The Open Source Initiative would like to congratulate the GNOME Foundation on its recent settlement of the patent lawsuit alleging that the Shotwell software infringed patents owned by Rothschild Patent Imaging. The settlement was a huge achievement -- not only did GNOME pay nothing, but Rothschild Patent Imaging and its owner, Leigh M. Rothschild, have agreed that, for all of their patents and future patents, they will not sue any user or developer of software under an Open Source Initiative-approved license (and their updated versions) where the software forms a material part of the infringement allegation. That is freedom from suit for the open source software world for over 100 patents.

This is a remarkable accomplishment that could only happen with the overwhelming support of the entire open source community. U.S.-based patent infringement lawsuits are notoriously expensive, so a business model has developed to sue those who appear to lack the financial means to mount a defense. The plaintiff is successful when the defendant pays a substantial sum simply because it is less than the cost to defend the lawsuit. However, with community support GNOME was able to raise over $150,000 from more than 4,000 donors, allowing it to not only stand strong against the threat but also ultimately procure a huge benefit for the open source community at large. This suit demonstrates to the world once again that the open source community and our values of mutual support, collaboration, cooperation, and transparency can accomplish greater ends than any one person standing alone.

The suit also demonstrates the critical role OSI-approved licenses play. Using an OSI-approved license demonstrates that the software project participants share common values that ultimately serve to spur innovation for the benefit of our society as a whole. Which now, thanks to the GNOME Foundation, is no longer inhibited by the threat of patent suits from the Rothschild parties. We are optimistic that more patent holders, non-practicing entities and practicing entities alike, will make the same calculation and help build instead of tear down.

Signed,
The OSI Board of Directors

---

Image credit: "celebrating-gnome.jpg" by Open Source Initiative, 2020, CC BY-SA 2.0, is a derivative (cropped and scaled) of "Pyro Spectaculars Marquee Event 2012, 5 March 2013" a photo by Pyro Spectaculars by Souza, available under CC BY-SA 2.0, via Flickr.

| Hold the Date | Tracks | Call for Proposals | Additional Information | Sponsorship | Code of Conduct |

A World-wide Open Source Summit: Build your local community, while engaging the global community.

The State of the Source Summit invites open source communities of practice from around the world to organize and contribute to a global conversation on the current state of open source software: non-technical issues that foster development and community, the licenses that enable collaboration, the practices that promote contribution, and the issues confronting cooperation.

Conference Goals

• Share the current state of open source licenses: understanding their value and impediments to further adoption.
• Identify current, non-technical, issues affecting open source software, development, and communities through the lenses of developers, companies, and projects.
• Conceptualize and plan for what the future may hold for open source software as a community and the Open Source Initiative as an organization.

Hold the Date (actually... hold the time zones) 

• Start:
  • Palo Alto CA, USA, 2:00 PM PDT  (2100 UTC), Wednesday, September 9th, 2020
  • Wellington NZ, 9:00 AM NZST (2100 UTC), Thursday, September 10th, 2020
• End:
  • Palo Alto CA, USA, 2:30 PM PDT (2130 UTC), Thursday, September 10th, 2020
  • Wellington NZ, 9:30 AM NZST (2130 UTC), Friday, September 11th, 2020
• Location: Earth
• Calendar and Schedule
  • Please note: this link will open a Google Calendar with a placeholder for the event days/times per your timezone. This calendar will be updated as sessions and activities are defined.
• News and Updates
  • Please note: this link will open a Mailman subscription page, where you can sign up for email notifications.

Call for Proposals 

We hope you will consider presenting on a topic of interest and invite you to submit your presentation to the State of the Source Call for Proposals.

• Opens, June 04, 2020
• Closes, July 09, 2020
• Schedule posts on August 25, 2020

Tracks 

The Open Source Initiative's mission is to educate about and advocate for the benefits of open source software and to build bridges among different constituencies in the open source community. The State of the Source serves the OSI's mission and our community, with a focus on understanding, implementing, and improving the state of open source software. Below you will find four tracks, themes that should drive each track's sessions, and even a few examples of topics that might help you develop your presentation.

