It very well could, either directly or indirectly. Imagine this: A crowdfunds project X which B works on, B uses a portion of their income to crowdfund project Y which C works on, C uses a portion of their income to crowdfund project Z which A works on, A uses a portion of their income to crowdfund project X which B works on. The circle is now closed. There is no reason the money can’t come full circle; if everything was crowdfunded it inevitably would.

I guess several times on this blog we’ve discussed what it would take for FOSS to be come a full-fledged mode of production, like peer production license and other appropriate institutions to share/protect earnings for commons participants.

On the other hand I think FOSS can certainly “disrupt capitalism” as is, even if not as a full mode, by undermining the scarcity needed as part of a successful commodification process. Of course one way this is employed is by different strains of capital in the info-tech ecosystem trying to disrupt each other’s business model, as Joel Kropotkin argued rather perceptively in his Strategy Letter V (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html). (Although he talks about a strategy to ‘commoditizing your complements’, when in the case of FOSS it might be better described as ‘common-ize your complements’).

I was thinking along the lines of how FOSS arguably also supports small producers and service providers by being a commons means-of-production allowing them to sell services more competitively with larger capital-intensive companies with a business model based on proprietary IP. I.E. akin to a move back to a more idealised form of 19th C market capitalism :- where firms have to compete much more directly on their ability to implement a solution more quickly and cheaply than others starting from a level playing field, rather than using market power based on size, or aiming to use/develop proprietary IP to establish monopolistic positions and thus rent-seek etc.

But then under capitalism, perhaps the interesting thing here is the built-in-limits to this process :- as if the underlying commons software of FOSS is _too_ good (in particular: too user-friendly and simple to set up for the non-expert), it would seem likely to increasingly reduce the market demand for these consultant’s services – clients would just do the job themselves. Yet the FOSS software has to be capable enough that it helps potential clients believe the service provider can implement a good solution with the platform.