Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
27 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Suchith Anand

Hi all,


I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?


This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?


Best wishes,


Suchith

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software 



This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

jody.garnett
Considering android is marketed as open, yes this is possible in our industry as well :)

Keep in mind we have several definitions of "open", even "open source" does not match the same meaning of open advocated by the free software foundation.

In our industry specifically we have open standards, allowing many proprietary (and open source) products to be marketed as "open" (in the sense that they support a standard allowing integration in a larger systems).

By the same token a proprietary vendor can define an API with license terms allowing customers and third-party vendors to create additional functionality that extends their software. This is the meaning of "open platform" I think you are referring to. There is a lot more meaning behind "open platform" though, ideally you have a way for those third-party vendors to turn a profit thus motivating their continued participation in your platform.

This is a rough-and-tumble competition - we can no longer use the short hand "open" to capture what we do here at OSGeo. We are going to have to wade into these debates with a strong story and clear examples from our community.  We should also expect platforms to be built up around our open source projects (say Carto being built around PostGIS). This is a great way to ensure these projects stay  viable, as long as we keep everyone involved sufficiently encouraged/valued/funded.

Oh and to answer your question, the mislead customers may of confused "open source" with "open platform". If we want the distinction clear in the market we need to use organizations such as OSGeo to push that message.

--
Jody Garnett

On 22 March 2017 at 13:15, Suchith Anand <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,


I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?


This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?


Best wishes,


Suchith

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software 


This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Kiringai Kamau
In reply to this post by Suchith Anand
Dear Suchith,

My opinion is that OSGeo defines the value chain orientation of open software to ensure customers. 

This will help customers to understand the elements/components that are/should be open and which are value added contributions of the vendor. All value added innovations of the vendor can/should be the revenue stream that the community can advocate for, and campaign against exploitation of those that unwittingly become targets of unscrupulous vendors. 

We can then leave the space of determining the value of the value added contribution to the private treaty of the two with the vendors encouraged to charge based on the intensity of the value add...

If a subcommittee on value added innovations goes not exist, then it behaves us to create one...we do need this very much in Africa. 

Kiringai 


Sent from my iPhone

On 22 Mar 2017, at 23:15, Suchith Anand <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,


I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?


This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?


Best wishes,


Suchith

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software 

This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

María Arias de Reyna-4
In reply to this post by jody.garnett
Hi,

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Jody Garnett <[hidden email]> wrote:
Considering android is marketed as open, yes this is possible in our industry as well :)


You can download the code, modify it, build it, use it and redistribute it. Some versions of Android may have private drivers or extensions, but Android itself is open. And free.

 

Keep in mind we have several definitions of "open", even "open source" does not match the same meaning of open advocated by the free software foundation.

In our industry specifically we have open standards, allowing many proprietary (and open source) products to be marketed as "open" (in the sense that they support a standard allowing integration in a larger systems).


From my perspective, that's perverting a very clear definition of open. We all had a very plain and specific meaning of open until some companies started to pervert it for their own evil purposes.

What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;


That which we call closed software will still stink as closed, even if you call  it open.
 

By the same token a proprietary vendor can define an API with license terms allowing customers and third-party vendors to create additional functionality that extends their software. This is the meaning of "open platform" I think you are referring to. There is a lot more meaning behind "open platform" though, ideally you have a way for those third-party vendors to turn a profit thus motivating their continued participation in your platform.

That's not an open platform. That's having an accesible API for you services. Please, do not confuse the terms. 
 

This is a rough-and-tumble competition - we can no longer use the short hand "open" to capture what we do here at OSGeo. We are going to have to wade into these debates with a strong story and clear examples from our community.  We should also expect platforms to be built up around our open source projects (say Carto being built around PostGIS). This is a great way to ensure these projects stay  viable, as long as we keep everyone involved sufficiently encouraged/valued/funded.

