X
Tech

Closed spectrum means closed source

It's true you can't impose open source rules on a closed source world which is closed by government fiat. But you can change governments, you can change rules, and you can open markets to competition.
Written by Dana Blankenhorn, Inactive

In lecturing open source developers about the mobile world in Germany this week, Dr Ari Jaaksi of Nokia spoke truth to the powerless.

That truth is that closed spectrum is a global problem. (This was the Nokia logo circa 1865.)

Mobile networks worldwide are licensed by governments to exclusive operators whose sole interest lies in maximizing revenue for themselves and those governments.  

The root of the problem is the world's spectrum policy. Whether it's done through a sale or a simpler political transfer, the policy of closed, exclusive spectrum needs to be addressed.

It works for the operators. It works for the governments. It does not work for the people. It does not maximize use of the resource or the economic value of that resource use.

When someone tells you that you must "obey" rules which don't exist in free markets, what they are telling you is that these markets aren't free.

In a blog post following his talk, Jaaski (left) wrote the "corporate" and "open source" worlds need to learn from one another and co-exist. Fair enough. Most open source projects are owned by companies, and most people working on them have jobs.

But there's a more important point I need to make in reply.

It's true you can't impose open source rules on a closed source world which is closed by government fiat. But you can change governments, you can change rules, and you can open markets to competition.  

Yes, you can. If that weren't possible, Ari, your logo would still be a fish.

Editorial standards