> There is a significant distinction between "company X hires open source person Y and allows them to spend some of their time on project Z" and "company X now

> There is a significant distinction between "company X hires open source person Y and allows them to spend some of their time on project Z" and "company X now owns project Z". I completely agree. The former doesn't generally result in a press release and/or public announcement that includes phrases such as "... will continue to operate as a not-for-profit entity under the same management, with the same principles, ...". Personally, I don't care one way or the other whether this was a "purchase" or a "merger" or "alliance" or whatever you want to call it. I have been a freenode user (and, if memory serves, an "occasional financial supporter") since (probably) shortly after it became freenode and I expect that I will continue to be a freenode user in the future (unless something major happens to change that). Vaguely worded announcements and a lack of detail, however, tend to cause things like "wild speculation" and "jumping to conclusions".