See “The Success of Open Source” by Steven Weber, p 231–243 (TODO: summarise here)

So Pledge members will attract more contributors

Pledge members understand that contributors must be compensated

Contributors are more likely to contribute to projects if they feel they will be fairly compensated

Companies with source-available products can benefit from contributors

4. To support distributed innovation by attracting contributors

Why should maintainers be the one paying for this?

For example, through better operating systems, internet technologies etc

And the opportunity cost paid by maintainers also increases social welfare

So Open Source maintainers partially pay for dependent corporations’ R&D

They could have been otherwise been doing paid work

Maintainers incur an opportunity cost when working on Open Source software

This isn’t fair to maintainers

Maintainers do not profit, despite the product being based on their work

When the product is successful, companies profit by selling the product to customers

Companies base their products on this Open Source software

Maintainers create Open Source software

Why should companies join the Open Source Pledge?

5. To attract employees

3. Because it shows thought leadership

2. Because it prevents dependencies from being at risk

And it will create more goodwill from potential employees

These positive relationships will make it easier to find potential employees with relevant skills

Paying maintainers is a good way to build positive relationships with developers in a company’s field

This differentiation can be a selling point for customers

This differentiates members from companies that just accept the status quo

Members show thought leadership and long-term thinking and preparation

This show that Pledge members have a good understanding of the current issues in Open Source

Companies that join the Pledge do more than accept the status quo in Open Source — they change it

Unhealthily maintained projects can develop bugs or serious security issues

When maintainers burn out, the projects they maintain are at risk

This is not sustainable, which makes maintainers vulnerable to burnout

So maintainers often have to work a second shift, working on their Open Source software after their day job

Working a day job takes up a lot of time

So maintainers have to pay the rent by getting a day job

Maintainers don’t get paid to work on their Open Source software

And it’s bad for everyone, because our internet infrastructure depends on Open Source software

This is bad for companies, because the Open Source software they rely on becomes vulnerable

1. Because it’s fair