Comments on: Differences between European and U.S. adoption of open source

People are people, sang Depeche Mode. But people adopt open source in very different ways, as I've seen at Alfresco.

[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