Add essay on commercial free software.

1 files changed, 339 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/essays/commercial-free-software.html b/essays/commercial-free-software.html
new file mode 100755
index 0000000..0267525
--- /dev/null
+++ b/essays/commercial-free-software.html
@@ -0,0 +1,339 @@
+<!--#set var="title" value="Commercial Free Software: Not an Oxymoron" -->
+<!--#include virtual="../includes/header.html" -->
+<h2>Commercial Free Software: Not an Oxymoron</h2>
+<p>
+	Many people believe that money can't be made in free (as in freedom)
+	software. They believe that "free" means "noncommercial", and they might
+	compare "open-source" software and "commercial" software as if the terms
+	were opposite and mutually exclusive. This is in fact a logical fallacy;
+	specifically it is an affirmation of a disjunct. Software can be both free
+	and commercial. If a software copyright license allowed only noncommercial
+	dealing, it would be considered neither free software nor open source.
+</p>
+<p>
+	Free software is in fact used commercially, and successful business models
+	around free software exist (and have existed longer than those around
+	proprietary software have). I've generalized the ways in which people make
+	money with free software into three broad categories: development, support,
+	and distribution.
+</p>
+<h3>
+	Development
+</h3>
+<p>
+	Modern economic models around free software closely resemble early economic 
+	models around software. Keep in mind that software freedom is as old as 
+	software itself. The "proprietarization", as I call it, of software began 
+	around the 1970s, apparently pioneered by International Business Machines 
+	(IBM). [1] It was furthered by companies like "Micro-Soft" and people like 
+	Bill Gates, who in 1976 published an "Open Letter to Hobbyists" that 
+	criticized people for sharing software without paying for it. [2] Before 
+	that time, software was usually distributed with source code (some 
+	universities even had policies of rejecting software that wasn't). Software 
+	was often distributed either at no cost or at the cost of making and 
+	shipping copies (at the time, on tapes). [3] Programmers were paid for the 
+	time they spent writing software, not for copies of the software itself (or 
+	really, licenses to use the software). [4] We see the same thing happening 
+	today. Programmers are being paid to work on software, and the software is 
+	distributed freely (that is, without unfair restrictions) and often even at 
+	no charge.
+</p>
+<p>
+	I cite four major examples of this phenomenon of paid development of free 
+	software. The first is Linux, a powerful and reliable high-performance 
+	kernel found in everything from televisions and ATMs to large servers and 
+	supercomputers (in fact, in over 90% of the world's 500 fastest 
+	supercomputers [5]). As of 2010, over 70% of work done on Linux is done by 
+	paid programmers. [6] At least 659 companies have supported the development 
+	of Linux. [7] Compare that to the Windows NT kernel of Microsoft Windows, 
+	the development of which is supported by only one company (the only one 
+	legally allowed to do so). Additionally, AMD's recent hiring of two more 
+	graphics driver developers shows that if you can improve a company's 
+	freely-licensed software, they might hire you to do so officially. [8]
+</p>
+<p>
+	The next example is Qt, a flexible cross-platform application framework 
+	popular in desktop, server, and embedded applications. [9] Qt is free 
+	software, licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) 
+	version 2.1. [10] Most of Qt's developers are employed by Qt Development 
+	Frameworks, a subsidiary of Nokia Corporation since 2008. [11]
+</p>
+<p>
+	My third example is GNAT, a compiler for the Ada programming language that 
+	is now a part of the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC). It was originally 
+	developed by the New York University under a $3-million contract awarded by 
+	the United States Air Force in 1992. Under the requirements of the 
+	contract, copyright on the software was assigned to the Free Software 
+	Foundation and the software was released under the GNU General Public 
+	License (GPL). [12]
+</p>
+<p>
+	Finally, I cite the GNU Project, a project announced in 1983 with the 
+	now-successful goal of creating a complete free operating system. The Free 
+	Software Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization founded by Dr. Richard 
+	Stallman in 1985 to support the development of free software, hired 
+	programmers to work on parts of the GNU system. GNU Bash (a popular and 
+	user-friendly command shell now used in systems like GNU/Linux and Apple 
+	Mac OS X), GLIBC (a C library), and GNU tar (an archiving program) were all 
+	initially developed by paid programmers. [13] Yet all are free software, 
+	and all are distributed often at no charge.
