Reply to Message

On the point of not being too critical

dberlind 21st Nov 2006

I agree. one question that is sure to arise in the minds of many is whether the efficacy of the act of open sourcing some software outweighs any downsides to what exactly got open sourced (eg: just a part of the software) or under what licensed.

I completely understand the reasons for wanting the "badgeware" provisos in these licenses. In fact, in an effort to credit the developers, if it were me personally, I'd be more than happy to respect those wishes if I was hosting their software (wishes=posting logos and copyright notices). I have a great deal of respect for how these entrepreneurs have taken the open source route to their startups and while trying to mitigate the risks to their viability. On the one hand, they're giving their software away. And they're not preventing a big company like Google or Yahoo from using their own software againt them. So, it doesn't seem like too much to ask to get some credit for their efficacy.

On the other, there are many people within the open source community who are not so deeply in touch with the legal machinations of open source software. So, I also understand the need for their to be some sort of authenticity when the phrase "open source" gets used.

The actions of SugarCRM, Socialtext, Scalix and Zimbra may be quite noble. You may see them as not pushing the envelope so hard that it breaks open source. But somewhere, someone else is going to come along and add their own Exhibit B that steps much further over the line. And they're going to say, "If those guys can do it, why can't I?" Also, why, for example, should other applicants (like when Sun got the CDDL approved) even bother?

So, this is a really hard problem to solve. I'm not about to get prescriptive about the solution. There are those in the open source community who I'm sure would bristle at the idea that someone like me would be even be willing to put the copyright notices and logos on their site. Sort of a "give an inch, take a mile" thing. But then again, Perens did tell me that if the language was softened to make the attributions optional, that he'd be OK with that.

db