Carla Mollica

Annotated Bibliography

Chopra, S., & Dexter, S. (2011). Free software and the economics of information justice. Ethics
and Information Technology, 13(3), 173-184.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/10.1007/s10676-010-9226-6

This short article provides a basic insight about how free and open source software has the
potential to transform and revolutionize economics in terms of information access. It
explores how, although FOSS is truly born out of a justice issue, it can be viewed as an
alternative to traditional business models, and help economic trends thrive. The article is
useful in making a case for the benefits of FOSS.

Coleman, E. G. (2005). The social construction of freedom in free and open source software:
Hackers, ethics, and the liberal tradition. (Ph.D., The University of Chicago). ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses, Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/docview/305415008?accountid=14068.
(prod.academic_MSTAR_305415008).
By focusing on the Debian free project, Colemans dissertation focuses on the expressive
freedoms of hackers. This article would be specifically useful as she explores that free and
open source software provides access to knowledge that encourages and enables people to
express themselves, and innovate and create change.

Coleman, G. (2009). Code is Speech: Legal tinkering, expertise, and protest among free and
open source software developers. Cultural Anthropology, 24(3), 420-454. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/docview/213114248?accountid=14068

Carla Mollica

Colemans article makes the assertion that source code should be considered as another
language, as speech, and within this framework, it should be treated with all of the respect
given to the right of free speech. Though FOSS challenges the ideology of intellectual
property, Coleman draws parallels between freedom of speech and freedom of code, thus
demonstrating that issues of intellectual property and ideas can be viewed as interpretative.
Although Coleman is clearly biased in favor of open source, her article brings up a myriad
of excellent points that can be used in supporting the case for open source.

DeLanda, M. (2001, Fall 2001). The politics of software: The case of open source. Dissent, 48,
96. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/docview/227272697?accountid=14068

This article provides a basic introduction to FOSS and proceeds to explore how the freedom
to change and improve software, as allowed by open source, would ultimately create more
reliable information technology. The author evaluates GPL and the programmers who
provided free time to improving the growth of the internet. Conclusions are drawn in favor
of FOSS based on pure quality over closed source.

Gallaway, T., & Kinnear, D. (2004). Open source software, the wrongs of copyright, and the rise
of technology. Journal of Economic Issues, 38(2), 467-474. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/docview/208838038?accountid=14068

This article deepens the case of open source software, while exploring the problems in
relation to copyright and intellectual property. Like several other articles, it draws on the
fact that free access to digitized information and software would boost economic trends.
The authors assertion that old economic models are no longer appropriate are underlying

Carla Mollica

throughout the article. This content can be useful in proving that open source benefits other
parts of society.

Kaufman, R. (2012). Access all areas? Bookseller, (5545), 11-12. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lxh&AN=82
281036&site=ehost-live

This short article explores the complex concept of open access by examining the basis and
need for it, as well as the implications of proprietary information. The authors perspective
shies away from personal belief and seems to objectively support the widespread availability
of quality information. This article would serve useful in providing basic groundwork on
the idea of open access.

Kuehnel, A. (2008). Microsoft, open source and the software ecosystem: Of predators and
preythe leopard can change its spots. Information & Communications Technology Law,
17(2), 107-124. doi:10.1080/13600830802204229
This article discusses the narrow attempts made by Microsoft in order to embrace open
source software through its Shared Source Initiative. The author evaluates the clear value
and benefit of free and open source software, and asserts that Microsofts efforts are too
miniscule for the grand scale of open source today, thus the metaphor of predator and prey.
This article is rife with facts, and thus will be a great source of data.
May, C. (2008). Opening other windows: A political economy of openness in a global
information society. Review of International Studies, 34(S1), 69-92.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/10.1017/S0260210508007808

Carla Mollica

The author demonstrates how open source poses a threat to intellectual property. He
provides insight into the global information society, information development, and how
political economy, communication, and infrastructure can be affected by the benefits of
open source inclusion. The authors objective stance makes it difficult to understand his
beliefs, while his statements support open source as a widespread benefit for society. The
article could be utilized to exemplify how open source affects a number of societal factors.

