4 ms·

The whole "you can use it until you reach $X of revenue" is a reason I just won't touch this. It's really weird, and it's none of their business how I earn my l

The whole "you can use it until you reach $X of revenue" is a reason I just won't touch this. It's really weird, and it's none of their business how I earn my living. (Ironically, I make $0 from software, but it's the principle of it that sticks in my craw) I'll stick with Lazarus / Free Pascal until they get rid of that one weird trick.

marginalia_nu 3y ago
Why? Seems like a very good license for this category of software. They get paid if if and only if you get paid, their interests are perfectly aligned with your interests.
- T-A 3y ago
  Ask yourself how they will know if and how much you get paid. I'm not downloading their stuff just to find out, but it seems like a safe bet that the license agreement grants them the right to audit you, and requires you to provide any documentation (like bank and tax statements) they deem necessary to do so. In order to know whom to audit, they are probably scanning app stores and software sites for apps made with Delphi. Personally identifiable telemetry and/or developer IDs embedded in each executable also wouldn't surprise me.
  - kwanbix 3y ago
    As far as I know, they trust that you would tell them as soon as you reach that level.
  - bruce511 3y ago
    I confess I'm not a delphi user, but I've used licenses like this in other places. I would be really surprised if they have any of the items you hypothesise. (Maybe an actual delphi user can comment.) The short answer (I cases I have experienced) is that they don't need to do any of this. If you use it past that point you are in violation of the license. If you choose to do that (or, you know, just pirate it) then you run existential business risk. If you think saving a few $ when you have a business making cash, then take the risk. In other words, businesses making money will tend to spend money because it's a good idea, from a business point of view, to do that.
    - T-A 3y ago
      > I would be really surprised if they have any of the items you hypothesise Turns out their "Software License and Support Agreement" is online. [1] Some relevant excerpts: Embarcadero will collect information about your use of the Community Edition for auditing purposes and improve our products and services. For more information about our collection, use and disclosure of personal data, please review Embarcadero's Privacy Statement at https://www.embarcadero.com/privacy-statement https://www.embarcadero.com/privacy-statement. Curiously, clicking the link above does not produce any privacy statement, it just redirects to a generic 'legal' page. [2] If Licensee is entering into this Agreement as an entity (e.g., as a corporation, a partnership, or other organization) or as an individual, Licensor may, at its expense, audit (electronic or otherwise) Licensee’s records and systems as they may relate to the use of Products, including, but not limited to, the number of copies of the Product in use by Licensee, the designated CPU(s) on which the Product is installed, the access of the Product including access to machine IDs, serial numbers and related information. As part of any such audit, Licensor or its authorized representative will have the additional right, on fifteen (15) days’ prior notice to Licensee, to inspect Licensee or the Named User’s records, systems and facilities, including machine IDs, serial numbers and related information, to verify that the installation, use of, and access to any and all Product is in conformance with this Agreement and its applicable terms. Additionally, within fifteen (15) days of such prior notice for audit, Licensee will provide Licensor all records and information requested by Licensor in order to verify that the installation, use and/or access of the Product is in conformance with this Agreement. Licensee and the Named User will provide full cooperation to enable any such audit. If Licensor determines that Licensee or the Named User’s installation, use of or access to the Product is not in conformity with this Agreement, Licensee will immediately take such steps as are necessary to bring Licensee and the Named Users’ installation, use and/or access into compliance with this Agreement, and pay the reasonable costs of the audit, in addition to any penalties, fees, or other remedies available to Licensor at law. Any such audit shall be conducted during regular business hours at Licensee’s facilities and shall not unreasonably interfere with Licensee’s business activities. If an audit reveals that Licensee has underpaid fees to Licensor, Licensee shall be invoiced for such underpaid fees (based on the list prices in effect at the time the audit is completed); and if the underpaid fees exceed 5% of the License fees already paid, then Licensee shall also pay Licensor the reasonable costs of conducting the audit. [1] https://www.embarcadero.com/products/rad-studio/rad-studio-eula https://www.embarcadero.com/products/rad-studio/rad-studio-e... [2] https://www.ideracorp.com/legal/embarcadero https://www.ideracorp.com/legal/embarcadero
  - rob74 3y ago
    Hmmm, yeah, sounds like actually doing that would cost them much more than what they could possibly gain from it...
    - T-A 3y ago
      Serously? Check out their license prices: https://www.embarcadero.com/app-development-tools-store/delphi https://www.embarcadero.com/app-development-tools-store/delp...
- nunobrito 3y ago
  It is a very good license. As seen so often on the Internet, that vocal minority who complains are the same bunch who wouldn't use the IDE to start with. I just wish this kind of thing would have been available 15 years ago, would likely have gave a better life to Delphi which is so far in my experience the best builder for IDE-based apps.
jve 3y ago
I do prefer this model when companies open up their products and make them usable for someone who just won't afford it for personal use. I.e Visual Studio (the IDE)
bjoli 3y ago
For someone like me it is a great agreement. I would install this and start play around and if I liked it I would try to build something and in the end, if it made money, I would buy the product. It is a much better agreement than a 30 day trial.
truckerbill 3y ago
This attitude is why we have adware and electron apps everywhere - though the pricing model could be tweaked a little. Unreal engine gets it right
pjmlp 3y ago
I rather much prefer this, than giving away fake FOSS that gets closed down as soon as there is no more VC money for free beer.
- badsectoracula 3y ago
  Something either is or isn't FOSS, there is no "fake". If nobody wants to pick up maintenance after the original developers pick up their bags and move on doesn't make something any less of FOSS.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    It is, because it was based on an hidden agenda of "bait and switch".
  - nunobrito 3y ago
    Oracle and RedHat laughing their a++ out while reading this comment. Try using RedHat Linux without a paid from them and complain all the way to the court that "it is FOSS".
    - badsectoracula 3y ago
      I don't know what does you mean with "using RedHat Linux", but if it is FOSS then i can use it as i want. If i can't then it isn't FOSS. There is no middle ground there, there is a widely accepted definition about what FOSS is and being able to run it as i want is a major aspect of it.
      - nunobrito 3y ago
        That just reveals lack of experience on the topic, my suggestion is to take some time to look into the licensing model of both cases I've suggested earlier and learn why a middle ground exists. You're not an expert on the topic and very likely this kind of licensing knowledge is not even relevant to your daily life. Nevertheless, there are nuances on OSS licensing that differ drastically from what you understand as "widely accepted definition".
benterix 3y ago
Seems really fair to me and I wish it was widely adopted as it's good for both sides.
adlpz 3y ago
What makes me uneasy is that it's the business or individual's whole revenue. Not the revenue generated by the app created with Delphi. That's 100% clear form the FAQ. So if I'm a freelancer, say, doing DB management, and I make 5k in a year, then I cannot get the Community Edition. The whole thing is weird and reaches way to deep into what I do apart from writing Delphi for my taste. I think I'd just rather prefer it being a commercial product with a reasonable freelance/small-business plan of, like, $200/yr up to $100k revenue or whatever. The current jump of free to essentially students to $1.5k + $500/yr is too steep to risk it with anything resembling a side project.
kwanbix 3y ago
The only problem I see, is that 5000 per year is very low, almost 400 dollars per month. It means that if I make 500 dollars per month, I have to pay 165 to Embarcadero. Makes no sense. I think more reasonable would be at least 24.000 per year, 2000 per month, and of course, net. By the way, Delphi is my favorite language, so is not anything against it, I just think that Delphi is too expensive to start with.
kcplate 3y ago
The concept wasn’t weird to me but the revenue threshold of $5k was.
ceeam 3y ago
Also, their "license" expires after a year and you have to re-obtain your free keys or reinstall it altogether. Pretty weird.

