Welcome at my blog!

This this initial post, I will try to give a short introduction on the subject by giving a short description of the “open source” and “free software” ideologies. In the second post I will write in general about how it could be advantageous for (commercial) organisations. In General? Indeed, because it seems a less-than-perfect idea to me to start now already with real world cases in form of, say, the latest developments concerning (the use of) open source technology in either commercial or non-commercial organisations. That is not really something suitable for an introduction on the matter, is it?
Anyway, let us get started by taking a look at the open source ideology. It is used the most in software, but it is actually a possible point of view for other technology, documents and creative works as well (though in the latter cases, different terminology is usually used). I will focus on the software part, however and I will not discuss things like Creative Commons, GNU Free Documentation License or anything else that cannot be more or less directly related to software.

Open Source Software and Free Software: a distinction

Open source software is software that is not proprietary (1). Such software is provided a license, just like in case of closed source programs, though such licenses can at best be described as being “copyleft”: you are allowed to copy it, share it and study (and even alter) its source code, though your redistribution or derivative product must be open source software as well. For those readers that wish to volunteer for reading the full definition, here it is.
Besides open source software (OSS), there is also a different kind of non-proprietary software. To this is being referred as “free software”, which should not be confused with “freeware” (which is provided without a fee, but is copyrighted). The word “free” is like in “free speech” or “freedom”, not like in “free beer”.
Free software makes use of the same principles as open source software, though there exist open source licenses that are too restrictive to be regarded as free. In addition, free software is made by people who have ethical reasons to release the software as being free. So for free software advocates, it is more than just the practical advantages of non-copyrighted programmes.
This can be illustrated by the following quote from Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation (2007):

A pure open source enthusiast, one that is not at all influenced by the ideals of free software, will say, “I am surprised you were able to make the program work so well without using our development model, but you did. How can I get a copy?” This attitude will reward schemes that take away our freedom, leading to its loss.
The free software activist will say, “Your program is very attractive, but I value my freedom more. So I reject your program. Instead I will support a project to develop a free replacement.” If we value our freedom, we can act to maintain and defend it.
(retrieved 9 February, 2010 from: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html)

Thus it can be said that “free software” is more or less a political movement, while “open source” is purely a development model.

Umbrella term

But how to refer to free and open source software, if the distinction will be quite hard notice in practice? Both may look the same, but they are not and thus we need a decent “umbrella term” to avoid using the name “open source” when we should not. The title of my blog is actually using it for both free and OSS, though that partly serves a purpose. People are most likely to search the web on “open source”, because that phrase is used the most by people who wish to present it as a development or business model (and besides that, a lot of people do not make a distinction between open source and free software).
So from this point, I will use the term “F/OSS” for all software that is not proprietary. That way we will avoid confusion.

Next time: how could F/OSS be of serve to (commercial) organisations?

----------------------------------------------

(1) Proprietary: Its use, redistribution or modification is either not allowed, or requires you to pay a fee or to get permission from the authors.