Eric Barroca addresses commercial open source

Trying to understand all the nuances of open source is no easy task even for an experienced technology writer. There are open source packages that are free and ones that cost money. There are companies that use open source components, but sell a commercial product based on those open source components. So where's the line and is there an official definition?

Eric Barroca, who is the CEO of open source CMS vendor Nuxeo [1] (whom we interviewed one one one [2]), attempts to find the fine distinctions between these different types of definitions in a recent blog post. In the process he calls out companies that claim to be open source, but are really old-fashioned commercial license companies in an open source-wrapper. As he points out, there is nothing wrong with a commercial approach, but if that's what you are, you shouldn't pretend to be something else.

It shouldn't be that hard to figure out what a company is or does, but as Barroca points out just because a company uses a GPL (General Public License) or has a community developing around its base software doesn't make it open source. In fact, as he says, many commercial software companies have thriving communities and an eco-system of third-party developers. Look no further than SharePoint if you want a good example of this.

So when you shop, shop carefully and know what your getting. Posts like Barroca's can help you better understand the nuances and ask the right questions to find the approach that's best for your organization.

For more information:
- see Barocca's blog post [3]

Related Articles:
One on One with Eric Barroca of Nuxeo [2]
Nuxeo announces new cloud service [4]
Tops three Web CMS for small publishers [5]