Re: Model for FOSS financing by consortium

Rich Bodo <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.misc.free-software-business
Message-ID <Pine.LNX.4.44.0404051537180.16583-100000@blasteroid>
On 6 Apr 2004, David N. Welton wrote:

> Rich Bodo <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > O.K. So a hypothetical.  Developer writes a widget, puts Copyright
> > Developer and GPL at the top, and submits to the Distributor.
> 
> > Distributor advertises widget, First_Customer agrees to pay 10KUSD
> > for unlimited use of widget, as per terms of contract outlined in
> > section 4, above.
> 
> > First_Customer is betting that Other_Customers will agree to pay
> > Distributor for use of widget, therefore causing Distributor to
> > effectively pass on a portion of that money to First_Customer.
> 
> My thoughts: that's (potentially) a lot of risk, and furthermore, it
> puts First_Customer in the position of selling widgets, something they
> may not have the interest or ability to pursue.

I was proposing a model whereby Distributor (D)is the selling widget
contracts as Forrest proposed.  First_Customer (F_C) is just paying a heck
of a lot for the widget because:

1) F_C has the cash and is not risk averse.

2) F_C is betting that D will sell many more of these contracts at
market rate, thereby providing F_C with an excellent return on
investment.

3) F_C wants the developer and the widget succeed.  Lots of reasons a
company might want to see OSS they use and the developers that support
it flourish.

4) FWIW, if D were a non-profit with some noble cause, it might make
F_C feel good or give them a tax write off of some kind.  IANAL.
IANAE.

-Rich

-- 
Rich Bodo | [email protected] | 650-964-4678
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.