Hey HN, I'm Ben Carlsson. I recently left Twitch (YC W2007) after five years and have founded an open source esports startup. In my downtime I've been trying to solve the perception issue that causes many open source authors (including myself) to be afraid of making money off their software.
Several times a year I've seen open source authors have mental breakdowns and post, more or less, "I'm giving up because of the unbelievable stress and/or lack of income, someone please take this off my plate".
As a community, it's embarrassing that such dedicated and successful authors have been driven to the edge, but on top of that every time it happens it contributes to a perception issue about open source software: "it might lead to a mental breakdown, better not".
Something is broken here. The kind-hearted are being driven away from open source. It's time to marry kind-heartedness with the free market. Open source should not mean poverty. Open source should not mean sacrificing nights and weekends with friends and family to fix bugs for large corporations for free. Working hard is one thing, but consuming your life with perceived obligations that don't put food on the table is another.
I believe dual licensing is a possible solution to this, but it hasn't taken off for two reasons:
1. Authors are afraid companies won't use their software because of the friction involved (not the $, but the internal bureaucracy)
2. Authors just want to write code, and can't be bothered to deal with licensing and payments and "customers", so just choose MIT
Dual licensing is what it sounds like -- the author chooses two licenses instead of one. The user chooses which one they want to use. Usually one is free but has restrictions (e.g. GPL), another is paid but has no such restrictions (a commercial license).
I'm trying to solve these two issues with dual licensing. I built Licenseland to take on #2, taking the extra headaches out of things like accepting payment. For now the #1 fear still remains, but I think it can be abolished with good success examples helping to set industry standards. Companies need to know that great open source software might cost some pocket change, and that letting their engineers spend that money should be a well-lubricated flow without second-guessing.
I will fall in love with you if you give me any feedback on this idea! I've been an open source developer and advocate in and out of companies (and government programs) for a decade now. Much love <3
I think that software with this license is not consider "free software".
Several times a year I've seen open source authors have mental breakdowns and post, more or less, "I'm giving up because of the unbelievable stress and/or lack of income, someone please take this off my plate".
As a community, it's embarrassing that such dedicated and successful authors have been driven to the edge, but on top of that every time it happens it contributes to a perception issue about open source software: "it might lead to a mental breakdown, better not".
Something is broken here. The kind-hearted are being driven away from open source. It's time to marry kind-heartedness with the free market. Open source should not mean poverty. Open source should not mean sacrificing nights and weekends with friends and family to fix bugs for large corporations for free. Working hard is one thing, but consuming your life with perceived obligations that don't put food on the table is another.
I believe dual licensing is a possible solution to this, but it hasn't taken off for two reasons:
1. Authors are afraid companies won't use their software because of the friction involved (not the $, but the internal bureaucracy) 2. Authors just want to write code, and can't be bothered to deal with licensing and payments and "customers", so just choose MIT
Dual licensing is what it sounds like -- the author chooses two licenses instead of one. The user chooses which one they want to use. Usually one is free but has restrictions (e.g. GPL), another is paid but has no such restrictions (a commercial license).
I'm trying to solve these two issues with dual licensing. I built Licenseland to take on #2, taking the extra headaches out of things like accepting payment. For now the #1 fear still remains, but I think it can be abolished with good success examples helping to set industry standards. Companies need to know that great open source software might cost some pocket change, and that letting their engineers spend that money should be a well-lubricated flow without second-guessing.
I will fall in love with you if you give me any feedback on this idea! I've been an open source developer and advocate in and out of companies (and government programs) for a decade now. Much love <3