura] to create a joint class mashup? - used by Miriam and Joseph's group.
* possible alternative: each picking a favorite SourceForge project / Linux-installing party?

Revision as of 14:20, 19 January 2009

Topic Owners: dulles,Ayelet

Back to syllabus.

Precis

Free and Open Source Software (F/OSS) does not obey the usual rules of market based economies. Those who contribute to the codebase of large F/OSS projects, for example, are often unpaid amateurs working in their free time. We propose that F/OSS is better understood using the mechanics of "gift economies" rather than market economies. These are economies which value reputation over profit, where value is had in the giving, not in the taking, and where the wealthiest are those who have given away the most. Yet Linux distributors such as RedHat operate in the market economy even though their products are free, depending on a services based business model.

In our class we will try to track the economies and motivations that move F/OSS forward, from an insider and an outsider perspective. We will focus of three questions regarding the economies of F/OSS: 1. Inside motivations: what makes programmers take part in creating open software without being payed? 2. The connection between F/OSS and money: how do Linux distributions effect motivations? what happens to F/OSS when it comes a part of a hybrid of market and gift economied? 3. What should we do about it - how does the general market economy and law promote or undermine the F/OSS project by influencing these motivations? how the IP regime limits, or doesn't, the commons-based development of software?

We will note that although the creative potential of the intellectual commons isn't limited to software, in regards to software, the Internet and computer technology generally enable commons-based creativity in a way never before possible and triggers the question whether F/OSS offers a better model for creating software than proprietary mechanisms ("with enough eyes, all bugs are shallow"). We would like to speculate as to why Linux has succeeded as a commons-based development and why art hasn't.


Fundemental Question

How is F/OSS created and how should law be reformed to promote is?

Guest Wish-list

Readings

a cool tech thing

maybe using Katlura to create a joint class mashup? - used by Miriam and Joseph's group.

  • possible alternative: each picking a favorite SourceForge project / Linux-installing party?
Retrieved from "http://cyber.harvard.edu/iif/?title=Free_and_Open_Source_Software&oldid=1351"