tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-61349907507311574182024-03-05T10:29:07.835-05:00Open Source Business ResourceChris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.comBlogger174125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-78365271000288102672011-08-03T11:16:00.000-04:002011-08-03T11:16:30.079-04:00Announcing the August Issue and Upcoming Changes to the OSBR<div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The August issue of the OSBR is now available in <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1341/1284">PDF</a> and <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/125">HTML</a> formats. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">For this issue of the OSBR, we issued a general invitation to authors to submit articles on the topics of open source business and the growth of early-stage technology companies.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Anthony Casson and Leslie Hawthorn from the Oregon State University <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1343/1286">describe</a> the Open Source Lab, which is home to many of the world's leading open source projects. They describe the benefits the lab provides to the projects it supports and the real-word experiences and educational opportunities it provides to its student employees. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">Tyler Mitchell, Executive Director of the Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo), <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1344/1287">examines</a> social interoperability as a parallel capability to technical interoperability. Using OSGeo as a case study, he highlights the importance of effective communication and relationships in enabling innovation within open source projects. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">Sandro Groganz, Co-Founder of Age of Peers, <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1345/1288">shares</a> insights into the structures and relationships of vendor-led open source ecosystems to highlight the business strategies available to partners. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">Tony Wacheski, CEO of Anystone Technologies, <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1346/1289">shares</a> the lessons he and his co-founder learned their first year as entrepreneurs. He describes the company's first applications and the valuable development, marketing, and sales experience they provided.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Chris McPhee, Editor-in-Chief of the <em>Open Source Business Resource</em> <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1347/1290">announces</a> that this publication will become the <em>Technology Innovation Management Review</em> following this issue. He looks back on four years of the OSBR and describes the upcoming changes to this publication.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In September, we look forward to the first issue of the <em>Technology Innovation Management Review</em>. We welcome your feedback and invite you to submit articles on the topics of managing innovation, entrepreneurship, open source business, economic development, or the growth of early-stage technology companies. Please contact the Editor, <a href="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">Chris McPhee</a>, if you are interested in submitting an article.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-22981299391111945352011-07-29T09:23:00.000-04:002011-07-29T09:23:12.453-04:00Redefining "Men's Work": Equality in the Playroom and the Boardroom<P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Today's columnist is Julian Egelstaff from Freeform Solutions. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1340/1283">writes</a>:</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>I learned a lot of things during the early years of <A HREF="http://www.freeformsolutions.ca/" TARGET="_blank">Freeform Solutions</A>. But not just about business and entrepreneurship. I also learned:</P><UL> <LI><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Two-year-olds will eventually go to sleep by themselves for an afternoon nap, if you're on the phone with a client long enough.</P> <LI><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Not all child-proof medicine bottles are created equal.</P> <LI><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>And never, ever, ever leave a permanent marker on the kitchen counter when you're in another room answering e-mail.</P></UL><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>I had the good fortune to learn these and many other
lessons courtesy of my twin daughters, who were born a few months
before Freeform Solutions was officially incorporated. For me
personally, and for my family, a big reason to start Freeform was to
have a flexible job that I could do at home, so I could look after
the girls. My wife continued with her 9-to-5 job out of the house.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>So, at the same time as I became a social
entrepreneur, I also became a man in the woman's world of child
rearing. I think it gives me a unique perspective on some of the
challenges facing women entrepreneurs.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Make no mistake, the world of child rearing is a
woman's world.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>If you don't believe me, just check out a random
selection of books on how to take care of babies and young children.
It won't be long before you find helpful chapters with titles like
“What Dad can do to help.” Just imagine picking up a
general business book and finding a chapter entitled “What your
wife can do to support your career.” Equality of the sexes is
closer to reality in the boardroom than the playroom.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>As a society, we seem to pay a lot of attention to
equality issues, at least in the workplace. They are routinely in the
news, many organizations have anti-discrimination policies, and a lot
of hiring practices are specifically designed to create an equal
playing field. A lot of the articles in <A HREF="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/124">this
month's OSBR issue on Women Entrepreneurs</A> talk about the
importance of various policies and programs in supporting women
entrepreneurs in the workplace.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>But when it comes to family life and personal
decisions, our society seems to have a different set of expectations
in place. These expectations are not just in the “parenting
industry” – the book publishers, the toy makers, the
companies marketing goods and services for looking after infants and
young children – those companies can almost justify the focus
on moms by the fact that women make up about 90% of the people
providing child care at home. But in my experience, many individuals
also implicitly hold this idea that looking after kids is “women's
work.”</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>When I was out and about with my pre-school aged
girls, people would often make conversation. Twins are a real
show-stopper. If you enter a grocery store with a matched set of
babies in a double stroller, total strangers will stop and talk to
you, several times, whether you like it or not.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>A common theme of conversation would be how nice it
was that I was giving mom a break. These people were trying their
best to be complimentary. It was just their instinctive assumptions
kicking in, we're all prone to that. When you hear hoof beats, you
think horses not zebras. And when you see a man pushing a stroller,
many people think dad-home-from-work, not stay-at-home-dad.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>My anecdotal experience is not the end of the story
here. Many researchers have spent a lot of time examining these
biases, as Tess Jewell explains in <A HREF="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1333/1276">her
article in this month's OSBR</A>.
</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>But it's not just the everyday world outside of work
that needs to welcome and support men who provide child care. The
workplace needs to stop viewing this as a women's issue, and start
treating it as a family issue that affects men equally.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>This is touchy stuff. You won't necessarily find
people talking about it openly around the water cooler, but in how
many workplaces would it raise eyebrows if a man took six or nine
months of paternity leave? He's entitled under the law. But wouldn't
it hurt his career?</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Breathless profiles of women executives in magazines
will not hesitate to comment on how she balances work and kids. But
for how many men is that even a question in the interview?</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Nonetheless, perceptions and behaviours are
gradually changing. Since 2001, fathers in Canada have been able to
take up to 35 weeks of parental leave, and a steadily growing
percentage of eligible fathers have been taking at least part of that
time – <A HREF="http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2008106/pdf/10639-eng.pdf" TARGET="_blank">10%
in 2001, increasing to 20% in 2006</A>. In Quebec, nearly half of
eligible fathers take at least some parental leave time. That's
probably because in Quebec there are more generous subsidies,
replacing up to 75% of your income.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>This is real progress, but men are still a distinct
minority when it comes to providing child care. Support for fathers
in the workplace needs to keep improving. Fathers need to be
encouraged to provide primary care for their children, and as a
society we need to welcome them into this role. Maternity leave is
not some kind of special trump card women get to play. Being involved
in raising your kids is a right that all parents have.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>It's not just a right, it's a joy. Your kids are
only young once. So come on guys, step up and take on this wonderful
role. Until we find a way to make it happen, women will continue to
be the only ones stuck with the challenge of balancing work and kids.
As long as there's no equality in the playroom, it will be impossible
to achieve equality in the boardroom.</P>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-78318338247458088262011-07-05T11:41:00.000-04:002011-07-05T11:41:35.123-04:00Women Entrepreneurs<div style="text-align: justify;">The July issue of the OSBR is now available in <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1331/1274">PDF</a> and <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/124">HTML</a> formats.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The editorial theme for this issue of the OSBR is Women Entrepreneurs. In this issue, we examine the reasons for the relative lack of women founders and leaders in technology businesses. Our authors discuss the entrepreneurial challenges that are unique to women and what changes may be implemented to tip the balance and increase the number of women entrepreneurs. This issue features the following articles:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Tess Jewell, a PhD student at York University and Ryerson University, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1333/1276">describes</a> the social and environmental factors that influence women’s career choices and participation in entrepreneurship.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Roseann O’Reilly Runte, President and Vice-Chancellor of Carleton University, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1334/1277">emphasizes</a> the importance of women's participation in entrepreneurial activities and their impact on regional economic development, including solutions for cultivating a more supportive environment for women entrepreneurs.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">J. McGrath Cohoon, Associate Professor at the University of Virginia and Senior Research Scientist at the National Center for Women & IT, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1335/1278">describes</a> research to determine what gender differences might contribute to the unequal gender composition of successful founders.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Janice Singer and Deborah Dexter, Industrial Technology Advisors for the National Research Council of Canada Industrial Research Assistance Program (IRAP), <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1336/1279">describe</a> existing programs to support women entrepreneurs and introduce Lead to Win for Women, a new program to increase the number of women-founded businesses in Canada's Capital Region.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Ruth Bastedo, President of Experience Media Group Inc., <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1337/1280">answers</a> the question: Why is there a dearth of women on high-growth technology startup teams? She describes the challenges she has faced as an entrepreneur and shares insights into the reasons for the current imbalance.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Cate Huston, Software Engineer at Google, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1338/1281">answers</a> the question: Should all women aspire to be entrepreneurs? In addition to supporting women entrepreneurs, she recommends encouraging and celebrating less overt forms of leadership.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For the upcoming August issue, we offer a rare unthemed issue and we welcome general submissions on the topic of open source business or the growth of early-stage technology companies. This is a great opportunity to publish your insights without having to wait for a relevant issue theme. Please contact the Editor, <a href="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">Chris McPhee</a>, immediately if you are interested in submitting an article for the August issue. </div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-36027907411823939042011-06-17T10:09:00.000-04:002011-06-17T10:09:28.581-04:00Nostalgic About the Future: Open Source Entrepreneurship<div align="JUSTIFY">Today's columnist is Julian Egelstaff from Freeform Solutions. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1328/1273">writes</a>: </div><div align="JUSTIFY">I'm nostalgic about the future. That sounds mixed up, but it's true. The future used to be a wondrous place, full of flying cars and plastic clothes and amazing architecture. Those were the good old “<a href="http://davidszondy.com/future/futurepast.htm" target="_blank">world's of tomorrow</a>.” Some of them are still with us in a sense. The <a href="http://www.spaceneedle.com/" target="_blank">Seattle Space Needle</a> predates the moon landings, and proudly shows us the sleek, stylized future that awaited us all afterwards.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">The buildings of Ontario Place were constructed less than a decade after the World's Fair that brought us the Space Needle. The <a href="http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/image_galleries/history_and_heritage/?8145">Ontario Place pavilions</a>, hovering over water, speak the same optimistic language of the future. When they were new, they were filled with previews of tomorrow; I still vividly remember being there thirty years ago, and seeing computer animation for the first time — a wireframe paper airplane floating endlessly over a blocky landscape.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Somehow, we slipped off that path to the future and ended up in a different place. No flying cars (too bad). No plastic clothes (thank goodness). The Ontario Place pavilions are now deserted, <a href="http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/836552--ontario-place-to-be-torn-down-and-rebuilt" target="_blank">awaiting demolition</a>.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">But on the flip side, we do have the Internet, more communications technology in our pockets than anyone could have dreamed of a generation ago, and a lot of open source software underlying it all. Sure, we didn't end up where some people thought we would, but it's been a wonderful march to a better tomorrow, hasn't it?</div><div align="JUSTIFY">When we look back, it's easy to see the steps, though they're not always linear. In the case of open source and the Internet, you could single out:</div><ul><li><div align="JUSTIFY">the creation of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET" target="_blank">ARPANET</a></div></li>
<li><div align="JUSTIFY">the start of the <a href="http://www.digibarn.com/collections/newsletters/homebrew/" target="_blank">Homebrew Computer Club</a></div></li>
<li><div align="JUSTIFY">the formation of the <a href="http://www.comcreations.com/os/section_who/stallman.htm" target="_blank">Free Software Foundation</a></div></li>
<li><div align="JUSTIFY">the invention of the <a href="http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/worldweb.htm" target="_blank">World Wide Web</a></div></li>
<li><div align="JUSTIFY">the <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.minix/browse_thread/thread/76536d1fb451ac60/2516b8c29126a8ef" target="_blank">start of Linux</a></div></li>
<li><div align="JUSTIFY">the launch of a graphical web with <a href="http://www.ex-mozilla.org/demodoc/demo.html" target="_blank">Mosaic</a> and later, <a href="http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nscpdorm.html" target="_blank">Netscape</a></div></li>
<li><div align="JUSTIFY">and so on through to our mobile, socially connected, always-on, <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/best-augmented-reality-apps-for-iphone-and-ios-2011-3#wikitude-points-you-to-wikipedia-entries-near-you-using-geo-location-1" target="_blank">future-that's-here-now</a>.</div></li>
