I've just read the entire thread, and it is quite interesting. The biggest concern I had when I first read this was a 'worst-case' scenario that I'm sure none of us wants to happen, but could still happen. Let me explain. . .
After I found out how wonderful this software was, I decided it was going to be my mp3 player for the foreseeable future. I took the plunge and bought it. I've spent many many hours 'customizing' Media Jukebox and its library of my MP3s with database entry categories, etc. This is work that I do not want to lose. Its worth far more than the $25 I paid for Media Jukebox - I'd say its worth hundreds of dollars to me.
With the new licensing scheme, my basic concern is what will happen if JRiver goes out of business. Of course, none of us want that to happen, but what if it does? None of us will be able to restore our licenses. All of the effort we put into categorizing our libraries of thousands of mp3s will be lost (most of the data is in a proprietary MJ database - not in the MP3 files themselves). Not only will we have lost the $25 we spent on Media Jukebox. We will have lost the 'value added' efforts we put into our libraries.
If I had known that this licensing scheme was coming down the path, I probably would not have spent all of the time I did creating my library database. The licensing scheme makes it too large of a risk; I could lose all of my work.
Luckily, I still have some old version 8 betas that work pretty well, and that use the old registraion method. They're backed up, and so is my old .RRG registration. So, hopefully, I'll be OK on this. But I'd really rather keep upgrading. And its certainly possible that if I use the 'newer' V8 software, the library of the 'newer' software may not be compatible with the old Beta software (haven't tried it so I don't know). If so, any 'additional work' done to my database after I switched to the newer licensing software would be lost, as it wouldn't 'restore' into the old beta software.
Anyway, as Jim said, they have two choices for the release version of MJ8 at this point due to time constraints: The old method, or the new method. There simply isn't time to create a different new method. I personally vote for keeping the old method. It has flaws, but it keeps customers happier. License distribution can be modified and automated 'after the fact'. For example, .RRG files can be emailed to users rather than (or in addition to) setting up a custom port to send the info from the license server to MJ directly. And a web site can be set up that verifies a user's identity, and then re-emails the .RRG file to them automatically so that JRiver employees don't have to provide the personal interaction. In addition, other 'quick fixes' could be put into MJ8 before release that 'automatically' backed up the license, or that provided more strong suggestions that the user do so.
Then as 'major' new versions come out, MJ can require a new license at that time (old .RRG file won't work). They can charge for the upgrade or not - depending upon what they want to do. By requiring new .RRGs on new releases, they keep 'stolen' .RRGs from being used indefinitely. But if someone doesn't want to upgrade, or if JRiver goes out of business, those who have backed up their .RRG licenses for their current version will NEVER be disadvantaged.
IF JRiver had the luxury of more time to look at this and try to make more people happier (including themselves), I think it would be a good idea to come up with a list of requirements. Hopefully, a scheme could be developed that met all requirements. That is unlikely, however, and some compromises would have to be made. As a result, some people might not be happy. You can't make everyone happy unless you can define all requirements that people might have, and then meet ALL of them. That probably won't happen, but hopefully a scheme could be designed that met most of them, and that kept most people happy.
As a start, here are some requirements I think are important for users and for JRiver's business. Feel free to add your own:
*) Owners of MJ should ALWAYS be able to install/reinstall their current purchased version of MJ on one of their computers as long as they've saved their license. This includes: Re-installs, re-formats, 2nd computer installs, installs if JRiver is out-of-business, installs of old paid version if new, unpaid version is all that JRiver sells, etc.
*) Licenses should be designed in a way to discourage or prevent sharing or distribution. (e.g. embed users's full name and credit card info into license and let purchasers know this is happening so that they will be less likely to want to share their license with others.)
*) Licenses should be installable either automatically (via port 80), or manually via entering the license information from a sheet of paper or from a licence file.
*) Software should not require an internet connection to register. (i.e. license should be manually installable via user typing, copying license file from floppy, or copying license file from CD-R)
*) Users should have the ability to maintain their privacy (other than buying the license). Thus, software should never have to communicate to JRiver or any other service EVER (unless the user chooses to use a service for CDDB or Album Cover downloads or such). No Spyware, no check-the-license-ware, no "ET phone home / MJ phone home", etc.
*) If the user has 'lost' his license, he should be able to get a replacement from JRiver after providing proof of purchase.
*) The 'replacement license' methodology should be automated to prevent a lot of overhead for workers at JRiver. It can, however, include some manual work on the part of the purchaser as long as instructions are available.
*) If replacement of licenses causes a lot of effort for JRiver, JRiver should have the right to charge a 'reasonable' fee to re-issue the license. (e.g. one free re-issue per year, and after that, you've gotta pay $5.)
*) JRiver should have the right to limit the number of requests for replacement licenses to a reasonable number - i.e. people should NOT be losing their licenses.
*) Software should encourage or almost 'force' people to make backup copies of their license to prevent users from having to call JRiver to get replacements. (Don't forget that not all computers have floppies, so 'forcing' a backup may be difficult)
*) Software should automatically save an on-disk backup of the license in a location that is likely to be saved by the user if the user transitions to a new computer or re-installs the operating system (in My Documents, for example). On a re-install, it should know to look there in case it can't find the license information in the registry or in the MJ directory.
*) New license files should be required within a reasonable time (say 30 days) of an upgrade to prevent 'stolen' licenses from continuing to work on new versions. The new license files should be distributed to registered licensees of the software. (If user doesn't upgrade, old license file will
continue to work.) New license files for minor upgrades or recent purchasers should be free. New license
files for a new version of software should charge a reasonable upgrade fee (around 1/3 to 1/2 of the cost of new software).
If you can think of any other reasonable 'requirements' that would protect either your or JRiver's interests without un-necessarily infringing on the other party's needs, please suggest them.
Author
Topic: The Ethics of Charging for Software (Read 8820 times)