Oh and to answer your question, the mislead customers may of confused "open source" with "open platform". If we want the distinction clear in the market we need to use organizations such as OSGeo to push that messag

I strongly disagree. We should use the word free as much as we can to get our space back, but also we should enfoce recovering the real meaning of open. Because leaving "open" to this false open software advocators will mean losing an important battle. The next thing will be not being able to call open to things that are also free. 

This is for our own good: if we leave "open" become dirty, we will have problems even when trying to explain to our customers why open software is better than closed software.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

María Arias de Reyna-4

So, to make it clear: 

 * Being interoperable (using open standards) does not mean being open
 * Having an API open to third party developers does not mean being open
 * Using libraries that are open in your source code does not mean being open
 * Having a good documentation does not mean being open

A company can try to use the word "open" to market but that's just openwashing. Just like when a food company tries to advertise something as healthy just because it has like 0,00001% of something that is healthy (according to EU laws, that's legal). You can use the word "open" and maybe it is legal (or maybe not?), but that doesn't mean you are not lying.

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 8:32 AM, María Arias de Reyna <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Jody Garnett <[hidden email]> wrote:
Considering android is marketed as open, yes this is possible in our industry as well :)


You can download the code, modify it, build it, use it and redistribute it. Some versions of Android may have private drivers or extensions, but Android itself is open. And free.

 

Keep in mind we have several definitions of "open", even "open source" does not match the same meaning of open advocated by the free software foundation.

In our industry specifically we have open standards, allowing many proprietary (and open source) products to be marketed as "open" (in the sense that they support a standard allowing integration in a larger systems).


From my perspective, that's perverting a very clear definition of open. We all had a very plain and specific meaning of open until some companies started to pervert it for their own evil purposes.

What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;


That which we call closed software will still stink as closed, even if you call  it open.
 

By the same token a proprietary vendor can define an API with license terms allowing customers and third-party vendors to create additional functionality that extends their software. This is the meaning of "open platform" I think you are referring to. There is a lot more meaning behind "open platform" though, ideally you have a way for those third-party vendors to turn a profit thus motivating their continued participation in your platform.

That's not an open platform. That's having an accesible API for you services. Please, do not confuse the terms. 
 

This is a rough-and-tumble competition - we can no longer use the short hand "open" to capture what we do here at OSGeo. We are going to have to wade into these debates with a strong story and clear examples from our community.  We should also expect platforms to be built up around our open source projects (say Carto being built around PostGIS). This is a great way to ensure these projects stay  viable, as long as we keep everyone involved sufficiently encouraged/valued/funded.

Oh and to answer your question, the mislead customers may of confused "open source" with "open platform". If we want the distinction clear in the market we need to use organizations such as OSGeo to push that messag

I strongly disagree. We should use the word free as much as we can to get our space back, but also we should enfoce recovering the real meaning of open. Because leaving "open" to this false open software advocators will mean losing an important battle. The next thing will be not being able to call open to things that are also free. 

This is for our own good: if we leave "open" become dirty, we will have problems even when trying to explain to our customers why open software is better than closed software.

 


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

María Arias de Reyna-4
In reply to this post by María Arias de Reyna-4

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 8:32 AM, María Arias de Reyna <[hidden email]> wrote:
This is a rough-and-tumble competition - we can no longer use the short hand "open" to capture what we do here at OSGeo. We are going to have to wade into these debates with a strong story and clear examples from our community.  We should also expect platforms to be built up around our open source projects (say Carto being built around PostGIS). This is a great way to ensure these projects stay  viable, as long as we keep everyone involved sufficiently encouraged/valued/funded.

Oh and to answer your question, the mislead customers may of confused "open source" with "open platform". If we want the distinction clear in the market we need to use organizations such as OSGeo to push that messag

I strongly disagree. We should use the word free as much as we can to get our space back, but also we should enfoce recovering the real meaning of open. Because leaving "open" to this false open software advocators will mean losing an important battle. The next thing will be not being able to call open to things that are also free. 

Maybe this part was not clear enough. I disagree that we can't use the word "open" to capture what we do. I think we can and should do. And point everywhere were it is not being correctly used. Being active here is important *now*, while we still have the meaning not completely perverted and the companies that do openwashing still play with the idea that they are "open" in the real sense.


