The 7 Myths of IP Risk: The Real Exposure Issues With Free and Open Source Software
The 7 Myths of IP Risk: The Real Exposure Issues With Free and Open Source Software
FOSS is widely recognized as providing significant technology, innovation and financial benefits to software development organizations, but it is not without associated management challenges and risks. In this second paper of a two part series (Part One: Managing the Operational and Security Exposure of Free and Open Source Software) that examines key risk factors in the context of free and open source software (FOSS) use, we look at the intellectual property (IP) and legal risks that may be encountered when FOSS software makes its way into products, either in planned or unplanned use. FOSS is pervasive in todays software lifecycle and supply chain. Gartner estimates that by 2013 open source technology will be included in 85 percent of all commercial software packages, and by 2016 will be included in mission-critical software packages within 99 percent of global enterprises1. Clearly FOSS is being rapidly adopted. In terms of risk, Gartner predicts that 50% of Global 2000 organizations will experience technology, cost and security challenges through lack of open source governance by 2013. Its clear that FOSS is about opportunity, and yes, about risk, complexity, and management challenges as well. In this paper, IP Risks and Myths: The Real Exposure Issues with Free and Open Source Software, we address the IP risks that developers, development managers, compliance officers, legal, and C-level managers must take into account when developing and distributing software created with FOSS in todays multi-source development processes. We also provide readers with a discussion of myths that surround IP exposure in FOSS and survey the real issues surrounding licensing obligations, IP exposure and good FOSS citizenship. We welcome your thoughts and comments.
Introduction
Business Suite, Oracle Database 11g); and FOSS, just a mouse click away and typically available free from public-domain sites (e.g., kernel.org for the Linux kernel, Mozilla.org for the Firefox browser, Fedora Project.org for the Fedora Linux distribution. It is also distributed under varying paid-support models by a few major vendors, e.g. Red Hat (Red Hat Enterprise Linux, RHEL), Canonical (Ubuntu desktop Linux), and Oracle (Oracle Enterprise Linux, a copy of Red Hats RHEL) as open source.
Driver, Mark What Every IT Practitioner Needs to Know About OSS; 2010 Gartner, Inc. & its Affiliates.
Lets break down the categories a bit further and show some of the critical differentiators enterprise IT organizations using FOSS should know:
Most open source projects are built around communities of contributors - individuals who contribute code, patches, and updates to FOSS projects. Community-centric projects represent the traditional FOSS model, and many are entrenched in the ethic (open, free-of-commercial-oversight innovation) of FOSS. Many projects enjoy wide community support (or corporate sponsors, e.g. Android/Google), and many others have smaller communities and few users. Factors such as copyright control or IP governance vary dramatically among projects as well. FOSS is abundant - hundreds of thousands of projects are available through thousands of repositories - and it has become mainstream, to the point that Gartners lead FOSS analyst, Mark Driver, recently observed, As OSS has matured, it has expanded its role within mainstream IT organizations to take on increasingly complex and mission-critical challenges. In 2010, Gartner estimated that open source is included in at least 75% of Global 2000 enterprises.3
FOSS
Free and open source software , while free, does always come with a license; someone (often many individuals) retains copyright ownership over the source code and often trademark control over the broader project.
FOSS licenses have obligations that must be met FOSS licenses are perpetual Some FOSS vendors depend on dual-license models that encourage users to try before they buy, as with shareware (see below), but users are never compelled to upgrade to enterprise commercial editions (one reason: FOSS code can always be forked.)
Shareware
Shareware encompasses a wide range of software solutions that focus on try before you buy or volunteer commercial contributions (often both elements). However, unlike public-domain code and more similar to FOSS, shareware is generally distributed under a license. In many cases, potential adopters can use the software freely (gratis), purchase and even redistribute it, but cannot modify it for their own purposes.
Shareware and FOSS are licensed, but FOSS specifically provides the freedom to modify the code as well. The terms and conditions for use of shareware are often restricted as well for example, for a 90-day trial period. Shareware often locks certain features unless you pay to access them.
Open source is ubiquitous, its unavoidable.having a policy against open source is impractical and places you at a competitive disadvantage
-Mark Drivers take on the futility of fighting vs embracing FOSS use Nevertheless, many enterprise IT organizations attempt to ban its use or are loath to use (or admit they use) FOSS, taking a head in the sand approach. In part this is due to the myths that surround FOSS.
2 3
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html Various, Gartner Predicts 2011: Open-Source Software, the Power Behind the Throne. 2010 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates.
leaders intent for the use of its software. Not all licenses require the release of source code; restrictive licenses may, but many permissive licenses do not.
Permissive
Modifications/enhancements may remain proprietary Distribution in source code or object code is permitted provided copyright notice and liability disclaimers are included and contributors names are not used to endorse products Examples: Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD), Apache Software License.