• Open Source Licenses and the OSI
• Projects & People
• Principles, Policy, & Practices
• “Hot Topics”

Track Themes and Topic Examples

 Open Source Licenses and the OSI

How do licenses and their application enable the collaboration, contributions, and co-creation realized through open source software? Understanding licenses, the motivations for their creation, their application, affordances, and the OSI’s role, are key for successful projects, communities, and the entire open source software movement. What is (should be) the role of the OSI, the OSD, and the License Review Process? What are the challenges facing these? What does the future of licenses and licensing hold? Possible presentation topics include:

• Benefits, risks, and possible approaches for reviewing the process and practices associated with OSI’s “License Review Process” (LRP).
• Possible reasons and approaches for reviewing and/or editing the Open Source Definition (OSD).
• Is license proliferation a problem and, if so, a problem that the OSI can fix?
• Process for reviewing and potentially de-listing or deprecating approved licenses based on problematic experiences with a license that was not foreseeable at the time of approval.
• License enforcement from community pressure to legal intervention.
• The unwritten rules of license approval - what they are, and should they be written?

 Projects & People

Everyone now uses open source in some way—from individual end-users to the biggest companies, in small non-profits or the largest governments, by self-learners and comprehensive universities. How are organizations leveraging open source licenses and software to not only deliver value to their constituents and community, but also ensure sustainability (funding, development, adoption, etc.) of the project? What are the responsibilities of those who benefit from open source software and licenses to the projects and communities that they rely on? How can we encourage, foster and support the maintainers that make it all possible? How can organizations best engage with communities in the development of their own projects? Possible presentation topics include:

• Open source business models (if they exist) through licensing.
• Unique issues in public and academic settings: sustainability is needed here too!
• Source available licenses, e.g., Polyform
• Compensation models for developers
• Using patents to enforce OS licenses
• Trademarks used for sustainability

 Principles, Policy, & Practices

The identification and application of open source licenses can impact both the development community and end-users. How are organizations managing their open source portfolios, identifying risks and benefits, while maximizing the value of co-development and software freedom? Possible presentation topics include:

• License explainer, pick a license and explain it to your peers.
• How to pick a license for your project, company, community.
• Compliance, compatibility, re-licensing, and other issues facing adoption, use, and development.
• "Post open source" and the emergence of ethical, source available, etc. licenses.

 “Hot Topics”

What are we missing around open source licenses and licensing, the Open Source Definition, the OSI, and other non-technical issues impacting the open source software movement?

Additional Information 

• Information sign-up (mailman list)
• Twitter: Hashtag, #StateOfTheSource

Sponsorship

[Download sponsorship details]

The State of the Source will be a global event and provides tremendous opportunities to directly engage with the open source software community and support the work of the Open Source Initiative. We hope you will join us in our efforts to create broader awareness, increase understanding, and address issues to help educate and build bridges between open source software communities.

Deadline for sponsorship commitment, August 25th (or until all opportunities filled).

For more information, or to confirm your sponsorship of the State of the Source Summit, please email jenn.cummings@opensource.org.

Hosting Sponsor $5,000

(Four Available - Limit Four)

Provides the maximum exposure for your organization--both online and with local communities--while highlighting your commitment to open source software and licenses.

