Dilbert mentions Open Source today. Or, rather, his boss mentions it "because it's free." Which it is, but it's the freedom to run, modify, and share software that's important.
In the Pointy-Haired Boss's office:
PHB: "From now on, I want you to use Open Source software for everything we do. It's free."
Dilbert: "I'll be right back."
At Alice's desk:
Dilbert: "It's an emergency. I think he's been reading."
The Foundation for Economic Education publishes a journal called 'The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty'. They published this article in January:
Open-Source Software: Who Needs Intellectual Property? by Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine
Note: this is just my opinion. The OSI board may have a different opinion if it speaks as a body.
Microsoft is spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) with their latest anti-Linux patent campaign. If they had an actual, solid case of patent infringement, they would go to a judge, get an injunction against the distribution of Linux, and sell patent licenses for FreeBSD. The fact that they don't, but are willing to sell patent licenses for an unnamed set of infringed patents, says that they have no legal case.
The European Union funded FLOSSCom research project is investigating Free / Libre Open Source software (FLOSS) communities as learning environments. They want to identify principles of FLOSS communities that could be transferred to (formal) educational settings (e.g. open culture, collaborative production, open and inclusive, values & volunteering, etc.). Their survey covers only a small part of their current research activities.