</ul><div align="JUSTIFY">But when we try and predict what's coming next — a key goal of any decent entrepreneur (entrepreneurship being the continuing theme of <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/123" target="_blank">this month's OSBR</a>) — it's a trap to look at that seemingly forward march of progress, and extrapolate to see tomorrow's technology today.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">As <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_S%C3%B8ren_Kierkegaard" target="_blank">Kierkegaard said</a>, “Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.” History is the same way. It seems orderly when we're looking back, but that's just us imposing an interpretation on a series of scattered data points.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">The progress of open source is not inevitable, and just because a lot of people seem to line up behind an idea, that doesn't make it come to pass. How many times have you heard people say that Linux will be “<a href="http://www.linux.com/archive/feed/28796" target="_blank">ready for the desktop</a>” now/this year/next year/in three years? Sure, it's closer than ever before, but <a href="http://www.linux.com/archive/feed/134808" target="_blank">it's definitely not a mainstream desktop operating system</a>, and it might never be.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Some people have suggested that there should be an <a href="http://losmb.com/" target="_blank">open source “marketing board”</a> modelled after the egg marketing board or the milk marketing board. This is an interesting idea, which has not yet come to pass, and which highlights the necessary interplay between technology and other forces, like business.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">As technologists, those of us involved in open source see a bright future for it, and believe it can achieve great things. But the technology won't get there on its own. If you invent it, they might not come. The history of technology is full of examples of the truly sideways march of progress.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">For instance, early crystal radio sets employed <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diode" target="_blank">the first semiconductor diodes</a> to tune in signals. This early innovation was replaced by vacuum tubes which dominated the electronics industry until the transistor came along in the 1950s.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Looking back on it now, vacuum tubes were a complete detour off the semiconductor path. How much interest and research into crystals and semiconductors never happened, or happened only later, because of the dominance of vacuum tubes? What effect did that detour have on the emergence of the modern semiconductor industry, now the backbone of all computing?</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Even something that seems like a basic law now, such as having 8-bits in a byte, wasn't a natural or inevitable property of our modern technology. Before IBM introduced the System 360 in 1964, <a href="http://www.computerhistory.org/internet_history/" target="_blank">there had been computer systems using all kinds of different byte sizes</a>, all the way up to 36! The dominance of the System 360 was one reason that 8-bits became the standard. Then came the Intel 8008, and before you knew it, the 8-bit future was here today.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">We tend to view the successful technologies as somehow better than what came before. In evolutionary terms, we want to believe that the dominant forms are somehow better adapted to their environments. We search for the good reason that explains why things worked out the way they did. But history (and biology) shows that the reasons for success don't always come from the correctness of the solution.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Opposable thumbs and bigger brains no doubt provided some significant advantages to the living things that inherited them. But not all adaptations produce benefits. Some things happen by accident, or a string of accidents. Features that look useful from our point of view (hindsight), <a href="http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/classictexts/gould.pdf" target="_blank">might just be side effects</a> as far as natural selection is concerned. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">Other features of organisms must have had intermediate forms, with some distinct benefits of their own, even if those benefits are difficult for us to appreciate with hindsight alone. A classic example is a wing. Wings didn't evolve because of the great benefits that flying conveys. Half a wing doesn't convey any flight benefits, and clearly wings didn't evolve in one generation. So intermediate stages must have provided some benefit of their own, independent of flight.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Similarly in the technology field, we shouldn't look at the successful technologies of today and assume they are the culmination of development that was aiming specifically for their current success. Unfortunately, real life is very messy, and <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/jan2008/id2008012_297369.htm" target="_blank">technologies become successful for lots of different reasons</a>, not just the intentions of their creators.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Taming these forces is one of the key challenges for any entrepreneur. As <a href="http://www.jwz.org/doc/backups.html" target="_blank">a wise man</a> once said, “The universe tends towards maximum irony.” Or put another way, there's a lot of natural forces conspiring against your version of the future ever coming to pass. So if we really want open source to live up to its potential, there's still a lot of work to do. The technology won't make the future happen by itself.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">That's the other reason I'm nostalgic for the future, the wonderland version of it that was going to be here today. There was a wonderfully naive air of inevitability about it, like a sure view of history, just running in reverse. Hopefully one day we'll get there, and when we do, we'll pat ourselves on the back and it won't seem like the journey was so hard. Future generations might think it was preordained. But the truth is that our future will be <a href="http://www.threehundredwords.com/2009/04/nearest-run-thing-you-ever-saw.html" target="_blank">a close run thing</a>. It always is.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-7758072054439779192011-06-10T11:40:00.000-04:002011-06-10T11:40:02.637-04:00Call for Papers for August Issue<div style="text-align: justify;">We believe there is great value in bringing multiple perspectives together to discuss a particular topic. This is why each issue of the OSBR has a <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/archive">theme</a>. It gives both authors and readers the opportunity to collectively explore a topic in both depth and breadth.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">However, a strict theme-for-every-month approach has a drawback. Although we often get suggestions for themes from readers and authors - and we welcome this wholeheartedly - we sometimes encounter the following problem: an author would like to write an article on a particular subject, but is quietly waiting for the right theme to come along. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This post is a call for papers for the August issue. At the moment, we have two articles planned. From Sandro Groganz, founder of <a href="http://www.initmarketing.com/">Initmarketing</a>, we have a very interesting article on the benefits of the community for partners of open source vendors. Also, I intend to write an article about the OSBR itself and some changes we are planning to improve the publication.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">We would like your input on the August issue, primarily in the form of proposals for articles you wish to contribute. One option is to develop a theme of "Open Source Ecosystems". Another option is to use this issue as an opportunity to publish articles that are not tied to a particular theme - this would be like the "Potpourri" category in the TV quiz show <a href="http://www.jeopardy.com/">Jeopardy</a>. In any case, all articles should of course fit within the scope of the OSBR and be relevant to the subject of open source business or the growth of early-stage technology companies.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Let's discuss these options on twitter (<a href="http://twitter.com/OSBR">@OSBR</a>). You can also send me your article proposals by <a href="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">email</a>. I also encourage you to extend this invitation to colleagues.<br />
<br />
Please feel free to ask me any questions about writing an article. You may also wish to check the <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/information/authors">author guidelines</a>. Note that the article deadline for the August issue is July 10th. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Chris McPhee</b><br />
Editor-in-Chief, OSBR</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-72400361496040842122011-06-07T09:32:00.000-04:002011-06-07T09:32:46.263-04:00Technology Entrepreneurship II<div style="text-align: justify;">The June issue of the OSBR is now available in <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1320/1265">PDF</a> and <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/123">HTML</a> formats. The editorial theme for this issue is Technology Entrepreneurship. This issue features the following articles:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Robert Poole, CEO of FreebirdConnect.com, <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1322/1267">describes</a> the benefits of starting a business that leverages an existing platform. He outlines relevant business models and describes the steps that an entrepreneur can follow to start a business on the FreebirdConnect.com platform. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Daniel Crenna <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1323/1268">shares</a> the lessons he learned as the sole founder of Lunarbits. He argues that we have as much to learn by analyzing the causes of failure as we do from celebrating success stories.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Frank Horsfall from Carleton University's Technology Innovation Management program <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1324/1269">describes</a> a new rapid prototyping environment to help student entrepreneurs test and refine their prototypes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Ali Kousari, CTO of Systema Technologies in Geneva, <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1325/1270">reviews</a> the challenges facing technology startups under traditional funding models. He describes new funding approaches and suggests ways of moving towards a new model of funding technology startups.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For the upcoming July issue, we focus on Women Entrepreneurs and welcome submissions that shed light on the particular challenges of increasing the number of women in founding and leadership positions. PPlease contact the Editor, <a href="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">Chris McPhee</a>, if you are interested in submitting an article for this theme; the deadline is June 15th. We also welcome general submissions on the topic of open source business or the growth of early-stage technology companies. </div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-12961302016684038992011-05-20T10:21:00.000-04:002011-05-20T10:21:18.433-04:00Open Source Business: More Than a Question of Profitability<P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Today we welcome a guest columnist, Martin Heitmann from the Berlin Institute of Technology, who invites you to participate in his survey on open source business. He <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1319/1264">writes</a>:</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Can open source development be truly sustainable? And if so, how? The answer depends on your point of view on sustainability. Very often, sustainability is only used as a buzz word for ecological footprints, while other definitions also include <A HREF="http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm">economical and social dimensions</A>. All three perspectives might be the starting point for intriguing studies about how open source development changes and continuously will change the world in the future. But today, our question asks whether open source development can be sustainable from an economic viewpoint. How can open source generate value over time and how are such mechanisms supposed to prevail? </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>>Open source development has gained much economic momentum in recent years and, despite frequent misunderstandings of the terms “open source” and “free software”, no one can deny this. Studies by <A HREF="http://www.blackducksoftware.com/development-cost-of-open-source">Black Duck Software</A> and the <A HREF="http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/ict/files/2006-11-20-flossimpact_en.pdf">European Commission</A> have tried to estimate the cost of reproducing just the global code base, as it was available at the date of the respective study’s sample collection. The dollar ranges in these estimations range from tens of billions to hundreds of billions. This notwithstanding, studies on the economic value creation of open source business are still scarce. What we can see from the estimated numbers is that, not only single companies, but also regional and national administrations have to pay attention to open source development. Without the provision of an open-source-friendly ecosystem, a region may miss opportunities to foster sustainable open source development.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>In conclusion, open source development has not even, but especially from an economic perspective much to offer for theorists, as well as practitioners from the private sector and people in charge in the public sector. Nonetheless, academic research on the business-related aspects of open source development has mainly focused on <A HREF="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00047-7">developer motivation</A> and <A HREF="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00050-7">organizational setups</A>. Albeit that many concept papers have asked how open source development <A HREF="http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/13925">might be profitable</A>, rather few studies have focused on business models or even their antecedents. (Examples of the few studies that have include <A HREF="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=519842">Bonaccorsi et al. </A>and <A HREF="http://inderscience.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&issn=0267-5730&volume=52&issue=3&spage=432">Perr et al</A>.)</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>The lack of research into open source business models might be due to the challenge of separating and classifying these business models. Often, the concepts show signs of overlap, which hinders subsequent analysis. How can we analyze what drives decision-making toward one business model and not the other if we cannot even distinguish between them? Actually, this task appears to be achievable and yet many studies fail in their attempt for a clear cut typology. One outstanding concept for delineation is that by <A HREF="http://cms.sem.tsinghua.edu.cn/semcms/res_base/semcms_com_www/upload/home/store/2008/7/3/2960.pdf">Chesbrough and Appleyard</A>. It mainly sorts open source business models into four clusters: i) <I>deployment</I> (e.g., professional services, consulting jobs); ii) <I>hybridization</I> (e.g., proprietary extensions and multi-license business models); iii) <I>complements</I> (e.g., complementary products enabled by open source software); and iv) <I>self-service</I> (e.g., organizations like the Sakai project).</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>In our research project on open source management at the Berlin Institute of Technology, we use this cluster scheme and we investigate the antecedents of business model choice in the open source software industry. By doing this, we aim to identify which factors are or were influential for companies’ initial business decisions regarding open source. Future studies will then also focus on the link between the circumstances of business model design and open source sustainability.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Following the invitation of OSBR, we would like to point out that our survey is still open and we want to invite you to participate. If you were involved in decisions on the business strategy of your company, please complete our survey. It will not take more than 10 – 15 minutes to complete. If you were not involved in the decision-making process, please pass on this invitation to any colleagues who were. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>The survey can be accessed online at: <br />