Myth #1: You cannot use free and open source software in a proprietary environment (or you will die)
Plenty of FOSS users are around and thriving. In fact Gartner states, By 2014, those organizations with effective, open-source community participation will consistently deliver high returns from their open-source investments.4 Whether this use is direct and intentional, or hidden and unintentional, is not important to debunk this myth; the point is that FOSS is in use in enterprises everywhere, behind the firewall and in products being distributed to customer and partners.
Miscellaneous licenses
Examples: Zlib/libpng.
Myth #2: All open source licenses require the release of source code for everything
There are more than 2,000 licenses in use for FOSS, although fewer than 70 are approved by the Open Source Initiatives (OSI) license review process. Each license differs in its terms. Licenses vary by type, reflecting the intent of their author(s). The choice of a license by a project usually reflects the project
Saying no doesnt prevent the influx of FOSS, and it can lead to denial, which may open your organization to significant risk. Again,
ibid.
from Mark Driver of Gartner: Whether directly adopted within inhouse IT efforts or acquired indirectly via an independent software vendor (ISV) or a packaged application channel, open source will continue to coexist with closed-source solutions in a blended (i.e., hybrid) presence among mainstream IT solutions in mission-critical roles. IT organizations must clearly understand where and how they are using OSS. (Emphasis is ours.) The final point here is that not only is saying no impractical from a prevention perspective, depriving your developers of leveraging the significant technical and financial benefits of FOSS will put them at a competitive disadvantage. (A subject for another paper perhaps but theres also the issue of if you plan to hire developers out of college, most of whom have made extensive use of FOSS during their education, having a policy against using FOSS will severely limit or prevent you from hiring good talent).
This case, which generated a great deal of press regarding the downstream liabilities that can be hidden in FOSS licenses, is illustrative. Attorney Moskin, cited above, was interviewed by Betanews. In the interview about the JMRI case, Moskin offered the example of a bank hiring a software developer to write a piece of billing software for use by its customers. Lets say the developer downloads a piece of open source software. The bank thinks its code is proprietary, but it actually incorporates open source. Other businesses [using the billing software] might then also be liable for copyright infringement, Moskin illustrated. Count on FOSS licenses to be enforceable, and know that there are plenty of people - the softwares creator, the community, or an organization such as the Free Software Foundation - willing to enforce the terms of the license.
Myth #4: None of these (license and IP) agreements are enforceable so it doesnt really matter anyway.
Where theres a license theres law, and a lawyer or organization (Groklaw, Free Software Foundation, Software Freedom Law Center) willing to prosecute violations, and often in support of the FOSS developer community. The recent Jacobsen v. Katzer case is a cautionary tale that busts Myth 4. Jonathan Moskin and Howard Wettan, two attorneys at White & Case LLP report that, although leaving some questions unanswered, last summers court decision in this case held that breach of an open source license does not merely permit a breach of contract claim, but that violating the conditions to the intellectual property license creates a cause of action for copyright infringement -- with associated [financial] remedies.An additional consequence of the Federal Circuits opinion was that, by pursuing copyright claims, an open source licensor may now be able to sue downstream licensees for copyright infringement.
Myth #5: No one will ever know (if we use it but dont observe license compliance.)
The above example proves this myth wrong, plus there are tools designed to find violations (http://www.binaryanalysis.org/ en/home ) and organizations that routinely look for and report violations, including www.gpl-violations.org. A few years ago this myth may have been more common, but with the advances in technology for automatically discovering FOSS, the increased awareness of FOSS and its associated obligations, its much less so today.
nature of the work lead to a search for code that will match the need: Who needs to write another parser? Why reinvent the wheel? Your competitors likely are using FOSS to advantage, can you afford not to? A quick Internet search will turn up many FOSS projects - Black Duck tracks more than 475,000 from more than 5,000 unique websites in its KnowledgeBase. Its important to have a FOSS use policy, but the only way to really be sure whats in your code is by using technology to automatically identify, manage and control the FOSS and other code in your code base.
Conclusion
FOSS is pervasive in todays software lifecycle and supply chain, and its use is now a mainstream strategy for many development organizations. But while its use has become pervasive on the part of development organizations, management and control has lagged far behind. FOSS is free but it must be managed as an asset and license obligations observed. In addition, FOSS often carries with it the obligation of contributing back to the community. The Enterprise IT organizations that succeed with FOSS will be those that move beyond common cause to what Gartner has labeled collective competency5.
Myth #7: We arent distributing software, so we dont have to pay attention, right?
With over 2,000 software licenses being used, license obligations vary. With some, license obligations exist independent of whether software is distributed to customers, partners, and associates. Large Enterprise IT organizations, utilizing 100s to 1000s of FOSS projects, need to be aware of license obligations to manage compliance and risk. An added wrinkle: while you may not be developing the code for redistribution, mergers and acquisitions can change everything. If your company is considering a change in status, its critical to know whats in the code youre acquiring before final agreements are inked. After all, your IP - including all software -is a significant asset.
Contact
To learn more, please contact: [email protected] or call +1 781.810.5100 Additional information is available at Black Ducks web site: www.blackducksoftware.com
WP-IPLR-0311-UL-AA