Community commentary: Encouraging open code in public procurement policies

Tom Donahoe tdonahoe at midpac.edu
Mon Feb 25 17:09:43 PST 2002


Hi all--
    Mostly I've been lurking on this list, but the discussion on this topic
compels me to say a little something on it.
    The crux of the matter, it seems to me, with the Open Source vs.
Proprietary software issue is the copyright model itself. On the one hand,
the open source movement represents, and I think expresses quite well, the
need for new copyright legislation. A community of practice exists here in
which developers, programmers, hobbyists, with varying level of expertise
share solutions to problems, while promoting learning and improvement of the
craft (reason why the word 'halau' is an appropriate name for the group,
even if there is no kumu per se). On the other hand, as I think someone else
pointed out, "A person's gotta eat." There should be some reward for the
person or people who put the time and effort into writing the majority of
the code...even if the community helps improve it.
    It's in that last clause that lies one of the major problems. Under
current copyright law (depending of course on how the copyright itself is
written), the community may not make changes to, or in some cases even
discuss, bugs that may exist in the code. The end-user can get stuck with a
lousy piece of software--and often is.
    I'm not sure I entirely buy the argument that information wants to be
free. Economists have long pointed out that information is the scarcest
good. If you don't know about a choice, it doesn't exist as an option for
you. As a teacher, I charge for my time...and I probably under charge at
that. ;-) I also notice on this board that the Linux certification isn't
free for that matter. Academic peer review journals don't come cheap either,
thus preventing academics who can't afford them from gaining access to
critical information. The irony here is that the producers of the research
aren't paid by the journal, but may receive payment through other means. And
the reviewers often don't get paid...makes you wonder why those journals are
so expensive. This may seem a digression of sorts, but I see it as a
parallel to the open source vs. proprietary software issue. Information may
not want to be free, but when information is freely shared it becomes it is
more powerful since more minds have access to it.
    I think we need to revise copyright laws in such a way as to lessen the
length of time that a person may hold a copyright--maybe back to the
original 14 years. This holding of a copyright for over a century is
detrimental both from an academic view, in that it can pre-empt academic
discussion, and economic view, by favoring only large developers and cutting
off any chance of developing a larger middle class. Furthermore, any law
that prohibits free discussion of improvement by a community of practice
will not only stifle improvement, but also learning. I think we need to find
a balance that permits creators to be rewarded for their efforts, but does
not limit access in such a way as to make it impossible for others to "stand
on the shoulders of giants."
    Just my take on it.

Aloha
Tom Donahoe

On 2/11/02 7:55 PM, "Rod Gammon" <AEG-Inc at hawaii.rr.com> wrote:

> You would not believe...
> 
> Whole books come out of august institutions like MIT, Oxford, etc.
> discussing software models or software supported analyses without discussing
> the software.  At least for linguistics.  The situation is so bad that
> Richard Sproat, at patent loving AT&T/Lucent, complains about it in a book
> published by that company.
> 
> So if we want open science, we have to fight for it.  This begins with
> scientists willingly promoting open source.
> 
> The big problem is fear of being poor.  Its one I wrestle with now.  Its not
> too bad as I can teach and, I hope, get grants to write open software and
> thus make money.  But I still fail to see how open source can lead me to
> income as a person only writing and selling open software.  Supporting,
> packaging, and fixing existing wares yes, perhaps.
> 
> But taking a void, say nlp software, and filling it with open source as
> profit making?  I welcome any model for making money that way.
> 
> aloha-
> rod g
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to luau as: thetman at lava.net
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst('Email.Unsub')
> 



More information about the LUAU mailing list