# A critique of FUTO's open-source claims, grant program, and affiliations

DevFeed: [A critique of FUTO's open-source claims, grant program, and affiliations](<https://devfeed.tech/articles/what-s-up-with-futo-20817.md>)

Original publisher: [Read original article](<https://drewdevault.com/blog/Whats-up-with-FUTO/>)

Author: October

Published: 2025-10-22T00:00:00Z

Content type: opinion

Language: en

Sources: [Drew DeVault](<https://devfeed.tech/sources/drew-devault.md>)

Topics: [Open Source](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/open-source.md>), [foss](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/foss.md>), [Cloudflare](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/cloudflare.md>)

Tags: [cloudflare](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/cloudflare.md>), [foss](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/foss.md>), [open-source](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/open-source.md>), [open-source-software](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/open-source-software.md>)

## AI overview

The article criticizes FUTO's use of the term "open source," arguing that the organization applies it to commercial source-available software. It also questions FUTO's grant program, its use of project logos and names, and its collaborations and promotions.

## Source excerpt

Some time ago, I noticed some new organization called FUTO popping up here and there. I'm always interested in seeing new organizations that fund open source popping up, and seeing as they claim several notable projects on their roster, I explored their website with interest and gratitude. I was first confused, and then annoyed by what I found. Confused, because their website is littered with bizzare manifestos,1 and ultimately annoyed because they were playing fast and loose with the term "open source", using it to describe commercial source-available software. FUTO eventually clarified their stance on "open source", first through satire and then somewhat more soberly, perpetuating the self-serving myth that "open source" software can privilege one party over anyone else and still be called open source. I mentally categorized them as problematic but hoped that their donations or grants for genuinely open source projects would do more good than the harm done by this nonsense. By now I've learned better. tl;dr: FUTO is not being honest about their "grant program", they don't have permission to pass off these logos or project names as endorsements, and they collaborate with and promote mask-off, self-proclaimed fascists. An early sign that something is off with FUTO is in that "sober" explanation of their "disdain for OSI approved licenses", where they make a point of criticizing the Open Source Initiative for banning Eric S. Raymond (aka ESR) from their mailing lists, citing right-wing reactionary conspiracy theorist Bryan Lunduke's blog post on the incident. Raymond is, as you may know, one of the founders of OSI and a bigoted asshole. He was banned from the mailing lists, not because he's a bigoted asshole, but because he was being a toxic jerk on the mailing list in question. Healthy institutions outgrow their founders. That said, FUTO's citation and perspective on the ESR incident could be generously explained as a simple mistake, and we should probably match gen