> If smaller companies like Tarsnap can do it, then what stops others?
Shareholders. Tarsnap enjoys the benefits of being a privately-owned company.
Shareholders. Tarsnap enjoys the benefits of being a privately-owned company.
Aside: I think for a public company it might even work well if ESG stared incorporating Open Source contributions.
Remember that it's a common -- incorrect -- trope that public companies are legally required to seek maximum profit, etc. It's a lot more complicated and nuanced than that.
It would not go unnoticed, but say if the CEO is >50% shareholder, he could just say “if you don’t like the way I run the company, sell the stock”.