Previously LGPL, now re-licensed as closed-source/commercial. Previous code taken down.

Commercial users pay $99/year, free for personal use but each user has to make a free account after a trial period.

  • Kayn@dormi.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    they licensed it as LGPL just to get their product popular and then said “I got the eyeballs I wanted, time to milk this!”

    Show us where the dev said exactly that.

    we are entitled to our ideology around FLOSS.

    You are not entitled to anything. The dev simply released their work with a license that allows others to use it freely. Nothing more, nothing less.

    So they just wanted people to test their product and market them for free?

    Again, show us where they vocalized exactly that.

    What about the compensation for people who beta-tested this product for free and recommended them to others?

    What compensation were they expecting?

    That just means they were looking for free marketing and eyeballs.

    So far you’ve done nothing but put a whole bunch of malicious words into this developer’s mouth.

    • MadhuGururajan@programming.dev
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Apparently you want me to point out where I took the developer’s words but intentions are not words. You’re deliberately trying to argue that I am accusing the dev of things they did not do, but that’s not true. I am only arguing on their actions and assigning motive to their actions which I make clear in all my comments.

      You’re the one who is calling people entitled for expecting LGPL code to be FOSS. I am merely replying to your comments.

    • MadhuGururajan@programming.dev
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Show us where the dev said exactly that.

      You’re asking me to show me where the dishonest person admitted to being dishonest.