__/ [ spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ] on Thursday 14 December 2006 19:25 \__
> Doug Mentohl <doug_mentohl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> did eloquently scribble:
>> "At face value, the open source software (OSS) proposition looks too
>> good to be true .. there still remains a lot of uncertainty about the
>> legal position when integrating open source code or adapting it by the
>> creation of derivative versions"
>
> Uncertaintly where exactly?
>
>> "In 2003, the SCO Group .. sued IBM a .. Although the cases are still
>> ongoing, SCO's argument looks weak, but in terms of time and
>> aggravation, the matter has been a costly one for the defendants.
>
> But worth every penny. Which IBM will no doubt recoup.
>
>> "there is also no warranty with open source products
>
> Is there with windows?
> Didn't think so.
>
>> and no software
>> developer to take responsibility for (or at least to indemnify an
>> innocently infringing user for) a product that is found infringe
>> another?s intellectual property"
>
> Microsoft indemnifies its users now?
> Tell that to the people bitten by the SQL developer thing a couple of years
> back.
>
>> "Many of these issues are a function of the youth of the open source
>> concept and the lack of standardisation that inevitably results"
>
> Youth? It's older than windows.
>
>> "Programmers frequently incorporate open source code into their work
>
> Frequently?
>
>> without considering the licensing implications and it is clear that
>> many chief information officers may not yet know the precise and
>> pervasive extent to which OSS has permeated their company?s systems
>> architecture"
>
> Oh deary me, they're in trouble then.
> (This has nothing to do with open source in itself though, only in the
> thieving bastards who decide to steal code without so much as a
> by-your-leave)
>
> Pretty poor FUD there.
...Seen it earlier and decided not to post, especially when I saw the ending
which said something that's utterly false. The assumptions throughout were
simply incorrect. IIRC, it argued that there's no free lunch (or free beer),
but the matter of fact is that TiVo can take their kernel and do anything
they want. Having somebody else 'gardening' for them forever is selfish and
unrealistic. It's a possibility though. And since when do companies refuse
to die or drop products which are no longer maintained? Even Vista is said
to be the last version of Windows (as we know it at least), according to
several analysts, writers, and even some people at Microsoft.
Customer controls code; controls price; controls vendors. The customer is in
charge. Regarding risks, Open Source /reduces/ them.
OpenLogic Expands Efforts to Help Enterprises Reduce Open Source Risk
,----[ Quote ]
| OpenLogic, Inc., a leading provider of software, stacks and
| support that enable enterprises to easily deploy and manage
| customized open source environments, today announced it has
| extended its long standing relationship with Black Duck
| software by joining the Black Duck Compliance Vanguard Alliance.
`----
http://www5.sys-con.com/read/300010_p.htm
OpenLogic Launches Indemnification for its Certified Library of Open
Source Products
,----[ Quote ]
| "Open source software has made great headway into the
| enterprise," said Steven Grandchamp, CEO of OpenLogic.
| "But for enterprises to fully embrace a broad range of
| open source products, they need to be able to deploy,
| manage and control their open source usage and limit
| their legal risk. This is the first time that enterprises
| have been able to access indemnification coverage for
| such a broad range of open source products from a
| single vendor."
`----
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/061016/sfm049.html?.v=71
Lloyd's Head of Exposure Management Calls for 'Open Source' Models
,----[ Quote ]
| "Open source modeling will present a platform where user can
| more easily see the levels of uncertainty within a risk,
| which would be healthy for the industry," Nunn stated.
`----
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2006/10/19/73409.htm
Case study - Open source allows risk management firm to minimises risk
,----[ Quote ]
| A respected engineering and risk management consultancy has
| decided toreduce its own exposure to risk by migrating to
| a complete open source infrastructure.
|
| ESR Technology (ESRT) believes that it has freed itself
| from the expense and vendor lock-in associated with
| proprietary software by deploying an entirely open source
| network infrastructure.
`----
http://www.computerweekly.com/ARTICLES/2006/04/25/215739/Case+study+-+Open+source+allows+risk+management+firm+to+minimises+risk.HTM
Open source risky? Nah. Just if you hire an attorney who
doesn't grok it
,----[ Quote ]
| the "risk" of open source is no greater, and is generally
| far less, than the risk of using proprietary software.
`----
http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2006/08/open_source_ris.html
Closing the Open Source Door a Risky Proposition
,----[ Quote ]
| The move from an open source model to a closed one may
| appeal to developers seeking to pay their bills, but the
| transition is a risky one. Some customers will balk at
| losing control of applications key to their business
| -- the federal government, in particular -- and may look
| for other open source alternatives to meet their software needs.
`----
http://www.linuxinsider.com/rsstory/52200.html
Your data or your life
,----[ Quote ]
| As unlikely and alarmist as this sounds, it could really
| happen. Intracare is the publisher of a popular practic
| management system called Dr. Notes. When some doctors
| balked at a drastic increase in their annual software
| lease, they were cut off from accessing their own
| patients? information.
|
| This situation is completely unconscionable. There can
| be no truly open doctor-patient relationship when an
| unrelated third party is the de facto owner of and
| gatekeeper to all related data.
`----
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/1709
Is new technology worth the risk?
,----[ Quote ]
| Irish businesses are holding back from taking advantage of
| modern technologies because they are concerned about potential
| risks.
|
| According to new research from CA, 100 per cent of Irish IT managers
| surveyed said risk-related concerns were enough to stop them
| implementing new technologies.
`----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/29/risky_technology/
Putting risk back on the vendor, not the customer
,----[ Quote ]
| Back to faith. In open source, risk shifts to the vendor,
| because there is no upfront license fee, just the ongoing
| support and maintenance. As such, if the open source
| vendor fails to deliver ongoing value, you dump them.
| Period. And if the product is great but the support is not,
| you can go to one of their SIs or others to get support.
|
| Yes, this puts a lot of risk on open source vendors. No,
| it's not easy. But yes, it is a dramatically better value
| proposition for enterprise buyers. No question.
|
| Enterprises should stop paying Monopoly Money (licenses)
| to vendors. They should pay for value, not licenses.
`----
http://asay.blogspot.com/2006/10/putting-risk-back-on-vendor-not.html
--
~~ Kind greetings and happy holidays!
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/3 Thu Dec 14 08:07 - 08:08 (00:00)
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
