Draft for counsel review. Not yet incorporated.
Infinity OS Foundation Download

Precedents

Companies that gave their open work to a non-profit.

A company that founds a non-profit and hands it the open work is not unusual. It has happened many times, for twenty five years. These are those stories, the ones that went well and the ones that went badly, and what they mean for the Infinity OS Foundation.

What this page is. Public history, gathered and checked by web search on 15 October 2026, and our reading of it. Every story links to its sources. Where we could not confirm a fact, we left it out.

  1. A company that builds something, gives the open part to a non-profit, and sells services around it is one of the most common patterns in software.
  2. IBM, Google, Meta, Mozilla, Docker and, in December 2025, Anthropic, OpenAI and Block all did it, mostly so that competitors would trust and adopt the work.
  3. Most foundations start out controlled by the company that founded them, as ours is today.
  4. When a company keeps control, it can change the licence or be bought, and the community has had to rescue the work (Terraform, Redis, Elasticsearch). WordPress shows the cost of one person on both sides.
  5. Standards now exist for how AI connects to tools. As far as we found, no one yet sets the standard for a business's own AI records: the intelligence bookkeeping. That is the Foundation's aim.

The pattern

Build it, hand it over, sell services around it.

Almost every story on this page follows the same four moves. The company that built the first version gives the open core to a neutral non-profit. The non-profit publishes it to everyone, rivals included. The company then earns its living by selling help, hosting and specialist work around the standard, in open competition with anyone else who wants to.

Two words used throughout. Open source means the code is published under a licence that lets anyone use, copy, change and share it. A fork is what happens when people take a copy of open code and carry on with it under a new name, usually because they no longer trust the original owner. The glossary at the end has the rest.

The pattern A company builds the work and gives the open core to a neutral foundation. The foundation publishes it to everyone. The company sells services, and everyone may buy help from it or from anyone else. BUILDS The company writes the first version EARNS Services help, hosting, upkeep, specialist work NEUTRAL HOME The foundation holds the code, the name and the standard, open to all EVERYONE Customers, rivals, students use it freely, build on it, and cannot be shut out 1 2 3 4
  1. The company gives the open core to the foundation, under a licence it cannot take back.
  2. The foundation publishes it to everyone, rivals included.
  3. The company earns by selling services around it.
  4. Anyone may buy those services, from the founder or from a competitor (dashed: a choice, not a lock).

The Uniform Commercial Code, for software

No law firm owns the UCC. Two non-profit bodies, the American Law Institute and the Uniform Law Commission, drafted it and first published it in 1952. Every state has since enacted it, though Louisiana has not taken every article. Every firm uses it, and firms compete on the quality of their advice, not on owning the code.

The model code
The open standard: the factory format and the starter blueprints.
The drafting body
The Infinity OS Foundation, a non-profit that holds it for everyone.
The firms
StarMynd first, then any other company that sells help, setup or upkeep. StarMynd may host a factory temporarily during setup, but does not run factories long term.
The clients
Businesses that own their own factory and can change advisers at will.

Picture a firm that wrote a good set of forms and donated them to the bar so they could become the standard forms. The firm still has an edge: it knows them best. What it gives up is the power to withdraw them.

So whatThe Foundation is not unusual. The unusual move would be to ask businesses to run their whole operation on a standard one company could change.

The stories

Twenty one stories, from Python in 2001 to 2026.

Grouped by shape. Each card gives the year, who did it, what they handed over, and what happened next, with links. The four cautionary tales, which make twenty five, have their own section.

Timeline of the examples, 2000 to 2026 Twenty four examples placed by year along one line. A filled circle is a project handed to a neutral foundation, a hollow square a non-profit that owns its company, a triangle a community rescue, a cross a cautionary tale. The marks crowd together after 2015 and again in 2025. 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2026 Python Blender Mozilla Eclipse Hadoop LibreOffice Jenkins Node.js Kubernetes OpenAPI containerd GraphQL Matrix Signal Elastic Rust PyTorch Rails Terraform Redis WordPress A2A MCP Omarchy Open source grows up: foundations hold the big projects Companies hand over on purpose Licence changes, forks, and AI standards
  • Handed to a neutral foundation
  • Non-profit owns the company
  • Community rescue
  • Cautionary tale
Each mark sits at its year; where several fall in one year they are spread out and joined to the year by a faint line. Names are links to the stories.

