What to do about COMMERCIAL packages NOT ported to 5.7?
Permalink
Less than a week ago Ryan @ mesuva asked "What to do about free packages ported to 5.7?" and the thread received some discussion that I think was valuable.
I ask this question not only because I have licenses for 5.6 that I doubt will be ported, but because I think it should at least give more valuable "food for thought" and/or discussion on a similar, related question (perhaps the other side of the same coin).
What happens if we have a license for an add-on we bought, and the developer does NOT update it, and we need it for 5.7+ sites, and decide to update it ourselves? mesuva pointed out in his free add-on scenario that he was talking about simple add-ons, but in this scenario, it could be for more complex ones as well. And I don't necessarily mean for release in the marketplace, although that should probably be discussed as well. If, however, we presume that it is not for release, then do I as the developer have the right to use my newly developed add-on on as many sites I develop as I need to? I think so.
This of course leads to more questions, and I expect some debate and discussion.
I ask this question not only because I have licenses for 5.6 that I doubt will be ported, but because I think it should at least give more valuable "food for thought" and/or discussion on a similar, related question (perhaps the other side of the same coin).
What happens if we have a license for an add-on we bought, and the developer does NOT update it, and we need it for 5.7+ sites, and decide to update it ourselves? mesuva pointed out in his free add-on scenario that he was talking about simple add-ons, but in this scenario, it could be for more complex ones as well. And I don't necessarily mean for release in the marketplace, although that should probably be discussed as well. If, however, we presume that it is not for release, then do I as the developer have the right to use my newly developed add-on on as many sites I develop as I need to? I think so.
This of course leads to more questions, and I expect some debate and discussion.
Once you have purchased an addon, as long as its just for the one site your license covers, you can make what changes you like to the code, including porting it to 5.7. You can use that one license however you want. But it remains just one license and you do not have the rights to any more than that one license, no matter how much work you have put into porting it.
If code was released with the standard marketplace license, that applies to both paid and free addons. The difference with free addons is that you can 'buy' as many licenses as you need to use with your own modifications to the code at zero cost per site.
Here is my attempt to classify the spectrum of developing and maintaining code for the marketplace, both free and paid.
a) Actively involved in supporting and porting to 5.7
b) Actively involved in 5.6, waiting for documentation for 5.7 or waiting for 5.7 to take off properly to make it worth their while or waiting for spare time to do the work.
c) Actively involved in 5.6, still undecided about 5.7
d) Actively involved in 5.6, no current intention of porting to 5.7
e) Was actively involved, still supports, but no time to port to 5.7
f) No longer actively involved, responds to contact.
g) No longer actively involved, not contactable.
h) Fire and forget. Released something with no intention or commitment to continuing to support it.
(a) and (b) you don't need to worry about because they will be supporting 5.7, it may just take a while.
Some of the developers falling between (b) or (c) and (f) could be open to offers for a joint project. You port the code, they release for 5.7 and give you a few licenses. You port the code, you release for 5.7, and you pay them a small commission on sales. You buy rights from them to port and release the code for 5.7... There are no doubt many other commercial deals that could be made. At least they are contactable and you can discuss possibilities with them.
The difficulty comes with (g) and (h). If you cant contact them, you cant discuss any sort of deal. If its a paid addon, they will have a paypal account registered with concrete5.org to receive their income and will have to contact Franz to be paid. Even then I suspect there are some user accounts accumulating a few $ that are abandoned.
With many addons belonging to (g) or (h), there is a good chance the addon is already obsolete and with have issues with 5.6, let alone 5.7. If the addon was genuinely useful, there is a good chance another developer has already released an alternative for 5.6 and that will fall into one of the contactable categories.
On the thread about free addons, I asked about applying lost property rules to addons. When an addon has value, that could become more difficult.
Maybe the marketplace license need a new clause about abandoned addons. That couldn't be applied retrospectively, but at least would make provision for future submissions.
If code was released with the standard marketplace license, that applies to both paid and free addons. The difference with free addons is that you can 'buy' as many licenses as you need to use with your own modifications to the code at zero cost per site.
Here is my attempt to classify the spectrum of developing and maintaining code for the marketplace, both free and paid.
a) Actively involved in supporting and porting to 5.7
b) Actively involved in 5.6, waiting for documentation for 5.7 or waiting for 5.7 to take off properly to make it worth their while or waiting for spare time to do the work.
c) Actively involved in 5.6, still undecided about 5.7
d) Actively involved in 5.6, no current intention of porting to 5.7
e) Was actively involved, still supports, but no time to port to 5.7
f) No longer actively involved, responds to contact.
g) No longer actively involved, not contactable.
h) Fire and forget. Released something with no intention or commitment to continuing to support it.
(a) and (b) you don't need to worry about because they will be supporting 5.7, it may just take a while.
Some of the developers falling between (b) or (c) and (f) could be open to offers for a joint project. You port the code, they release for 5.7 and give you a few licenses. You port the code, you release for 5.7, and you pay them a small commission on sales. You buy rights from them to port and release the code for 5.7... There are no doubt many other commercial deals that could be made. At least they are contactable and you can discuss possibilities with them.
The difficulty comes with (g) and (h). If you cant contact them, you cant discuss any sort of deal. If its a paid addon, they will have a paypal account registered with concrete5.org to receive their income and will have to contact Franz to be paid. Even then I suspect there are some user accounts accumulating a few $ that are abandoned.
