Those who rely entirely on proprietary systems become dependent. And a so-called vendor lock-in is created: Switching to other solutions becomes so technically or economically costly that it is hardly possible.

This risk is increasingly being recognised, particularly in the public sector, in research and education, but also in companies that rely on long-term planning security and data protection.

What does vendor lock-in mean?

Vendor lock-in describes a situation in which users are tied to a specific provider due to proprietary technologies, data formats or interfaces. This makes it difficult or impossible to use alternative systems.

Frequent causes are:

• Proprietary file formats and incompatible APIs
• Contract structures with high switching costs or long terms
• Lack of interoperability with other solutions
• Technological dependency due to proprietary cloud stacks

The consequences often only become apparent when market conditions change: Providers increase prices, remove functions or shift their focus. If a platform is sold, discontinued or provided with new licensing models, organisations quickly lose access to functions, data or support.
A discontinued product forces migration, incurs costs and imposes unpleasant decisions, including collaboration with service providers that would never have been chosen. Organisations lose control over their IT strategy.

Risks for security and sovereignty

Vendor lock-in is not only an economic problem, but also a question of security and digital sovereignty. If central data, communication channels or collaboration platforms run exclusively via providers from third countries, data protection and compliance are jeopardised.

In the context of the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the upcoming NIS 2 Directive in particular, it is clear that institutions must be able to clearly demonstrate who has access to their data and where it is processed. Dependencies on proprietary cloud services outside the EU often stand in the way of these requirements.

Open source as a counter-model

Open source software offers a way out of this dependency. It creates transparency about code, interfaces and data flows. Users can view the source code, operate it themselves or have it customised by third parties without being tied to a single provider.

This creates technological freedom:

• Interoperability through open standards
• Transparency and traceability
• Competition between different service providers
• Long-term control over data and systems

Open source is more than just a licence issue, it is a strategic decision for resilience, sustainability and digital independence.
If products are bought up or discontinued, the option remains to continue development yourself, find new partners and build support chains independently, the freedom not to have to migrate.

OpenCloud: Open, sovereign, independent

OpenCloud is a completely open platform for file management and collaboration that puts digital sovereignty into practice.
OpenCloud can be operated both on-premises in your own data centre and via trusted partners as a SaaS solution in Germany.

Organisations thus retain full control over their data and decide for themselves who gets access and how the platform is operated.

An example of how digital freedom is feasible.

Open technologies ensure freedom of action

Vendor lock-in occurs when short-term convenience is prioritised over long-term freedom. Those who rely on open standards and open source at an early stage reduce risks and create technological room for manoeuvre.

Because digital sovereignty means: the freedom to decide for yourself how and with what you work.