| In policy discussions on Free/Libre and Open Source Software, many acronyms are used. For the purposes of this discussion, we will use the general term of FOSS and refer to the FSF’s user-driven definition of free software.
In the United States, the role of OSS has been dictated largely by market forces. Because it has proven to be more or as efficient as proprietary software in many circumstances, as well as competitive in the commercial sector, FOSS has evolved in a tenuous relationship with proprietary software. The proprietary software companies have a tremendous amount of capital, power, and influence, but faced with the decentralized nature of FOSS development and the strength of redistributive copyleft licensing, they seem to be fighting losing battles.
In developing regions of the world, where many newly industrializing nations face pressures to rapidly integrate into the information, opportunity exists for governments to take progressive stances on national policies toward use of FOSS. These regions face several threats when dealing with challenges of technological advancement to which OSS can give rise to opportunities.
In regions of underdeveloped software markets (low demand for income, linguistic, or legal issues), FOSS can respond to unmet local market demand.
Legacy ICT infrastructure and other conditions contributing to scarcity of access can lead to compatibility issues with proprietary software.
In developing countries, software copyright infringement rates are estimated to be above 90 percent. Statistics like this affect the amount of foreign direct investment a country is able to attract, and can even prevent a nation from gaining membership benefits from the WTO.
But as the world becomes increasingly networked, cooperative approaches to FOSS are necessary to achieving critical mass in regional economies of scale. |