With many addons belonging to (g) or (h), there is a good chance the addon is already obsolete and with have issues with 5.6, let alone 5.7. If the addon was genuinely useful, there is a good chance another developer has already released an alternative for 5.6 and that will fall into one of the contactable categories.
On the thread about free addons, I asked about applying lost property rules to addons. When an addon has value, that could become more difficult.
Maybe the marketplace license need a new clause about abandoned addons. That couldn't be applied retrospectively, but at least would make provision for future submissions.
Bare in mind also, just because a package has not been ported yet, does not mean that it will not be.
I know we have half a dozen plugins we have plans to port, but have not yet. We want to see 5.7 gain some traction and stability before pouring more money than we have already.
Keep in mind - development costs.
ChadStrat
I know we have half a dozen plugins we have plans to port, but have not yet. We want to see 5.7 gain some traction and stability before pouring more money than we have already.
Keep in mind - development costs.
ChadStrat
That makes you (b) above, pretty much where I consider myself to fit in.
Here's an idea for all you add-on (and even theme) developers that you might want to do. (I had another developer suggest part of this to me).
Why not suggest (perhaps to existing clients, or even on your marketplace pages) that you are willing to put a priority on a particular add-on , for an extra fee. From the builders perspective, it's certainly good to know there is an (ideally) fairly inexpensive option I can take advantage of when I need a particular add-on, if it's sooner than it would otherwise be released. It could be made even more attractive by adding a fair amount of additional licenses (making a real win/win).
Put another way, since you are "waiting" for enough momentum to make it worth your while (and your situations and add-ons are all different, but you know what you want/need to make it worthwhile), why not build that momentum yourself by "pre-selling" (and giving some extra licenses away as part of the deal doesn't really "cost" you anything, but can certainly make it attractive enough to some builders to get some cash flowing and momentum happening!
Why not suggest (perhaps to existing clients, or even on your marketplace pages) that you are willing to put a priority on a particular add-on , for an extra fee. From the builders perspective, it's certainly good to know there is an (ideally) fairly inexpensive option I can take advantage of when I need a particular add-on, if it's sooner than it would otherwise be released. It could be made even more attractive by adding a fair amount of additional licenses (making a real win/win).
Put another way, since you are "waiting" for enough momentum to make it worth your while (and your situations and add-ons are all different, but you know what you want/need to make it worthwhile), why not build that momentum yourself by "pre-selling" (and giving some extra licenses away as part of the deal doesn't really "cost" you anything, but can certainly make it attractive enough to some builders to get some cash flowing and momentum happening!
I think it's like a chicken or the egg first scenario. On the one side, theme and add-on devs like yourself want enough marketshare/demand to justify the time and effort with an anticipated ROI. On the other side, site builders who rely on these need and want enough of them to feel comfortable they can get what they need to be able to do what they want to (without coding themselves) before making the move from 5.6 to 5.7+.
Off Topic- And that doesn't say anything about bug concerns, lack of needed documentation, etc.
Off Topic- And that doesn't say anything about bug concerns, lack of needed documentation, etc.
I can see how classifying/grouping creator devs in this manner adds useful perspective. Certainly it seems to change what might be appropriate for one group VS the next (in particular the last few f-h).
To state the obvious, the spectrum applies to not just developers but individual packages.
I have two add-ons that do pretty well and I'm in the (b) group (half-way to (a)). As okdnet says, there's a long-term investment aspect to the calculation. However, even with that, it's not an easy thing to justify. I'm finding the migration to be a HUGE pain, taking several days per add-on. I need to look pretty far into the future of c5.7 to make my effort worth it. This is ESPECIALLY true considering that a) c5 use is pretty flat, b) it'll be a LONG time (years -- I'd bet 5) before all sites are >= 5.7, and c) the recently increased rev share. TBH, I almost feel migrating my add-ons to be a favor to my customers.
My other add-ons are (d) or (f). Not enough customers to even consider migrating. I'll let them die a (very very slow) death on c5.6. I'd certainly be amenable to some sort of commercial agreement to sell the code.
As far as "lost property", I don't think IP works this way. Look at all the abandoned books and music out there that publishers want to sell but can't. There'd have a be a very explicit agreement that you're essentially placing your IP in escrow and willing to give up rights if you don't ... I don't know... respond to an email in 30 days or something...
I have two add-ons that do pretty well and I'm in the (b) group (half-way to (a)). As okdnet says, there's a long-term investment aspect to the calculation. However, even with that, it's not an easy thing to justify. I'm finding the migration to be a HUGE pain, taking several days per add-on. I need to look pretty far into the future of c5.7 to make my effort worth it. This is ESPECIALLY true considering that a) c5 use is pretty flat, b) it'll be a LONG time (years -- I'd bet 5) before all sites are >= 5.7, and c) the recently increased rev share. TBH, I almost feel migrating my add-ons to be a favor to my customers.
My other add-ons are (d) or (f). Not enough customers to even consider migrating. I'll let them die a (very very slow) death on c5.6. I'd certainly be amenable to some sort of commercial agreement to sell the code.
As far as "lost property", I don't think IP works this way. Look at all the abandoned books and music out there that publishers want to sell but can't. There'd have a be a very explicit agreement that you're essentially placing your IP in escrow and willing to give up rights if you don't ... I don't know... respond to an email in 30 days or something...
In that case if you post it yourself, you could use that license on it. I think that would make sense. You would then buy a license for the 5.6 and use it on your modified 5.7 … this is a bit awkward, but I guess that would (legally) be ok. Now, that would not entitle you to release it to the marketplace afterwise.
Another solution, is having sb else (or you) create an equivalent addon not using the initial code.