Money isnt the bad thing. Money isnt why companies like Microsoft and google are bad. Its control. In linux everyone has their hand in the pie such that no one can control it. The person at the helm linus torvalds has proven to be a good leader and not bias towards any corporation in particular.

Even Richard Stallman uses Linux.

All of those companies use servers. And all of those servers run Linux. Linux is the backbone of the web.

Linus Torvalds, the creator of the Linux kernel, owns the Linux trademark. He is currently the lead developer, and he approves and merges the code contributions from each of the “areas” (idk the right term for them) into the main branch for release versions.

The Linux kernel is distributed by The Linux Kernel Organization, a “California Public Benefit Corporation”. It’s “recognized by the IRS as a 501©3 private operating foundation”.

They are managed by The Linux Foundation which is “a 501©6 non-profit”.

It’s not “sold” to big corporations, because none of these companies are publicly traded.

But companies do use Linux massively. It has a massive market share in the server space. That’s why the Linux Foundation has a board of directors with many people from big tech corps.

Like other FOSS projects, Linux couldn’t really exist (the way it does) without sponsors and contributors. Companies sponsor its development to help improve and maintain the kernel, and in return they can use it for their needs. That’s how maintainers are compensated for their work. Many contributions are also from companies who add code to help adapt the kernel for their needs.

But because of the project’s licensing and leadership, privacy and transparency are protected. The kernel doesn’t collect or send user data to any company or server. If someone writes code that does that, leadership would probably not merge it anyways, but even if, any person could check (more frequently, “audit”) the code and remove it or choose to not use the project. Anyone is free to “fork” the kernel to make modifications or go a different direction, assuming they follow the license.

Now for desktop Linux distros, like Linux Mint, there’s other software that you should also think about its features and management, and whether that is “safe” too. Out of the box, things like Systemd (init process) or Cinnamon (desktop environment) are maintained and distributed by different groups. IMO for Linux Mint: it’s safe and protects privacy. But that’s subjective, it’s always good to be critical and to form your own opinions! :)

Like everyone else said, funding=/=ownership. I do suspect, however, that part of why these big tech companies fund Linux is because they rely on something built on Linux in one way or another. Linux tends to be the better options for things like servers, low processing devices, and more, and if they keep funding it, it continues to exist so they can use it. You’d be surprised about how much of the world actually uses Linux in some way.

In terms of being “safe,” if you mean in terms of data collection/privacy, just because big companies have an interest in Linux, that does not mean your Linux Mint install is sending telemetry back to those big companies with your personal data.

Big companies have an interest in Linux because Linux is the backbone of server infrastructure all over the world. They contribute to the code, but the code is open source, so the community could see if they were putting some kind of telemetry into open source projects, or the community could simply fork the code if a big company tried to do some other objectionable thing.

Those big tech companies benefit from Linux just like you do, so they spend money to fund its development. They also have engineers working on it.

So, no, it’s not sold to US big tech. It is, in part, funded by US big tech.

Define ‘sold’ because everyone has its own understanding of what that term means. What are you worried about?