04.05.19
Gemini version available ♊︎Zemlin PAC: Influence for Sale, Under the Banner of ‘Linux’, at the Cost of a House
Picture contributed by a reader
Summary: Events are very “big business” for the Linux Foundation; the business model, however, is highly disturbing; this is the first installment of a series about Linux Foundation events
LIST OF ARTICLES to date (this year) was last published on Tuesday. The list is probably essential reading ahead of our next batch of articles, which examine the operations of the Linux Foundation. They call themselves “Linux Foundation”, but the Linux Foundation isn’t what it seems. It is also changing over time, certainly not for the better (unless betterment is judged on financial terms alone). Here is that list again:
- What Happened to the Linux Foundation?
- Constructive Suggestions for the Linux Foundation
- The Linux Foundation is Not About Linux
- Guest Post: The Linux Foundation Needs to Define “Support”
- Jim Zemlin’s Linux Foundation Still Does Not Care About Linux Desktops
- Microsoft and Its Patent Trolls Continue Their Patent War, Including the War on Linux
- The Linux Foundation Needs to Speak Out Against Microsoft’s Ongoing (Continued) Patent Shakedown of OEMs That Ship Linux
- Jim Zemlin’s PAC Keeps Raising Money From Microsoft
- Microsoft is Complaining About Android and Chrome OS (GNU/Linux) Vendor Not Paying for Microsoft Patents (Updated)
- Today’s Open Invention Network is Run by Former Patent Trolls, Connected to and Backed by Microsoft
- WSL is a Misleading Acronym/Name Because There’s No Linux in It, It’s Just Windows
- Microsoft ‘Bought’ the LOT Network Like it Did the ‘Linux’ Foundation and It’s Now, as a Result, Yet Another Microsoft PR Front
- Microsoft Loves Linux
- Which Microsoft?
- Microsoft’s Patent Trolls Are Still Suing Microsoft’s Rivals to Help Sell Microsoft
- The Evolution of Microsoft Embracing Python Like a Python Snake
- Always Remember That Red Hat Also Considered Microsoft as a Buyer
“They call themselves “Linux Foundation”, but the Linux Foundation isn’t what it seems.”What we are about to show is the troubling role the Linux Foundation (LF from here onwards) plays; it’s almost like a corporate shim if not dagger inside the community. By filtering and censoring talks, for example (just like the CoC in the case of mailing lists and events), LF became a filter of what’s permissible for “Linux” (they own the trademark) to say. And remember that “Microsoft loves Linux”; Microsoft paid, so it must be true. Don’t dispute that!
We’re aware of GNU/Linux developers who actually write all the code (used by millions, even large corporations all around the world) while broke. Ideology is their driver. Some receive maybe (at most) $500 a month, sometimes through donations, to just pay for food and secure a roof over their heads. Meanwhile, LF management staff (people with degrees in PR or accounting) get over $500,000 a year. Tax-free! And they’re marketing people who help Microsoft; they don’t write a single line of code (never did, they lack the skills). We know where they get this money and the strings attached to this money. Future parts of this series will cover this subject.
We’ve decided to separate our findings so as to better present the facts about LF. We’ll publish something every couple of days. We will break it down into logical units as there are many different aspects and one very long article simply wouldn’t be effective.
A few weeks ago I received an E-mail message (from LinkedIn): “More people who want to connect with you: Kimberly Andrews, Event Partnership Manager at Linux Foundation”
Interesting. I never heard of that person before. Why would I connect? Why did that person attempt to connect? I no longer connect with anyone anyway (especially since Microsoft bought this platform, whereupon I stopped logging in).
So Kim tried to befriend me through Microsoft’s LinkedIn. Why? There can only be one explanation. It’s because I write about LF. Much could be said about the choice of Microsoft’s LinkedIn, but LF used that well before the takeover, as did I.
Readers of ours have longer been curious about these events. “So,” one reader told us a month ago, “as I wrote this I wondered, what are the tiers for membership and contract…. I think I’d like to research that next.”
So… LF people “want to connect with” their critic. Just like typical PR people. Like Novell’s PR people.
As one reader put it: “Oh. They do, do they? Is that a good thing? Or…? What do you suggest?”
There are words for these tactics. A decade ago when I covered or uncovered Microsoft’s suppressed documents (obtained through subpoena) I saw how they targeted their critics. It was more or less like that. Now it’s the LF people doing it.
LF is big money. Very big money. More and more money each year. Notice the figures in the following sponsorship brochure. Add these up and you soon reach tens of millions of dollars (for events alone).
Companies that support GNU/Linux could (if not should) pay the development firms/developers, maybe the LUGs, not Zemlin PAC. It would do a lot to help actual development. What we see above is the ‘monopolisation’ of events.
Giving directly to developers would be equivalent of giving to the needy and not ‘charities’ that just belch out scraps to the actual people in need (while paying themselves astronomical salaries). But that analogy aside, let’s look at some findings we’ve had verified.
In the words of one of our readers: “Taking money and swag from Microsoft + Selling Magazine space + selling tweets + not even using Linux… When one organization has control of the media, training, and propaganda, we enter a very dangerous phase — where there is an organization representing Linux — that is actually… “Evil Empire”.”
“You would not believe my findings,” said this reader, whose research into this leads into our next part, a guest post titled: “Putting the CON in Conference!”
Stay tuned. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA