World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Open source movement

Article Id: WHEBN0025190769
Reproduction Date:

Title: Open source movement  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Open source, Open design, Free software movement, Open-source religion, Open Source Ecology
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Open source movement

The open source movement is a broad-reaching movement of individuals who support the use of

Programmers who support the open source movement philosophy contribute to the open source community by voluntarily writing and exchanging programming code for software development.[4] The term “open source” requires that no one can discriminate against a group in not sharing the edited code or hinder others from editing their already-edited work. This approach to software development allows anyone to obtain and modify open source code. These modifications are distributed back to the developers within the open source community of people who are working with the software. In this way, the identities of all individuals participating in code modification are disclosed and the transformation of the code is documented over time.[5] This method makes it difficult to establish ownership of a particular bit of code but is in keeping with the open source movement philosophy. These goals promote the production of “high quality programs” as well as “working cooperatively with other similarly minded people” to improve open source technologies.[4]

Brief history

Finnish software engineer Linus Torvalds

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, two different groups were establishing the roots of the current open source software movement. On the United States eastern coast, Richard Stallman, formerly of the MIT AI lab, created the GNU project and the Free Software Foundation.[6] The GNU project was aimed to create a free operating system, and used the GNU General Public License (GPL) as the software license to prohibit proprietization of the software, but allow redistribution and modification.

On the U.S. West coast, the Computer Science Research Group (CSRG) of the University of California at Berkeley was adding improvements to the original Unix operating system from AT&T, and developed many applications, which became known as "BSD Unix". These efforts were funded mainly by DARPA contracts , and a dense network of Unix hackers around the world helped to debug, maintain and improve the system.[7] During 1991–1992, two significant events took place:

  • In California, Bill Jolitz completed the Net/2 distribution, until it was ready to run on i386-class machines. Net/2 was the result of the effort of the CSRG to make a version of BSD Unix free of AT&T-copyrighted code. He called his work 386BSD, and it quickly became appreciated within the BSD and Unix communities. It included not only a kernel, but also many utilities, making a complete operating system.[7]
  • In Finland, Linus Torvalds, a computer science student, unhappy with Tanenbaum's Minix , implemented the first versions of the Linux kernel. Soon, many people were collaborating to make that kernel more and more usable, and added many utilities to make GNU/Linux a real operating system.[7]

In 1993, both GNU/Linux and 386BSD were reasonably stable platforms. Since then, 386BSD has evolved into a family of BSD-based operating systems (NetBSD, FreeBSD, and OpenBSD), while the Linux kernel is used in many GNU/Linux distributions such as Slackware, Debian, Red Hat, SUSE, Mandrake, and many more.[7]

The label “open source” was created and adopted by a group of people in the [10]


In the beginning, a difference between hardware and software did not exist. The user and programmer of a computer were one and the same. When the first commercial electronic computer was introduced by IBM in 1952, the machine was hard to maintain and expensive. Putting the price of the machine aside, it was the software that caused the problem when owning one of these computers. Then in 1952, a collaboration of all the owners of the computer got together and created a set of tools. The collaboration of people were in a group called PACT (The Project for the Advancement of Coding techniques). After passing this hurdle, in 1956, the Eisenhower administration decided to put restrictions on the types of sales AT&T could make. This did not stop the inventors from developing new ideas of how to bring the computer to the mass population. The next step was making the computer more affordable which slowly developed through different companies. Then they had to develop software that would host multiple users. MIT computation center developed one of the first systems, CTSS (Compatible Time-Sharing System). This laid the foundation for many more systems, and what we now call the Open Source Movement.[11]

The Open Source Movement is branched from the free software movement which began in the late 80s with the launching of the GNU/Linux project by Richard Stallman.[5] Stallman is regarded within the open source community as sharing a key role in the conceptualization of freely shared source code for software development.[5] The term “free software” in the free software movement is meant to imply freedom of software exchange and modification. The term does not refer to any monetary freedom.[5] Both the free software movement and the open source movement share this view of free exchange of programming code, and this is often why both of the movements are sometimes referenced in literature as part of the FOSS or “Free and Open Software” or FLOSS “Free/Libre Open Source” communities.