A. Handed to a neutral foundation

  • 16 stories

The company, or the people who built the work, place it in a non-profit so that no single firm controls it. This is the Foundation's own shape.

AI agentsDecember 2025

MCP, AGENTS.md and goose

Three AI companies hand their agent standards to one neutral home.

Who
Anthropic, OpenAI and Block, with the Linux Foundation.
Handed over
On 9 December 2025 the Linux Foundation formed the Agentic AI Foundation. Anthropic gave its Model Context Protocol (MCP), which lets AI reach business tools and data; OpenAI gave AGENTS.md, a file format that gives coding agents a project's instructions; Block gave goose, an open agent.
Next
The platinum members include Amazon Web Services, Anthropic, Block, Bloomberg, Cloudflare, Google, Microsoft and OpenAI: direct competitors funding one shared home.

"committed to ensuring MCP remains open-source, community-driven and vendor-neutral"Anthropic, 9 December 2025

The closest match to us: AI companies putting harness layer standards into a neutral home so that rivals will adopt them.

Sources: Linux Foundation, Anthropic, SD Times

Messaging standard2018 to 2019

Matrix and Element

Founded by a company, with a board first picked by the founders.

Who
New Vector, the company now called Element, which built the Matrix messaging standard.
Handed over
On 29 October 2018 it set up the Matrix.org Foundation, a UK non-profit company limited by guarantee. The first two directors (called Guardians) were the founders. By 11 June 2019 all Matrix.org assets had moved from the company, and three independent Guardians had joined.
Next
In 2025 the Foundation wrote that Element had previously paid for all its infrastructure, and that it still had further to go on open governance.

"ensure that the current team form a minority on the board"Matrix.org, 29 October 2018

A board picked by the founders at the start is normal. Matrix began that way.

Sources: Matrix 2018, Matrix 2019, Matrix 2025

Developer tools2001 to 2004

Eclipse and IBM

IBM gives away a $40 million investment, then gives away control.

Who
IBM.
Handed over
In 2001 IBM released the Eclipse software tools as open code, a gift valued at about $40 million, and on 29 November 2001 a consortium of vendors was announced to guide them.
Next
In February 2004 the consortium became the Eclipse Foundation, an independent not-for-profit with its own board, loosely patterned on the Apache Software Foundation, formed so that other vendors would trust it and join.

IBM's code became an industry standard only once IBM no longer controlled it.

Sources: InfoQ, eWeek, Eclipse Foundation

Programming language2001

Python

Four employers in ten years, then a home that does not move.

Who
Guido van Rossum and the core team. Python began at CWI in the Netherlands, moved to CNRI in Virginia in 1995, to BeOpen.com in May 2000, and to Digital Creations (later Zope Corporation) in October 2000.
Handed over
In 2001 the Python Software Foundation was formed to own the language's rights.
Next
The PSF, a 501(c)(3), holds the rights to most Python releases and protects the trademarks.

"created specifically to own Python-related Intellectual Property"Python documentation, history of the software

When the people move between companies, the work stays put.

Sources: Python licence history, PSF about, PSF

Cloud software2015

Kubernetes and Google

Google gives its container system a neutral home as it reaches 1.0.

Who
Google.
Handed over
On 21 July 2015, as Kubernetes reached version 1.0, Google donated it as the first project of the new Cloud Native Computing Foundation, run by the Linux Foundation, with partners including AT&T, Cisco, Docker, IBM, Intel and Red Hat.
Next
In August 2018 Google moved the project's day to day infrastructure to the foundation too, with $9 million in cloud credits over three years.

Handing over can come in stages: first the code and name, later the machinery.

Sources: CNCF and TechCrunch, CNCF

AI framework2022

PyTorch and Meta

Meta's rivals now sit on the board of Meta's AI framework.

Who
Meta.
Handed over
On 12 September 2022 Meta moved PyTorch to the new PyTorch Foundation under the Linux Foundation. The founding board: AMD, Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud, Meta, Microsoft Azure and Nvidia.
Next
No change to the code or its technical governance; Meta said it would keep PyTorch as its primary AI framework.

A company can give away control and keep using, and investing in, the work.

Sources: Linux Foundation, Phoronix

Programming language2021

Rust and Mozilla

A board split evenly between the funders and the people who do the work.

Who
Mozilla, Rust's original home, with AWS, Google, Huawei and Microsoft.
Handed over
On 8 February 2021 the Rust Foundation was announced as an independent non-profit. Mozilla transferred the Rust trademarks and domains to it.
Next
Ten directors: five from the founding companies, five from the project's own leadership.

