Comments on: Microsoft capitulates to the OSI, gets horse-whipped for its troubles
The community wants to tar and feather Microsoft, showing the ugliest side of the community.
Most Popular
15 sites that went kaput in 2009
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Top 10 news stories of the decade
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
About The Open Road
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Add this feed to your online news reader
The Open Road topics
Would you allow a bad person to baby sit your kid? At Alfresco, don't you hire the very best people and decline to hire the others? Isn't that discrimination? Isn't that treating people differently? What did they teach you in law school? Most people understand that the ability and freedom to discriminate is the basis of liberty. Surely you favor liberty. Discrimination is only bad in certain, carefully circumscribed situations.
Aren't you simply saying you believe M$ was treated, unfairly? Aren't you really avoiding the real issue which is that M$ is a badly behaving 8,000 pound gorilla and therefore some people rationally think you have to treat M$ differently than others? So really, why do you think that shouldn't be done? (And please stow that "discrimination" nonsense.)
BTW, I enjoy your blog and your insights greatly, but his missive just seems boneheaded.
Would you allow a bad person to baby sit your kid? At Alfresco, don't you hire the very best people and decline to hire the others? Isn't that discrimination? Isn't that treating people differently? What did they teach you in law school? Most people understand that the ability and freedom to discriminate is the basis of liberty. Surely you favor liberty. Discrimination is only bad in certain, carefully circumscribed situations.
Aren't you simply saying you believe M$ was treated, unfairly? Aren't you really avoiding the real issue which is that M$ is a badly behaving 8,000 pound gorilla and therefore some people rationally think you have to treat M$ differently than others? So really, why do you think that shouldn't be done? (And please stow that "discrimination" nonsense.)
BTW, I enjoy your blog and your insights greatly, but his missive just seems boneheaded.
Recall these comments made to The Bangkok Post in May 2007:
"The Free Software movement is dead. Linux doesn't exist in 2007. Even Linus has got a job today" --Bill Hilf
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/14/2038250
Recall these comments made to The Bangkok Post in May 2007:
"The Free Software movement is dead. Linux doesn't exist in 2007. Even Linus has got a job today" --Bill Hilf
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/14/2038250
http://port25.technet.com/archive/2007/05/15/clarifications.aspx
http://port25.technet.com/archive/2007/05/15/clarifications.aspx
But I don't agree with treating Microsoft differently, even if we feel (and I have this sneaking suspicion) that its intentions are bad. Yes, I would never let a confirmed or suspected pedophile babysit my kids - never, ever, ever. But I'm also not an organization set up around the principle of non-discrimination. OSI is emphatically set up to approve licenses, not look into motives.
It is for the community, not the OSI, to police motives. I think the kind of feedback you're giving me here is excellent and needed. This is how we pressure Microsoft to play fair. But I don't think the OSI can do this without violating its charter.
But I don't agree with treating Microsoft differently, even if we feel (and I have this sneaking suspicion) that its intentions are bad. Yes, I would never let a confirmed or suspected pedophile babysit my kids - never, ever, ever. But I'm also not an organization set up around the principle of non-discrimination. OSI is emphatically set up to approve licenses, not look into motives.
It is for the community, not the OSI, to police motives. I think the kind of feedback you're giving me here is excellent and needed. This is how we pressure Microsoft to play fair. But I don't think the OSI can do this without violating its charter.
I looked around on the OSI web site and did not find a charter, but I did find some bylaws. In addition to approving licenses, the bylaws require that the OSI shall "educate the public about the advantages of open source software".
To lend its good name to a M$ license without taking into account M$'s nature and history would mislead, not educate the public. Let's face it, M$ is a corner case. Sui generis. A monopoly. One of a kind. You ignore that at your own peril.
- I appreciate hearing back from you ...
- by mondegreen August 20, 2007 8:37 PM PDT
- with regard to my comment. I'm a little unsure, however, about what you refer to as the OSI's "principle of non-discrimination". As far as I can tell, it's a requirement for the licenses it approves but not a part of any "charter" pertaining to the organization itself.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(10 Comments)I looked around on the OSI web site and did not find a charter, but I did find some bylaws. In addition to approving licenses, the bylaws require that the OSI shall "educate the public about the advantages of open source software".
To lend its good name to a M$ license without taking into account M$'s nature and history would mislead, not educate the public. Let's face it, M$ is a corner case. Sui generis. A monopoly. One of a kind. You ignore that at your own peril.