(btw: most of Carto is also open software: https://github.com/CartoDB maybe not a good example of a closed wrapper over an open software.)

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Luí­s Moreira de Sousa
Dear all,

In all countries of the OECD marketing practices are regulated in one way or another. For instance, if I sell ear rings made out of lead I can not claim they are made of silver. In some cases this sort of distinction is not easy, as is the case with "open source" or "open".

In the European Union various mechanisms have been put in place for similar situations, such as the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) [0] to label goods produced in specific regions (think of Port, Champagne, Scotch) or the Traditional Specialities Guaranteed (TSG) [1] to differentiate products crafted by traditional processes.

So far, organisations like the OSGeo or the FSF have focused on labelling projects that meet particular criteria in open source, but have not - and can not - prevent others from misusing the concept. This thread shows that this is a new path the community must trail. 

I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.

Regards.


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

María Arias de Reyna-4

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa <[hidden email]> wrote:

I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.

 
+1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Jim Klassen-2

Historically, labeling software "open" has meant built to open standards that anyone else could theoretically implement.  For example OpenLook, OpenSTEP, The Open Software Foundation (the group behind the Motif X11 toolkit - and the lack of a free and open source implementation was a major stumbling block in porting lots of existing software to Linux prior to lessrif and then the general switch to GTK), X/Open.

It wasn't until the late 90's that "open" started being used as shorthand for "open source" largely due to the influence of esr (Eric S. Raymond) as a pragmatic response to the commonly held (and in my opinion incorrect) view at the time that free software as promoted by RMS (Richard Stallman) wasn't suitable for use by businesses.

I know this may be seen as many as semantic minutiae, but this email thread seems to be getting at the now decades old argument about the differences between "open source" and free (as in libre) software.  This differentiation is well covered online, so I will not repeat it here.

So in my view of the terms:

Can a proprietary system be "open"?  Yes and based on historical usage even closed source systems can be labeled "open".

Can a proprietary system be "open source"?  Again historically yes.  As an extreme example of this, I believe once upon a time Microsoft open-sourced many parts of Windows but with an extremely restrictive license and limitations that certainly did and do not meet the norms of the open source community.  IIRC The early versions of Qt also were also a less extreme example of this.

Can proprietary software be free/libre?  No, by definition.

On Mar 23, 2017 04:21, "María Arias de Reyna" <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa <[hidden email]> wrote:

I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.

 
+1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

jody.garnett
Think my point is that android software is open source ... but the android open platform is google.

Open platform - business arrangement between platform provider, customers and vendors
Open software source - software license model
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 5:11 AM James Klassen <[hidden email]> wrote:

Historically, labeling software "open" has meant built to open standards that anyone else could theoretically implement.  For example OpenLook, OpenSTEP, The Open Software Foundation (the group behind the Motif X11 toolkit - and the lack of a free and open source implementation was a major stumbling block in porting lots of existing software to Linux prior to lessrif and then the general switch to GTK), X/Open.

It wasn't until the late 90's that "open" started being used as shorthand for "open source" largely due to the influence of esr (Eric S. Raymond) as a pragmatic response to the commonly held (and in my opinion incorrect) view at the time that free software as promoted by RMS (Richard Stallman) wasn't suitable for use by businesses.

I know this may be seen as many as semantic minutiae, but this email thread seems to be getting at the now decades old argument about the differences between "open source" and free (as in libre) software.  This differentiation is well covered online, so I will not repeat it here.

So in my view of the terms:

Can a proprietary system be "open"?  Yes and based on historical usage even closed source systems can be labeled "open".

Can a proprietary system be "open source"?  Again historically yes.  As an extreme example of this, I believe once upon a time Microsoft open-sourced many parts of Windows but with an extremely restrictive license and limitations that certainly did and do not meet the norms of the open source community.  IIRC The early versions of Qt also were also a less extreme example of this.

Can proprietary software be free/libre?  No, by definition.

