The Open Source Resistance: Maintaining the Commons on Company Time
The modern digital economy is built on a foundation of Open Source Software (OSS). From the kernels of our operating systems to the libraries powering our web applications, almost every major corporation extracts immense value from the open source commons. Yet, a systemic imbalance persists: while companies profit from this software, the burden of maintenance often falls on individuals working their evenings and weekends.
Recently, Mike McQuaid, a longtime Homebrew maintainer and former GitHub employee, published the "Open Source Resistance" manifesto. It is a direct-action call to maintainers to stop begging for permission and start treating OSS maintenance as the critical infrastructure work it is—performing it during company time.
The Core Argument: Infrastructure, Not Hobbies
The central premise of the Open Source Resistance is that OSS is not a "hobby" or a "charity project." Because businesses are fundamentally dependent on these tools, maintaining them is equivalent to managing technical debt or updating internal infrastructure.
McQuaid argues that the current model—where maintainers ask for a "Friday afternoon" or a donation button—preserves a power imbalance. Instead, he suggests that maintainers should simply integrate this work into their professional day. As the manifesto states:
"Maintainers inside companies should and can just take work time for the necessary work on the OSS code those companies already depend on. No paperwork required. No internal programme. No request for a manager’s blessing."
The Practical Guide to "Resistance"
For those considering this path, the manifesto provides a framework for doing so without jeopardizing their employment:
- Do the Work: Focus on reviewing PRs, updating dependencies, and shipping fixes for the software your company actually uses.
- Protect Yourself: This is the most critical step. Maintainers are urged to verify their contracts and ensure they own the Intellectual Property (IP) of the code they ship.
- Maintain Balance: The manifesto warns against "taking the piss." Spending 100% of work hours on OSS is a recipe for termination. The goal is a sustainable balance, not total abandonment of employer duties.
The Legal and Ethical Minefield
The proposal has sparked significant debate, particularly regarding the legality of "time theft" and IP ownership.
The IP Conflict
A primary point of contention in the community is the "Work for Hire" doctrine. In many jurisdictions, including the US and UK, code written during work hours or on company equipment is legally owned by the employer. Several commenters on Hacker News pointed out that without a formal agreement, contributing to OSS on company time could inadvertently hand over the ownership of a project to a corporation.
To mitigate this, McQuaid suggests negotiating a "carve-out" in employment contracts or using the Balanced Employee IP Agreement, which allows employees to retain ownership of open source work that does not compete with the business.
The "Time Theft" Debate
Critics argue that if a company pays for a developer's time, they have the right to dictate how that time is spent. One commenter noted that the core of OSS licenses is that anyone can benefit without contributing back. From this perspective, using work hours for unapproved OSS work is seen as a breach of contract or "piracy."
Conversely, proponents argue that companies are already "stealing" from maintainers by extracting value without providing the resources for sustainability. They view this not as theft, but as a necessary correction to a parasitic relationship.
Alternative Paths to Sustainability
While the "Resistance" approach is a form of direct action, the discussion highlighted several more conventional paths to achieving the same goal:
- The Framing Shift: Instead of asking for "charity time," some developers suggest framing OSS contributions as a way to get free, rigorous peer review from global experts and to zero out future maintenance costs for the company.
- Formal Pledges: Initiatives like the Open Source Pledge and Open Source Friday seek to institutionalize support through financial contributions or dedicated time.
- Interview Leverage: Senior engineers often use their hiring process to negotiate OSS time upfront, making it a non-negotiable part of their employment terms.
Conclusion: A Sustainable B-Grade
Perhaps the most provocative take in the manifesto is the acceptance of lower corporate visibility. McQuaid suggests that developers may receive worse performance reviews than those who spend every waking hour "feeding the company machine."
However, he argues that a "sustainable B grade is healthier than burning your life for an A grade at a company that can still fire you tomorrow." In an era of mass layoffs and AI-driven disruption, the Open Source Resistance posits that the only true security lies in the health of the commons and the professional sustainability of the people who maintain it.