Microsoft Out in the Open
This morning, we were excited to learn that two of Microsoft's Shared Source licenses have been approved by the OSI. It's been an interesting and educational couple of months since we submitted these licenses (we announced our intent in July, and submitted on August 10th.)
Context & Ripple Effects
This closes a loop opened two years ago, when [[a:1175545|Microsoft and the OSI began discussing whether any Shared Source license could qualify as open source]] — a conversation that mattered because Shared Source was widely read inside the community as marketing rather than licensing. Microsoft announced its intent to submit in July 2007 and filed on August 10th; today the OSI approved two of the licenses, giving them formal open-source standing.
The pickup by All about Microsoft alongside Port 25's own announcement shows the story travelling beyond developer blogs into mainstream Microsoft coverage — notable because it treats an OSI stamp of approval as news about Microsoft's strategy, not just licensing housekeeping.
First-order effects
- Projects and redistributors can now use these two Shared Source licenses in work that requires OSI-approved terms, removing the practical barrier that kept Microsoft-authored code out of open-source distributions.
- Microsoft's Port 25 outreach team gets external validation that its licensing submissions were judged on the Open Source Definition rather than dismissed over who wrote them.
Second-order effects
- Other holders of proprietary-but-source-available licenses now have a working template: submit to the OSI, accept its review process, and gain access to open-source distribution channels — raising the bar for vendors whose licenses remain unapproved.
- Open-source advocates gain a concrete case to scrutinize, since approval obliges the community to treat these licenses as equivalent to established ones, sharpening debates over what the Open Source Definition actually requires.
Third-order effects
- If more incumbent vendors follow Microsoft's path of seeking OSI approval for controlled licenses, the line between 'Shared Source' and open source becomes procedural rather than ideological — openness defined by which gatekeeper certifies the terms.
- A pattern of vendor-submitted licenses passing OSI review would push the OSI toward acting as a de facto standards body for commercial openness, with its approval decisions shaping how large companies package source code.
The trend: Proprietary software vendors are progressively seeking formal open-source certification for their own licenses, converting openness from an ideology into a compliance layer atop traditional commercial development.