+</p>
+<p>
+	But you may think this doesn't make any sense. Why do companies pay for the 
+	development of software for which few people pay? They must be losing lots 
+	of money. Actually, they have a financial interest in having high-quality 
+	software available, even if few or no people actually pay for it (but 
+	remember that free software is a matter of freedom, not price). Many 
+	companies sell support for free software; we'll see more about this later. 
+	Many companies sell hardware with which free software is run (servers, 
+	wireless network adapters, digital cameras, mobile phones, televisions, 
+	cars, <em>commercial airplanes</em>, etc.). Many companies see free software as a 
+	way to save time and money and not have to reinvent the wheel. If you want 
+	something that serves a similar but not identical function as a proprietary 
+	program does, you have to write a new program from scratch; a free program, 
+	on the other hand, can simply be adapted to a new purpose. I suspect this 
+	is part of AMD's motivation in supporting Coreboot, a free bootloader that 
+	is faster and more flexible than proprietary BIOSes, in their server and 
+	embedded products. [14][15][16]
+</p>
+<p>
+	Finally, most software is custom software, software that is written for a 
+	single person or company and not meant to be released. This software is 
+	technically commercial and often free in a trivial sense. If there's one 
+	user, and that user has the rights to the software, then the software is 
+	free for all its users. [13][17]
+</p>
+<h3>
+	Support
+</h3>
+<p>
+	With proprietary software, only the copyright holder is allowed to 
+	understand it, and only they are allowed to support it. Support of 
+	proprietary software is a /monopoly/. (And as it turns out, this allows 
+	something like extortion. A phone call to Microsoft about Windows XP costs 
+	$59; an e-mail costs $49. And soon they'll discontinue support for Windows 
+	XP completely. [18] You have to pay to report a bug, then pay for an 
+	"upgrade" to see if they've fixed it. [13]) With free software, everyone is 
+	allowed to understand it and support it. Support of free software is a 
+	/free market/. [13] There is competition in free software support. 
+	Companies and individuals must please their clients, because their clients 
+	are free to go elsewhere for support.
+</p>
+<p>
+	Individuals make money from making changes to free programs. They can 
+	support their own programs (in fact, Richard Stallman made a lot of money 
+	doing this, more than he ever did before [13]) or anyone else's free 
+	programs. Again, like the earliest programmers, these individuals are paid 
+	for doing work, not for the results of their work. The results of their 
+	work are usually free software that does what their clients want it to do.
+</p>
+<p>
+	Individuals and companies sell consulting services and support contracts 
+	for free software. The first company to officially do so was Cygnus 
+	Solutions, founded in 1989. Cygnus maintained many parts of the GNU 
+	development toolchain and offered commercial support for GNU software. 
+	Between 1999 and 2000, Cygnus merged with Red Hat, Inc. [19][20] Red Hat 
+	sells support for GNU/Linux, and its revenue is expected to reach $1 
+	billion this year, an impressive record. [21][22] Canonical Ltd., founded 
+	in 2004, maintains and supports a number of free software projects, 
+	including the Ubuntu GNU/Linux operating system. [23] Nokia Corporation 
+	used to provide official support for the Qt framework, but earlier this 
+	year it sold this support business to Digia Plc. [24] Digia is one of 27 
+	"Qt Partners", companies that work with Nokia to provide commercial support 
+	for Qt. [25] AdaCore is a company run by the original developers of GNAT, 
+	the aforementioned Ada compiler commissioned by the U.S. Air Force. AdaCore 
+	has been officially supporting GNAT since 1994. [12][26] 
+	Sencha Inc. also offers support for its own free software. 
+	[27] The Debian project has a list of 824 consultants in 63 countries who 
+	support the use of Debian GNU operating systems. [28] The Free Software 
+	Foundation lists 86 individuals and companies offering support services in 
+	free software. [29] Clearly, there is a successful business model here -- 
+	one based in a free market.