These movements share fundamental differences in the view on open software. The main, factionalizing difference between the groups is the relationship between open source and proprietary software. Often makers of proprietary software, such as Microsoft, may make efforts to support open source software to remain competitive.[12] Members of the open source community are willing to coexist with the makers of proprietary software[5] and feel that the issue of whether software is open source is a matter of practicality.[5]

In contrast, members of the free software community maintain the vision that all software is a part of freedom of speech[5] and that proprietary software is unethical and unjust.[5] The free software movement openly champions this belief through talks that denounce proprietary software. As a whole the community refuses to support proprietary software. It also is suggested there are external motivations exist for these developers. One motivation is when a programmer fixes a bug or makes a program it benefits others in an open source environment. Another motivation is that a programmer can work on multiple projects that they find interesting and enjoyable. Programming in the open source world can also lead to commercial job offers or entrance into the venture capital community. These are just a few reasons why open source programmers continue to create and advance software.[13]

While cognizant of the fact that both it and the open source movement share similarities in practical recommendations regarding open source, the free software movement fervently continues to distinguish themselves from the open source movement entirely.[5] The free software movement maintains that it has fundamentally different attitudes towards the relationship between open source and proprietary software. The free software community does not view the open source community as their target grievance, however. Their target grievance is proprietary software itself.[5]

Legal issues

The Open Source Movement has faced a number of legal challenges. Companies that manage open source products have some difficulty securing their trademarks. For example, the scope of “implied license” conjecture remains unclear and can compromise an enterprise’s ability to patent productions made with open source software. Another example is the case of companies offering add-ons for purchase; licensees who make additions to the open-source code that are similar to those for purchase may have immunity from patent suits.

In the court case "Jacobsen v. Katzer", the plaintiff sued the defendant for failing to put the required attribution notices in his modified version of the software, thereby violating license. The defendant claimed Artistic License in not adhering to the conditions of the software’s use, but the wording of the attribution notice decided that this was not the case. "Jacobsen v Katzer" established open source software’s equality to proprietary software in the eyes of the law.

In a court case accusing Microsoft of being a monopoly, Linux and open source software was introduced in court to prove that Microsoft had valid competitors and was grouped in with Apple.

There are resources available for those involved open source projects in need of legal advice. The Software Freedom Law Center features a primer on open source legal issues. International Free and Open Source Software Law Review offers peer-reviewed information for lawyers on free software issues.


Richard Stallman in 2008

Richard Stallman, a supporter of the free software movement, was one of the free software movement advocates who proposed an alternative to the private models prevalent in the industry. After developing a non proprietary operating system called GNU, Stallman founded the Free Software Foundation in 1983. For most of the 1970s and 1980s, organizations such as AT&T, with their Unix operating system initiative, have promoted a policy of shared source code.

Linus Torvalds then built upon Stallman’s development in the late 1980s and created the Linux operating system that he released under Stallman’s GNU General Public License. This enabled open source programmers to improve, modify, and develop his system.[14]

The Open Source Initiative (OSI) was also instrumental in the formalization of the Open Source Movement. The OSI was founded by Eric Raymond and Bruce Perens in February 1998 with the purpose of providing general education and advocacy of the open source label through the creation of the Open Source Definition that was based on the Debian Free Software Guidelines. The OSI has become one of the main supporters and advocators of the open source movement.[15]

In February 1998 the open source movement was adopted, formalized, and spearheaded by the [5] The OSI owns the trademark “Open Source[4] The main tool they adopted for this was the Open Source Definition[16]

The “open source” label was conceived at a strategy session that was held on February 3, 1998 in Palo Alto, California and on April 8 of the same year, the attendees of Tim O’Reilly’s Free Software Summit voted to promote the use of the term “open source”.[15]

Overall, the software developments that have come out of the open source movement have not been unique to the computer science field, but they have been successful in developing alternatives to propriety software. Members of the open source community improve upon code and write programs that can rival much of the propriety software that is already available.[5]

The rhetorical discourse used in open source movements is now being broadened to include a larger group of non-expert users as well as advocacy organizations. Several organized groups such as the Creative Commons and global development agencies have also adopted the open source concepts according to their own aims and for their own purposes.[17]

The factors affecting the Open Source Movement’s legal formalization are primarily based on recent political discussion over copyright, appropriation, and intellectual property.[18]

