This doesn't sound like a new funding model. Releasing a free open-source product as a "teaser", and then charging for things like: support, customisation, add-ons, security patches for old versions, etc. is already done, and is IMO the best way to make money from open source. Canonical, Red Hat, Elastic Co, and many more already do this.<p>So I'm not saying the article is wrong at all in its assessment, just that it shouldn't claim to be something new.