The funding companies and the project's own leaders shared the board from the start.

Sources: LWN, the announcement, Rust Foundation

Data standard2018

GraphQL and Facebook

From one company's internal tool to a shared standard.

Who
Facebook, which built GraphQL in 2012 for its mobile News Feed and published it in 2015.
Handed over
On 6 November 2018 the Linux Foundation announced the GraphQL Foundation, with Airbnb, Apollo, Coursera, Elementl, Facebook, GitHub, Hasura, Prisma, Shopify and Twitter.
Next
The Register noted the move came after licence worries had raised doubts about GraphQL's future the year before.

"growing and sustaining a neutral GraphQL ecosystem"Linux Foundation, 6 November 2018

A neutral home answered doubts that the owner's own licence had raised.

Sources: GraphQL and Linux Foundation, TechCrunch, The Register

Web software2014 to 2015

Node.js and Joyent

A neutral home heals a split caused by one company's control.

Who
Joyent, the company that sponsored Node.js.
Handed over
At the end of 2014 many contributors, unhappy with how Joyent ran the project, forked it as io.js. In February 2015 Joyent announced a Node.js Foundation; in May io.js agreed to join.
Next
On 16 June 2015 the two code bases merged under the Node.js Foundation at the Linux Foundation, with IBM, Intel, Joyent, Microsoft, PayPal and Famous as top members.

Handing over early avoids the fork; handing over late can still repair it.

Sources: Linux Foundation, InfoQ, I Programmer

Data standard2015

OpenAPI and SmartBear

A company buys a standard, then gives it away to make it the standard.

Who
SmartBear Software, which bought the Swagger specification (begun in 2010 by Tony Tam at Wordnik) in March 2015.
Handed over
On 5 November 2015 SmartBear gave the specification to the new OpenAPI Initiative at the Linux Foundation, with 3Scale, Apigee, Capital One, Google, IBM, Intuit, Microsoft, PayPal and Restlet.
Next
Its stated aim: a vendor neutral, portable and open way to describe how web services talk to each other, starting from Swagger 2.0.

Like a standard form: worth more to its author once everyone uses it.

Sources: Linux Foundation, OpenAPI history

Cloud software2017

containerd and Docker

A company gives away its core engine and keeps its products.

Who
Docker Inc.
Handed over
Announced in December 2016, and on 15 March 2017 Docker donated containerd, the core of its container engine, to the Cloud Native Computing Foundation.
Next
The foundation's technical committee accepted it unanimously at the end of March 2017, alongside a rival runtime from CoreOS.

The shared part goes to the commons; the business is what is built on top.

Sources: The Register, CNCF

Data software2006 to 2008

Hadoop and Yahoo

A company leads the work without ever owning it.

Who
Yahoo, which hired Hadoop's creator Doug Cutting in January 2006 and invested in the technology.
Handed over
Nothing needed handing over: Hadoop began in 2006 as a project inside the Apache Software Foundation, and Yahoo's engineers built it there. It became a top level Apache project in January 2008.
Next
In February 2008 Yahoo said its search index ran on a 10,000 core Hadoop cluster; Last.fm, Facebook and the New York Times were early users.

The cleanest version: the funder's work lives in the neutral home from day one.

Sources: InformationWeek, Hadoop history

Web framework2022

The Rails Foundation

Companies that rely on the work fund a foundation to teach it.

Who
Eight companies: Cookpad, Doximity, Fleetio, GitHub, Intercom, Procore, Shopify and 37signals. David Heinemeier Hansson, Rails' creator, chairs it.
Handed over
On 14 November 2022 they launched it with $1,000,000 in seed money, to improve Rails documentation, education, marketing and events.
Next
Others have joined since, including 1Password (2024) and Judge.me (2025).

Documentation is a recognised foundation job in its own right. Keeping the guides is one of our two.

Sources: Rails Foundation launch, 1Password, Judge.me

AI agents2025

A2A and Google

In AI, the handover now happens within months.

Who
Google, which introduced its Agent2Agent protocol in April 2025.
Handed over
On 23 June 2025 the Linux Foundation launched the A2A project with Google's specification, software kits and tools, with AWS, Cisco, Microsoft, Salesforce, SAP and ServiceNow.
Next
It sits beside MCP: MCP connects an agent to tools and data; A2A lets agents talk to each other.

Google's stated reason was to avoid every company building its own rival protocol.

