• Free and open-source software, also F/OSS, FOSS, or FLOSS (free/libre/open source software) is software that is liberally licensed to grant the right of users to study, change, and improve its design through the availability of its source code. This approach has gained both momentum and acceptance as the potential benefits have been increasingly recognized by both individuals and corporate players.

Free and open source software is an inclusive term which covers both free software and open source software which, despite describing similar development models, have differing cultures and philosophies. Free software focuses on the philosophical freedoms it gives to users while open source focuses on the perceived strengths of its peer-to-peer development model. Many people relate to both aspects and so ‘F/OSS’ is a term that can be used without particular bias towards either political approach. The FLOSS Concept Booklet describes the differences as legal differences:

Legally, Free Software and Open-Source take quite different attitudes to sharing source code and what obligations those who share legally require. The different attitudes are a product of political ideology and cannot be easily reconciled – though they can be neutrally explained (only) by referring to the legal concepts of ’share-alike’ and a ‘consortium’. The term FLOSS emerged to simply avoid having to discuss or define these ideas to ordinary users who want to know about the implications for end users. Which do not normally include the legal negotiations between contributors.

Free software licences and open source licenses are used by many software packages. The licenses have important differences, which mirror the differences in the ways the two kinds of software can be used and distributed and reflect differences in the philosophy behind the two.

By mid 2007 enough companies were opening some source to hop on the open source bandwagon, while keeping other advanced functionality closed, that the common meaning of “open source” came to include what is now called Commercial Open Source Software (COSS) as well. Today either the specificterms free software/FOSS/FLOSS or COSS are often used instead of the more general term “open source” in order to differentiate between the two different models and preserve the original meaning of the free software/FOSS/FLOSS space.

what is open source and what’s foos?????

Open source is sold and FOSS is not

//

I think I finally figured it out FOSS software can’t be sold while open source can be.

This is a feature, not a bug. It’s why the GNU smiles.

Much of my confusion involves the GPL and FOSS. The GPL was created as a FOSS license but it remains the most popular open source license out there.

I explained the reason in my 2006 piece The Open Source Incline. Giving outside contributors the same rights you enjoy is the best way to encourage their participation. For an open source company the GPL helps drive development and the construction of a community, which it needs to thrive.

So the GPL, while created for FOSS, is also used by open source. And there remains a key difference between FOSS software and open source, which Matt nails. Open source is sold and FOSS is not.

What marks a FOSS project is not its license but the motivation behind it. A FOSS project is not driven by dreams of financial gain. It’s driven by dreams of service, of shared effort helping all boats rise. The Mozilla Foundation is not about the Benjamins even though Firefox uses a Mozilla license rather than the GPL. Money keeps things moving but no one is getting rich.

Open source combines the shared effort of FOSS and marries it to the profit motive. Open source developers share code in order to sell support, or services, or products built using the code. The key word in the previous sentence is sell.

Open source is sold, FOSS is downloaded. Open source companies are looking for a profit, FOSS projects are looking to get by, to grow, to serve and to share.

Matt makes his living as an open source executive with Alfresco. Alfresco uses the GPL, but it’s an open source company, not a FOSS project. Alfresco wants to make money. Making money is good.

But how much money? To an open source company, the answer is as much as possible. To a FOSS project the answer is enough to get by.

There is nothing wrong with either model. Both can, in fact, use the same licenses, or different licenses. But if someone comes to you wearing a suit, a smile, and their hand out, it matters little what license their wares may carry. They’re still a salesman.

They’re open source.