On April 5, Bruce Perens, author of the "open source" definition, gave his annual "State of Open Source" press conference at the LinuxWorld Expo and Conference in Boston. In an animated discussion, Perens presented his views and analysis of the impact recent events have had on open source. As LinuxWorld was my first opportunity to attend a conference representing TUX Magazine, I was happy that this was my first press conference. It's difficult, though, to remain unbiased and impartial when I witness someone sharing information on a subject he clearly cares about deeply. What makes it even more difficult is that I have grown to care deeply about the subject as well.

That being said, it strikes me that the core of Peren's message is one that should be of great interest to the leaders of all open-source projects. Many of the developers I've met within the Open Source community, although perhaps concerned about the state of software patents, don't see the broader perspective of their efforts. In addition, I sometimes wonder if the larger Open Source community grasps the importance of seemingly unrelated events, including the resignation of Peter Quinn and the NTP/Rim patent violation case.

In a project I ran for two years, we were fortunate to have Peter Quinn, ex-CIO for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, present at two different activities. I've spoken at length with him both before and after his resignation, and he is an example of someone working hard on something for which he has great passion. Fortunately for us all, his passion was focused on preserving the historical record of electronic documents for the future. For his passion and belief that open standards were the best way to protect that electronic record, Quinn became the subject of investigation and subtle harassment. To insulate himself and his family, Quinn reluctantly resigned at the end of last year. The fallout of this situation, as reported by Perens, has worsened the prospect of other leaders in government speaking out in support of the Open Document format issue. They now know that Microsoft will do its best to end their careers if they even try. I surmise that their fear extends beyond the Open Document Format issue and now includes open source in general, specifically any support for an open-source office suite.

In his best-selling books Crossing the Chasm and Inside the Tornado, Geoffrey Moore clearly points to the important role industry leaders have in aiding technology move from early adoption to mass market adoption. For me, government holds a special role in open-source adoption. Just as DARPA's need to develop a robust self-healing network led to people being able to look up information instantly on the Internet, I feel government needs to look to open source and embrace it to reduce costs and dependence on proprietary software. However, it falls upon us in the community to be agents of change to help government leaders understand the value of open source. In this capacity, the community is fortunate to have Perens working on the critical task of influencing government.

Hearing Perens bring together the various elements of political action, litigation, patents and legislation leaves one wondering about the risks for open source. The NTP vs. RIM Systems case brings new worries to software innovators everywhere. Regarding this court case, Perens states clearly, "This case sends a signal to get-rich-quick artists everywhere; it's not even necessary for your patent to be valid. Become a troll, extort, litigate, be rewarded! When you're done, take 10% of your plunder and become a philanthropist for the tax shelter; the man on the street will consider you a hero and a leader."

Although Steve Ballmer recently raised the ever-present threat of a patent attack against Linux, Perens indicated that every day Microsoft fails to file a suit against Linux, the Linux community gains a better defense. Perens claims this is true due to the Doctrine of Laches, which stipulates that if you hold off on filing a patent suit while waiting for the market to grow, you lose. Although the standard interval for Laches defense is six years, there have been successful defenses with a period of as little as one year.

One can see how easy it is for members of the Open Source community to miss the impact these situations have on themselves and their projects. However, in a siren call to all projects and developers, Perens pointed out the large disparity that exists in the ability to contest a patent claim through litigation. Open-source participants, in many cases, are individuals who cannot sustain a single day in court, where it can cost three to five million dollars to prosecute or defend a single case, according to the American IP Association's Economic Survey. Perens concluded his speech with this recommendation: "Only by moving the process of contesting a patent out of the courts does it appear that we can grant justice to the poor as well as the wealthy." He emphasized this point by noting that the Open Source community needs to achieve change by creating a political action committee that can educate and lobby about the perils to innovation that the current patent system allows.