When I set out to convert all my software over to be Open Source -- and fully fund development with contributions from the community -- I knew there was a strong chance it wouldn't work out [heck, nobody else has pulled it off]. There was a very real possibility that it wouldn't even get off the ground.
But get off the ground, it did. We all pulled together and made it happen. We hit our fundraising goals for the first month in just 8 days. Which gave me a great deal of hope for the coming months.
Unfortunately things didn't quite work out.
Total recurring donations are down to just a small fraction of the initial goals -- and way below what is needed to sustain development.
I attempted to make a few modifications to funding model to no avail. It's just simply not working. [Over the next few weeks I'll spend some time taking a look at how it went, day-by-day -- then I'll publish what I figure out - in one single post - so we can all learn from it.]
So... what now?
Now I need to return my lively-hood to a model that I know can support me and my family [and had done so for years previously]. So new versions of some of my software will be returning to a closed source license (in this case the GLL).
Illumination Software Creator 5.x and above will be released Closed Source. As will the next releases of BLABA and the games [Linux Tycoon and 2299].
The previous version of all of these will, obviously, remain under the GPL. The Lunduke SDK and Radical Comic Designer will, as well, be staying GPL.
I will continue working on a "Non-Me" Open Source project for one week each month [right now this is Inkscape].
Those who wish to contribute to any of that work my continue to do so.
Everyone who has contributed will get an email from me, tomorrow, that gives them full licenses for all of the new versions of the Closed Source software listed above.
Over the next few hours, there will be a few small changes to Lunduke.com to reflect the new details -- along with the first beta release of Illumination Software Creator 5.0.
This has been an exciting experiment. I'm hoping we can learn from it to better fund similar projects in the future. And I'm happy that some new Open Source software has resulted from it.
For me... it's time to play it safe, business-wise, and just focus on making awesome software for a while -- and selling it the good old fashioned way.
Filed under: Games, I am awesome, Illumination, Linux, Lunduke SDK, Maemo, Open Source, Radical Breeze, Tech Stuff |
I don’t blame you…
July 12th, 2012 at 1:43 am
You had a good run. You did your best.
July 12th, 2012 at 1:48 am
It was a fantastic experiment, and I look forward to purchasing some of your fantastic software
July 12th, 2012 at 2:08 am
Whatever happened to the rights to that video game you were offered?
July 12th, 2012 at 2:20 am
“I am an angry person.” [Synopsis by Bryan]
July 12th, 2012 at 2:33 am
“I don’t like being called an angry person.” [Synopsis by Bryan]
July 12th, 2012 at 2:43 am
“Hey, don’t call that guy angry!” [Synopsis by Bryan]
July 12th, 2012 at 2:43 am
“For some stupid reason I’ll reply to this.” [Synopsis of Bryan by Bryan]
July 12th, 2012 at 2:46 am
Would it be possible to give us a breakdown of how it all happened, and what went down? It is rude to ask for how much money you earned, and I dont expect you to say that, but it would be nice to track exactly how it all happened and stuff.
How long did the whole thing last, anyway?
July 12th, 2012 at 3:11 am
crshbndct: Actually I’ll be providing all of the numbers. I think the more details I can include the more helpful it’ll be to others looking to make a go of it.
July 12th, 2012 at 3:14 am
“heck, nobody else has pulled it off”
Well, with respects, and as I mentioned in another post, I did pull it off:
http://www.hardcoded.net/articles/fairware-it-kinda-works.htm
With the hopes that you will publish this comment.
July 12th, 2012 at 3:49 am
Ok thanks man. Its disappointing that you couldn’t make a go of it, but I suspect that for any already successful closed source project to switch to FOSS is gonna be hard. Small project starting up from scratch (i.e. not full time) and building into a big deal? Sure it would work then, but to make the switch is always gonna take some serious doing..
Also, on a Side note: Will ISC 5.0 be available to those who bought 4.x? Or will it be a repurchase. Not giving my opinion on either option though, just wondering. (Hell, Microsoft makes you pay for 3 service packs for windows between each actual version anyway)
July 12th, 2012 at 3:52 am
I think you can do the experience again, with another software, maybe one that you design for this only purpose.
Reading the Virgil Dupras post, I noticed a big difference between you two, the software he opened is for the average guy daily use, is something anyone could need, not a specialized software like yours… And I am talking about the games also, a lot of people don’t play games, and even those who play may not like some game, so the population you are reaching is way smaller than it needs to be…
I say that you got to change the rules of the game, not try to make people like what you done until now, but do what they are looking for.
