The Growing Challenges of Open Source Licensing
Adrienne Bresnahan/Getty Images
LONDON -- Over the past decade, a significant shift has occurred in the software industry. Major companies that initially thrived under open-source licenses, such as Redis, Elastic, MongoDB, and HashiCorp, have moved towards proprietary licensing models. This strategic pivot, driven by pressures from cloud provider competition and investor expectations, ostensibly aims to maximize profitability. Yet, this approach seems more about short-term gains than sustainable success. The reality is, the anticipated financial boom often fails to materialize as expected.
Community-Driven Alternatives: The Rise of Forks
At the UK’s State of Open conference, Dawn Foster, director of data science for the CHAOSS Project, highlighted a fascinating trend: forks—community-driven alternatives to proprietary codebases—are seeing remarkable success. Concurrently, companies that deviated from open-source principles are experiencing stagnant growth and increasing dissatisfaction among users. This trend emphasizes a significant gap between theoretical business strategies and practical outcomes.
Monetization of Code: A Misguided Venture
Switching from open-source licenses, such as Apache 2.0 or AGPL, to more restrictive licenses like Server Side Public License (SSPL) or Business Source License (BSL), might seem like a sound business move. However, their implementation often fails to yield the anticipated financial rewards. A study by RedMonk’s senior analyst Rachel Stevens uncovered a surprising lack of correlation between license changes and increases in company value. Growth patterns remain largely unchanged, undermining expectations of a dramatic upswing post-license change.
The Fork Phenomenon
During the London event, James Governor, co-founder of RedMonk, further elaborated on this point: "There is neither a share price rise for public companies nor significant revenue gains from relicensing. The numbers simply don’t support the hypothesis that relicensing is a magic bullet for financial growth." The failure to capitalize on these license changes has spawned a thriving ecosystem of forks. Notable examples include OpenSearch, created after Elastic’s licensing shift in 2021, and Valkey, a Redis fork that gained momentum within a mere eight days. Backed by the Linux Foundation heavyweights like AWS, Google, and Alibaba, these forks highlight the vibrancy and potential of community-led projects.
Forks Under Neutral Foundations: Success Stories
Foster’s research through CHAOSS revealed a striking contrast between organizational diversity in forks versus proprietary software. Forks integrated within neutral foundations exhibit three times more diversity. OpenSearch, for example, saw contributions from 45 organizations in its first year compared to Elasticsearch’s predominantly single-vendor model. This demonstrates that open-source forks are not just viable but often preferable to proprietary alternatives. An overwhelming number of users migrate to forks to escape vendor lock-in.
The Benefits of Forks: Innovation and Flexibility
Open-source forks have a significant advantage in terms of innovation speed, leading to superior products and community trust. Grafana, a successful fork from Kibana, expanded into a $6 billion enterprise by incorporating features such as metrics support—features initially dismissed by Kibana’s parent company, Elastic. This highlights the critical role of flexibility and responsiveness in open-source development.
Governance Models of Forks
Open-source forks, particularly those managed by organizations like the Linux Foundation, tend to thrive due to inclusive governance structures. OpenTofu, a HashiCorp Terraform fork, embodies this principle, ensuring no single entity controls the project’s roadmap. This governance model boosts popularity and trust among developers.
Breaking Misconceptions: Forking Without the Original Contributors
Contrary to common assumptions, forks do not require support from original contributors to be successful. Foster noted, "If you had asked me a few years ago, I certainly believed this was true; I did not believe that a fork could be successful without forking the contributor community. I’m happy to have been wrong." This assertion underscores the importance of community over individual contributors in sustaining successful projects.
A Cautionary Tale for Investors
Stephen Walli, from Microsoft’s Azure office, emphasized, "Projects are not products despite a tendency to assume otherwise." Companies that originate from open-source can mistakenly treat projects as commercial products, a misconception that undermines true open-source potential.
In conclusion, Foster’s data offers compelling insights: forks flourish when communities align against proprietary constraints. Companies that excessively control licenses not only risk alienating their user base but also stifle innovation. Conversely, forks supported by neutral foundations often become industry benchmarks. For investors and stakeholders, the message is clear: wagering against open-source principles seldom reaps rewards.
Open Source Innovations and Opportunities
- The open-source tools that could disrupt the entire IT incident management market
- This Linux distro could let your old laptop "shine on" after Windows 10’s sunset
- 6 Linux myths, busted
- 5 lightweight Linux distributions with very low system requirements
