Many of my views are influenced by these roles.
These are still my views, not those of these orgs or others.
Consider GNU project.
Founded on idealism.
Paid non-profit staff.
Those projects remain community-oriented.
Open Source is a corporate fad now.
FLOSS sometimes drifts toward for-profit corporate interest.
Project decisions are made by companies.
Yet, corporate sponsorships are common and desired.
But for-profit control of projects can be dangerous.
Fedora vs. Ubuntu as Coke vs. Pepsi
For-profits act in interest in shareholders.
Those who care most about software are usually not shareholders.
Interests do align sometimes with software freedom community.
Common ground is needed so multiple for-profits can participate.
501(c)(3) non-profits act in interest of the public good.
Software freedom is best when in public good.
Non-profit orgs (NPOs) are best place for software freedom.
Distribute that money to advance & improve project (and public good).
Make sure project isn’t controlled by for-profit interests.
Help leadership with non-technical decisions.
Neutral ground when corporations sponsor.
You can go your own way, but …
Too many NPOs will confuse donors.
Each needs a board of directors, incorporation, meetings, IRS filings.
Hackers end up doing work they hate.
Less Free Software gets written.
Many projects get same benefit of single non-profit.
Or, you can still go your own way.
Copyright © 2010, 2011 Bradley M. Kuhn.
These slides, this talk, and audio/video recordings thereof are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.