On Mar 23, 2017 04:21, "María Arias de Reyna" <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa <[hidden email]> wrote:

I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.

 
+1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
--
Jody Garnett

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Suchith Anand
In reply to this post by María Arias de Reyna-4
+1 .

I am also interested in how we can protect taxpayers money in this. The need for cost savings by using Open source GIS software will help the local authorities and various government departments across Europe in reducing huge licence fee costs for proprietary software and  Government and taxpayers as a whole will benefit from cost efficiencies, reduce the cost of lock-in to suppliers and products. This is especially important for future IT investments (for example Cloud Computing) , so that more options are explored and choices available. I presented my ideas on the importance of having a National level strategy for Open Principles in Geospatial [1] . Overview slides are at https://www.slideshare.net/SuchithAnand/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial



It is my duty as a global citizen to work on this  so that all our future generations are empowered fully. Let us plan to meet and discuss ideas at FOSS4G -Europe for making OSGeo European chapter.


Best wishes,

Suchith


[1] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/03/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial-ideas-and-inputs-needed/


________________________________________
From: Discuss <[hidden email]> on behalf of María Arias de Reyna <delawen+[hidden email]>
Sent: 23 March 2017 9:20 AM
To: Luí­s Moreira de Sousa
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.


+1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...


This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Suchith Anand
In reply to this post by Kiringai Kamau
Kiringai and all,

Thanks to all who send your feedbacks from different perspectives to my query.  Openness means being open to different perspectives ,ideas, viewpoints, cultures  and learning and improving to be a better human every day... We are all part of a big ecosystem all working for Geo. GeoForAll means Geo for All and we welcome everyone to be part of Openness in Education.  

The irony is that over 10 years back when i started putting my ideas and frameworks in place for Open Principles in Science and Education, some of the propertiery GIS vendors and thier supporters were laughing at me and doing thier best indirectly to stop me , but now it seems they are all working overtime trying to be Ambassodors of Openness!  Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery . What amazing changes happening and OSGeo has done great work to accelerate the pace of Open in all directions.  I welcome all to be part of the Open movement.

One thing is clear . The Future of Geo is Open.

Best wishes,

Suchith

________________________________________
From: Kiringai Kamau <[hidden email]>
Sent: 23 March 2017 4:28 AM
To: Anand Suchith
Cc: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Dear Suchith,

My opinion is that OSGeo defines the value chain orientation of open software to ensure customers.

This will help customers to understand the elements/components that are/should be open and which are value added contributions of the vendor. All value added innovations of the vendor can/should be the revenue stream that the community can advocate for, and campaign against exploitation of those that unwittingly become targets of unscrupulous vendors.

We can then leave the space of determining the value of the value added contribution to the private treaty of the two with the vendors encouraged to charge based on the intensity of the value add...

If a subcommittee on value added innovations goes not exist, then it behaves us to create one...we do need this very much in Africa.

Kiringai


Sent from my iPhone

On 22 Mar 2017, at 23:15, Suchith Anand <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:


Hi all,


I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?


This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?


Best wishes,

Suchith


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software


This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss




This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Ravi Kumar-3
In reply to this post by Suchith Anand
This is a good thread, and let us discuss to derive a 'Note', for those facing 'Questions', evangelising Free and Open GIS.

I suggest this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_platform for many who wish to know.
May be we can have a page on, 'OSGeo Wiki' on this topic.
Cheers
Ravi Kumar


On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Suchith Anand <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,


I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?


This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?


Best wishes,


Suchith

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software 


This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

jody.garnett
And here is the biz model definition, I would be interested if the original poster can clarify in which context the word was used :)
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:55 PM Ravi Kumar <[hidden email]> wrote:
This is a good thread, and let us discuss to derive a 'Note', for those facing 'Questions', evangelising Free and Open GIS.

I suggest this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_platform for many who wish to know.
May be we can have a page on, 'OSGeo Wiki' on this topic.
Cheers
Ravi Kumar


On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Suchith Anand <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,


I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?


This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?


Best wishes,


Suchith

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software 


This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
--
Jody Garnett

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Suchith Anand
My query was if the term Open can be used for marketing any properitery softwares and platforms and to know if there are any guidelines on this? This definition  Ravi Kumar send  is helpful to help me understand one aspect of this . Thanks Ravi Kumar.

Best wishes,

Suchith
________________________________________
From: Jody Garnett <[hidden email]>
Sent: 25 March 2017 7:21 AM
To: Ravi Kumar; Anand Suchith
Cc: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

And here is the biz model definition, I would be interested if the original poster can clarify in which context the word was used :)
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:55 PM Ravi Kumar <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
This is a good thread, and let us discuss to derive a 'Note', for those facing 'Questions', evangelising Free and Open GIS.

I suggest this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_platform for many who wish to know.
May be we can have a page on, 'OSGeo Wiki' on this topic.
Cheers
Ravi Kumar


On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Suchith Anand <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

Hi all,


I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?


This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?


Best wishes,

Suchith


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software



This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
--
Jody Garnett




This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Mateusz Loskot
On 25 March 2017 at 10:17, Suchith Anand <[hidden email]> wrote:
> My query was if the term Open can be used for marketing any properitery softwares and platforms and to know if there are any guidelines on this?

Nobody has a monopoly on use of the word.

BTW, without a secret, there is no technology advancement, there is no
motivation for development of counter-technologies.
Mind you, communities and businesses have long recognised without
open, there is no close and vice versa.
Hence, so called business-friendly open source licenses, LocationTech, etc.

Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Sandro Santilli-4
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 12:43:29PM +0100, Mateusz Loskot wrote:

> without a secret, there is no technology advancement

I think this is a purely ideological position.

Secrets can generate all kind of deseases, if you ask me :)

--strk;
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Mateusz Loskot
On 25 March 2017 at 12:54, Sandro Santilli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 12:43:29PM +0100, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
>
>> without a secret, there is no technology advancement
>
> I think this is a purely ideological position.
>
> Secrets can generate all kind of deseases, if you ask me :)

They do, but at the same time, we wouldn't be where we are now
in terms of civilisation development. yin/yang

Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

pcav
Il 25/03/2017 12:56, Mateusz Loskot ha scritto:

> They do, but at the same time, we wouldn't be where we are now
> in terms of civilisation development. yin/yang

Not quite sure about that: Mateusz, do you have a reference to support this?
All the best, and thanks.

--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?

Carl Reed-2
In reply to this post by jody.garnett
I would also be interested. Have not read the entire thread yet. That said, most (all?) large app and software providers now offer open APIs. Check out Google, Twitter, Amazon and on and on. These APIs are "open" because anyone can implement, use, develop, etc. You could even use the API definition to implement your own API against your own back end servers. Based on the license type (often Apache) the caveat is that you could not sell that "new" API.

Now, of course, all of these open APIs access one or more back end server apps or services and there may are may not be a fee for using those apps or services. Most of these software and infrastructure companies allow limited free use of the back end service and/or geospatial data access.

Obviously, there is some continuum of what the market says about what is open and what is not.

So, if the API is open and the client is free and there is free (but limited) access to proprietary services and data, is this open?

Interesting question :-)

Cheers

Carl

On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 1:21 AM, Jody Garnett <[hidden email]> wrote:
And here is the biz model definition, I would be interested if the original poster can clarify in which context the word was used :)
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:55 PM Ravi Kumar <[hidden email]> wrote:
This is a good thread, and let us discuss to derive a 'Note', for those facing 'Questions', evangelising Free and Open GIS.

I suggest this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_platform for many who wish to know.
May be we can have a page on, 'OSGeo Wiki' on this topic.
Cheers
Ravi Kumar


On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Suchith Anand <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,


I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?


This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?


Best wishes,


Suchith

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software 

This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
--
Jody Garnett

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



--
Carl Reed, PhD
Carl Reed and Associates

Mobile: 970-402-0284

“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

— Thomas Jefferson, U.S. Founding Father


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
12