Benefits:

• One branded presentation room. Includes use of company name as the room name and introduction slide promoted on screen as participants join each session.
• $1,000 contribution, in the sponsor's name, to OSI & Brandeis University Open Source Technology Management Scholarship (https://www.brandeis.edu/gps/future-students/learn-about-our-programs/open-source-technology-management.html)
• $500 contribution, in the sponsor's name, to support access and participation of marginalized speakers through dedicated stipends.
• Two hallway sponsorships.
  • Includes room branding (logos, content, etc.) and 1-minute promotional deck/video (vetted) to greet participants.
• One "locally produced" virtual BOF session (breakout-room)
• Promotion of all "locally produced" in-person sessions. Due to concerns over the COVID19 pandemic, please ensure all local activities are in line with your local government and health regulations.
• One session as moderator.
• Promotion of sponsor's future virtual or in-person events.
• Promotion and branding
  • Dedicated weekly tweet (43K followers) promoting sponsor's activity in and with the State of the Source.
    • Includes sponsor’s custom message, link, hashtags, account (runs ten weeks, beginning July 2020)
  • Recognized in OSI direct emailing promoting the State of the Source to 13,000+ contacts.
  • Logo and link included in all acknowledgments related to the State of the Source and State of the Source website.

Presenting Sponsor $3,000

(Eight Available - Limit Ten)

Benefits

• One "locally produced" virtual BOF session (breakout-room)
• $500 contribution, in the sponsor's name, to support access and participation of marginalized speakers through dedicated stipends.
• One hallway sponsorships.
  • Includes room branding (logos, content, etc.) and 1-minute promotional deck/video (vetted) to greet participants.
• Promotion of locally produced in-person sessions. Due to concerns over the COVID19 pandemic, please ensure all local activities are in line with your local government and health regulations.
• Promotion and branding
  • Recognized in OSI direct emailing (13,000+ contacts)
  • Logo and link included in all acknowledgments related to the State of the Source and State of the Source website.

Captioning and Accessibility Sponsorship, $2,000

(FULL - Limit One)

Benefits

• Named sponsor for captioning services
• All presentations will be live captioned by a professional stenographer
• Promotion and branding
  • One dedicated acknowledgment via Twitter (43K followers)
  • Recognized in OSI direct emailing (13,000+ contacts)
  • Logo and link included in all acknowledgments related to the State of the Source and State of the Source website.

Watch Party, $500

Benefits

• Promotion of locally produced in-person sessions. Due to concerns around the COVID19 pandemic, please ensure all local activities are in line with your local government and health regulations.
• $100 contribution, in the sponsor's name, to support access and participation of marginalized speakers through dedicated stipends.
• Promotion and branding
  • Logo and link included in all acknowledgments related to the State of the Source and State of the Source website.

Code of Conduct 

State of the Source is a community conference intended for networking and collaboration in the open source community.

We value the participation of each member of the community and want all attendees to have an enjoyable and fulfilling experience. Accordingly, all attendees are expected to show respect and courtesy to other attendees throughout the conference and at all conference events.

To make clear what is expected, all delegates/attendees, speakers, exhibitors, organizers and volunteers at any Open Source Initiative event are required to conform to the following Code of Conduct. Organizers will enforce this code throughout the event.

Short Version

The Open Source Initiative is dedicated to providing a harassment-free conference experience for everyone, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, or religion. We do not tolerate harassment of conference participants in any form.

All communication should be appropriate for a professional audience including people of many different backgrounds. Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate for any conference venue, including talks.

Be kind to others. Do not insult or put down other attendees. Behave professionally. Remember that harassment and sexist, racist, or exclusionary jokes are not appropriate for State of the Source.

Attendees violating these rules may be asked to leave the conference at the sole discretion of the conference organizers.

Thank you for helping make this a welcoming, friendly event for all.

The Longer Version

Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention.

Participants asked to stop any harassing behavior are expected to comply immediately.

Exhibitors in the expo hall, sponsor or vendor booths, or similar activities are also subject to the anti-harassment policy. In particular, exhibitors should not use sexualized images, activities, or other material. Booth staff (including volunteers) should not use sexualized clothing/uniforms/costumes, or otherwise create a sexualized environment.

Be careful in the words that you choose. Remember that sexist, racist, and other exclusionary jokes can be offensive to those around you. Excessive swearing and offensive jokes are not appropriate for State of the Source.

If a participant engages in behavior that violates this code of conduct, the conference organizers may take any action they deem appropriate, including warning the offender or expulsion from the conference with no refund.

