3 ms·

There's nothing stopping you from charging money for FOSS software. Sell the first one for as much as it cost to write it.

otterley 12d ago
I assume you mean "sell it before you open source it." If you found one willing buyer while it was still closed source, odds are there are others. Why deprive yourself of additional income? Open sourcing does happen from closed source, but usually that's long after the income stream has exhausted itself (see, e.g., https://github.com/microsoft/ms-dos https://github.com/microsoft/ms-dos).
- limagnolia 12d ago
  Or before you make it. Lots of folks get paid to make open source- they are employees, contractors, and creators with patrons who pay them to create.
bigstrat2003 12d ago
There's nothing stopping you, true. But I think you will find that nobody is going to buy software for whatever thousands of dollars it took you to make it. So the limitation in this case is a practical one, not a legal or moral one.
- otterley 12d ago
  That suggests there's never been a viable market for commercial software at all, which is obviously wrong.
  - rpcope1 12d ago
    That's kind of black and white thinking though. No one is going to pay a million dollars for QuickBooks, but a lot of people paid several hundreds. Just because no one pays you to develop a new QuickBooks (at least pre LLM), doesn't mean there's not a market there.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 12d ago
      Okay, then sell it until you make a million bucks then open source it.
    - matheusmoreira 12d ago
      Isn't that the whole point of crowdfunding platforms like kickstarter? Developer presents the idea and how much it costs. If enough people pitch in, then the idea is funded, the developer gets the money as a lump sum and can turn the idea into reality. Why did this model fail?
- HeyLaughingBoy 12d ago
  I can't possibly take this at face value since it's obvious that people (businesses) pay others many tens or hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars to build software for them. So, what do you really mean?
horsawlarway 12d ago
Honestly, there's a real elegance to this model. I'd argue the best possible model for goods that have no marginal costs (aka IP) is the "pay me to create it" model. As in, let a creator decide how much they value creating the work. Then pay them that to create it - then release it free for everyone. --- No ridiculous societal restraints that cost time and money to enforce (poorly) as IP law. Compensation is happening. Creating is encouraged. Practical constraints make it unlikely we'll get much closer to this than Kickstarter (and equivalents) but it's a very honest model, that works with intellectual property by default.
- thayne 12d ago
  I think Kickstarter and similar are a great model for creating open source software. It's more problematic for maintaining it. It could work for some features and bugs, but it doesn't scale down super well (maybe have campaigns for a packet of related features and bugs?), and more importantly it isn't great to have security fixes dependent on a successful funding campaign.
daedrdev 12d ago
Are you aware of what FOSS stands for?
- yjftsjthsd-h 12d ago
  You know that F stands for free as in freedom not beer?

otterley 12d ago

I assume you mean "sell it before you open source it." If you found one willing buyer while it was still closed source, odds are there are others. Why deprive yourself of additional income? Open sourcing does happen from closed source, but usually that's long after the income stream has exhausted itself (see, e.g., https://github.com/microsoft/ms-dos https://github.com/microsoft/ms-dos).

limagnolia 12d ago
Or before you make it. Lots of folks get paid to make open source- they are employees, contractors, and creators with patrons who pay them to create.

bigstrat2003 12d ago

There's nothing stopping you, true. But I think you will find that nobody is going to buy software for whatever thousands of dollars it took you to make it. So the limitation in this case is a practical one, not a legal or moral one.

otterley 12d ago
That suggests there's never been a viable market for commercial software at all, which is obviously wrong.
- rpcope1 12d ago
  That's kind of black and white thinking though. No one is going to pay a million dollars for QuickBooks, but a lot of people paid several hundreds. Just because no one pays you to develop a new QuickBooks (at least pre LLM), doesn't mean there's not a market there.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 12d ago
    Okay, then sell it until you make a million bucks then open source it.
  - matheusmoreira 12d ago
    Isn't that the whole point of crowdfunding platforms like kickstarter? Developer presents the idea and how much it costs. If enough people pitch in, then the idea is funded, the developer gets the money as a lump sum and can turn the idea into reality. Why did this model fail?
HeyLaughingBoy 12d ago
I can't possibly take this at face value since it's obvious that people (businesses) pay others many tens or hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars to build software for them. So, what do you really mean?

horsawlarway 12d ago

Honestly, there's a real elegance to this model. I'd argue the best possible model for goods that have no marginal costs (aka IP) is the "pay me to create it" model. As in, let a creator decide how much they value creating the work. Then pay them that to create it - then release it free for everyone. --- No ridiculous societal restraints that cost time and money to enforce (poorly) as IP law. Compensation is happening. Creating is encouraged. Practical constraints make it unlikely we'll get much closer to this than Kickstarter (and equivalents) but it's a very honest model, that works with intellectual property by default.

thayne 12d ago
I think Kickstarter and similar are a great model for creating open source software. It's more problematic for maintaining it. It could work for some features and bugs, but it doesn't scale down super well (maybe have campaigns for a packet of related features and bugs?), and more importantly it isn't great to have security fixes dependent on a successful funding campaign.

daedrdev 12d ago

Are you aware of what FOSS stands for?

yjftsjthsd-h 12d ago
You know that F stands for free as in freedom not beer?