Funding Open Source for Digital Sovereignty (opens in new tab)

Technology

"Open Source alone won’t deliver digital sovereignty. Europe must fix procurement and fund those who actually build it."

[Dries Buytaert]

Vital thoughts from Drupal founder Dries Buytaert on how, if Europeans and others are going to rely on open source software as a way to decouple from US services, funding the people and communities that build open source software must be part of the conversation:

“Open Source is the most credible path to digital sovereignty. It’s the only software you can run without permission. You can audit, host, modify, and migrate it yourself. No vendor, no government, and no sanctions regime can ever take it away.

But there is a catch. When governments buy Open Source services, the money rarely reaches the people who actually build and maintain it. Procurement rules favor large system integrators, not the maintainers of the software itself. As a result, public money flows to companies that package and resell Open Source, not to the ones who do the hard work of writing and sustaining it.”

Dries’s solution involves evaluating a company’s open source contributions as part of a procurement process. If governments and other organizations are willing to do this in practice, that would work, at least for certain kinds of maintainers and communities. It would favor the companies that give back to an open source project over the ones that just repackage someone else’s work, and in doing so, make it more attractive for companies to give back in the first place.

But I think there’s another way to look at the problem: provide the tools, infrastructure, and platforms for maintainers to start companies around their work. Rather than encouraging existing companies to become open source participants, this would encourage open source participants to become companies. It might even incentivize new kinds of companies to be drawn up as co-operatives of open source maintainers.

When a company obtains software, it’s looking for more than the code: it needs a solution to a problem. Services address organizational problems more directly than codebases alone. There’s a reason why Dries’s Acquia and Matt Mullenweg’s Automattic have become so successful.

There is nothing unethical about creating services businesses (or non-profits with service missions) that are aligned with the open source nature of their underlying products — and, indeed, that direct connection with customers will make those products better. But I’d say that most open source maintainers either aren’t thinking that way or are daunted by the prospect. So perhaps they could use a little help?

Loading more...

Keyboard Shortcuts

Navigation
Next / previous item
j/k
Open post
oorEnter
Preview post
v
Post Actions
Love post
a
Like post
l
Dislike post
d
Undo reaction
u
Save / unsave
s
Recommendations
Add interest / feed
Enter
Not interested
x
Go to
Home
gh
Interests
gi
Feeds
gf
Likes
gl
History
gy
Changelog
gc
Settings
gs
Browse
gb
Search
/
General
Show this help
?
Submit feedback
!
Close modal / unfocus
Esc

Press ? anytime to show this help