diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6c9540523bba1408792e62e7ba26338a497bfd6a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+*.aux
+*.fdb_latexmk
+*.fls
+*.knowngood
+*.log
+*.out
+*.pdf
+*.tex
+*.toc
+noun_Book_861143.svg
+noun_Book_861143_ltgreen.svg
+noun_Email_3027864.svg
+noun_Email_3027864_ltgreen.svg
+noun_Key_1785639.svg
+noun_Key_1785639_crop.svg
+noun_Key_1785639_ltgreen.svg
+noun_Telephone_2591756.svg
+noun_Telephone_2591756_ltgreen.svg
+svg-inkscape
+
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..f1fdb9da3a88d2ad6bcb6db2f0dafbac64a41a58
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+
+### The upstream master version of this Makefile lives here:
+###
+### https://github.com/OpenTechStrategies/ots-doctools/blob/master/ext-Makefile
+###
+### A copy of this Makefile will often be included in a document
+### source tree, because for people who build documents, it's very
+### convenient to just run 'make' or 'make some_document_name.pdf' and
+### have the desired thing happen. This Makefile then just forwards
+### all the action to the much more sophisticated Makefile found at
+### ${OTS_DOCTOOLS_DIR}/Makefile. Therefore, please try not to make
+### changes here; instead, put any improvements in the other Makefile.
+
+.PHONY: default check
+
+# The order of the rules below is important; change only with care.
+
+default: check
+ @make -s -f ${OTS_DOCTOOLS_DIR}/Makefile
+
+%: check
+ @make -s -f ${OTS_DOCTOOLS_DIR}/Makefile $@
+
+check:
+ @if [ "${OTS_DOCTOOLS_DIR}X" = "X" ]; then \
+ echo ""; \
+ echo "ERROR: Your OTS_DOCTOOLS_DIR env var is not set up yet."; \
+ echo " Please see this repository for instructions:"; \
+ echo " https://github.com/OpenTechStrategies/ots-doctools."; \
+ echo ""; \
+ exit 1; \
+ fi
diff --git a/dosp-survey.ltx b/dosp-survey.ltx
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..5158a8221f6be685fe23b93a5ea3ab3bbcb5731b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/dosp-survey.ltx
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
+---
+title: "Delayed Open Source Publication:\\\\A Survey of Past and Current Practices"
+date: TBD Nov 2023
+draft: true
+---
+
+%% extends "report.ltx"
+
+\BLOCK{block preamble}
+\BLOCK{endblock}
+
+\BLOCK{block body}
+
+\begin{center}
+ Seth Schoen, Karl Fogel, James Vasile
+\end{center}
+
+\renewcommand*{\contentsname}{} % Get rid of "Contents" from top of TOC
+\tableofcontents
+\addtocontents{toc}{\protect\thispagestyle{empty}} % no page numbers
+
+\setcounter{page}{1}
+
+\newpage
+
+\numberedsection{Executive Summary}\label{executive-summary}
+
+\otsfirstterm{Delayed Open Source Publication} (DOSP) is the practice
+of distributing or publicly deploying software under a proprietary
+license at first, then subsequently --- and in a planned fashion ---
+publishing that software release's source code under an open source
+license.\footnote{Note that this definition deliberately does not
+ include \foreignphrase{ad hoc} or improvisatory open source releases
+ of formerly proprietary code. For example, the 1998 release of the
+ Netscape Navigator source code, which through further development
+ eventually became Mozilla Firefox, is \emph{not} an example of DOSP.
+ This report is examines the history and effects of DOSP practiced as
+ a conscious strategy; the effect of unplanned and unpredicted open
+ source publication is also an interesting topic, but a separate
+ one.}
+
+Software produces have practiced DOSP throughout the history of free
+and open source software.\footnote{We use the terms ``free software''
+ and ``open source software'' synonymously throughout this report.}
+However, surveying this phenomenon at a high level, from its
+beginnings through today, shows some clear trends:
+
+\emph{TBD: Everything below is tentative, draft, still a
+ work-in-progress, etc. Feel free to read and comment, but please do
+ not consider anything from this point on to reflect the settled
+ opinions of the authors nor of any organizations.}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+
+ \item The rise of the Business Source License (BUSL).
+
+ Use of BUSL is really taking off.
+
+ Deserves its own section --- see Section \ref{busl}.
+
+ \item Delayed unconditional release.
+
+ Planned OSS releases with just a pre-defined time delay.
+
+ \item Delayed event-driven regular release.
+
+ OSS publication happens regularly, but is driven each time by some
+ regular event (e.g., the publication of the latest proprietary
+ version, which prompts the previous version to now be open
+ sourced).
+
+ \item Delayed conditional release.
+
+ "We'll publish this as open source as soon as we get funding" or
+ "as soon as we find the right non-profit home for it", etc.
+
+\end{itemize}
+
+There are also post-hoc or unscheduled releases, where the authors
+didn't originally plan to release the software as open source but
+eventually decide to do so. These aren't technically in scope, but we
+should give some examples somewhere --- maybe in a footnote or
+appendix --- just to make it clear that it's something that happens.
+
+\numberedsection{The Business Source License (BUSL)}\label{busl}
+
+TBD Include BUSL's precursors here, e.g., TGPPL, maybe others?
+
+How long are the delay periods typically?
+
+What are the eventual OSS "destination" licenses are?
+
+See also the CC report about springing licenses (\ref{sources}).
+
+\numberedsection{Some Section}\label{some-section}
+
+TBD
+
+\subsection{Some Subsection}\label{some-subsection}
+
+TBD
+
+\numberedsection{Sources and References}\label{sources}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+
+\item \otscite{Creative Commons Final Report: On the Viability and
+ Development of Springing Licenses}\\
+ \otsurl{https://creativecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Springing-licenses-FINAL.pdf}
+
+\end{itemize}
+
+\numberedsection{Acknowledgements}\label{acknowledgements-sow}
+
+TBD
+
+\BLOCK{endblock}