Sources: Linux Foundation, BleepingComputer

A modern example2025 to 2026

Omarchy and the Omacom Foundation

A founder gives his work away first, builds trust, then gives it a foundation.

What
Omarchy is a ready made Linux desktop for programmers (Arch Linux with the Hyprland window manager, tools and themes already set up), released free under the MIT licence. David Heinemeier Hansson, the creator of Ruby on Rails, first released it on 26 June 2025. Its site says it was incubated at 37signals.
Handed over
On 21 August 2026 he announced the Omacom Foundation, a non-profit he says he is incorporating, to hold the Omarchy trademarks, pay for its infrastructure, promote it, and fund the open projects it depends on.
Next
Reported pledges run well over ten million dollars (totals differ by source and date), from individual patrons such as Michael Dell, Patrick Collison, Tobi Lütke and Jack Dorsey, and from corporate patrons including 37signals and OpenAI.
How it differs
It is a desktop for individual developers, not a standard for running a business. Its trust came from a year of giving it away before any foundation existed, and the money comes from many patrons rather than one founding company. We could not confirm that incorporation is complete.

"It now feels like a moral obligation to make this future more broadly available"David Heinemeier Hansson, omarchy.org, 21 August 2026

A company founder can give work away openly, earn the community's trust, and then lock that gift in with a foundation that holds the name.

Sources: Omarchy announcement, omarchy.org, DHH, August 2025, MIT licence on GitHub, It's FOSS

AI chips and software2017 to 2026

NVIDIA: from open but company held, to neutral foundations

Even the largest AI chip maker hands its tools to neutral homes when it wants others to build on them.

Before
In October 2017 NVIDIA released NVDLA, the full design of a deep learning accelerator chip, with its compiler, drivers and tests. It was open, but under NVIDIA's own "Open NVDLA" licence, and NVIDIA kept control of it.
Handed over
On 29 September 2025 the Linux Foundation announced that Disney Research, Google DeepMind and NVIDIA had contributed Newton, their open physics engine for robot learning, for vendor neutral governance. In March 2026, at KubeCon Europe, NVIDIA donated its GPU driver for Kubernetes to the Cloud Native Computing Foundation.
Why NVDLA stayed
NVDLA was not tied to NVIDIA's own chips: it was meant for other companies' low cost edge and IoT chips, a market NVIDIA does not sell into. NVIDIA reportedly saw it as a way to grow AI on small devices, and with it demand for training in the cloud on NVIDIA's own GPUs. It was a gift to grow the market, with no rivals invited to share in running it. NVIDIA never said why it did not use a foundation; that reading is ours.
What happened
The hardware design was last changed in April 2018 and its software in September 2019 (NVIDIA's own repositories, checked 15 October 2026). It never became the standard it set out to be.
How it differs
NVIDIA did not create a foundation of its own; it placed projects into existing ones. The pattern is the same: when a company wants rivals and partners to build on its tool, it gives up control of it.

"from being vendor-governed to offering full community ownership"NVIDIA, on its GPU driver, March 2026

The same company shows both choices: keep an open tool under its own control, or move it to a neutral home so others will trust it.

Sources: NVDLA, CNX Software, 2017, BDTI: why NVIDIA opened NVDLA, NVDLA hardware commits, NVDLA software commits, Linux Foundation: Newton, NVIDIA: KubeCon 2026, Help Net Security

B. The non-profit owns the company

  • 2 stories

The reverse structure: the charity sits on top and owns a taxable company that earns the money.

Web browser2003 to 2005

Mozilla and Firefox

The charity owns the trademarks; its company earns the revenue.

Who
The Mozilla Foundation, a California not-for-profit set up in July 2003 to hold Mozilla's trademarks and copyrights.
Structure
On 3 August 2005 it formed the Mozilla Corporation, a wholly owned, tax-paying subsidiary, so the business side could pursue revenue a non-profit could not.
Next
The model has lasted twenty years; in 2020 Thunderbird moved into a second subsidiary.

Shows how a non-profit and a company can be stacked with the charity in control.

Sources: Mozilla 2005, Mozilla archive, Mozilla Foundation history

Private messaging2018

Signal

One founder's money, a 501(c)(3) on top.

Who
Brian Acton, a co-founder of WhatsApp, and Moxie Marlinspike, Signal's creator.
Structure
On 21 February 2018 they announced the Signal Foundation, started with $50 million of Acton's own money. The foundation owns Signal Messenger LLC, which builds the app.
Next
The foundation was reported as formally tax exempt in February 2019.