Do a research, find out the most used closed license software out there, and when you find out what software we are talking about, make a free competitor that can overthrow it.
It can be anything, a ativirus, organizer, file compressor, social network chat client, whatever… Just make de best competitor for the best paid software out there, and we will spread the news about it.
What do you think? Are you in?
July 12th, 2012 at 4:40 am
Oh well I gues we all can’t be satified, but well seewhat happen from here on out.
July 12th, 2012 at 4:47 am
GPL says it must always remain free. You can’t modify a GPL software and then provide it as closed source.
I am afraid you cannot legally release future versions as closed source software unless you rewrite the whole code base (which is unlikely).
I think you made another mistake, you should have chosen a simplified 2-clause BSD license instead of GPL.
July 12th, 2012 at 5:13 am
Is this like when an App Store app goes free for a few days for a popularity bump?
July 12th, 2012 at 5:50 am
I have to say, I kind of saw this coming. You move was surely hyped at the beginning but you still guess that donations would stay that high.
And another big problem is your software itself. Simply opening the source of a software does not make it a good open source project. And in your case it was probably one of the worst I have ever seen. The git repos only contain giant xml files that need to be compiled with RealStudio, which is not only commercial but also closed source. This makes it hard and contribute and e.g. impossible to ship within any distro. It also results in the lack of some advantages for the end user when using free software. You cannot port it to other platforms and if that company somehow no longer ships their product you are still lost. Even if you would not charge anything this project would be quite an unsuccessful open source project due to this.
The result is that those who don’t care about open source will be happy to get a software free of charge and wont donate anyway. And those who are actually into free software are probably disappointed.
What we can learn from this is that there is way more to do than just dropping your “source” when starting an open source project.
Greetings,
Pierre
July 12th, 2012 at 6:19 am
Well, I’m disappointed that this didn’t work. Both that you didn’t get enough money from donations, and that you didn’t open source your better works.
Thanks for giving this a shot! Certainly a brave move.
But lets move right along to lessons learned, for those brave souls that want to try something like this:
1. Audit your code/licensing before the date when you say you will release sources, so you can release usable source code while people are still excited (and before they need to donate again.)
2. Be prompt about your financial transparency. There was a progress bar with timely info here for a while, but it didn’t say if it was the total pledges, or the amount cleared so far that month (and it went away after a while).
3. Expect a drop in donations after the first payment (especially if you don’t fulfill your promises in the first three weeks.) Perhaps it would be best to initially go open source when the pledges are 50-100% more than your minimum just-scraping-by income level.
4. This would be easier to pull off if you were single and/or lived in a cheap part of the world. E.g. I’ve been happily living on less than $1,000/ month for most of my adult life (13 years).
July 12th, 2012 at 7:05 am
You definately made an effort to let your software reach its full potential. I believe that everybody (maybe except yourself) have gained from this effort, so it is definately not in vain!
I was not one of your strongest supporters after your discussion (so put it mildly) with RMS, becuse he despite his unwelcomming attitutde did point out that you preach differently than you practise – and you did not seem to accept this. But even RMS should agree that you have made an effort to aide free software (even though he is unlikely to say this in public), but sometimes we have to fail many times before we succeed.
Have you considered using the model from the Quake series (and other games) where old versions are made open source when the new versions are released. That way all your code will eventually be open source, but people will still have to pay to get ‘all the new features’ if they want them straight away. This way the free versions benefits the free software and open source communities, but also work as adds for the non-free versions, giving your projects positive publicity when you need it the most.
July 12th, 2012 at 8:44 am
well this is to bad…
i was wondering though for the people who purchased before this experiment will we be sent new links for the software that we purchased or will all the old download links i have bookmarked from before still work like before?
July 12th, 2012 at 12:02 pm
Sad news
Well, for the next year I’ll continue to support you monthly through Paypal, that is, if you haven’t closed that. And I’ll consider purchasing a copy of ISC 5.x
July 12th, 2012 at 12:17 pm
SecureZone: I am the owner of these works. Which makes this very simple. Besides, the GPL’d versions were different branches than the non-GPL’d versions. The ISC 5.0 Beta 1 release, for example, is part of a branch that was never released as GPL.
