Are there valid reasons to keep software closed source?
I have survived my holiday break and spent enough time watching the Battlestar Galactica TV series that I started thinking about the possibility of open source software for Cylons. I hope you had a nice holiday break as well and are excited and ready to start thinking open source in 2011.
With everyone doing their 2011 predictions or 2010 look backs I thought I would take a different tack and discuss an issue that people in open source don’t discuss much – is there any software that shouldn’t be open sourced? My immediate reaction to this question is that all software should be open sourced and the question makes no sense. I tend to focus on the benefits of open source: more testers, more smart people fixing algorithms, etc and not necessarily on the business reasons for the software.
However, with more thought on this (while pondering what our future Cylons will look like) I believe that the real answer is YES. There are clearly times when having a closed source solution is the way to go. For example, assume you work for an investing firm where a mathematician has created the ultimate formula for stock selection to maximize profit. The software running this formula is clearly a competitive advantage for the company and would not benefit from the solution being exposed to everyone. Protecting the IP of a company in software is similar to the way the Colonel protects KFC’s secret recipe and needs to stay closed.
In my example, I found that a company’s competitive advantage is a valid reason for keeping software closed; however, I have not come up with another reason to keep software closed and am looking for your thoughts; what other reasons exist to keep software closed? It seems to me that software for life critical machines such as airplanes, space shuttle,or health care devices should be open with protected IP parts closed to ensure business needs. Perhaps we should have all software open except the IP portions?