A non-profit funded mainly by one source can work, which is how we start.

Sources: Signal, TechCrunch, Signal Foundation history

C. The community rescues the work

  • 3 stories here, 3 more with the cautionary tales

What happens when there is no neutral home and the company fails, is sold, or changes course. Each time, users had to found one in a hurry. OpenTofu, Valkey and OpenSearch are told with their companies in the cautionary tales.

3D software2002

Blender

Users pay €100,000 to free software from a failed company.

Who
Ton Roosendaal and the users of Blender, after its company, NaN, stopped work.
Rescue
He set up the non-profit Blender Foundation in March 2002. In July the investors agreed to sell the rights; a "Free Blender" campaign raised the €100,000 price in about seven weeks.
Next
Blender was released as open source on 13 October 2002. Development continues with volunteers worldwide.

Work held only by a company dies with the company unless someone buys it back.

Source: Blender manual, history

Office software2010 to 2011

OpenOffice, Oracle and LibreOffice

A buyer arrives; the community leaves; the handover comes too late.

Who
The OpenOffice.org community, after Oracle bought Sun, OpenOffice's sponsor, in 2009.
Rescue
On 28 September 2010 they announced The Document Foundation and a fork called LibreOffice, backed by Ubuntu, Novell and Red Hat. On 1 June 2011 Oracle gave OpenOffice and its trademark to the Apache Software Foundation, by licence rather than copyright transfer.
Next
Two foundations, two office suites, from what had been one project.

The future buyer risk, in one story.

Sources: LibreOffice history, Apache OpenOffice history, TechCrunch

Developer tools2011

Hudson becomes Jenkins

Whoever holds the trademark holds the name, but not the people.

Who
The Hudson community, after Oracle (again via Sun) claimed the Hudson name and filed for the trademark in December 2010.
Rescue
On 29 January 2011 the community voted 214 to 14 to rename the project Jenkins and move off Oracle's servers.
Next
Oracle kept Hudson going, interest in it collapsed, and Oracle gave the remains to the Eclipse Foundation at the end of 2012.

Why the Foundation, not StarMynd, should hold the name.

Sources: InfoQ, Hudson history

Cautionary tales

When the company keeps the keys.

Told fairly. These companies had real reasons. In three of the four, large cloud companies were selling the work as a paid service; in the fourth, Automattic said a rival host was profiting while giving little back. The point is not that they were wrong. The point is that a customer cannot plan around a promise the maker is free to change, and that one person on both sides of a foundation invites a fight.

A promise versus a structure Top: a company's promise to keep work open reaches the customer through a dashed line that a new licence, a new owner or a new plan can cut. Bottom: a foundation holding the work under an irrevocable licence reaches the customer through a solid line with nothing to cut. A PROMISE Company "it stays open" Customer's business CUT BY: A NEW LICENCE (TERRAFORM, REDIS, ELASTIC) A NEW OWNER (SUN TO ORACLE, HASHICORP TO IBM) A NEW PLAN (WORDPRESS, 2024) A STRUCTURE Foundation irrevocable open licence Customer's business NOTHING TO CUT

WordPress and Automattic

One person on both sides of the foundation.

  1. The WordPress Foundation takes the WordPress trademarks from Automattic, the company of WordPress's co-founder Matt Mullenweg. But the foundation's trademark policy gives Automattic an exclusive licence for commercial use.
  2. At WordCamp US Mullenweg says a competing host, WP Engine, takes far more than it contributes. On 25 September WordPress.org blocks WP Engine from its servers.
  3. WP Engine sues Automattic and Mullenweg, alleging extortion and abuse of power; they deny it, and later counterclaim over the trademark.
  4. A federal court grants WP Engine a preliminary injunction restoring its access while the case continues.

Fair to Automattic: its complaint, that a profitable competitor gave little back, is a real problem for open projects. Automattic says the ruling is only preliminary and that it expects to win at trial.

The lesson: when the foundation's neutrality depends on one person who also runs a company, the community notices.

Sources: SiteLock timeline, TechCrunch, WPShout, LWN

HashiCorp, Terraform and OpenTofu

A licence change, then a new owner.

