Free-rider using open source

Scientific researchers have their own paradigm of constant exchange of knowledge similar to that in the open source community, because science advances most rapidly when discoveries are made known to other scientists who can add their intuitions to them. Scientists gain fulfillment from the publication of their work, because this increases their stature among other scientists and in general determines the success of their careers. Scientists routinely use open source as a means of publishing the software component of their work. In addition, scientists are motivated by the desire to be of benefit to society. Thus, to scientific participants, users are of benefit and should not be considered free-riders.

There is some question regarding whether the free-rider problem is as significant in the case of software as it is for other sorts of products, and whether it applies to open source at all. A free-rider on a bus uses the scarce resource of a seat, so that a potential paying rider could be denied a chance to ride the bus. A free-rider who has bootlegged a copy of Microsoft Windows may or may not diminish the market for paid copies of Windows, but does not use any scarce resource that would exclude other Windows users. A free-rider using open source does not diminish a market or use any scarce resource.

Open Source versus Free-Rider

The free-rider problem is familiar in economics. It means taking advantage of a product or service without providing any return to the provider of that product or service. All open source users start out as free-riders. They download and try the software, and perhaps deploy it, and do not generally consider contributing to that software's development until they are already using it and desire an additional feature.

If they desire an additional feature, they may implement that feature themselves rather than pay one of the initial developers. At this point, they are not free riders. Businesses that join an open source project as developers contribute some software to the product, and all of those businesses derive an economic benefit from making use of the software in a cost-center of their business. There are developers that are not motivated by the desire to provide software for a business cost-center. These are individuals whose motivations are primarily artistic, and scientific researchers.

Volunteers derive emotional fulfillment from having users for their software, just as artists derive fulfillment from having others appreciate their paintings. For volunteers, users provide an intangible benefit which the volunteer desires. Thus, those users should not be considered free-riders.

Companies that place importance in a particular open source product tend to hire developers who have already gained stature as a developer of that product. Thus, individuals who have started with no pecuniary interest in the open source project tend to find employment with an organization that does have such an interest. And thus individuals who participate in open source development often reap an economic gain from that participation. This is another reason that users should not be considered free-riders by these individuals.