Editing Open-source software (section)

== Legal and economic issues ==

=== Licensing ===
{{Main|Open-source license}}
{{Further|Free-software license}}
{{See also|Free and open-source software#Licensing|Software license}}

FOSS products are generally licensed under two types of licenses: [[permissive software license|permissive licensing]] and [[copyleft|copyleft licensing]].<ref name=":7" /> Both of these types of licenses are different than [[Proprietary software|proprietary licensing]] in that they can allow more users access to the software and allow for the creation of [[derivative work]]s as specified by the terms of the specific license, as each license has its own rules.<ref name=":7" /> Permissive licenses allow recipients of the software to implement the author's [[copyright|copyright rights]] without having to use the same license for distribution.<ref name=":7" /> Examples of this type of license include the [[BSD licenses|BSD]], [[MIT License|MIT]], and [[Apache License|Apache licenses]].<ref name=":7" /> Copyleft licenses are different in that they require recipients to use the same license for at least some parts of the distribution of their works.<ref name=":7" /> Strong copyleft licenses require all derivative works to use the same license while weak copyleft licenses require the use of the same license only under certain conditions.<ref name=":7" /> Examples of this type of license include the [[GNU General Public License|GNU family of licenses]], and the [[Mozilla Public License|MPL]] and [[Eclipse Public License|EPL]] licenses.<ref name=":7" /> The similarities between these two categories of licensing include that they provide a broad grant of copyright rights, require that recipients preserve copyright notices, and that a copy of the license is provided to recipients with the code.<ref name=":7" />

One important legal precedent for open-source software was created in 2008, when the Jacobson v Katzer case enforced terms of the [[Artistic License|Artistic license]], including attribution and identification of modifications.<ref name=":7" /> The ruling of this case cemented enforcement under copyright law when the conditions of the license were not followed.<ref name=":7" /> Because of the similarity of the [[Artistic License|Artistic license]] to other open-source software licenses, the ruling created a precedent that applied widely.<ref name=":7" />

Examples of [[free-software license]] / [[open-source license]]s include [[Apache License|Apache licenses]], [[BSD licenses]], [[GNU General Public License]]s, [[GNU Lesser General Public License]], [[MIT License]], [[Eclipse Public License]] and [[Mozilla Public License]].<ref name=":7" />

=== Legal issues ===
Several gray areas exist within software regulation that have great impact on open-source software, such as if software is a good or service, what can be considered a modification, governance through contract vs license, ownership and right of use.<ref name=":7">{{Cite book |last=Brock |first=Amanda |title=Open Source Law, Policy and Practice |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2023 |isbn=978-0-19-886234-5 |edition=2nd |location=UK}}</ref> While there have been developments on these issues, they often lead to even more questions.<ref name=":7" /> The existence of these uncertainties in regulation has a negative impact on industries involved in technologies as a whole.<ref name=":7" />

Within the legal history of software as a whole, there was much debate on whether to protect it as [[intellectual property]] under [[patent law]], [[copyright law]] or establishing a unique regulation.<ref name=":7" /> Ultimately, [[Copyright|copyright law]] became the standard with computer programs being considered a form of literary work, with some tweaks of unique regulation.<ref name=":7" />

Software is generally considered [[source code]] and [[object code]], with both being protectable, though there is legal variety in this definition.<ref name=":7" /> Some jurisdictions attempt to expand or reduce this conceptualization for their own purposes.<ref name=":7" /> For example, The European Court of Justice defines a computer program as not including the functionality of a program, the [[Programming language|programing language]], or the format of data files.<ref name=":7" /> By limiting protections of the different aspects of software, the law favors an open-source approach to software use.<ref name=":7" /> The US especially has an open approach to software, with most [[Open source license|open-source licenses]] originating there.<ref name=":7" /> However, this has increased the focus on [[Patent|patent rights]] within these licenses, which has seen backlash from the OSS community, who prefer other forms of [[Intellectual property|IP]] protection.<ref name=":7" />

Another issue includes [[technological protection measures]] (TPM) and [[digital rights management]] (DRM) techniques which were internationally legally recognized and protected in the [[World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty|1996 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Treaty]].<ref name=":7" /> Open source software proponents disliked these technologies as they constrained end-users potentially beyond copyright law.<ref name=":7" /> Europe responded to such complaints by putting TPM under legal controls, representing a victory for OSS supporters.<ref name=":7" />

