The context
Docker, as everyone here may know, is a container control technology, allowing to create, start and stop containers, but also to create images (a complete system that the container will run). These images can be distributed by various means but one of the best known is the Docker Hubmanaged by a private company. It is therefore necessary to distinguish Dock free softwareDocker Hub the image repository and Docker the company driving development and the Hub.
Countless free software is available in the form of images hosted on the Docker Hub, and this is sometimes the preferred mode of distribution, especially for its simplicity. A docker run NOM-DE-L-IMAGE and you immediately execute what you want, without compiling or installing (this raises various questions, for example security, but that’s another story). So it’s no exaggeration to say that the Docker Hub is an important component of the free software ecosystem.
On the Docker Hub, you can create an account “for free” (that is to say, leaving personal data) and host your images there. More, and this is the important point, it only concerns individuals. If you want to work in a group, for example because it’s a big project, or because you want to avoid bus factor, you need an organization account (“Team” in Docker Hub terminology). There are also paid offers but we do not consider them here.
What happened
The Docker company has announced that free organizational accounts will be discontinued. From now on, any free software project that is not strictly single-user will have to pay. This announcement, and the speed and lack of discussion, elicited many reactions. It should indeed be noted that the company has not announced any derogatory measures for free software.
More precisely, to be entitled to free access for multi-user access (the Open Source program), it is not enough for the software to be free: you also need zero commercial activity, even the sale of services around the software or the paid development of additional functions make you lose the status (I quote: “ Not have a pathway to commercialization. Your organization must not seek to make a profit through services or by charging for higher tiers. “). Furthermore, there is no certainty as to the time and effort it will take to have this status recognized.
It is therefore a severe blow to free software. It illustrates once once more the fact that being under a free license is a necessary condition to ensure the sovereignty of individuals, but not a sufficient condition.