Comment by bbkane
1 year ago
> Profit isn't far removed from theft
I definitely think there are unethical ways to profit - capitalism needs to be regulated for the good of the consumer/ecosystem/society.
However, I don't believe that a blanket comparison of any type of profit to theft can be useful or correct.
> so maybe this shouldn't feel so unfair
Do you think this company is unethical for writing closed source software and trying to sell it?
And contributing back is one of the approaches to maintaining open-source dependencies. I have described how to deal with OSS dependencies in [1] (yet to translate it :P).
[1] https://www.tisonkun.org/2024/11/17/open-source-supply-chain...
This article is actually a translated one. In the original article[1], I talked about commercial open-source and how one can collaborate with the open-source community when running a software business.
This section is moved to the second-to-last section in the posted blog, including:
[QUOTE]
When you read The Cathedral & the Bazaar, for its Chapter 4, The Magic Cauldron, it writes:
> … the only rational reasons you might want them to be closed is if you want to sell the package to other people, or deny its use to competitors. [“Reasons for Closing Source”]
> Open source makes it rather difficult to capture direct sale value from software. [“Why Sale Value is Problematic”]
While the article focuses on when open-source is a good choice, these sentences imply that it’s reasonable to keep your commercial software private and proprietary.
We follow it and run a business to sustain the engineering effort. We keep ScopeDB private and proprietary, while we actively get involved and contribute back to the open-source dependencies, open source common libraries when it’s suitable, and maintain the open-source twin to share the engineering experience.
[QUOTE END]
I wrote other blogs to analyze open-source factors within commercial software[2][3][4][5], and I have practiced them in several companies as well as earned merits in open-source projects.
When you think about it, there are many developers working for their employers, and using open-source software in their $DAYJOB is a good motivation to contribute more (especially for distributed systems; individuals can seldomly need one). I know there is open-source developers who develop software that has nothing to do with their $DAYJOB. I'm maintaining projects that has nothing to do with my $DAYJOB also (check Apache Curator, the Java binding of Apache OpenDAL, and more).
[1] https://www.tisonkun.org/2025/01/15/open-source-twin/
(Need a translator) [2] https://www.tisonkun.org/2022/10/04/bait-and-switch-fauxpen-...
[3] https://www.tisonkun.org/2023/08/12/bsl/
[4] https://www.tisonkun.org/2022/12/17/enterprise-choose-a-soft...
[5] https://www.tisonkun.org/2023/02/15/business-source-license/