Think Free Speech, not Free Beer
By Kevin Cannon and Paul May. Dublin City University 2002.
The Online Presence of Open Source
The nature of the Open Source movement and its related advocacy groups is, for the
most part, indistinguishable from their online nature. Their online presence reflects a
broad community of people who advocate the free availability, modification and
distribution of source code for computer programmes. Beyond these over arching
principles, there are many sub-communities who view the open source philosophy in
different ways, and these ideological ambiguities are shown in the movement’s
various online manifestations.
The movement’s online presence can be broken into various groupings, including
open source developers, spokespeople, high-profile advocates, open source users and,
naturally enough, critics of the movement’s principles. This decentralised network of
interested parties, illustrated below, encompasses a broad spectrum of ideas and levels
of organisation.
The open source developer community is mainly focussed around project
development hubs, such as SourceForgei and the Open Source Developers Networkii.
These hubs promote and encourage the development of open source projects by
providing services for developers, such as server space, corporate outreach
programmes, forums, social outlets and of course, source code repositories.
Through these hubs, programmers can both build and publicise their projects,
collaborating with other programmers as they go along. These portals allow project
contributors to become organised, facilitating development of both new and
established projects. This model means that the developer community exists in both
dynamic and centralised forms. Disparate, decentralised groups of programmers begin
to collaborate with others through these open source portals, and become organised
around specific projects.
i
SourceForge – http://www.sourceforge.net
ii
Open Source Developers Network – http://www.osdn.org
Project development teams usually consist of a small group of collaborators who carry
out the majority of programming. For example, the Apacheiii web server, one of the
largest open source projects currently underway, has a core group of only 20
programmers, and the server they maintain has a market share of over 50%iv. The
active developer community therefore, moves form disorganisation to organisation by
using services such as OSDN and SourceForge. It is fair to say that the online
presence of the movement is central to its entire existence.
There are several high-profile spokespeople for the open source movement, and as
with the other groupings, these people have their own distinct online presence.
Whereas sites such as the Open Source Development Network and SourceForge
actively encourage the development of open source applications, advocacy sites, such
as Opensource.org (The Open Source Initiative) and FSF.org (The Free Software
Foundation) define and promote the ideas and benefits of using open source software.
By publishing literature and policy statements, advocates such as Eric Raymond,
Richard Stallman and Linus Torsvalds encourage existing open source users, and
attract new users, consumers and corporate supporters. Reflecting the nature of the
movement, these advocates, while they support the same basic principles of freely
available source-code, often produce significantly different types of literature,
highlighting the many micro-beliefs present in the movement. For example, Eric
Raymond sees his own community, the Open Source community as “a pitch for ‘free
software’ on solid grounds, rather than ideological tub-thumping”v This style of
literature conflict directly with the writings of “Free Software” advocate, Richard
Stallman who writes “above all, society needs to encourage the spirit of voluntary cooperation in its citizens. When software owners tell us that helping our neighbours in
a natural way is ‘piracy’, they pollute society’s civic spirit.”vi
While the idea of “Free Software” can trace its literal origins back to the inception of
the highly ideological Free Software Foundation in 1984, in recent times, more
iii
The Apache Project – http://www.apache.org
iv
Source: Netcraft server statistics – http://www.netcraft.com
v
Source: The Open Source Initiative FAQ – www.opensource.org/advocacy/faq.html
vi
Source:
Why
Software
Should
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-free.html
Not
Have
Owners
by
Richard
Stallman
–
pragmatic open source models have evolved. The success, and self-sustainability of
open source software projects such as Apache has bolstered the confidence of a
previously obscure community. This growth in confidence and technical stability has
attracted commercial entities such as IBMvii and Sun Microsystemsviii. While the
online presence devoted to open source of companies is small, it adds a commercial
perspective to the discourse surrounding the movement.
