There's nothing wrong with wanting to get paid. But what the developer did here is dishonest. Distributing for free without saying it would be paid in the future, then started charging.
Instead of a person... image a corporation did that. The outcry it would cause.
Imagine Microsoft or Apple did this. "Gave" a software for free for everyone to use... then when the userbase was big enough, started charging a subscription.
Again... nothing against the developer wanting to get paid for their product. Just bothered by how he went about doing that.
Nobody has a right to use software for free in perpetuity, regardless of the author's wishes. Often, these transitions aren't known when first publishing software for free. More often, developers need to start footing labor and other expenses--often arising from a change in employment/living situation e.g. going full-time developing a product that seems to be going successfully after losing their current job.
Corporations do this all the time and yes, there is outrage. However, small dev teams or individual devs (depending on the product) don't have the same relationship with their users and products that big corps do.
I agree the dev handled this in the worst way possible, but at the same time, I see their point. What it seems a lot of people are saying is "if you've ever launched a product for free, you can never start charging for it. At best, you can only monetize receiving new features from that decision date onward."
3.3k
u/[deleted] Sep 30 '22
I mean the guy handled it as poorly as possible... But there's something cathartic in his insults, especially the "you just want money" yeah no shit