Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Source Could Learn from Capitalism

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the don't-give-it-away-for-free dept.

ukhackster writes to tell us that Sun's Simon Phipps challenged many open source ideals at a recent open source conference in London. Urging the open source community to look to the lessons of capitalism, Phipps called for "volunteerism" to be replaced with "directed self-interest" and denounced the perceived legal issues surrounding open source. From the article: "Phipps took time out to take a swipe at some of the exhibitors at the conference who were selling professional advice on negotiating the open source 'legal minefield'. 'I disagree with those who say who say open source is a legal minefield,' he said as he threw from the stage a brochure from one firm of lawyers. 'If you think open source is a minefield you're doing it wrong.'"

3 of 385 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Missing the point by rgmoore · · Score: 5, Informative
    The Stallman-esque extremists who want to avoid anything that they think is in some way capitalist are just as bad, though.

    Not nearly as bad as the people who try to categorize others incorrectly. Stallman doesn't think that it's wrong to make money selling Free Software. To the contrary, he actively encourages people to do so. Just read the FSF's essay on selling Free Software. For people who can't bother to follow the link, a salient quote is (emphasis is from the original):

    Since free software is not a matter of price, a low price isn't more free, or closer to free. So if you are redistributing copies of free software, you might as well charge a substantial fee and make some money. Redistributing free software is a good and legitimate activity; if you do it, you might as well make a profit from it.

    Distributing free software is an opportunity to raise funds for development. Don't waste it!

    That doesn't seem like somebody who's opposed to capitalism.

    --

    There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

  2. Reporter missing the point by WebMink · · Score: 5, Informative

    In fact I said and routinely say nothing of the sort. Matt Asay does a fine job of summarising the main points I made, which you will note do not include claiming "open source could learn from capitalism". In fact I wonder if the other reporter was even at the same event. Reading through the whole thread here I'm amazed that people feel they can come to any conclusions about what I think based on an intentionally provocative and ill-informed article by a ZDNet reporter who badly summarises the thrust of my keynote in reported speech apparently intended to garner Slashdot coverage.

    And I disagree with your outdated analysis of Sun, naturally.

  3. Re:Missing the point by SavvyPlayer · · Score: 5, Informative
    The Stallman-esque extremists who want to avoid anything that they think is in some way capitalist are just as bad, though.
    There is nothing Stallman-esque about avoiding all things capitalist. Stallman's philosophy is distilled in what he calls the "Four Freedoms". These are:

    0. The freedom to run the program, for any purpose.
    1. The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
    2. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor.
    3. The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

    The FSF supports any (legitimate) business/revenue model which respects these four freedoms.