Hi folks,
I've cross-posted this on both techtalk and issues, because it probably
belongs on issues, but it was spurred by the conversation on techtalk about
the story on MS, and it's view of Linux.
I read the original speach (which is at:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/craig/05-03sharedsource.asp)
A line in the National Post story caught my eye:
"Open source, which was associated in the 1980s with anti-commercial software
programmers who adhered to communitarian work ideals, emerged as a commercial
phenomenon in the 1990s as a popular way of building software to manage Web
sites."
My question is (it's kinda fuzzy): to what extent do others see embracing
open-source software as a potentially political statement about intellectual
property, and capitalism?
It seems to me that some really, really big fights are going on and brewing
about intellectual property, all fueled by the fact that current technology,
whether it be digital tech, or chemistry and molecular biology, makes it
increasingly difficult to police IP. It feels like as the powers that want to
maintain their IP (software companies, record companies, publishers, drug
companies) pressure governments to enact stricter legislation against the
"theft" of IP (like UCITA, for instance), that these regulations begin to
impinge on the free speach and basic rights of individuals in ways never
before seen.
And, it seems to me, that the open-source movement is a great counter to that
trend.
But, now that open source is seen as a potential business model, how does
that change things? And how is being an open-source programmer part of the
puzzle?
Anyway, I thought this would be an interesting set of issues to discuss and
ponder.
--
------------
Michelle Murrain, Ph.D.
President
Norwottuck Technology Resources
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.norwottuck.com
_______________________________________________
issues mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
