There are a number of factors you're not addressing, and are very convenient to overlook. One particular (example) is that it is no longer necessary to pay for

There are a number of factors you're not addressing, and are very convenient to overlook. One particular (example) is that it is no longer necessary to pay for software for typical (e.g., email, web browsing, Skype, music playing, spreadsheeting) activities with a computer. You can. You don't have to unless external forces constrain you to. Socially, an expectation is being created that useful software is without monetary charge. I would like the readers to extrapolate from this what happens as more users expect gratis software. If I was running a business, I would use 100% gratis software unless a really compelling reason otherwise was presented. As a software engineer, I usually recommend gratis software for most things... it works great! Why should I pay Microsoft/Oracle/etc when gratis software works so well? This means that non-gratis software companies (and their developers) are simply not receiving my dollars. Unfortunately us, we as software developers have to pay the bills, and gratis software is, well, gratis. Arguably, we can assume that software developers will continue to invent new and shinier things, useful to all, which people will pay for. But "past performance is no predictor of future performance", as stock prospectuses like saying, and I believe that to be a great statement about our industry. Who could have predicted the fall in 15 years of mainframes in 1970 [1]? I think that a viable business model for AGPL3 software still needs to come into fruition besides consulting/SaaS. Let's personalize this: I own a Macbook Pro, and have paid $0.00 for software on it; I use it probably 80% of the time I'm at home doing all sorts of geeky things. I feel bad for Mac app developers, but I don't need what they sell: gratis software does it for me. I've only paid for 2 pieces of app software on my personal computers in the last decade(not counting games - maybe I should?): - Microsoft Office for Mac (prior Mac) - Quicken (Once) Plus OSX 10.6, 10.4, and Windows 7. Until I come into a stiff requirement for a piece of proprietary software, I have no plans to change the 'use gratis/GPL software' model. It's worked well so far! I've bought about 4 (cheap) apps on the iPod, in contrast - the GPL is effectively banned, iirc. Of course, the GPL has caused some wonderful shared goods to come into being: gcc, emacs, Linux, etc. But those hard-working very smart developers don't receive money from me in general[2], because it's more financially efficient to use software gratis. I release my small amounts of public software under the AGPL3, because I believe in building a better world together, instead of grabbing each other's resources. But I think that we need to figure out a better way to make our bills get paid. To summarize: Someone around here referenced the idea of a post-scarcity world. I think common software is becoming a post-scarcity world, and I don't know how common app developers are going to survive and keep developing on those common apps. [1] probably a few visionaries, but besides them... :-) [2] modulo donations or swag