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
Related items on risk (or lack thereof):
On the issue of Open Source risk:
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
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
|
|
