4 ms·
I suppose one problem with this is when you release a new version that substantially overlaps with the previous version. If I release WidgetReader 2.0 that has
by quietbritishjim 6y ago
I suppose one problem with this is when you release a new version that substantially overlaps with the previous version. If I release WidgetReader 2.0 that has 90% of the code shared with WidgetReader 1.0, and only sell new licences to the new version, should I be obliged to allow free access to WidgetReader 1.0? What about when I release WidgetReader 1.1? Or if I give free upgrades to all existing licence holders to 1.0? (Free upgrades are actually most likely when the upgrade is especially small e.g. a patch to fix some bug, but by your rules they're almost the worst because now there are no supported installations of the old version left at all.)
For that matter, what if I rewrite the whole code base but keep the same general functionality and target audience - does that change things? If so then you've just disincentivised certain types of refactors even though they have very little impact on the users.
Of course there is a big gap, both in code and functionality, between Acrobat 1.0 and the current version but it's still the same product in theory, so it leaves open the question of where to draw the line.
- mrweasel 6y agoI don't think the argument was that you should hand over the source code. It's just that you shouldn't be able to legally go after others distributing the old version. There is an issue with the period right after your WidgetReader 2.0 is released. Most will be perfectly happy with version 1 (many may even prefer it) and you'll have a hard time selling the new version, given that you're competing with your own old and now free version. Perhaps it should be more like: 10 years after the end of life date. It's tricky, I want software companies to be able to make money on sell their software, and not having to rely on subscriptions, but I also feel that we should be able to legally copy 25 year old video games and software for DOS 6.22.
- quietbritishjim 6y agoI understood there was no pressure to release source code, I was just using source code overlap as a measure of similarity. An expiry time, like 10 years, sounds a lot more reasonable. It's a bit like the expiry for copyright and pantents, at least in their original concepts. Come to think of it, maybe the solution is simply to dramatically reduce copyright expiry, maybe to a simple fixed 10 years for creation point. That would probably benefit everything, not just software.
- nottorp 6y agoHow about when you release WidgetReader 31.0? Or maybe 201.0? Does WidgetReader 1.0 still have any value? Which is the case in TFA.