Is open-source software an effective replacement for proprietary applications?
Open-source software is a good replacement for proprietary software, but means open-source licenses need to be complied with.
The popularity of open-source, or open-source software, is constantly increasing among businesses, due to a period of cost reduction. The use of open-source software such asOpen Office, for the best known, has become a real alternative since they now have functionalities and quality equivalent to those of their proprietary competitors.
The subject had already been addressed in a previous post about copyright. However, this term is often used and understood in an abusive way, which causes confusion and does not simplify the understanding of the open-source system, which is very rich and whose competitive advantages are significant.
It is therefore useful to provide a brief definition, in order to understand the interests of free trade in legal and operational matters.
The Free Software Foundation defines open-source software as software subject to a license that gives users the “freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, modify, and improve this software”
Software is considered free if its license guarantees four fundamental freedoms: open use, unrestricted copying, direct access to the source code, and the right to modify and redistribute the source code. However, it is still possible to provide specific features for each license.
This philosophy is entirely opposed to that of proprietary software, which is distributed in object code and for which the above rights are generally limited by the publisher in order to maintain control over the use that is made of it, and to protect its technical know-how.
In practice, the freedoms granted to users may in particular be the following:
Open-source licenses are therefore intended to allow users greater diversity and freedom of use. They are also encouraged to fix bugs and improve the software, and then return the developments to the community so they can be reused.
As a result, this software is in principle likely to be supported and developed over a long period of time, unlike proprietary software. Indeed, for the latter, a change in the publisher's policy may call into question the organization of customers as soon as support and maintenance can be put an end to.
The objective of open-source software is therefore to ensure a balance between the creativity of developers and the protection of their intellectual property.
The main advantages of open-source software are the limitation of costs and a better balance of powers and responsibilities between the creator of the software and the users.
This does not necessarily mean that the software is open-source, it can be marketed by a publisher or distributed for money by a member of the community, but rather that the user of the software will not be bound by an agreement with a company, especially with regard to maintenance.
Since the code is accessible, it is therefore entirely possible to consider maintenance internally or via a third-party application maintenance contract.
Open-source software also makes it possible to limit the risk associated with software compliance audits.
As indicated above, the risks associated with a change in the publisher's commercial orientation are mixed as long as the development of the software can be continued by the community, and a third party can take care of maintenance.
It is also easy to understand the rights granted to users by the developer of the open-source component. While there are various and varied open-source licenses, some are used on a recurring basis and have therefore been analyzed in depth by specialists, which makes them understandable to everyone.
The issue of contamination is the thorniest point in legal matters. Indeed, licenses require that any development made from a module subject to this license be redistributed under the same license. The aim of this particularity is to ensure that users of derived software have no less freedom than users of the original software.
However, such a clause can be a real headache to use them when certain licenses are not compatible with each other (for example the GPL license with the BSD license). It will not be possible to add two modules subject to these licenses, as long as all or part of their licenses are opposed.
It is therefore appropriate, when developments are carried out on the basis of components subject to open-source licenses, to carefully analyze the applicable licenses in order to ensure that they can work together. It would be uncomfortable to realize this a posteriori since exploitation could become impossible.
PlETHORA OF OPEN SOURCE LICENSES exist and can be used by developers. This is the case, in a non-exhaustive manner, of the following licenses, in their successive versions:
These all have different particularities, in particular: they can make it possible to redistribute for commercial or non-commercial use, require redistribution under the same license or not, maintain or not all of the four freedoms...
When it is decided to use open-source software or to integrate a open-source component into a development, it is necessary to inform yourself before using the applicable license in order to be able to search for alternatives if they are not compatible with the expected use.
Moreover, nothing prevents a company that has developed internally from creating its own license so that it is fully adapted to its needs. It can be considered open-source as long as it respects the four freedoms set out above. However, it is more practical to choose one of the pre-existing licenses, as their advantages and disadvantages are clearly understood.
Taking the direction of open-source software is therefore a choice to be thought through carefully beforehand on a technical level and legal, but which provides a particularly interesting opening for businesses if it is well exploited.
Using terms and conditions that are not adapted to the SaaS model (self-service or signed) is risky. Learn how to choose the right terms format for your SaaS.
Why choose a mutual NDA in SaaS? Protect sensitive information, save time, and build a balanced business relationship from the start.
Let's build together to grow your business
I have been supporting software and SaaS companies for more than 10 years, to structure their business, protect their intellectual property and improve their contracts.
