Every few years we have to be reminded that open source isn’t a business model. Let’s talk about the business dynamics that everyone seems to keep forgetting.

SHOW: 816

SHOW TRANSCRIPT:

SHOW VIDEO: https://youtube.com/@TheCloudcastNET

CLOUD NEWS OF THE WEEK - http://bit.ly/cloudcast-cnotw

CHECK OUT OUR NEW PODCAST - "CLOUDCAST BASICS"

SHOW NOTES:

Adam Jacobs discusses open source and business (The Changelog)
“figure out how to play nice with competition” (Twitter)
The will never be another Red Hat - Economics of OSS (a16z)

OPEN SOURCE IS A LICENSE, NOT A BUSINESS MODEL

There are rules around software licenses (e.g. Apache, GPL, etc.)
There are no rules about how people feel about software, creators or maintainers

FREE, FREE TIERS, EXTENSIONS, CLONES

Red Flags: Writes most of the code, took VC funding (multiple rounds)
Green flags: Lots of diverse (companies) contributors
Yellow flags: Foundation owns copyright
“There’s the business side and there’s the hippie side of OSS”
“I have endless ambitions”
“I didn’t build a forever entity”
“When is the rug pull going to happen?”
If a company takes VC funding, is open source anything more than a marketing vehicle?
“Docker figured it out and now they are doing like $100M”. Did they?
When is OSS personal, and when is it a company?
Will there never be another Red Hat, or just not another Linux?
How much is too much when determining if a company should give things away for free?

FEEDBACK?

Email: show at the cloudcast dot net
Twitter: @cloudcastpod
Instagram: @cloudcastpod
TikTok: @cloudcastpod

Open Source and Business <sigh>

The Reasoning Show