And this is why I don't use the term "open source" anymore. The "top 5 reasons to use open source" are all completely disconnected and don't really have any logical progression from the "ideals of open source" ("open source" doesn't have an ideology). Why libraries should use free software is a much more straightforward list:<p>1. Free software means that libraries can be assured that they can continue running on the same software and freely maintain it, without needing to worry about downgrades or license agreements.<p>2. Free software means that libraries can collaborate on improving the software they use (and help one another to run their libraries efficiently) without violating a proprietary license agreement.<p>3. Libraries are meant to be stewards of knowledge, and proprietary software takes away your ability to learn about software. Free software solves this problem, for the patrons as well as the librarians.<p>4. The reading history of an individual should remain private, and there is no way for a library to be sure of this without using free software. A reading history that can be used as evidence threatens human rights.<p>5. A library running on free software cannot ever be pressured by developers to stop distributing some form of book. As libraries are a primary source of information and knowledge, this is a freedom of speech issue and can only truly be solved by free software.<p>All of the above list clearly links to the four fundamental freedoms (with emphasis on my own politics). But that's why I invite everyone to refer to free software by it's proper name.
Former Librarian (9 years out) : I was shocked at the negative reaction I received from all librarians at the time with the terms Open Source / Free Software.<p>Caused is the proprietary nature of the Library Systems. They were so archaic and backwards it caused me to look for a new job within 6 months. Mine was from Sirsi Dynix. Steve Balmer had nothing on these people.<p>My servers was a Windows Server with a Oracles DB Array and a few other servers. I was required to reboot daily my windows box and I had to halt the whole system so I could do my daily backups. It was horrible (I also had to switch to two systems since they killed the system we purchased from them (prior to my arrival)) In total about 120 hours of webinars in 3 months can cause anyone to lose the will to hear and see anything. So I started the research to replace everything to Open Source (Evergreen) and the onslaught was intense. I was just doing research and they were already telling my boss how everything they did wrong was my mistake. I had the logs to show that they were lying and a boss who trusted me, but it was SO FRUSTRATING.<p>They would do everything to discourage the ideals of Open Source in conferences they would have info sheets just spreading FUD about the insecurity of Open Source since Hackers could have access to the whole code.<p>Wikileaks even did a release. Check out the Librarian defending the FUD. <a href="http://jasongriffey.net/wp/2009/11/03/sirsi-dynix-vs-open-source-software/" rel="nofollow">http://jasongriffey.net/wp/2009/11/03/sirsi-dynix-vs-open-so...</a><p>So glad I am not a Systems Librarian today. That and paying tens of thousands every year for old dusty journals pay for by tax dollars.
Libraries do support open source software. In some cases, they even create it. For example, Enki, an ebook platform created by Califa (a consortium of CA libraries) was created in response to OverDrive (a larger for-proft ebook platform). This isn't to say that they couldn't do more to get the word out about consumer-facing open source projects/tools, but we should give credit where it's due.
The article doesn't say why open source is more important for library staff to know about than the thousands of other subjects libraries have books on.
An open source library system is one good way to get libraries first-hand experience with the advantages: <a href="http://www.koha.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.koha.org</a>