Examples of software that have come out of the open source movement


  • The collaborative nature of the open source community creates software that can offer customizability and, as a result, promotes the adoption of its products.[23]
  • The open source community promotes the creation of software that is not proprietary, resulting in lower costs.[23]
  • Individuals who have intrinsic interest in code writing and software creation motivate the development of open source software within the community. This differs from proprietary software, the development of which is often motivated through potential monetary gains.[23]
  • An open source tool puts the system administrator in control of the level of risk assumed in deploying the tool.[24]
  • Open source provides flexibility not available in closed products. The hope is that individuals make improvements to an open tool and will offer those improvements to the original developer and community at large. The give-and-take of the gift economy benefits the entire community.[24]
  • Open source licenses and software can be combined with proprietary software. While open source was initially seen as a threat to corporations, some companies found ways to strengthen their proprietary code with open source code, re-releasing it as an improvement.[25]
  • In the event of market failure, programmers and innovators work together to make sure that the software still works[26]
  • Globalization of Market

The Open Source Movement has allowed smaller businesses to participate in the global economy. Before smaller businesses did not have access to the software needed to participate or compete in the global market. It was the larger corporations, the producers of the networks and software who had the power. “That is, individuals who have access to the software needed to create, organize, or distribute content can plug into and participate in the global community”.[27] The creation of the Open Source Movement has created “a degree of global computing access that might have been unthinkable in a world where proprietary was the only option.” [27] Individuals or organizations with access to an open source had the means needed to develop technical material for a variety of consumers. The Open Source Movement created equal opportunities for people all over the world to participate in the global economy.

Members of the Open Source Movement stress the importance of differentiating between “open source” software and “free software”. Although the two issues are related, they are quite different. The open source movement and the free software movement are different but they work together. Both movements strive for freedom of the internet and dislike the idea of ownership over a website.[28] For both open source and free software, one can find the source code and executable component easily and for free online. The largest difference is that free software requires any changes to be submitted to the original maker for redistribution, and any derivative software must also be distributed as free software. This is mainly to keep companies from making minor changes to free software and redistributing it as their own, for a price.[29]

A major advantage to open source code is the ability for a variety of different people to edit and fix problems and errors that have occurred. Naturally because there are more people who can edit the material there are more people who can help make the information more credible and reliable. The open source mission statement promises better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in. They stress the importance of maintaining the Open Source Definition. This trademark creates a trusted group that connects all users and developers together.[30] To fully understand the Open Source Definition, one must understand certain terms: Free redistribution means that there is no restriction on any party to sell or give away the software to third parties. Source Code means that the program must efficiently publicize the means of obtaining the source code. Derived works means that the program must allow certain works to be distributed under the same terms. There must be a promise of no discriminating against any certain persons or groups. All of these factors allow for the open source movement to become available to all and easy to access, which is their overall mission. The latest updates from the Open Source Institution took place on January 19, 2011: The OSI collaborated with the Free Software Foundation and together they updated a version of the request that they have sent to the US Department of Justice.[31]

Motivations of Programmers

With the growth and attention on the open source movement, the reasons and motivations of programmers for creating code for free has been under investigation. In a paper from the 15th Annual Congress of the European Economic Association on the open source movement, the incentives of programmers on an individual level as well as on a company or network level were analyzed. What is essentially the intellectual gift giving of talented programmers challenges the "self-interested-economic-agent paradigm,"[32] and has made both the public and economists search for an understanding of what the benefits are for programmers.

  • Altruism: The argument for altruism is limited as an explanation because though some exists, the programmers do not focus their kindness on more charitable causes. If the generosity of working for free was a viable motivation for such a prevalent movement, it is curious why such a trend has not been seen in industries such as biotechnology that would have a much bigger impact on the public good.[32]
  • Community Sharing and Improvement: The online community is an environment that promotes continual improvements, modifications, and contributions to each other's work. A programmer can easily benefit from open source software because by making it public, other testers and subprograms can remove bugs, tailor code to other purposes, and find problems. This kind of peer editing feature of open source software promotes better programs and a higher standard of code.[32]
  • Recognition: Though a project may not be associated with a specific individual, the contributors are often recognized and marked on a project's server. This allows for programmers to receive public recognition for their skills, promoting career opportunities and exposure. In fact, the founders of Sun Microsystems and Netscape began as open source programmers.[32]
  • Ego: "If they are somehow assigned to a trivial problem and that is their only possible task, they may spend six months coming up with a bewildering architecture...merely to show their friends and colleagues what a tough nut they are trying to crack."[33] Ego-gratification has been cited as a relevant motivation of programmers because of their competitive community.[33] An OSS (open source software) community has no clear distinction between developers and users, because all users are potential developers. There is a large community of programmers trying to essentially outshine or impress their colleagues.[34] They enjoy having other programmers admire their works and accomplishments, contributing to why OSS projects have a recruiting advantage for unknown talent than a closed-source company.[33]
  • Creative Expression: Personal satisfaction also comes from the act of writing software as an equivalent to creative self-expression – it is almost equivalent to creating a work of art. The rediscovery of creativity, which has been lost through the mass production of commercial software products can be a relevant motivation.[35]


  • The structure of the open source community requires that individuals have programming expertise in order to engage in open code modification and exchange. Individuals interested in supporting the open source movement may lack this skill set, but there are many other ways of contributing.[5]
  • Programmers and developers comprise a large percentage of the open source community and sought-out technical support and/or documentation may not be useful or clear to open source software lay-users.[23]
  • The structure of the open source community is one that involves contributions of multiple developers and programmers; software produced in this fashion may lack standardization and compatibility with various computer applications and capabilities.[23]
  • Production can be very limited. Programmers that create open source software often can turn their attention elsewhere very quickly. This opens the door for many bug filled programs and applications out there. Because no one is paid to create it, many projects are never completed.[36]
  • In the open source industry, the user decides the quality of the software. A user must learn the skills of software creation independently and then make the appropriate determinations for quality and capabilities.[37]
  • Librarians may not be equipped to take on this new responsibility of technologies.[38]
  • There is no guarantee that development will happen. It is unknown if an open source project will become usable, especially when a project is started without significant support from one or more organizations. Even if the project does reach a usable stage, it is possible the project can die if there is not enough funding or interest toward it.
  • It is sometimes difficult to know that a project exists, and its current status. Especially for open source projects without significant support, there is not much advertising involved in open source software.
  • Not much support exists for open source software. Qualified support essentially does not exist. The available support for open source software is predominantly self-motivated discussions found on the Internet, and since the software is constantly being changed, no manuals or instructions are made.
  • There is no guarantee of updates. Although open source software is available to anyone for free, regular updates are not assured since users do not pay for its use.
  • Beyond the obvious detriments towards the theoretical success of open source software, there are several factors that contribute to the lack of long-term success in open source projects. One of the most obvious drawback is that without pay or royalty licensing, there is little financial incentive for a programmer to become involved with a project in the first place, or to continue development and support once the initial product is released. This leads to innumerable examples of well-anticipated software being forever condemned to beta versions and unsupported early model products. With donations as the only source of income for a truly open source (and GPL licensed) project, there is almost no certainty in the future of the project simply because of developer abandonment, making it a poor choice for any sort of application in which future versions, support and a long-term plan would be essential, as is the case for most business software.[39]
  • Organizations with enterprise agreements still pay licensing agreements even if they choose to run alternative open source software. Therefore many organizations are unlikely to consider using alternative products. As a cost-saving method of using Microsoft products, many large corporations use enterprise agreements and therefore pay a single company wide IT licensing fee, at lower cost per product. "Organizations with EAs that are interested in alternative products can benefit from the gap-filler scenario, but only after they drop Microsoft Office from their EA at the next renewal and final true-up." [1]

Evidence of open source adoption

Libraries are using open source software to develop information as well as library services. The purpose of open source is to provide a software that is cheaper, reliable and has better quality. The one feature that makes this software so sought after is that it is free. Libraries in particular benefit from this movement because of the resources it provides. They also promote the same ideas of learning and understanding new information through the resources of other people. Open source allows a sense of community. It is an invitation for anyone to provide information about various topics. The open source tools even allow libraries to create web-based catalogs. According to the IT source there are various library programs that benefit from this.[38]

The following are events and applications that have been developed via the open source community as and echo the ideologies of the open source movement.[5]

OpenCourseWare Consortium — an organization composed of various colleges that support open source and share some of their material online. This organization, headed by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was established to aid in the exchange of open source educational materials.[5]

Project Gutenberg — prior to the existence of Google Scholar Beta, this was the first supplier of electronic books and the very first free library project[5]

Google — this search engine has led the way in transformation of Web-based applications, such as books, scholarly journals, that are based primarily on open source software.[5] Google continues to make applications based on open software. Recently, in November 2009, Google announced that it would be “enabling people everywhere to find, and read full text legal opinions from U.S. federal and state districts, appellate and supreme courts using Google Scholar”[12]

Microsoft — Before summer of 2008, Microsoft has generally been known as an enemy of the open source community. The company’s anti-open source sentiment was enforced by former CEO Steve Ballmer, who referred to Linux, a widely used open source software, as a “malignant cancer”. Microsoft also threatened Linux that they would charge royalties for violating 235 of their patents. In 2004, Microsoft lost a European Union court case,[40] and lost the appeal in 2007,[41] and their further appeal in 2012:[42] being convicted of abusing its dominant position. Specifically they had withheld inter-operability information with the open-source Samba (software) project, which can be run on many platforms and aims to “removing barriers to interoperability”. In 2008, however, Sam Ramji, the then head of open source software strategy in Microsoft, began working closely with Bill Gates to develop a pro-open source attitude within the software industry as well as Microsoft itself. Ramji, before leaving the company in 2009, built Microsoft's familiarity and involvement with open source, which is evident in Microsoft's contributions of open source code to Windows Azure, “its new-age web service for building and hosting applications on the net”, among other projects. These contributions would have been previously unimaginable by Microsoft.[43] Microsoft’s change in attitude about open source and efforts to build a stronger open source community is evidence of the growing adoption and adaption of open source.[44][45]

Government agencies and infrastructure software — Government Agencies are utilizing open source infrastructure software, like the Linux operating system and the Apache Web-server into software, to manage information.[12] In 2005, a new government lobby was launched under the name National Center for Open Source Policy and Research (NCOSPR) “a non-profit organization promoting the use of open source software solutions within government IT enterprises." [46]

Synthetic Biology- Synthetic Biology is considered the feasibility of the open source movement. This new technology is important and exciting because it promises to enable cheap, lifesaving new drugs as well as helping to yield biofuels that may help to solve our energy problem. Although synthetic biology has not yet come out of its "lab" stage, it has great potential to become industrialized in the near future. In order to industrialize open source science, there are some scientists who are trying to build their own brand of it.[47]

Open Source Movement in the Military- Open source movement has potential to help in the military. The open source software allows anyone to make changes that will improve it. This is a form of invitation for people to put their minds together to grow a software in a cost efficient manner. The reason the military is so interested is because it is possible that this software can increase speed and flexibility. Although there are security setbacks to this idea due to the fact that anyone has access to change the software, the advantages can outweigh the disadvantages. The fact that the open- source programs can be modified quickly is crucial. A support group was formed to test these theories. The [48]

Open Source in Education- Colleges and organizations use software predominantly online to educate their students. Open source technology is being adopted by many institutions because it can save these institutions from paying companies to provide them with these administrative software systems. One of the first major colleges to adopt an open source system was Colorado State University in 2009 with many others following after that. Colorado State Universities system was produced by the [49]

“For educators, The Open Source Movement allowed access to software that could be used in teaching students how to apply the theories they were learning”.[50] With open networks and software, teachers are able to share lessons, lectures, and other course materials within a community. OpenTechComm is a program that is dedicated to “open access, open use, and open edits- text book or pedagogical resource that teachers of technical and professional communication courses at every level can rely on to craft free offerings to their students.” [51] As stated earlier, access to programs like this would be much more cost efficient for educational departments.

