Why does it make sense to be a part of the Open Source community

I came across the open source movement in 2006 when I truly got introduced to the Linux operating system. As far as I am concerned, Linux is by far the biggest brand ambassador of open source software. Since then I have come across and used multiple open source software and tools. I have somewhat understood the business model of companies like Red Hat, openSuse and others.

However, what has always amazed me was that how did this movement survive for so long! And here I am not talking about bare bones survival but it is a movement that is thriving and growing every day. There are people who are excited enough to jump onto this bandwagon. And not only people who have time on their hands and just out of college but people with families, holding regular jobs and with serious skills to contribute. What is it about the open source movement that has seen it become an elite cult within Information Technology domain!

Let me first point out the most obvious reason – open source software is free (from all hooks). Nobody is asking for money, nobody is asking for any personal data – basically there is absolutely no obligation to give anything back, which is wonderful. And yet, life teaches us there are “No free lunches” – at least a major part of our financial markets are run by this principle. So what’s really going on?

But before I come to that answer let me ask another question from a different perspective which I think is more intriguing. Why are so many amazingly skilled people so over-the-board enthusiastic about this movement? Why would someone use their time and skill to make a wonderful piece of software and just give it away?

Now contributing to or attempting to contribute to open source software is one of the best ways to gain IT skills. And this argument holds true even for highly skilled individuals as it definitely adds to their arsenal. Maybe that in itself is a major force driving the movement. And along the line others have realized that some of these software are good enough to replace proprietary systems.

Now once you have built some interesting piece of software you might want to release it to the world. There could be various reasons for that – acceptance, accolade, marketing your skills and so on. This is where the GNU licenses come in. And in my honest opinion the GNU licensing in itself is the second major reason for such terrific success of the open source movement.

If a piece of software is released by an individual, let’s call her A, without any licensing then another entity, let’s call the entity B, is free to usurp it and convert it to proprietary software. The GNU licensing schemes offer some protection to people releasing their software to the public. The only catch is that even you yourself can’t claim complete ownership over the code anymore. But on the plus side, this licensing ensures that nobody else can also claim ownership to your code; nobody can ever sue you for ownership; any third party can freely improve your code and distribute it without being bogged down by licensing concerns. And as many people correctly point out this puts engineering focus squarely on improved software rather than on licensing battles.

Furthermore, many people automatically assume that open source is equivalent to non-commercial. You only have to look at Red Hat, openSuse and others to realize that this far from the truth. At the individual level open source is also a lot about marketing your skills that can work as an indicator to the services that you can provide to another entity. In a way of speaking this is by far the best marketing tool ever. As I read somewhere (probably in “What is a Hacker” by Eric Raymond), being part of the open source community does not mean that you have to be a full time member. You can profit from your skills as you deem fit as long as you are making enough contributions. Of course there are members like Richard Stallman, right at the top of the chain, who give away all their work but that is an individual choice.

In essence, the open source movement has created an alternate software market. Participants in this market ensure that most required software remain free. This market also focuses primarily on better software and other concerns are pretty low in the priority list. As far as the “no free lunch” principle is concerned – it does not apply to users but participants pay by giving up any right to claim benefits through their code (you may argue that marketing is a direct, tangible, material benefit). Finally, against popular belief open source is not a non-commercial movement.