Search results

Profiles Linux and how it was given away on the Internet by Netscape as part of its so‐called browser war with Microsoft. Looks at the growth and future of free systems, discussing them in full. Shows, in three highlighted boxes, source code and open source definitions; copyleft — a definition, and hacker — a definition. Looks at various terms such as: support sellers; loss leader; widget fronting; accessorizing; and service enabler. Sums up that only now are people beginning to understand what the Internet offers.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the level of knowledge, among university professors, about copyright problems related to e‐learning activities.

An online questionnaire was used to survey professors teaching subjects online.

There is a considerable lack of knowledge on the part of professors regarding copyright issues, both in general terms and in specific matters related to digital learning. Strong discrepancies are found between the text of the law and the notion actually held by professors as to how legislators have formulated the law.

This information may be useful for professors themselves as well as for persons managing the e‐learning platforms of universities. It demonstrates that the law was reformed without any discussion with those actually engaged in online teaching.

According to its supporters open source software is more secure and reliable than proprietary code, and even tends to foster more innovation. Its technical superiority can be linked to the ongoing peer review process which typifies the open source model. In addition, programs such as Linux offer a potential challenge to the hegemony of Microsoft. Open source holds out the possibility of restraining platform leaders such as Microsoft from acting opportunistically. Some even argue that the open source code model is ethically superior to the proprietary model because of its transparency. Given these economic and social benefits, should government policy makers intervene, by tilting the playing field to open source programs? Would such government intervention truly be welfare‐enhancing? Before answering that question we note that some of the presumed technical and economic benefits of open source software are open to question. At the same time, the claims of moral superiority or social desirability are inflated and discount incentives necessary for software development. But even if this software were technically and morally superior, there is still no basis for government intervention. Our position is simple: the invisible hand of the market and not the visible hand of government should decide the fate of open source code. There is no identifiable market failure for the government to fix nor is there any plausible policy justification for giving open source software preferential treatment.

The paper has three purposes: the first is to provide a deeper understanding of the ideology and work practices of free and open source software development, the second to characterize the free software movement as a new type of computerization movement and the third to present a conceptual diagram and framework with an analysis showing how the free software computerization movement has evolved into an occupational community.

Qualitative data were collected over a four year period using a virtual ethnography in a study of free and open source software development and, in particular, a study of a free software community, GNUenterprise, located at www.gnuenterprise.org, which has the goal of developing a free enterprise resource planning software system.

It is concluded that the ideology of the free software movement continues to be one of the factors which mobilize people to contribute to free and open source software development. This movement represents a new type of computerization movement which promotes the investment of time in learning a new software development process instead of investment of money in the acquisition and use of new technology.

The research findings are limited by a detailed study of only one free software development project.

This paper is of significance to software developers and managers of firms who wish to incorporate free and open source software into their companies.

This research presents an original conceptual diagram and framework for how computerization movements have emerged into an occupational community.

The purpose of this paper is to emphasize the importance of modern and forward‐looking educational practices that encourage learner development of open sourcing and collaboration as being desirable competencies for twenty‐first century knowledge and innovation workers. Its intent is to employ the topic of “ethical cheating” as the springboard for opening a constructive dialogue between historic traditions of academic ethics and the emergence of digital‐age learners who are already functioning as digital pioneers, innovators, and content contributors in an increasingly connected, rapidly‐paced world.

The paper examines the subject of academic cheating in the context of emerging high‐technology environments. It defines the term “ethical” cheating from the perspective of digital‐age learning and contrasts it with traditional academic views of cheating in classical educational situations.

Rapid developments in digital information technologies such as cell‐phones, pdas, and the internet are profoundly changing student attitudes toward what constitutes cheating in academic settings. The presence of widespread high‐tech devices already enables increasing numbers of learners around the globe to participate in extensive and ongoing collaborative and open‐source activities that reflect competitive business practices but run counter to the accepted norms of traditional educational institutions. The introduction of the term “ethical cheating” here reflects the growing dissonance between traditional academic views of ethical standards and the impatience of learners straining to become twenty‐first century workers and societal members. A new dialogue is needed to reconcile these differences.

