Open-Source-Projekte zwischen Passion und Kalkül

Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Aufsatz gibt einen systematisierenden Überblick über Open-Source-Communities und ihre sozioökonomischen Kontexte. Zunächst erfolgt eine Rekonstruktion der Ausdifferenzierung quelloffener Softwareprojekte. Daran anknüpfend werden vier idealtypische Varianten derzeitiger Open-Source-Projekte voneinander abgegrenzt. Anschließend wird aus technik- soziologischer Sicht diskutiert, weshalb quelloffene Softwareprojekte ihre Formatierung als Gegenentwurf zur kommerziellen Produktion inzwischen verloren haben, aber im Unterschied zu früheren Spielarten der kollektiven Invention überlebensfähig geblieben sind.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literaturverzeichnis

  1. Allen, R. (1983). Collective Invention. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 4(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  2. Alphabet Inc. (2016). Form 10-K 2015. Washington D.C.: United States Securities and Exchange Commission.Google Scholar
  3. Benkler, Y. (2002). Coase’s Penguin, or, Linux and ‚The Nature of the Firm‘. Yale Law Journal, 112, 369–446.Google Scholar
  4. Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Benkler, Y. (2013). Practical Anarchism, Peer Mutualism, Market Power, and the Fallible State. Politics & Society, 41(2), 213–251.Google Scholar
  6. Benkler, Y. & Nissenbaum, H. (2006). Commons-based Peer Production and Virtue. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14(4), 394–419.Google Scholar
  7. Bergquist, M., Ljungberg, J. & Rolandsson, B. (2012). Justifying the Value of Open Source. ECIS Proceedings. URL: http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2012/122/ (5/2017).
  8. Bezroukov, N. (1999). A Second Look at the Cathedral and the Bazaar. First Monday, 4(12). URL: http://firstmonday.org/article/view/708/618 (5/2017).
  9. Brooks, F. (1975). The Mythical Man-Month. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  10. Corbet, J. (2015). Development Activity in LibreOffice and OpenOffice. LWN.net (3/25/2015). https://lwn.net/Articles/637735/ (5/2017).
  11. Corbet, J. & Kroah-Hartman, G. (2016). Linux Kernel Development Report. San Francisco: The Linux Foundation.Google Scholar
  12. Corbet, J., Kroah-Hartman, G., McPherson, A. (2009–2015). Linux Kernel Development Report. San Francisco: The Linux Foundation.Google Scholar
  13. Dolata, U. & Schrape, J-F. (2016). Masses, Crowds, Communities, Movements: Collective Action in the Internet Age. Social Movement Studies, 15(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
  14. Driver, M. (2014). Within the Enterprise, Open Source Must Coexist in a Hybrid IT Portfolio. Gartner Inc. Research Report. Stamford: Gartner Inc.Google Scholar
  15. Fisher, F., McKie, J., Mancke, R. (1983). IBM and the US Data Processing Industry: An Economic History. Santa Barbara: Praeger.Google Scholar
  16. Free Software Foundation (1989). GNU General Public License (GPL) Version 1.0. URL: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-1.0.en.html (5/2017).
  17. Gates, Bill (1976): An Open Letter to Hobbyists. In: Computer Notes 1(9), 3.Google Scholar
  18. Geels, F. & Schot, J. (2007). Typology of Sociotechnical Transition Pathways. Research Policy, 36(3), 399–417.Google Scholar
  19. Gelsi, S. (1999). VA Linux Rockets 698%. In: CBS Marketwatch (12/10/1999). URL: http://www.cbs-news.com/news/va-linux-rockets-698/ (5/2017).
  20. Greenstein, S. & Nagle, F. (2014). Digital Dark Matter and the Economic Contribution of Apache. Research Policy, 43(4), 623–631.Google Scholar
  21. Gulley, N. & Lakhani, K. (2010). The Determinants of Individual Performance and Collective Value in Private-collective Software Innovation. Harvard Business School Technology & Operations Management Unit Working Paper 10/065.Google Scholar
  22. Henkel, J., Schöberl, S. & Alexy, O. (2014). The Emergence of Openness: How and Why Firms Adopt Selective Revealing in Open Innovation. Research Policy, 43(5), 879–890.Google Scholar
  23. Kolassa, C., Riehle, D., Riemer, P. & Schmidt, M. (2014). Paid vs. Volunteer Work in Open Source. Proceedings 47th Hawaii Int. Conference on System Sciences, 3286–3295.Google Scholar
  24. Kranich, N. & Schement, J. (2008). Information Commons. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 42(1), 546–591.Google Scholar
  25. Kreiss, D., Finn, M. & Turner, F. (2011). The Limits of Peer Production: Some Reminders from Max Weber for the Network Society. New Media & Society, 13(2), 243–259.Google Scholar
  26. Lakhani, K. & Hippel, E. v. (2003): How Open Source Software Works. Research Policy, 32, 923–943.Google Scholar
  27. Lerner, J. (2012). The Architecture of Innovation. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  28. Lerner, J. & Tirole, J. (2002). Some Simple Economics of Open Source. Journal of Industrial Economics, 50(2), 197–234.Google Scholar
  29. Lessig, L. (1999). CODE and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  30. Microsoft Corp. (2015). Annual Report. http://www.microsoft.com/investor/reports/ (5/2017).
  31. Moody, G. (2002). Rebel Code. The Inside Story of Linux and the Open Source Revolution. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  32. Netscape Communications (1998). Netscape Announces Mozilla.org. Press Release (2/23/1998).Google Scholar
  33. O’Mahony, S. (2003). Guarding the Commons. How Community Managed Software Projects Protect their Work. Research Policy, 32, 1179–1198.Google Scholar
  34. O’Mahony, S. & Ferraro, F. (2007). The Emergence of Governance in an Open Source Community. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1079–1106.Google Scholar
  35. Osterloh, M. & Rota, S. (2007). Open Source Software Development: Just another Case of Collective Invention? Research Policy, 36, 157–171.Google Scholar
  36. Perrow, C. (1991). A Society of Organizations. Theory & Society, 20, 725–762.Google Scholar
  37. Raymond, E. (1998). Goodbye, „free software“; Hello, „open source“. Announcement (11/22/1998). URL: http://www.lab.unb.br/pub/computing/museum/esr/open-source.html (5/2017).
  38. Raymond, E. (1999). The Cathedral and the Bazaar. Sebastopol: O’Reilly.Google Scholar
  39. Rifkin, J. (2014). The Zero Marginal Cost Society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  40. Spinellis, D. & Giannikas, V. (2012). Organizational Adoption of Open Source Software. Journal of Systems and Software, 85(3), 666–682.Google Scholar
  41. Spreeuwenberg, K. & Poell, T. (2012). Android and the Political Economy of the Mobile Internet. First Monday, 17(7). http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v17i7.4050 (5/2017)
  42. Stallman, R. (1983). New UNIX Implementation. URL: http://bit.ly/1DSDoXW (5/2017).
  43. Torvalds, L. (2002). Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper Documentation from Linux Tree. Linux Kernel Mailinglist (4/20/2002). URL: http://www.lwn.net/2002/0425/a/ideology-sucks.php3 (5/2017).
  44. Weber, S. (2000). The Political Economy of Open Source. BRIE Working Paper 140. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
  45. Westenholz, Ann (Eds.) (2012). The Janus Face of Commercial Open Source Software Communities. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für SozialwissenschaftenUniversität StuttgartStuttgartDeutschland

Personalised recommendations