7 ms·
I like the approach and it seems to be definitely better for everyone, but how you monetize a library?
by 101008 6y ago
I like the approach and it seems to be definitely better for everyone, but how you monetize a library?
- randlet 6y agoYou can sell a library just as well as any other piece of software I think.
- freeone3000 6y agoNot really. Your market is different. Instead of selling to business managers seeking to solve a problem, you're selling to developers. Developers tend to like solving problems themselves, and you're competing versus free.
- chrisrhoden 6y agoThe definition being used here for libraries and services has both being marketed to developers. We're talking about APIs, not a web product with a UI etc. Services, in this article, doesn't refer to things that can only be built as services (e.g. because it queries a proprietary dataset) but those that might optionally be built as services (e.g. fetching and processing otherwise accessible data) and could, as easily, be built as a library.
- selfhoster11 6y agoThere's an ecosystem of paid libraries and tools around Java and C#. While developers might like to solve problems of their own, standards compliance is one place that they likely wouldn't want to tread their own path if they can help it. They've got work to do, and deadlines.
- pjmlp 6y agoOn the Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, Apple and Google developer ecosystems there are plenty of shops selling libraries. Basically where most devs selling commercial software live on.
- 0xbadcafebee 6y agoYou can totally sell libraries to business managers. You can sell sauteed rat's assholes on a stick to business managers, you just need the right sales pitch.
- vbezhenar 6y agoStealing a library is easier than stealing a service.
- luismedel 6y agoYes. I suppose it’s the same with installable software. But it sells anyway.
- vbezhenar 6y agoOne example of this is computer games. There are games like StarCraft 2, Diablo 3, where server is required even for solo-playing and it's not possible to play offline. I think that one of the reasons is to make it harder to crack a game (as you would need to re-implement server) and to make a cracked game objectively worse (as your implementation will not be as polished).
- pjmlp 6y agoAnd a crime in both cases. https://www.bsa.org/ https://www.bsa.org/
- PeterisP 6y agoIncluding a stolen library you in commercial software that you distribute is easy to do but also easy to detect, so it only means that you're willing to pay a triple of the price in damages.
- 6y ago
- malkia 6y agoFor example gamedev middleware is an example of that - be it individual library, for example audio: fmod, criware, wwise, miles, etc., or full blown game enines (unity, unreal, etc.). Just few examples.
- selfhoster11 6y agoDoes everything have to be about money? This is "Hacker" News, not "Monetize Everything" News.
- RohMin 6y agoHow are we to survive then
- aloisdg 6y agoby switching from a competitive money driven world to a cooperative one.
- Toutouxc 6y agoGreat, when does the spaceship launch?
- aae42 6y agoas if a spaceship launching anywhere would change anything
- lamp987 6y agoCommunism doesn't work.
- mnsc 6y agoCapitalism doesn't work.
- smoe 6y agoMaybe, if we could finally get out of the cold war mindset, we might realize that there are more than two black/white options to run a society.
- selfhoster11 6y agoI agree that communism failed, bo capitalism has failed too where it's not tightly regulated by the government to cull its worst tendencies.
- Igelau 6y agoSell a license. I can't think of a better example off the top of my head, but here's a case study: CKEditor has multiple commercial licensing plans: https://ckeditor.com/pricing/ https://ckeditor.com/pricing/
- cjvirtucio 6y agounipdf for golang is another example.
- 0xdky 6y agoBack in the days, RogueWave had a pretty solid customer base selling portable C++ standard libraries. I worked at 2 different companies and they both quite heavily depended on RogueWave STL.
- folex 6y agoYou may take a look at Fluence's ideas on that https://fluence.network https://fluence.network It basically allows you to share your code to others in exchange for a fee. If someone builds an app or service that uses your library, and it is paid within Fluence, you will receive a fee. This works transitively.
- gohbgl 6y agoIn an IP world you can license it. Otherwise you can crowd fund for new versions, ask for donations, offer support, etc.
- airstrike 6y agoCreate a service that uses the library and then monetize the service?
- eska 6y agoCall it a framework..
- alcover 6y agobut how you monetize a library? Oh that's a burning question for me. I'm finishing a C lib that - if all goes well - will be very useful. I worked hard on it and now I don't know how to license it. I'm okay with non-profit OSS projects to use it freely, but I need others to pay for it. How ? How do you express such a dual license ? And how do you ensure for-profit users reward you ? That's not the part I prefer in this project...
- mhh__ 6y agoGPLv3 with a commercial exception. Corporate suits don't like the GPL, so if they buy a commercial licence they support the project without having to redistribute (You can also offer support)
- alcover 6y agoGPLv3 with a commercial exception Thx. Do you mean GPL + my custom addendum ? How do you write it if you're not versed in `legalese` jargon ?
- mhh__ 6y agohttps://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/selling-exceptions https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/selling-exceptions for a little philosophy behind it, however it will always be the GPL OR a commercial licence rather than an amalgam of the two
- ben509 6y agoNotably, the FSF recommends against[1] modifying the GPL. And, you'd want to hire a lawyer to go over whatever scheme you're thinking of. It's easier to draft a separate license agreement if you're the sole copyright holder. If you're not the sole rights holder, if your project contains other GPL code, you'll need permission from the authors to license under terms other than the GPL. That would include patches from other authors, unless they sign the rights over to you. [1]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ModifyGPL https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ModifyGPL
- TeMPOraL 6y agoB2B, license per-developer-seat-year.
- 0xbadcafebee 6y agoCharge money for it? You know, like back in the stone age, when people charged money for software?
- zo1 6y agoIt's easy, you release it open source... Then make sure you have languages "officially" promote it in their documentation and have people adopt it thinking it's great and an actively developed project that's going to be around forever, etc... And then fork it, stop releasing security updates for the older (open-source) versions, and turn it into a product that you charge people for because corporates are now dependent on it. For a real-life example of it, see this blatant bait and switch fuckery: https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/26489 https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/26489
- asdff 6y agoYou put it on your resume and make your bread doing other jobs or freelance work, where you are now the top candidate in the pile thanks to the work you've done with your publically available library where anyone can inspect the source and see your handiwork. Engineers in tech always complain that there is no proof of good work, like someone in biochemistry with a stack of papers on their CV would have. Well, this is how you do it. You spend effort sharing ideas with the community knowing you won't necessarily make a dime off of them, just like the biochem person who doesn't get paid per paper, and not spend 100% of your personal efforts working for someone else in private on a for profit project you aren't at liberty to intimately discuss.
- rikroots 6y agoMaybe if you code up a library that meets a specific set of requirements, but you do it in a way so that using the library seems simple on the surface but, the deeper the end-user-developer goes, the more illogical stuff becomes. At that point you have a developer too invested in the work they've already done to abandon it: a developer in the market for a "... The Good Parts" or "... Cookbook" book. I was not thinking of Actionscript when I wrote this comment.
- thinkharderdev 6y agoThe way they were monetized before SaaS was a thing. You sell licenses to use them. You can't 100% prevent people from using them without a license but for the most part you don't really have to. A company with real assets is generally not going to use a cracked version of proprietary libraries and expose themselves to litigation.