Filed under: Developer, Open Source, Analysis, Podcasts
The dangers of taking credit for open-source software
Open-source software is everywhere, and developers use it to speed up their development on a regular basis. This is as it should be, for the most part, assuming the developers follow the licensing for whatever open-source software (OSS) they use. Along with licensing, the open-source community is, probably rightly so, very focused on attributing credit correctly. Considering that most OSS developers do not make any money for their contributions, credit and reputation are really the only compensation they can expect.
Imagine the horror in the OSS community then, when a mini-TEDTalk was released today that had presenter Chris Hughes showing off augmented-reality software that is built on very powerful open-source toolkits, but fails to attribute any credit to them, or even mention their existence.
Ralph Hauwert certainly took issue, and wrote a scathing blog post describing the offense. To TED's credit, they have updated the page for today's video, acknowledging the furor and offering an explanation. According to the update, Chris hadn't been intending on presenting at TED, but after privately showing his project to a number of people, he was invited to do a short 2 minute presentation. Due to the extremely short format, there was apparently no time for attribution of credit for the software frameworks his software was based on.
This is a cautionary tale. Clearly someone made a mistake, and Hughes' reputation may end up bearing the brunt of the error. It's important to remember that in the software business there are always two currencies at play: the typical financial currency that we usually think of (you know, money), and credit for the work that was done. Although there is a lot of open-source software that is licensed to be free to use, that fact amplifies the focus on correctly attributing credit for the work that went into the software.
My guess is this is a lesson Chris Hughes isn't likely to forget again.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
So, just how good at time waster games are you? Think you've got the stuff? Well, The World's Hardest Game 2.0 doesn't think you do.
Yes, amazingly, it's possible to have a sequel to a game called "The World's Hardest Game". It doesn't seem logically possible, since if the first one was actually the world's hardest, how could another one come along and share the moniker? It made me doubt the name in the first place. That is, until I tried the game.
The mechanics of the game are very simple. You are a small red square, ...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
minibar said 12:20PM on 6-24-2009
"as it should be, for the most part, assuming" and "probably rightly so" seems too equivocating to open with unless you follow up on exceptions.
who is Chris Hughes, what is TED, and how do readers relate to them? (rhetorical question)
attribution error is not so much a software issue as an ethical issue common to journalism, sciences, arts, business, etc.. and it far greater than a mere "mistake."
most of what i see here is a reference to a "scathing" blog post, as if DLS were to become the next gossip column, which makes me more sad than it already has.
Reply
Iocane said 12:54PM on 6-24-2009
This is a blog, not a catalog of fully developed or properly researched articles. You might want to ratchet your concerns regarding journalistic standards down a bit.
Timmy P. said 1:03AM on 6-25-2009
You will be kicked out of Institutions of Higher Education for not attributing the content's owners. So why is it surprising that this guy is being chastised, doesn't he deserve worse?
Reply
ChrisHughesBakaDesu said 2:43AM on 7-02-2009
Chris Hughes Augmented Reality hoax, moron taking credit for software he did not write:
http://blog.ted.com/2009/06/a_note_on_today.php
http://www.unitzeroone.com/blog/2009/06/23/ideas-worth-taking-credit-for-the-ted-augmented-reality-hoax/
Reply