Where was FOSS at Davos?

The World Economic Forum is held at Davos. Historically, its relevance has been questionable, but this year, the focus was on collaboration, a topic close to FOSS. So I asked Brian Behlendorf, who attended, Where was FOSS at Davos? Here is his more or less unedited response, which Brian graciously allowed me to publish here; all rights, of course, remain his.

Where was FOSS at Davos? On one hand, in its most abstract form, it was everywhere - the theme of the conference this year was "the power of collaborative innovation", after all. And of the people I talked to, the idea that businesses would find it in their own self-interest to work jointly on projects with passionate individuals, the government, or other businesses, even their competitors, was relatively uncontroversial. Jimmy Wales's presence at this year's conference and last was also proof that this was a concept that went beyond software. Though, a couple of people were surprised to hear that Wikipedia was a non-profit - which suggests that further ideas about IP ownership and the role of non-profits isn't as well understood.

The more specific sessions at the conference dealing with collaboration - you can find links to them, often including video, at www.weforum.org - often were discussions less about collaborating with the open public and more about collaborating with business partners in a private setting; or with customers but in a still very controlled way. One example given by Mark Parker, CEO of Nike, was their collaboration with Apple: they have a set of running shoes that can communicate back with an iPod information about distance, speed, and calories burned, which then feeds a desktop app back at home and a web site where reportedly 40 million miles had been collectively burned. The runners can see each other's totals, compete for the most miles ran or calories burned, and message each other on the site. This, of course, is a long distance from the kind of collaboration we know about in the FOSS world... maybe I am damning with faint praise here, but it seems better than nothing.

But back to FOSS. As Davos is often best thought of as the Olympics of networking, finding a way to describe FOSS and its attributes crisply was important. Everyone had heard of Linux, 99% had heard of Apache, and of those I asked about 80% had heard of OpenOffice. That's the good news. On the downside: twice, I mentioned ODF vs. OOXML in conversations with people, and each time, there was a lack of awareness of the issue. I really don't want to embarrass them so I won't name names, but they were people who really should have known; one was a leader of a business that has been around for years and has serious document management and longevity issues, the other a government official who was charged with preserving his country's culture but sadly non-technical. In both cases, the initial response was along the lines of "this is a mess that you techies have created, I expect you to clean it up", as if it was simply a matter of defects in code that a company like Microsoft would be cleaning up quickly. If it turned out that valuable company data from 1993 were in a Word file format that couldn't be properly read by Office 2008, then they'd simply hire someone or a firm to dive in and repair it by hand. I believe I brought both of them around to understanding how it's not just a matter of bugfixing or outsourcing the problem, that it is a knowlege and institutional threat, and the role they need to play as informed customers in pressuring vendors to do the right thing. But, Microsoft's judo-move with OOXML of appearing to do the "right" thing that isn't actually right in practice has more power than I think you or I would wish were true.

Most of the time, though, Davos isn't a place to have difficult conversations about situations and events that appear to be beyond the field of the people in the conversation - it's often simply a place to meet and build bonds with people in your field and, more importantly, beyond; bonds that later can be used when a crisis hits or some need arises. I found myself preferring to discuss possibilities and potentials rather than what's wrong or looming worries. I know that sounds impossibly frou-frou, and I could blame the rarified air, or the overabundance of champagne. Instead, though, I think it's because this is for most people a one-week escape from the harsh realities of their daily business world, into a world where they can relate to others as people, to be stoked by new ideas. They'd much rather talk about the potential for Open Source software on the OLPC as a means to democratise technology; or Open Source software in disaster relief operations as a means to increase flexibility.

Perhaps it's my own failing of marketing, but I need to improve the way I talk about the ODF/OOXML debate so that it sounds less about conspiracy paranoia (no matter how well deserved) and speaks more about possibility, choice, freedom, economic opportunities, and growth. The Extremadura story is a beautiful story about free software, for example - especially when it's told in a way that shows how it could have never had a similar impact had they chosen to use proprietary software, even if "donated".