What is the Tidelift open source funding Model?

Abstract and Motivation

Open source software (OSS) fuels today’s tech. Its creators toil without pay. Firms profit hugely—$8.8 trillion yearly, per Harvard—off their work. Tidelift steps in with a solution. It uses subscriptions to fund maintainers. Companies pay $100–$150 per developer annually. This keeps OSS secure and alive. Other paths exist. The Open Source Pledge seeks donations. License-Token.com links pay to usage. Gitcoin relies on votes. OSS bugs like Log4Shell prove funding’s urgency. This article digs into Tidelift’s setup, results, and flaws. It weighs options for better OSS backing.

Introduction

Tidelift launched in 2018. It supports OSS creators with cash. Firms subscribe, paying $100–$150 per developer yearly. Maintainers earn $50,000–$100,000 annually. This tackles OSS neglect and risks. Tech leans on OSS heavily, says the Linux Foundation. Yet, its makers often scrape by. Tidelift wants to change that. This piece examines its origins, process, financial reach, and legal angles. It pits Tidelift against the Open Source Pledge and License-Token.com. It probes exploitation and names key users.

Historical Background

Tidelift kicked off with $15 million in 2018. General Catalyst and Foundry Group pitched in. It grabbed $25 million in 2019. By 2022, Dorilton Ventures added $27 million. The Log4Shell crisis in 2021 boosted it. That bug exposed OSS weaknesses. Tidelift pays maintainers to patch such gaps. It built on Red Hat’s legacy. Now, it spans many OSS tools.

Participation Mechanics

Companies sign up for Tidelift this way:

Fees grow with developers. Maintainers apply here.

Payment Distribution and Maintainer Support

Tidelift maps OSS use via software bills of materials (SBOMs). Funds reach maintainers of active projects. Key OSS gets steady pay. It builds a project catalog. Only listed OSS earns money. Maintainers must follow security rules. They fix issues quickly.

Payment Enforcement Mechanisms

Tidelift locks in payments with contracts. Firms pay or lose access. Non-payment cuts off updates. This tops voluntary setups like Open Collective. It binds money to benefits.

Problems with Subscription Limits

Tidelift’s price outstrips donations. Small firms balk at it. It funds only cataloged projects. Fresh OSS gets nothing. Maintainers need approval first via Tidelift’s process.

Legal Liability of Open Source Developers

OSS makers face legal heat:

• United States: Laws target flaws under DMCA rules. Tidelift’s SLAs ease this.
• European Union: GDPR fines hit for data leaks. Tidelift lowers that threat.
• Other Regions: Rules differ, per WIPO. Suits persist.

Tidelift offers $50,000–$100,000 yearly. It beats the Pledge’s $500–$2,000. Still, it’s under the $130,000 U.S. median.

Bootstrapping Limits and Exploitation Resistance

Tidelift ignores new OSS. It demands a catalog. Giants like Adobe use it. Startups can’t break in early. Compare:

• Open Source Pledge: Funds known OSS via donations. No early help.
• License-Token.com: Pays new projects by use via NFTs. Stops free riders.
• Gitcoin: Sends vote cash to open source startups via quadratic funding. Amounts shift.

Tidelift curbs exploitation with fees. Firms pay for value. It outdoes donations.

External Exploitation and Subscription Gains

Donations let firms grab OSS free, per Stephen Walli. Tidelift bills them. Maintainers gain stable income. It supports JavaScript, Python, and more. Over 35 million repos tap its OSS.

Financial Impact and Adoption

Tidelift collected $67 million by 2022. It pays maintainers solidly. Users include NASA and Bloomberg. Log4Shell sped its rise. Maintainer totals stay vague.

Comparative Analysis of Funding Models

Open Source Pledge Comparison

The Open Source Pledge seeks $2,000 per developer. It’s less than Tidelift’s $10,000–$15,000 for 100 devs. Tidelift offers bigger payouts. It adds security patches.

License-Token.com as an Alternative

License-Token.com sells NFT licenses. Maintainers set prices by use. It’s cheaper than Tidelift’s rates. It aids new Fair Code via blockchain.

Challenges and Considerations

• Cost: Tidelift burdens small firms, per pricing.
• Risks: Lawsuits still loom for maintainers, says OWASP.
• Gaps: Early OSS stays unfunded.

Supporting Organizations

Conclusion

Tidelift boosts big OSS with subscriptions. It pays well but costs plenty. It misses new projects. The Open Source Pledge is low-cost but soft. License-Token.com suits all OSS with fair pay. Tidelift tackles exploitation best. Check OSS security, blockchain cash, or fair code.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the Tidelift model?
   Tidelift funds maintainers with subscriptions. Firms pay $100–$150 per developer yearly.
2. Why does Tidelift matter?
   OSS needs cash. Tidelift keeps it secure and funded.
3. How does Tidelift help maintainers?
   It pays $50,000–$100,000 yearly. Firms get updates.
4. How does Tidelift compare to the Open Source Pledge?
   Tidelift gives more cash. The Pledge is cheaper but optional.
5. What are Tidelift’s limits?
   It’s pricey. It skips fresh OSS. Only cataloged projects earn.
6. What are alternatives to Tidelift?
   Look at Open Source Pledge, License-Token.com, Gitcoin or Drips.
7. Is Tidelift legally binding?
   Yes. Firms sign for access.
8. Can Tidelift fund all OSS?
   No. It needs a catalog.
9. What if a firm stops paying Tidelift?
   It loses fixes and support.
10. How does Tidelift cut legal risks?
    It patches flaws fast with SLAs.