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.