marginalia_nu 3y ago

Why? Seems like a very good license for this category of software. They get paid if if and only if you get paid, their interests are perfectly aligned with your interests.

T-A 3y ago
Ask yourself how they will know if and how much you get paid. I'm not downloading their stuff just to find out, but it seems like a safe bet that the license agreement grants them the right to audit you, and requires you to provide any documentation (like bank and tax statements) they deem necessary to do so. In order to know whom to audit, they are probably scanning app stores and software sites for apps made with Delphi. Personally identifiable telemetry and/or developer IDs embedded in each executable also wouldn't surprise me.
- kwanbix 3y ago
  As far as I know, they trust that you would tell them as soon as you reach that level.
- bruce511 3y ago
  I confess I'm not a delphi user, but I've used licenses like this in other places. I would be really surprised if they have any of the items you hypothesise. (Maybe an actual delphi user can comment.) The short answer (I cases I have experienced) is that they don't need to do any of this. If you use it past that point you are in violation of the license. If you choose to do that (or, you know, just pirate it) then you run existential business risk. If you think saving a few $ when you have a business making cash, then take the risk. In other words, businesses making money will tend to spend money because it's a good idea, from a business point of view, to do that.
  - T-A 3y ago
    > I would be really surprised if they have any of the items you hypothesise Turns out their "Software License and Support Agreement" is online. [1] Some relevant excerpts: Embarcadero will collect information about your use of the Community Edition for auditing purposes and improve our products and services. For more information about our collection, use and disclosure of personal data, please review Embarcadero's Privacy Statement at https://www.embarcadero.com/privacy-statement https://www.embarcadero.com/privacy-statement. Curiously, clicking the link above does not produce any privacy statement, it just redirects to a generic 'legal' page. [2] If Licensee is entering into this Agreement as an entity (e.g., as a corporation, a partnership, or other organization) or as an individual, Licensor may, at its expense, audit (electronic or otherwise) Licensee’s records and systems as they may relate to the use of Products, including, but not limited to, the number of copies of the Product in use by Licensee, the designated CPU(s) on which the Product is installed, the access of the Product including access to machine IDs, serial numbers and related information. As part of any such audit, Licensor or its authorized representative will have the additional right, on fifteen (15) days’ prior notice to Licensee, to inspect Licensee or the Named User’s records, systems and facilities, including machine IDs, serial numbers and related information, to verify that the installation, use of, and access to any and all Product is in conformance with this Agreement and its applicable terms. Additionally, within fifteen (15) days of such prior notice for audit, Licensee will provide Licensor all records and information requested by Licensor in order to verify that the installation, use and/or access of the Product is in conformance with this Agreement. Licensee and the Named User will provide full cooperation to enable any such audit. If Licensor determines that Licensee or the Named User’s installation, use of or access to the Product is not in conformity with this Agreement, Licensee will immediately take such steps as are necessary to bring Licensee and the Named Users’ installation, use and/or access into compliance with this Agreement, and pay the reasonable costs of the audit, in addition to any penalties, fees, or other remedies available to Licensor at law. Any such audit shall be conducted during regular business hours at Licensee’s facilities and shall not unreasonably interfere with Licensee’s business activities. If an audit reveals that Licensee has underpaid fees to Licensor, Licensee shall be invoiced for such underpaid fees (based on the list prices in effect at the time the audit is completed); and if the underpaid fees exceed 5% of the License fees already paid, then Licensee shall also pay Licensor the reasonable costs of conducting the audit. [1] https://www.embarcadero.com/products/rad-studio/rad-studio-eula https://www.embarcadero.com/products/rad-studio/rad-studio-e... [2] https://www.ideracorp.com/legal/embarcadero https://www.ideracorp.com/legal/embarcadero
- rob74 3y ago
  Hmmm, yeah, sounds like actually doing that would cost them much more than what they could possibly gain from it...
  - T-A 3y ago
    Serously? Check out their license prices: https://www.embarcadero.com/app-development-tools-store/delphi https://www.embarcadero.com/app-development-tools-store/delp...
nunobrito 3y ago
It is a very good license. As seen so often on the Internet, that vocal minority who complains are the same bunch who wouldn't use the IDE to start with. I just wish this kind of thing would have been available 15 years ago, would likely have gave a better life to Delphi which is so far in my experience the best builder for IDE-based apps.

