The European Commission's Open Source-Friendly Stance Draws Fire
by Sam Dean - Jul. 06, 2009Comments (1)- Related Blog Posts
- Over 10 Open Source Cloud Computing Tools and Resources
- Training and Support: Still Key to Enterprise Open Source Adoption
- Linux Prospects, Post-Windows 7
- OStatic Buffer Overflow...
- Red Hat Has Another Rocking Quarter, Looks Toward Better Economic Times
The European Commission is out with a white paper, downloadable as a PDF here, that calls for much broader and more standardized adoption of open source software across Europe. As IDG News Service notes, the white paper is getting both positive and negative reactions because of the bias it shows toward open source software. Jonathan Zuck, President of the Association for Competitive Technology, says in a statement: "It aims to facilitate digital cooperation among European administrations, but in effect it excludes many well-established technologies from being used for e-Government services due to a narrow definition of open standards. This will hurt first and foremost innovative tech start-ups that rely on patent protection to establish themselves in the marketplace." Will it?
Opposing viewpoints on open source in government are nothing new, of course. In this post, we discussed arguments that surrounded the formal arrangement between the Open Source Software Institute (OSSI) and the U.S. Department of Defense, for example. However, in that case the opposition to open source standards in government came largely from I.T. people who were concerned about costs for training and support.
Jonathan Zuck of the ACT asserts, in his opposition statement to the European Commission's white paper, that "innovative startups that rely on patent protection" will be hurt by the EC's stance. It's just as easy, though, to argue that welcoming open source in European governments will boost many commercial open source providers, both new and established. Government contracts help the revenues and the funding prospects for commercial open source companies, which can often make money from supporting free software that saves governments money.
In his statement, Zuck adds:
"Contrary to what is often said, commercial software is not the playground of big business, but primarily of inventive SMEs thriving in niche markets. Only the protection of their intellectual property permits those innovators to create growth and jobs."
It's not true that creating moats around software and intellectual property through patents is required to "create growth and jobs." Look at growing, healthy commercial open source players such as Red Hat and Alfresco Software. Red Hat has resoundingly shown that offering free software and reasonably priced support, plus sound investing, represent a fantastic combination for creating growth and jobs. Zuck's statement of opposition to the European Commission rings of a very closed-minded stance. Open source does not mean a race to zero for businesses and industry. Let's hope the European Commission and governments around the world keep their eyes on the many advantages that open source does offer.
Â
