Open Source Initiative

Last updated
Open Source Initiative
FormationFebruary 8, 1998(26 years ago) (1998-02-08)
Type Standards organization [1]
Location
Area served
Worldwide
Executive Director
Stefano Maffulli (September 2021 – present)
Budget
US$ 209,500 (2019) [3]
Revenue
US$ 209,500 (2019) [4]
Website opensource.org

The Open Source Initiative (OSI) is the steward of the Open Source Definition, the most widely used standard for open-source software.

Contents

Founded in 1998, the Open Source Initiative coined the term open source in opposition to the free software movement. While free software is the same thing as open-source software, OSI preferred to make a pragmatic and business-friendly case for open-source software.

For most of its existence, the OSI's activities have been focused on the definition and certifying software licenses as compliant with it. OSI originally had a closed organizational model, but began to switch towards a membership organization in the 2010s to raise more money and expand its activities.

History

In 1998, Netscape released the open-source Navigator browser. [5] On 8 February, [6] Eric Raymond and Bruce Perens founded the Open Source Initiative (OSI) and coined the term open source to refer to what had previously been called free software. [5] [7] The OSI prefers the label "open source" to "free software" because the latter term has undesirable ideological and political freight, and it wants to focus on the pragmatic and business-friendly arguments for open-source software. [1] OSI defines open source as a "development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process. The promise of open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in". [8] Perens drafted a set of open-source guidelines, [9] which were adopted by the OSI as the Open Source Definition. [1] [10]

In January 2020, Perens left OSI over controversy regarding a new license (the Cryptographic Autonomy License), which had been proposed for the OSI's approval. [11] Raymond was banned from the OSI mailing list in March 2020. [12]

In 2022, OSI began work on an Open Source AI Definition, inviting dozens of researchers and corporate representatives to make a draft. Even companies with accessible code often do not release the data set used to train the model and impose usage restrictions on what can be done with the trained model. Maffulli said a new definition was necessary because artificial intelligence "is different from regular software and forces all stakeholders to review how the Open Source principles apply to this space". [13] [14]

Governance

The OSI is a California public-benefit nonprofit corporation, with 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status. [7] It adopted a closed rather than membership-driven organizational model in order to build consensus around its definition. All authority is vested in its Board of Directors, and future boards are appointed by the current board. This governance model has hampered OSI's efforts to achieve other goals not related to the definition. Unlike other free and open-source organizations, it does not develop software, which means that volunteer efforts have been directed elsewhere. [1]

In 2008, the OSI attempted to reform its governance, inviting fifty people onto a private mailing list, but this attempt led to no publicly available result. [1] In 2012, the organization again tried to transition towards a membership-based structure, creating affiliate and individual memberships without any formal say over the organization. A plan for corporate membership was also announced, but has not materialized as of 2022. The motivation for adopting a membership-based structure is to obtain greater financial resources, enabling full-time positions to increase the organization's effectiveness. [1] [15]

In March 2021, the OSI organization held a vote for executive director among its members, but the results were annulled because the election was hacked. [6] The election was re-run and Stefano Maffulli appointed its first executive director in September 2021. [16]

Open Source Definition

The Open Source Definition is the most widely accepted standard for open-source software. [17] [18] Providing access to the source code is not enough for software to be considered "open-source": it must also allow modification and redistribution under the same terms and all uses, including commercial use. [19] The Open Source Definition requires that ten criteria be met for a license to be approved. [20] [1] It allows both copyleft—where redistribution and derivative works must be released under a free license—and permissive licenses—where derivative works can be released under any license. [1] [21] [22] Software licenses covered by the Open Source Definition also meet the Free Software Definition and vice versa. Both the Free Software Foundation and the OSI share the goal of supporting free and open-source software. [1]

License approval process

The OSI approves certain licenses as compatible with the definition, and maintains a list of compliant licenses. New licenses have to submit a formal proposal explaining the rationale for the license, comparison with existing approved licenses, and any legal analysis. The proposal is discussed on the OSI mailing list for at least 30 days before being brought to a vote and approved or rejected by the OSI board. Although the OSI has made an effort to have a transparent process, the approval process has been a source of controversy. [23]

Seven approved licenses are particularly recommended by the OSI as "popular, widely used, or having strong communities": [23]

  1. Apache License 2.0
  2. BSD 3-Clause and BSD 2-Clause Licenses
  3. All versions of the GPL
  4. All versions of the LGPL
  5. MIT License
  6. Mozilla Public License 2.0
  7. Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL)
  8. Eclipse Public License version 2.0

