[fma]

Liability. Same thing with why it can be hard to use open source in a large company. Liability.

If something screws up they dont want to be sued. If you use open source you can't sue someone if it breaks...but if I use Oracle I can get support and in extreme case sue for damages.

[cyphar]

> but if I use Oracle I can get support and in extreme case sue for damages.

That's not true. Most proprietary software licenses have the "not suitable for purpose" warranty clause that basically means that you can't sue them if their database crashes on you. Oh, and you can get support for free software from many different companies (SUSE and RedHat being two).

[mcbits]

That sounds like the opposite problem from releasing open source code. I would imagine one of NASA's concerns is ensuring none of the code reveals classified information. Another risk (this one for anyone thinking about publishing their code) is that it turns out to infringe on some obscure patent - though I'm not sure if it would be easier or harder to get a settlement from NASA than a private business. (So yes, "Liability." is still a possible reason.)

[peterkshultz]

But don't most open source licenses waive liability? MIT and other popular licenses state that the work is provided "as is" and that the author cannot be held liable.

[dragonwriter]

> But don't most open source licenses waive liability?

Most open source licenses include a liability disclaimer. Many jurisdictions, OTOH, have laws which limit the effect of liability disclaimers, so whether the disclaimer means anything, and if so what it means, varies based on which jurisdictions law applies to the liability at issue.