Slashdot Mirror
Economics and Open Source Projects
david_christie writes "Dan
Gillmor has a piece on the economist Yochai Benkler's
paper "Coase's Penguin, or Linux and the Nature of the
Firm" which examines open source projects
asan example of an emerging general model of economic behavior that is neither market nor company based. A previous version of the paper was noted
in slashdot back in October, but it's been revised for upcoming publication
in the Yale Law Review and is well worth a second look. Benkler attempts to
explain why open source projects succeed, without falling back on theories about
the special nature of software projects or hacker culture. He suggests that
more general economic principles are at work, which are displacing the
traditional motivations (market prices and employee relationships) that
economists use to quantify individual behavior. If he's right the open source
model could spread to other forms of creative work where the output is
information or culture (music production comes to mind). The author thinks
deeply about the information flows characterizing collaborative projects like
free software development ("commons-based peer production"). That distinguishes
this paper from the usual economist mumbo-jumbo about price points and such.
Like Larry Lessig on the
legal side of things, this is a guy who gets it and has thought deeply about how
his field relates to it."
Open Source Projects can be sold. However, you must include the source code. You can still have a regular copyright on content. An example would be the Quake engine. Id released the source code. You can develop a game with it and change the source. You can then sell the game all you want. You must release the source you used/changed for the game. However, you can still copyright the graphics, music, and content and prevent others from using it in a commericial product. Open Source does not mean free software as in money, but free access to the source code to the software.
The Economist has just put up an article about how Open Source's future in the world, and how bright it looks.
Economics is not the study of money. It is the study of the flow of resources and value through a system. Early economic systems had nothing being sold - things were given or traded, and in some gift-based cultures you got nothing tangible in return. OpenSource has a definite economic structure and flow of resources - they follow the interest.
Actually, I would make the argument that OpenSource-type movements are only really possible in an already mature and vibrant economy. Could OpenSource have evolved without this strange commodity we call "free time?" Most of human history was involved with very few activities: eating, sleeping, reproducing, fighting, and running away from things try to kill you. Only in the last few centuries have societies evolved with "free time" built into them. Once you have free time, you have time to think about what you "enjoy." Once you know what you enjoy and some extra wealth lying around (either in the form of time, currency, or resources), then you can pursue the things you enjoy. Only in this final state can OpenSource (as it exists today) really work and thrive.
Funny, if my hypothesis is correct, OpenSource is not some anti-American (or anti-Liberal Capitalist Democratic Republic, for those of you outside of the USA) conspiracy, but rather a natural outgrowth of our society.
The battles for control over sheet music at the turn of the 20th century would be very instructive for the majority of slashdotters. Until intellectual property laws were strengthened, it was perfectly legal to send someone to a musical and have them write down the music during the performance. Then sheet music publishers would buy the copied music and publish it themselves, with not a penny to the original composers/arraingers. Gilbert and Sullivan used to complain bitterly about this.
Meanwhile, in the developing world (which was America at the time), copyrights on European (especially British) content was ignored. Dickens hated America for just this reason. Remind anyone of China in the 21st century?
Somehow, the world survived the sheet music monopolies and content control system (back when content control meant hiring thugs to destroy businesses that were suspected of "pirating" sheet music), just as it will survive the RIAA, MPAA, and the DMCA. They're just going to be made irelevant by some future technological occurence.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
Most musicians also have other full time jobs which pay for those neat toys. how often do you hear of a person who has taken the the time and effort (thousands of hours) to become proficient musician who does not own an interment to play? The Sad truth is unless you are very talented, very young, very good looking and very lucky you are not go to make it in the music business (well the popular music business anyway) and even then the large record companies get the lions share of the cash. Can you name any musician that gets radio play that was not at one time in their career young and good looking. I have no doubt that there are thousands of fat old bald guys out there who could blow you away with their music but lack the opportunity and support (and looks) needed for commercial success. This sad reality will change for the better in the information age. Suddenly the fat old bald guy can afford a good quality digital studio in his basement for less money than his instrument. Suddenly he can publish his music for free on the internet. Suddenly anyone can get that music for free and and play it in their car on the way to work. Sure there is a lot of crap out there but the cream will float to the top and more people will listen. The Time for open source music is ripe. It is has been happening for a little while now. As a fat old musician/songwriter with a recording studio in his basement I can tell you open source music is alive and well.
Indeed, I can imagine that. These were my ideas
I got quite a long way with it - on that page are ideas for how such a musical marketplace could work, how quality would be ensured (ie how do you sort the wheat from the chaff without record companies A&R depts) and answers to questions musicians would commonly have.
I can so see this happening. Music is, in a way, a parallel of the software world. Music is effectively information and can be replicated and copied for zero cost. It's dominated by a rich and powerful entity (the RIAA vs MS), and the world is crying out for something better. It's ripe for the gift economy to be established here.