<sorry for any x-posting> Dear all, Hope everyone is taking it easy for the Winter/Summer Holidays. Looks like we might get a White X-mas in Boston. I have been a bit delayed with my update on the website. Apologies to the patiently waiting authors :) - Any way here is some brain food to enjoy for the holidays. Many thanks to all the authors for the submissions. We are now approaching the 200 paper mark - and whoever submits the 200th paper will get some MIT knick knacks! So hurry up and submit! Have a great holiday! Warmly, Karim Paper - 1 Authors: Lerner, Josh & Jean Tirole Title: The Economics of Technology Sharing: Open Source and Beyond http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/lernertirole3.pdf Abstract: This paper reviews our understanding of the growing open source movement. We highlight how many aspects of open source software appear initially puzzling to an economist. As we have acknowledge, our ability to answer confidently many of the issues raised here questions is likely to increase as the open source movement itself grows and evolves. At the same time, it is heartening to us how much of open source activities can be understood within existing economic frameworks, despite the presence of claims to the contrary. The labor and industrial organization literatures provide lenses through which the structure of open source projects, the role of contributors, and the movement's ongoing evolution can be viewed. Paper - 2 Authors: Dalle, J.-M., P. A. David, Rishab A. Ghosh, & W. E. Steinmueller Title: Advancing Economic Research on the Free and Open Source Software Mode of Production http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/davidetal.pdf Abstract: Early contributions to the academic literature on free/libre and open source software (F/LOSS) movements have been directed primarily at identifying the motivations that account for the sustained and often intensive involvement of many people in this non-contractual and unremunerated productive activity. This issue has been particularly prominent in economists' contributions to the literature, and it reflects a view that widespread voluntary participation in the creation of economically valuable goods that is to be distributed without charge constitutes a significant behavioral anomaly. Undoubtedly, the motivations of F/LOSS developers deserve to be studied more intensively, but not because their behaviors are unique, or historically unprecedented. In this essay we argue that other aspects of the "open source" phenomenon are just as intriguing, if not more so, and possibly are also more consequential topics for economic analysis. We describe the re-focusing and re-direction of empirical and theoretical research in an integrated international project (based at Stanford University/SIEPR) that aims at better understanding a set of less widely discussed topics: the modes of organization, governance and performance of F/LOSS development -- viewed as a collective distributed mode of production.. We discuss of the significance of tackling those questions in order to assess the potentialities of the "open source way of working" as a paradigm for a broader class of knowledge and information-goods production, and conclude with proposals for the trajectory of future research along that line. Paper - 3 Berry, David M. Title: Internet Research: Privacy, Ethics and Alienation – An Open Source Approach http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/berry2.pdf Abstract: This paper examines some of the ethical problems involved in undertaking Internet research and draws on historical accounts as well as contemporary studies to offer an analysis of the issues raised. It argues that privacy is a misleading and confusing concept to apply to the Internet, and that the concept of non-alienation is more resourceful in addressing the many ethical issues surrounding Internet research. Using this as a basis, the paper then investigates the Free/Libre and Open Source research model and argues for the principles of ‘open source ethics’ in researching the online world, which includes a participatory and democratic research method. Paper - 4 Berry, David M. Title: THE CONTESTATION OF CODE: A preliminary investigation into the discourse of the free/libre and open source movements http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/berry1.pdf Abstract: This paper uses discourse analysis to examine the free/libre and open source movements. It analyses how they fix elements within the order of discourse of computer code production. It attempts to uncover the key signifiers in their discourses and trace linkages between the sedimented discourses of wider society. Using discourse theory and critical discourse analysis, the theoretical foundations underpinning each of the movements are critically examined and the effect on the wider developer and Internet community is discussed. Additionally, this paper seeks to recommend discursive strategies that could be employed to avoid the threat of colonization by neoliberal discourse and the consequent challenge this has for the ideas of freedom, liberty and community within the developer communities’ own discourses. Paper - 5 Crowston, Kevin & James Howison Title: The social structure of Free and Open Source software development http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/crowstonhowison.pdf Abstract: Metaphors, such as the Cathedral and Bazaar, used to describe the organization of FLOSS projects typically place them in sharp contrast to proprietary development by emphasizing FLOSS’s distinctive social and communications structures. But what do we really know about the communication patterns of FLOSS projects? How generalizable are the projects that have been studied? Is there consistency across FLOSS projects? Questioning the assumption of distinctiveness is important because practitioner-advocates from within the FLOSS community rely on features of social structure to describe and account for some of the advantages of FLOSS production. To address this question, we examined 120 project teams from SourceForge, representing a wide range of FLOSS project types, for their communications centralization as revealed in the interactions in the bug tracking system. We found that FLOSS development teams vary widely in their communications centralization, from projects completely c entered on one developer to projects that are highly decentralized and exhibit a distributed pattern of conversation between developers and active users. Thesis - 1 Author Escher, Tobias Title: Political Motives of Developers for Collaboration on GNU/Linux http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/escher.pdf Abstract: This paper examines to what degree developers of the collaboratively produced computer operating system GNU/Linux are politically motivated for their contributions. It first states that software is politically relevant. It then goes on to argue for the political significance of Free Software/Open Source Software (FS/OSS) and discusses the developers ambivalent attitude towards a politicisation of FS/OSS. Centrepiece is a survey carried out with 85 GNU/Linux developers that showed that most of them are conscious of the social relevance of FS/OSS and that their engagement is of a deliberately political nature. Thesis - 2 Author: Görling, Stefan Title: A critical approach to Open Source Software http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/gorling.pdf Abstract: The purpose of this masters' thesis was to discuss a number of assumptions regarding the benefits of Open Source software projects. By studying what has been written about Open Source combined with a number of own data collections, this thesis argues that: • Brooks law is still valid in Open Source projects • Many Open Source projects are failures • Open Source culture is a product of the 90s, not the 70s • Open Source is no guarantee for reduced lock-in effects • Our most famous Open Source projects are not built up by nerds working for free, but professionals, employed by commercial companies to contribute to the projects. • Large Open Source projects are often hierarchical and bureaucratic • Opening your source does not automatically lead to a large number of contributors • Open Source breeds diversity, not a single winner • Open Source projects often targets the community itself, rather than external actors • Companies benefiting from Open Source are often based on traditional business models rather than revolutionary visions • Open Source is not necessarily an efficient way to develop software -- Karim R. Lakhani MIT Sloan | The Boston Consulting Group Mobile: +1 (617) 851-1224 http://spoudaiospaizen.net http://web.mit.edu/lakhani/www | http://opensource.mit.edu