Ask Slashdot: How To Get Open Source Projects To Take Our Money?

New submitter wkaan writes "Last financial year, we had an underspend at work, and it was suggested and agreed that we should give some cash away — $20k to be exact — to open source projects. Four projects were selected. A management catch was that it could not appear to be a donation and it had to be for something we had notionally received in the current financial year. At that time it was early June, our financial year finishes at the end of June. The four projects were emailed using the most relevant looking contact address on their website. Often this was 'Finance' or 'Donations' contact. What do you know, none of the projects that were contacted could work out a way to accept our money. We were unable to give a cent of the twenty grand away, not even a cent. All somebody needed to do was invoice us for something (perhaps 'support' or whatever) and they'd have received $5000. Of the projects contacted, two never replied to our mail — perhaps they thought it a scam? The other two contacted couldn't work out what to invoice and just went away. Is open source too rich to need the money? Have you got a funny donation story? Better still, do you have a way this can be streamlined when we have our next underspend? The goal was not to have a funny (sad) story, but to support the projects that support our business." For those of you with open source projects for which would you would like to take donations but sometimes cannot, what complications get in the way?

Comments

Try actually donating?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your company seems to have a problem understanding what 'donate' means.

Re:Try actually donating?

[gstoddart]

Why was it important to management that the money be earmark for a specific invoiceâableâ item?

Likely because of how companies do their accounting.

You've got your capital budget, your operating budget, approved projects, and who knows what else (not an accountant).

The company trying to make the 'donation' needed to keep it within the same bucket and needed the potential recipients to give them an invoice.

In this case, it was "we'd like to 'give' you money, but it needs to look like on your side like you billed us for something". And generally when someone needs you to account for something in a special way, you might need to ask if you can (or should) actually do that without causing yourself problems.

And if I'm a charity and someone says "we'd like to donate, but can you make it look like you sold us a car instead" -- my first impulse is going to be a little wary of that deal. Because, it's no longer a donation, it's money being disguised as something else, and the recipient potentially gets themselves into legal trouble by trying to do that.

So, you try calling the Red Cross and say you'd like to donate $1 million, but they need to make it look like they sold you an island you could get the same problem. They didn't sell you an island, and as much as that $1 million might be shiny, needing to stay strictly within the rules means you might just have to say "if you want to donate $1 million, awesome, but we can't do magic accounting to make it look like something else".

Seems legit

[stewsters]

Deer project owner,

Our corporation has too much money. Please send details of how give you $500 Dollars US$ without donating.

-Prince of Nigeria

Hire a developer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Spend the 20k to hire a developer which you pay to contribute code to these projects.

Varnish Moral Licence

[beebware]

Did you consider buying a Varnish Moral Licence ?

Budgets, not tax. Jeez.

[damacus]

"Dodging" tax laws has a negative connotation. Tax laws related to donations *benefit* companies generally as write-offs. I think your post was unfair and presumptuous as to the original poster's intentions.

I don't think the original poster's intentions / considerations had anything to do with tax laws and instead are directly relevant to financial budgets, hinted at by the "underspend" part. Budgets are different from a wallet or general corporate account. You don't want to get into dealings with the administration on misappropriation of budgeted funds.

As far as misappropriations are concerned: if your underspend is on a 'services' or 'software' category, and you use a lot of open source software, it isn't necessarily a misappropriation of funds (and the spirit of the account) to help ensure the projects on which your company depends stay in good health. The groups could've sold a $5,000 consultation or Support Meeting and just talked about how the org. used the software in question and had a chance to present ideas to them. And then at the end of the call or meeting, the project is $5K richer.

TL;DR large organizations that may have money to spend sometimes need some flexibility.

Sue them ...

[Anonymous Coward]

... for being bearded hippies, and then settle out of court

Re:$20,000 hammer

[TWiTfan]

It also sounds very suspicious and skeevy. I wouldn't have taken the money either. If someone called me up out of the blue and offered me thousands of $ on my OSS project, asking for some vague (and possibly fraudulent) invoice in return, and telling me they were on a strict deadline and needed it fast--my first inclination would be to ask them if they're a Nigerian prince. I would assume either:

a) scam/fraud
b) money-laundering scheme
c) IRS sting

And then I would have said "Thanks, but no thanks" and hung up the phone.

Re:$20,000 hammer

[jc42]

Imagine if you receipt at the grocery store listed the total of all 20 things you bought, then divided them evenly between all 20 items so your milk is $2.94, your bread is $2.94, your lettuce is $2.94, your apples are $2.94, and so on, I'm sure that a lot of people wouldn't even look. A few might raise hell over the numbers.

That's pretty close to what really happens. Some decades back, when the first stories started to appear about the $1000 hammer or $5000 power cord or whatever, there were also occasional stories from people familiar with the accounting practices who explained the bogosity of the calculations. Of course, people just ignored this, and repeated the stories as evidence of administrative (usually government) idiocy.

The basis of it all generally turned out to be the fact that many organizations (especially government) explicitly list an "administrative fee" on their invoices when purchased through the usual purchasing department. This is typically a fixed percentage of the bottom-line price. People would simply divide this charge by the number of items, to get the per-item administrative fee, and add it to an item's price to get the item's "cost".

Thus, it's common to have separate power cords, due to the different plugs needed in different parts of the world, So you might have an order for a computer (10,000), plus a cord that fits your wall outlets ($10), for a total of $10,010. If the administrative fee is 10%, the total charged your department is $11,011. You critics will then list the charge for each item as $1,001 / 2, or $500.50, so your price for the computer is $10,500.50, and the price of the cord is $510.50.

That's a pretty expensive power cord, right?

Not that we should expect any such accountant's explanation to have any effect on the situation. That would take all the fun out of reporting on bureaucratic idiocies (that our political opponents support, of course).

And there might well be $500 power cords. They might include things like a transformer that adapts to a wide variety of line voltages, generate AC output of a different frequency than the input, or have a storage battery to get through short power fluctuations, etc. But that's a different explanation, with different ways of misleading your readers or listeners.

Re:$20,000 hammer

[Anonymous Coward]

All of the answers here seem to be coming from people who have never worked (or don't understand) how the commercial world works and are saying "scam" "fraud" and accusing you of all sorts of nonsense. They are full of it, ignore them.

I get it - your department has a budget for software. Your budget is annual, and at the end of the year, you realized you hadn't spent your entire budget. Someone goes, "hey, let's support open source - we use it!". You then try to find open source to support, and pick four projects, and have zero success getting people to take the money. You have to get them to take it quickly, because if you don't spend the money by the end of your accounting year, it is gone. This is totally normal.

I think the issue is, (a) the people who work on open source sometimes don't understand how businesses work and (b) they are (like everyone should be) tuned into the fact that there are scams out there and things that sound too good to be true sometimes are. But at the end of the day, all you want is a receipt from them saying "we took your money", because otherwise your company will think you created a shell company and paid yourself. You don't care if it is a donation - you don't want the tax credit - you just need a receipt to satisfy your corporate anti-fraud processes. There is no fraud in paying someone for having done something in the past, i.e. having written open source software.

My suggestions, having never done this - you need actual human contacts set up in advance who believe your story. They need to understand how businesses work (it sounds stupid to people outside of large companies that budgets go away if you don't spend them, but unfortunately the world does work that way regardless of whether it sounds stupid). Maybe posting to a mailing list / support forum, instead of trying to email individuals, would get your more traction. You literally just need one prominent developer on the project to take the money - it doesn't have to be the "project", which may not even exist as a traditional legal entity. They will have to pay taxes on the money as income, which isn't a scam, but it also isn't your problem if you are paying them, it's theirs (legally).