  1. HashiCorp's Terraform, a tool companies use to set up their computer systems, is open source under the Mozilla Public License.
  2. HashiCorp moves Terraform to the Business Source License, which restricts some commercial use.
  3. The community's copy, OpenTofu, joins the Linux Foundation, with pledges from more than 140 organisations; it reaches a stable release on 10 January 2024.
  4. IBM completes its $6.4 billion purchase of HashiCorp, announced in April 2024.

Fair to HashiCorp: it built Terraform and carried its cost; a company is entitled to change the licence on future versions of its own code.

The lesson: both risks a customer fears, a new licence and a new owner, arrived within eighteen months.

Sources: Spacelift, Linux Foundation, OpenTofu release, TechRepublic

Redis and Valkey

The fork took the contributors.

  1. Redis moves new versions to two source available licences; cloud providers may no longer offer it free of charge.
  2. Eight days later the Linux Foundation launches Valkey from the last open version, backed by Amazon, Google Cloud, Oracle, Ericsson, Snap and others.
  3. A year on, DevClass reports Redis lost most of its outside contributors. In May 2025 Redis 8 adds the open source AGPL licence as an option.

Fair to Redis: it came most of the way back, and its worry about cloud providers was real.

The lesson: trust lost in a week can take a year to partly rebuild.

Sources: Valkey history, DevClass, The Register

Elastic and OpenSearch

A fork that ended up in a foundation.

  1. Elastic moves Elasticsearch, a widely used search engine, off its open licence, saying Amazon was profiting without collaborating.
  2. Amazon forks the last open version as OpenSearch; version 1.0 ships in July 2021.
  3. Elastic adds the open source AGPL licence as an option.
  4. Amazon transfers OpenSearch to a new OpenSearch Software Foundation at the Linux Foundation, with SAP, Uber, Oracle, Canonical and Aryn on the board.

Fair to Elastic: the New Stack reported that the two 2024 moves were unrelated, and Elastic says it has always believed in open source.

The lesson: even Amazon, with its own fork, chose a neutral foundation to win other companies' trust.

Sources: Elastic, The New Stack, AWS Insider, Instaclustr

So whatThe rescues on this page mostly ended in a neutral foundation. We would rather start with a foundation than be rescued into one.

Why it is best practice

Six reasons, each with its evidence.

When a company open sources something it wants others to build on, a neutral foundation is the industry's standard answer. The reasons are practical, and each one is shown by a story above.

  1. Trust

    Businesses will build on work only if no single firm can pull it away. A non-profit with a public mission is a promise in a form people can check.

    Shown by: Eclipse, Node.js

  2. Competitors adopt it

    Rivals will not build on a standard a competitor controls. Put it in neutral hands and they fund it.

    Shown by: Kubernetes, PyTorch, MCP, A2A

  3. No surprise relicensing

    Work held by a foundation under an irrevocable open licence cannot be closed later by the company that wrote it.

    Shown by: Terraform, Redis, Elastic

  4. No surprise buyer

    If StarMynd were ever sold, the buyer gets StarMynd, not the standard. The open work stays where it is.

    Shown by: OpenOffice, Jenkins, HashiCorp

  5. A neutral trademark

    The name is how people find the standard. Whoever holds it decides who may say they use it.

    Shown by: Rust, Jenkins, and the counterexample WordPress

  6. It outlives the founders

    Companies fail, change plans and lose people. A foundation is built to keep going.

    Shown by: Python, Blender, Mozilla

Why a business cannot accept a promise here

We believe factories raise the stakes beyond normal software. A stolen AI agent or one written procedure could never replicate a business; a factory holds the whole of it: its knowledge, its automations, the governance between them and its industry know-how, built up over years.

A business that runs on a factory has written its methods, its records and its decisions into it. If someone else controls the format, they control the business's memory. That is a bigger dependence than ordinary software, and it is why Andrew wants the format held where nobody can take it back: not by StarMynd, and not by whoever might one day own StarMynd.

So whatThe Foundation is not charity theatre. It is the structure that makes the promise believable, and believable promises are what get adopted.

Common questions

Three questions we hear, answered plainly.

Isn't it controlled by StarMynd?

Today, StarMynd founded the Foundation and funds and staffs it, and we say so. That is normal at the start: Matrix, Eclipse and others began that way.

Andrew Warner is a member of the Foundation's founding board and the chief executive of StarMynd. He owes a duty to each, and he says so openly. StarMynd's products integrate natively with Infinity OS, but the Foundation will not block competitors or pick winners. Stage one, keeping free software maintained and keeping the guides for it, carries little conflict. Stage two, if we reach it, will have its own governance, set out before we begin it.

