Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Perens Talks About Open Source Risk Management

Posted by Hemos on from the more-fun-then-roulette dept.

Big Sav writes "Here is a quick but good interview with Bruce Perens. It also raises the topic of indemnification vis a vis the SCO court case " Interesting interview - talks about Peren's new Open Source Risk Management company.

14 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. Self-promotion by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not that I can really blame him, but this interview is simply a promotion of his new OSRM company. Like posting an interview with your favorite movie star (who spend the entire time plugging his or her new film). It just doesn't seem like "news" as much as it is a commercial.

    1. Re:Self-promotion by Kegster · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, Its a bit of a standard plug tour. Though he didn't say anything particularly contraversial in this article, unlike in the one he did for computerworld, with its "if linux gets too commercial the developpers will throw their toys out of the pram and do a Cartman"

    2. Re:Self-promotion by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Note that I started my post with "I can't blame him" - Perens is doing what I would do in his place... but is it news for Slashdot?

  2. erm... by mirko · · Score: 5, Insightful
    About the legal problems small users might face due to the SCO hype :
    With small users, I don't think there's a problem. I don't think they're visible enough.


    What if SCO choose to attack them like the ??AA went to war against p2p users ?
    Small users cannot afford lawyers, after all...
    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
    1. Re:erm... by baudilus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unless they go after users who register their software for support reasons (RedHat, Mandrake), I don't see this being a real possibility. Also, the RIAA sues people under the premise that they are "costing" them money by providing a way to get music for free, for which they would otherwise pay (a ridiculous as we all know this is). I don't think SCO could even find out who is using it, let alone be able to prove monetary damages of any amount. Even if a suit is successful, how could they prove how much money they "lost"? The legal process would cost more than it's worth.

  3. Is this a good thing? by gregarican · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To me it sounds as if the group Bruce is on the board of is trying to exploit or otherwise captalize on the FUD of SCO actually winning a lawsuit. Which probably won't happen. Kind of reminds me of start-up companies which were around for all of the Y2K madness back in 1999. The FUD helped fuel interest, which really exaggerated the real deal.

    Maybe Bruce should start selling underwear to Iraqi prisoners...

    1. Re:Is this a good thing? by pointbeing · · Score: 4, Interesting
      To me it sounds as if the group Bruce is on the board of is trying to exploit or otherwise captalize on the FUD of SCO actually winning a lawsuit.

      Agreed.

      They're not really offering a lot for the money anyway - on the kernel developer side they offer $25k of protection. IMO if someone was to actually *win* a lawsuit $25,000 would be just a drop in the bucket.

      Also, why would I give $100k to someone who doesn't know that at least in this context 'panel' isn't a proper noun? ;-)

      --
      we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
      -- anais nin
  4. Necessary by Plaeroma · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For our less read posters http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=indemnifi cation In a perfect world, this service wouldn't be necessary. But, you really can't expect companies to take even imagined risks. If this helps people get involved in OSS despite all the SCO FUD, then job well done.

  5. Bottom line is... by Otter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...the claimed TCO of Linux has just gone up by however much Getting Sued Over Linux insurance you decide you need. Perens claims he isn't taking advantage of FUD, and he may well not be -- but at least acknowledge that this represents a 180 degree change from "No one could possibly believe there's any legal risk associated with Linux use and anyone who says otherwise is a Microsoft spy!"

    --
    What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
  6. What is risk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Most people think that risk is "probability of bad outcome weighted by cost of bad outcome", or somthing like that. It's not, because in a market, "price" reflects all probabilities and weightings, i.e. price is the "expected value".

    Risk is properly measured by the variance in possible outcomes, the amount of "spread" around the expected value, and probability does not enter into that.

    Risk has a value because every extra dollar you add to your wealth is worth less to you than the one that came before. So, upward "wins" in the variance are worth less than downward "losses", i.e. you should be willing to pay to eliminate risk, to shrink your variance.

    So, the economic "risk" of the SCO lawsuit exists with regard to the spread in possible outcomes, and has nothing to do with their probabilities. The value of insurance to you is based on your economic activity and your risk aversion.

    Insurance will increase the spread of Linux, not decrease it.

    Perens is capitalizing on his name, not on the FUD, since the article doesn't reflect that he understands risk in detail.

  7. I did RTFA you insensitive clod! by gregarican · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's a PR line. Lawspeak. It indeed is capitalizing on the FUD since any educated person in the technology industry knows that the SCO case doesn't have a leg to stand on. The only potential clients I can see are those who blindly fall for the FUD that SCO has perpetuated.

    Just like those consulting companies that were around in 1999 to ensure that no Y2K disaster was going to hit clients. I know some companies would go into people's homes and ensure they were Y2K-compliant. What a freakin' joke! Remember folks stockpiling food and readying themselves for living in bomb shelters? Of course it's an extreme comparison, but the basis is the same. Capitalizing on more ignorant folks' fears.

  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Re:Extortion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    MS has had these problems as well. At least one patent holder has threatened to sue end users over database technology in Access. I hate to break this to you the Wet Blanket of Proprietary Wisdom but this is a universal problem for business. It isn't unique to OSS.

    It seems that running proprietary software isn't a safe option either. I'd recommend going back to abacuses but someone probably has a patent on those as well.

  10. Peren's Outlook by Inhibit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having heard Bruce Peren's give a speech before and had a chance to hear some of his outlook on Linux and IP, he seems to have a fair handle on how it all works.

    From the interview it seems that it's an effort to provide some indemnity while making people aware of the possible IP/Copyright issues inherent in coding software in the USA (and probably Europe soon). They're offering a service to assess risk of malicious lawsuits and possible IP violation. Doesn't sound like spreading Fear, Uncertainty, *or* Doubt to me.

    --
    You're reading Slashdot. Of course you like Linux and pc hardware