I really like the sound of this, however when there is a lack of transparency on the site regarding costs, and breakdown of how the money is divided (payment handling, a cut for the company themselves etc.) - and you need to "request a demo" to find out enough to make a decision, no matter how genuine this proposition is, I feel it loses a lot of it's open source positive credentials.

As a side example, Elementary OS App Store is an example of more what I'd expect, they try to encourage payment for open source projects and handle the distribution of funds, but they have transparent costs and the project itself is open source.

Please can you include more information on your website.

Also in terms of vulnerability mitigation, NPM have started giving me warnings, so I am much better able to handle the upgrade / management / damage limitation of using packages with known vulnerabilities for JS at least. I'm sure that's coming more widely, so for me the Licence stuff is great, and some of the vulnerability info is handy, but if I was to use the service it would be to primarily pay out for packages I use professionally, so with the current info provide, that's an instant no. I'd have considered it genuinely if I knew what it was exactly you were proposing.