Differences between European and U.S. adoption of open source

In my role as pseudo general counsel at Alfresco, I wade through a lot of contracts. As part of this, I'm constantly trying to find the right balance between the needs of our customers and partners in different geographies.

Interestingly, our European and North American customers view licensing very, very differently. Generally speaking, our European customers want our software under an open-source license (GPLv2). North Americans? They want the benefits of open source without the obligations and perceived risk (meaning, they prefer a dual-license approach that allows them to contribute back modifications if they wish, but not out of duty).

I've been trying to figure out why the two geographies, surrounded only by the Atlantic Ocean, have such different perspectives on licensing. I believe it comes down to this: governments versus private corporations.

Throughout Europe governments lead the adoption of open-source software, and Alfresco has been widely adopted by governments throughout Europe. In my experience, government IT workers (especially in Europe) tend to buy into the ideals of open source more fully than their private-sector counterparts. They're looking for open platforms upon which the vendor and buyer can collaborate. They trust the GPL and seek out its obligations.

This is somewhat less true of North America, where most open-source adoption is driven by enterprises seeking to lower costs and maximize innovation. In my experience, their developers buy into the ideals of open source but their legal departments generally do not, largely because their understanding of the risks and obligations of open source remain anemic, though it's getting better. So these buyers (or, at least, their legal departments) tend to want contracts that look like the Old World of software. They prefer dual licensing when they can get it as a way to mitigate perceived risks. In other words, they want the benefits of open source without worrying about possible obligations.

Your experience may differ from mine, but I've canvassed opinion on this and have found that others largely share my experience. This means that if you're hoping to do business in Europe and North America, you need to be prepared for the differing approaches to open-source licensing, contracts, indemnification (Europe cares much less about it than the United States does), etc.

And given that open-source businesses are almost of necessity global businesses, you'd be wise to get ready for this difference in views sooner rather than later. Consider yourself warned.

[pscoop]

Matt, is this not just a difference in Government v. Enterprise and the relative mix of the two sectors in the North American and European OSS market? What I mean is; are the differences between the way European enterprises v North American, and EU Government v. NA Government view OSS licencing, and if there is could it be because in Europe, Enterprises look for exemplars and good practice and follow Government (because they are leading this wave of adoption) whereas in North America the situation is reversed?

[Matt Asay]

I'd say that yes, it's just a government difference, except that US governments seem to mimic many of the concerns/attitudes of their US corporate counterparts. We have a wide range of Federal and State governments as customers, and their concerns are much like their corporate cousins....

[unifex_]

Well, let me give my two cents ... I never understood why me, the customer, should care about this whole licensing issue. What I mean is, I am not a programmer, I am not a developer, I am not a reseller, I don't use the software to make something for profit. I will never look into any code or sell any software. For me, the only question is: does it work, really? Example: Adobe Acrobat works. Another example: Xfig works. Counter example: Open Office does not really work - not for involved presentations, etc. Consequently, I choose software that works. Last thing I care about is what is written in that license agreement that they make me agree to (by clicking a button). I mean, if I need this software, I have to agree, otherwise it won't install. And since there is really no choice - e.g. no viable alternative to Acrobat, etc. - I have to click "yes". A bit stupid, but just a consequence of the fact that most specialized software is unique. So, ok I realize the need for that license in order to protect against people who want to resell it illegally, but me as a user - I don't care about its terms and thus whether it's GPL or something else.

[theopensourcerer]

Matt, one other major difference between the EU and the USA is the software patent laws, We (I'm in the UK) don't really have them and don't believe how an idea/formula can be patented... So our protection is almost solely through Copyright law which the GPL - and other OSS licenses - try their utmost to protect. Currently and historically, there has been no need to be (overly) concerned about IP infringement.

[dcardozo]

Well, let me give mine...I never understood why me, a normal human being, should care about the whole contracting issue. What I mean is, I am not a lawyer, I am not a politician, I am not a philosopher.
If I was hungry, last thing I care about is what is written in that license agreement that they make me agree to (by signing with my blood). I want my lunch. I don't care about its terms and thus whether it's agreeing to be a slave or an employee. I mean, if I need this meal, I have to agree, otherwise they won't give it to me. A bit stupid?

[unifex_]

Indeed. Any argument can be made absurd by exaggerating. Software is not food. A computer at home is useful, but by no means necessary. Thus no computer-related issues are really crucial for home users, except for some data security if you are using online banking. And there you better read those license agreements. But that's not what this discussion is about.

[lmasanti]

Maybe you can go a "little further"...
There are Open Licensing with "obligations to give back" (GPL) and "without obligations" (Apache, BSD).
What kind is the prefered/objected in Gov/Bus in EU/NA?

[Ian Skerrett]

It is interesting that the EU has also created their own open source license. http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/en/document/6523
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Public_Licence