Advertisement

A Licensing and Business Model for Sharing Source Code with Clients—Leveraging Open Client Innovation in the Proprietary World

  • Mikko Riepula
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 51)

Abstract

While the pure-form open source model has been in the focus of much information systems research recently, research is lacking on truly hybrid software licensing models that combine limited openness of source code with traditional value appropriation logic. Yet such boundedly open models are implied by open innovation literature and by the recent emphasis on client involvement therein. The further amalgamation of traditional proprietary software licensing with open source licensing can be rationalised through commodification of software, shift from products to services, the viability of the pure-form open source model, and the continuing need for better operational efficiency. After reviewing other hybrid-OSS models, a very practical hybrid licensing model is presented that responds to the need of software vendors in various vertical domains. Its benefits and limitations are discussed, and it is positioned relative to the value co-production (co-creation) literature. A set of research questions are raised to the information systems research agenda.

Keywords

client-shared source shared source gated source open source hybrid OSS OSS 2.0 software licensing client innovation client co-production distributed development inner source corporate source software business model software commodification software commoditization 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cook, S.: The Contribution Revolution. Letting Volunteers Build Your Business. Harvard Business Review, 60–69 (October 2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ramírez, R.: Value co-production: Intellectual Origins and Implications for Practice and Research. Strategic Management J. 20, 49–65 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nambisan, S., Nambisan, P.: How to Profit from a Better ‘Virtual Customer Environment’. MIT Sloan Management Review 49(3), 53–61 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nambisan, S., Baron, R.A.: Interactions in Virtual Customer Environments: Implications for Product Support and Customer Relationship Management. J. of Interactive Marketing 21(2), 42–62 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bettencourt, L.A., Ostrom, A.L., Brown, S.W., Roundtree, R.I.: Client Co-Production in Knowledge-Intensive Business Services. California Management Review 44, 100–128 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    den Hertog, P.: Knowledge-Intensive Business Services as Co-Producers of Innovation. Int. J. of Innovation Management 4(4), 491–528 (2000)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Möller, K., Rajala, R., Westerlund, M.: Service Innovation Myopia? A New Recipe for Client-Provider Value Creation. California Management Review 50(3), 31–48 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Levy, Y., Ellis, T.J.: A Systems Approach to Conduct an Effective Literature Review in Support of Information Systems Research. Informing Science J. 9, 181–212 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cusumano, M.: The Business of Software: How to Survive and Thrive in Good Times and Bad. The Free Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nambisan, S.: Why Service Businesses are not Product Businesses. MIT Sloan Management Review, ABI/INFORM Global 42(4), 72–80 (2001)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Teece, D.J.: Profiting from Technological Innovation: Implications for Integration, Collaboration, Licensing and Public Policy. Research Policy 15, 285–305 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kampas, P.J.: Shifting Cultural Gears in Technology-driven Industries. MIT Sloan Management Review, 41–48 (Winter 2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rossi, C., Bonaccorsi, A.: Why Proft-Oriented Companies Enter the OS Field? Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Incentives. In: Open Source Application Spaces: Fifth Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering (5-WOSSE), St Louis, MO, USA, May 17 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shah, S.K.: Motivation, Governance and the Viability of Hybrid Forms in Open Source Software Development. Management Science 52(7), 1000–1014 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Osterloh, M., Rota, S.: Open Source Software Development—Just Another Case of Collective Invention? Research Policy 36, 157–171 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    von Hippel, E., von Krogh, G.: Open Source Software and the ‘Private-Collective’ Innovation Model: Issues for Organization Science. Org. Science 14(2), 209–223 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Allen, R.C.: Collective Invention. J. of Economic Behaviour and Org. 4(1), 1–24 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bonaccorsi, A., Giannangeli, S., Rossi, C.: Entry strategies under competing standards: Hybrid business models in the open source software industry. Management Science 52(7), 1085–1098 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fitzgerald, B.: The Transformation of Open Source Software. MIS Quarterly 30(3), 587–598 (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hecker, F.: Setting Up Shop. The Business of Open Source Software. IEEE Software 16(1), 45–51 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Karels, M.J.: Commercializing Open Source Software. In: Many Have Tried, a Few Are Succeeding, But Challenges Abound. ACM Queue, July/August 2003, pp. 46–55. ACM, New York (2003) (1542-7730/03/0700)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Krishnamurthy, S.: An Analysis of Open Source Business Models. In: Feller, J., Fitzgerald, B., Hissam, S.A., Lakhani, K.R. (eds.) Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software, pp. 279–296. MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Välimäki, M.: The Rise of Open Source Licensing. In: A Challenge to the Use of Intellectual Property in the Software Industry. Turre Publishing, Helsinki (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    West, J.: Value Capture and Value Networks in Open Source Vendor Strategies. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2007), pp. 176–185 (2007)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Thomke, S., von Hippel, E.: Customers as Innovators—a New Way to Create Value. Harvard Business Review 80(4), 74–81 (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    von Hippel, E.: Open Source Projects as Horizontal Innovation Networks—by and for Users. MIT Sloan Working Paper No. 4366–02 (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    von Hippel, E.: Democratizing Innovation: The Evolving Phenomenon of User Innovation. J. für Betriebswirtschaft 55, 63–78 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Harhoff, D., Henkel, J., von Hippel, E.: Profiting from Voluntary Information Spillovers: How Users Benefit by Freely Revealing Their Innovations. Research Policy 32(10), 1753–1769 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fink, M.: Business and Economics of Linux and Open Source. Prentice-Hall, New Jersy (2003)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mannaert, H., Ven, K.: The Use of Open Source Software Platforms by Independent Software Vendors: Issues and Opportunities. In: Open Source Application Spaces: Fifth Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering (5-WOSSE), St Louis, MO, USA, May 17. ACM, New York (2005) (1-59593-127-9)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ven, K., Mannaert, H.: Challenges and Strategies in the Use of Open Source Software by Independent Software Vendors. Information and Software Tech. 50, 991–1002 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lindman, J., Rossi, M., Marttiin, P.: Applying Open Source Development Practices Inside a Company. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Open Source Systems, Milan, Italy, pp. 381–387 (2008)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    van der Linden, F., Lundell, B., Marttiin, P.: Commodification of Industrial Software. A Case for Open Source. IEEE Software (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dinkelacker, J., Garg, P.: Corporate Source: Applying Open Source Concepts to a Corporate Environment. In: Proceedings of 1st Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering, Toronto, May 15 (2001)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sharma, S., Sugumaran, V., Rajagopalan, B.: A Framework for Creating Hybrid-Open Source Software Communities. Information Systems J. 12, 7–25 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gurbani, V.K., Garvert, A., Herbsleb, J.D.: A Case Study of Open Source Tools and Practices in a Commercial Setting. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering, St Louis, MO, USA, May 17, pp. 24–29 (2005)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gurbani, V.K., Garvert, A., Herbsleb, J.D.: A case study of a corporate open source development model. In: Proceedings of the the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering, Shanghai, China, pp. 472–481 (2006)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Matusow, J.: The Shared Source Initiative: The Microsoft Perspective. In: Feller, J., Fitzgerald, B., Hissam, S.A., Lakhani, K.R. (eds.) Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software, pp. 329–346. MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fox, P., Wareham, J., Giner, J.L.C.: Value Appropriation in Hybrid Technology Ecosystems. In: 29th Int. Conference on Information Systems, Paris, France (2008)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Schultze, U., Prandelli, E., Salonen, P.I., van Alstyne, M.: Internet-enabled Co-Production: Partnering or Competing with Customers? Comm. of AIS 19, 294–324 (2007)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    O’Mahony, S.: The Governance of Open Source Initiatives: What Does It Mean To Be Community Managed? J. of Management Governance 11, 139–1150 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    West, J., O’Mahony, S.: The Role of Participation Architecture in Growing Sponsored Open Source Communities. Industry & Innovation 15(2), 145–168 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    West, J.: How Open is Open Enough? Melding Proprietary and Open Source Platform Strategies. Research Policy 32, 1259–1285 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lakhani, K.R., von Hippel, E.: How Open Source Software Works: ‘Free’ User-to-user Assistance. Research Policy 32, 923–943 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., Thaler, R.: Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking: Entitlements in the Market. The American Economic Review 76(4), 728–741 (1986)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., Schwartze, B.: An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J. of Economic Behavior & Organization 3(4), 367–388 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tuli, K.R., Kohli, A.K., Bharadwaj, S.G.: Rethinking Customer Solutions: From Product Bundles to Relational Processes. J. of Marketing 71, 1–17 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikko Riepula
    • 1
  1. 1.Helsinki School of EconomicsAalto UniversityHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations