[mythtv-users] Help sponsor MythTVMultiplex.

Paul Mason latepaul at gmail.com
Fri Apr 13 17:50:43 UTC 2007


On 13/04/07, Michael T. Dean <mtdean at thirdcontact.com> wrote:
>
> On 04/13/2007 10:37 AM, Marko Nurmenniemi wrote:
> > johnny wrote:
> >
> >> Chad wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Is it true that guy behind this is Mr Christer Åkers, who also own
> company
> >>>> Edge Innovations (http://www.edgeinnovations.fi/)...
> >> Yes its true.
> >>
> >
> > This is good news to me, the more interested people we have the better
> > chance to get improvements to source.
> >
> >>> ...If your intent is to
> >>> "bring to light" the fact that this feature makes it so a company is
> >>> potentially benefiting from this...
> >>>
> >
> > This to me is the power of Linux (...GPL) as long as the code still GPL
> > also after the "commercial" implementation this is excellent.
> >
> > I have 100% better feeling when I'm supporting other Myth users (with my
> > 25€) than buying the latest from "Windows/closed source" and this is
> > what is happening. I'm NOT handing out money to the mentioned company,
> > this is a improvement I'm investing and they have promised to deliver.
> > The community will benefit more than any single company from this.
> >
> > Buying closed source SW-products is like burning money in comparison.
>
> I think what people are saying is that since OSP says, "We need to
> collect 6000 Euro for this feature.  ... We would like to see that as
> many mythtv users as possible can contribute 25 Euro or more...  We,
> Open Source Partners Ltd have contributed 500Euro as start capital. ...
> We are intending to contribute the missing amount when the collected
> money is above a certain amount."
>
> So, OSP is willing to contribute some amount up to 6000 Euro (less,
> actually, but there is some "missing amount" they've chosen as an
> acceptable maximum contribution).  However, if 220 users donate 25 Euro
> each, OSP is only donates the minimum they've promised (500 Euro).
>
> IMHO, a much better thing to do would be to say, "We /are/ donating 3000
> Euro (or whatever).  We /need/ 120 users to donate 25 Euro each to reach
> a minimum of 6000 Euro.  If more than 120 users donate 25 Euro, the
> developers will get 100% of the extra money."
>
> Since every donation potentially reduces OSP's share of the bill (the
> "missing amount" they are willing to contribute), those donations are
> basically going into OSP's pockets--and not into Daniel's, Janne's, and
> Shane's.
>
> How is that any different from "buying closed source SW-products"?  In
> both cases the money is pocketed by a company.  In this case, however,
> the company pocketing the money isn't even doing the work to create the
> new feature--in the closed-source case, that company has to do some work.
>

Not necessarily, they could out-source the work too - which is what this is.


Think of it this way: suppose OSP were using a proprietary piece of software
to which they owned the IP. They want it enhanced to add this feature. So
they find some developers and negotiate a price of 6000 euros. They pay the
money, the work gets done. Developers walk away 6,000 richer, OSP has its
new feature for its product.

That's the closed source way.

But by doing it this way they're saying - "We recognise that others will
benefit from this feature and invite them to contribute, to share the cost
of the work." So some people contribute, which yes, reduces OSP's share BUT
the developers still walk away 6,000 euros better off.

Now crucially, donations are entirely voluntary and OSP will make up the
difference so the feature will get done. Someone could want this feature but
decide not to donate (for good, bad or indifferent reasons). So they're
benefitting without contributing, whereas OSP are at the very least giving
500 euros. But in any case the developers pocket 6,000 - which is a price
they themselves have agreed is fair for the work. (If they haven't then they
should re-negotiate asap)

Now the approach you suggest sounds better because the developers might get
more than 6,000. The problem is what happens if there's a shortfall? Many
projects have used this kind of approach and either delay waiting for the
donations to hit the right level or end up cancelling. This way the
developers get a guaranteed amount, and work begins on a guaranteed date.

And there's nothing stopping those so inclined to donate directly to the
developers even after the 6,000 has been raised. Assuming the current total
on the website is updated regularly then that's at least as likely (or
unlikely) under either scheme, because people will always know when they're
donating "excess".

-- 
Paul Mason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20070413/ea39c377/attachment.htm 


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list