[Fsf-friends] Institutional Model vs. Bazaar Model

[Ramanraj K]

Nagarjuna G. wrote:
  > On Thursday 30 Sep 2004 6:17 pm, Mahesh T. Pai wrote:
  >
  >>Please comment on
  >>
  >>http://paivakil.port5.com/writings/protectyourcode.shtml
  >>
  >>Not yet published -- except here.
  >
  >
  > just glanced, not read completely.  But thought why Eric's bazaar
  > model may not work in the long run.  cuold you comment on that.

If assignment  is for reasonable  consideration, it could evolve  as a
viable  alternative  to  the  Bazaar  Model,  that  we  can  call  the
Institutional Model.   Some essential projects just won't  sell at the
bazaar, and it would require institutional support for survival.

Eric S. Raymond, in his  well known Software Release Practice HOWTO at
http://www.faqs.org/docs/Linux-HOWTO/Software-Release-Practice-HOWTO.html#HOLDER
along with others have been  suggesting for a long time, assignment of
works in favour  of FSF or like orgs  to safeguard community interests
in free software code.  In the bazaar model, free code gets wrapped as
open source,  developed and  "sold" in the  market.  The  unsold stock
gets discarded with no takers.   The bazaar alone cannot be allowed to
decide what develops and what  does not.  An alternative to the bazaar
model has been  around for a long  time, but we need to  give a formal
shape  to  the  Institutional  Model,  and  get  things  moving.   The
Institutional  model is necessary  to ensure  that the  developers are
assured of  a fair compensation for  their work, regardless  of how it
fares in the bazaar.

Many  students  and developers  frequently  ask  anxious questions  in
mailing lists about how free sofware could feed and support them.  The
bazaar model certainly serves businesses  well, but it does not assure
individual developers reasonable  compensation for their contributions
to the free software pool.

Recently,  Vel  Murugan, a  Loyala  College  student, who  contributed
substantially  to the  Tamil PC  project that  enables users  who know
_only_ Tamil to use OpenOffice  and other tools, fell ill, having lost
both  his kidneys.  A  plea for  funds was  put at  the ILUGC  list by
Bharathi, Hari and writer Sujatha,  the well known Tamil writer behind
Tamil PC project  also asked his readers to  contribute. Thankfully, a
philanthropist has come forward to meet the expenses of the treatment,
and funds  that were received  towards treatment have been  listed at:
http://www.ambalam.com/sujatha/2004/september/sujatha26_02.html
Projects such as the Tamil  PC, and its developers certainly deserve a
substantial grant or  compensation for their work.

Fredrick  Noronha  and many  have  been  suggesting micro-grants,  and
others  kinds of  fundings  for free  software  projects.  RMS  mooted
Software Tax. The free software code  base is public wealth, and it is
fair to  expect governments  to become the  major source of  funds and
grants, that could  be disbursed to deserving projects  through FSF or
other responsible  institutions through  the device of  assignments.

E gov  software is worth  about Rs.  1400  Crores per annum  in India.
Surely, much of  e gov software could be built  from the free software
directory,  and for  utilising  free software,  the  gov could  doante
anything from  Rs.  10 to Rs.100  crores, to start  with.  These would
enable FSF India to have its own hardware, mirroring facilities, state
of the  art distros, and  provide fair compensation to  developers who
maintain the  free software  pool in good  shape.  The gov  could save
more  than Rs.1000  crores or  use  it to  meet infrastructure  needs.
Individuals or private entities would  seldom be able to match the gov
in funding  and the gov  has no other  viable software source  for its
needs.

The  question does  arise, at  what stage  assignment of  copyright or
funding of a  project is appropriate.  Eric's bazaar  model gives good
clues:

<quote>
Early reviewers and test  audiences for this essay consistently raised
questions   about  the   preconditions  for   successful  bazaar-style
development, including  both the qualifications of  the project leader
and the state of code at the time one goes public and starts to try to
build a co-developer community. It s fairly clear that one cannot code
from  the ground  up in  bazaar style  [IN]. One  can test,  debug and
improve   in  bazaar   style,   but   it  would   be   very  hard   to
originateoriginate a project  in bazaar mode.  Linus didn't  try it. I
didn't  either.   Your  nascent  developer  community  needs  to  have
something  runnable  and  testable  to  play  with.   When  you  start
community-building, what you need to be able to present is a plausible
promise.  Your program doesn't have  to work particularly well. It can
be crude, buggy,  incomplete, and poorly documented. What  it must not
fail to do  is (a) run, and (b)  convince potential co-developers that
it  can be  evolved  into  something really  neat  in the  foreseeable
future.
</quote>

Merely because a software is  good, it won't automatically find takers
under any model.   Since free software is based  on meritocracy, there
is a better chance for good appreciation of meritorious projects.

Good funding along with assignments for valid consideration would help
to evolve a good Institutional Model that will maintain and strengthen
the foundations of free software.