I've looked at the project and know people who use the bitcoin, and love what you're doing.  However, I've seen similar projects leaning on large companies, doing so for financial support and fortifying the project but at the same time, glorifying the company and being dependant on an entirely different system with a different ethic.  This happens because companies want to look good, and sometimes partly because they actually care.  Nevertheless, what may seem like a tactful move at first will guarantee the end of bitcoin as it should be.

I'm talking about offers from large companies, like Google, offering sponsorship and support.  Google is a great thing, and many righteous individuals work there who want to do good by communities like this one, however at the end of the day it is a company; it has shares and shareholders, and managers and directors who will act with Google as a corporation.  I don't mean to say Google is as ugly as something like Microsoft, but they still have the potential to be just as powerful as Microsoft one day and who knows what they will do with their power.

Accepting donations to the project from large companies is great, but as soon as they want their label flashed around or want a piece of paper they hope to hold you to court over signed then bits of bitcoin are dying.

I'm sure that most people agree with me and already think what I write here, as well as a few who think that corporation association is a good thing.  I merely wish to express my opinion here and hope that anyone who may have thought otherwise heeds my advise, whilst reassuring others who think what I think of our view.

Please excuse this post if it's not welcome in this topic, I hope it belongs here but I've only just entered this forum.

I am not sure that BitCoins can technically be sold out. It is just a protocol, right? Maybe corporations can buy specific implementations - they probably will. The existing BitCoin services are also corporations, I presume.

Yep and unlike the MiB they might even be able to do it without getting too totally in the bad graces of their friendly neighborhood Hackers.

Google Simmer of Code, anyone?

-MarkM-

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but, it seems to me that bitcoin doesn't need much more developpement, does it?

It hasn't been thouroughly tested for bugs and DoS attacks. It hasn't been peer reviewed by security experts.

Before that happens it's not suitable as a serious and reliable currency.

If Google (or another big firm) were to support BitCoin it'd probably be in the form of engineering hours and possibly mining capacity rather than direct donations. Given that neither Satoshi nor Gavin work for such a firm, I don't think there's much chance of corporate takeover.

I feel the opposite, the more popular bitcoin becomes, the more work needs to be done.

Security, robustness should be high on the priority list. Unlike other FOSS project where financial impacts are indirect, bitcoin software leaves very little margin for errors. A successful hack can cause massive and instantaneous damages.

It will also be nice to see implementations in other languages such as Java, Perl, Ruby etc. Having a (much) larger developer base to contribute or review the code will help.

Some peripheral projects mentioned on this forum:
    Bitcoin point-of-sale (POS & SDK)
    Bitcoin account hub (AH)
    Mobile clients
    Trading API
    Web of trust integration
    ...