author: @sleepyfox
title: ObFOSScation
date: 15-Oct-2024
The problem with #FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) is that everybody thinks they know what it means. I once spent a couple of years working on and off with Ross Gardler, a VP of the Apache Software Foundation and Manager of OSS-Watch in Oxford.
It turns out that FOSS is really quite complex, and not just from a legal perspective. Many people are familiar with the whole "Free as in speech, not as in beer" quote, originally I believe e from the Free Software Foundation, founded in 1985 to freely distribute Unix-like operating systems, principally the GNU project.
There are entire books written about free software, such as 'Free: the future of a radical price', 2009, by Chris Anderson - then editor-in-chief of Wired magazine - so I'm not going to reiterate any of that material here.
There seem to be a number of very high-profile conflicts in the FOSS community right now, including but not limited to:
- Puppet and Perforce;
- WordPress and WP Engine;
- Rails and Wordpress, although basically DHH vs. the World at this point (as usual).
I'm not going to go into detail on these either, there's more than enough reportage on the InterWebs on that front.
What I want to highlight is something a bit different: there have been a number of calls for increased 'leadership', or 'stewardship', of the open source community, in the guise of that this is the responsible thing to do, because so many companies that are now a major part of the day-to-day running of the Web rely on these FOSS projects, that are 'at risk' because they are being badly led or irresponsibly managed by these irresponsible amateurs.
Well, I've got some news for you. Your decision to use my FOSS project in your company's essential infrastructure, a project that has no warranty (given or implied), that is free of both cost and contract of sale, that is specifically excluded from the Sales of Goods Act, 1979 (or any of its more modern revisions), that has no support contract or support mechanism, is a risk that is entirely of your own making, taken on your own recognisance, and one that you are legally obligated to bear the responsibility of.
I owe you NOTHING.
To think that I should make a change to my project because it doesn't work for you or your company, is plain entitlement and nothing else. To think that I should do anything for you, no matter how important, no matter what the consequences, is plain fantasy.
When we talk about Free Software, an important freedom that is hardly ever discussed is the freedom from obligation that the author has from anyone that should choose to use that software. They don't owe you anything.
Next time you decide to use some FOSS components or projects in your line of business application, understand that the trade-off you implicitly accept in its use is that you now own the running, support and maintenance of that software yourself, it ain't free (as in beer). If you can't afford that cost, then you shouldn't be using the software.
Note that this isn't about whether to not companies are good open source citizens, this is irrespective of whether you choose (or have the choice, depending on licensing) to upstream your changes/fixes back to the community.
You own your own choices. You chose not to pay for something (or someone) in order to support this thing. Now if it breaks, it's on you. You can't go crying to Legal that you expected random strangers on the Internet to fix your software for free.
Stop being a child. Own your choices.