Contact Information

If you are being harassed, notice that someone else is being harassed, or have any other concerns, please contact Jenn Cummings at jenn.cummings@opensource.org.

Conference staff will be happy to help participants experiencing harassment feel safe for the duration of the conference. We value your attendance.

Procedure for Handling Harassment

• Attendee procedure for incident handling
• Staff procedure for incident handling

License

This Code of Conduct was forked from the North Bay Python Code of Conduct, which was derived from the PyCon US Code of Conduct under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license, itself originally forked from the example policy in Geek Feminism wiki, created by the Ada Initiative and other volunteers, which is under a Creative Commons Zero license.

 

---

Image credit: "StateoftheSource.png" by Open Source Initiative, 2020, Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0), is a derivative (merged, cropped, scaled, and color adjusted) of "World Grunge Map" by Nicolas Raymond, 2012, Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0), via Flickr; "people-man-women-grandma-grandpa-4035403" by AnnaliseArt, 2020, Pixabay License, via Pixabay, and; "browser-web-internet-technology-4026002" by jakubem, 2020 Pixabay License, via Pixabay,

Membership emphasizes growing outreach and engagement with broader software and technology communities.

PALO ALTO, Calif., June 9, 2020 -- The Open Source Initiative® (OSI), the international authority in open source licensing, is excited to announce the affiliate membership of the OpenJS Foundation, the premier home for critical open source JavaScript projects, including Appium, Dojo, jQuery, Node.js, and webpack, and 30 more. The OpenJS membership with the OSI highlights the incredible impact of JavaScript across all industries, web technologies, communities, and, ultimately, the open source software movement.

“The OpenJS Foundation is thrilled to join OSI as an Affiliate Member and we’re proud to have Myles Borins represent our JavaScript communities, ” said Robin Ginn, OpenJS Foundation Executive Director. “In addition to all of our projects using OSI-approved licenses, our neutral organization shares common principles with the OSI, including technical governance and accountability. As an Affiliate Member, we can better advance open source development methodologies for individual open source projects and the ecosystem as a whole.”

Formed through a merger of the JS Foundation and Node.js Foundation in 2019, the OpenJS Foundation supports the healthy growth of JavaScript and web technologies by providing a neutral organization to host and sustain projects, as well as collaboratively fund activities that benefit the ecosystem as a whole. Originally developed in 1995, JavaScript is now arguably the most widely used programming language, with Github reporting it as the “Top Language” from 2014 through 2019 in their State of the Octoverse report. Javascript’s growth and popularity can be attributed to its accessibility, often identified as a language for new developers, and its applicability, a core component of today's web-driven technology landscape. JavaScript also serves as a conduit to, and proof of concept for, open source software development, projects, and communities. For some, JavaScript provides their first experience in open source development and communities, and for others, their experience in JavaScript projects and communities are helping to lead and further refine the larger open source movement itself.

The OpenJS Foundation serves as a valuable resource for both new JavaScript developers and emerging projects--offering a foundation for support and growth--as well as veterans with broad experience with mature projects--providing a platform to extend best practices and guiding principles out to the broader open source software community.

Working with the OpenJS Foundation provides the Open Source Initiative a unique opportunity to engage with one of the open source software movement’s largest and most influential communities. JavaScript developers and projects are deeply committed to open source as a development model and its ethos of co-creation through collaboration and contribution, making OpenJS Foundations affiliate membership and the community they represent a critical partnership for not only open source’s continued growth and development but the OSI as well.

 “We are thrilled to welcome aboard OpenJS as an OSI Affiliate Member, ” said Tracy Hinds, Chief Financial Officer of OSI. “It is a time in open source where it’s vital to learn from and be challenged by the growing concerns about sustainability. We look to OpenJS as a great partner in iterating over the questions to be asking in how projects are building, maintaining, and sustaining open source software.”

