Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

amazingcto.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 311 posts

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#301

Post by jjk166 »

krisoft wrote: post #79
Someone1234 wrote: post #55

I just want to state outright that OP was wronged, and I side with them. That being said; I dislike both full subscription (i.e. breaks on expiration) and lifetime licenses. Subscriptions are too expensive for software that rarely gets major investment and lifetime licenses are dishonest (e.g. company cannot work for free, so their funded is based on unlimited growth, which isn't realistic for most). My current favor…

I see your point, and I largely agree with you. One trickynes is with the "This incentivizes them to deliver value" part. The problem is that if the software just "works" and there are no compelling new features the user will quite rationally stop buying new updates. Which incentivises the developer to make sure that either the software never really "just works" or that they hype up new features to create FOMO. They…

> Which incentivises the developer to make sure that either the software never really "just works"

If they are deliberately limiting their current product, that just makes it easier for a competitor to come in and steal their business. Every upgrade season people are going to be asking themselves "do I stick with this janky product or do I look to see if there's something better out there?"

Similarly if a company overhypes an update, it will make customers more skeptical of updates in the future. Generally it's pretty easy to wait a few months after a new release is out to see if it's positively received.

There are more nefarious antipatterns, like putting in bugs that don't crop up until around when the next upgrade becomes available, or breaking compatibility between versions so once a critical mass switches voluntarily, everyone else is pretty much forced. But really there's no system immune to abuse by sufficiently motivated bad actors.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#302

Post by mthoms »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #294
mthoms wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't have such a draconian interpretation of the idea. I don't know where you got "lynch mob", "ruin[ing] random people" and "social credit score" from it to be honest. Quite a dramatic take. Individuals and companies knowing more information about the professional history of the people they're doing business with is always better.

I know you didn’t. But any such idea should be constructed game theoretically with 4chan on the other side. “Blind for humans” would destroy lives. And it doesn’t give people a chance at redemption in their career. I’ve had low points in my career I wouldn’t want to follow me any more than they do already. When you’ve done something for 40+ years you’ll have run the entire gamut of human experience, good, bad, and ug…

I assumed we were talking exclusively about executives, not rank-and-file. I also assumed we were talking about poor business decisions rather than personal ones.

I get your point though - I'm just more inclined to believe this would be used for good, rather than evil. I also agree that people should have a chance at redemption.

I think you might be over-stating the effect this would have. Most people won't care. And if Elon Musk is any indication, having a bad reputation only hurts so much if the offering is compelling (eg. Space-X, Tesla). Both of those are huge successes despite Elon having a questionable reputation personally and professionally.

Note - I'm making no judgement here - I'm just talking about the consensus opinion on Elon as I see it.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#303

Post by mthoms »

cycomanic wrote: post #284
mthoms wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you do receive a perpetual fallback license. But it's for the version that was out when you started your subscription. https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/article_attachments/203511589...

Your statement is misleading. Your statement is only true if you only pay for subscription for a single year. As the other poster pointed out you get a perpetual licence for any version you paid for 12 month or more. So in the example you link if I continue the subscription for another 4 month I will be able to keep v2.

I'm not sure I understand. You're saying my statement is true if "you only pay for subscription for a single year" but false if "you get a perpetual licence for any version you paid for 12 month or more". Did you mean to say "more than 12 months?" because otherwise those statements overlap.

>in the example you link if I continue the subscription for another 4 month I will be able to keep v2.

Well, I never claimed otherwise. But perhaps we can agree to summarize it all in a different way:

At the end of any twelve month (or more) subscription you are are forced to downgrade to a one year old version, regardless of what's been released since.

Agree?

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#304

Post by Takennickname »

dahwolf wrote: post #166
qikInNdOutReply wrote: post #12

The problem with such betrayal is, that companies names are all but smoke and mirrors by now. The reputational damage should be tracking with the leading employees. One customer betrayal travels along with the manager who caused it, to whatever company s/he touches. No matter how the company is named, no matter how much branding, one linked in api roll call later you know what you got.

Sounds like cancel culture on steroids.

