Tidelift’s Post

The FTC's Office of Technology has written a post examining the potential benefits and risks of open-weights generative models, drawing parallels to traditional open-source software. Why it matters: Having regulators understand how open-weights models could impact innovation, competition and consumer choice in the generative tech sector is critical. While these models may reduce costs and increase flexibility, they also present new challenges around licensing, privacy, and potential misuse. Organizations exploring AI adoption need to weigh these factors carefully, as the open-weights landscape continues to evolve. (Source: Federal Trade Commission) https://lnkd.in/gYVqGVU8

𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐬: 𝐀𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐞 2.0 𝐨𝐫 𝐌𝐈𝐓? I came across this question when diving into open-source projects, and after some research, I made a quick comparison from both developer and user perspectives on the image below. 𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐝𝐨 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫? 1. Patent Protection: Shields users from potential patent claims. 2. Legal Clarity: Offers clear, legally binding terms, reducing risks. 3. Encouraging Adoption: Makes software more attractive to users, especially businesses. 💡 Therefore, I'd choose Apache 2.0 for explicit patent protection and comprehensive terms, and MIT for simplicity and flexibility. Feel free to share your thoughts about these licenses! #OpenSource #AI #Apache2 #MIT #Developers #Licensing

𝐂𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐒𝐨𝐟𝐭𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐈𝐨𝐓 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬⁣ When integrating open-source accelerators into your IoT platform, selecting the right software license is crucial. Here’s a comparison of popular licenses to help you make an informed decision:⁣ ⁣ 𝐌𝐈𝐓 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞⁣ Pros: Highly permissive; allows modification, distribution, and private use with minimal restrictions.⁣ Cons: Limited protection for your code if integrated with other software.⁣ Best For: Projects seeking maximum freedom and minimal restrictions.⁣ 𝐀𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝟐.𝟎⁣ Pros: Permissive like MIT, but includes an explicit grant of patent rights and provisions for trademark use.⁣ Cons: Requires preservation of license notices in redistributed code.⁣ Best For: Projects needing patent protection and robust legal coverage.⁣ 𝐆𝐍𝐔 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 (𝐆𝐏𝐋)⁣ Pros: Strong copyleft; any derivative work must also be open-source under the same license.⁣ Cons: Can be restrictive; may require your entire project to be open-source if combined with GPL code.⁣ Best For: Ensuring that derivative works remain open-source.⁣ 𝐆𝐍𝐔 𝐋𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐫 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 (𝐋𝐆𝐏𝐋)⁣ Pros: Allows linking with proprietary software without affecting the proprietary license of the larger project.⁣ Cons: Still requires modifications to LGPL-licensed code to be open-source.⁣ Best For: Projects that want to maintain open-source integrity while using proprietary software.⁣ 𝐁𝐒𝐃 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞⁣ Pros: Permissive with minimal restrictions; allows proprietary use and distribution.⁣ Cons: Similar to MIT but with slight variations in wording.⁣ Best For: Projects seeking minimal interference and broad compatibility.⁣ 𝐂𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐬⁣ Pros: Offers various levels of permissions and restrictions; good for non-software content like documentation.⁣ Cons: Not typically suited for software code.⁣ Best For: Documentation and content rather than code.⁣ 𝐊𝐞𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬:⁣ Freedom vs. Control: Permissive licenses (MIT, Apache, BSD) offer more freedom but less control over derivative works. Copyleft licenses (GPL, LGPL) ensure that modifications remain open-source but can impose restrictions.⁣ Patent Protection: Licenses like Apache provide protection against patent claims, which can be critical in competitive environments.⁣ Compatibility: Ensure the chosen license is compatible with your project’s goals and other software you are using.⁣ Choosing the right license depends on your project’s needs for freedom, protection, and compatibility. Evaluate these factors to align your accelerator choices with your platform’s strategic objectives. #iot #opensource #accelerators #solutions