+</p>
+<h3>
+	Distribution
+</h3>
+<p>
+	Additionally, some people sell free software. That is, they charge a fee 
+	for distribution, even of other people's work. How is this morally 
+	acceptable? A person can profit from someone else's hard work? Well, it may 
+	go against the traditional free software economic model of paying for time 
+	spent on work instead of for copies of the results of that work. But it's 
+	not inherently unethical or even illegal. In fact, software licenses must 
+	allow this practice in order to be considered free licenses. [30] In some 
+	cases, there is a cost in making and distributing copies of software (e.g. 
+	the cost of burning and shipping CDs). Or people may just want to earn some 
+	money for performing a moral act (sharing freedom) and maybe even 
+	contribute some of the profit back to the developers. [31] In the 1980s, 
+	Richard Stallman himself charged a fee for copies of GNU Emacs (a text 
+	editor he wrote) that he shipped on tape. In doing so, he made about $1300 
+	per month, a respectable income from something that's "free"! [13]
+</p>
+<h3>
+	*Conclusion*
+</h3>
+<p>
+	In short, programmers have always had ways to earn money with free 
+	software, even before proprietary software existed. Most programmers who 
+	write free software are in fact paid for their work, in a variety of ways. 
+	The difference in free and proprietary software economic models is that 
+	copyright holders (not necessarily even the developers) of proprietary 
+	software profit from restricting users, while free software developers make 
+	money in more ethical ways. Free software programmers are usually paid for 
+	the time spent writing software, not for copies of the software (or more 
+	accurately, the right to use the software).
+</p>
+<ol>
+	<li>
+		"Proprietary Software". <span style="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. July 10, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Open Letter to Hobbyists". <span style="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. July 6, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Williams, Sam. "For Want of a Printer". <span style="cite-title">Free as in Freedom</span>. 2002: 
+		O'Reilly.
+		<a href="http://oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch01.html">http://oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch01.html</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		<span style="cite-title">The Codebreakers</span>. 2006: Asia Pacific Development Information 
+		Programme. Aired on BBC World.
+		<a href="http://www.apdip.net/news/fossdoc">http://www.apdip.net/news/fossdoc</a>, 
+		<a href="http://www.archive.org/details/The-Codebreakers">http://www.archive.org/details/The-Codebreakers</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Operating system Family share for 11/2010". <span style="cite-title">Top500 Supercomputing 
+		Sites</span>. Top500.Org.
+		<a href="http://www.top500.org/stats/list/36/osfam">http://www.top500.org/stats/list/36/osfam</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Kroah-Hartman, Greg; Corbet, Jonathan; and McPherson, Amanda. "Who is 
+		Sponsoring the Work" <span style="cite-title">Linux Kernel Development: How Fast it is Going, Who 
+		is Doing It, What They are Doing, and Who is Sponsoring It</span>. 2010: The 
+		Linux Foundation. 
+		<a href="http://www.linuxfoundation.org/docs/lf_linux_kernel_development_2010.pdf">http://www.linuxfoundation.org/docs/lf_linux_kernel_development_2010.pdf</a>.
+		12-13.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Kroah-Hartman, Greg; Corbet, Jonathan; and McPherson, Amanda. "Who is 
+		Doing the Work" <span style="cite-title">Linux Kernel Development: How Fast it is Going, Who is 
+		Doing It, What They are Doing, and Who is Sponsoring It</span>. 2010: The Linux 
+		Foundation. 
+		<a href="http://www.linuxfoundation.org/docs/lf_linux_kernel_development_2010.pdf">http://www.linuxfoundation.org/docs/lf_linux_kernel_development_2010.pdf</a>.
+		10.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Larabel, Michael. "AMD's New Open-Source Employees". <span style="cite-title">Phoronix</span>. July 5, 
+		2011.
+		<a href="http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTYzOA">http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTYzOA</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Qt (framework)". <span style="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. July 13, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_%28framework%29">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_%28framework%29</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Qt Licensing". Nokia Corporation. 
+		<a href="http://qt.nokia.com/products/licensing">http://qt.nokia.com/products/licensing</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Qt Development Frameworks". <span style="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. July 8, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_Development_Frameworks">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_Development_Frameworks</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"GNAT". <span style="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. May 9, 2011.