History

As a campaign of sorts, "open source" was launched in 1998 by Christine Peterson, Jon "maddog" Hall, Larry Augustin, Eric S. Raymond, Bruce Perens, and others. [24] [25]

The group adopted the Open Source Definition for open-source software, based on the Debian Free Software Guidelines. They also established the Open Source Initiative (OSI) as a steward organization for the movement. However, they were unsuccessful in their attempt to secure a trademark for 'open source' to control the use of the term. [26] In 2008, in an apparent effort to reform governance of the organization, the OSI Board invited 50 individuals to join a "Charter Members" group; by 26 July 2008, 42 of the original invitees had accepted the invitations. The full membership of the Charter Members has never been publicly revealed, and the Charter Members group communicated by way of a closed-subscription mailing list, "osi-discuss", with non-public archives. [27]

In 2012, under the leadership of OSI director and then-president Simon Phipps, the OSI began transitioning towards a membership-based governance structure. The OSI initiated an Affiliate Membership program for "government-recognized non-profit charitable and not-for-profit industry associations and academic institutions anywhere in the world". [28] Subsequently, the OSI announced an Individual Membership program [29] and listed a number of Corporate Sponsors. [30]

On November 8, 2013, OSI appointed Patrick Masson as its general manager. [31] From August 2020 to September 2021, Deb Nicholson was the interim general manager. [32] Under the direction of Deborah Nicholson, the interim manager, the voting and election was held with results and then halted and set for re-election due to vulnerabilities in the election process. "This week we found a vulnerability in our voting processes that was exploited and had an impact on the outcome of the recent Board Election." [33] No election results or further updates are posted as of June 2021.[ citation needed ]

In January 2020, founder Bruce Perens left OSI over controversy regarding a new license (the Cryptographic Autonomy License), which had been proposed for the OSI's approval. [34] Later, in August 2020, Perens elaborated on his concerns: "We created a tower of babel of licenses. We did not design-in license compliance, and we have a tremendous noncompliance problem that isn't getting better. We can't afford to sue our copyright infringers." [35]

Eric S. Raymond, another co-founder of the OSI, was later banned from the OSI mailing list in March 2020. [36]

In November 2020 the board of directors announced a search for an executive director [37] which was concluded in September 2021 with the appointment of Stefano Maffulli. At the same time, the role of president of the board was abandoned in favor of chair of the board.

Relationship with the free software movement

Both the modern free software movement and the Open Source Initiative were born from a common history of Unix, Internet free software, and the hacker culture, but their basic goals and philosophy differ, the free software movement being more focused on the ethics of software, and their open source counterparts being more focused on practical benefits. The Open Source Initiative chose the term "open source", in founding member Michael Tiemann's words, to "dump the moralizing and confrontational attitude that had been associated with 'free software'" and instead promote open source ideas on "pragmatic, business-case grounds". [38]

As early as 1999, OSI co-founder Perens objected to the "schism" that was developing between supporters of the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and the OSI because of their disparate approaches. Perens had hoped the OSI would merely serve as an "introduction" to FSF principles for "non-hackers." [39] Richard Stallman of FSF has sharply criticized the OSI for its pragmatic focus and for ignoring what he considers the central "ethical imperative" and emphasis on "freedom" underlying free software as he defines it. [40] Nevertheless, Stallman has described his free software movement and the Open Source Initiative as separate camps within the same broad free-software community and acknowledged that despite philosophical differences, proponents of open source and free software "often work together on practical projects." [40]

On March 23, 2021, in response to Richard Stallman's reappointment to the Board of the Free Software Foundation, the OSI released a statement calling upon the FSF to "hold Stallman responsible for past behavior, remove him from the organization's leadership and work to address the harm he caused to all those he has excluded: those he considers less worthy, and those he has hurt with his words and actions." The OSI also stated that they would not participate in any events that include Stallman and "cannot collaborate with the Free Software Foundation until Stallman is removed from the organization's leadership." [41]

Board members

As of February 2024, the Open Source Initiative Board of Directors is: [42]

Past board members include: [43]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bruce Perens</span> American computer scientist

Bruce Perens is an American computer programmer and advocate in the free software movement. He created The Open Source Definition and published the first formal announcement and manifesto of open source. He co-founded the Open Source Initiative (OSI) with Eric S. Raymond.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Free software</span> Software licensed to be freely used, modified and distributed

Free software, libre software, or libreware is computer software distributed under terms that allow users to run the software for any purpose as well as to study, change, and distribute it and any adapted versions. Free software is a matter of liberty, not price; all users are legally free to do what they want with their copies of a free software regardless of how much is paid to obtain the program. Computer programs are deemed "free" if they give end-users ultimate control over the software and, subsequently, over their devices.

