Commentary
Death, Taxes, And Open Source Business Models
To the eternal list of death and taxes, we might as well add debates about open source licensing and sales. Two recent discussions about licensing and business models got me thinking again about what's suitable to what end, and how to interpret what you see other companies doing as a model for your own work.
To the eternal list of death and taxes, we might as well add debates about open source licensing and sales. Two recent discussions about licensing and business models got me thinking again about what's suitable to what end, and how to interpret what you see other companies doing as a model for your own work.
More Software Insights
White Papers
- How To Regain IT Control In An Increasingly Mobile World - by BlackBerry
- The BlackBerry PlayBook tablet's Good Bones - by BlackBerry
Reports
More >>Webcasts
- Maximize ROI with Database Consolidation onto Private Clouds
- The ABC's of Cloud Computing in the Midmarket
The two companies in question are MySQL and Alfresco. With the former, we have Zack Urlocker talking about a business model where the add-ons and the support are what cost you. With the latter, there's a standard core version (FOSS) and an enterprise version (not-FOSS), and the licensing for each sparked a bit of a debate about whether or not dual licensing creates as many problems as it solves. Thing is, I find myself thinking less about the specific advantages of any one strategy and more about the methodology of any given strategy at all.
My original line of thinking about open source licensing has gone like this: Whatever it is you do, make sure you are consistent. You are guaranteed to irk someone no matter which way you shift, so you're best off walking as straight a path as you can. If you start by offering an open source core with proprietary add-ons and for-pay support, then stick to that. If your deal is a totally open platform with support being the only thing people buy, then stick with that.
Sounds like good advice on paper, but how realistic is it? Business models change because the world itself changes. People make a great deal of noise about the record industry's business model being obsolete, but obsolescence is a moving target, and today's particular open source strategy may be tomorrow's curiosity -- at least for you. The other thing I worry about is how tough it can be to remain pragmatic in the face of potentially devastating criticism about your motives and intentions.
I'll pose this last thought in the form of a question: Is it OK to switch licensing and business models as long as you're not inconveniencing existing customers? Or is it better to pick one stance and stick with it come heck or high water?
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/syegulalp
Related Reading
| To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy. | |
|
|
T-Shirt Giveaway: Each week we're selecting one great comment from our readers. The author of the comment will receive an InformaitonWeek Community t-shirt. So get posting! |
Subscribe to RSSResource Links
This Week's Issue
Technology Whitepapers
- Mobile BI: Actionable Intelligence for the Agile Enterprise
- Creating the Enterprise-Class Tablet Environment - by Yankee Group
- The BlackBerry PlayBook tablet's Good Bones - by BlackBerry
- Red Alert: Why Tablet Security Matters - by BlackBerry
- New Visual and Wizard-Driven Paradigms for Exploring Data and Developing Analytic Workflows
Featured Broadcast
This white paper explains how to create a manageable, scalable environment suited to answer real-time business needs by building out a data center on a standards-based, virtualization-aware, energy-efficient and affordable platform. Plus, learn how virtualization is making the jump from the server realm into the application, mobile and database worlds in the additional resources section.
Learn More












