> He imagines a simple yearly compliance process that gets companies all the rights they need to use Post-Open software. And they'd fund developers who would be encouraged to write software that's usable by the common person, as opposed to technical experts.

This seems horrible due to its complexity and poor filter for who contributes.

I’d rather just buy software licenses from Microsoft et al and let the corporate governance guide projects from whatever this new madness is.

It’s funny because commercial software exists. Projects are free to sell and customers free to buy. We don’t need some new subscription type. Just sell software and stop trying to get cool kid points.

Of course redhat/ibm sucks for how they’ve misused open source, but that’s a separate issue.