Comment by DoreenMichele | Hacker News Reader

Comment by DoreenMichele | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

If however you want to drive Serious Money into actually funding OSS projects please remember this: While virtually no company has a donations budget, almost every company has a $$$ marketing budget.

I've done a lot of volunteer work over the years and I've spent a lot of years developing web projects (not as a programmer).

The thing is that idealistic efforts and commercial efforts tend to have an inherent conflict of interest that a donation model helps get around.

I take tips and Patreon on my projects, plus I do a certain amount of paid work. The minute you start commercializing it, you need to do it for the money and someone else will be telling you what matters to them. It actively interferes with you doing what you think is best organically.

Once in a while, someone manages to find some sweet spot where their career and their ideals fit together nicely. But most folks need to do drudge work that they don't find morally objectionable to pay the bills, then find other avenues to express their ideals.

I think it's a great thing that it is now possible for some people to do a thing for idealistic reasons or the like and have a few bucks kicked their way for their trouble. But I think it kind of misses the point if you want to suggest ways to commercialize it. People can already do that by starting a regular, old fashioned business.

OSS is generally about doing a thing that serves humanity in some important metrics. And I wish serving humanity and making a profit were easier to marry together. But, in practical terms, I think that's just a hard thing to do.

Giving people a third option to do a thing they believe in and have a few bucks kicked their way seems like a way out of that trap so more people can try to do things "for the right reason" rather than for the almighty dollar.

I completely agree with you in some cases.

However as a data engineer I strongly doubt that many (any) of the dozens of open source projects I use on a weekly basis were created for idealistic reasons.

They were almost all tools (or collections of tools) that were created to fill a business need, or to make a developer's life easier, and then open sourced for one reason or another.

I don't see any conflict with corporate sponsorship of these projects.

I'm not at my best. Maybe someone other than me can find Patrick McKenzie's HN comment about "please make it easy for me to get an invoice instead of calling it a donation because I have to comply with tax laws and yadda, but would be happy to support your open source project if I actually use it for business purposes and can get the piece of paper called an invoice that my accountant and the government insist on."

I think that's a good direction that is probably underdeveloped currently, though every single time I mention it someone points to a tweet of his rather than the actual HN comment. (Which is not the end of the world and maybe there's a better way to frame that, I'm just not at my best )

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10863939

Yes, that's the one (with accompanying pertinent discussion).

Thanks.

The parent of this thread is someone in marketing suggesting ways this could come out of the marketing budget, very similar to the workaround of invoicing suggested in your linked comment. Both are ways to make donating to OSS a business expense rather than a charitable donation.

No, not really. Adding logos and yadda in exchange for remuneration is a really well established form of commercial monetization. In contrast, invoicing OSS is a new and innovative way to get cash for what you already do, just like a donation.

If people want to go that route, my comments on the internet aren't some kind of bar to that approach, so I'm not sure why you seem to feel some need to argue it.

But if you are doing open source for idealistic reasons and yadda, as per my comment, then invoicing per Patrick McKenzie's explanation is actually something new and innovative that serves a similar function to the donation model in terms of preserving an element of the OSS model that matters to some folks/projects, but opens up the possibility of getting it from a company. In addition to being something of a green field for the donation model and extra source of money, companies generally have deeper pockets than individuals.

I'm not telling anyone they aren't allowed to commercialize their project. I'm just saying it's a space I've thought long and hard about for many years and researched and yadda, and if you are in open source because a business model is antithetical to your mental models and goals for the project, then invoicing may suit your needs in cases where corporate sponsorship feels like the wrong answer.

Invoicing support, maintenance and custom development of open-source software is a more established practice than patreon-style donations to open-source developers.

I'm aware that OSS sometimes makes money on activities like customer support and custom development. That's not what's being discussed here.

We’re discussing it right now... I’m referring to the concept of “invoicing open-source” which you describe as “new and innovative”. I’m arguing that it’s not. It’s a variation of the support and custom development model which is already very common.

You don't need an invoice to make something a business expenses and or tax deduction.

Even in the case of an audit, the bank or credit card statement showing who the money was paid to is enough.

Now, if you are giving cash, you would definitely need an invoice.

That is not gonna fly where I am from. Our external accountant, CPA type guy, will absolutely hound our ass, and charge his hourly rate doing it, for the invoice corresponding to the VISA card charge.

Well of course the business can have their own policies. I am just saying what the law is and what the IRS is allowed to require you to keep. You don't have to keep receipts. There are lots of other acceptable forms of documentation.

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...

This is just flat wrong advice in every jurisdiction I’ve worked in and further wouldn’t fly at any employer. The bank statement may provide the WHO in the transaction, but the invoice / receipt / similar provides the most important part, the WHAT that was paid for.

No, you are wrong. Sure, employers will all have their own rules. But I am talking about IRS substantiation.

The IRS lists out the different forms of documentation needed to support your expenses.

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...

You can see right there under Expenses that credit card statements as well as cancelled checks are valid documentation for a write-off.

From your link:

> Your supporting documents should show the amount paid and a description that shows the amount was for a business expense.

A credit card statement typically doesn’t fulfill the second half of that requirement. That doesn’t mean the card statement isn’t a valid supporting document, just that it wasn’t enough by itself.

I too read an IRS document once, that doesn’t make me an expert on accounting. However, when every single finance person has stated that the WHAT was as important and then your own link says that too, I generally would back down and admit maybe I misunderstood and/or made a mistake. YMMV.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com