The free software movement is a social movement with the goal of obtaining and guaranteeing certain freedoms for software users, namely the freedoms to run, study, modify, and share copies of software. Software which meets these requirements, The Four Essential Freedoms of Free Software, is termed free software.

The Free Software Definition written by Richard Stallman and published by the Free Software Foundation (FSF), defines free software as being software that ensures that the users have freedom in using, studying, sharing and modifying that software. The term "free" is used in the sense of "free speech," not of "free of charge." The earliest-known publication of the definition was in the February 1986 edition of the now-discontinued GNU's Bulletin publication by the FSF. The canonical source for the document is in the philosophy section of the GNU Project website. As of April 2008, it is published in 39 languages. The FSF publishes a list of licences that meet this definition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Open-source license</span> Software license allowing source code to be used, modified, and shared

Open-source licenses are software licenses that allow content to be used, modified, and shared. They facilitate free and open-source software (FOSS) development. Intellectual property (IP) laws restrict the modification and sharing of creative works. Free and open-source licenses use these existing legal structures for an inverse purpose. They grant the recipient the rights to use the software, examine the source code, modify it, and distribute the modifications. These criteria are outlined in the Open Source Definition.

The Open Source Definition (OSD) is a document published by the Open Source Initiative. Derived from Bruce Perens' Debian Free Software Guidelines, the definition is the most common standard for open-source software. The definition has ten criteria, such as requiring freely accessed source code and granting the open-source rights to everyone who receives a copy of the program. Covering both copyleft and permissive licenses, it is effectively identical to the definition of free software, but motivated by more pragmatic and business-friendly considerations. The Open Source Initiative's board votes on proposals of licenses to certify that they are compliant with the definition, and maintains a list of compliant licenses on its website. The definition has been adapted into the Open Knowledge Foundation's Open Definition for open knowledge and into open hardware definitions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Open-source software</span> Software licensed to ensure source code usage rights

Open-source software (OSS) is computer software that is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to use, study, change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone and for any purpose. Open-source software may be developed in a collaborative, public manner. Open-source software is a prominent example of open collaboration, meaning any capable user is able to participate online in development, making the number of possible contributors indefinite. The ability to examine the code facilitates public trust in the software.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Open-source hardware</span> Hardware from the open-design movement

Open-source hardware consists of physical artifacts of technology designed and offered by the open-design movement. Both free and open-source software (FOSS) and open-source hardware are created by this open-source culture movement and apply a like concept to a variety of components. It is sometimes, thus, referred to as FOSH. The term usually means that information about the hardware is easily discerned so that others can make it – coupling it closely to the maker movement. Hardware design, in addition to the software that drives the hardware, are all released under free/libre terms. The original sharer gains feedback and potentially improvements on the design from the FOSH community. There is now significant evidence that such sharing can drive a high return on investment for the scientific community.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Free and open-source software</span> Software whose source code is available and which is permissively licensed

Free and open-source software (FOSS) is software that is available under a license that grants the right to use, modify, and distribute the software, modified or not, to everyone free of charge. The public availability of the source code is, therefore, a necessary but not sufficient condition. FOSS is an inclusive umbrella term for free software and open-source software. FOSS is in contrast to proprietary software, where the software is under restrictive copyright or licensing and the source code is hidden from the users.

Alternative terms for free software, such as open source, FOSS, and FLOSS, have been a controversial issue among free and open-source software users from the late 1990s onwards. These terms share almost identical licence criteria and development practices.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Stallman</span> American free software activist and GNU Project founder (born 1953)

Richard Matthew Stallman, also known by his initials, rms, is an American free software movement activist and programmer. He campaigns for software to be distributed in such a manner that its users have the freedom to use, study, distribute, and modify that software. Software that ensures these freedoms is termed free software. Stallman launched the GNU Project, founded the Free Software Foundation (FSF) in October 1985, developed the GNU Compiler Collection and GNU Emacs, and wrote all versions of the GNU General Public License.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Python Software Foundation License</span> Permissive free software license which is compatible with the GNU General Public License

The Python Software Foundation License (PSFL) is a BSD-style, permissive software license which is compatible with the GNU General Public License (GPL). Its primary use is for distribution of the Python project software and its documentation. Since the license is permissive, it allows proprietization of the derivations. The PSFL is listed as approved on both FSF's approved licenses list, and OSI's approved licenses list.