Open Source in Healthcare- Created in June 2009 by the nonprofit eHealthNigeria, the open source software OpenMRS is used to document health care in Nigeria. The use of this software began in Kaduna, Nigeria to serve the purpose of public health. OpenMRS manages features such as alerting health care workers when patients show warning signs for conditions and records births and deaths daily, among other features. The success of this software is caused by its ease of use for those first being introduced to the technology, compared to more complex proprietary healthcare software available in first world countries. This software is community-developed and can be used freely by anyone, characteristic of open source applications. So far, OpenMRS is being used in Rwanda, Mozambique, Haiti, India, China, and the Philippines.[52] The impact of open source in healthcare is also observed by Apelon Inc, the "leading provider of terminology and data interoperability solutions". Recently, its Distributed Terminology System (Open DTS) began supporting the open source MySQL database system. This essentially allows for open source software to be used in healthcare, lessening the dependence on expensive proprietary healthcare software. Due to open source software, the healthcare industry has available a free open source solution to implement healthcare standards. Not only does open source benefit healthcare economically, but the lesser dependence on proprietary software allows for easier integration of various systems, regardless of the developer.[53]

Ideologically related movements

The open access movement is a movement that is similar in ideology to the open source movement. Members of this movement maintain that academic material should be readily available to provide help with “future research, assist in teaching and aid in academic purposes.” The Open access movement aims to eliminate subscription fees and licensing restrictions of academic materials[12]

The free culture movement is a movement that seeks to achieve a culture that engages in collective freedom via freedom of expression, free public access to knowledge and information, full demonstration of creativity and innovation in various arenas and promotion of citizen liberties.[54]

[55] The Creative Commons license offers a slightly more lenient alternative to “all rights reserved” copyrights for those who do not wish to exclude the use of their material.[56]

