To get a better idea of how the ideas of open source (and free software) reconcile with those of libertarianism, consider that basically all such licensing regi

To get a better idea of how the ideas of open source (and free software) reconcile with those of libertarianism, consider that basically all such licensing regimes involve consent and contract on the part of the authors and their community of users and contributors. Classic libertarian values are voluntary, organic collaboration over centralized, coercive, command and control. Even the GPL is predicated on this. Indeed, a symbiotic relationship that has developed between the world of open source and the proprietary projects of the tech giants startups and startups, all driven by the enlightened self-interest of all the actors involved, big and small. As for the more dogmatic GNU-style Free Software movement, it makes a couple of (erroneous, in my view) assumptions about a inherent coerciveness of "non-free" software, and builds their entire philosophical vision out from that idea. However, the continued eclipse of the GPL by more "liberal" BSD/MIT-style licenses seems to demonstrate that those assumptions are increasingly failing to validate. It's interesting to note that Eric Raymond, author of the Cathedral and the Bazaar, and one of the key collaborators that developed the term "Open Source" and the ensuing definitions, is a pretty staunch libertarian. He's written extensively about both topics at http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/ http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/.