The most visible open source presence online is that of open source users. Using
mailing lists, message boards, IRC, online gaming, instant messaging, Usenet and
websites, users communicate about a wide range of topics, some of them related to
open source, some of them not. The archetypal example of an online medium used by
“open sourcers” is Slashdot.org. On Slashdot, users critique new software, discuss the
development of projects such as Mozilla and Gnome, and at the same time discuss a
wide range of peripheral interests, such as books, films and science. Slashdot
represents the open source community at its most unorganised, and also at its most
personal and vocal.
Our Research Methodology
To cover a wide variety of material, we adopted a rigid search methodology for our
initial research. Starting with the literal string “Open Source”, we searched the web
and Usenet news groups for information. By filtering out irrelevant information, we
began to assemble a clearly defined lexical data set of terms relating to open source.
We then used that data set to search for new information, adding to the data set as we
continued, pruning terms from the data set which became irrelevant as the material we
retrieved became more relevant. This resulted in a broad range of material on which
to base our initial analysis of the open source community. This methodology, outlined
in image 1, allowed us to access a wide variety of different views and communities
relating to open source, which would not have been retrieved using simple search
parameters.
vii
The IBM Open Source Software proect – http://oss.software.ibm.com
viii
Sun Microsystems Open Source - http://sunsource.net
Image 1: An overview of our data set search methodology.
After finding sufficient material, most of our research involved reading and
categorising the material into the various strands of the open source community. We
then researched the theories of Manuel Castells, Jurgen Habermas and Michel
Foucault with which to analyse elements of the open source discourse. We also
employed lexical analysis tools on some key pieces of literatureix.
As well as our use of the data set searches, categorisation, reading and application of
theory, we employed covert observation and active participationx of the open source
community. By joining the Slashdot user list, we were able to read articles posted by
other members, and take part in discussions to learn more about the open source
movement.
Media Employed by the Open Source Movement
ix
See Appendix for lexical analyisis of some of the discourse around open source.
x
Having anticipated this very essay question in 1998, the authors spent a total of three years in a B.Sc.
degree course, learning to programme, and allowing themselves to be exposed to open source
sympathisers.
As outlined in section one, the open source movement is present in many online
forms, but they are also represented by themselves and by others in offline media. The
movement, like other facets of computing such as gaming and computer graphics, has
magazines, journals and books devoted to open source. Titles such as Linux Journal
are completely dedicated to issues relating to open source, such as the Linux operating
system. Open source is also represented in other general computing magazines such
as Wired, Byte and Computer Weekly. We found that technical magazines tended to
be more specific in their coverage of open sourcexi, with the level of in-depth
discussion decreasing as magazines became less technical.
The coverage which the open source movement receives in the mainstream media
appears to be minimal, with general discussion about the movement’s ideas appearing
in the technology and business sections of a small number of print publicationsxii. As
with the print media, representation of open source on media such as television is
minimal, and is limited to technology and business programming. David Winton's
documentary on the Mozilla project, Code Rushxiii, was the only mainstream
representation of open source on we could find on mainstream television.
The contrast between the online and offline presences of the movement is stark. The
vocal online community of the open source movement appears to translate badly into
mainstream media. The technical, community based nature of their online presence
lends itself representation in accordingly technical publications. The mainstream news
appeal of open source is clearly limited at this point in time.
One of the primary ways the open source movement represents itself in public is
through talks and conferences. Examples include the O'Reilly Open Source
xi
For example, Wired Magazine coverage of a talk by Linus Torvalds, creator of the open source Linus
operating system is a typical example of coverage by a reasonably technical , general computer
magazine of the open source movement www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.05/open_source.html
xii
A typical example of coverage of open source we found in offline media. The Irish Times – Finance
Section
–
9th
of
August
2000
-
Available
online
at
Ireland.com
-
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/finance/2000/0908/fin24.htm
xiii
More information on the Code Rush documentary can be found at the PBS website -
http://www.pbs.org/whatson/press/winspring/coderush.html
Conventionxiv, ApacheConxv, and in Irelandxvi, Linux Awareness in Ireland Day.