See also


  1. ^ [2] Definition of Open Source : Open Source Initiative Retrieved 2012-08-03
  2. ^ [3] Get Involved : Apache Foundation Retrieved on 2012-08-03.
  3. ^ Bradley, D.A. (2005). "The divergent anarcho-utopian discourses of the open source software movement". Canadian Journal of Communication 30: 585–611. 
  4. ^ a b c d Wyllys, R.E. (2000). Overview of the Open-Source Movement. Retrieved November 22, 2009, from The University of Texas at Austin Graduate School of Library & Information Science
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Warger, T. (2002). The Open Source Movement. Retrieved November 22, 2009, from Education Resources Information Center
  6. ^ Richard Stallman. The GNU Project. In Chris DiBona, Sam Ockman, and Mark Stone, editors, Open Sources. Voices from the Open Source Revolution. O'Reilly & Associates, 1999
  7. ^ a b c d A brief history of open source software. Retrieved on 2011-11-30.
  8. ^  
  9. ^ A Brief History of the Open-Source Movement. (2011-11-18). Retrieved on 2011-11-30.
  10. ^ History of the OSI | Open Source Initiative. Retrieved on 2011-11-30.
  11. ^ Weber, Steven. The Success of Open Source. The President and Fellows of Harvard College. 2004. Print pg.20–28. This whole paragraph is referenced to Steven Weber
  12. ^ a b c d Taft, D. K. (2009, November 3). Microsoft Recommits to $100k Apache Contribution at ApacheCon. Retrieved November 22, 2009 from eWeek
  13. ^ Lerner, Josh; Tirole, Jean (March 2000). "The simple Economics of Open Source". Cambridge, MA.: National Bureau of Economic Research.  
  14. ^ Voyce, S. (2011). Towards an open source poetics: Appropriation, collaboration, and the commons.Criticism, 53(3), 407-438. Retrieved from
  15. ^ a b Open source initiative . (n.d.). Retrieved from
  16. ^ The Open Source Definition | Open Source Initiative. Retrieved on 2011-11-30.
  17. ^ Sullivan, J. (2011). Free, open source software advocacy as a social justice movement: The expansion of f/oss movement discourse in the 21st century.Journal of Information Technology and Politics,8(3), Retrieved from
  18. ^ Ceraso, A., & Pruchnic, J. (2011). Introduction: Open source culture and aesthetics. Criticism, 53(3), 337. Retrieved from
  19. ^ a b Unknown. (2007). How the Open Source Movement has Changed Education: 10 Success stories. Online Education Database.
  20. ^ Langley, N. (2007). Apache is the big chief in the world of web servers. Computer Weekly, 34. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.
  21. ^ a b c d e Metcalfe, R. (200p, October 13). Examples of Open Source Software. Retrieved November 22, 2009, from OSS Watch
  22. ^ The PHP Group. (2009, November 20). What is PHP? Retrieved November 22, 2009, from PHP
  23. ^ a b c d e Webb, M. (2001, July 18). Going With Open Source Software. Retrieved November 22, 2009, from techsoup
  24. ^ a b The Benefits of Open Source. Retrieved on 2011-11-30.
  25. ^ Fosfuri, Andrea; Giarratana, Marco; Luzzi, Alessandra. "The Penguin Has Entered the Building: The Commercialization of Open Source Software Products". Organization Science. Retrieved 6 February 2012. 
  26. ^ von Hippel, Eric. "open Source Software and the "Private-Collective" Innovation Model: Issues for Organization Science". Organization Science. INFORMS: Institute for Operations Research. Retrieved 6 February 2012. 
  27. ^ a b Kirk St.Amant & Brian D. Ballentine (
  28. ^ Elliott, Margaret S. "Institute for Software Research". University of California. Retrieved 2012-06-01. 
  29. ^ West, Joel. "How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies". Research Policy, Volume 32, Issue 7, July 2003, Pages 1259-1285. Elsevier B.V. Retrieved 6 February 2012. 
  30. ^ Poynder, R. (n.d.). IT Feature: The Open Source Movement. Information Today, Inc.. Retrieved January 25, 2011
  31. ^ Wyllys, R. (n.d.). Overview of the Open-Source Movement. UT School of Information – Home Page. Retrieved January 25, 2011
  32. ^ a b c d Lerner, Josh; Jean Tirole (9 May 2001). "The open source movement: Key research questions". European Economic Review 45 (4-6): 819–826.  
  33. ^ a b c Greenspun, Philip. "Managing Software Engineers". Retrieved 7 February 2012. 
  34. ^ Ye, Yunwen; Kouichi Kishida (3–10 May 2003). "Toward an Understanding of the Motivation of Open Source Software Developers". International Conference of Software Engineering. Retrieved 7 February 2012. 
  35. ^ Bonaccorsi, Andrea; Cristina Rossi (2003). "Why Open Source software can succeed". Open Source Software Development 32 (7): 1243–1258.  
  36. ^ Advantages and Disadvantages of Open Source Software. Software Company. Retrieved on 2011-11-30.
  37. ^ Golden, Bernard. Succeeding with Open Source. Pearson Education. 2005
  38. ^ a b Poynder, Richard (2001). "The Open Source Movement". Information Today 8 (9). 
  39. ^ Going With Open Source Software. (2001-07-18). Retrieved on 2011-11-30.
  40. ^ " - The EU Microsoft Decision - December 2004". Retrieved 13 October 2014. 
  41. ^ " - EU Ct. of 1st Instance: Microsoft Abused its Dominant Position - Updated - September 2007". Retrieved 13 October 2014. 
  42. ^ " Microsoft Loses Its EU Appeal". Retrieved 13 October 2014. 
  43. ^ Metz, Cade. (2012, Jan 30). Meet Bill Gates, the Man Who Changed Open Source Software. Retrieved Feb 4, 2012 from [4]]
  44. ^ Metz, Cade. (2011, Nov 4). How Microsoft Learned to Stop Worrying and (Almost) Love Open Source. Retrieved Feb 4, 2012 from [5]]
  45. ^ The Samba Team. (n.d). Samba: Opening Windows to a Wider World, What is Samba?. Retrieved Feb 4, 2012 from [6]
  46. ^ Chris Preimesberger Open Source Movement Gets a Lobby. eWeek. 14 October 2005
  47. ^ Wilson Center. (2009). Synthetic Biology: Feasibility of the Open Source Movement. Wislson On Demand Center.
  48. ^ Toon, John (2009). "Open Source Movement May Accelerate Military Software Development".  
  49. ^ About. Retrieved on 2011-11-30.
  50. ^ St.Amant & Ballentine 2011 p.343
  51. ^ Still (
  52. ^ eHealthNigeria. (2012). eHealthNigeria: FAQs. Retrieved Feb 4, 2012 from [7]]
  53. ^ (2012, Jan 17). Apelon Announces Availability of a Completely Open Source Terminology Management Solution. Retrieved Feb 4, 2012 from [8]]
  54. ^ Students For Free Culture. (2009). Main Page. Retrieved November 22, 2009, from free
  55. ^ "Creative Commons Organization". Creative Commons. Retrieved 2011-10-20. 
  56. ^ "How to find Creative Commons images on Flickr". New Media Rights. Retrieved 2011-10-20. 

Further reading

This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.