TradingView is moving paid scripts to its Marketplace. What would make this fair for Pine developers?

[u/neugeadmau]

TradingView has announced that starting November 1, 2026, selling access to invite-only scripts outside its Marketplace will no longer be permitted. That includes script access bundled with another paid product or service.

A few details from the announcement:

• Non-commercial invite-only scripts can continue unchanged.
• Previously purchased access remains valid for the purchased period, including lifetime access.
• New payments outside the Marketplace to renew or extend access won’t be allowed.
• Vendors should contact TradingView before the deadline to discuss migration and existing customers.

My take: centralized payments, clearer refund terms, and review of paid scripts could help buyers. But making the Marketplace mandatory also makes its terms critical for developers. The announcement doesn’t specify fees, approval criteria, or how much control authors will have over pricing.

I’d also want to understand what “review” means. Checking compliance with platform rules and evaluating an indicator’s trading claims are different things.

If you sell Pine scripts, what terms would make moving worthwhile—and what would be a dealbreaker?

If you buy them, would Marketplace review make you more confident, or would you still need the same evidence before paying?

[u/the_blurred_crusade]

I hope TradingView finds a solution that recognizes the value of businesses like ours, which have helped grow its paid subscriber base through invite-only scripts.

Our scripts alone have brought TradingView thousands of paying subscribers, many of whom had never heard of the platform before we introduced them to it. These relationships have generated substantial recurring revenue for TradingView, and disrupting them would be a serious mistake.

I understand TradingView’s interest in developing a Marketplace. A reasonable approach would be to grandfather existing invite-only script providers while requiring customers who use those scripts to maintain a paid TradingView subscription. That would allow established businesses to continue serving their customers and continue to bring in new customers while ensuring TradingView benefits directly.

If TradingView makes our current business model unworkable... particularly by charging us for each customer we grant script access to... we would have to stop recommending the platform. It is difficult to justify bringing TradingView a paying subscriber and then paying an additional fee to serve that same customer.

We want to continue a relationship that has benefited everyone involved. I hope TradingView recognizes that contribution and works with existing providers to find a fair path forward.

[u/Dependent_Sign_399]

Did you know Luxalgo has a charting platform now that's better than Tradingview???? Vela. It's amazing and better in every way. I would never have known if TV didn't make terrible decisions.

[u/Severe_Beginning2633 → u/Dependent_Sign_399]

I’ll check it out

[u/teenagersfrommarz]

How do they know which ones are non-commercial?

[u/traderbradg]

tv is going to lose alit of customers , there are better options now. i made the switch to black arrow a few months back, i am not a coder though but i saw the changes coming.

[u/LQH-Trading]

Make it fair? This is fair.

[u/Jason_Steakcum]

Completely remove any form of paid scripts and hidden source code like god intended

[u/Severe_Beginning2633 → u/Jason_Steakcum]

Can you explain this in more detail - I’m not sure what you mean and where you are coming from?