I ask completely seriously.

As far as I know, the whole project is open source and is not as invasive as Xitter

    • cabbage@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      60 minutes ago

      Mastodon is non-proprietary software. So one person or company cannot own it in a meaningful sense.

      His foundation might own the copyright on the name and logo, so that bad actors can’t pretend to be them. That’s pretty much it.

    • Foni@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      No, he is not the owner of Mastodon. No, his company is not responsible for what happens there, because there is no company or similar. A non-profit foundation (chaired by Eugen Rochko) develops the software and launches it on mastodon.social, and that foundation does not even participate in what the rest of the instances do. They could go crazy tomorrow, sell the domain or change the software to make it more invasive, the rest of the instances would be sent to hell and the network would continue as if nothing had happened

    • stinerman [Ohio]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Yes. Mastodon is a product of Mastodon gGmbH. He is the BDFL (Benevolent Dictator for Life) of the software. Anyone can fork the software if they so choose and make their own.

      What I think @Foni@lemm.ee is trying to get at is that Mastodon is a non-profit and doesn’t have investors looking to make a return like Bluesky does. Mastodon is driven entirely by donations.