[TriLUG] Can open source solutions be viable companies?

[Tom Bryan]

On Tuesday 02 July 2002 05:53 pm, Michael Mueller wrote:

> The small amount of research I've been able to do with ss7box going open
> source has been inconclusive.  I've asked my clients what they think.  They
> did not have a strong opinion.  They just wanted something that worked
> whose total cost of operation is in line with the risk of using the
> application. 

The people in business who actually *buy* your product probably won't ever 
care.  The source code is like giving them instructions in a foreign 
language.  It doesn't hurt them, but it certainly doesn't help them.  The 
only reasons that they should care involve the business cases for wanting 
source code (see below).

Now, if they have a sharp guy in their IT staff, that guy will be thrilled to 
have the source code (if he knows that he can get it).  He may or may not 
modify it or fix bugs, but he'll probably end up looking at it eventually.  
He may just not understand some odd behavior, and he'll look at the source to 
see what the code is actually doing (and what the comments say!).  He may 
want to suck the data out of it into some other tool, and he'll need to know 
the data structures being used for files and network communication.  

Completely customizing the source

> I volunteer to give them the source but the clients don't really
> know what to do with it and they don't seem enthused about about learning
> what to do with it.  

Some never will.  Like I said, to the businees guys, it doesn't matter.  Of 
course, if someone in their company *uses* that code to do something that 
saves them money *and* tells the business guys "good thing I had the source 
code," then they'll start to care.  Heck, maybe they'll start demanding 
source from their other vendors. :-)

> It is open to those that need it.  

Most high-end commercial software vendors would give away the source to their 
code except for three things
1) fear that a competitor will get their hands on it and scoop their best 
features...how do you prove that they used your GPL code?
2) fear that the customer will tweak the code, add extensions, and tie it in 
with their in house software and expect the vendor to support it
3) fear that some competent programmer at the customer site will see the code 
and say, "This code sucks!"

"Open to those that need it" may help you with item 1.  If your customers are 
large enough, consider that possibility that they may have the capital to 
spin off a little software consulting division...using your code and their 
business contacts to compete with you.  Either that, or a handful of 
employees could leave the company, taking your code with them to do the same 
thing.

I work on a large Orcale-based application that is used by fewer than 10 
companies.  I know that we had a problem with one customer reading some 
PL/SQL scripts that we sent "unwrapped."  We believe that she tried to 
rewrite them herself and called us to say that our software was broken.  Once 
we started shipping obfuscated code, the problems at that customer site went 
away.  That's item 2.

If you're really good, then item 3 won't be a problem.  ;-)

> Since I've already
> been attacked by a CSS vendor's lawyer, I feel no need to make the source
> publicly available.  

And it seems like you're already worried about item 1.

As a home consumer, I demand free software whenever I can get it.  I don't 
mind paying for it, but as a programmer, I can use the rights that free 
software gives me.  At work, we use free software because we can get it 
without having to pay for it.  

If I ran a business and didn't understand much about software, then I just 
want to make sure that my software vendor isn't trying to screw me.  If your 
customers don't understand why they might want the source, then they're not 
very good businessmen.  ;-)  They should want to avoid vendor lock-in through 
standard open file formats, open protocols, and open source (when they can 
get it).  If they can buy it from you and then hire someone else to support 
it, they're in good shape.  Not that they would want to!  It's just too 
inconvenient.  But if you ever go under, they still have the code.  If you 
jack up your support costs to something they can't or won't afford, they can 
take your code and go shopping around for someone who will support it for 
less.  They don't care about the code.  They care about the business.  I'm 
not sure whether you want to explain all of this to them.  If they're happy 
enough with your software to buy it and pay for support and keep you in 
business, then from the business side, you're done.  

If you haven't done so, you should probably read Raymond's "The Magic 
Cauldron" at http://tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/magic-cauldron/.  Whatever your 
opinions of ESR and his work, it may add some fresh ideas to your license 
conversations.

---Tom