Hacker News Reader

Let's rephrase this a bit so I'm sure I understand.

Microsoft, a $3.4T company, should charge people for open source they didn't even write?

Hell no. Hell no.

That's a mischaracterization of TFA's point. Your re-phrase makes it sound like the proposal is for filthy-rich Microsoft to pocket additional bucks from other people's open source work. Ostensibly, yes, Microsoft will be doing such action but the spirit of TFA is more like for Microsoft to act as a tax collector and, crucially, redistribute the collected tax back to the community---the money will not add to Microsoft's $3.4T-worth coffers!

Naturally this comment isn't a "fuck yes!" to the idea of Microsoft-as-tax-collector but if we're discussing TFA, let's not be needlessly cynical to the idea presented.

The comment you responded to may have incorrectly assumed that all the problems were self-evident, but apparently they are not.

> redistribute the collected tax back to the community---the money will not add to Microsoft's $3.4T-worth coffers!

Ummm, yeah, no.

Microsoft is a contributor to many open source projects, so it could, in fact, directly add to its own coffers.

And, the onus to pay for what was nominally free software could make paid software look more attractive, so it could indirectly push people to, e.g., office subscriptions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com