</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY><A HREF="http://strategie.service.tu-berlin.de/limesurvey/index.php?sid=18951&lang=en">http://strategie.service.tu-berlin.de/limesurvey/index.php?sid=18951&lang=en</A></P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>The anonymity of your responses is guaranteed. All data will be analyzed and published only in an aggregated form. As compensation for your efforts, we would like to offer you a more detailed report on our findings. If you relinquish your anonymity, we can provide you with a benchmark report that compares your individual answers to the overall study results. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Further information about our research can be found at <A HREF="http://www.oss-research.info/">http://www.oss-research.info</A> </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>With your participation you help us in our research and our efforts to gain better understanding of how the open source development model can be interlinked with the private and the public sector. Of course, business model antecedents are only the start. From this starting point, we can then dive deeper into matters like social sustainability, regional creation of wealth, and on a micro level, the profitability of open source business models.</P>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-14907138210324937162011-05-13T14:55:00.002-04:002011-05-13T14:55:47.745-04:00Is a Wind of Change Blowing Through the Quebec Government?<P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Today we welcome a guest columnist, Pierre-Paul Lemyre from Lexum. He <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1318/1263">writes</a>:</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Five years ago, I coordinated a series of meetings with IT managers within the Quebec Government. I met with senior administrators, business analysts, and software team leaders from all over the administration, ranging from the largest departments to small public corporations. The objective was to grasp their feelings toward free/libre open source software (F/LOSS) in general and, more specifically, to determine the most adequate F/LOSS licensing strategy for the government. This project eventually resulted in the production of legal guidelines for the administration. In the notes I took during the meetings, were the following insightful quotes, which illustrate the the degree of enthusiasm towards F/LOSS at that time. One goes like this: "It is difficult to replace an existing solution that works - even if it is onerous - with a cheaper solution that contains several flaws, such as a lack of support." Another one states that, "Open source solutions still need to prove themselves over the next few years." </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>The private sector had a different point of view. Less than one year after those meetings took place, <A HREF="http://www.savoirfairelinux.com/">Savoir-Faire Linux</A>, a Quebec firm providing support services for Linux, contested the decision of the Régie des rentes du Québec to sole source to Microsoft the replacement of the operating system and office suite for its desktops. The whole affair started with a friendly email exchange about the opportunity to open the procurement process to competitive bidding. It ended three years later with a <A HREF="http://www.canlii.org/fr/qc/qccs/doc/2010/2010qccs2375/2010qccs2375.html">declaratory decision of the Superior Court of Quebec</A> stating that the Régie des rentes acted illegally and should have instead undertaken a public tender. Savoir-Faire Linux definitively made its point, but the contract with Microsoft was not canceled because so much time had elapsed since it had been granted. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Although the Savor-Faire Linux decision was rendered only a few months ago, it is pretty clear by now that the wind had stopped blowing against F/LOSS in Quebec City. Maybe the timing was beneficial as the judgment followed the announcement of the complete failure of a few high profile modernization projects in the public sector (see the <A HREF="http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/politique-quebecoise/201004/09/01-4268716-naufrage-informatique-a-la-csst.php">CSST affair</A> for instance). Maybe the simple fact that <A HREF="http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=801412">almost all businesses are now integrating some form of OSS</A> also contributed. It fact, it is difficult to determine to what extent the government is now seeing the value of F/LOSS, but it is clear that the Savoir-Faire Linux decision created momentum for change.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Whatever the reason, by the end of 2010 the Quebec Government adopted a <A HREF="http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/documents/ministere/politique_cadre.pdf">new policy on the governance and management of public information resources</A>, specifying that from now on F/LOSS should be considered on the same basis as any other software and that guiding tools will be provided to this end. In order to enforce its new position, the government is asking public bodies to complete a feasibility study on the possibilities offered by F/LOSS for any information technology expense exceeding $25,000. This approach should at least have the benefit of bringing mature F/LOSS solutions to the attention of the decision makers. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Having to state in an official document that F/LOSS will be considered says a lot about the prevailing winds. This is not to say that F/LOSS is totally absent from the public infrastructure in Quebec. As anywhere else, a portion of the servers, network infrastructure, and mainframes runs on F/LOSS. However, in most cases these solutions were acquired outside of the regular procurement process and are not supported by any vendor. And when it comes to the desktops, F/LOSS is still nowhere to be found.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Yet, F/LOSS is growing in favour. I have been asked to update the <A HREF="http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/documents/logiciel_libre/guide_2007.pdf">guidelines</A> I initially produced in 2007 to guide public servants in their management of F/LOSS licenses. The updated guide should be released shortly in conjunction with procedures for evaluating F/LOSS projects and another document addressing the measurement of the total cost of ownership of F/LOSS. In addition, a training curriculum has just been setup by the government for information technology managers interested in learning more about F/LOSS. I am curious to see how many participants will turn out at the <A HREF="http://www.cldc.cspq.gouv.qc.ca/Default.aspx?tabid=127&CategoryID=30&List=1&SortField=ProductName,ProductName&Level=a&ProductID=199">session on licensing</A> I am giving next June.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>At this stage, it is difficult to say if all these initiatives will have any effect on the software procurement habits of the Quebec Government. But even if this opening to F/LOSS can be considered moderate at best, it is nonetheless an opening. We at <A HREF="http://www.lexum.com/en/index.html">Lexum</A> will continue to knock at the door as often as possible. With time and persistence, we hope that F/LOSS will find its place within our public software infrastructure.</P>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-977438850644655322011-05-04T11:46:00.000-04:002011-05-04T11:46:34.135-04:00Technology Entrepreneurship<div style="text-align: justify;">The May issue of the OSBR is now available in <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1310/1255">PDF</a> and <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/122">HTML</a> formats. The editorial theme for this issue is Technology Entrepreneurship. This issue features the following articles:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Michael Ayukawa, founder of Cornerportal, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1312/1257">reflects upon</a> the shifts in his entrepreneurial world view framework and highlights the transformative effect of collectives on an entrepreneur's view of their environment and options. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Natasha D’Souza, founder of Virtual EyeSee, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1313/1258">illustrates</a> how the implementation of an idea depends on the entrepreneur's approach to development and commercialization. The article focuses on leveraging collectives to increase the likelihood of entrepreneurial success. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">Fred Dixon, CEO of Blindside Networks, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1314/1259">shares</a> key lessons learned while balancing the demands of building a business and nurturing the open source project that the business depends on. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">Arthur Low, founder and CTO of Crack Semiconductor, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1315/1260">retraces</a> the history of key advances in the integrated circuits and electronic design automation tool industry to show that a shift from proprietary to open source tools now means that viable business models exist for small companies to create advanced silicon intellectual property.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Igor Sales and Aparna Shanker from Carleton University's TIM program <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1316/1261">outline</a> their plans to bring together freelance Android developers and software development firms using a platform that proves the expertise and reputation of developers. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">For the upcoming June issue, we continue the theme of Technology Entrepreneurship. We encourage any entrepreneurs who wish to share their insights and lessons to submit articles for this issue before May 15th. In July, we focus on Women Entrepreneurs and welcome submissions that shed light on the particular challenges of increasing the number of women in founding and leadership positions. Please contact the Editor, <a href="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">Chris McPhee</a>, if you are interested in submitting an article for either of these themes; we also welcome general submissions on the topic of open source business or the growth of early-stage technology companies.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-13895967362810515092011-04-29T10:05:00.000-04:002011-04-29T10:05:34.020-04:00To Profit Or Not To Profit<P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Today's columnist is Julian Egelstaff from Freeform Solutions. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1309/1254">writes</a>:</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>To profit or not to profit, that is the question. In fact, it's pretty much the only question (or maybe just the biggest one) when you're going through the legal process of setting up a social enterprise. In Canada at least, there's no middle ground. You're either a for-profit business or you're a not-for-profit (or charity) without share capital. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>When we incorporated <A HREF="http://www.freeformsolutions.ca/" TARGET="_blank">Freeform Solutions</A>, there was never any debate about this. We literally weren't in it for the money, and one of the other co-founders, Jason Côté, had already successfully started another national not-for-profit organization (now called <A HREF="http://www.actua.ca/" TARGET="_blank">Actua</A>). </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Although Freeform has been pretty successful, there are times when access to capital sure would have been nice. Our legal status certainly precluded any traditional sorts of financing. And, as altruistic founders, we have forever forgone the opportunity to "cash out" in the future. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>So it was with great interest that I read <A HREF="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1308/1252" TARGET="_blank">Stephen Huddart's column last week</A>, in which he discussed the <A HREF="http://socialventureexchange.org/" TARGET="_blank">Social Venture Exchange</A> being incubated at <A HREF="http://www.marsdd.com/" TARGET="_blank">MaRS</A>. As Huddart writes, social enterprises "are hampered by a lack of access to investment capital." (And I could share ample anecdotal evidence to back this up.) So it's not surprising that an enterprising group of folks faced with the same situation are trying to find a way around it. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>This is what "collectives" in our sector do very well: they identify issues and cluster around them with solutions, trying to find one or more that "sticks." Tonya and Mark Surman wrote about the organizational and governance aspects of this behaviour in the <A HREF="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/698/666" TARGET="_blank">September 2008 issue of the OSBR</A>. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>It would certainly be fantastic if for-profit social enterprises had a specialized market that catered to their needs. But given the current legal structures we're all stuck with, I can't imagine how this would help organizations that are legally not-for-profit. It is enshrined in the legislation that no one shall profit from the operations of a not-for-profit corporation. Why invest in it then? </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>While the Social Venture Exchange is working on the financing side of this problem, I believe that we need some parallel work in the legal and political aspects of this problem. There may be all kinds of reasons that people creating a social enterprise may not want to set it up legally as a for-profit corporation. The most basic philosophical reason is that they may want something other than majority shareholder rights to control the direction of the organization. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Yes, that diminishes the attractiveness of the venture to investors. If you can't own it and control it, are you going to be as eager to invest in it? Frankly, that lack of control is a risk to you as an investor. But it might be critical to the social entrepreneurs behind the organization. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Our binary for-profit/not-for-profit legal structure reminds me of copyright law before <A HREF="http://creativecommons.org/" TARGET="_blank">Creative Commons</A> came on the scene. In the old days, things were either public domain, or they were "all rights reserved." But Creative Commons recognized that some creators may want to find a middle ground. "Some rights reserved" is the phrase used to describe this, and Creative Commons licensing gives creators control over which ones they reserve and which ones they give away. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>We need the same thing in the social entrepreneurship space. Some innovators may want to keep all control in their own hands and follow the not-for-profit model we have right now. Some may be perfectly happy to give up some of the legal rights and the control they have over their organization in order to make it more attractive for certain kinds of investments, but not go completely down the for-profit road we have now. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>One simple example. Governance by a volunteer board of directors is pretty much universal among not-for-profits. The board is often elected by the members of the organization, not shareholders, because there are no shareholders. Many social enterprises may wish to keep that part of the legal structure. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>But at the same time, they may want to get rid of some of the financial restrictions, mainly the one that prevents anyone from profiting from the organization. If you want people to invest, they need to have some way of making money from the investment. So perhaps a social enterprise could offer something like a bond, or a dividend-paying share that had no voting or control rights. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>There are all kinds of dimensions on which an organization might want to tweak its legal structure, just like Creative Commons licenses give you specific control over attribution requirements, separate from the right to create derivative works, separate from the right to use a work commercially. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>I won't trot out the cliche and say that with an election on, it's the perfect time to raise this issue with your MPs. Personally, I agree with the misquoting of Kim Campbell, that an election is not the time to discuss serious issues. Sadly, our elections are all about marketing, advertising, and spin. But through ongoing work all the rest of the time, organizations like the <A HREF="http://ontariononprofitnetwork.ca/" TARGET="_blank">Ontario Nonprofit Network</A> and <A HREF="http://www.imaginecanada.ca/" TARGET="_blank">Imagine Canada</A> can effect changes and we should all support them doing it. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>It's a long road, and change doesn't happen overnight, as any social entrepreneur will tell you. But like I tell my daughters, nothing worth doing is easy, and this is one kind of change that all of us "changemakers" have a vested interest in seeing happen.</P>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-67743872276268945862011-04-15T09:54:00.000-04:002011-04-15T09:54:18.553-04:00On-Ramping to the Next Economy: Financing Innovation, Sustainability, and Resilience<div align="JUSTIFY">Today's columnist is Stephen Huddart from the J.W. McConnell Family Foundation. Stephen <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1308/1252">writes</a>: </div><div align="JUSTIFY">According to one feisty audience member at a conference I spoke at in Phoenix recently, growing US indebtedness and a weakening dollar will result in the US dollar losing its role as the world's reserve currency. As other countries elect to price their transactions in Euros, gold, or something else, they will dump their unwanted dollars, driving the greenback even lower. Consequently, he insisted, it's time to think about creating local and regional currencies, along with the militia we'll need in order to protect ourselves when the US government goes bankrupt.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">This cheery scenario was offered at the Resilience 2011 conference, where Michele-Lee Moore and I were presenting a paper-in-progress about the role of intermediaries in directing grant financing to local implementation of social innovations. We contrasted this with an ecosystem approach, where multiple funders and advisors have access to an open platform that supports innovation within a particular domain - be that geographical (e.g., Arizona), thematic (e.g., healthcare), or both. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">Without subscribing to the alarmist and defeatist rhetoric of our commentator, we can agree that resilient local economies are an important element in any innovation ecosystem. This point was underlined at a roundtable I attended at the <a href="http://johnmolson.concordia.ca/en/faculty-research/research-centres/david-obrien-centre-for-sustainable-enterprise">David O'Brien Centre for Sustainable Enterprise</a> at Concordia University last week, where students and faculty spoke enthusiastically about their work on environmentally sustainable technologies ranging from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromachines">micromachines</a> to "inward-looking architecture" (an age-old concept that offers material, space, and energy gains by building around central green spaces or atria). The discussion took a despondent turn however, when the subject turned to financing. The consensus view was that the innovations they are working on are hampered by a lack of access to investment capital. "We have the ability to generate solutions," said one participant, "but there's not enough specialized funding to properly test or take them to scale." </div><div align="JUSTIFY">This may be about to change. A team based at <a href="http://www.marsdd.com/">MaRS</a> and led by Adam Spence is developing a <a href="http://socialventureexchange.org/">Social Venture Exchange</a> (SVX) - a concept also emerging in the US, the UK, Singapore, South Africa, and elsewhere - that would provide a platform for capitalizing social enterprises. To be listed, projects would have to meet financial as well as social or environmental criteria.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">As Mr. Spence explained to me recently, such exchanges can be readily scaled to support local or regional economies. Eventually, they would form part of a network of similar exchanges, allowing specialization to occur - a Vancouver-based exchange could carve out a niche around open source ventures for example, while Montreal might develop particular expertise around green building technology. With a common software platform, and <a href="http://pulse.app-x.com/">shared metrics on social and environmental impact</a>, all nodes in the network will be able to speak to one another. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">It is interesting to note how the Keystone Off-The-Shelf (KOTS) project introduced in these pages last year (<a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1182/1133">Bailetti, 2010</a>) and <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1302/1246">updated in this issue</a> could help to populate such an exchange with a flow of promising ventures. As an intermediary with the ability to catalyze and add capacity to an emerging innovation ecosystem, KOTS represents a promising innovation in its own right. Its first application - <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1303/1247">Carleton Entrepreneurs</a> - will be of interest to universities, venture philanthropists, and intermediaries who seek to develop domain-level interventions. Add an open access, crowd-accelerated innovation platform like <a href="http://openideo.com/">openIDEO</a>, and it is possible to discern the outlines of a new set of economic relationships, harnessing collective capacity to turn our complex challenges into systems of continuous social innovation. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">And where will the investments come from? Well, for many individual and institutional investors, blended returns that consider financial and social or environmental goals are preferable to those that consider financial return alone. Add "local" to that mix and you have a platform that should attract patient risk capital from municipalities, community foundations, universities, pension funds, and others with a stake in creating resilient, innovative local economies. In the final analysis, this movement depends on a commitment to making a collective effort to reshape markets in the public interest, rather than to a race to protect and monopolize benefits for a select few. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">Establishing such market mechanisms as a means of creating more resilient local economies should be a priority for governments, and leaders in all sectors. In Canada, this work is currently being led by <a href="http://socialfinance.ca/taskforce">The Task Force on Social Finance</a>, whose report on the subject is an excellent primer. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">Alternatively, we could consider that militia idea.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-91402407748595835492011-04-07T14:19:00.000-04:002011-04-07T14:19:30.014-04:00Collectives<div style="text-align: justify;">The April issue of the OSBR is now available in <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1300/1244">PDF</a> and <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/121">HTML</a> formats. The editorial theme for this issue is Collectives and the Guest Editor is Professor Tony Bailetti from Carleton University. This issue features the following articles:<br />
<br />
James Makienko and Antonio Misaka from Carleton University <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1302/1246">provide</a> an update on the Keystone Off-The-Shelf (KOTS) platform, which is designed to support collectives that enable small innovative companies to grow their revenue.<br />
<br />
Tony Bailetti and Ludovico Prattico from Carleton University <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1303/1247">describe</a> the first application of the KOTS platform, which is the Carleton Entrepreneurs program. This program helps graduate and senior undergraduate students transform their ideas into compelling opportunities and successful businesses.<br />
<br />
Michael Ayukawa, Founder of CornerPortal, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1304/1248">answers</a> the question: “What is a good deal?” by reviewing the literature on deals and deal-making processes relating to business collectives. His answer to this question was used to define the business rules embodied in a component of the KOTS platform.<br />
<br />
David Péloquin, Jean Kunz, and Nicola Gaye from the Policy Research Initiative <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1305/1249">provide</a> an approach to risk management that can be generalized to any situation where social actors respond to and manage risks in a multi-player environment. This “social management of risk” approach focuses on the involvement of potential actors in pursuing societal objectives in relation to risk.<br />
<br />
Michael Weiss from Carleton University <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1306/1250">discusses</a> a model for company-led open source projects around two dimensions: the level of control over the project and the diversity of applications derived from the project. The article reflects a recent trend towards collectives of companies that develop shared assets in the form of open source projects. <br />
<br />
The editorial theme for the upcoming May issue is Women Entrepreneurs and the deadline for submissions is April 15th. For subsequent issues, we welcome general submissions on the topic of open source business or the growth of early-stage technology companies. Please contact the Editor, <a href="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">Chris McPhee</a>, if you are interested in making a submission.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-12859610236419080902011-03-18T10:02:00.002-04:002011-03-18T11:19:07.752-04:00The Social Side of Co-Creation<div style="text-align: justify;">Today's columnist is Stephen Huddart from the J.W. McConnell Family Foundation. Stephen <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1297/1243">writes</a>:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
<i>“Everyone a changemaker”</i><br />
-<i><a href="http://www.changemakers.com/">Ashoka Changemakers</a></i></div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">As articles in <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/120">this issue of OSBR</a> attest, co-creation is how a lot of business innovation is getting done these days. This is significant in its own right, but what happens when co-creation involves collaboration across whole sectors?</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Recently in Ottawa, I took part in a roundtable convened by the <a href="http://www.ppforum.ca/">Public Policy Forum</a> to explore social innovation and aboriginal youth. Speaking under the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_House_Rule">Chatham House Rule</a>, representatives of aboriginal organizations, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Health Canada, and the corporate and philanthropic sectors reviewed the dimensions of a social tsunami that will influence Canada for better or worse for decades to come: aboriginal youth are the fastest-growing demographic in the country, with the potential to make a valuable contribution to economy and community or to place heavy demands on our social welfare and penal systems. Currently only 50% complete high school, so education is key.</div><div style="text-align: justify;">It was evident from our discussion that no one sector can address this complex challenge alone. There is a clear need for the continuous co-creation of new approaches, requiring aboriginal leadership, involvement of young people themselves, responsive government policy and funding for education and training, private sector ingenuity and jobs, and engagement of the community sector at every level. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">Co-creation at this scale requires platforms that enable cross-sectoral collaboration. A number of philanthropic foundations and aboriginal partners have recently banded together to create <a href="http://philanthropyandaboriginalpeoples.ca/">The Circle on Philanthropy and Aboriginal Peoples in Canada</a>, which meets about once a year, holds teleconferences every six weeks or so, and uses a Google site to collect and share information. Organizing a sector this way enables us to collaborate first among ourselves, and then with other sectors. This September, several members of The Circle (as it is commonly referred to), along with <a href="http://canada.ashoka.org/">Ashoka Canada</a> and private sector partners, will launch a national <a href="http://www.changemakers.com/">Changemakers</a> competition in First Nations, Métis, and Inuit education. In effect, this is open sourcing the search for innovative programs and change strategies. In order to address system-level dynamics, Changemakers uses a “discovery framework” – a grid that plots common barriers against a typology of solutions. The competition launches with this framework already populated with prototypical innovations, to orient submissions and focus attention on thematic areas. Changemakers also encourages proponents to amend their proposals in response to public comment while the competition unfolds. </div><div style="text-align: justify;">This is just the beginning. Broad, open platforms like this enable wide sharing of information and ideas, but the next step is to create high-functioning ecologies of change. To borrow from <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1290/1236">the paper by Hyötyläinen and colleagues</a> in this issue of the OSBR, such an ecology should comprise an open innovation component, strategic networks, strategic alliances, as well as hub-spoke relationships. It should also include “change labs” where parties can come together for facilitated exploration of new models and mindsets. And where promising practices are identified, funding and policy should follow.</div><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">[A note to regular readers: At this week’s <a href="http://www.nten.org/ntc">Nonprofit Technology Conference</a> in Washington DC, founders Peter Deitz and Christine Egger announced that <a href="http://www2.guidestar.org/">GuideStar</a> will be the new home for their open source database <a href="http://www.socialactions.com/">Social Actions</a>, which I profiled in my <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1191/1141">September 2010</a> column, and which they wrote about in the <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/914/883">July 2009 issue of OSBR</a>. Congratulations to all involved.]</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-1332572432552779332011-03-11T11:20:00.000-05:002011-03-11T11:20:52.212-05:00Hubs and Hugs: How the Right Networks Can Create Unlimited Value<P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Today's columnist is Julian Egelstaff from Freeform Solutions. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1296/1242">writes</a>:<br />
<P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>"You can't run out of hugs!" my girls told me, loudly. I had told them, after about a million hugs, that if I gave any more before bedtime then I might run out and there would be none for tomorrow.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>It's obvious of course that some things are inexhaustible. But the lines aren't always as clear as you'd think.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>My wife recently got a Kobo e-reader. She chose the Kobo in part because it's compatible with <A HREF="http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/books-video-music/downloads-ebooks/" TARGET="_blank">Toronto Public Library eBooks</A>, and the Kindle is not. Yes, the library loans out eBooks. Now there's an interesting concept.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>The library will give you a perfect copy of an electronic document, for use over a limited period of time. After that it will automatically expire from your e-reader. At least there's no possibility of returning it late! I wonder if they delete a copy from their own computer while its in your possession? More likely, some lawyers have simply been busy writing licensing agreements.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>To make the situation more curious, there's a limit to the number of copies of eBooks that the library has to loan out. If they're going to auto-expire the documents, why can't they at least give out an infinite number of copies? Other than reading the book on a cool e-reader, where are the benefits of this being an electronic medium?</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>I suspect the limit on copies has a lot to do with <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Lending_Right" TARGET="_blank">Public Lending Rights</A> and the inability of libraries to reimburse authors an infinite amount of money for an infinite amount of eBook loans.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Whatever the reason, at least you can get everything from project <A HREF="http://www.gutenberg.org/" TARGET="_blank">Guttenberg</A> for free. Their copies are as inexhaustible as hugs.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>It all makes me think about network effects. In my opinion, <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe's_law" TARGET="_blank">Metcalfe's law</A> is one of the most important ideas of the last fifty years: "The value of a network goes up as the square of the number of users." I think it's a useful lens for looking at the basic mechanics of eBooks, hugs, and co-creation in general, which is the theme of <A HREF="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/120" TARGET="_blank">this month's OSBR</A>.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>The eBooks from the library are about as useful as regular books. The lending model has effectively neutered them of all the potential benefits they could have from being an electronic medium, other than the convenience of storage and reading on an e-reader. The alternative, I suppose, would be a kind of "Napster for books", and we all know how that turned out for music. So there's no point in beating them up for it, their decisions make sense, even if they're frustrating to digital rights anarchists. The library is preserving the value of the hoard (or should that be horde... of lawyers?).</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>But imagine if the eBooks were an inexhaustible resource. Free for all to use and not locked up by some licensing agreement or lending right reimbursement limit. Where would the value be located then? It would be dispersed through the network. People with more books to share would be important. People with many connections to others, and therefore an ability to get more books, would also be important (as connector nodes).</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Certainly, libraries would still be important because they would have more books than other nodes, though not for long perhaps, depending on the technical implementation. But regardless, the expertise of librarians, who know the "book landscape" better than anyone else, would still be a valuable commodity if libraries could figure out how to offer that value to the network.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>As things stand, back in the real world, all those people are still out there, reading eBooks, but their network is not so interconnected, in most cases (more on that later). For the most part, the network is hub-and-spoke, with the libraries and retailers in the middle, and the value locked up there. All that potential, lost.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>If you read Metcalfe's law more deeply, it's the connections between the users that matter, not just their number, and the community of eBook readers is all the weaker because the number of interconnections is fundamentally limited by the network model of the old publishing industry, where the libraries and book sellers are trying to dominate as large hubs among all the consumer nodes.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>So-called "open business models" try to capitalize on all that network potential. Social networking is the perfect example. The value of Facebook lies in its huge number of users. Who wants to be the first user of Facebook? It's about as useful as having the first telephone. Facebook's business model (if they have a business model) explicitly tries to create value from the network by providing a way for the connections to happen and enabling the free exchange of resources and information. The users of Facebook are co-creating the value of Facebook. Every time you post a new photo, Mark Zuckerberg owes you one. Hopefully you feel justly compensated by free access to all the sharing tools he has given you.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>I did say "for most", when describing the lost potential of real-world eBook networks. For some people, there is a new and growing option on the horizon: person-to-person eBook lending. This is a very exciting development that shows there may yet be a happy, truly interconnected digital future for the old business of publishing.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>As Catherine MacDonald <A HREF="http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/books/the-rise-of-the-e-book-lending-library-and-the-death-of-e-book-pirating/article1912797/?service=mobile" TARGET="_blank">wrote recently</A> in the Globe and Mail over the past two months, 12,000 Kindle users in the US have signed up for the "Kindle Lending Club", a service that lets Kindle owners swap copies of books they own. There are other similar services popping up, though nothing yet for Kobo users in Canada.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>The huge interest and fast growth of these services should come as no surprise. It's the same open model as we see in social networking: it encourages connections between people. It's not far removed from my fantasy world of inexhaustible eBooks. It makes everything about the network – everything about owning a Kindle and having eBooks – more valuable and worthwhile to the participants. The network configuration doesn't just determine the value through some abstract process. The network configuration actively encourages different kinds of behaviour, and through that behaviour the users will co-create the value.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>People only participate in old hub-and-spoke networks because they have to, since the value is being hoarded in the middle of the network and they can only get to it one way. Open networks encourage people to participate. There's something in it for them. When people sense the value of sharing information on social networking sites, when they can easily swap their eBooks with other<br />