These conferences usually include talks by high profile spokespeople, workshops and
demonstrations of new software, and sales of open source software. These
conferences are important offline focal points for the open source community,
drawing together many different aspects of the movement, from its philosophy to the
technical and commercial implementation of the open source model.
The Movement’s Defining Principles and Stances
For the most part, the open source community defines itself through an oppositional
stance to the dominant, closed source ideology. The base principle on which the
movement is founded argues that source code for computer software should be freely
available to those who want it. They believe that by freely distributing source code,
software will be of a higher quality, because it can be audited and modified by people
who want to do so.
However, within the broad open source community, as with all loosely defined
groups, there are contradictions and sub-divisions, with many different interpretations
of the open source philosophy. These divisions are highlighted by the numerous open
source software licensesxvii, but the major divisions in the community have arisen out
of ideological differences. Spokespeople such as Richard Stallman see the distribution
of source code with software, “free software” as he calls it, as being fundamentally
linked with democratic freedoms, such as freedoms of speech. “Free software is a
matter of freedom, not price”xviii
xiv
More information is available at http://www.oreillynet.com/oscon2001/
xv
The ApacheCon website – http://www.apachecon.com
xvi
Coverage of LAID at Ireland.com - www.ireland.com/newspaper/computimes/1999/1101/cmp1.htm
xvii
The
full
text
of
all
approved
open
source
licenses
is
available
at
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/index.html
xviii
Source: Some Confusing or Loaded Words and Phrases that are Worth Avoiding by Richard
Stallman – http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html
Stallman’s Free Software Foundation see the open source movement as being “two
political camps within the free software community” (Stallman, 2002), illustrating the
relationship between the two communities in the following diagram.
Image 2: Categories of Free and Non-Free Software. Source: Free Software Foundation.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html
The Free Software movement defines itself in direct political opposition with closed
source software; “The enemy is proprietary software”xix
The other main division in the community belongs to the Open Source Initiative,
which was founded by Eric Raymond in 1998. The OSI was founded to promote the
case for what had been called “free software” on less ideologically based grounds in
order to make it more attractive to business, and reduce the dominance of proprietary
software.xx Whereas the discourse surrounding the Free Software Foundation is that of
liberty, freedom and “the enemy”, OSI define themselves as selling the pragmatic
xix
Source: Why “Free Software” is better than “Open Source” by Richard Stallman –
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html
xx
The OSI defines Open Source software in the document The Open Source Definition -
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition_plain.html
benefits of open source, such as the “many eyeballs” effect, where open source code
evolves in an open environment where many programmers can independently review
code and make improvements.
While these two groups are ideologically separate, they can be defined together in
their opposition to the dominant, closed source model, where software is released to
the public in compiled form without source code. This model, personified in many
ways by software giant Microsoftxxi, sees computer code as valuable “intellectual
property” to be carefully controlled. Software patents allow companies to protect new
and unique developments in their source code, which is directly at odds with the open
source philosophy of shared information and innovation.
The discourse which surrounds the open source community is wide ranging and
sometimes contradictory. By its very nature as a community based entity, there are
varying levels of discourse, ranging from the literature of high profile advocates, to
the discussions of open source users.
The primary feature of all these discourses however, is the desire for the redistribution of knowledge in the form of source code from the dominant forces of
proprietary software into the hands of individuals. The Free Software ideology sees
this as an essential part of democracy and freedom, with the proprietary model
perpetuating a situation where “users lose freedom to control part of their own
lives.”xxii The Open Source Initiative advocates the distribution of source code as a
better way of software development, and as a way to improve the evolution of
technology.xxiii
Both of these form a debate where social action is based around ideas, rather than a
common cultural foundation.
