ARGVMI~1.PIFargv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.org
Aug 19, 2026, 5:20 PMWas it, though? Or did Mastodon gGmbH do something to deserve to lose its nonprofit status?
Did the German tax authority publicly explain the decision?
Replies
GunChleocgunchleoc@mastodon.scotAug 19, 2026, 5:31 PM@argv_minus_one @bazkie Many German authorities still live in the previous millennium and don't get online volunteering.
This is Mastodon's blog post about what happened: https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2024/04/mastodon-forms-new-u.s.-non-profit/#mastodons-non-profit-status-in-germany
The decision was not explained.
Aug 19, 2026, 6:13 PM@gunchleoc @argv_minus_one this is all very iffy
"Mastodon is bigger than any single entity, but it does need formal structures to operate effectively."
why? the network would run great without these corporate structures.
"The first of these was the Germany-based non-profit (Mastodon gGmbH). The second is now the U.S. non-profit (Mastodon, Inc.). Mastodon product development, user data, trademarks and copyright are in the hands of the German Mastodon gGmbH."
so the product development, user data, trademarks and copyright are in the hands of a for-profit. yay?
"Mastodon, Inc. creates the opportunity to raise funds from U.S. sources for the project at large, as well as build relationships and explore partnerships beyond Europe."
what relationships and partnership? why?
"While Mastodon is firmly based in Europe, we do not want to limit our engagement potential."
'engagement' 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮
- ARGVMI~1.PIFargv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.orgAug 19, 2026, 6:23 PM
Uh no, the copyright, on the code at least, is not in the hands of a for-profit. It's in the hands of Eugen Rochko and several hundred other individuals.
Quoth the README: “Copyright (c) 2016-2026 Eugen Rochko & other Mastodon contributors” (and there is a link to a list of said contributors)
There does not appear to be a CLA or required copyright assignment.
https://github.com/mastodon/.github/blob/9fbf5954df1918d6190b38469e52426df20294c5/CONTRIBUTING.md
https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/blob/07f91058a096bcfb92797e145bb7183ac5c6168f/CONTRIBUTING.md
- ARGVMI~1.PIFargv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.orgAug 19, 2026, 6:26 PM
And no, that isn't going to change in the future. Not unless they somehow convince those hundreds of people to all hand over their copyright to a for-profit, which uh, good luck with that.
The German for-profit does own the trademark, and you do need a corporate structure for that unless you want Rochko himself to own it, but this is FOSS and replacing problematic trademarks is old news (cf. Xorg, Iceweasel, Forgejo, etc etc etc).
- ARGVMI~1.PIFargv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.orgAug 19, 2026, 6:33 PM
What *does* concern me is that this for-profit runs the flagship instance with hundreds of thousands of active users. There isn't much stopping them from going full techbro with those users and turning off federation, even if the rest of the network will survive.
And they sure are talking like techbros these days.
- Aug 19, 2026, 6:56 PM
@argv_minus_one @gunchleoc exactly, that's my biggest worry as well!
- Aug 19, 2026, 6:55 PM
@argv_minus_one @gunchleoc I do not want a trademark to exist at all.
but so, the "copyright is owned by mastodon gmbh" part on their blog is a lie then, great :)
- ARGVMI~1.PIFargv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.orgAug 19, 2026, 7:04 PM
If the trademark doesn't exist at all, a bad actor will register it for you and then sue you for using your own project's name.
That's how Linux became ®'d.
- Aug 19, 2026, 7:20 PM
@argv_minus_one @gunchleoc ? afaik linux is trademarked by linus
I mean, if you're right, we could just go around and trademark, dunno, grep, or ls
- Aug 19, 2026, 7:30 PM
@argv_minus_one @gunchleoc
"Prior Use and Common Law Rights
The “First to Use” PrincipleUnlike some countries that operate on a “first to file” system, the United States law prioritizes “first to use.” This means actual use of a name in commerce establishes rights, even if the name isn’t federally registered.
Common Law Trademark RightsIf a business or individual uses a name for their goods or services, they can establish what are called common law rights. These rights are automatic from the moment the name is used publicly in commerce and can provide some limited protection, even without a registered trademark.
(..)
If someone else is using the name actively, they may have common law trademark rights that could block your registration, even if they never went through the official trademarking process."
https://www.etblaw.com/can-you-trademark-a-name-someone-else-is-using-but-did-not-trademark/
- ARGVMI~1.PIFargv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.orgAug 19, 2026, 7:31 PM
Yeah, I didn't say the Linux trademark is owned by a corporation, only that it exists as a trademark.
And yeah, the trademark registration was found invalid by a court, for the above reasons. Linus ended up owning the trademark because the judge awarded it to him.
But not before a costly court battle over the matter. Registering a trademark is cheaper and more reliable.
- Aug 19, 2026, 7:33 PM
@argv_minus_one @gunchleoc maybe. but linux is linus'. mastodon is everyone's. I still prefer no trademark.
to each their own* I guess maybe linux is also everyone's, at least somewhat. but I mean it was made as one guy's hobby project, while mastodon was made as a *social* network
- GunChleocgunchleoc@mastodon.scotAug 20, 2026, 9:08 AM
@bazkie @argv_minus_one Mastodon was also originally made as one guy's hobby project, only that he did the right thing and no longer owns it personally.
Accusing them of being liars is a bit over the top, don't you think?
- ARGVMI~1.PIFargv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.orgAug 20, 2026, 3:03 PM
In this day and age, when nothing is sacred and we're being betrayed at every turn by just about everyone, I hope you'll find it understandable that @bazkie and I are wary of yet another betrayal.
Especially since the betrayals are mostly coming from organizations that started talking corporate first, *then* betrayed, and Mastodon is talking corporate.