Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb) [LWN.net]

Rob Enderle strikes again on TechWeb. "The SCO lawsuits, at the very least, show that discovery is incredibly easy with an open source product. In order to sue for intellectual property violations, you often have to get your hands on the source code of the defendants' products. That requires convincing a court to force the defendant to turn over the source code in a process called "discovery"; that process can be difficult. The pain associated with getting hold of proprietary source code is one of the things that limits intellectual property lawsuits for commercial software. But with open source software, the code is already available, out in the open." You have to admire the honesty of it: the risk with free software is that plagiarism is easier to discover.

to post comments

So what?

Posted Aug 13, 2003 14:08 UTC (Wed) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222) [Link] (1 responses)

My guess on this is that the proper response is what I've been saying for years and years: All commercial software should have source code in escrow somewhere, and the location should be available to anyone who has a license for the software. Legal procedures for obtaining the software source code should be in place.

The only reason there's a "discovery" process involved is that our leaders don't have the courage to do this kind of thing. They don't have the courage because they are owned by rich men under the power of gold.

With regard to the article: This is why someone should swear an injunction against SCO until they tell us exactly where the damage is (like there is any.)

So what?

Posted Aug 13, 2003 15:33 UTC (Wed) by Peter (guest, #1127) [Link]

what I've been saying for years and years: All commercial software should have source code in escrow somewhere, and the location should be available to anyone who has a license for the software. Legal procedures for obtaining the software source code should be in place.

And here's my pontification on the subject: considering the original purpose of copyright law - encouraging publication - I think copyright protection should not exist for something which is not publicly available. I.e. source code for a proprietary product. If you don't publish it, all you get is trade secret protection, and some quasi-copyright protection on your actual binaries (so people can't "pirate" them). Your idea of holding source in escrow is also a good one, specifically for legal disputes.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 13, 2003 14:34 UTC (Wed) by zutman (guest, #5077) [Link]

(Hmm, was that a real opinion, or just a rhetoric exercise?)

The hyperbole that software is the result of labor and should
be paid is a non-sequitur. Nobody is forced to publish
open-source. There is only one thing: maybe the customers
or users would like it that way. (The choice is yours.)

And whoever wants to mis-use trade secrets and copyrights
ought better to publish closed source, but that goes untold.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 13, 2003 14:44 UTC (Wed) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] (1 responses)

You have to admire the honesty of it: the risk with free software is that plagiarism is easier to discover.

I'm not even gonna read the article. This comment from LWN seems to sum it up just fine. Sometimes we tend to have just TOO much fun with these clueless pundits.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 13, 2003 15:46 UTC (Wed) by Peter (guest, #1127) [Link]

I'm not even gonna read the article. This comment from LWN seems to sum it up just fine.

Oh, go on and read it. The LWN comment was just one of his points. His main point seemed to be, not that open source is particularly evil, but that people have unreasonably high expectations for it and are bound to be disappointed. But then again he does think open source is evil, or at least too risky. Come to think of it, he doesn't seem to be able to make up his mind. He basically says that deploying, say, Oracle on Linux might be a great way to save some money compared to Oracle on HP-UX or whatever, whereas something like PostgreSQL on Linux would be a big no-no because you're relying on open source.

Hmmm, maybe I should go reread it; one of us is obviously confused, either I or the author.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 13, 2003 17:01 UTC (Wed) by davidl (guest, #12156) [Link] (6 responses)

I've had debates before with this guy via e-mail. Once you come up with some solid evidence he scurries right back into his shell. He represents a group of people who think they are going to cream off money making crap and meaningless software from now until the end of time.

