Is OpenLogic a friend or foe to open source?
OpenLogic just announced that it had a good 2007. The company tripled its number of customers, and now counts three of the Fortune 10 as companies, with many more in the Fortune 500. Good for them.
What is perhaps less appealing about the company's success is that it may be achieving its success at the expense of the projects that make it possible in the first place. Two of its top-five projects (in a consolidated library of 380 total projects) - JBoss and Hibernate - are developed by Red Hat. Yet the company crows about the fact that vendors like Red Hat won't get paid under its model:
OpenLogic allows companies to consolidate their open source provisioning, governance and support through a single vendor [Read: OpenLogic]. Customers have embraced this model by significantly expanding their relationship with OpenLogic.
Let's follow this to its natural conclusion. The more successful OpenLogic becomes, the more it puts its "feeder" open-source projects and companies out of business. With friends like these....
This is, of course, one of the blessings and curses of open source. It dramatically decreases vendor lock-in but also provides the tools to ensure vendors don't get paid at all. OpenLogic, as Oracle tried to do to Red Hat before it, may not be adequately accounting for the source of its business, which is the developer (corporate or otherwise) that writes software that it then opts to integrate. Kill that source by skimming the fat off the top and OpenLogic will leave itself barren of a future.
I've heard complaints of this sort on OpenLogic before, that the company hasn't gone out of its way to ensure the companies and communities developing open-source software get paid. If true, OpenLogic will truly be biting the hands that feed it.
I'd like to see a commitment from OpenLogic to the communities - corporate and organic - from which it derives value, a commitment to actively replenish these wells of code. Open source doesn't just need integrators. It needs people giving back. OpenLogic's model is a boon to open source if it gives as much as it takes. But if its focus is in taking the support revenue from the vendors and others writing the software, it will do itself and its customers no favors.
Matt Asay is general manager of the Americas and vice president of business development at Alfresco, and has nearly a decade of operational experience with commercial open source and regularly speaks and publishes on open-source business strategy. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Red Hat is a public company whose primary responsibility is generating a return for its shareholders. As for the other 300?they in the game to make money and demonstrate they are viable businesses so they get purchased by public companies or go public themselves.
I submit that competition from the likes of OpenLogic serves the interests of open source vendors by validating (what many investors consider) niche markets. Additionally, vendors like OpenLogic serve the community by ensuring that open source companies deliver value for service provided rather than generating revenue from their entitlement status.
It seems that the open source community suffers from a bit of NIMBY (not in my back yard.) Our mission is to dethrone the hegemony and eliminate vendor lock-in?except when it comes to us.
http://www.openlogic.com/products/support.php
http://www.openlogic.com/community/index.php
Thank you for continually reminding us in the business applications of Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) of our responsibilities of never forgetting where-from the gold mind of software technology flows.
Following is my response to blog post from OpenLogic regarding your story.
>
http://www.openlogic.com/blogs/2008/02/how-openlogic-gives-back-to-open-source/
The article from Matt Assay about OpenLogic basing their business on Open Source software with possibility of no return or give-back by the company, and your eloquent response help to keep thought process and dialog thriving in the area.
However I would not feel totally comfortable accepting your response - on "face value" so to speak , not because it clearly and intelligently lays out the relationship of Openlogic with developers and the community, but because there is no way to verify or support any claim or statement made in support of the company's position.
It is incumbent that OpenLogic is willing to publicly identify at least one relationship with Open Source Software vendor business or developer group that is mentioned in online response, and secure a "published" endorsement from at least one named individual or group from the open source development community that it supposedly supports.
i am confident that such effort will be invaluable and successful in OpenLogic marketing program and provide positive publicity to/for the Open source development community.
Otherwise, statements as made can be construed as mere "public Relations" stunts with no basis in fact or reality.
W. Anderson
kimalcorp@nac.net
<
I do hope your article prompts OpenLogic and other companies capitalizing on FOSS development to more frequently and "varifiably" state their positions, policies and actions in support of this great movement.
W. Anderson
wanderson@nac.net