The OSI Affiliate Member Program, available at no-cost, allows non-profit organizations to join and support the OSI's work to promote and protect open source software. Affiliate members participate directly in the direction and development of the OSI through board elections and incubator projects that support software freedom. Membership provides a forum where open source leaders, businesses, and communities engage through member-driven initiatives to increase awareness and adoption of open source software.

About OpenJS Foundation
The OpenJS Foundation (https://openjsf.org/) is committed to supporting the healthy growth of the JavaScript ecosystem and web technologies by providing a neutral organization to host and sustain projects, as well as collaboratively fund activities for the benefit of the community at large. The OpenJS Foundation is made up of 35 open source JavaScript projects including Appium, Dojo, jQuery, Node.js, and webpack and is supported by 30 corporate and end-user members, including GoDaddy, Google, IBM, Intel, Joyent, and Microsoft. These members recognize the interconnected nature of the JavaScript ecosystem and the importance of providing a central home for projects which represent significant shared value.

About the Open Source Initiative
For over 20 years, the Open Source Initiative (https://opensource.org/) has worked to raise awareness and adoption of open source software, and build bridges between open source communities of practice. As a global non-profit, the OSI champions software freedom in society through education, collaboration, and infrastructure, stewarding the Open Source Definition (OSD), and preventing abuse of the ideals and ethos inherent to the open source movement.

 

License-Review mailing list topics for February 2020:

• Continued discussion on the Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4)
• Resolution of the Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4) – Approved
• Resolution on the Mulan PSL V2 - Approved

Continued discussion on the Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4)

Statement for the need of consistency with capitalizations
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004649.html

Support for approval despite lingering concerns such as the potential for abuse and the earlier drafting history, due to lack of grounding in the current text. 
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004650.html

Question concerning the license and its ability to ensure that customer data won’t be locked and that the sharing of improvements to the code will be maximized
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004651.html 

Confirmation on all concerns being addressed by the license
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004652.html 

Suggestion that more discussion is still needed due to concerns with how the license is in previously-mentioned situations and how it interacts with the principles of FOSS and its effect on users, but with a slight inclination towards approval   
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004653.html

Support for rejection or further discussion due to privacy risks
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004662.html

Clarification that the license requires that users retain control of keys but that system keys are not User Data as defined 
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004663.html

Request for the location in the license for this distinction and statement that the distinction between user and system as well as client and server are unclear in peer-to-peer systems
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004664.html

Request for the location in the license for this distinction and statement that the distinction between user and system as well as client and server are unclear in peer-to-peer systems
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004664.html

Directions to section 4.1 in the definition of the source code and user autonomy provisions in 4.2.2, both where it is stated that cryptographic keys are required to make the distinction clear
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004665.html 

Concerns regarding the requirement for documentation for use, requirement for configuration information, the possibility for coercion regarding handing over encrypted data and encryption keys,  the term “recipient” being too broad, and that the issues like privacy attacks caused by the client-server style approach of the CAL. Requests for scenario examples for further discussion.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004668.html 

Clarification that there is no requirement for the generation of new documentation and that the context of configuration information is just for the information needed to install and use, that the CAL is written for a peer-to-peer application though is compatible in client-server applications, and that the term “recipient” can be used as in a peer-to-peer network users can act as a client as well as act as a server. Response that the request reflects a misunderstanding of the CAL requirements. 
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004669.html 

Request for clarification on the problems being addressed regarding user freedom, language adjustment recommendations, statement that the privacy attack is easier to accomplish, and a request for information on the limitation of the disclosure of recipient user data without the disclosure of the operator’s private data, together with an example that highlights the issue.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004672.html 

Answer that a problem addressed is the gradual re-centralization of decentralized systems, clarification that no new documentation is required and that the context is the provision of the source code, and that the example provided that highlights the issue around the disclosure of data is in the wrong layer.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004674.html 

Request for clarification whether interaction with a remote version of an application requires distribution of source code or not and modified example highlighting the issues of data accessibility and transmission and compliance with the license.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004675.html 

