4 ms·

"At OCV, we start and invest in open core companies. We identify open source projects with traction and recruit CTO/CEOs to build a commercial application and c

"At OCV, we start and invest in open core companies. We identify open source projects with traction and recruit CTO/CEOs to build a commercial application and company around it. Our vision is that open core will eventually replace proprietary software as the default. Preventing a “bait and switch” from open source to proprietary is central to our model. It is for this reason we think open source is more than a license—it’s the base of all software companies." I was with it until this, big oof. How about contact the maintainers and try to interest them in this arrangement? Also looking at their operating model, fuck that. There are more favorable arrangements to be had. YC is one of them. If you're going to build a company you should definitely capture more of the upside. "The operating team" <-- notable lack of the word owner. This makes me even more unlikely to open source ANY of my work now, especially with this type of predatory bs running around. I'd rather make the money from my work thanks. I'd expect a better, less predatory, model from the CEO of GitLab.

lbotos 4y ago
Consider this statement my own, but look at my profile for bias. I think you might be misunderstanding. Look at the companies there now: https://github.com/flowforge/flowforge https://github.com/flowforge/flowforge - The CTO is the creator. https://www.mermaidchart.com/about-us/ https://www.mermaidchart.com/about-us/ - Knut Sveidqvist is the creator of mermaid and involved. https://github.com/koor-tech https://github.com/koor-tech - Rook business, from a Rook Maintainer https://fleetdm.com/ https://fleetdm.com/ - Long time contributor is CTO. "Recruit" meaning see if the creator is interested in being CEO/CTO. And if they are one, find the other co-founder. OCV is trying to throw money at OSS maintainers and help them make a business with his connections, capital and experience. I literally watched him do it with DZ. I don't expect that to change with this new venture. But I am biased.
- ianbutler 4y ago
  That's good to see. He may want to change the wording then. It comes off much more of recruiting around the maintainers. I'd be curious what happens if they say no. But so far from what you just posted, the actions seem to speak more charitably than I read it. The entire thing read to me like a typical venture studio model that will wind up screwing OSS maintainers out of the value they have created. I'd really consider reworking the marketing copy. I was super disappointed to see it from the CEO of GitLab because generally speaking I love your product and because I think you guys have been THE model for how to properly monetize open core while walking a good line for the open source part.
jacooper 4y ago
>This makes me even more unlikely to open source ANY of my work now, especially with this type of predatory bs running around. Use a copyleft license like the GPL or the AGPL.

lbotos 4y ago

Consider this statement my own, but look at my profile for bias. I think you might be misunderstanding. Look at the companies there now: https://github.com/flowforge/flowforge https://github.com/flowforge/flowforge - The CTO is the creator. https://www.mermaidchart.com/about-us/ https://www.mermaidchart.com/about-us/ - Knut Sveidqvist is the creator of mermaid and involved. https://github.com/koor-tech https://github.com/koor-tech - Rook business, from a Rook Maintainer https://fleetdm.com/ https://fleetdm.com/ - Long time contributor is CTO. "Recruit" meaning see if the creator is interested in being CEO/CTO. And if they are one, find the other co-founder. OCV is trying to throw money at OSS maintainers and help them make a business with his connections, capital and experience. I literally watched him do it with DZ. I don't expect that to change with this new venture. But I am biased.

ianbutler 4y ago
That's good to see. He may want to change the wording then. It comes off much more of recruiting around the maintainers. I'd be curious what happens if they say no. But so far from what you just posted, the actions seem to speak more charitably than I read it. The entire thing read to me like a typical venture studio model that will wind up screwing OSS maintainers out of the value they have created. I'd really consider reworking the marketing copy. I was super disappointed to see it from the CEO of GitLab because generally speaking I love your product and because I think you guys have been THE model for how to properly monetize open core while walking a good line for the open source part.

jacooper 4y ago

>This makes me even more unlikely to open source ANY of my work now, especially with this type of predatory bs running around. Use a copyleft license like the GPL or the AGPL.