> The licensing is a sideshow. No, it is fundamental to why bountysource can even possibly exist, as well as companies like Red Hat or Collabora. We built a sy

> The licensing is a sideshow. No, it is fundamental to why bountysource can even possibly exist, as well as companies like Red Hat or Collabora. We built a system of free licenses since the late 80's that allow this kind of business. If you don't want to allow this sort of business, you need a different license. No Microsoft employee can possibly use bountysource to fund a project to improve Excel, not even if they wanted to. The license terms don't allow it. > Just inverting the order of those makes it seem pretty silly: I'm not sure I see the problem here. I suppose you object to the meaning of "claim" not being the same as "cash out"? That does seem a bit problematic.