"burn them at the stake" vibes

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#305

Post by Takennickname »

mnw21cam wrote: post #200
mannykannot wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That pumping might have been seen as a warning that the company either does not intend to support the product much longer, or has doubts that it will be able to do so. And while I agree with your final sentence, unless Visicom was careless, the actual license agreement, which supersedes the promotional claim, will have permitted what happened and so essentially revoked the offer. Caveat emptor!

Not in a large number of countries in the world.

Wow how many countries are you licensed to practice law in?

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#306

Post by Veserv »

slavik81 wrote: post #290
Veserv wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is absolutely lying. The original owners could have put in a voluntary, irrevocable, liquidated damages clause that is sufficiently punitive that no subsequent owner of the company would think to violate it. As they intend to honor the “lifetime license” for a lifetime and totally do not intend to renege for that duration there is no harm in enforcing that clause with force of law.

> The original owners could have put in a voluntary, irrevocable, liquidated damages clause that is sufficiently punitive that no subsequent owner of the company would think to violate it If a court believed the liquidated damages were punitive, they would reject the value specified by the contract and substitute a more reasonable estimate of the actual damages.

I am aware such a result is possible, but as far as I am aware (I am not a lawyer) punitive liquidated damages being substituted occurs due to a general legal theory of unconscionability that such terms are imposed against a weaker party and are sufficiently unfair.

That is not the case here as this is the clearly strong party, being the entity drafting the contract of adhesion, uniformly adding it to contracts where they have complete control over the terms where it harms themselves for the benefit of the weaker party. I find it highly unlikely that a clause with such facts would be struck down in existing precedent or in the future, though I could be wrong. If I am wrong, then I need to come up with a new idea.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#307

Post by donmcronald »

mthoms wrote: post #303
cycomanic wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement is misleading. Your statement is only true if you only pay for subscription for a single year. As the other poster pointed out you get a perpetual licence for any version you paid for 12 month or more. So in the example you link if I continue the subscription for another 4 month I will be able to keep v2.

I'm not sure I understand. You're saying my statement is true if "you only pay for subscription for a single year" but false if "you get a perpetual licence for any version you paid for 12 month or more". Did you mean to say " more than 12 months?" because otherwise those statements overlap. >in the example you link if I continue the subscription for another 4 month I will be able to keep v2. Well, I never claimed ot…

Another way to put it...

If you want to cancel your subscription you need to pay for an additional year if you want to keep using the version you're currently using.

I'm not sure why JetBrains gets so much praise. Their licensing is objectively worse than when it used to be perpetual licenses with upgrade pricing. It's going to get worse too. I think JetBrains Space is going to get pushed more and it's a subscription lock-in nightmare.

It's very sad to see JetBrains locking their solution for dev environments behind a subscription.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#308

Post by yellowapple »

dahart wrote: post #256
JohnFen wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very fact that it's possible for it to not work out makes it a deceptive term because it's not a "lifetime license". If you actually buy software, there is no possibility that the company can take it away from you.

> The very fact that it's possible for it to not work out makes it a deceptive term because it's not a "lifetime license". Naw, by that logic any sale of any kind is “deceptive”. You’re conflating sometimes with always. The existence of dishonest people doesn’t make you a dishonest person, right?

> Naw, by that logic any sale of any kind is “deceptive”.

It is not possible for the late-night Mexican drive-through joint (which I am about to patronize) to force me to "un-eat" the bacon breakfast burrito, chicken torta, and large horchata I have ordered and am prepared to consume.

> The existence of dishonest people doesn’t make you a dishonest person, right?

If I'm engaging in a behavior which dishonest people typically do and honest people typically don't, then it's entirely reasonable to scrutinize whether I'm being honest.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#310

Post by XCSme »

Someone1234 wrote: post #55

I just want to state outright that OP was wronged, and I side with them. That being said; I dislike both full subscription (i.e. breaks on expiration) and lifetime licenses. Subscriptions are too expensive for software that rarely gets major investment and lifetime licenses are dishonest (e.g. company cannot work for free, so their funded is based on unlimited growth, which isn't realistic for most). My current favor…

> My current favorite business model is the "You're buying the current version and [years] of updates."

After working on UXWizz (self-hosted analytics) for thirteen years and trying to find the right pricing model, I ended up to the same conclusion. For downloadable products, it makes most sense for both the buyer and the seller.

Post reply on HN