IN THE EYES of the Free software movement, sharing enhances the pace of innovation and contributes to cultural wealth. Ideas are everywhere and we should stop being overly possessive when it comes to the infinitely shareable. It is therefore natural to discourage artificial limitations and this new article speaks about two of them: patents and copyrights (even though Open Source does rely on copyrights):
The concept of protecting ideas and innovation by legal means dates back to antiquity. But many of our existing laws are under strain, their suitability and ultimate purpose called into question.
Here, Anton Hughes discusses collaboration and considers the role of the open-source movement in a world still governed largely by copyright and patents.
Open source began in the late 1970s and early 80s as a way of preserving the sharing ethos upon which early computer science was built. Since then it has grown well beyond its original scope, and now underscores the creation of many creative works.
In a sense, the answer is almost certainly "yes." It's hard to imagine how Google could have prevented some iPhone innovations from seeping into Android design. The iPhone was the talk of Silicon Valley in 2007 and 2008. It would have been practically impossible for the Android development team to avoid learning about iPhone features. Once Google's engineers were exposed to the concepts Apple pioneered, they couldn't help but be influenced by them.
But if Google is guilty of using Apple's ideas, Apple is equally guilty. Many researchers and companies invented technologies that predate the iPhone but made it possible. As Microsoft's Buxton points out, Wayne Westerman (the multitouch researcher who sold his startup and became an Apple employee in 2005) cited the work of numerous early multitouch researchers in his 1999 PhD thesis. The iPhone incorporated key innovations pioneered by Bob Boie, IBM, Jazzmutant, Jeff Han, and others.
Comments
Michael
2012-02-27 16:24:21
The idea they have a war against OSS is like saying they have a way against themselves.
Roy: your knowledge of these things you write about is abysmal - how can you not know Apple uses so much OSS? And even with that they do not write / maintain, they include more and get more OSS into the hands of more desktop users than *any* desktop Linux distro. Seen in that way: they are better for OSS than any desktop Linux distro (though they also use their own proprietary software - software you think they owe you, so you hate them... and, because of their success, you - in your own words - "envy" them).
Let go of your envy and work to make desktop Linux better... help it to catch up. Desktop Linux has become much better over the last few years... there is a chance it will actually be competitive and you can actually advocate desktop Linux and focus on something positive and not just attack those products you know are better suited for most people.
walterbyrd
2012-02-28 01:24:19
And scox viciously attacked Linux, even though scox was a Linux vendor themselves. Scox loved Linux, as long as scox could claim to own it.
Sun tried to do the same thing, and so did Novell. Like scox, those companies claimed that only their versions of Linux was legal.
Apple clearly feels threatened by Android, and has filed a flood of scox-scam like lawsuits; in an effort to keep Apple competitors off the market.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2012-02-28 01:32:36
Michael
2012-02-28 02:54:49
Oh, I think there is no doubt that unless Apple does something the carriers will start pushing lower end, lower quality devices if they think that will help them earn more money. As it is now, there are a large number of the lower quality Android devices (and some higher end ones) and they are very commonly seen in the market. Still, in terms of profits for companies and - more importantly - satisfaction for users, Apple still holds a large advantage. Comsumers do not care if AT&T is not making as much money from one device as from another, they care about what pleases them most and what offers them the best value. Still, advertising works and AT&T and others may very well try to push the idea that the also-ran is as good as the "real" product... and Google might get a better handle on the significant issues of fracturing and reactive malware work as opposed to Apple's model of being pro-active.
Interesting times ahead and I wish both well - as long as both do not directly plagairize from each other. Unlike Roy, I openly oppose plagairism, even though I admit there is a fine line between plagairism and being inspired from each other.