Many of today’s online businesses wouldn’t exist without the open-source community, who write and manage code that’s freely available. What luck for for-profit companies building on the Web today!
And while the developers within the open-source community are typically passionate geeks who altruistically give their time and attention to projects they care deeply about, these communities generally need some kind of support to keep their ecosystems robust and expanding.
Typically this support comes through sponsorship and investment (financial or labor) by large corporations.
These partnerships between open-source development communities and large for-profit corporations are mutually beneficial, but, can sometimes crack under the pressure of misaligned incentives.
This was on full display recently in the very public dispute between WordPress founder and Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg and WP Engine, a hosting provider that services websites built on WordPress. Both companies utilize the open-source software maintained by the WordPress Foundation and Wordpress.org.
Mullenweg attacked WP Engine for several of their features and their use of WP (signaling WordPress) in their name, which he said confused users into thinking they were part of the broader WordPress family of companies. WP Engine jumped in to defend itself, sending a cease-and-desist letter asking Mullenweg to withdraw his statements and saying their use of the trademark was covered under fair use.
This has set off a heated battle between the two companies, leaving end users with websites down, as well as unsecured from attacks. And it’s a lot of users – around 40% of websites are running on WordPress software.
But this isn’t a debate relegated only to websites. The Web – that digital eternity we spend so much time on today – is built on and remains running on a lot of this free open-source code.
It’s critical that this continues. It’s critical that major corporations see the privilege of utilizing the open-source community and continue to support their work. If benevolence isn't attractive, then perhaps enlightened self-interest: where would your team be if that open source community collapsed tomorrow?
Developer Advocate focused on Python and the Web at JetBrains.
Benefits of free and open
The benefits of the open-source initiatives are manyfold.
The fact that there’s a huge repository of software that companies can use to build their business makes development times faster, lowers costs and promotes competition. It’s also a more flexible solution for businesses, not only in its utility as a highly-customizable source code, but in that there’s no contract lock-in, so users can integrate with any third-party tool they wish. Plus, open source code is completely transparent and monitored by thousands of experts, which means bugs and faults are found and fixed quickly, creating a safer Web overall.
It seems like a no-brainer for large well-off corporations to support those efforts. And yet, that’s not always the case.
As the WordPress drama suggests, this collaboration between public and private entities can get bogged down by unclear guidelines of use, trademark conflicts and more.
This is why it’s so important for open-source communities to architect their projects effectively. There are many potential business models open-source projects can employ, from software-as-a-service (SaaS) to open core to crowdfunding, but projects need to be aware of the future challenges that could arise. While many choose to monetize the product itself – think RedHat, which contributes to many open-source projects but also supplies open-source products to enterprises for a price – doing this under the same trademark can cause problems in the future.
Instead, open source projects should separate their foundations from commercial entities and establish strong governance. Separating the public and private means there’s less chance of confusion. And strong governance allows open-source projects to build a large community, create material incentives for corporations to contribute, and then (and only then) protect themselves with trademarks against any truly bad actors.
Reputation on the line
When these steps are taken, for-profit corporations have myriad reasons to support an open-source project.
For one, there’s general self-interest in seeing these free repositories – called the commons – grow because they drive innovation and collaboration. Supporting open-source projects ultimately benefits companies as the programming language and tech tools they rely on expand.
Other companies sponsor open source projects that align with their own very specific needs. For instance, Google is a big sponsor of the Python Software Foundation. They invest large amounts of money into the project address specific technical challenges within the business’ use of the programming language. And Meta invested heavily in fixing issues in building Django-based applications to help them scale Instagram.
Lastly, it’s a reputation play.
As the conflict between Automattic and WP Engine has shown, developers are a sensitive audience. Many in the development community are strongly on the side of open source and keeping it pure of profit-making intentions. Already 159 Automattic employees have left, accepting a severance package the company offered for those who disagreed with how Mullenweg was handling the situation.
It’s important that for-profit companies give back to open-source projects to build a positive reputation with developer communities. From those communities they not only get code and software, but they can then discover and hire top talent within the open-source contributor community.
Ultimately, while incentives seem misaligned between these two groups at times, the collaboration is key for the long-term stability of the Web we all rely on for an ever-increasing amount of daily activities.
We've featured the best Linux app.
This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro
