Slashdot Mirror
Can You Be Denied the Right To Support OSS?
jerico.dev writes "I am currently selecting a CM tool for a project. Important condition: the software must be OSI compliant. I considered Alfresco, since they call themselves 'open source.' Then I heard from several of Alfresco's partners that they are not allowed to do projects based on Alfresco's GPL edition because their partnership contract denied them the right to do so. They only can support Alfresco's enterprise edition. But Alfresco's VP of business development Matt Asay told me that their enterprise edition is not OSI compliant. Does anyone in the Slashdot crowd have experience with partner contracts of other OSS vendors? Is it normal that Sun, Red Hat, etc. force their partners to decline projects based on their open source editions? It's probably legal to do so, but do you think it is legitimate and fair?"
Wow... just when I begin to think that open source may be making some true inroads in enterprise culture, someone who still doesn't even understand that you can make money off open source software gets modded "Insightful"...
I don't know who/what Alfresco is, but I think I have a good general case answer.
"I am currently selecting a CM tool for a project. Important condition: the software must be OSI compliant. I considered Alfresco, since they call themselves 'open source.' Then I heard from several of Alfresco's partners that they are not allowed to do projects based on Alfresco's GPL edition because their partnership contract denied them the right to do so. They only can support Alfresco's enterprise edition. But Alfresco's VP of business development Matt Asay told me that their enterprise edition is not OSI compliant. Does anyone in the Slashdot crowd have experience with partner contracts of other OSS vendors? Is it normal that Sun, Red Hat, etc. force their partners to decline projects based on their open source editions? It's probably legal to do so, but do you think it is legitimate and fair?"
Your subject question (Can using open source be denied?) is not the same as your real question (Do you think it's legit and fair?). You've pretty much answered the subject question yourself: yes. To elaborate, the Alfresco partners who do not have the right to develop against the GPL edition are not really being "denied" that right; they voluntarily relinquished it in order to become Alfresco partners and they have a contract that says so. Anytime they want to do so, they can end their relationship with Alfresco and develop against the GPL edition all they want. The fact that they don't do so tends to indicate that they believe it is more profitable to be an Alfresco partner and forego developing for the GPL edition.
Certainly it's legal to do so (IANAL). Is it legitimate? Yes, probably. Is it fair? Yes, probably. I'm a big supporter of the GPL and if I were to release anything I've written to the public, I would do so under the GPL, but the reason I think the Alfresco partner contract is probably legitimate and fair is that Alfresco is basically saying "We'll give you the special access and other things that go with being an Alfresco partner, which will help you make more money. In return, we will ask you to help us make money too, by developing only for the proprietary edition of Alfresco." I don't think that's unreasonable or unfair. Alfresco has released a GPL version of their product, but they do need to make a living, and I don't really see cause for complaint if they require their partners to not use the GPL version.
Now for my good general case answer: "So what?"
To expand on that, Alfresco partners can't develop for the GPL edition, and the Enterprise edition is not OSI-compliant. You have three simple choices
1) Don't use an Alfresco partner. Anyone who is not an Alfresco partner is free to develop for the GPL edition;
2) Don't use Alfresco;
3) Adjust your spec so that OSI-compliance is not required (this is the least desirable of the three and one I would not recommend, but it is a choice).
"Just remember: When someone more intelligent or knowledgeable than you are, labeling them an elitist doesn't change anything."
hayuck hayuck, that was hilarious. I'm glad you feel the need to prove your "intelligence" through a slashdot post.