The paper introduces the term “ethical cheating” as a springboard to initiate a new dialogue between traditional academic norms and the emergence of new student attitudes regarding the use of digital technologies that facilitate learning through open‐sourcing and collaboration.

This article makes the case that the education community can learn from professional learning and innovation practices, collectively called “Working in the Open” (or “Working Open”), that have roots in the free/open source software (F/OSS) movement. These practices focus on values of transparency, collaboration and sharing within communities of experimentation. This paper aims to argues that Working Open offers a compelling approach to fostering distributed educational professional networks that focus on co-constructing new projects and best practices.

Insights presented here are based on three sources: expert perspectives on open source work practices gleaned through interviews and blog posts, a qualitative case analysis of a collaborative project enacted by a group of informal learning organizations within the Hive NYC Learning Network, a community of over 70 youth-facing organizations in New York City, as well as an overview of that network’s participation structures, and, finally, knowledge-building activities and discussions held within the Hive NYC community about the topic in situ. From these sources, the authors derived general principles to guide open work approaches.

The authors identify five practices deemed as central to Working Open: public storytelling and context setting, enabling community contribution, rapid prototyping “in the wild”, public reflection and documentation and, lastly, creating remixable work products. The authors describe these practices, show how they are enacted in situ, outline ways that Hive NYC stewards promote a Working Open organizational ecosystem and conclude with recommendations for utilizing a Working Open approach.

Drawing from the F/OSS movement, this article builds on standard practices of professional learning communities to provide an approach that focuses on pushing forward innovation and changes in practice as opposed to solely sharing reflections or observing practices.

The Open Source Software movement has much to offer the library community. But can it survive the onslaught of patent applications?

The purpose of this paper is to promote the opportunities of open source software (OSS) development in aeronautics. Using the development of an open source framework for conceptual aircraft design as an example, this paper discusses how an inter‐organizational collaboration between industry and academia can build an environment for multi‐disciplinary aircraft design projects.

The paper takes the form of a literature study and comparison of software tools.

The open source model can facilitate the emergence of a large inter‐organizational community in aeronautics for developing a comprehensive software framework.

Developing a general OSS framework for conceptual aircraft design has the potential of attracting a large community for inter‐organizational collaboration on software tools for a multi‐disciplinary optimization (MDO) environment.

Using the concepts of open source in aeronautics has the potential to improve the collaboration among industry and academia on developing software tools for an MDO environment.

In heterogeneously segmented markets, collaborating with product users in product innovation is important for business success. End user innovators and embedded user innovators differ in terms of their prior embeddedness in the target industry. The purpose of this study is twofold. First, the authors empirically compare these two types of user innovators in terms of their diffusion channel selection. Second, the authors analyze how the technological advances of their innovations affect this difference.

Using an online questionnaire survey, this study collected a sample of 237 user-generated innovations in Japan and analyzed several hypotheses using quantitative statistical approaches.

The analysis shows that embedded user innovators are more likely than end user innovators to transfer their innovations to producers rather than peers. As the technological advances of their innovations increase, end user innovators' likelihood of transferring their innovation to producers increases more significantly than that of embedded user innovators.

This is the first paper to investigate the difference between end user innovators and embedded user innovators with respect to their diffusion channel selection as well as the moderating role of technological advances. The findings bring new perspectives to the domains of user–producer collaboration and technology transfer.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the literature about the commercial involvement in open source software, levels of this involvement and consequences of attempting to mix various logics of action.

This paper uses the case study approach based on mixed methods: literature reviews and news searches, electronic surveys, qualitative interviews and observations. It combines discussions from several research projects as well as previous publications to present the scope of commercial choices within open source software and their consequences.

The findings show that higher levels of involvement in open source software communities poses important questions about the balance between economic, technological, and social logics as well as the benefits of being autonomous, having access to collaborative networks and minimizing risks related to free-riding. There are six levels of commercial involvement in open source communities, and each of them is characterized by a different dilemma.

The paper sheds light on the various level of involvement of business in open source movement and emphasize that the popularized “open innovation” concept is only the first step in real involvement and paradigm shift.