Foundation vs Commercial Entity
Separation exists so stewardship does not collapse into revenue capture.
Why separation matters
If consequential claims should not be governed by unilateral authority, then stewardship cannot become a function of commercial success. The Foundation stewards boundaries and shared goods. The commercial entity builds, integrates, operates, and delivers. These roles must remain distinct.
Two distinct roles in one ecosystem
Commercial innovation may exist around initiatives such as Locate without granting authority over governance, truth claims, or shared ecosystem legitimacy.
Foundation
Commercial entity
Stewards shared ecosystem goods, role boundaries, and institutional legitimacy
Builds integrations, tooling, managed services, and ecosystem-facing products
Maintains specifications, standards, and governance discipline
Monetizes services around the ecosystem where appropriate
Commissions audits and preserves public legibility around consequential mechanisms
Supports onboarding, partnerships, operational tooling, and implementation services
Should not collapse stewardship into product operations or revenue logic
Should not convert commercial success into authority over governance or truth claims
Should not offer exclusive licensing or preferential ecosystem arrangements
May innovate around initiatives such as Locate without defining the Foundation’s stewardship role
Governance boundaries
Commercial success does not confer unilateral authority over core governance parameters.
- Commercial actors should not unilaterally alter core governance parameters or shared ecosystem rules.
- Related-party arrangements should be disclosed publicly.
- The Foundation should not grant exclusive licensing or preferential integrations.
- Governance evolution should be documented before material authority changes take effect.