Please do not post any more articles from this guy - it's a waste of time.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 13, 2003 17:34 UTC (Wed) by pointwood (guest, #2814) [Link] (2 responses)

Completely agreed - that guy is certainly not worth spending any time on.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 14, 2003 0:53 UTC (Thu) by wweber (guest, #11678) [Link] (1 responses)

> that guy is certainly not worth spending any time on

Frankly, it often seems it is GNU that is not worth the time. Today I made another attempt to run gschem from gEDA suite. What a waste of time! What EE has the time to figure out he needed a major upgrade to his OS (Mandrake 8.2 to 9.1) in order to run the application? Backward compatibility seems to be unheard of in the GNU crowd. This is multiple times as bad as it is in the Apple Mac world.

Funny - I actually got to use gschem, by downloading the CygWin port and running it under Windows 98. It is easy to sympathize with those who take MS superiority for granted.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 15, 2003 18:48 UTC (Fri) by davidl (guest, #12156) [Link]

What on earth has this got to do with Robert Enderle's comments? It certainly has
nothing to do with your inability to upgrade the components required, rather than
the whole OS (that's a Windows thing).

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 14, 2003 0:40 UTC (Thu) by jonabbey (guest, #2736) [Link] (2 responses)

Hm, really? I just spent 20 minutes writing him. I thought his column was actually quite frank and honest.. humble, even, after a fashion.

It's incredibly common for supporters of a minority platform to get extremely zealous in advocacy. Rob may be a bit blinded by that as of the writing of this column (and I'm sure that the howls of outrage he'll receive after writing it won't help), but the fact is that while zealous advocacy is symptomatic of minority status, it's not symptomatic of permanent minority status.

I'm looking forward to seeing if/how he responds to my non-flaming comments. Judging from his column, I expect him to be able to acknowledge at least a degree of truth in my comments.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 14, 2003 1:40 UTC (Thu) by jonabbey (guest, #2736) [Link] (1 responses)

And in fact, I just got a very pleasant and thoughtful reply from him.

I think a lot of people get their hackles up so much at the threat that the minority position that they've signed up for will be destroyed that anyone who says anything contrary to the position is treated as an outsider and attacked.

In his reply, Rob mentioned that one of his big impetuses for writing the article was seeing someplace that one of the BSD founders received death threats from linux supporters for bringing up the issue of IP risks in Linux.

I fully agree with him that Linux users and boosters need to keep that kind of behavior in check.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 16, 2003 10:22 UTC (Sat) by davidl (guest, #12156) [Link]

Oh yer, he's pleasant alright - but comes up with total rubbish.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 13, 2003 19:56 UTC (Wed) by dokhebi (guest, #14023) [Link] (1 responses)

Rob Enderle states that '...open source is a religion...' Not true. It is a philosophy, but Mr. Enderle does not know the difference.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 13, 2003 21:54 UTC (Wed) by MathFox (guest, #6104) [Link]

A Buddhist LWN reader is in meditation over the question which of his philosophies is more religious.
Please do not disturb.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 13, 2003 23:52 UTC (Wed) by Frapazoid (guest, #13982) [Link]

So what if plagiarism is easier to discover?

If you're worried about getting caught, <i>Don't do it.</i> Duhhhhhhh.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 14, 2003 5:06 UTC (Thu) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] (3 responses)

What did I tell you people about the FUD articles? Please stop feeding your valuable Google Juice to professional trolls.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 14, 2003 12:56 UTC (Thu) by erat (guest, #21) [Link] (2 responses)

I don't think squelching opposing opinions is the way to go, even if the guy's a nutter. You
can't address the FUD that you never see.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 14, 2003 14:40 UTC (Thu) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] (1 responses)

You address it once, then be done with it. You don't give Rob Enderle constant attention for making the same dumb claims over and over. That's counterproductive.

Opinion: Reasons To Shun Open Source-ry (TechWeb)

Posted Aug 14, 2003 22:51 UTC (Thu) by erat (guest, #21) [Link]

Some of us want to read stuff for ourselves and form our own opinions, and believe it or not some of us have not had a chance to read much of Mr. Enderle's work and would like to see first hand what he's pooping on today. I'm glad you've read his stuff, posted your reactions, and are ready to move along, but that's you, not me.

Whatever.