This comparison only covers software licenses which have a linked Wikipedia article for details and which are approved by at least one of the following expert groups: the Free Software Foundation, the Open Source Initiative, the Debian Project and the Fedora Project. For a list of licenses not specifically intended for software, see List of free-content licences.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Free-software license</span> License allowing software modification and redistribution

A free-software license is a notice that grants the recipient of a piece of software extensive rights to modify and redistribute that software. These actions are usually prohibited by copyright law, but the rights-holder of a piece of software can remove these restrictions by accompanying the software with a software license which grants the recipient these rights. Software using such a license is free software as conferred by the copyright holder. Free-software licenses are applied to software in source code and also binary object-code form, as the copyright law recognizes both forms.

BSD licenses are a family of permissive free software licenses, imposing minimal restrictions on the use and distribution of covered software. This is in contrast to copyleft licenses, which have share-alike requirements. The original BSD license was used for its namesake, the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD), a Unix-like operating system. The original version has since been revised, and its descendants are referred to as modified BSD licenses.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyleft</span> Practice of mandating free use in all derivatives of a work

Copyleft is the legal technique of granting certain freedoms over copies of copyrighted works with the requirement that the same rights be preserved in derivative works. In this sense, freedoms refers to the use of the work for any purpose, and the ability to modify, copy, share, and redistribute the work, with or without a fee. Licenses which implement copyleft can be used to maintain copyright conditions for works ranging from computer software, to documents, art, and scientific discoveries, and similar approaches have even been applied to certain patents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">GNU Free Documentation License</span> Copyleft license primarily for free software documentation

The GNU Free Documentation License is a copyleft license for free documentation, designed by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) for the GNU Project. It is similar to the GNU General Public License, giving readers the rights to copy, redistribute, and modify a work and requires all copies and derivatives to be available under the same license. Copies may also be sold commercially, but, if produced in larger quantities, the original document or source code must be made available to the work's recipient.

The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization founded by Richard Stallman on October 4, 1985, to support the free software movement, with the organization's preference for software being distributed under copyleft terms, such as with its own GNU General Public License. The FSF was incorporated in Boston, Massachusetts, United States, where it is also based.

The Shared Source Initiative (SSI) is a source-available software licensing scheme launched by Microsoft in May 2001. The program includes a spectrum of technologies and licenses, and most of its source code offerings are available for download after eligibility criteria are met.

The Organization for Ethical Source (OES) is a non-profit organization founded by Coraline Ada Ehmke in December 2020, to support the ethical source movement, which promotes that "software freedom must always be in service of human freedom". The organization is dedicated to "giving technologists tools and resources to ensure that their work is being used for social good and to minimize harm". It develops tools to "promote fair, ethical, and pro-social outcomes for those who contribute to, or are affected by, open source technologies".

