The straw men of open source

The straw man in this case is the Microsoft-led argument that using Linux carries patent risks. It doesn't. But signing on to the idea that it might is like my running bet that I'll die next year. It's insurance.

The paranoid customers who expect or demand such insurance may never use Linux anyway, but Dell figures the risk is minimal, and it can still offer popular distributions like Red Hat and Ubuntu, so why not?

The reason why not is it gives the straw man argument power. It can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

There are many such straw men in open source. The idea that open source is in conflict with copyright. The idea that developers are being ripped-off because they share their work with the community.

At one time there was merit in these arguments, just as there was merit seen in the idea of spontaneous combustion. Some of these arguments are myths that can be tested. Others are legal arguments that can be adjudicated. Still others are just superstitions, passed on out of ignorance.

What moderates against straw men, and what limits their reach, is the community. Any argument which stands against the consensus of the community becomes an extraordinary claim, demanding extraordinary proof.

And when such proof isn't forthcoming, we should let it lie. Michael Dell's failure to do that, in the case of the Microsoft-Linux straw man, is going to cost him.