McGowan, M. K., Stephens, P., & Gruber, D. (2007). An exploration of the ideologies of
software intellectual property: The impact on ethical decision making. Journal of Business
Ethics, 73(4), 409-424. doi:http://dx.doi.org.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/10.1007/s10551-0069215-1

Attempting to explain the complexities of the ethics of software and source code as an
intellectual property, this article details the many different perspectives of interested parties
(broken into four groups by the authors). The article presents yet another challenge to
embracing open source, even if the benefits of utilizing technology for the greater good
supersede intellectual property.

Powell, A. (2012). Democratizing production through open source knowledge: From open
software to open hardware. Media, Culture & Society, 34(6), 691-708.
doi:10.1177/0163443712449497

Powell focuses on the potential of open source and free software as a tool to create greater
democratization. She frames the benefits of this in terms of information exchange,
economic and market production, and communication in society. The author also provides a
sound background on the initial ideology, access to source code and licenses, and delves

Carla Mollica

into the idea of open source and open license hardware as a complex next step in the
FOSS movement.

Poynder, R. (2010). Open source and the democratic process. Information Today, 27(11), 31.
Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/docview/816697933?accountid=14068

This short book review of David Booths Peer Participation and Software: What Mozilla has
to Teach the Government focuses on the loose organization and collaborative efforts of open
source and how it could act as a model for how the government conducts campaigns and
programs. While the author runs through some examples used by Booth, his overarching
suggestion seems to disprove Booths assertion that Mozilla is the appropriate example off
which to model. After reading this review, it seems the best source would be the book itself.

Raymond, E. S. (2004, Jul/Aug 2004). Open minds, open source. Analog Science Fiction & Fact,
124, 100-109. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/docview/215343126?accountid=14068

This article demonstrates that technology and software have become innate to our
infrastructure as a society, and we need to embrace open source as a compatible, reliable
alternative to traditional business models of closed source software. The author provides a
basic description of source code and underlines the significance of open sources peer
review, which provides a quality performance unmatched by closed source. The author,
having actively written code and having a hand in the Open Source Initiative, provides
unique insight as he argues for ultimate transparency in source code. His defense of open
source as more reliable than closed brings a technical (if not scientific) aspect to the debate
that would prove helpful.

Carla Mollica

The rise of the free software movement: Freedom from proprietary control. (2004). Multinational
Monitor, 25(7/8), 29-33. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/docview/208869782?accountid=14068
This interview with Richard Stallman provides readers with unique insight into Stallmans
beliefs and ideas, as the founder of the Open Source Movement. Stallmans explanations of
free software, free programming, the benefits of each and for whom, the players, as well as
his four software freedoms are useful in understanding the background and basic tenets of
the Open Source Movement.

Truscello, M. J. A. (2005). The technical effect: Free and open source software and the
programming of everyday life. (Ph.D., University of Waterloo (Canada)). ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses, Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.jerome.stjohns.edu:81/docview/305389027?accountid=14068.
(prod.academic_MSTAR_305389027).

In his dissertation, Truscello examines the relationship between everyday life and software.
He discusses in great detail what he refers to as the rhetorical ecology of the technical
effect, while including a brief history of FOSS, drawing on some of the major players, and
examining the uses of software cross-culturally. The conclusion suggests that proprietary
and open source software should eventually collaborate for the greater good.

Willinsky, J. (2006). The access principle: The case for open access to research and scholarship.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Retrieved on 4 July 2013, from
http://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/9780262512664_Download_the_full
_text.pdf

Carla Mollica

Willinskys book focuses specifically on the availability of open access. As part of FOSS,
and maybe one that is more overlooked than open code, he demonstrates the benefits of
public access to research and scholarship. He threads his argument throughout the book:
that open access is the primary way in which research should be conducted; proprietary
would be considered discriminatory and thus, hinder innovation and research that could
provide for the greater good. The book is broken down into 13 chapters, each examining
open access from different angles of society. This volume would be valuable for the sheer
amount of information Willinsky covers on a vast scope of different topics as they relate to
open access.