• Plaintext Group proposal: Open Source Subsidy Program

    Plaintext Group, developed by Schmidt Futures, is a non-partisan technology innovation policy initiative. Through the OSS Virtual Incubator Program, they aim to support innovative ideas that systematically improve the sustainability of the open source software ecosystem.

    Open Source Subsidy Program

    We applied to this incubator program by refining our “Tax incentives for companies to switch to open source” proposal, which we previously shared on the digital platform of the Conference on the Future of Europe.

    Our focus in this proposal is to incentivize companies building software solutions to open source their applications, especially non-business-critical ones. This subsidy could take the form of a tax break or a direct payment to partially cover their company’s development costs.

    From the “Goals” section of our proposal:

    • Expand the open source ecosystem, and establish an open source culture in the software industry by shifting from private to public solutions.
    • Increase productivity by helping businesses save resources through reusable open source software.
    • Maximize innovation possibilities and accelerate the economy.
    • Improve digital autonomy by having more open source solutions in the market.
    • Help existing open source initiatives with additional financial support.

    You can review the full proposal via the link below:
    Open Source Subsidy Program

    Software Ecosystem Map

    Our second proposal under the program calls for regular mapping of the software ecosystem to help policymakers develop long-term open source strategies:
    Software Ecosystem Map

    ***

    One of the unique aspects of this incubation program is that they’ve gathered all the applications under a public repository. You can visit the following link to see other proposals:
    OSS Virtual Incubator – Proposals

  • Question: You have 100 money. How would you distribute it across the entire open source ecosystem?

    Intro

    Open source software has well-known economic, technical, and social benefits, including increased innovation and collaboration, reduced vendor lock-in, and lower barriers to entry for startups.

    Furthermore, reliance in open source solutions is becoming increasingly widespread, and they have become the infrastructure for many of our modern digital systems, especially in the recent period.

    However, paradoxically, these open source solutions suffer from a chronic funding problem. For the past few years, we have also been exploring why, despite all their benefits, open source solutions have failed to capture the economic value they generate.

    The primary question we focus on is how to build a sustainable economy around this ecosystem and solve the funding problem through free-market dynamics to maximize the production of open technology.

    We plan to prepare a series of articles to explain our position in detail. To briefly summarize our findings so far:

    • Open technologies, such as open source software, generate significant value for our economies and require a steady stream of revenue in return.
    • Due to coordination issues and lack of contracts (a.k.a. the Free Rider Problem), the businesses that consume open technologies cannot return that revenue to the ecosystem.
    • This coordination failure leads to the underproduction of these digital public goods.

    To maximize the production of these goods, we should:

    • Recognize open technologies as a new type of digital public good produced through the private sector.
    • Establish national or regional public funds to finance these new public goods.
    • Call on all software and tech companies to produce open tech and, in return, enable them to directly earn revenue from these funds.
    • In the long term, aim to establish an international marketplace for digital public goods.

    Agile Public Funds

    There are several key areas that need to be studied before this structure can be implemented. One of the critical questions is: how to distribute a dedicated fund to the open technology ecosystem.

    Even in its current state of underproduction, the open source ecosystem has an incredibly complex structure. On the one hand, there are thousands of applications and packages, each with its own versions. On the other hand, based on our estimates, more than a million companies benefit from this ecosystem. Plus, this two-way network of dependencies is not static and constantly changes.

    If we aim to finance this complex structure, our public funding models must be compatible with the unique characteristics of this ecosystem to ensure scalability.

    For example, traditional financing options like grants may be suitable for one-off and long-term projects, but they aren’t well-suited to our scenario.

    Instead, we should create scalable and data-driven public funds that evaluate the success of each solution using specific metrics and distribute resources regularly across the entire ecosystem.

    The experiment

    In this experiment, we will demonstrate a simplified version of how we can fund an entire ecosystem using a data-driven approach.