=== Economic/business implications ===
In open-source communities, instead of owning the software produced, the producer owns the development of the evolving software.<ref name=":14">Wynants, M., & Cornelis, J. (Eds.). (2005). ''How open is the future? : Economic, social and cultural scenarios inspired by free and open-source software''. ASP.</ref> In this way, the future of the software is open, making ownership or [[intellectual property]] difficult within OSS.<ref name=":14" /> [[Software license|Licensing]] and branding can prevent others from stealing it, preserving its status as a [[Public good (economics)|public good]].<ref name=":14" /> Open source software can be considered a public good as it is available to everyone and does not decrease in value for others when downloaded by one person.<ref name=":14" /> Open source software is unique in that it becomes more valuable as it is used and contributed to, instead of diminishing the resource. This is explained by concepts such as investment in reputation and [[network effect]]s.<ref name=":14" />

The economic model of open-source software can be explained as developers contribute work to projects, creating public benefits.<ref name=":14" /> Developers choose projects based on the perceived benefits or costs, such as improved reputation or value of the project.<ref name=":14" /> The motivations of developers can come from many different places and reasons, but the important takeaway is that money is not the only or even most important [[incentivisation|incentivization]].<ref name=":14" />

Because economic theory mainly focuses on the consumption of scarce resources, the OSS dynamic can be hard to understand. In OSS, producers become consumers by reaping the rewards of contributing to a project.<ref name=":14" /> For example, a developer becomes well regarded by their peers for a successful contribution to an OSS project.<ref name=":14" /> The social benefits and interactions of OSS are difficult to account for in economic models as well.<ref name=":14" /> Furthermore, the innovation of technology creates constantly changing value discussions and outlooks, making economic model unable to predict social behavior.<ref name=":14" />

Although OSS is theoretically challenging in economic models, it is explainable as a sustainable social activity that requires resources.<ref name=":14" /> These resources include time, money, technology and contributions.<ref name=":14" /> Many developers have used technology funded by organizations such as universities and governments, though these same organizations benefit from the work done by OSS.<ref name=":14" /> As OSS grows, hybrid systems containing OSS and proprietary systems are becoming more common.<ref name=":14" />

Throughout the mid 2000s, more and more tech companies have begun to use OSS.<ref name=":55">{{Cite book |last=Tozzi |first=Christopher |title=For Fun and Profit: A History of the Free and Open Source Software Revolution |publisher=MIT Press |year=2017 |isbn=978-0-262-34118-9 |location=United States}}</ref> For example, [[Dell|Dell's]] move of selling computers with [[Linux]] already installed.<ref name=":55" /> [[Microsoft]] itself has launched a [[Linux-based operating system]] despite previous animosity with the OSS movement.<ref name=":55" /> Despite these developments, these companies tend to only use OSS for certain purposes, leading to worries that OSS is being taken advantage of by corporations and not given anything in return.<ref name=":55" />

=== Government uses ===
While many governments are interested in implementing and promoting open-source software due to the many benefits provided, a huge issue to be considered is [[cybersecurity]].<ref name=":8">{{Cite book |last=Pannier |first=Alice |title=Software Power: The Economic and Geopolitical Implications of Open Source Software |publisher=Études de l'Ifri |year=2022 |isbn=979-10-373-0641-8}}</ref> While accidental vulnerabilities are possible, so are attacks by outside agents.<ref name=":8" /> Because of these fears, governmental interest in contributing to the governance of software has become more prominent.<ref name=":8" /> However, these are the broad strokes of the issue, with each country having their own specific politicized interactions with open-source software and their goals for its implementation.<ref name=":8" /> For example, the United States has focused on [[national security]] in regard to open-source software implementation due to the perceived threat of the increase of open-source software activity in countries like China and Russia, with the Department of Defense considering multiple criteria for using OSS.<ref name=":8" /> These criteria include: if it comes from and is maintained by trusted sources, whether it will continue to be maintained, if there are dependencies on sub-components in the software, component security and integrity, and foreign governmental influence.<ref name=":8" />

Another issue for governments in regard to open source is their investments in technologies such as [[operating system]]s, [[semiconductor]]s, [[Cloud computing|cloud]], and [[artificial intelligence]].<ref name=":8" /> These technologies all have implications for global cooperation, again opening up security issues and political consequences.<ref name=":8" /> Many countries have to balance technological innovation with technological dependence in these partnerships.<ref name=":8" /> For example, after China's open-source dependent company [[Huawei]] was prevented from using [[Android (operating system)|Google's Android system]] in 2019, they began to create their own alternative operating system: [[HarmonyOS|Harmony OS]].<ref name=":8" />

Germany recently established a [[Sovereign Tech Fund]], to help support the governance and maintenance of the software that they use.