jve 3y ago

I do prefer this model when companies open up their products and make them usable for someone who just won't afford it for personal use. I.e Visual Studio (the IDE)

bjoli 3y ago

For someone like me it is a great agreement. I would install this and start play around and if I liked it I would try to build something and in the end, if it made money, I would buy the product. It is a much better agreement than a 30 day trial.

truckerbill 3y ago

This attitude is why we have adware and electron apps everywhere - though the pricing model could be tweaked a little. Unreal engine gets it right

pjmlp 3y ago

I rather much prefer this, than giving away fake FOSS that gets closed down as soon as there is no more VC money for free beer.

badsectoracula 3y ago
Something either is or isn't FOSS, there is no "fake". If nobody wants to pick up maintenance after the original developers pick up their bags and move on doesn't make something any less of FOSS.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  It is, because it was based on an hidden agenda of "bait and switch".
- nunobrito 3y ago
  Oracle and RedHat laughing their a++ out while reading this comment. Try using RedHat Linux without a paid from them and complain all the way to the court that "it is FOSS".
  - badsectoracula 3y ago
    I don't know what does you mean with "using RedHat Linux", but if it is FOSS then i can use it as i want. If i can't then it isn't FOSS. There is no middle ground there, there is a widely accepted definition about what FOSS is and being able to run it as i want is a major aspect of it.
    - nunobrito 3y ago
      That just reveals lack of experience on the topic, my suggestion is to take some time to look into the licensing model of both cases I've suggested earlier and learn why a middle ground exists. You're not an expert on the topic and very likely this kind of licensing knowledge is not even relevant to your daily life. Nevertheless, there are nuances on OSS licensing that differ drastically from what you understand as "widely accepted definition".

benterix 3y ago

Seems really fair to me and I wish it was widely adopted as it's good for both sides.

adlpz 3y ago

What makes me uneasy is that it's the business or individual's whole revenue. Not the revenue generated by the app created with Delphi. That's 100% clear form the FAQ. So if I'm a freelancer, say, doing DB management, and I make 5k in a year, then I cannot get the Community Edition. The whole thing is weird and reaches way to deep into what I do apart from writing Delphi for my taste. I think I'd just rather prefer it being a commercial product with a reasonable freelance/small-business plan of, like, $200/yr up to $100k revenue or whatever. The current jump of free to essentially students to $1.5k + $500/yr is too steep to risk it with anything resembling a side project.

kwanbix 3y ago

The only problem I see, is that 5000 per year is very low, almost 400 dollars per month. It means that if I make 500 dollars per month, I have to pay 165 to Embarcadero. Makes no sense. I think more reasonable would be at least 24.000 per year, 2000 per month, and of course, net. By the way, Delphi is my favorite language, so is not anything against it, I just think that Delphi is too expensive to start with.

kcplate 3y ago

The concept wasn’t weird to me but the revenue threshold of $5k was.

ceeam 3y ago

Also, their "license" expires after a year and you have to re-obtain your free keys or reinstall it altogether. Pretty weird.