Statement that creating new functionalities regarding data dumps are not required by the CAL but that the license prevents removing them and that in the example there would be no violations.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004699.html 

Statement that concerns with the CAL in terms of the OSD are with regards to the forced disclosure of private data or keys, the term “use” being too broad with the suggestion to use “execute” instead, issues with the implications of data retention in the event of accidental data loss and data extraction if it is not easy, and that a peer-to-peer actor model environment would be difficult to be compliant and may result in security weakening. Sections 6 and 10 of the OSD are highlighted.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004686.html 

Clarification that there is no forced disclosure without a legal right, that the difference in wording of “use” and “execute” are not meaningful in the context of providing information, that the difficulty level of providing data has already been discussed, that there is no requirements with regards to data retention, and that liability regarding data extraction is with the service provider and no the developers.  Answer that there is no discrimination involved if the author chooses an architecture that is more difficult in terms of compliance.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004688.html 

Clarification on “user data”, statement that “use” is better, that the License Committee judged that the requirement to give user/recipient data is not too burdensome, and that OSD 6 and 10 don’t require that the license be usable for every type of software.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004692.html 

Suggestion to include the nullification of copyleft/proprietary dual licensing into the license.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004680.html 

Answer that it is not a good idea to introduce changes at this stage.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004682.html 

Recommendation to reject or have more discussions due primarily to the user data provision due to unclarity regarding who is the service provider.
 https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004679.html

Direction to section 4 which defines what providing a service is in terms of communicating the Work to another person.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004681.html 

Question with regards to a theoretical example where voice recording is submitted to improve the quality of voice recognition and the accessibility of all recordings by one user.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004683.html 

Answer that it would not allow access to the recordings of others.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004684.html 

Concerns with the PII, GDPR, CCPA, and similar laws and their implications with the CAL.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004689.html 

Answer that the CAL was written to be compatible with the GDPR and the CCPA and uses similar language.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004690.html 

Concerns with regards to the frequent occurrence that a bit of data is about more than one person and that GDPR itself is still evolving.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004705.html 

Answer that data that GDPR applies to is a different set than what the CAL considers User Data
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004708.html 

Statement that the obligations with regards to the cryptographic keys would not be under the CAL
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004696.html 

Resolution of the Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4) – Approved

Approval of the Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4) for the Uncategorized Licenses category
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004660.html

Eight voted in favor, none opposed, one abstained, and two were not present.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004694.html 

Resolution of the Mulan PSL V2 - Approved

Approval of the Mulan PSL V2 for the International category
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004670.html

Nine voted in favor, none opposed and abstained, and two were not present.
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/004695.html

This is an interesting time for open source.

An approach to intellectual property that was once seen as radical is now mainstream. In 2011, 13 years after "open source" was coined and the Open Source Initiative was founded to promote and protect it, O'Reilly Media declared that open source had won. In 2016, WIRED followed suit. Now, open source undergirds software development across a truly unfathomable range of applications and fans the flames of other open culture movements. It has inspired new ways of collaborating with each other, experiments in community governance, and has been so successful that it is colloquially taken to mean all of the above.

And yet, open source feels so tenuous sometimes. Questions dog us. Setting aside run-of-the-mill fear, uncertainty, and doubt, people are raising legitimate questions: are our projects sustainable? Are our communities safe and healthy? Are maintainers being treated fairly? Is our work just? Can open source weather continued attempts at redefinition?

These concerns are not new, but the scale they're playing out on is. And Open Source Initiative--though it has sustained its core mission around licensing for 22 years, slogging through the legal janitorial work that makes open source adoption easy--has simply not been a leading voice in these other conversations.

Even on the topic of licensing, OSI has been found on its back foot. Our response to the recent flare ups of open core and source available licensing was lackluster. Everyone agrees: open source needs a bolder, more responsive, and representative OSI.

How do we get there? We have a plan, and you're part of it.

A Short Take on the Long Road to Now

The key to understanding how we move forward is to first remember how we got here. OSI as we know it didn't exist until 2013. 

