summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/essays/commercial-free-software.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'essays/commercial-free-software.html')
-rwxr-xr-xessays/commercial-free-software.html351
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 351 deletions
diff --git a/essays/commercial-free-software.html b/essays/commercial-free-software.html
deleted file mode 100755
index 4b9c489..0000000
--- a/essays/commercial-free-software.html
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,351 +0,0 @@
-<!--#set var="title" value="Commercial Free Software: Not an Oxymoron" -->
-<!--#include virtual="/includes/header.html" -->
-<h2>Commercial Free Software: Not an Oxymoron</h2>
-<p>
- TODO: Clean up some wording, consider removing reference to Sencha Inc.,
- maybe mention Qt "open governance", mention transferable skills under
- "Development", discuss application stores under "Distribution", and note
- that most money in proprietary software comes from support rather than from
- licenses.
-</p>
-<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 a
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_a_disjunct">false
- exclusionary disjunct</a>. Software can be both free and commercial. If a
- software copyright license allowed only noncommercial dealing, it would be
- considered neither free 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 <em>monopoly</em>. (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
- <em>free market</em>. [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>
-<h3>
- References:
-</h3>
-<ol>
- <li>
- "Proprietary Software". <span class="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. July 10, 2011.
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software">&lt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Open Letter to Hobbyists". <span class="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. July 6, 2011.
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists">&lt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- Williams, Sam. "For Want of a Printer". <span class="cite-title">Free as in Freedom</span>. 2002:
- O'Reilly.
- <a href="http://oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch01.html">&lt;http://oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch01.html&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- <span class="cite-title">The Codebreakers</span>. 2006: Asia Pacific Development Information
- Programme. Aired on BBC World.
- <a href="http://www.apdip.net/news/fossdoc">&lt;http://www.apdip.net/news/fossdoc&gt;</a>,
- <a href="http://www.archive.org/details/The-Codebreakers">&lt;http://www.archive.org/details/The-Codebreakers&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Operating system Family share for 11/2010". <span class="cite-title">Top500 Supercomputing
- Sites</span>. Top500.Org.
- <a href="http://www.top500.org/stats/list/36/osfam">&lt;http://www.top500.org/stats/list/36/osfam&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- Kroah-Hartman, Greg; Corbet, Jonathan; and McPherson, Amanda. "Who is
- Sponsoring the Work". <span class="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">&lt;http://www.linuxfoundation.org/docs/lf_linux_kernel_development_2010.pdf&gt;</a>.
- 12-13.
- </li>
- <li>
- Kroah-Hartman, Greg; Corbet, Jonathan; and McPherson, Amanda. "Who is
- Doing the Work". <span class="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">&lt;http://www.linuxfoundation.org/docs/lf_linux_kernel_development_2010.pdf&gt;</a>.
- 10.
- </li>
- <li>
- Larabel, Michael. "AMD's New Open-Source Employees". <span class="cite-title">Phoronix</span>. July 5,
- 2011.
- <a href="http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&amp;px=OTYzOA">&lt;http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&amp;px=OTYzOA&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Qt (framework)". <span class="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. July 13, 2011.
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_%28framework%29">&lt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_%28framework%29&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Qt Licensing". Nokia Corporation.
- <a href="http://qt.nokia.com/products/licensing">&lt;http://qt.nokia.com/products/licensing&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Qt Development Frameworks". <span class="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. July 8, 2011.
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_Development_Frameworks">&lt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_Development_Frameworks&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "GNAT". <span class="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. May 9, 2011.
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT">&lt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- Stallman, Richard. "Free Software: Freedom and Cooperation". <span class="cite-title">GNU
- Project</span>. Free Software Foundation, Inc. July 13, 2011.
- <a href="http://www.gnu.org/events/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.html">&lt;http://www.gnu.org/events/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.html&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Coreboot and Open Source Development". <span class="cite-title">Business Blog</span>. Advanced Micro
- Devices, Inc. February 28, 2011.
- <a href="http://blogs.amd.com/work/2011/02/28/amd-coreboot/">&lt;http://blogs.amd.com/work/2011/02/28/amd-coreboot/&gt;</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">&lt;http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22677-amd-to-use-coreboot-in-llano-other-upcoming-parts&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Benefits". <span class="cite-title">coreboot</span>. January 15, 2008.
- <a href="http://www.coreboot.org/Benefits">&lt;http://www.coreboot.org/Benefits&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Categories of Free and Nonfree Software". <span class="cite-title">GNU Project</span>. Free Software
- Foundation, Inc. July 13, 2011.
- <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#PrivateSoftware">&lt;http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#PrivateSoftware&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Support Options". <span class="cite-title">Microsoft Support</span>. Microsoft Corporation. (No
- portable URI. Go to
- <a href="https://support.microsoft.com/oas/default.aspx?gprid=1173&amp;st=1&amp;wfxredirect=1&amp;sd=gn">&lt;https://support.microsoft.com/oas/default.aspx?gprid=1173&amp;st=1&amp;wfxredirect=1&amp;sd=gn&gt;</a>,
- click "Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition", select "Other", and
- click "Continue".)
- </li>
- <li>
- "Cygnus Solutions". <span class="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. June 8, 2011.
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_Solutions">&lt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_Solutions&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Marketing Cygnus Support -- Free Software history". September 27,
- 2006.
- <a href="http://www.toad.com/gnu/cygnus/">&lt;http://www.toad.com/gnu/cygnus/&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- Woods, Dan. "Red Hat At $1 Billion". <span class="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/">&lt;http://blogs.forbes.com/ciocentral/2010/11/30/red-hat-at-1-billion/&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- Dignan, Larry. "Red Hat: Nearing $1 billion in revenue; Not bad for
- free software". <span class="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">&lt;http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/red-hat-nearing-1-billion-in-revenue-not-bad-for-free-software/46445&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Canonical Ltd.". <span class="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. June 12, 2011.
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_Ltd.">&lt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_Ltd.&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- Nystrom, Sebastian. "Nokia and Digia working together to grow the Qt
- community". <span class="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/">&lt;http://blog.qt.nokia.com/2011/03/07/nokia-and-digia-working-together/&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Partner Locator". Nokia Corporation.
- <a href="http://qt.nokia.com/partners/partner-locator">&lt;http://qt.nokia.com/partners/partner-locator&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "AdaCore". <span class="cite-title">Wikipedia</span>. May 20, 2011.
- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdaCore">&lt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdaCore&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Company". <span class="cite-title">Sencha</span>. Sencha Inc.
- <a href="http://www.sencha.com/company/">&lt;http://www.sencha.com/company/&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Consultants". Debian Project. July 11, 2011.
- <a href="http://www.debian.org/consultants/">&lt;http://www.debian.org/consultants/&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- Sullivan, John. "Service Directory". Free Software Foundation, Inc.
- April 14, 2011.
- <a href="http://www.fsf.org/resources/service/">&lt;http://www.fsf.org/resources/service/&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "The Free Software Definition". <span class="cite-title">GNU Project</span>. Free Software
- Foundation, Inc. July 13, 2011.
- <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html">&lt;http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html&gt;</a>.
- </li>
- <li>
- "Selling Free Software". <span class="cite-title">GNU Project</span>. Free Software Foundation, Inc.
- July 13, 2011.
- <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html">&lt;http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html&gt;</a>.
- </li>
-</ol>
-<!--#include virtual="/includes/footer.html" -->