Open Source Software Security & License Compliance: Navigating the dual-headed dragon in lights of AI generated code In the ever-evolving landscape of software deployment, the twin challenges of security and license compliance have become a critical focus across the global supply chain. This surge in attention has catalyzed innovations and the emergence of startups dedicated to addressing these multifaceted challenges. Concurrently, legislative efforts, spanning from the US and the EU to China and Japan, underscore the importance of software security and the imperative to track software components. I will be addressing this topic at the AppSec Event (Feb 6 - link below) and will delve into the intricate realm of license compliance and security through the lens of software composition analysis. In addition, I will address the unique challenges posed by Generative AI technologies in the realm of security and compliance, discussing potential risks and mitigation strategies. The presentation will unveil common issues encountered and offer insights into their resolution within the framework of policies, automated tooling, educational programs, and active involvement in organizations leading the charge to create solutions via the collective efforts of companies, universities, government, and open source projects. The slides are work in progress. I attach the agenda slide here and will provide the full deck after the event. ## Join us at the AppSec Event hosted by OpenText on Tuesday, February 6, 2024, in Stockholm, Sweden. It's a full day event with several super interesting speakers. Free registration: https://lnkd.in/dE9yQNfi #appsec #appsecurity #opensource #compliance #securityaudit #compliancemanagement

#EUSwPatsKnowledgeBase ❌ Extracting flight data: not technical 💡 To learn more about the decision of the Technical Board of Appeal, please visit our European Software Patents Knowledge Base: https://lnkd.in/dCXFMPmi #SoftwarePatent #intellectualproperty #BusinessMethods

Open source software represents an important aspect of #OpenScience, since its supports the public goods status of technical knowledge, while removing cost and licensing barriers to digital tools and solutions https://ow.ly/RsRV50SK3OW

The #InteroperableEuropeAct has been adopted in the European Parliament plenary with 524 votes in favour, 18 against and 97 abstentions. In spite of ambiguities in the wording and the exclusion of the Free Software Community from the governance of the regulation, decisions makers heard our demands. The European Commission will have to provide information on the development of #FreeSoftware interoperable solutions, and will have to set up actions in support of these solutions. We will closely monitor the implementation of this regulation, making sure that Free Software and its Community can effectively contribute to an interoperable Europe. #IEA #EU https://lnkd.in/eEaDiekB

At SigNoz, we fundamentally believe that observability should be more open and transparent. As a fundamental need for any software product, observability for software product is as important as electricity is for our daily lives. The future should have more open and transparent products as the default, rather than walled gardens and vendor lock-ins. This is a guiding principle into every things we do at SigNoz: - From native support of open source instrumentation standards like OpenTelemetry - To having the product available in open source on Github - From having a transparent usage based pricing - To building things in open where we share inner workings of how we do things at SigNoz In continuation of this philosophy, we recently launched our Trust Center recently. It shows: - The compliance and security controls we follow - Our current compliance certification ( e.g. We are SoC2 Type 1 compliant) - Our subprocessor lists ( especially relevant for customers who need to adhere to GDPR) - Ability to Request Access to our compliance reports for our customers We are always looking to understand what can promote more transparency and default to open-ness in this ecosystem. Do share any inputs you have or best practices you have seen around this in the comments. (PS: Attaching link to our trust center in the comments, since Linkedin doesn't like it to be in the main post)

Using AI software developers are sometimes not aware that OSS code is copied into their products. If you do not know which OSS component is used where in your software, you can hardly guarentee compliance or security. Always check with a forensic open source analysis

One of the best ways for organizations to protect themselves is to know what software is being consumed, assembled and shipped by their teams. One of the best open source projects I can recommend to assist your teams in securing software supply chain is Open Source Insights by Google! This project means business. Curious what package is dependent on other packages? Curious if a package is consuming something with a compliant/maybe not so compliant license? Locating a CVE across all dependent packages? This does it all without a paywall. Even better- provides api access to their data for deeper integration into your existing workflows/toolchain I really love this project and would love to see it evolve further! The visualizations are absolutely insane. Link Below! https://deps.dev/ #softwaresupplychainsecurity #softwaresupplychain #huntorbehunted