Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Open Source Software

BSA Lashes Out At Mandatory Open-Source Licensing (bsa.org) 54

Longtime Slashdot reader Elektroschock writes: The American Business Software Alliance (BSA) does not consider mandatory open-source licensing to be an appropriate indicator of sovereignty. This is among the "pointed messages" they sent to the French government consultation (closed) today. "What protects Europe is the ability to govern, audit, and mitigate risk, not where a company files its corporate papers," said Thomas Boue of BSA. "Criteria of this kind raise costs, reduce access to best-in-class security solutions, and risk conflicting with the EU's international trade commitments."

BSA Lashes Out At Mandatory Open-Source Licensing

Comments Filter:
  • by Z00L00K ( 682162 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:05PM (#66177004) Homepage Journal

    They are just afraid that if they lose the European market then the rest of the world will follow.

  • by MeNeXT ( 200840 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:08PM (#66177010)

    "What protects Europe is the ability to govern, audit, and mitigate risk, not where a company files its corporate papers," said Thomas Boue of BSA.

    That would be true if the company could ignore the law of the country where it files it's papers. Then again you govern by enacting laws that impose conditions that companies have to follow therefore it's not for BSA to tell Europe how to govern.

    • by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:29PM (#66177056) Journal
      Example: Microsoft shared personal details, emails and meeting minutes of Dutch regulatory officials with the US House of Representatives, under the CLOUD Act [wikipedia.org]. MS (and a few other BSA members) supported the act when it was proposed. So now they can lie in the bed they made.
  • I'm confused (Score:5, Insightful)

    by almitydave ( 2452422 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:09PM (#66177016)

    Isn't "the ability to govern, audit, and mitigate risk" a big reason to use open-source software over proprietary? I though the point of the move was to eliminate dependence on opaque softare from US-based (and potentially US gov-compromised) companies. It sounds like they're advocating for the EU's actions here.

    • by unrtst ( 777550 )

      Oh, you're absolutely right. They're definitely advocating in their own self interests, and just saying the EU shouldn't worry about the very same problems it's trying to address.

      They're right that where a company files its papers doesn't matter... but that's only if the software is Open Source.

    • So, even with AI finding constant vulnerabilities in *Nix stuff, you want to "govern, audit, and mitigate risk" on something that updates constantly and anybody can modify the new update to do anything?

      Even with the major gaping security holes that you could slip the entire Pacific fleet through, I've never had a single problem in Win10 LTSC behind the router firewall.

  • Let's make a clear distinction between open source, and libre source. Just because you allow your source code to be audited, doesn't mean you're giving away the product for free, which is a critical distinction. That being the case, there are only a few reasons to refuse an open-source license:

    1. You're doing something illegal, you have to hide.
    2. You're doing something unethical, or immoral, and want to keep that hidden.
    3. You're ashamed of the code.
    4. Your code is terrible.

    Outside of that,
    • by HiThere ( 15173 )

      You left out "trade secrets". That would be plausible if the software were sufficiently innovative.

      • I had a professor who used that example, but instead of a trade secret, you should be getting patent protection. A trade secret in your code, is hiding unknown and unverifiable activity, which in my opinion is a bad thing. Technically, you could still have a trade secret in the code and handle it with licensing, which would work, so that could be mitigated.
        • We hide trade secrets in this industry by not releasing internal software to the public or partners. We have manufacturing and engineering software that we don't reveal and some of this is under open source license. Yet with GPLv2 at least we are still able to keep our secrets and comply with the license, as we don't distribute even binaries in that case.

        • by HiThere ( 15173 )

          I didn't mean to claim that I though trade secrets in code were a good thing, merely that they were a reason a company might not want to open their source code. Patents are not such a reason. (Also, I don't believe software patents should be valid. Copyright, yes. Trademarks, yes. Trade secrets, yes. But software should not be patentable. [And copyrights should have a much more limited duration.])

  • by couchslug ( 175151 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:25PM (#66177046)

    Businesses want captive audiences so they act accordingly.

    That's why their assertions should be seen as malicious.

  • Of course (Score:5, Insightful)

    by abulafia ( 7826 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:27PM (#66177050)
    BSA is a sock with googley eyes glues on. Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle and other software audit enthusiasts are the hand inside.

    Of course they don't want Europe breaking dependency. It is like asking your dealer if you should get clean.

    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Not just that, but subscriptions have probably hurt as well because it's a lot harder to audit when everyone is subscribing and now you're paying per user, not per computer.

      After all, you can buy Microsoft Office outright for $400, and it's good on one PC. Or you can subscribe to M365 and now you can use it on 5 PCs - 1 of which may be a user's personal home computer, and 5 mobile devices or tablets. And 4 PCs is basically an IT department's allocation of computers for a person - they can have a desktop and

  • I don't really care what the BSA thinks, and they don't carry any legal authority, so whats for lunch?
  • Did anyone ever have any respect for BSA? Why would anyone care what BSA thinks?

    What moron says "You have to have our software" while implying that you will be audited and sued over any oversight?

  • by WolfgangVL ( 3494585 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:48PM (#66177126)

    Turning off software suites over petty grievance really worked out, huh? Sure glad we've got a thin skinned man-baby thumbing every scale he can find.

    Damn right the whole world is going to move away from US... EVERYTHING. We've spent the last year pissing in everybody's beer, flexing in the window, and slashing tires around the world.

    It's a completely different landscape than it was a year ago- the assumptions are all different now, and US tech is no longer stable and reliable.

    These are consequences the GOP can't ignore, and they directly fuck with the money. Going to be interesting to see just how much money-fuckery the money people will accept.

    • ... the money people will accept.

      The US elite (are estimated to) have tripled their spending: It's why the USA isn't in an economic depression, now. Logic says, they'll run-out of things to buy, which is when the pain starts: It will be another GFC. Because the poor already lack money for niceties, the spending slump that precedes a depression, will reach rock bottom in a matter of days. It's difficult to imagine what causes a government to lose control and post-apocalyptic tribalism to rise, but that will be a good starting point.

    • by couchslug ( 175151 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @04:34PM (#66177308)

      The more global consumers are alienated by US software and others business practices the more all customers benefit from alternatives. The US is free to compete or not as it chooses.

      US culture is now inherently anti-consumer, pro-kleptarchy and anti-personal freedom. As a USian that does me zero good while FOSS does me and other informed users much good, in my case since early this century.

      US exports mostly enrich the kleptarchy while US milfare mostly enabled US economic competitors thus facilitating offshoring and domestic job destruction in other than miltary and related businesses.

      The US is free to end restrictive arms sale conditions and behave like adults. Weapons sales should not come with a leash unless the objective is domestic job destruction.

  • by JustAnotherOldGuy ( 4145623 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:50PM (#66177130) Journal

    "What protects Europe is the ability to govern, audit, and mitigate risk, not where a company files its corporate papers," said Thomas Boue of BSA.

    Ah yes, auditing closed-source software has always been a walk in the park, companies are only too happy to open up their proprietary trade-secret software so people can have a look, right?

    Fuck Thomas Boue and his endless mouthfuls of lies.

  • by dogugotw ( 635657 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @02:52PM (#66177132)

    Europe is leaving due to actions taken by the US. If those actions are a problem, maybe support candidates who have better policies. Justva thought.

    Also Boy Scouts of America care about software??? Not a fan of acronyms in article titles.

    • Europe is leaving due to actions taken by the US. If those actions are a problem, maybe support candidates who have better policies. Justva thought.

      Also Boy Scouts of America care about software??? Not a fan of acronyms in article titles.

      Glad I wasn't the only one wondering why boy scouts were lashing out at opensource software LOL.

  • I don’t buy the BSA claims that open-source requirements “raise costs” or “reduce access to best-in-class security solutions”; open-source software is notably lower in cost (most of it made freely available, while some distributors just charge for support) and have better visibility for finding and closing security bugs. As for conflicting with trade agreements, those are political decisions that can be renegotiated.

  • OpenAI to join Washington lobbying group BSA | The Software Alliance [semafor.com]

    “BSA advocates for modern laws and policies that build trust among people, companies, and governments. Our mission is to ensure that responsible software innovation [bsa.org] can thrive throughout the world.”
  • Sooooo... they want us to trust US companies and their lackeys, accept their bribes, and feel safe when we get fucked over by the CLOUD act or some other US law which tell US companies to hand over data whenever the US government feels like it?

    No thanks.

  • (Just like that The Exploited song.)

    I thought the BSA's goal was to end software piracy. Mandatory use of open source will certainly achieve that goal!

    • Nah they are created by Microsoft and Adobe and are not much more than a mob-like organization trying to get more sales for it's sponsor members.
      • I think if you do a survey of companies that have had a negative experience with BSA you might find that those companies use more open source and do their best to avoid BSA's sponsers.

  • Or does your software vendor own your computer?

  • The BSA is the sockpuppet of corporations that rely on customers who can't migrate to alternatives because of vendor lock-in. So of course they'll do what they've always done: advocate for expensive, low-quality software with horrible terms and conditions, because that's what keeps the money flowing.

    And until the last year, that was mostly working, because the pain/friction involved in changing to something else was too great, and so sticking with bad-but-working crap was preferable to trying to migrate
  • ... Lobby crew!

    FOSS finally getting general public mindshare. Finally!

  • FTA: "Origin-Based Sovereignty Criteria Will Hurt Europe's Competitiveness".

    The truth: "Origin-Based Sovereignty Criteria Will Hurt Over-reaching American Tech Companies".

    Background: Wikipedia says that "BSA members include Adobe, Amazon Web Services, Atlassian, Autodesk, Cloudflare, Cisco, Dropbox, IBM, Microsoft, Nikon, Oracle, SAP, Salesforce, Siemens and Zoom". At least ten of these thirteen high-profile companies are American giants.

    The takeaway: The smart money is ditching US digital services, softwar

  • Our corporate overlords do not like the ability of democratically chosen government to limit their power...

  • I saw the headline and was wondering why the Boy Scouts of America cared about open source licensing.
    • A Scout is Trustworthy but this BSA has never demonstrated that virtue.

      Their PR is difficult to parse as valid English but it sounds like gaslighting of the type "you can only trust what you may not examine."

      It sounds incoherent but perhaps that means they have nothing else left.

      Most people in Open Source are generally Helpful.

  • Douchy BSA wonk doesn't like the EU guarding the golden goose a little bit more carefully these days. Problem is, they need to. Most American businesses are not trustworthy and dont subscribe to any sort of legal framework or ethos that MAKES them trustworthy, so here we are. You do you, EU.

  • by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Friday June 05, 2026 @06:41PM (#66177476) Journal

    I'm flabbergasted that a trade group consisting 100% of organizations that publish closed-source software would be worried about having to comply with other people's licenses that require opening any changes / modifications / reuse made.

  • Ernie Ball - the guitar string company - was raided by the BSA and subsequently humiliated publicly, all in the name of selling software licenses. Sterling Ball was not impressed - he went totally open source after that. Wonder if the BSA has told France about this fun episode?

    https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech... [cnet.com]

This process can check if this value is zero, and if it is, it does something child-like. -- Forbes Burkowski, CS 454, University of Washington

Working...