My creds: Been in open source for 25 years, one of the earlier users of Ubuntu when it launched in Fourways, South Africa (remember those sleeved CDs they used to send for installation media) though I hardcore rep Debian, have deployed and supported countless tools across 3 continents, the most memorable being Mambo which later became Joomla, though I switched to Drupal.

I think the label has been hijacked by many corporations to front an ethical FOSS front but in reality release a hobbled version of their software that is inherently open source at the core, but, has a commercial hard gate around certain things, like scalability/performance/high availability, authentication and security (big yikes here), integrations, usability, reporting and analytics etc… you get where I am going with this. I respect that people have to do what they have to do to eat and grow, but there is blatant misrepresentation happening and it needs to be called out. Or maybe I am wrong here?

  • emb@lemmy.world
    52·
    3 months ago

    The term for this is openwashing. Seems like it’s been ramping up for a while. Any software or tech vendors know that open(source) is an attractive point, especially to devs. But they don’t want to deal with the realities of it.

    Most famous example in recent times is OpenAI, which has that name but not much else.

  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlEnglish
    12·
    3 months ago

    Yes, some free/freemium products mislead or straight-up lie. Check the source code and the license(s). In some cases the fee version is open source but the premium version is neither open nor even source-available. AlternativeTo lets you filter based on Open Source, Free, and Paid.

  • Yaky@slrpnk.net
    3·
    3 months ago

    The ones I know of are not really masquerading, but rather, funding themselves and/or directly related services (often hosting) via convenient ways.

    • Conversations.im (XMPP/Jabber client) is $8 on Google Play, free on F-Droid and is FOSS. Dev runs their own instance.
    • OsmAnd+ costs money on Google Play, is free on F-Droid, provides hosting of gigabytes of map data.
    • Beeper (bridges from popular chats to Matrix) costs money (subscription I believe), but can be set up on one’s own (I run two bridges on my chat server).

    What I do dislike is companies overusing “Open” or “Free” in their own or their product names, with no implication of Free or Open Source software. Similar to slapping “engineer” on non-engineering roles or “manager” on non-managerial ones.

    • makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml
      6·
      3 months ago

      N8N. Claims to be open source. After a bit of an outcry, call their code availability ‘Faircode’ now. It’s openwashing

      • pReya@discuss.tchncs.de
        1·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, it is. But I think they’ve dialled it down quite a bit. Or do you still have som examples where they claim to be open source? It’s mostly users misunderstanding what OSS is.

  • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    413·
    3 months ago

    Been in open source for 25 years

    have deployed and supported countless tools across 3 continent

    My creds

    What does this even mean? You used free software made by others to your benefit or profit and that’s your “credentials”?

    What in the actual fuck. How about you start a project without expecting anything and be the change you want to see?

    No one else needs to run by your “label”, people who are knowledgeable know people need to earn to eat and have to make a livelihood.

    No ones stopping you from using the base opensource code to extend it to your liking.

    This is just open-source entitlelism. Nobody owes you shit.