    The experiment can be summarized as follows:

    • Each month, we will randomly select three open source projects from the Open Source Collective dataset.
    • We will assign a score to each project using the Criticality Score tool.
    • We will allocate a small amount of money among these three projects based on their results.

    We currently lack critical data points, such as the “usage” of open source solutions. Therefore, we acknowledge that the scores may be significantly flawed. Initially, our experiment focuses not on the accuracy of the results but on contributing to the discussion of how the open source ecosystem, especially through a public model, should be funded.

    Process details

    You can follow all our work and progress under the Open Source Public Fund experiment document.

    Here are the steps of the process:

    • We retrieve the Open Source Collective dataset and keep it under the “Open Collective – Accounts” sheet.
    • To calculate a score, the Criticality Score needs a repository. For collectives without a repository, we pick the collective’s “most popular” one based on the number of stars. It is possible to calculate a score for all repositories within each collective and distribute the funds accordingly. However, we will use a single repository to keep the process simple.
    • To determine the amount to distribute, we will track the follower counts of our social media accounts. We decided to take this approach to keep the numbers dynamic rather than distributing a fixed amount each month. Here are the social media accounts we currently include in the calculation: LinkedIn, Mastodon, and Bluesky.
    • Once the scores are ready, we will select the three projects and distribute the amounts through the Open Collective platform.

    We plan to complete the project selection, scoring, and funding allocation process during the first week of each month and will update the document with the results.

    We also plan to review and improve the algorithm in time. Please visit the document for the selected projects, scores, weights, and final amounts.

    Notes & links

    Criticality Score: A tool from the Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) that assesses the importance of an open source project by evaluating factors such as the project’s age, contributor count, and commit frequency. We will use this tool to determine each project’s score.

    Open Source Collective:  A nonprofit fiscal host that has been providing financial and legal infrastructure to open source projects since 2017. We will use their public dataset to select the open source projects.

    Open Collective: A crowdfunding platform focused on grassroots groups, currently hosts thousands of communities. We will use their platform to make our payments and their public API to retrieve the Open Source Collective’s dataset.

    Open Source Public Fund experiment: Our document listing all the projects, their scores, and the results.

  • Future of Europe proposal: Tax incentives for companies to switch to open source

    The Conference on the Future of Europe is a unique, Europe-wide, democratic exercise in which citizen-led discussions allow people from across Europe to share their ideas through a digital platform to address Europe’s challenges and help shape its future.

    We took this opportunity to share two complementary ideas for financing and expanding the open source ecosystem in Europe. Our fırst proposal, “Universal income for open source maintainers,” focuses on establishing a dedicated fund for the EU’s open source ecosystem.

    Our second submission below proposes creating a subsidy program to encourage companies to open source non-essential software solutions. Our proposal aims to optimize expensive engineering resources in the software and technology sector by minimizing overlapping solutions and facilitating cross-company collaboration.


    Tax incentives for companies to switch to open source

    Without an external incentive, most companies develop their software in their silos, even if it’s not about the core business. When we compare the number of proprietary and open source software developers globally, we roughly estimate that more than 95 percent of the software developed as proprietary software.

    This over-protective approach results in companies making investments that potentially overlap and lead them to reinvent similar solutions. We could substantially reduce these overlaps and increase efficiency by explicitly investing in open source software and pooling resources.

    The EU can set up an open source subsidy program to create strong incentives for companies to switch from proprietary to open source. If a company declares to build their software as open source, they can/should get a tax break for each dedicated developer/employee via this program.

    How to accurately validate the information that companies will provide and the ideal size of the subsidy needs to be studied. The initial goal should be to encourage companies to open their non-essential software.

    In the long term, we should minimize proprietary and maximize open source to increase collaboration between companies and foster innovation in the software ecosystem.

  • Future of Europe proposal: Universal income for open source maintainers

    The Conference on the Future of Europe is a unique, Europe-wide, democratic exercise in which citizen-led discussions allow people from across Europe to share their ideas through a digital platform to address Europe’s challenges and help shape its future.

