Sometimes I wonder whether Ubuntu is really an open source software company any more. Yes, yes, I realize Ubuntu is not a company at all but a free Linux distribution, GPL'd and open source by definition. But still, the Ubuntu distro is sponsored by a traditional for profit company, Canonical Ltd, and it is very fair to say that the distro would not exist without the company. Ubuntu describes itself on its web site as "a community developed and supported project," but in reality it has no separate existence from Canonical and that firm's owner and founder Mark Shuttleworth.

Legally speaking, "Ubuntu" is a trademark owned by Canonical. In practice, it's a brand. As far as I know, the Ubuntu project has no source of revenue other than the Ubuntu Foundation, which is funded by Canonical and Shuttleworth. Most of the key developers behind the Ubuntu distro work for Canonical or the Foundation. So really it isn't so unfair after all to treat Ubuntu as a proxy for Canonical Ltd. And therefore the question at the start of this post is legitimate, to wit: is Ubuntu really an open source – um, well – outfit?