Narrow your search
Two years after the open-source licensing wars over "badgeware" and license proliferation, it's clear that customers simply don't care.
SugarCRM is giving away its software. It should never give away its brand.
Google has wrongly banned the Mozilla Public License from its accepted licenses for Google Code. This is wrong-headed and misguided.
What is Facebook trying to accomplish? If the point was to protect the Facebook platform from competition (and, to be frank, derivative works), Facebook chose a good license in CPAL. If it was to encourage development, it couldn't have chosen a worse li
While vendors care a lot about things like data portability, it turns out that customers really don't.
I don't like the new Common Public Attribution License. But I think I can see how it was approved.
Perhaps there's not one business model that is always right, but rather a phased approach to licensing that changes as one's need to monetize the software changes.
Bruce Perens wants to be on the OSI board. What has he done to deserve this?
Mark Radcliffe is finally getting some of the attention he deserves. Is it too much? I don't think so, and here's why.
A look back at the top stories of 2007 vis-a-vis open source.