Progressive techies favor Free and Open Source Software because the collaboration needed to produce software means its ownership can’t be restricted. Companies believe in proprietary software because they’ve built their wealth stealing people’s thinking, claiming ownership over it, and then re-selling it to people.
Let's be serious here for a moment. I am a proponent of open source software. I use it. I modify it. However I also know a few things:
Many "open source" developers do so after working a 9-5 (or whatever hours) at someone elses company in order to pay the bills. They do not, like paid product developers, make a living off of the product they produce.
Since they do not make money off the products they produce a great deal of OSS simply sucks and cease to exist not too long after they are created. There are plenty of exceptions but anyone being honest about it knows this to be the case.
Many "open source" developers live with their parents who pay the costs of living in the not-so-free world. It's all nice and cute to chuck stones at "bad" corporations when you live off of other people's 9-5, but it is not a good argument against such corporations. I am far more inclined to listen to an OSS developer who actually makes a living supporting his or herself and his or her family off the "sweat of their brow" rather than at the expense of the people who end up paying for them to "live their principles".
Look, I read Counterpunch. Every year they ask for donations from their readers, something on the order of 80K. I'm not sure how much they make over the year, but Counterpunch not only provides "free" material (paid for by those donations I'm sure) but they have a subscriber only newsletter (not so free).
I "pay" for Black Agenda report monthly. The information people get on that site is "free" insomuch that persons who "donate" allow the site to continue to operate. The point is that "free" only goes so far. People have to be compensated for their efforts or end up living off those who are. That's how it works. I'm more inclined to compensate someone for their efforts, than to bandwagon for those who live off those who are compensated.
Among my folks we call such attitudes as "free-ism" and we don't mean it kindly.
Should corporations be fair and responsible with their profiteering? Absolutely. None of the above is a rationalization for exploitation. But not all business is exploitation.
Posts