readers, when they get something out of it themselves, they're more motivated to participate. It's the same thing with open source software, with Wikipedia, and all the other blossoming examples of openness surrounding us. When people are motivated to contribute, the value they can create is inexhaustible.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>It's like hugs. You give because it feels good, not because you have to, and that feeling never runs out.</P>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-46386576014312230792011-03-08T10:15:00.000-05:002011-03-08T10:15:12.835-05:00Lead to Win for Women<P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>We are pleased to welcome a guest columnist today. Janice Singer from the National Research Council’s Industrial Research Assistance Program <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1295/1241">writes</a>:</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Today, March 8<SUP>th</SUP>, marks the 100<SUP>th</SUP> anniversary of <A HREF="http://www.internationalwomensday.com/">International Women’s Day</A>. As women in the Western world, we have a lot to celebrate: better opportunities, better education, better health, more choices for everything, really. We also have a lot to be concerned about - there is still a tremendous amount of work necessary throughout the developing world to increase the status of women. To set the focus right up front for today, though, this column is neither about our successes at home nor the burning issues facing us internationally.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>This column is about one glaring area where women must make more progress at home, right here in Canada. For the past two years, I have worked for the <A HREF="http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/eng/ibp/irap.html">National Research Council’s Industrial Research Assistance Program</A> (NRC-IRAP) as an Industrial Technology Advisor (ITA). My role is to work with small and medium-sized innovative, growth-oriented businesses. I have a toolkit including advisory services, linkages, and funding that I can offer to clients to help them bring their products and services to market, and grow. It’s a job that I’m passionate about. I am currently actively working with about 45 clients, and I have a caseload of about 60-70 clients at any one time. Of these clients, <B>only 3 have founders, co-founders, or CEOs that are women</B>. That works out to about 4%. Even as a software engineering researcher in a male-dominated field, about 15-20% of my colleagues were women. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Of course, this number is based on my personal experience and may not apply overall, but in Ottawa, it does seem to hold with my colleagues. Also, this is not to say that women don’t play an important role in the male-driven businesses – we see them frequently as CFOs, heads of HR, and in high-level technical and management positions. These are important roles that drive business growth, but are significantly different than a CEO’s role. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Now here is the crux of the problem, and what I’d like to address today. I know there is a lot of research in this area, but it doesn’t seem to have increased the numbers. Why aren’t women CEOs? What is different about a woman CEO than a male CEO? And most importantly, how can we support and grow women CEOs? </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>To try to address these burning questions in Ottawa, we have just started a program called Lead to Win for Women, or LTW<SUP>2</SUP>. By building on the model of <A HREF="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1013/97">Lead to Win</A>, our goal is to offer the infrastructure necessary to help women build and then grow their businesses. To be clear, we’re not offering our services to women entrepreneurs just because they’re women entrepreneurs. We’re looking for women who are interested in significant growth, with a roadmap that brings them beyond their regional boundaries and a revenue stream that supports a significant number of future employees. If you’d like to open a cupcake shop, that’s great, but it’s not LTW<SUP>2</SUP>. However, if you’re planning on world domination in cupcakes, then LTW<SUP>2 </SUP>would like to help you get there. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>We believe that women have the same essential needs as men when it comes to starting a business. However, we will tailor the program as we go to ensure it attracts and supports women entrepreneurs. Right now, LTW<SUP>2 </SUP>is focusing on five key program elements:</P><OL> <LI><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Support to validate early product concepts;</P> <LI><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Support to test prototypes or early stage products;</P> <LI><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Access to a resource pool who can code, develop user interfaces, sell and market, and develop websites;</P></OL><OL START=4> <LI><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>A LTW<SUP>2</SUP> website that can be used as a showcase and exchange for matching needs/resource pool;</P> <LI><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Access to a board that can steward revenue growth.</P></OL><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>LTW<SUP>2 </SUP>is just being organized. Our official launch date is April 30, 2011. Our goal is to make Ottawa the world’s leading centre for growth-oriented businesses launched by women. And we plan to evolve our program as necessary to meet the needs of LTW<SUP>2 </SUP>clients. </P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>We encourage everyone to send us feedback and help us shape this program. In particular, we would like to hear from woman entrepreneurs in Ottawa who might benefit from the LTW<SUP>2</SUP> program. Also, we’d like to hear from any women who have launched a successful business with six or more employees – please look back on your experiences and comment on the five elements that comprise our initial focus.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Together, let’s determine what can we do now so that in 20 years, we mark the 120<SUP>th</SUP> anniversary of International Women’s Day by celebrating two decades of increasing numbers of successful women CEOs.</P><P ALIGN=JUSTIFY>To learn more about LTW<SUP>2</SUP>, contact: <A HREF="mailto:Janice.Singer@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca">Janice.Singer@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca</A></P>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-41140226804087568722011-03-01T12:10:00.000-05:002011-03-01T12:10:22.652-05:00Co-CreationThe March issue of the OSBR is now available in <A HREF="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1285/1231">PDF</A> and <A href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/120">HTML</A> formats. The editorial theme for this issue is Co-Creation and the Guest Editors are Marko Seppä from the University of Jyväskylä and Stoyan Tanev from the University of Southern Denmark. This issue features the following articles:<br />
<br />
Marko Seppä and Stoyan Tanev <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1287/1233">summarize</a> recent value co-creation research and identify an emerging focus on business co-creation.<br />
<br />
Jukka Huhtamäki, Martha G. Russell, Kaisa Still, and Neil Rubens <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1288/1234">use</a> network analysis to examine linkages between organizations and the emergence of cooperative activities in an innovation system. <br />
<br />
Kati Järvi and Antti Pellinen <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1289/1235">examine</a> evolving business models in mobile service production and provision with an emphasis on the shift from one-sided to two-sided markets, including the emergence of application stores as intermediaries in service delivery.<br />
<br />
Raimo Hyötyläinen, Katri Valkokari, and Petri Kalliokoski <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1290/1236">present</a> four models of business renewal through co-creation within networks, distinguishing between the exploitation of present knowledge for efficiency and the exploration of new knowledge for innovation.<br />
<br />
Frederick Ahen and Peter Zettinig <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1291/1237">argue</a> that if networks are effective mechanisms for criminal organizations to infiltrate into any value chain, then networks should also work for responsible businesses in their quests to counter this phenomenon of value destruction.<br />
<br />
Xian Chen and Paul Sorenson <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1292/1238">examine</a> the effect of service quality on business relationships between clients and SaaS service providers and provide an approach and tool for evaluating SaaS applications.<br />
<br />
Taina Savolainen and Sari Häkkinen <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1293/1239">present</a> two case studies that illustrate the importance of trustworthiness as a leadership trait and managerial skill.<br />
<br />
The editorial theme for the upcoming April issue is Communications Enabled Applications. For subsequent issues, we welcome general submissions on the topic of open source business or the growth of early-stage technology companies. Please contact the Editor, <A HREF="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">Chris McPhee</A>, if you are interested in making a submission.Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-83633104015985018242011-02-18T14:13:00.000-05:002011-02-18T14:13:19.703-05:00Civic Hacking<div align="JUSTIFY">Today's columnist is Christopher Sean Morrison from BRL-CAD. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1274/1221">writes</a>:</div><br />
<div align="JUSTIFY"><i>"The three principles of transparency, participation, and collaboration form the cornerstone of an open government." </i> </div><div align="RIGHT">Peter R. Orszag, Open Government Directive </div><div align="JUSTIFY"><br />
A couple months ago, a friend of mine at the <a href="http://osuosl.org/" target="_blank">Oregon State University's Open Source Lab</a> asked if I'd heard about an upcoming "Civic Hack Day" event happening in Baltimore. I'm usually pretty in tune with the tech-happenings and other events going on in the city where I live, but this was rather surprising news that affected me personally. Not only was <a href="http://civichackday.org/" target="_blank">this event</a> being held in the same city, it was in my own neighborhood, less than a quarter mile from my house, and I was learning about it from someone more than 2500 miles away on the other side of the country. It couldn't have been arranged more conveniently.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">I had been following Baltimore's <a href="http://data.baltimorecity.gov/" target="_blank">Open Data Initiative</a> that was announced just a couple weeks earlier in January, but hadn't yet put much thought into the possibilities. Not a whole lot of cities have made their information available online, including less than a dozen in the United States. What does one do with data on things like parking tickets, city drainage routes, and property tax values? Even with my ignorance -- or perhaps especially because of it -- I was more than happy to sign up for this all-day collaborative coding session that had been arranged to get the mental juices flowing. If anything, I figured that amongst the few dozen developers in attendance that there'd at least be a few interesting ideas I might be able to help with. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">This wasn't the first time I'd worked with civic data, to say the least, but this was the first time with data that I had a personal connection to. With the various federal and state data sets I've poked at, (for me at least) the information very quickly becomes collections of impersonal statistics that one has no control or influence over. Even when you find trends or correlations, the information is often just not particularly useful. It can be informative, newsworthy, and fantastic for government accountability but unlikely that it will affect your day-to-day behavior unless you work in politics.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">There's something alluring about city data, though. The numbers and records are no longer aggregate information, it gets personal. Not only was my house tax valuation easily found, but there was the data for my property line, my building plot, streets through my neighborhood, and so much more. It was "my" data. Sure enough, a quick search through an XML text file even revealed that parking ticket from last fall. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">The publishing of civic data in conveniently consumable form has been ongoing for several years now. Tracey Lauriault introduced OSBR readership to civic data back in <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/514/473" target="_blank">February 2008</a>. A year later, Jennifer Bell <a href="http://osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/829/802" target="_blank">wrote</a> about how open data and government transparency are affecting our role as participatory citizens. Companies, non-governmental organizations, and private individual software developers are springing up around the data to help manage, characterize, visualize, and repurpose this information in meaningful ways. Today, you can find numerous governments at the city, state, province, and federal level digitally publishing all kinds of raw data on how they operate, where money is spent, what information they track, when transactions occur, and who they interact with. It's a new level of access to data that is only beginning to be realized.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">At the federal level, the amount of data being made available and the rate at which it's increasing is staggering. The United States now has more than 300,000 data sets available with more being added on a daily basis. In January 2009 on his first day in office, President Obama issued an Open Government Initiative memo committing the U.S. federal government to "an unprecedented level of openness" in order to establish "a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration." A little less than a year later in December 2009, that became an Open Government Directive, the <a href="http://data.gov/">http://DATA.gov</a> website was established, and federal agencies were mandated to develop a plan specifically towards improving transparency, participation, and collaboration with the public. Now a little more than a year since, 17 of 29 government agencies fully meet the requirements set forth by the directive with others making significant progress towards openness.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Cities, however, have actually taken much longer to publish their data. Perhaps it's due to local politics or funding, but more than likely it's at least in part because the information is more personally identifiable that they have to be more careful. If someone reports a pothole that needs to be fixed, it is useful for their request to be geotagged (i.e., have the exact physical location annotated with the report). Service personnel will know which streets to focus attention on and you'll know which ones to avoid. Similarly, geotagged crime data makes it very easy to create a visual graph of the crime hot spots in a city. Certain types of crime reports, though, might give away a victim's location and make them susceptible to repeated crime offenses. The datasets have to be carefully reviewed before they can be made available to the world.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">That said, there are several big and small cities alike now that publish their civic information to the Internet. Having published substantial repositories of information in 2009, <a href="http://datasf.org/" target="_blank">San Francisco</a> continues to be a great example on providing excellent civic data openness. They followed on the heels of the massive data repositories released through the Washington D.C. <a href="http://data.octo.dc.gov/" target="_blank">Data Catalog</a>. For more than a year, London has also published <a href="http://data.london.gov.uk/" target="_blank">hundreds of datasets</a>. <a href="http://www.toronto.ca/open/" target="_blank">Toronto</a> is yet another. The city of Ottawa recently wrapped up their <a href="http://www.apps4ottawa.ca/" target="_parent">Open Data App Contest</a> where developers competed for cash prizes as they looked to find <a href="http://www.ottawa.ca/online_services/opendata/index_en.html" target="_blank">innovative and useful things</a> to do with their city's data. New York similarly sponsored a <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/datamine/html/home/home.shtml" target="_blank">BigApps 2.0 contest</a> to make use of their civic data. The list goes on and on as city governments around the world increasingly open up access to their civic data.