Founded in 1998, the organization was held together in its first decade through strong board leadership in Michael Tiemann (2001-2012) and Danese Cooper (2002-2011). Deb Bryant (2012-present), Karl Fogel (2011-2014), Mike Milinkovich (2012-2018), and Simon Phipps (2010-2020) helped OSI begin professionalizing, by hiring General Manager Patrick Masson (2013-present), and becoming more democratic, with the introduction of a community-elected board. Molly de Blanc (2016-2020), Allison Randal (2014-2019), and Stefano “Zack” Zacchiroli (2014-2017) fostered better ties with the free software community. Richard Fontana (2013-2019) elevated legal discussions, taking OSI’s licensing work from knowledgeable hackers to expert practitioners and defining a review process. And Pam Chestek (2019-present) has brought a new level of professionalism to the license review process.

This is a reductionist and inevitably incomplete view of OSI’s history, but the point is this: OSI has come a long way, and I am forever grateful to the talented and generous individuals who collectively invested decades to get us here.

Over the last seven years, OSI has: sustained its core mission, shaped policy around the globe, worked tirelessly to mitigate open washing, built an alliance of more than 125 organizations representing hundreds of thousands of people, provided a home for projects like ClearlyDefined, and rolled out programs like FLOSS Desktops for Kids and Open Source Technology Management courses with Brandeis University.

We have seen incremental progress every year. OSI has expanded its programs and refined its operations. The trouble is, our operational capacity has not kept pace with the growing responsibility.

What Comes Next

Two years ago, the OSI Board recognized the need for another transformation, and made staffing the organization a priority. Pursuing that has required us to shave a great number of yaks! Along the way, we've identified several other key changes, all of which are reflected in our Annual Initiatives and the efforts our Committees have in flight.

In broad strokes, we have deep organizational development work to do (more on that later) as well as community engagement initiatives including:

• Create more opportunities for people to make their voices heard and get involved with the process, by convening Working Groups and Advisory Boards to work in concert with our Committees.
• Develop a communications plan and capabilities in order to be responsive to community developments, as well as lead and facilitate emerging conversations.
• Invest in an updated Code of Conduct and moderation tools.
• Continue investing in documentation in service of transparency.
• Continue targeted recruitment in service of representation.
• Hire people to serve as Community and Communications Manager supporting this work.

Suffice it to say, we have our work cut out for us!

Well That Sounds Promising

The good news is that OSI has never been in a better position than it is now. We have all the right players on all the right bases. We're more organized than ever. And an intense period in the spotlight has brought the work we need to do into sharp focus.

The bad news is that we only have 5 months operating budget in reserve, thus lack the funding to hire additional staff... And we're likely to suffer a 20-40% drop in revenue due to the pandemic and resulting economic downturn.

Your Role In This

This is where you come in. We need your voice to make sure we plot a path forward that meets your needs, and we need your support to fund the work ahead.

We'll be sharing about new opportunities to make your voice heard as this work unfolds, but you can always reach us on social media, IRC, and directly via our mailing lists or contact form. And the OSI Board, being community-elected, is chock full of people whose job it is to serve you--you can always reach out to us individually.

If you are not yet an Individual Member, we ask you to become one, which will keep you apprised of our work and allow you to vote in our annual elections, or even nominate yourself.

If you lead a nonprofit organization or community that believes in open source, we encourage you to become an Affiliate Member, which helps us provide mutual support and allows you to nominate and vote in elections.

And if your company relies on open source to conduct business, we ask that you invest back into the community that makes your work possible by becoming a Corporate Sponsor.

Together, we'll make sure that open source continues to thrive.

With gratitude,

Josh Simmons
President
Open Source Initiative

---

Image credit: "charting-a-course.jpg" by Open Source Initiative, 2020, CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication, is a derivative (cropped and scaled) of "Compass, 11 September 2006" a photo by Adam Levine, available under CC0, via Flickr.