Forum Posts Feed
what are acceptable licensing terms?
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Pierre Paul Landry
May 19, 2009 at 03:19 AM
moritz wrote:
>thanks Pierre, your perspective as a software developer is much appreciated!
>Also
>reassuring for me that your licensing terms are not as prohibitive as I had thought (I
>recall having seen a mention of a “90 day transition period before you have to pay for
>full commercial license”?).
>If you can clarify that your only restriction is
>“single user” then you can expect my order shortly!
>
I want IQ licensing to be as simple as possible and so:
” All licenses use the simple principle that only 1 instance of the license can be running at any one time.” You are free to install it on as many computers as long as this rule is never broken.
Regarding the 90 days, perhaps it isn’t clear. Let me explain. The Personal license can be used in any of the following cases:
1- Personal use (i.e. non-professional use)
2- If you are employed and want to use IQ at work but the employer refuses to pay (whatever the reason is). If you must pay for it, then a personal license will do. Consultants do not qualify for this (as they can write it off in their income tax. They should use the Small business license)
3- 90 days in a work place. After that period of time, either one of the professional licenses must be purchased by the employer or you purchase it yourself (see #2 above)
4- Non-profit / Students use
Pierre
Posted by Dan Chartrand
Jun 30, 2009 at 04:12 AM
I’m a developer that has struggled with this question myself. How to keep paying customers from feeling the license terms are too restrictive, while still making enough income on purchased licenses to continue development.
When I first started selling VueMinder Calendar, I went with the “easiest to enforce” approach, which was 1 license per computer. However, I felt this was too restrictive, and seemed to be hurting sales rather than helping, so I switched to a more lenient policy of allowing a single user to install the same license (for their own personal use) on up to 5 computers. After making the switch, I saw new orders increase by about 30%.
Now, could someone install on 6 computers instead of the 5 specified in the license terms? Yes, and I wouldn’t know about it and don’t really have any way to enforce them not to (I’m not using DRM or any other invasive techniques). But honestly, I’d much rather someone pay for a personal license and install on their 6 computers (even if the limit is 5), than someone think the terms are too restrictive and resort to using a keygen or cracked version.
Posted by Stephen Zeoli
Jun 30, 2009 at 06:41 PM
Dan,
You philosophy as a developer seems to me very sensible. My sense, and I could be wrong, is that people who cheat on licensing were never going to be paying customers anyway. That is, you’re not actually losing money when they cheat, because they were never going to pay even if you’d made the license more restrictive. That may be small consolation for those people who do cheat.
But perhaps in a small way, those of us with CRIMP make up for them because we buy so much more software than we ever could possibly use!
Steve Z.
Dan Chartrand wrote:
>I’m a developer that has struggled with this question myself. How to keep paying
>customers from feeling the license terms are too restrictive, while still making
>enough income on purchased licenses to continue development.
>
>When I first started
>selling VueMinder Calendar, I went with the “easiest to enforce” approach, which was
>1 license per computer. However, I felt this was too restrictive, and seemed to be
>hurting sales rather than helping, so I switched to a more lenient policy of allowing a
>single user to install the same license (for their own personal use) on up to 5
>computers. After making the switch, I saw new orders increase by about 30%.
>
>Now,
>could someone install on 6 computers instead of the 5 specified in the license terms?
>Yes, and I wouldn’t know about it and don’t really have any way to enforce them not to
>(I’m not using DRM or any other invasive techniques). But honestly, I’d much rather
>someone pay for a personal license and install on their 6 computers (even if the limit
>is 5), than someone think the terms are too restrictive and resort to using a keygen or
>cracked version.