Open Source Contributors Research Articles

Openness, Open Source, and the Veil of Ignorance

Author(s): Scotchmer, Suzanne | Abstract: The open source movement evolved in the one industrial context where openness is not required by intellectual property law.1 Nevertheless, openness itself cannot be the driving force behind the open source movement. This is because openness can be achieved in many ways other than the GPL, for example, with proprietary licenses, or licenses that are even more permissive than the GPL, such as the BSD license.Early commentators explained this new development model by focussing on the motives of the programmer, such as to demonstrate skills. See the survey by Stephen M. Maurer and Suzanne Scotchmer (2006). But firms also participate in open-source collaborations, sometimes contributing significant resources (Joachim Henkel, 2006, Dirk Riehle, 2009). Doing so can be profitable even if the contributors are rivals in the market. The quality improvements or cost reductions provided by a rival’s open-source contributions may outweigh the deleterious effect of empowering the rival to be a better competitor.

Giving It Away for Free? The Nature of Job-Market Signaling by Open-Source Software Developers

Abstract Much work has been done in recent times to answer the question of why people contribute, and continue to contribute to open-source and free software, despite the lack of immediate financial gain in most cases. Lerner and Tirole (2002) hypothesize that open-source contributions act as a form of job-market signaling – they permit prospective employers to judge a person's ability directly. This paper tests the nature of this signaling using a complementarity framework. Do developers use open source software as a way to enhance the signal from a college education, or to substitute for it, in a form of learning by doing? I find evidence that they are complements, while conclusively rejecting the idea that they are substitutes.

Open source content contributors’ response to free-riding: The effect of personality and context

We address concerns about the sustainability of the open source content model by examining the effect of external appropriation, whereby the product of open source contributors’ efforts is monetized by a party that did not contribute to the project, on intended effort withdrawal (reduction in contribution level). We examine both the personality of contributors and their contextual motivations to contribute, using a scenario-based survey of Wikipedia contributors. The findings suggest that perceived justice of the open source license terms, and intrinsic motivations are both negatively related with effort withdrawal intentions. Moreover, we find that the effect of the fairness personality trait on effort withdrawal is stronger for individuals who are low in perceived justice and weaker for individuals high in justice. The findings of factors predicting effort withdrawal contribute to the open source literature, which tends to focus on contribution and motivations, but not on what impacts changes in individual contribution levels.

Open Source Development with a Commercial Complementary Product or Service

We examine optimal control decisions regarding pricing, network size, and hiring strategy in the context of open source software development. Opening the source code to a software product often implies that consumers would not pay for the software product itself. However, revenues may be generated from complementary products. A software firm may be willing to open the source code to its software if it stands to build a network for its complementary products. The rapid network growth is doubly crucial in open source development, in which the users of the firm's products are also contributors of code that translates to future quality improvements. To determine whether or not to open the source, a software firm must jointly optimize prices for its various products while simultaneously managing its product quality, network size, and employment strategy. Whether or not potential gains in product quality, network size, and labor savings are sufficient to justify opening the source code depends on product and demand characteristics of both the software and the complementary product, as well as on the cost and productivity of in‐house developers relative to open source contributors. This paper investigates these crucial elements to allow firms to reach the optimal decision in choosing between the open and closed source models.

Giving it Away for Free? The Nature of Job-Market Signaling by Open-Source Software Developers

Much work has been done in recent times to answer the question of why people contribute, and continue to contribute, to open-source and free software, despite the lack of immediate financial gain in most cases. Lerner and Tirole (2002) hypothesize that open-source contributions act as a form of job market signaling - they permit prospective employers to judge a person's ability directly. This paper tests the nature of this signaling using a complementarity framework. Do developers use open source software as a way to enhance the signal from a college education, or to substitute for it, in a form of learning by doing? I find evidence that they are complements, while conclusively rejecting the idea that they are substitutes.

Why develop open-source software? The role of non-pecuniary benefits, monetary rewards, and open-source licence type

A review of the basic theory of optimal open-source software contributions points to three key factors affecting supply: non-pecuniary benefits, future expected monetary returns, and open-source licence type. This paper argues that existing large-scale software developer surveys are inadequate for measuring the relative importance of these three factors. Moreover, previous econometric studies that collect their own unique datasets generally measure the importance of only one supply factor in isolation. To fill the gap, I specify a dynamic programming model of joint labour supply and open-source contribution decisions that can provide empirical estimates of relative importance within a single unified framework.