Through reading the article I feel that open source codes have allowed many people to build on the software codes that have been passed around through the converging world via the inter web. Unfortunately, the open source practice would result in ideas being shared openly. With the concepts of patents and copyright, which is pretty much the key stronghold of ideation in the creative and making industries, it negates the positive effects of open sources practices, which is essentially sharing information and learning how things work.
The rise of patents and copyright only serves to enable commercial entities to capitalise on their “faster finger” to apply for patents and copyrights, protecting their “creative information” from spreading too far into the open source domain. However, unlike the propriety of stock images and royalties, software is compilation of programming languages and is essentially decodable one way or another. In terms of creative ideation, patents would negate the spread and build up of a community of the open source code.
In more intimate communities however, this idea is of open source is much more welcoming as there is a lack of commercial regard as high level conglomerates are not there to interfere and the supporters of this open source movement have moved to something further away from a community movement, but into a political movement.
All in all, I feel that open source communities would be great for peer learning and peer build up, but it would also mean that there would end up with a lack of commercial benefits in the long run.
I agree that whilst open source is beneficial for peer to peer learning, this concept would also mean that there would be a lack of commercial gain. For instance, creators that make cultural products would only be able to create only when they have their basic hierarchies of needs met, and have spare time to create free content for peer to peer learning. If they were to try to make content for the purpose of commercial gain, they would be restricted to rules and regulations of what the company deems is “advertiser-friendly”. Examples include journalists on Buzzfeed, creators on Youtube, and even huge film companies such as Sony Pictures Animation. As such, this affects the quality of cultural products created, the artists, and the society that is born out of consuming the creative works.