Slashdot Mirror
The New 501(c)(3) and the Future of Open Source In the US
An anonymous reader writes: If you're involved in the free and open-source software movement — especially in the United States — you may want to read through this, as long as it may seem. It appears that the United States' Internal Revenue Service has strongly shifted its views of free and open-source software, and to the detriment of the movement, in my opinion. From the article: "The IRS reasons that since Yorba’s open source software may be used for any purpose, Yorba is not a charity. Consider all the for-profit and non-charitable ways the Apache server is used; I’d still argue Apache is a charitable organization. (What else could it be?) There’s a charitable organization here in San Francisco that plants trees throughout the city for the benefit of all. If one of their tree’s shade falls on a cafe table and cools the cafe’s patrons as they enjoy their espressos, does that mean the tree-planting organization is no longer a charity?"
You'll only give them ideas.
From the wikis: charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety
Why do you need to be charity? Why not educational/scientific?
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
So... a non lawyer got a request from the IRS to explain his charitable status, they decided he wasn't a charity, and now he's posting to a blog that the entire open source world is coming to an end? I think dude needs to spend more time getting a lawyer and less time posting to slashdot.
I HATE the IRS with a passion. This stuff should be easy. But the fact of the matter is, it's not. You need legal representation if you're going to be a 501(c)
Then we have this: "We have no plans to appeal their decision."
ok... so what's the point of this post? If you're agreeing with them, I don't get it. If you're not agreeing with them, but just rolling over, then you deserve what you get.
While this might seem to suck, I know from first-hand inquiries that it is not possible to allow a charitable organization such as a church, for example, that has a kitchen to allow their kitchen to be used even by one of its own members for any kind of commercial purpose, even if the church receives absolutely *NO* benefit from said use. Allowing it would jeopardize the church's tax-exempt status, so it's not allowed.
Really, if you want to be a charity, then you can't allow your resources to be used by people with commercial interests. Sucks for open source organizations that want to act as charities, and I can see it being detrimental for some donations because I know that getting a tax exemption does motivate some people to donate.
But bear in mind that if tax-exemption were really the only reason or even the primary reason why people might donate to a cause or organization that they may believe in, it's highly unlikely that something like crowdfunding would ever work, and we have plenty of evidence to show that it does.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
the current president is mega-corporate bitch;
Unlike which of the previous several?
You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
I recommend reading the excellent IRS writeup posted at http://yorba.org/docs/IRS-dete... by the way.
One of the key phrases:
Developing Open Source Software Is An Activity Ordinarily Carried On As An Incident To Commercial Or Industrial Operations
In a nutshell, Yorba failed to properly differentiate themselves from a traditional for-profit company. As a for-profit software company owner, I'd say that that's a fair statement. If Yorba was actively engaging in outreach to provide free software to schools (and then incidentally released it to the public), again that would be different.
When you apply for 501(c)3 status you're asking that the general public subsidize your business. Its not unreasonable to require a significant burden of proof before such a federal subsidy is granted.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
How about:
Lost at C:>. Found at C.