xxi
Microsoft and the Commercial Software Model - www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/craig/05-
03sharedsource.asp
xxii
Source:
Why
Software
Should
Not
Have
by
Richard
Stallman
–
Open
Source
Initiative
-
Owners
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-free.html
xxiii
Source:
The
Open
Source
Definition
by
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition_plain.html
the
In a post industrial society…it is the defence of the subject, its
personality and its culture against the logic of apparatuses and
markets that replaces the idea of class struggle.xxiv
It is therefore possible to see the open source discourse as a post-industrial discourse,
where the liberty of individuals to exercise power over knowledge is a fundamental
right. Richard Stallman writes about the illegal distribution of software between
individuals in terms of power and knowledge, saying “I shouldn’t have the power to
tell you not to do these things. No one should”xxv
The proprietary software model is therefore seen by the open source communities as
retaining knowledge which should be in the hands of individuals. In this interplay,
power equates to knowledge, and knowledge is the source code that advocates want
to use, distribute, learn from, and teach with.
The open source discourse, as well as being fundamentally about the distribution of
power and the movement towards a culture of shared knowledge, can also be read in
economic terms. Under these headings, open source can be seen as another facet of
the re-structuring of the relationship between capital and labour, the “disaggregation
of labor ushering the network society”xxvi
The same technologies which created global commodity markets in the 80’s, have
now evolved to a point where a de-centralised group of computer programmers can
viably create computer software. Open source can be read as either an ideological
xxiv
Source: The Rise of the Network Society by Manuel Castells. Page 23. 1996. Blackwell Publishers,
Oxford.
xxv
Source:
Why
Software
Should
Not
Have
Owners
by
Richard
Stallman
–
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-free.html
xxvi
Source: The Rise of the Network Society by Manuel Castells. Page 279. 1996. Blackwell
Publishers, Oxford.
reaction to the coporatisation of what was once a scientific venturexxvii, the creation of
software, or as an alternative economic model which utilises source code as a raw
material, and global communication networks as pathways through which to form a
unified force against those who they see as unwilling to share knowledge in the form
of source code.
Conclusions
This essay has tried to outline the principle facets and motivations of the open source
communities. By analysing its online presence, its sub-divisions and micro
communities, as well as the literature of its advocates and critics, we have attempted
to outline the principle levels of discourse which surround the movement. We have
shown that within the open source movement there are a number of contradictory
philosophies, and that these philosophies unite on a macro level to form an
oppositional stance to the dominant model of software production and distribution.
We contest that the open source movement is a product of a broader post-industrial,
networked society, where the ability of disparate groups to organise virtually can not
only create virtual communities and belief structures, but can also create a discourse
which seeks to redefine dominant modes of economic production and the relationship
between
xxvii
labour,
production,
and
current
corporate
ideologies.
For an excellent, accessible history of the foundation of the computer industry,
see Accidental Empires by Robert Cringley. 1996. Penguin Books.
Appendix
Results of lexical analysis, using Wordsmith, on the Free Software Foundation
website, www.fsf.org
Results of lexical analysis, using Wordsmith, on the Open Source Initiative website,
www.opensource.org
Results of lexical analysis, using Wordsmith, on documents by Microsoft relating to
open source software.
Results of lexical analysis, using Wordsmith, on Richard Stallman’s personal website
– http://www.stallman.org
Bibliography
Castells, M., (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.
Cringely, R.X., (1996). Accidental Empires. New York: Penguin Books.
Stubbs, M., (1983). Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hine, C., (2000). Virtual Ethnography. London: Sage.
Rabinow, P. (ed.), (1991). The Foucault Reader. New York: Penguin Books.
Habermas, J., 1984. Communication and the Evolution of Society. Cambridge: Polity.
Babad, E., Birnbaum, M., Benne, K., (1983). The Social Self: Group Influences on
Personal Identity. London: Sage.
Stallman, R. (2002). Personal Site of Richard M. Stallman. http://www.stallman.org.
Accessed March 2002.
Stallman, R., (2002). Free Software Foundation Website. http://www.fsf.org.
Accessed March 2002.
Raymond,
Eric
S.,
(2002).
Open
Source
Initiative
Website.
http://www.opensource.org. Accessed March 2002.
Slashdot: News for Nerd, Stuff That Matters. http://www.slashdot.org. Accessed
March 2002.