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">As "Civic Hack Day" came to a close in Baltimore, I was left awestruck at the abundance of personal, professional, and commercial possibilities. In that single day of coding, we'd collectively developed numerous proof-of-concept applications that leveraged Baltimore's available civic data. One guy had a crime density map working while another had an animation of crime incidents over time. Another group created an application that listens for people tweeting 311 support requests (with geotagged pictures attached) via Twitter.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">What did I end up with? I developed a working geometry importer for my favorite open source CAD system to read in shapefile data as 3D geometry. By converting the city data into 3D geometry, it becomes easy to procedurally generate an accurate model of the entire city based on any number of criteria. Perhaps it'd be useful to model each tax district with buildings scaled according to their recorded tax value. An analytic visibility analysis might show if there's a correlation between light poles, public video cameras, and crime levels or whether the crime is merely shifted around the corner out of sight. Maybe, just maybe, it'll even help avoid that next parking ticket. </div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-14569255294900507922011-02-01T13:48:00.000-05:002011-02-01T13:48:24.053-05:00Recent Research<div style="text-align: justify;">The February issue of the OSBR is now available in <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1265/1212">PDF</a> and <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/118">HTML</a> formats. The editorial theme for this issue is Recent Research. This issue features the following articles:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Carlo Daffara, head of research at Conecta, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1267/1214">describes</a> the factors to consider when selecting a license to suit both business objectives and licensing constraints. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Monique Bardawil from Carleton University's Technology Innovation Management program <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1268/1215">outlines</a> her recent research to identify key players in the mashup ecosystem, where businesses must develop appropriate strategies based on an accurate understanding of the structure of the ecosytem and the role of its key players. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Amanda Shiga, CMS Practice Lead at non~linear creations, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1269/1216">presents</a> her research into the competitive actions taken by API providers in the mashup ecosystem.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Islam Balbaa, Technical Business Analyst at Kinaxis, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1270/1217">describes</a> his recent research into the fit between software-as-a-service products and the requirements of particular business units. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Chulaka Ailapperuma, Senthilkumar Mukunda, and Shruti Satsangi from Carleton University's Technology Innovation Management program <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1271/1218">illustrate</a> how social network analysis can be used to study online communities, including free/libre open source software developer teams. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The editorial theme for the upcoming March issue is Co-creation. We have invited authors from the Research Forum to Understand Business in Knowledge Society to contribute to this special issue. The Guest Editors will be Stoyan Tanev from the University of Southern Denmark and Marko Seppä from the University of Jyväskylä.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For subsequent issues, we welcome general submissions on the topic of open source business or the growth of early-stage technology companies. Please contact the Editor, <a href="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">Chris McPhee</a>, if you are interested in making a submission.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-24831098083483220322011-01-28T10:18:00.000-05:002011-01-28T10:18:25.186-05:00The Definition of Open?<div align="justify">Today's columnist is Jason Côté from Freeform Solutions. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1264/1211">writes</a>:<br />
<br />
On December 8, 2010, Andy Rubin, Google's Vice President of Engineering (and co-founder of Android prior to Google's acquisition of it in 2005), tweeted: “<a href="http://twitter.com/Arubin/status/12727540783251456">There are over 300,000 Android phones activated each day</a>.” This was the first time Google's claim for Android surpassed Apple's for the iPhone.</div><div align="justify">Having upgraded to the Samsung Galaxy S Captivate only days earlier, I played a very small part in this growing trend; Samsung has already <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-03/samsung-says-it-sold-10-million-galaxy-s-smartphones-since-debut-in-june.html">sold 10 million Galaxy S smartphones</a>. As an advocate for free and open source software, I am inclined to support any Android-based device on principle, even though my first Android phone, the HTC Dream (or G1 as marketed in the US), was certainly not as polished as the iPhone available at the time.</div><div align="justify">Two months earlier, the same Andy Rubin offered the following <a href="http://twitter.com/Arubin/status/27808662429">definition of open</a> via twitter: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make”. <span style="font-weight: normal;">A few simple keystrokes and I have the entire Android source code at my fingertips. </span>This definition is great in theory, but what is the reality?</div><div align="justify">For me, reality is that my Samsung phone is running Android 2.1, currently the second most popular version. Android 2.2 is currently <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29#ge_share">the most popular in use</a>, and is now available for some carriers in Canada and the US, but not others. The latest release of Android is 2.3, and Android 3.0 is expected to be released “soon.” When 3.0 is released, my phone will be a full three versions behind the state of the art.</div><div align="justify">So, while the codebase is open, it seems that software patches and operating system updates are not guaranteed to be made available... or work when they are; my HTC phone was stranded with Android 1.5, with no chance for upgrade. Even worse, after a required software update to re-enable 911 service, the phone never worked reliably again, although there was much finger pointing between Rogers and HTC about these issues. So much for all bugs being shallow.</div><div align="justify">I also recently bought Samsung's Galaxy S Tab (tablet). I thought it would be the same as my Samsung smartphone. However, the tablet is running on Android 2.2, one version ahead of my phone... yet some applications have been added or removed, and others modified to work with the larger screen size. On top of this, Google has insisted that Android 2.x is not ready for tablets, and most manufacturers are waiting for Android 3.0. As with my previous mobile phone, a similar uncertainty already exists as to whether future versions of Android can, and will, be available for my new tablet.</div><div align="justify">The installed version is only one consideration. Google offers a “pure” Android experience on phones it markets itself. There are no less than ten variants of the Galaxy S smartphone in Canada and the US alone, one available for each major carrier. Some of the hardware differences are necessary to support the various cellular network technologies deployed, but many other changes are simply for marketing purposes, to allow each carrier to “differentiate their product offering.” Each carrier can customize the device, including by adding their own applications.</div><div align="justify">All this “differentiation” is not always a good thing. While my tablet is fully capable of making cellular phone calls, and has a front facing camera for video conferencing, the phone functionality has been disabled. Yet, “cell standby” is regularly among the top uses of my tablet's battery. Do I personally modify my tablet to enable the features or operating system I want to use? It is open, right?</div><div align="justify">In the case of mobile devices, these business issues, and hardware issues, compound the question of openness. But it's not all wine and roses in the pure software world either. In our daily work with nonprofits, just like the Google versus Apple question, we are sometimes asked what is the “right” content management system (CMS) to use. Idealware produces an annual report <a href="http://idealware.org/reports/2010-os-cms">comparing open source content management systems</a>, including four popular systems in use in the nonprofit sector: Drupal, Joomla, Plone, and Wordpress. We usually pick <a href="http://drupal.org/">Drupal</a>. Even with a broad mandate to support the use of IT by nonprofits, Freeform Solutions cannot be an expert in everything, just like cellular carriers cannot offer all versions of Android.</div><div align="justify">We generally prefer any open source CMS over a proprietary one, if only so that we can modify it to meet the unique needs that nonprofit organizations often have. We limit such modifications as much as we can, though, since software development is expensive. But, we like having options and choices, and we enjoy the opportunity to build on the effort of others, and then share our efforts in support of developing the community.</div><div align="justify">But while we rarely face hardware issues and only a few marketing “differentiation” issues – choosing which Drupal distribution, for example ― we have produced, and maintain, many sites in Drupal 5 and 6. <a href="http://drupal.org/drupal-7.0">Drupal 7 was recently released</a> and <a href="http://drupal.org/node/1027214">Drupal 5 is no longer supported</a>. Jumping two versions is never simple, so what do we recommend for our Drupal 5 websites? What if the organization that owns the site cannot afford the upgrade work? Do we leave clients stranded with an obsolete version that may have security or other unresolved issues?</div><div align="justify">And regardless of these kinds of versioning issues, if Drupal misbehaves, our clients are often pointing at us, like my post-911-upgrade situation between Rogers and HTC, even though we are neither the carrier nor the manufacturer in this example. Regardless, we often feel responsible for addressing these issues, so we usually do whatever we can.</div><div align="justify">By embracing “open,” there are many benefits that come your way, but clearly there are also many hurdles if you expect to reap all those benefits. On the flip side, there are clearly benefits to Apple doing everything it can to limit options and choices in favour of creating a predictable, repeatable experience for users across numerous hardware devices. Steve Jobs believes the real issue is not open versus closed at all, but <a href="http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/10/18/apples_steve_jobs_slams_google_rim_and_rival_tablet_makers_on_conference_call.html">fragmentation versus integration</a>; he thinks that Android is fragmented and becoming ever more so. Perhaps the diversity of hardware platforms makes a version of the forking problem inevitable.</div><div align="justify">In our case, every website we produce is different, and each modification we make might take the underlying software in a different direction. Nonetheless, I prefer the complex and diverse ecosystem of Android – and open source; it is much like the nonprofit sector, where diversity is most often a strength.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-79222953093466208152011-01-21T10:15:00.000-05:002011-01-21T10:15:03.921-05:00Opening Up to the Future<div align="JUSTIFY">Today's columnist is Stephen Huddart from the J.W. McConnell Family Foundation. Stephen <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1263/1210">writes</a>:</div><div align="JUSTIFY">My colleague at Social Innovation Generation, Al Etmanski, asked everyone he’d mentioned in his <a href="http://www.aletmanski.com/" target="_blank">popular blog</a> over the past year to contribute a piece to a special year-end issue, on the theme of “What would you like to see more of in 2011?” Fifty-eight responded, and <a href="http://www.aletmanski.com/files/becoming-visible.pdf" target="_blank">the results</a> constitute an impressive range of hopes and ideas about the future. I recommend it. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">With a nod to Al, in my first OSBR column for 2011, I want to share some things that I am looking forward to seeing more of in the coming year, before reflecting on what they might portend for the world of open source software. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>1. Companies going beyond corporate social responsibility to create “shared value”.</b> In Cali, Colombia recently, Mark Lundy, a researcher and policy analyst at the International Centre for <a href="http://www.ciat.cgiar.org/Paginas/index.aspx" target="_blank">Tropical Agriculture</a>, told me about an evaluation the Centre did on the impact of fair trade and organic programs on coffee growers. “To our surprise,” he told me, “in the programs we looked at, growers’ families were going hungry between 10 and 50% percent of the time.” Lundy went on to work with companies, intermediaries and growers to create eco-efficient and economically beneficial supply chains. In a <a href="http://web.mit.edu/%7Ejjay/Public/papers/InnovationsForHealthyValueChainsv15.doc" target="_blank">2008 report</a>, he reflected on one such process: “...it was very powerful to see that […] there are no bad guys and good guys. We are all in the same system and we are all operating under constraints, particularly information constraints. And that negatively affects how the whole system performs.” </div><div align="JUSTIFY">As Porter and Kramer point out in a <a href="http://hbr.org/2011/01/the-big-idea-creating-shared-value/ar/1" target="_blank">seminal paper in this month’s Harvard Business Review</a>, while fair trade improves producers’ share of revenues, the resulting 10-20% increase in income pales in comparison to the 300% or more that can be generated by investments in efficiency, yield improvement, quality and the building of resilient local economies. Such investments are more costly at the outset and take longer to develop, but the resulting clusters of suppliers, technicians, physical infrastructure, and social services constitute a more robust and enduring approach to creating economic, social, and environmental value. As implementation of the landmark Boreal Forest Agreement gets underway in Canada this year, similar investments in local economies will be needed to shift an extractive, non-renewable business model to one designed for sustainability <i>and</i> productivity. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>2. Educational institutions partnering with community organizations.</b> Cindy Blackstock is an aboriginal leader dedicated to improving the lives of First Nations children and families. As the Executive Director of First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada (<a href="http://www.fncfcs.com/" target="_blank">FNCFCSC</a>), she has pioneered programs to guide the community sector in working effectively with on-reserve partner agencies (Caring Across Boundaries); treat critically ill children first and figure out which jurisdiction will pay for it later (Jordan’s Principle), and invest in aboriginal education (Shannen’s Dream). Cindy and the FNCFCSC are bringing the federal government before the Canadian Human Rights Commission, alleging discrimination in the provision of education and health services to aboriginal children. As a result, the FNCFCSC has had to forego federal support, and keeping the doors open has been a constant challenge. Then, on January 1st, the University of Alberta made her an Associate Professor, encouraging her to continue her role at the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society. As Cindy recounted recently, “When the university first approached me I did not see how an academic appointment could foster equity for First Nations children and families. As discussions evolved, it became clear that the University’s commitment to citizenship and scholarship meant it was willing to creatively bring the strengths of these two independent organizations together to advance the rights of First Nations children.” Cindy will be seconded to the FNCFCSC while she develops a graduate course on social policy advocacy to mentor a future generation of social policy activists. “Universities are supposed to be places where our democracy is protected by academic freedom so that scholars can freely investigate matters and engage in public policy advocacy, even when that might be unpopular with the government of the day.” Cindy said, “The university’s decision to partner means that FNCFCSC has a new partner and a new platform from which to advance our shared vision of supporting First Nations children and families.” </div><div align="JUSTIFY">Over the past five years, <a href="http://www.communityservicelearning.ca/en/community_service_learning.htm" target="_blank">university-based community service learning</a> and scholarship have become widespread in Canada. The U of A Faculty of Extension/FNCFCSC agreement establishes a new high-water mark for this kind of partnership – bringing community expertise into the academy and funding its sustainability. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>3. Sectors learning and acting together.</b> Working on complex issues across sectors, and at different levels of scale, is not something we’ve grown up knowing how to do, but it is becoming an essential twenty-first century competency. In September, the University of Waterloo and York University’s Shulich School of Business (with support from the J. W. McConnell Family Foundation), will offer a <a href="http://sig.uwaterloo.ca/curriculum-development" target="_blank">Masters Diploma in Social Innovation</a>. It is designed to enable a cohort of students drawn from the private, public, and community sectors to collaboratively explore and then generate new approaches to complex challenges. Much of the program will be offered online, and curriculum content will eventually made available to other institutions interested in offering it. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">In the co-evolutionary spiral that integrates open source technologies with social innovations, developments like those described here herald an era in which systems and institutions increasingly open their boundaries – and their internal processes – in order to learn, to innovate, and to co-construct a more humane and sustainable world. As companies come to recognize that their social license to operate depends on creating shared value, it is essential that there be open lines of communication between what is happening on the front lines, the executive suite, and in the board room. As our educational institutions invest in deeper partnerships with community, the feedback loops between learning and action become shorter; and as we learn more about working together on our biggest challenges, we become a more innovative and resilient society. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">Happy New Year! </div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-72482423787451484682011-01-14T10:01:00.000-05:002011-01-14T10:03:49.010-05:00There Is No Creative Commons License<p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Today's columnist is Jordan Hatcher from the Open Knowledge Foundation. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1262/1207">writes</a>:</P><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>People often talk about using “the Creative Commons license” or suggest that a business or government body “uses Creative Commons” for their licensing. The problem: there isn't one Creative Commons license. Creative Commons (CC) isn't a single license but rather is a collection of them. </P><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>There are a set of six main CC licenses, plus other legal tools such as CC0 and the Public Domain Mark. CC also has its own <a HREF="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/" TARGET="_blank">version of the BSD license</A>, and <a HREF="http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses" TARGET="_blank">several deprecated licenses</A>, such as the Developing Nations license. Creative Commons therefore doesn't make "a license." Some of these licenses are <a HREF="http://www.opendefinition.org/okd/" TARGET="_blank">open</A>, some aren't. In my opinion, they are generally inappropriate for software and are also inappropriate for databases, for most users. For the most part, CC offers content licenses. </P><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Here, I want to focus on the six main CC licenses because they're the most popular. The six main CC licenses consist of combinations of four license elements: </P><ol><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">BY – Attribution (giving credit)</P><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">NC – Non-commercial (banning commercial use)</P><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">SA – Share Alike (copyleft/reciprocal licensing)</P><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>ND – No-derivatives (restricting remix of the work) <br />
</P></OL><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>CC <a HREF="http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses" TARGET="_blank">doesn't offer</A> these main licenses without attribution, so the set of six looks like: </P><ol><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">Attribution (BY) (OPEN) <br />
</P><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">Attribution | No Derivatives (BY-ND) <br />
</P><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">Attribution | Non-Commercial | No Derivatives (BY-NC-ND) <br />
</P><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">Attribution | Non-Commercial (BY-NC) <br />
</P><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">Attribution | Non-Commercial | Share Alike (BY-NC-SA) <br />
</P><li><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Attribution | Share Alike (BY-SA) (OPEN) <br />
</P></OL><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Two of the above license elements don't meet the <a HREF="http://www.opendefinition.org/okd/" TARGET="_blank">Open Knowledge Foundation's open definition</A> because they restrict the field of use – the non-commercial (NC) element – and the ability to reuse and create derivative works – the no derivatives (ND) element. As a result, only two of the six main CC licenses can be classified as open licenses: CC-BY and CC-BY-SA. </P><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>So let's say you've decided which of the six licenses best fits your needs as a creator. The license variation doesn't end with that initial choice. Even within the six main licenses, there are many variations of each, though each still accomplishes the core goal of that license type. <a HREF="http://www.jordanhatcher.com/2010/open-licenses-vs-public-licenses/" TARGET="_blank">Public licenses</A>, such as those published by Creative Commons, get upgraded as the law changes or as bugs in the license text are fixed, and each of the six licenses has been through multiple versions. All past versions remain active for people who licensed their work under those versions, though of course new licensors should choose the most current version. So the six licenses change through time, with past versions still potentially active. Licensors should always consider how they will upgrade their CC content when new license versions come out as part of their adoption plan. </P><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>In addition to versioning, these six licenses also get "ported" to the national law of many different jurisdictions. Intellectual property law is generally national in nature, but the Internet is global. Canada, France, Germany, Scotland, England & Wales, USA, Mexico, and so on all have their own adapted version of these six licenses. Currently CC has projects around their licenses in more than 70 separate jurisdictions. Also, CC offers an “unported” license for uses that aren't specific to any one jurisdiction. So, when discussing CC licenses, be aware that CC has multiple jurisdictional variations across both the six main license types and version types – a CC-BY Scotland and a CC-BY Canada for example. </P><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>Broadly, each license type does what it says: a CC-BY license should only require attribution, regardless of whether it's a Scottish 2.5 version of the CC-BY license or the latest unported 3.0 version. However, the process of adapting a CC license for a particular nation goes beyond language localization; the licenses get mapped onto national IP laws, and so there can exist important legal differences. For instance, the European Union CC licenses may be silent on areas such as the EU's <i>sui generis</I> Database Right or may explicitly waive the Database Right (depending on the jurisdiction and version), or there may even be a choice of law and jurisdiction clause, such as the Scottish CC licenses. </P><p ALIGN=JUSTIFY>So when licensing and discussing CC licenses, make sure you're specific as to what you want and what you mean: It can have an important impact on the end result. </P>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-47336816704577442092011-01-07T14:45:00.000-05:002011-01-07T14:45:48.684-05:00The ABCs of Humane Organization<div align="JUSTIFY">Today's columnist is Christopher Sean Morrison from BRL-CAD. He <A href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1261/1206">writes</a>: <br />
</div><br />
<div align="JUSTIFY"><i>"Who we are in the present includes who we were in the past." </i> </div><div align="RIGHT">Fred Rogers<br />
</div><div align="JUSTIFY">For a variety of reasons, the start of a new year is a perfect time for "digital cleaning." I always spend a little time making sure everything in my home directory is properly filed away, categories all make sense, duplicates are weeded out, and everything is fully backed up. The process is similar to the <a href="http://www.43folders.com/2004/09/08/getting-started-with-getting-things-done" target="_blank"><i>Getting Things Done</i></a> task management approach, with a notable exception. Since it's all digital, the storage costs are so close to zero that you really don't ever have to purge! You can be a guilt-free digital pack rat as long as it all gets properly organized into your archive. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY">I have a copy of practically every piece of electronic data I've ever worked on. Everything. Included in my massive data archive is everything from the obvious "keepers" such as source code repositories, family pictures, and OSBR articles, to the exceedingly mundane and trivial: emails, old university assignments, notes on my favorite scotch whiskies, log files, and more. If you've ever sent me an email, chatted with me over IRC, or observed my habit of taking pictures of fire hydrants while on travel, you can rest assured that particular piece of data is filed away in the archive. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY">Why? I love information. The obsessive data historian in me is fond of the information that I've created, written, and modified over the decades as that work and experience brought me to where I am today. It's a treasure trove with gems I can reflect upon, (re)learn from, and build on. The obsessive digital pack rat in me defends the archive as a vault of exceptionally useful information worth preserving because it's often and unexpectedly useful later on. Even with well over a million files, I can quickly find what I'm looking for when I need it. Neither my obsessive data historian or pack rat mentality, however, would be effective if the archive was a burden to maintain or if the data wasn't organized. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY">How does one keep everything they've ever done on a computer organized? Well that's the same as asking how does one eat an elephant. The smug answer is "one bite at a time." Pun intended. Human-user interface expert Jef Raskin of Macintosh fame and author of <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=D39vjmLfO3kC" target="_blank"><i>The Humane Interface</i></a> said, "An interface is humane if it is responsive to human needs and considerate of human frailties." Start small and build up infrastructure as you need it. Don't start with a complex web-based content management system tied to an SQL database. Adopt a simple organization scheme that fits your needs. That brings me to my ABCs of data archive management: <b>A</b>ttics, <b>B</b>asements, and <b>C</b>upboards. As your data-organization demands grow, progress from the attic stage, to the basement stage, to the cupboard stage to meet your growing needs. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>The Attic:</b> The first simple step you can take towards organizing your personal or business data is to create an attic. Software developers that have used the CVS version control system know the concept well as 'Attic' was the graveyard files went to when they were deleted. An attic is a place you really don't go to very often. It's not pretty, rarely smells good, and will likely have "unwanted visitors" that will turn your data into useless shredded bedding if left unattended for very long. But it's a start. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">A data attic can be as simple as a directory on your filesystem where you toss files as a backup every now and then. For businesses, it's a shared directory on a network file system. The key organizational trait you've introduced is that: there is one, and only one, place for everything. The maintenance overhead is exceptionally low because you're not spending time organizing your data, but if you had to find something, you at least know <i>where</i> to look. The downside, of course, is that you're not really organized yet and it can be practically impossible to find anything. If you're one of those people that has hundreds of desktop icons, you know what I'm talking about. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>The Basement:</b> As the data in your attic grows, so should your organizational strategy. For those who live in a part of the world that isn't familiar with subterranean accommodations, it's generally a cold simple space albeit much larger than an attic, often used for storage, but usually haphazardly organized. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY">A basement is where files get grouped together. You need to organize now that your files are no longer "in plain sight." It doesn't have to be pretty or efficient, but it should roughly categorize common types of information into at least 1/10th chunks. How you categorize will depend heavily on the data, but start vague and refine as needed. Documents, Pictures, Projects, etc. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY">Even though you not putting in a lot of organizational effort, you have to put in <i>some</i> effort (and your time is priceless) so it's time to think about the other <i>B</i> word: <i>Backups</i>. There really should be backups during the attic stage, but the reality is that most naively or ignorantly don't. By the time you start investing time and effort into your system, though, you <i>definitely</i> should be thinking at least about catastrophic data recovery. An effective simple backup strategy I used for many years was simply an automatic sync of my archive onto another hard drive nightly. That drive was replaced with a bigger drive as the size of my archive grew and the old one was stored off-site in case the house burnt down. That (along with a RAID 5 filesystem) was more than enough infrastructure to save me from any minor fat-fingering mistakes and hard drive failures. The level of effort required to restore data was roughly proportional to the level of disaster.</div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>The Cupboards:</b> Once your data is really big, you're invested. Your storage system is to the point where it's used frequently, maybe even many times throughout the day. From an efficiency standpoint, this is where you want to get to because it's where your data becomes the most convenient and easy to access. It should be a fully organized and easily perused storage system that you and others could work with on a daily basis. Your setup should be pleasant and efficient to work with with. There should be only as much complexity as is called for. It takes more regular maintenance to keep cupboards organized and more effort to put things away, but they are the most humane organization. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY">Keeping business data organized at this level can be a very challenging given the rate at which most organizations generate and process data, so you may need to collaborate with your workforce on establishing something that works for them. Don't just dictate a usage policy. </div><div align="JUSTIFY"></div><div align="JUSTIFY">It takes a lot of time and effort to preserve digital knowledge after a job is over, whether personal or professional. It's overhead and nobody else is going to pay for it so it has to become common culture. Avoid wasting time reinventing, relearning, and rediscovering. Philosopher George Santayana said eloquently that, "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." You will reap rewards on your organizational investment in the long term. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">A few tips to leave you with: </div><ul><li><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>Don't store stuff you didn't touch.</b> I too have been tempted to download an entire human genome dataset just for the sake of having it, but data doesn't belong in an archive until you actually do something with it. </div></li>
</ul><ul><li><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>Separate out other people's stuff that you do touch.</b> That way, if you ever need to ditch evidence in a pinch, it's all in one place. I got sophisticated and use a directory named "notmine.” </div></li>
</ul><ul><li><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>Make a complete backup at least once a year.</b> Portable USB drives make for great off-site storage. </div></li>
</ul><ul><li><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>Have a solid search mechanism.</b> If you can't find your data quickly, the archive will turn into a graveyard. Be adept at <i>find</i>, <i>grep</i>, and <i>awk</i>. Leverage Spotlight, use <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_folder" target="_blank">virtual folders</a>, set up a file index - whatever works quickly for you. </div></li>
</ul><ul><li><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>Clear your home directory once a year.</b> Make the archive your central file store. Put everything away at least once a year. Take out only what you're actively working on. It helps to purge your email inbox at the same time. </div></li>
</ul><ul><li><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>Use human-readable directory names.</b> If might have saved you all of 4.2 seconds when you created "oldfmpxs" to store your old family pictures, but you shouldn't have to perform a mental somersault five years later trying to remember what you were thinking. </div></li>
</ul><ul><li><div align="JUSTIFY"><b>Share your organizational and backup setup with others.</b> Be proud of your data collection. Help others preserve their digital possessions too.</div></li>