+		<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Stallman, Richard. "Free Software: Freedom and Cooperation". <span style="cite-title">GNU 
+		Project</span>. Free Software Foundation, Inc. July 13, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://www.gnu.org/events/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.html">http://www.gnu.org/events/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.html</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Coreboot and Open Source Development". <span style="cite-title">Business Blog</span>. Advanced Micro 
+		Devices, Inc. February 28, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://blogs.amd.com/work/2011/02/28/amd-coreboot/">http://blogs.amd.com/work/2011/02/28/amd-coreboot/</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"AMD to use Coreboot in Llano, other upcoming parts". Fudzilla. May 10, 
+		2011. 
+		<a href="http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22677-amd-to-use-coreboot-in-llano-other-upcoming-parts">http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22677-amd-to-use-coreboot-in-llano-other-upcoming-parts</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Benefits". <span style="cite-title">coreboot</span>. January 15, 2008. 
+		<a href="http://www.coreboot.org/Benefits">http://www.coreboot.org/Benefits</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Categories of Free and Nonfree Software". <span style="cite-title">GNU Project</span>. Free Software 
+		Foundation, Inc. July 13, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#PrivateSoftware">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#PrivateSoftware</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Support Options". <span style="cite-title">Microsoft Support</span>. Microsoft Corporation. (No 
+		portable URI. Go to 
+		<a href="https://support.microsoft.com/oas/default.aspx?gprid=1173&st=1&wfxredirect=1&sd=gn">https://support.microsoft.com/oas/default.aspx?gprid=1173&st=1&wfxredirect=1&sd=gn</a>,
+		click "Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition", select "Other", and 
+		click "Continue".)
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Cygnus Solutions". <span style="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. June 8, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_Solutions">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_Solutions</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Marketing Cygnus Support -- Free Software history". September 27, 
+		2006.
+		<a href="http://www.toad.com/gnu/cygnus/">http://www.toad.com/gnu/cygnus/</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Woods, Dan. "Red Hat At $1 Billion". <span style="cite-title">CIO Central</span>. Forbes.com LLC. 
+		November 30, 2010. 
+		<a href="http://blogs.forbes.com/ciocentral/2010/11/30/red-hat-at-1-billion/">http://blogs.forbes.com/ciocentral/2010/11/30/red-hat-at-1-billion/</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Dignan, Larry. "Red Hat: Nearing $1 billion in revenue; Not bad for 
+		free software". <span style="cite-title">ZDNet</span>. CBS Interactive. March 23, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/red-hat-nearing-1-billion-in-revenue-not-bad-for-free-software/46445">http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/red-hat-nearing-1-billion-in-revenue-not-bad-for-free-software/46445</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Canonical Ltd.". <span style="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. June 12, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_Ltd.">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_Ltd.</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Nystrom, Sebastian. "Nokia and Digia working together to grow the Qt 
+		community". <span style="cite-title">The Qt Blog</span>. Nokia Corporation. March 7, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://blog.qt.nokia.com/2011/03/07/nokia-and-digia-working-together/">http://blog.qt.nokia.com/2011/03/07/nokia-and-digia-working-together/</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Partner Locator". Nokia Corporation. 
+		<a href="http://qt.nokia.com/partners/partner-locator">http://qt.nokia.com/partners/partner-locator</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"AdaCore". <span style="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. May 20, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdaCore">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdaCore</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Company". <span style="cite-title">Sencha</span>. Sencha Inc.
+		<a href="http://www.sencha.com/company/">http://www.sencha.com/company/</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Consultants". Debian Project. July 11, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://www.debian.org/consultants/">http://www.debian.org/consultants/</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		Sullivan, John. "Service Directory". Free Software Foundation, Inc. 
+		April 14, 2011.
+		<a href="http://www.fsf.org/resources/service/">http://www.fsf.org/resources/service/</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"The Free Software Definition".  <span style="cite-title">GNU Project</span>. Free Software 
+		Foundation, Inc. July 13, 2011. 
+		<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html</a>.
+	</li>
+	<li>
+		"Selling Free Software".  <span style="cite-title">GNU Project</span>. Free Software Foundation, Inc. 
+		July 13, 2011.
+		<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html</a>.
+	</li>
+</ol>
+<!--#include virtual="../includes/footer.html" -->