StarMynd is the Foundation's temporary steward while the open standard is adopted and proven. That is the well-worn path: IBM, Google and Meta each led software they opened while it proved itself, then handed it to independent governance as it became a standard. We intend to do the same and transition to an independent body over time, as it makes sense. We are not setting dates.

Why not just a company?

For one company alone, keeping this work inside StarMynd could have been fine. An open standard is a question for many players. Nobody builds their business on an open tool one company controls, because that company can change the terms, fail or be sold. That is why companies like IBM, Google and Meta handed their projects to neutral foundations.

A company can relicense or withdraw what it gives away (HashiCorp, Redis), and a business whose whole operation runs on a factory cannot accept that risk. When the Foundation holds the standard and the starter blueprints under an open licence that cannot be withdrawn, StarMynd cannot take them back, and neither can a future buyer of StarMynd.

What if the Foundation ends?

Then you keep what you have. Anything you download from the Foundation is yours, under its open licence, and stays yours. If stewardship ever passes to a government body, another non-profit or a company that shares our mission, no one is stranded: everyone keeps the copy they downloaded, and only the maintenance moves.

The stories here show why that matters: Blender's users had to buy their software back from a failed company. Work held by a foundation, under an open licence, does not need rescuing.

The gap we fill

Nobody yet sets the standard for a business's AI books.

Between the AI model and the work a business does sits what we call the harness layer: the layer that connects AI to a business's own work and records. Andrew Warner, as a CPA, calls the part of it that keeps the records intelligence bookkeeping.

The harness layer stack Three layers. At the bottom, the model, from any provider. In the middle, the harness layer, split in two: the connections, now standardised by MCP, AGENTS.md, A2A and goose; and the business's books, records, approvals, permissions and portability, not yet standardised as far as we found. At the top, the business's own work. 3 THE BUSINESS'S WORK Sales, books, customers, operations what the business actually does 2 THE HARNESS LAYER The intelligence bookkeeping STANDARDISED, 2024 TO 2025 MCP: how AI reaches tools and data AGENTS.md: how agents read instructions A2A: how agents talk to each other goose: an open agent NOT YET, AS FAR AS WE FOUND Who did what, on whose word Approvals and sign offs The permissions ladder Moving between models and hosts 1 THE MODEL Any provider, closed or open bought as a service, and swappable

What is already standardised, honestly. The Agentic AI Foundation now holds MCP, AGENTS.md and goose, and the Linux Foundation holds A2A. Together they standardise how agents connect to tools and data, read instructions, and talk to each other. That is real progress, and the Foundation builds on it.

Nearby work, also honestly. ISO/IEC 42001 (December 2023) is a certifiable standard for how an organisation manages its use of AI: policies, roles, controls. OpenTelemetry is drafting conventions, still marked as in development, for tracing what AI agents do inside software. Both help. Neither, as far as we found, defines the business's own record of its AI work in a form another provider could pick up and read.

What is still missing is the business's factory itself, held in a form anyone can read:

  • its records of who did what, on whose word;
  • its approvals, and who may approve what;
  • its permissions ladder: what the AI may do alone, what it must ask about;
  • its portability between models and hosts, so the business can change provider and keep its history.

Bookkeeping standards, for intelligence

Any accountant can open any company's books and read them, because the books follow shared standards. In the United States those are set by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, an independent, private, not-for-profit body created in 1973 and recognised by the SEC. No accounting firm owns GAAP. Firms compete on the quality of their work, and a client can change accountants without rewriting its books.

The books
The factory's records of decisions, approvals and permissions.
GAAP
The open factory standard the Foundation is setting out to define.
The standard setter
The Foundation now; later, perhaps, a wider industry body.
The accounting firms
StarMynd and any other firm that helps businesses build and keep their factories.

Andrew's aim, in his words, is to be for the harness layer what the accounting and law standard setting bodies are for their professions.

Part of the harness layerStandard todayStatus
Connecting AI to tools and dataMCP, Agentic AI FoundationExists
Giving agents a project's instructionsAGENTS.md, Agentic AI FoundationExists
Agents talking to agentsA2A, Linux FoundationExists
How an organisation governs its AI useISO/IEC 42001, a management system standardExists
Tracing what an agent did inside softwareOpenTelemetry conventions for AIIn development
The business's own books: decisions, approvals, permissions, portable between providersNone foundThe gap

So whatThe connection standards are being handed to neutral homes; the bookkeeping standard has no home yet, as far as we found. That is why the Foundation exists.

