In a CS PhD program at University of Cincinnati (1997–2000).
Dropped out with a Master’s to do policy work for Free Software Foundation.
Worked at various non-profits.
Now I run a 501(c)(3) fiscal sponsor non-profit, called Software Freedom Conservancy.
I’m not a researcher; I’m a policy wonk & advocate for software freedom.
There was a computer.
There were terminals.
There were users.
… and the users had freedom.
to use.
to learn and modify for yourself.
to copy and share.
to modify and share modified versions.
1974: AT&T gives University of California Berkeley full Unix source.
BSD releases its own distribution.
No one worries about the licensing, until …
They built licensing walls.
By separating the software from the computer.
As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. … [If] software is something to share … You prevent good software from being written.
AT&T monopoly gone: 1987 break-up.
Unix copyrights end up with USL.
They sue UC-Berkeley in 1992.
BSD, as a project, only barely recovered.
Founded on idealism.
Recruited volunteers.
Paid non-profit staff.
Centered around MIT.
But MIT was changing.
patents == $$$
spin-offs == $$$
MIT gets USA Patent 4,405,829 on RSA.
USA is first to invent (until 2011).
MIT launches spin-off: RSA Data Security.
Sets back adoption of public key cryptography by a decade (IMO).
Government funds research.
Universities gain patents & copyrights.
Universities launch spin-offs.
Universities get money.
RSA was published in 1977; patented years later.
Why’d we let that wealth leave USA for South Africa?
Hired a lawyer, but couldn’t get University lawyers to budge.
Academic software systems should be released in software freedom.
The four freedoms are designed for academic exploration.
Yet, universities function like businesses.
We should be agents of change on this issue.
I’ve been a lab rat in four different studies.
No real objection, but I’d rather researchers would “go native”.
So many research systems are released as proprietary software.
The referred paper is king: what about the software?
Even systems without commercial viability are kept proprietary.
Perennial issue for academic research.
Academia should take lead here.
Haskell wasn’t merely an academic language:
University of Glasgow released implementation as Free Software.
Many contributors; both volunteer & for-profit industry interest.
Now widely used Free Software programming language.
Reference: [Hudak2007]
Linux-based systems are everywhere (Android, etc.).
So many other FLOSS systems are standard.
Your students need to know how to contribute.
FLOSS communities are notoriously difficult to engage with.
Project communities join.
Become part of the org (as if they’d incorporated a non-profit).
Becomes a center-point for collaboration & communication with project.
[Hudak2007] Hudak, et al. “A History of Haskell:Being Lazy With Class”. Proceedings of the third ACM SIGPLAN conference on History of programming languages". Pages 12–1–12–55. (Video of talk)
[Milton2010] Cerny, Milton and Hellmuth, Kelly. “Economic Crises? Technology Transfer to the Rescue”. 21 Taxation Exempts 6 (2010).
[JobsCouncil2011] President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. “Taking action, building confidence: Five Common-Sense Initiatives to Boost Jobs and Competitiveness” Interim Report. October 2011.
Presentation and slides are: Copyright © 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 Bradley M. Kuhn, and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-By-SA) 3.0 United States License.
Some images included herein are ©’ed by others. I believe my use of those images is fair use under USA © law. However, I suggest you remove such images if you redistribute these slides under CC-By-SA-USA 3.0.