    Taking advantage of this opportunity, we submitted a proposal requesting that the EU recognize open source software as a public good and establish a dedicated fund for the EU’s open-source ecosystem.

    Because the proposals published here are open to everyone, not just technical professionals, we wanted to reference the highly popular idea of “Universal Basic Income” in our proposal, to hint at its “no strings attached” nature.

    You can read our proposal below.


    Universal income for open source maintainers

    Investing in open source software (OSS) has critical benefits; it maximizes innovation, prevents reinventing similar solutions, and supports digital autonomy. According to OpenForum Europe, the economic impact of OSS on the EU economy is estimated to be between EUR 65 and EUR 95 billion in 2018.

    However, independent open source maintainers struggle to generate revenue despite their crucial contribution and usually abandon their work in the long term. This outcome is an inefficient way of utilizing our resources and leads to OSS being underproduced.

    The EU can/should recognize OSS as a public good and address this problem by direct financial support to maintainers, similar to universal basic income. The union can set up a public fund that makes periodic payments to maintainers who pass specific criteria.

    The criteria to receive an income might be:

    • The maintainer should be an EU citizen
    • The software must be using an open source license
    • A certain number of organizations within the EU should be actively using the software

    The right amount of income and the method to determine the usage in companies need to be studied. The income, ideally, should be attractive enough for the maintainers to keep working on OSS full-time.

    By directly investing in OSS, we can ensure a more robust software supply chain and attract IT talent to the EU, next to the previously mentioned benefits.

  • Sustain Podcast: Changing Open Source Culture With Serkan Holat

    Following the Sustain Summit, the SustainOSS team launched a podcast series to discuss various aspects of open source software and explore sustainability ideas, where practitioners, supporters, funders, researchers, and maintainers from the open source community share their insights.

    In our conversation with Richard Littauer, Pia Mancini, and Eric Berry, we discussed that although open source software offers more benefits than proprietary software, resources are not flowing toward it. Our conclusion for this underfunding problem is the lack of coordination among consumers. As a solution, we debated introducing a dedicated “Open source tax” and distributing the collected revenue to the open source ecosystem in a data-driven manner through a public fund.

    You can listen to the full episode via the link below:
    Sustain Episode 16: Changing Open Source Culture With Serkan Holat

  • Sustain Summit 2018 session notes: Open Source Public Fund

    Sustain Summit 2018 was a one-day event around the sustainability of open source. It was a full day of sessions with 100 open source enthusiasts who tackled topics such as governance, community management, succession planning, and more.

    We want to thank our event organizers for their fantastic efforts in hosting this event and for facilitating conversations around this crucial topic.

    During the event, we held a session to discuss how to address the financial sustainability of open source software through establishing national public funds and dedicated taxes. You can find our session notes below.


    Subject

    Explore the possibility of using government taxes as an alternative way to create a steady income for open source projects.

    Reasoning

    Like other goods and services, software purchases are also subject to “Value-added tax (VAT)”. VAT compensates for the shared services and infrastructure (like “Roads and Bridges”).

    Open source software can be recognized as a digital infrastructure that allows other commercial software to build their business on top of it. Therefore, creating a fund through a “software-targeted” tax could be justifiable.

    Outcome

    • This fund could consist of government tax revenues, funds, crowdfunding campaigns, sponsors, etc.
    • The fund could distribute the collected taxes through initiatives like Open Collective. Open Collective’s built-in transparency would also address concerns about how the money is being spent.
    • Since all open source projects can get an income from this fund, a new metric system needs to be introduced to understand the size and the importance of open source projects.
    • Other similar programs/campaigns can be studied to learn more about the experience — for example, the “Public Money, Public Code” campaign.
    • These “sustainability” conversations can be extended to other intellectual properties & digital content, next to software — for example, open hardware initiatives such as Open Source Ecology.

    Related links & ideas
    Tax incentives for electric vehicles in the EU
    One percent for open source

    Participants
    Bastien Guerry
    Marcos Montes Fontelo
    Serkan Holat