I re-read Thomas Goetz’s article "Open Source is Everwhere" in last November’s Wired Magazine, to try to focus on the real reasons for favouring open source. I want to reassure myself that I’m not becoming dogmatic in my support of OS systems. This quote from the end of the article resonated with me:
Open source is often framed as an attack on the corporate world at large. But in fact, the open source approach can be a boon for companies. Licensing from a trusted collaborative project saves money and leaves the technology open to further development. By showing corporations that a closed, defensive approach to intellectual property can be less efficient than liberal licensing, Cambia and a few other open source efforts are leading the way to the mainstream.
In this light, where corporations are part of the model, open source suddenly becomes something less marginal and more ingenious. It forces industry to reckon with openness rather than hide behind intellectual property. In driving down the cost of software or encyclopedias or biotechnology, open source is unleashing billions in capital otherwise put to woefully inefficient ends. Just because it’s not about making money first doesn’t mean it won’t make money second (just ask the folks who bought their mansions with Red Hat shares).
Openness is pretty much like democracy; and I can’t see many reasons against it. The same for lower costs and increased efficiencies. I also like the idea that open source is still about making money, because we all have to feed our ourselves and our families. What I like best about open source is that the development process is a real meritocracy, much like being an entrepreneur. In small business, if you don’t deliver, you can’t make an honest living.