July 12th, 2012 at 1:28 pm
SecureZone says:
“GPL says it must always remain free. You can’t modify a GPL software and then provide it as closed source. I am afraid you cannot legally release future versions as closed source software unless you rewrite the whole code base (which is unlikely).”
That’s not actually true. If you own the copyright of a project, you can re-release under different licenses, even if you had previously released it under the GPL. The only thing you can’t do is revoke the GPL.
See this for a better explanation:
http://stackoverflow.com/a/11455485/247696
July 12th, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Bryan I wish you the best in whatever you do. I know how hard it is to support a family. Keep doing what you love.
July 12th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
TBH Marco Capile & pierre pretty much got it spot on.
July 12th, 2012 at 6:08 pm
Thank you for trying.
July 13th, 2012 at 8:25 pm
Thanks for making the effort. The failure of this project has been instructive for the community. In short, you may have failed, but you “failed better.”
July 15th, 2012 at 3:20 am
It was worth a shot, and I for one am glad you took a crack at it.
Some ideas to consider:
I liked one of the previous posters’ comments about open-sourcing an old version of the software, like is done with the Quake engine.
Another idea is to look at one of the (arguably the sole) super-successful model of open source software: Support-supported. Now, the way this could be implemented in your case(since you don’t have a gazillion buckzoids or a giant corporation (Canonical *cough* Red Hat *cough*) would be to open-source the software itself, but rather offer access to some nifty cloudy stuff for a price. What sort of cloudy stuff? I’m not sure, but for now I’ll just say thunderclouds.
Also, you need not open-source *all* your stuff. The one everyone likes and finds super useful? Charge for that. The cool game that’s just to show off your coder chops and delightful personality? The thingamabob you just felt like making? Open-source that. Among other stuff, it can help you punt your non-OSS software.
If that’s a bit much, open-source the frumpy old project that pretty much all devs have lying around for something that could have been cool but was overshadowed by more important endeavors. I mean, the sort that’s so frumpy that you wouldn’t even want to BDFL it. We all have one.
In short- throw the community a bone (doesn’t need to be the flagship bone) whilst establishing some guaranteed certainty when it comes to income- so at least, if people get stingy with donations, you have *something.*
Other (possibly implausible and somewhat irrelevant but equally worth mentioning) things to ponder:
-Synopsis by Bryan (The Ebook)
-Paid speaking gigs
-Adjunct a college class somewhere
-Synopsis by Bryan (The webcast/webcomic/newsriff-ad-supported?)
-Merch
-Endorsement deals (Yes, that and the last idea are musician things)
-Synopsis by Bryan (The service-glowingly positive synopses for donors? )
-Synopsis by Bryan (The game- maybe a cleverbot-like thing?)
-Donation-raffle off chances for people to have you record voice-mail greetings for them (somewhat stolen from ‘Wait, wait, Don’t Tell Me!)
-Road-Sign Hank with director’s cut (maybe a Synopsis by Bryan?)
Remember, even failed experiments do something for the community. You’ve done a good thing, regardless, so just keep the development and chuckle-inducing banter up. I eagerly await the numbers for your experiment and hope that I and the community at large can learn/adapt something useful from them.
July 15th, 2012 at 11:18 am
You can still do something for funding open-source projects. You shouldn’t take monthly subscriptions. Or you can. My english is not enough for explain how but i can give an example.
You need monthly 4000$ and there is 12 month so you need 48000$ for a year. You can sell your software closed until you get 48000$. If you have 4 software, you can open first at 12000$, second at 24000$ … Money from buying+donations on this month can make it happen. I think you should consider this. You can take monthly donations too. Every month you can publish a chart of donations.
I couldn’t tell clear but you should get the point. Sorry for my grammar mistakes.
Regards.
July 18th, 2012 at 9:34 pm
“[heck, nobody else has pulled it off].”
What about the guy who maintains Ardour? Pretty sure people are paying him (just) enough to do it full time.
July 25th, 2012 at 2:13 am
Geoffrey B: The developer of Ardour has been attempting to do this for some time… and failing. He does contract work to pay the bills (though he does bring in *some* from donations… just as I managed to do… *some*… but not enough).
July 26th, 2012 at 2:05 am
[...] isn't an experiment in funding Open Source Software. This is a permanent change (at least as permanent as anything in [...]
October 18th, 2012 at 1:22 am
[...] It was a complete disaster. [...]
November 26th, 2012 at 10:39 pm