The New 501(c)(3) and the Future of Open Source In the US 228
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?"
Re:All a simple mistake... (Score:0, Informative)
The fact that you had to use a derogatory term for the tea party people shows you have limited intelligence and nothing of significance to offer.
Re:Executive Branch (Score:2, Informative)
the current president is mega-corporate bitch; how ironic considering his promises and the beliefs of those who voted for him
Re: 501(c)(3) Classes (Score:4, Informative)
Seriously, what 'Wiki' are you quoting? Why not quote actual IRS regulations?
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf... [irs.gov]
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf... [irs.gov]
they were not trying to be a charity. (Score:4, Informative)
501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals.
They applied under charity, education, and science. Scientific seems the best bet. By providing source code you could say they are advancing computer science. But it is a stretch. The IRS instead saw Yorba as a provider of free stuff. Free stuff is nice but it isnt' advancing science or education. Free stuff is only charity when it is provided to a disadvantaged group of people according to the IRS. Note that environmental activism does not appear in that list. I don't think planting trees would quilify at all as a non profit. (unless it was done in a disavantaged neighborhood)