ProductsDesktop Server For Scientific Computing For IBM POWER For IBM System z For SAP Business Applications Red Hat Network Satellite ManagementExtended Update Support High Availability High Performance Network Load Balancer Resilient Storage Scalable File System Smart Management Extended Lifecycle SupportWeb Server Developer Studio Portfolio Edition JBoss Operations Network FuseSource Integration Products Web Framework Kit Application Platform Data Grid Portal Platform SOA Platform Business Rules Management System (BRMS) Data Services Platform Messaging JBoss Community or JBoss enterprise
SolutionsApplication development Business process management Enterprise application integration Interoperability Operational efficiency Security VirtualizationMigrate to Red Hat Enterprise Linux Systems management Upgrading to Red Hat Enterprise Linux JBoss Enterprise Middleware IBM AIX to Red Hat Enterprise Linux HP-UX to Red Hat Enterprise Linux Solaris to Red Hat Enterprise Linux UNIX to Red Hat Enterprise Linux Start a conversation with Red Hat Migration services
TrainingPopular and new courses JBoss Middleware Administration curriculum Core System Administration curriculum JBoss Middleware Development curriculum Advanced System Administration curriculum Linux Development curriculum Cloud Computing and Virtualization curriculum
ConsultingStandard Operating Environment (SOE) Strategic Migration Planning Service-oriented architecture (SOA) Enterprise Data Solutions Business Process Management
Issue #5 March 2005
- Red Hat Summit: Learn, network, experience open source
- Tiemann's take on the Summit
- Meet the Summit speakers
- Video: Red Hat's philosophy of customer service
- Fedora: Powered by the community
- Video: Backstage pass: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
- Red Hat Network in action
- Demo: Take the Red Hat Desktop virtual tour
- RSS: News when you want it
- How I learned to stop worrying and love the command line,
- Certified applications for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
- Gaining insight into the Linux kernel with Kprobes
- Tiemann named president of OSI
- The security dilemma, part 1: Intrusion detection
From the Inside
In each Issue
- Editor's blog
- Red Hat speaks
- Ask Shadowman
- Tips & tricks
- Fedora status report
- Magazine archive
Tiemann named president of OSI
This month we talk with Michael Tiemann, Vice President of Open Source Affairs at Red Hat. Michael has recently been appointed as the new president of the Open Source Institute (OSI). We asked Michael to tell us a little bit about his new role.
Red Hat Magazine: How long have you been a member of OSI?
Michael Tiemann: I was actually at the seminal meeting at Christine Peterson's (Founder of the Foresight Institute) house where Eric Raymond, Bruce Perens, and others brainstormed the term "open source." But I did not join the OSI until January 2001.
RHM: How did you become a member and why?
MT: I have been on a number of small boards, all of which were companies or causes I believed in. The first such board was Cygnus, which comprised three very charismatic hacker-types interested in proving (and profiting from) the fact that there was more value in delivering services around free software than in trying to build a better bunch of bits. I think that was a success. Another such board was IUMA, the Internet Underground Music Archive. IUMA was a groundbreaking best-of-the-web site back in the dayattempting to be the Apple Music Store for unsigned, independent bands. That was less of a success, in part because the music industry is so cutthroat that they'd rather cut their own throats than to let a new voice be heard.
When Eric Raymond approached me to join the OSI board, I saw a great opportunity in that I think the OSI's mission is vitally important as well as a challenge. I had a lot of experience in working with individuals who lead the vanguard, founder-board-executive issues, etc. I had no illusions that being on the OSI board would be an easy job, but then again, anything meaningful takes effort.
I joined expecting that I could help with fund raising, founder transition issues, and helping the OSI to mature into the organization the world needs it to be.
RHM: What duties are performed by the president of OSI?
MT: Eric Raymond was the first president of the OSI, and his style was very effective at helping the OSI be heard. As President Emeritus, Eric will still be a major voice both inside the OSI and to our constituents.
The role, as I see it, for me as president is to make sure the OSI remains focused on and completes its highest priority tasks:
First, expanding the board to be more representative of the global open source community. Today, the board is populated 100% by Americans living in the US. My hope is that when the next election is held for president at least 35% of the votes come from members living or working outside the US and that over time we have even greater diversity of participation.
Second, continuing to be a strong and proactive steward of the Open Source Definition. The ACLU is an organization that sees themselves as advocates of the freedoms that the US Constitution grants to its citizens. Sometimes these freedoms lead to uncomfortable situations, but the ACLU takes the position that the principle of freedom trumps the convenience of comfort. The Open Source Definition defines the guiding principles for open source license writers. Sometimes these writers create licenses that the community won't accept, but is that a problem with the principles or a consequence of freedom?
And then a third task that I take on along with my fellow board members: to be a positive spokesperson for the organization, the community, and to speak truth to power.
Of course, the president is also responsible for managing the staff of the OSI, which has grown recently with the addition of a Director of Legal Affairs and a Director of Public Relations.
RHM: The number of OSI licenses seems to be growing to an unwieldy number. Do the folks at OSI agree or disagree with this assessment?
MT: Well, from my perspective this question is the question that the OSI and the community should be asking. And yes, I do have some opinions about where this question may lead.
Let me take a step back and start with the license that put me on my path to success: the GNU GPL. For me, the GNU C compiler was the code I most wanted to hack, and the GPL was the license that gave me the strongest promise that whatever else happened in the future, nobody could deny me the fruits of my labor. With good code and a good license, there was nothing stopping me from working 16-18 hours a day, 6-7 days a week. That the GPL offered me the fruits of others who valued a similar promise (and who often wrote better code than I could) was all upside. The GPL has another great property: its share-and-share alike nature has protected GPL-covered code from the kind of forking that fragmented Unix. I'm not saying that all forking is badit's necessary for innovationbut when forks cannot be reintegrated by willing developers, that's bad.
There was no license proliferation under the GPLone either used it or one did not. When the LGPL was created, there was a license choice, but no license incompatibility. Great work if you can get it, but in 1998, scarce few companies were willing to use GPL code, let alone author code licensed under the GPL.
The OSI took the approach that instead of getting people to adopt
principles encoded in a license (which is precisely what the GPL
isit even says so in the preamble, the OSI would author a set of
principles that people could agree to
When I look at Fedora Core 3 and see that over 70% of the code is covered by the GNU GPL, it tells me that today, the market favors the GPL as the best open source license. But I could not imagine using Fedora Core 3 without software covered by non-GPL licenses. There's value in competition, even at the licensing level.
I have no doubt that the discussions about license proliferation are going to force the OSI and the communities it serveshackers, the private and public sectors, educational institutions, non-governmental organizations, etc.to take a hard look at the principles and the consequences and decide where we should take open source for the next 25 years. I believe that in the end we will find that license proliferation is a symptom, not a problem, and that the symptom lies not with the OSD but those who try to bend the OSD to their own private agendas.