</ul>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-79620377729587799242011-01-03T13:23:00.001-05:002011-02-01T13:14:52.302-05:00The Business of Open Source<div style="text-align: justify;">The January issue of the OSBR is now available in <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1251/1196">PDF</a> and <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/117">HTML</a> formats. The editorial theme for this issue is The Business of Open Source and the Guest Editor is Michael Weiss, Associate Professor in the Technology Innovation Management program at Carleton University. In this issue, we have the following articles:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Mark VonFange, Professional Services Manager at iXsystems, and Dru Lavigne, Director of Community Development for the PC-BSD Project, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1253/1198">provide</a> evidence of the increasing use of open source solutions in enterprise IT infrastructures. With its advancements in availability, usability, functionality, choice, and power, free/libre open source software (F/LOSS) provides a cost-effective means for the modern enterprise to streamline its operations. The article quantifies the benefits associated with the use of open source software. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Ian Skerrett, Director of Marketing at the Eclipse Foundation, <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1254/1199">identifies</a> five best practices for multi-vendor open source communities. Multi-vendor open source communities such as Eclipse, Apache, or Linux enable companies to lower development costs and gain access to wider addressable markets. The article also discusses the importance of foundations in implementing multi-vendor open source communities. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Michael Ayukawa, Mohammed Al-Sanabani, and Adefemi Debo-Omidoku <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1255/1200">explore</a> the relationship between companies and open source communities. The article identifies the ways in which companies can participate in open source communities and how they can benefit from engaging with the community. It also asks how open a company should be. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Ali Kousari and Chris Henselmans <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1256/1201">weigh</a> the benefits and risks of companies moving from a private to a private-collective innovation model. In this model, a company collaborates with other companies by making its project public and, in turn, may benefit from higher-quality, decreased time to market, and maximized revenue. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Robert Poole <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1257/1202">discusses</a> how companies that rely on open source may fear losing control over the execution of their product development strategy. Understanding the mechanisms of control inherent in open source projects and the benefits of hybrid approaches helps companies articulate those fears and make appropriate strategic decisions to match their business objectives. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">John Schreuders, Arthur Low, Kenneth Esprit, and Nerva Joachim <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1258/1203">present</a> Nokia’s Qt product (initially developed by Trolltech) as an example of a hybrid business model. They illustrate how the hybrid approach was implemented and the extent to which the approach has been effective for Nokia. The Qt story illustrates how F/LOSS business models were developed during a period when participants were just beginning to understand how to make money with open source. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The editorial theme for the upcoming February 2011 issue of the OSBR is Recent Research and submissions will be accepted up to January 15th. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For the March issue, we have invited authors from the Research Forum to Understand Business in Knowledge Society to contribute to a special issue on Co-creation. The Guest Editors will be Stoyan Tanev from the University of Southern Denmark and Marko Seppä from the University of Jyväskylä. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For subsequent issues, we welcome general submissions on the topic of open source business or the growth of early-stage technology companies. Please contact the Editor, <a href="mailto:chris.mcphee@osbr.ca">Chris McPhee</a>, if you are interested in making a submission.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-58114586450384495642010-12-17T09:36:00.000-05:002010-12-17T09:36:02.964-05:00Advancing Open Source for Humanity<div align="JUSTIFY">Today's columnist is Jason Côté from Freeform Solutions. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1230/1177">writes</a>:</div><br />
<div align="JUSTIFY">“<i>Because people who change the world need the tools to do it.”</i></div><div align="RIGHT">The Nonprofit Technology Network</div><div align="JUSTIFY">IEEE, the world's largest technical professional association, unveiled a new tagline earlier this year: Advancing Technology for Humanity. The tagline is intended to showcase the organization's belief that, “IEEE and its members across the engineering, computing, and technology community worldwide advance innovation and technological excellence for the benefit of humankind.” While reading <a href="http://www.ieee.org/about/news/2010/10feb_2010.html" target="_blank">the press release</a>, my faith in my undergraduate engineering education, and my membership in the IEEE, was suddenly renewed.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">The belief that people use and develop technology to benefit society, and the specific and natural alignment of the open source movement toward this effort, is well evidenced in <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/issue/view/114" target="_blank">this month's issue of the OSBR</a>, including through other IEEE initiatives. Still, while “humanitarian open source” might be narrowly defined as the application of open source in support of humanitarian response efforts, a broader, more inclusive definition is at least consistent with the expansive meaning of open source itself. Thankfully, the shared values evident in open source are increasingly evident in other areas of society, especially in the nonprofit sector.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Perhaps one timely example is the <a href="http://www.humanitariancoalition.ca/" target="_blank">Humanitarian Coalition</a>, a network of Canada's leading aid organizations, including CARE Canada, Oxfam Canada, Oxfam-Québec, and Save the Children Canada. During humanitarian emergencies, these agencies coordinate their efforts, share resources, and provide information to everyone about the disaster and their response efforts, all while doing what they each do best. On January 12, 2010, a 7.0-magnitude earthquake struck near Port-au-Prince, Haiti's capital, reducing much of it to rubble. An estimated <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Haiti_earthquake" target="_blank">three million people were affected</a> by the quake; the Haitian government originally reported that “an estimated 230,000 people had died, 300,000 had been injured, and 1,000,000 made homeless.”</div><div align="JUSTIFY">The Humanitarian Coalition and its members responded immediately, and have continued to work together with Haitians, in communities across Haiti, to help rebuild their country and restore their livelihoods. Canadians continue to follow these activities and are sympathetic to the continued struggle of the Haitian community. Now, approaching the one-year anniversary of this catastrophic earthquake, the Humanitarian Coalition has launched the <a href="http://haitiportal.humanitariancoalition.ca/" target="_blank">Haiti Portal</a>, a website to share the progress that has been made, and send messages of support and hope from Canadians to survivors in Haiti. The fact that the website uses the Drupal open source content management system is likely of little consequence to most people.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">Thankfully, such events lift us beyond the various challenges that otherwise make it difficult for us to coordinate our efforts and collaborate to achieve a greater social impact. Still, what about our daily efforts to bring about systemic change? In my daily work in the nonprofit sector, I see many passionate people working to create change in their world. In the following three examples, there is an emphasis on intentional sharing and on building ecosystems that naturally produce social innovation.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">1. Inspired by the participatory culture of open source, the <a href="http://socialinnovation.ca/" target="_blank">Centre for Social innovation</a> (CSI) in Toronto is a shared physical space where over 250 people work, meet, and connect. CSI has now opened a second location, buying a beautiful old building in downtown Toronto that will be home to another 400 people; you can even invest in the project through a <a href="http://socialinnovation.ca/communitybonds" target="_blank">community bond</a>. They have recently released <a href="http://socialinnovation.ca/sssi/" target="_blank">Shared Spaces for Social Innovation</a>, effectively open sourcing their model, and offer specific templates and tools to help other people get started. They are also working to scale their social finance innovation (i.e., the community bond) across Ontario.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">2. The <a href="http://ontariononprofitnetwork.ca/" target="_blank">Ontario Nonprofit Network</a> (ONN) is a network of networks of organizations working for public benefit on a variety of issues relevant to the nonprofit sector. ONN facilitates cross-sectoral collaboration, in part through their use of the <a href="http://ontariononprofitnetwork.ca/page/constellations" target="_blank">Constellation Governance Model</a> as a framework for organizing. The model promotes action through “coordinated, mutual self-interest,” and without requiring the creation of another nonprofit organization. Each constellation is a “self-organizing action team” that is led by whomever leads. Accordingly, constellations appear when needed and disappear when their work is complete.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">3. The <a href="http://www.nten.org/" target="_blank">Nonprofit Technology Network</a> (NTEN) recently released their <a href="http://www.nten.org/research/nten-20112014-strategic-plan" target="_blank">strategic plan</a> for the next few years, and invited the community - “a community transforming technology into social change” - to openly discuss its future. The conversation will continue at the <a href="http://www.nten.org/ntc" target="_blank">2011 Nonprofit Technology Conference</a>, the next annual three-day gathering of nonprofit professionals from around the world. Conference participants will learn about becoming networked, building networks and networks of networks, and representing the technology needs of nonprofits as a community that speaks with a single, unified voice.</div><div align="JUSTIFY">With a focus on nonprofit technology, open source, and social innovation, my organization is a member of CSI, ONN, and NTEN. I personally do what I can to participate in their physical and virtual spaces, sometimes as a follower, and sometimes as a leader. It never seems like enough. Collaborating takes time and requires effort; it is hard work! It requires persistence and patience. It can be immensely rewarding when it works, and intensively frustrating when it doesn't. Simply put, collaborating is a journey. For me, I expect, a lifelong one. I feel particularly grateful, especially at this time of year, to be travelling among so many wonderful people. Together, I believe we are advancing humanity.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6134990750731157418.post-58443595643661919362010-12-10T15:04:00.006-05:002011-01-19T14:02:42.730-05:00On Symbian, Communities, and Motivation<div align="JUSTIFY">Today's columnist is Carlo Daffara from Conecta. He <a href="http://www.osbr.ca/ojs/index.php/osbr/article/view/1228/1176">writes</a>:</div><div align="JUSTIFY">I have followed with great interest the evolution of the <a href="http://www.symbian.org/" target="_blank">Symbian</a> open source project - from its start, through its tentative evolution, and up to its closure this month. This process of closing down is accompanied by <a href="http://www.symbian.org/news-and-media/2010/11/08/symbian-foundation-transition-licensing-operation" target="_blank">the claim that</a>: "the current governance structure for the Symbian platform – the foundation - is no longer appropriate." </div><div align="JUSTIFY">It seems strange. Considering the great successes of Gnome, KDE, Eclipse, and many other groups, it is curious that Symbian was not able to follow along the same path. I have always been <a href="http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/?p=267" target="_blank">a great believer</a> in OSS consortia, because I think that the sharing of research and development is a main strength of the open source model, and I think that consortia are among the best ways to implement R&D sharing efficiently. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">However, to work well, Consortia need to provide benefits in terms of efficiency or visibility to all the actors that participate in them, not only to the original developer group. For Nokia, we know that one of the reasons to open up Symbian was to reduce the porting effort. As Eric Raymond <a href="http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=2772" target="_blank">reports</a>, "they did a cost analysis and concluded they couldn’t afford the engineering hours needed to port Symbian to all the hardware they needed to support. (I had this straight from a Symbian executive, face-to-face, around 2002)." </div><div align="JUSTIFY">But to get other people to contribute their work, you need an advantage for them as well. What can this advantage be? For Eclipse, most of the companies developing their own integrated development environment (IDE) found it economically sensible to drop their own work and contribute to Eclipse instead. It allowed them to quickly reduce their maintenance and development costs while increasing their quality as well. The Symbian foundation should have done the same thing, but apparently missed the mark, despite having a large number of partners and members. Why? </div><div align="JUSTIFY">The reason is time and focus. The Eclipse foundation had, for quite some time, basically used only IBM resources to provide support and development. In a similar way, it took WebKit (which is not quite a foundation, but follows the same basic model) more than two years before it started receiving substantial contributions, as can be found <a href="http://neugierig.org/software/chromium/notes/2010/02/webkit-commits.html" target="_blank">here</a>. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">And WebKit is much, much smaller than Symbian and Eclipse. For Symbian, I would estimate that it would require at least three or four years before such a project could start to receive important external contributions. That is, unless it is substantially re-engineered so that the individual parts (some of which are quite interesting and advanced, despite the claims that Symbian is a dead project) can be removed and reused by other projects as well. This is usually the starting point for long-term cooperation. Some tooling was also not in place from the beginning; the need for a separate compiler chain - one that was not open source and that in many aspect was not as advanced as open source ones - was an additional stumbling block that delayed participation. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">Another problem was focus. More or less, anyone understood that for a substantial period of time, Symbian would be managed and developed mainly by Nokia. And Nokia made a total mess of differentiating what part of the platform was real, what was a stopgap for future changes, what was end-of-life, and what was the future. Who would invest, in the long term, in a platform where the only entity that could gain from it was not even that much committed to it? And before flaming me for this comment, let me say that I am a proud owner of a Nokia device, I love most Nokia products, and I think that Symbian still could have been a contender, especially through a speedier transition to Qt for the user interface. But the long list of confusing announcements and delays, changes in plans, and lack of focus on how to beat the competitors like iOS and Android clearly reduced the willingness of commercial partners to invest in the venture. </div><div align="JUSTIFY">Which is a pity - Symbian still powers most phones in the world and can still enter the market with some credibility. But this later announcement sounds like a death knell. Obtain the source code through a DVD or USB key? You must be kidding. Do you really think that setting up a webpage with the code and preserving a read-only Mercurial server would be a too much of a cost? The only thing that it shows is that Nokia stopped believing in an OSS Symbian. As a small side project, I am now dumping the full Mercurial repository, and will create a Google Code project for preservation. At least, it will remain visible without having to ask Nokia for a DVD.</div><br />
<div align="JUSTIFY">UPDATE: The repository is now available at <a href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/symbiandump/files/">http://sourceforge.net/projects/symbiandump/files/</a>. It is a substantial, massive archive – I had to drop all Mercurial additions to make it fit in the space I had available, and still it amounts to 6.1Gb, Bzip-compressed. I have performed no modifications or changes on the source code, and it remains under its original licenses. I hope that it may be useful for others, or at least become a nice historical artifact.</div>Chris McPheehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14643732409883774421noreply@blogger.com0