Meeting Schedule

  • February 24, 2021



5 minIntroductory Remarks & Antitrust Policy NoticeD Luchuk
15 minNeed - uses for added revenueD Luchuk & All
25 minOptions - open discussionD Luchuk & All
10 minConclusions and Next StepsD Luchuk


  • Brief - revenue options (pdf):

Presentation - meeting agenda (pdf):



Introductory Remarks 

  • David Luchuk provided a brief overview of Trust over IP's stable and viable budget situation. This strong position presumes that paid members will choose to renew their Membership agreements, with the majority of those set to renew starting in May 2021.
  • Membership renewal, which will be sequenced to align with Trust over IP's shift to a calendar-based fiscal year, offers an opportunity to make potential changes to fee structures and membership tiers in the coming two months.
  • David Luchukadvised that Linux Foundation and the JDF organization should be engaged early to ensure there is a clear understanding of why Trust over IP aims to increase revenues and what resources Linux may be able to offer to  help it reach those goals.

Need - uses for added revenue

  • David Luchuk offered a brief outline of some possible uses for added revenue including the acceleration of key deliverables, hiring of strategic resources and issuance of value-added contracts to support the Foundation's work.
  • Jim St.Clairasked whether Trust over IP has a comprehensive list of needs and possible activities it would aim to support with additional funds adding that it will be easier to start with a complete sense of exactly what the Steering Committee wants and then seek a budget to fit.
  • John Jordan indicated that the Foundation will benefit from more time and effort committed from the Program Manager on community engagement and outreach to new and prospective members. Other Linux Foundation projects, for example, feature a "Director of Ecosystem" role in addition to Program Manager.
    • Drummond Reedagreed that more effort dedicated to outreach would ultimately lead to more paid memberships and a more diverse community.
  • Jim St.Clairasked whether Linux Foundation places constraints on the manner in which Trust over IP choses to spend its budget.
    • David Luchukexplained that it is not a question of constraints being imposed. Rather, Linux Foundation aims to ensure they fully understand what projects like Trust over IP are trying to achieve so that the maximum benefit can be generated from resources and services Linux Foundation has to offer its projects.
  •  Will Groahreminded the group that in prior discussions, Steering members had envisioned an order-of-magnitude change in the budget for Trust over IP. He asked whether there was clarity on how much revenue was generated, and how program operations were managed, at other Linux projects.
    • David Luchuk committed to follow up on this question with Linux Foundation and JDF.
  •  Karl Kneisindicated that Trust over IP needs to point to progress and deliverables in its marketing and communications. We need to challenge ourselves to produce artifacts that show progress to educate the market on what we are doing. Trust over IP needs to be seen for being more impactful and influential.

Options - open discussion

  • David Luchukopened a discussion on potential options for increasing revenue by highlighting possible changes to membership fee structures, potential to pursue a membership drive, opportunity to seek targeted funding through crowdsourcing and fee-for-service approaches such as external certification.
  • Jim St.Clair observed that these options are mutually supportive and all ultimately tie back to demand in the market for Trust over IP expertise and products.
  • Drummond Reed asked about the role Linux Foundation plays in determining how Trust over IP spends its operating budget.
  • Darrell O'Donnell added that our Foundations needs to better understand what we have access to from Linux directly.
    • David Luchuk reiterated that Linux Foundation aims to fully understand what Trust over IP aims to achieve with its budget so that the community benefits as much as possible from services it offers to projects. 
  • Will Groahraised the possibility of generating revenues by seeking sponsors for media content, such as webinars and podcasts.
  • Karl Kneissuggested Trust over IP aim to learn from external organizations such as ID2020 about how they generate revenue and mange their program operations.
  • Drummond Reedsuggested Linux Foundation projects be the starting point for learning about how other initiatives are funded and structured.
  • He also shifted the discussion to the question of membership fee structure and the possibility increasing the highest level of fees for large Steering members in our Foundation. 
  • John Jordansuggested that increasing Trust over IP's connection to Linux Foundation leadership, so that our work is more visible and better understood, will help create opportunities to grow.
  • Jim St.Claircommented on the possibility that Trust over IP could seek grant funding, in some cases, and offer expertise as an independent body as a service with fees attached.
  • Darrell O'Donnellraised the difficulty this could create in terms of portioning the work, credit and revenue among participants.
  • John Jordanindicated he wasn't convinced this sort of activity was in scope for our community.
  • Jim St.Clairasked for clarification on Trust over IP's legal status and its ability to apply for grants, charge fees, offer services.
    • David Luchuk committed to seek further clarity from Linux Foundation.

Conclusions and Next Steps

  • Drummond Reed suggested that Trust over IP should set itself the goal raising its profile with, and getting the attention of, Linux Foundation leadership to further its goals and pursuing options to increase revenues.

Action items

  • David Luchuk to follow up with Linux Foundation and JDF to request information regarding how other Linux projects generate revenue and structure their operations, as well as to clarify Trust over IP's legal status and ability to generate new revenue through various means.

  • No labels