Unless the charter leaves room for such a drastic pivot, I'm not sure how well this would hold up. Whether the original charter is binding is up for lawyers to debate, but as written it seems to spell out the mission clearly and with little wiggle room for interpretation. Maybe they could go after the definition of when open sourcing would benefit the public?
>>_heimd+(OP)
Other possibility is that they claim they spent the non-profut funds prior to going for-profit? It would be dubious to claim damages if the entity was effectively bankrupt prior to for profit creation.
>>lumost+B6
Wouldn't that require notification to all interested parties of the nonprofit since its effectively killing off the nonprofit and starting a new entity?