4. Comparison of FOSS/OER's The open source has a high yield, where (a) reliability / stability / scalability are critical, and (b) the correction of the design and implementation is not easily verified by means other than independent peer review. The OER's, too.
5. Comparison of FOSS/OER's The free software is interest to consumers by their desire not to depend a monopoly in providing services. With the OER's happening to the contrary. Some people believe that using them means relying on a repository (future monopoly) is same.
6. Comparison of FOSS/OER's Market pressure (syllabus?) and product evolution can critically change benefits (results). It is not the case of OER's because it not subject to market rules.
7. Models of sustainable FOSS/OER's Cooperative (Apache), sharing costs. Can be applied to OER's. Protection against the loss of developers (Cisco). Not is applicable to the OER's. Indirect sales . Not is applicable to the OER's. Loss-Leader/Market: Positioner (subscription / advertising). Can be applied to OER's.
8. Models of sustainable FOSS/OER's Widget frosting : Provide free software enables consumers to their loyalty (OCW). Can be applied to OER's. Charging support services , value added (Cygnus, Read Hat). Can be applied to OER's. Sales of accessories for free software. Can be applied to OER's. Mixed: sale now, and after free. Can be applied to OER's.
9. Models of sustainable FOSS/OER's Speculative : creating source, release, creating an environment for accreditation and sell the brand (Sun). Can be applied to OER's.
10. Models of sustainable FOSS/OER's Resources: The Magic Cauldron (Raymond) http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/magic-cauldron/ar01s10.html#id2762608 Coase’s Penguin (Benkler) http://www.benkler.org/CoasesPenguin.html Competitive Implications of Software Open-Sourcing (Asundi, Carare, & Dogan) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1185374