Freedom is Not Free: A Model for Open Source Sustainability

The modern world runs on open source software—trillions in economic value, and growing more essential to digital sovereignty by the day. Yet, beneath this foundation, the projects producing it are starved of capital. Open source simply does not have the structural resources it needs to be sustainable. The code is free, but the human and technical infrastructure required to maintain it is not.

A project like Drupal is no longer just a code repository; it is a full-scale utility provider. We deliver supply chain security, product management, and continuous integration pipelines. Our licenses waive all warranties and responsibilities—and yet enterprise scale demands we provide these services anyway, because no one else will. The core failure of our current model is that open-source funding is completely disconnected from these operational cost centers.

Because we lack a built-in mechanism to capture the value open source creates, we have accidentally engineered an extractive system. The Takers who consume open source without paying their fair share of its operational footprint are not acting out of malice; they are simply doing exactly what the market currently incentivizes them to do.

It is not inevitable that open source must be extractive. That is an architectural choice. To change the outcome, we must change the incentives. Using regenerative system design, we must re-engineer open-source models to capture enough resources from our outputs to continuously sustain our inputs. We must ensure that supporting open source the right way becomes both the easy way and the expected way.

Right now, supporting open source the right way is almost impossible for our largest users. Public procurement systems are designed to buy structured services from single vendors. They cannot write open-ended checks to decentralized communities. To bypass this "charity trap," we must transition to an operational cost framework and move the operating costs of open source off the donation sheet and directly into core operating budgets as a predictable, line-item consumption expense.

To make the easy way possible, open source foundations must clearly quantify and communicate our true technical and human costs. In Drupal, we know part of it. We provide $10 per site per year in consumable technical infrastructure, but our revenues only fund $7.50. The remaining $2.50 is pushed off as technical debt to the future. That gap says nothing about the release managers and security teams whose essential work is still mostly donated—that burden sits entirely outside this number. We must turn these technical and human maintenance costs into a transparent, billable utility, giving institutions a clear, legally compliant way to pay for what they consume.

But once we make it easy to pay for this utility, how do we make it the expected way?

That requires establishing two clear standards.

For the vendor ecosystem, we need a sustainable participation standard. In Drupal, we have a contribution credit system to visibly recognize our Makers, those who invest real capital, code, and labor into the project. This system also helps us to identify the Fakers, organizations that use sponsorship and marketing to signal commitment while funding and doing little-to-none of the actual work.

For public institutions and enterprise users, we need a sustainable use standard defined by three practices:

• One, select vendors who sustainably participate in the projects they use.
• Two, include an explicit open source maintenance line item in every contract—a cost-recovery expense that shifts the burden off pro-bono maintainers.
• Three, require timely upstream release of all non-sensitive bug fixes and features.

With these standards in place, Open Source Program Offices can work with procurement officers to differentiate the true Makers from the Takers and Fakers at the point of purchase. And, the market-making power of public purchasing operationalizes "Public Money, Public Code" into the norm.

Open source cannot thrive on the margins of volunteerism, but it doesn’t have to. Once public policy acknowledges open source maintenance as an operational cost rather than a charitable act, everything else follows. That's regenerative system design in practice: change the incentives, and the system begins to fund itself.

Adapted from a June 23, 2026 presentation by Tiffany Farriss at the Sovereign Tech Agency's Breakfast Reception during United Nations Open Source Week.  Photo by Mike Gifford, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.