There is software you discover. And there is software you never let go of.
Immich belongs to the second category. An open source photo and video service that does what Google Photos or Apple iCloud do — except you remain the owner. Your own pictures. Your own data. Your own infrastructure.
Anyone who has looked at Immich once knows: it is good. Very good. Modern, fast, well thought out. And it is free.
But this is not primarily about Immich as a tool. It is about Immich as proof.
Honesty as a business model
Immich costs nothing. The developers essentially say: “Take it. Use it. If you can and want to, support us. If not, that is fine too.”
That sounds harmless. It is not.
In a world where every SaaS service disappears behind a paywall, where every click is tracked and every behavior analyzed to be monetized, this attitude is almost rebellious.
No pressure. No coercion. Simply: we build something great. Use it. And if it means something to you, help out.
That is not naive. That is a statement about how software should be.
The other side of the coin
Then there is the other side. And here it gets nuanced.
There are companies that generate billions in revenue. That run on Linux. That store their data with PostgreSQL. That build their cloud infrastructure on Kubernetes. That use open source tools daily without which they would not exist.
And what do they give back?
Some give back a great deal. Companies like Google, Meta, or Amazon invest heavily in open source — whether through paid developer positions, foundations, or direct funding programs. Red Hat exists only because Canonical pioneered the model. The Linux Foundation, the Open Source Initiative, the Apache Software Foundation — all of these are answers to precisely this question. There are role models. And they are impressive.
But there are also the others. The free-riders. Companies that use the same infrastructure, draw the same profit from it — and give nothing back. Not financially. Not through developers. Not through documentation. Not through bug reports.
The math is simple: these companies earn their money partly because open source software keeps costs down that they would otherwise have. Licenses. Maintenance. Support. And they treat this software as infrastructure that costs them nothing and simply exists.
That is not an accident. That is a decision. And decisions can be changed.
Somebody always pays the bill
The developers, the maintainers, the people who write a security patch at three in the morning because a bug was discovered — they do not do it out of pure altruism. They do it because they believe that what they build is valuable.
And it is valuable. It is the most valuable part of digital infrastructure.
The question is not whether open source should be paid for. The question is why it has not already happened automatically.
A proposal that should not need proposing
Imagine this: there were rules. Clear, fair, respectful rules.
Companies above a certain size contribute to the open source projects they use. Not as a penalty. Not as a tax. As recognition.
Five dollars a month. Ten. Fifty. Depending on size, depending on usage. It is not about making the projects rich. It is about the people who keep these projects alive being able to rely on something.
Thousands of companies each paying a small amount adds up to something that makes a difference. And those who can and want to pay more — we respect them for it.
Why this matters
Because open source is not idealism. Because it is the infrastructure everything stands on. And because infrastructure needs to be maintained.
When the people who have great ideas and turn them into working software are also properly compensated, something simple happens: they can focus. They can keep building. They can get better. This cycle — good ideas lead to good software, good software is used and valued, the creators can keep working — is no pipe dream. It is an automatism that only needs one final step: that appreciation becomes measurable.
The gap between rhetoric and reality
Everyone says: open source is great. Everyone uses it. And almost nobody acts accordingly.
That is not an accusation. That is an observation. And observations can be changed.
The question is whether we are ready to understand the difference between “using at no cost” and “valuing.”
How we live it
At libcom.de, this is not a theoretical concept. It is everyday practice.
The software we deploy, configure, and manage is almost exclusively open source. Linux. PostgreSQL. nginx. Docker. Kubernetes. And yes — tools like Immich that show where this could all be heading.
But we do not just take. We also give back.
The support we provide is mostly the kind that rarely takes center stage but without which no community functions: documentation. Bug reporting. Flagging issues that would otherwise go unnoticed. Writing up problems so others do not make the same mistake. These are not grand gestures. But they are necessary. And they are the first step.
The next step — financial contributions to the projects that make our daily work possible — is still outstanding. For now. 😉
Open source is the perfect solution. The technology is there. The quality is there. The community is there.
What is missing is a fair way to compensate the people who keep it alive. Not out of pity. Out of respect.
And if we achieve that, everyone wins.