Conference News & Coverage

Diamond Sponsors

  • Fotango
  • Intel
  • Microsoft

Gold Sponsors

  • Dell Inc.
  • Hewlett Packard
  • IBM
  • Mozilla Corporation

Silver Sponsors

  • ActiveState
  • Autodesk
  • Google
  • Greenplum
  • Ingres
  • Novell, Inc.
  • OpSource
  • Rearden Commerce
  • SnapLogic
  • ThoughtWorks
  • Ticketmaster

Sponsors & Exhibitors

For information on exhibition and sponsorship opportunities at the convention, contact Sharon Cordesse

For Media Partnership opportunities, please contact Avila Reese

Download the OSCON Sponsor/Exhibitor Prospectus (PDF).

Conference News

To stay abreast of Conference news and to receive email notification when registration opens, please sign up here.

Press & Media

For media-related inquiries, contact Dawn Applegate at

Program Ideas

Drop us a line at and tell us who and/or what would make OSCON a must-attend event.

User Groups & Professional Associations

For user group and professional association related inquiries, contact Marsee Henon at


Who Gets to Decide What Open Source Means?

Danese Cooper, Open Source Diva, Intel and Open Source Initiative
Brian Behlendorf, Founder & CTO, CollabNet
Chris DiBona, Open Source Programs Manager, Google, Inc.
Ross Mayfield, CEO, Social Text
John Roberts, Co-Founder and CEO, SugarCRM
Michael Tiemann, Vice President, Open Source Affairs, RedHat, Inc.

Track: Emerging Topics
Date: Wednesday, July 25
Time: 11:35am - 12:20pm
Location: Portland 252

This is a panel about who gets to decide what open source is (or is not)...what open source really "means" at the end of the day. Tim O'Reilly used to talk at OSCON about the importance of "unintended consequences" in the Open Source Effect but these days we're seeing companies and associations calling themselves open source but, in fact, working pretty hard to limit the possible consequences to their business models (including but not limited to creative attempts to attach consequences to code reuse as in Badgewear licenses). Is this a necessary component of the marriage of open source and Web 2.0?

Also in the last quarter we've seen the formation of several new "associations" such as the Linux Foundation and the Open Source Alliance in the U.S. Big business is still really interested in open source. Does this mean that marketing will increasingly frame the conversation around what is or isn't open source, or is there still a place for the Hacker ethic? Is the Hacker ethic even appropriate in cases where there is no distribution trigger?