Words and sources

Glossary, and every link used.

Open source
Code published under a licence that lets anyone use, copy, change and share it.
Licence
The terms under which the code may be used. An irrevocable one cannot be withdrawn later.
Relicensing
When the owner puts future versions under new, usually stricter, terms.
Fork
A copy of open code that others carry on under a new name.
Source available
Code you can read but may not freely use for every purpose. Not open source.
Linux Foundation
A non-profit that hosts many neutral projects, including most examples here.
Harness layer
The layer that connects AI to a business's own work and records.
Factory
What a business builds and runs on the harness layer: its methods, records and AI workers.

All sources were checked by web search on 15 October 2026.

AI standards

  1. Linux Foundation: formation of the Agentic AI Foundation
  2. Anthropic: donating the Model Context Protocol
  3. IT Brief: Anthropic donates MCP
  4. SD Times: new home for MCP, goose and AGENTS.md
  5. Linux Foundation: the Agent2Agent project
  6. BleepingComputer: Google donates A2A
  7. IEC: ISO/IEC 42001:2023
  8. OpenTelemetry: conventions for AI agent spans

Handed to a neutral foundation

  1. Matrix.org: introducing the Foundation (2018)
  2. Matrix.org: Matrix 1.0 and the Foundation (2019)
  3. Matrix.org: dispelling myths (2025)
  4. InfoQ: Eclipse at 10
  5. eWeek: Eclipse reorganizes into independent entity
  6. Eclipse Foundation: about
  7. Python: history and licence
  8. Python Software Foundation: about
  9. Python Software Foundation
  10. CNCF and TechCrunch: Kubernetes 1.0 donated
  11. CNCF: the $9 million Google grant, 2018
  12. Linux Foundation: Meta transitions PyTorch
  13. Phoronix: PyTorch Foundation formed
  14. LWN: the Rust Foundation announcement
  15. Rust Foundation: Hello World, 2021
  16. GraphQL: intent to form a foundation
  17. TechCrunch: GraphQL gets its own foundation
  18. The Register: GraphQL on Linux
  19. Linux Foundation: Node.js Foundation governance
  20. InfoQ: Node.js Foundation
  21. I Programmer: Node.js Foundation heals rift
  22. Linux Foundation: the Open API Initiative
  23. OpenAPI Specification history
  24. The Register: Docker donates containerd
  25. CNCF: containerd accepted
  26. InformationWeek: Hadoop at 10
  27. Apache Hadoop, history
  28. Ruby on Rails: the Rails Foundation
  29. Rails Foundation welcomes 1Password
  30. Judge.me joins the Rails Foundation
  31. Omarchy: Omacom Foundation launches
  32. omarchy.org
  33. DHH: Omarchy is on the move (August 2025)
  34. GitHub: omacom/omarchy, MIT licence
  35. It's FOSS: Omacom Foundation

Non-profit owns the company

  1. Mozilla: the Foundation forms the Corporation (2005)
  2. Mozilla archive: about the Foundation
  3. Mozilla Foundation history
  4. Signal: the Signal Foundation
  5. TechCrunch: $50 million from Brian Acton
  6. Signal Foundation history

Rescues and cautionary tales

  1. Blender manual: history
  2. LibreOffice history
  3. Apache OpenOffice history
  4. TechCrunch: one year after the schism
  5. InfoQ: Hudson becomes Jenkins
  6. Hudson history
  7. SiteLock: Automattic and WP Engine timeline
  8. TechCrunch: WordCamp US, September 2024
  9. WPShout: the preliminary injunction
  10. LWN: WordPress trademarks
  11. Spacelift: Terraform licence change
  12. Linux Foundation: OpenTofu
  13. Linux Foundation: OpenTofu general availability
  14. TechRepublic: IBM completes HashiCorp purchase
  15. Valkey: history
  16. DevClass: one year after Redis changed its licence
  17. The Register: Redis returns to open source
  18. Elastic: Elasticsearch is open source again
  19. The New Stack: OpenSearch, fork to foundation
  20. AWS Insider: OpenSearch changes hands
  21. Instaclustr: five years of OpenSearch

Analogies and background

  1. Uniform Commercial Code history
  2. The FASB, history
  3. Phoronix: NVIDIA joining the Linux Foundation (2012)

Why we set the Foundation up this way: Our StarMynd story, How we work and Andrew's letter.