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Gardler, Ross; Walli, Stephen R (2022). "Evolving Perspective on Community and Governance". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University Press. pp. 47–48, 52. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0002. ISBN   978-0-19-886234-5.
  2. ↑ "Charity Navigator - Unrated Profile for Open Source Initiative". Archived from the original on 2019-05-12.
  3. ↑ "Charity Navigator - Unrated Profile for Open Source Initiative". Archived from the original on 2019-05-12.
  4. ↑ "Charity Navigator - Unrated Profile for Open Source Initiative". Archived from the original on 2019-05-12.
  5. 1 2 "The Ins and Outs of Open Source" Kalina, Ira; Czyzycki, Alice.  Consulting to Management; Washington Vol. 16, Iss. 3, (Sep 2005): 41-46.
  6. 1 2 Vaughan-Nichols, Steven (March 24, 2021). "Open Source Initiative election hacked". ZDNET. Retrieved 19 May 2024.
  7. 1 2 Boehm, Mirko; Eisape, Davis (2021). "Standard setting organizations and open source communities: Partners or competitors?". First Monday. doi: 10.5210/fm.v26i7.10806 . ISSN   1396-0466.
  8. ↑ Hahn, Erin N. "An Overview of Open-Source Software Licenses and the Value of Open-Source Software to Public Health Initiatives" (PDF). Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest: 692.
  9. ↑ Overly, Michael R. (2003). The Open Source Handbook. Pike & Fischer. p. 5. ISBN   978-0-937275-12-2.
  10. ↑ Katz, Andrew (2022). "Everything Open". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University Press. p. 521. ISBN   978-0-19-260687-7.
  11. ↑ "OSI co-founder leaves initiative over new license".
  12. ↑ "Co-founder of OSI Banned from Mailing Lists".
  13. ↑ Claburn, Thomas (16 May 2024). "Open Source Initiative tries to define Open Source AI". www.theregister.com. Retrieved 18 May 2024.
  14. ↑ Gent, Ed (March 25, 2024). "The tech industry can't agree on what open-source AI means. That's a problem". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 18 May 2024.
  15. ↑ Vaughan-Nichols, Steven (18 July 2012). "New life for the Open Source Initiative". ZDNET. Retrieved 19 May 2024.
  16. ↑ Vaughan-Nichols, Steven J. "The Open Source Initiative names Stefano Maffulli as its first Executive Director". ZDNet. Retrieved 2021-09-20.
  17. ↑ Mertic, John (2023). Open Source Projects - Beyond Code: A blueprint for scalable and sustainable open source projects. Packt Publishing Ltd. p. 5. ISBN   978-1-83763-385-2.
  18. ↑ De Maria, Carmelo; Díaz Lantada, Andrés; Di Pietro, Licia; Ravizza, Alice; Ahluwalia, Arti (2022). "Open-Source Medical Devices: Concept, Trends, and Challenges Toward Equitable Healthcare Technology". Engineering Open-Source Medical Devices. Cham: Springer International Publishing. p. 4. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-79363-0_1. ISBN   978-3-030-79362-3.
  19. ↑ Greenleaf, Graham; Lindsay, David (2018). Public Rights: Copyright's Public Domains. Cambridge University Press. p. 485. ISBN   978-1-107-13406-5.
  20. ↑ Erlich, Zippy (2007). "Open Source Software". Handbook of Research on Open Source Software. IGI Global. pp. 187–188. ISBN   978-1591409991.
  21. ↑ Meeker, Heather J. (2008). The Open Source Alternative: Understanding Risks and Leveraging Opportunities. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 21–22. ISBN   978-0-470-25581-0.
  22. ↑ Laurent, Andrew M. St (2004). Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing: Guide to Navigating Licensing Issues in Existing & New Software. O'Reilly Media, Inc. pp. 9–11. ISBN   978-0-596-55395-1.
  23. 1 2 Smith, P McCoy (2022). "Copyright, Contract, and Licensing in Open Source". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University PressOxford. pp. 108–111. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0003. ISBN   978-0-19-886234-5.
  24. ↑ "History of the OSI".
  25. ↑ "A Look Back at 10 Years of OSI". Archived from the original on 2018-04-29.
  26. ↑ http://www.opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.php Announcement of losing 'open source' trademark
  27. ↑ "OSI Charter Member Discuss List". Archived from the original on 2013-04-21. Retrieved 2012-06-19.
  28. ↑ "Become an OSI Affiliate". 22 May 2012.
  29. ↑ "OSI Announces Individual Membership".
  30. ↑ "OSI Corporate Sponsors". 23 July 2023.
  31. ↑ "OSI Names New General Manager". LWN. 2013-10-23. Retrieved 2014-01-27.
  32. ↑ "Deb Nicholson to Join Open Source Initiative as Interim General Manager". Software Freedom Conservancy. Retrieved 2021-02-16.
  33. ↑ "OSI election update".
  34. ↑ "OSI co-founder leaves initiative over new license".
  35. ↑ Perens, Bruce (2020-08-24). "What comes after Open Source?". DebConf20. Retrieved 2021-06-01.
  36. ↑ "Co-founder of OSI Banned from Mailing Lists".
  37. ↑ "OSI Seeks to Hire Executive Director | Open Source Initiative". opensource.org. 19 November 2020. Retrieved 2021-09-20.
  38. ↑ Tiemann, Michael (2006-09-19). "History of the OSI". Open Source Initiative. Retrieved 2009-04-25.
  39. ↑ "It's Time to Talk About Free Software Again". 2014-11-19. Archived from the original on 2014-07-16. Retrieved 2014-11-19.
  40. 1 2 Stallman, Richard (2009-04-21). "Why 'Open Source' Misses the Point of Free Software". Free Software Foundation. Retrieved 2009-04-25.
  41. ↑ "OSI Response to RMS's reappointment to the Board of the Free Software Foundation | Open Source Initiative". opensource.org. 23 March 2021. Retrieved 2021-04-03.
  42. ↑ "Current composition of OSI board of directors". Open Source Initiative. 20 September 2022.
  43. ↑ "OSI Emeritus Members | Open Source Initiative". Open Source Initiative. Retrieved 17 February 2019.
  44. ↑ "2009 OSI Board Elections held in April". Archived from the original on 2022-04-07. Retrieved 2009-05-23.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.