Open Source Company: Definitely NOT An Oxymoron

August 21, 2009 - 4:33 pm

In his August 20th blog post, Brian Prentice of Gartner asks “Is ‘Open Source Company” An Oxymoron. Brian concludes with:

“At the end of the day there are open source projects and communities that support them. Then there are companies which seek to leverage open source projects, and their communities, for commercial advantage. But, there is no such thing as an open source company.

Simple and straightforward.”

The quick blow to the kneecap to this line of argument is:

1. An oxymoron requires that the two components be in logical opposition to one another.

“Open Source”, as defined by the OSI, is not about companies. It’s about code and licenses.

“Company” (whether public, private, for-profit, or not-for-profit), as defined by the statutes governing them, is not about code or licenses. It’s about ownership, liability, and financial considerations.

“Open Source” and “Company” are not in logical opposition to one another – they’re completely orthogonal.

This might make “Open Source Company” ambiguous in meaning, but it’s not an oxymoron.

2. Languages are fluid and common parlance often involves in a way that creates words and definitions that are far removed from their etymological origins. Or even original logic.

As an example, the Unix command ‘tar’ was once an abbreviation for “tape archive”. And yet now the meaning (and the function) has nothing to do with tapes, at least not for most people. Despite this, nobody wastes mental energy arguing that ‘tar’ is oxymoronic because it no longer applies to tapes.

Common parlance has currently evolved such that “open source company” is used as a short hand for a wide range entities that have varying degrees of “open sourceness” and diverse company structures.

That doesn’t make the term nonsensical or incorrect, any more than “hot dog” is when used describe a wide range of sausages of beef, pork, chicken or turkey….but never dog.

“Open Source Company” might not be perfect, but it will certainly do for now. Anyone have anything better?

2 Comments

  • At 2009.08.21 17:07, Justin said:

    Agreed it’s not an “oxymoron” in the literal sense but he still makes many valid points that are far more interesting to debate than going to the dictionary for support.

    • [...] and Matt Asay noted that open source is not longer a differentiator. Meanwhile David Dennis argued against Brian Prentice’s asking whether “open source company” is an [...]

      (Required)
      (Required, will not be published)