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

281–290 of 311 posts

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#281

Post by TeMPOraL »

pdpi wrote: post #189
TeMPOraL wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps a good case study here is/will be Affinity. They produce graphics software competing directly with Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign, and their core differentiator is that they don't do subscriptions - you pay up front, and get a regular, perpetual license in return. Few months ago, they released version 2 of their software suite. There are some new features and a host of UI and performance improvements, bu…

If you use Affinity Photo for photo work, what do you use for library management? It's basically the only thing keeping me on Lightroom.

Nothing? To this day, I don't understand the concept of "library management" and Lightroom as a tool. Might be simply because I'm neither a photographer nor a digital artist. In decades of doing all kinds of ad-hoc, amateur, one-off works, the amount of photos and designs I collected is entirely manageable with default filesystem tools (explorer.exe) - or Linux shell, or Emacs, if I feel like being fancy.

In fact, I seem to be developing apprehension towards any kind of domain-specific "library managers". I tolerate game launchers/library managers like Steam or Origin or whatever, but that's only because it's the blessed way to legally buy games without having to purchase physical objects (CDs, DVDs, ...). But other than that?

For images, in the past I used ACDSee; these days, I use IrfanView. Both have some library management capabilities. I don't use them. Same is the case for music - it's fine of the player wants to provide virtual collections based on metadata, but if it tries to use them to abstract away the file system, I'll throw it out and look for a replacement. To date, I don't use Calibre for dealing with my Kindle, because every time I checked, the app was 90% about library management - meanwhile, all I actually want from it is the ability to convert between ebook formats.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#282

Post by pcthrowaway »

rhaway84773 wrote: post #207
crazygringo wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say it's dishonest in the sense that a company knows the probabilities are such that they can't actually ever truly support a lifetime license, so it's a lie from the start. At the end of the day, companies usually go out of business or else sell themselves to another company within a certain number of years. And a new company (like in this case) may change their mind about lifetime licenses, because it's a total…

I agree. The only time a lifetime license will actually be honored as such is of the company’s product fails and it’s no longer around as a company, so it allows you to continue using the current version as is. When companies that have offered lifetime licenses don’t fail, they inevitably kill the lifetime part of the license by pulling different tricks like, creating a cloud version which now becomes their future ve…

> The only time a lifetime license will actually be honored as such is of the company’s product fails and it’s no longer around as a company, so it allows you to continue using the current version as is.

You could also sell mission-critical software with a lifetime license. It just has to be bad enough that it can outlive the user.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#283

Post by MrOwnPut »

JohnFen wrote: post #236
MrOwnPut wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you elaborate? My Plex lifetime license has been very valuable to me and has already saved me money.

Because it's not clear what "lifetime" means. In practice what it means is "until the company is sold" or restructured or whatever. But the implication is that it's for your lifetime. How does your lifetime license save you money over just engaging in a straight-up purchase?

It's very clear what it means, it means the lifetime of how long you think this product is going to last. It's a decision as a consumer you make.

When I purchased the Plex lifetime license 6 years ago, I asked myself how many years to break even vs if I purchased yearly. The answer was 2.5 years.

I also asked myself if Plex was going to last at least that long, and I thought they were, and they did, and I wanted to support them.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#284

Post by cycomanic »

mthoms wrote: post #267
mattl wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you get all the versions you've paid for. "You will receive perpetual fallback licenses for every version you’ve paid 12 consecutive months for." https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What...

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.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#285

Post by Nexxxeh »

emodendroket wrote: post #111
MrGilbert wrote: post #15

Happy Scale, a weight tracking app I really enjoy, had the opposite example: I bought a full license for some bucks some years ago, and later they decided to switch to a subscription based model to ensure funding. Instead of going the "hey, here is a new version of the app, you need to subscribe now", they explicitly included a thank-you note directed at everyone that bought the "Premium In-App Purchase" at the begin…

Not saying it’s right but the reasoning is easy to understand: offering updates forever for someone who’s never going to give you any more money is profoundly unappealing from a business perspective

But the costs of that customer are generally negligible, whereas the potential loss of advertising from fucking them over may be significant.

You're potentially converting your customer into an evangelist for your competitor.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#286

Post by pdpi »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #281
pdpi wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you use Affinity Photo for photo work, what do you use for library management? It's basically the only thing keeping me on Lightroom.

Nothing? To this day, I don't understand the concept of "library management" and Lightroom as a tool. Might be simply because I'm neither a photographer nor a digital artist. In decades of doing all kinds of ad-hoc, amateur, one-off works, the amount of photos and designs I collected is entirely manageable with default filesystem tools (explorer.exe) - or Linux shell, or Emacs, if I feel like being fancy. In fact, I…

> Nothing? To this day, I don't understand the concept of "library management" and Lightroom as a tool. Might be simply because I'm neither a photographer nor a digital artist.

Photos don't have a natural band/album/song taxonomy like music, or author/series (maybe)/book like books. Cameras just give you a date/sequence number structure, which is great for the purpose of incremental backups (just add folders for the last calendar day to the backup). That's almost completely useless for browsing photos, though. When you have several hundred gigs of photos, you need something better.

In lightroom I have photos catalogued by location, by event, and by subject, and a few ad hoc collections. E.g. I really like nature photography, so "by subject" means I have them grouped up by species, and "by location" also covers parks, zoos, etc.

The reject/star rating workflow makes it easy to get rid of out of focus/blurry/otherwise inadequate photos and flag keepers for developing. I don't bother going for a fine-grained rating, but five-stars means photos I'm developing right away, four-stars are photos that are good but not amazing. I often end up revisiting these and finding something that makes me change my mind once I put in the work to develop them.

You just have to actually feel the pain of not having a tool like that, and then buy into the workflow, I guess.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#287

Post by effingwewt »

I've had apps/games I paid for suddenly change to IAP/subscription and completely screw everyone who purchased the original.

Square Enix screwed over android users who'd paid 20/game for the Final Fantasy series (I had purchased them all at one point), and for no reason deprecated the 'old versions' and released new ones (with zero updates/changes to the apps) and charged the full price again.

They never updated the original apps, the same bugs persisted for years, they finally update just to charge again.

I forget the publisher but Titan Quest on Android did the same thing. Shifted to a 'legendary edition' and screwed all original purchasers. Enough people complained that they released the add-ons for the old version at a higher price.

Now I just buy games on Switch or steam. Can't even re-buy the games on switch as after the SE screwing FF7 remake and then android apps I'm done giving them money.

So back to emulators to play the classics before IAPs.

Feel like everything just gets worse instead of the better I'd always imagined =(

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#288

Post by hinkley »

tescocles wrote: post #53
nelox wrote: post #41

The OP states “the reason I tell all my CTO coachees they need everything in writing from their boss in their contract, a new boss will probably only honor what is written down, not spoken promises.” However, he seems to have ignored his own advice and not understood the ManyCam EULA. “… This license is in effect until one of the parties terminates the license. You may terminate the license by no longer using the Man…

I don't know the contract law in the relevant (presumably US) jurisdiction, but surely an asterisk in the contract that's basically: Lifetime perpetual licence!* *but we can cancel any time without any penalty lol teehee is not enforceable? I don't think it would fly in court where I live, it doesn't matter if it was in a signed contract if it's preposterously unfair. edit: and I don't even necessarily think a lifeti…

Saying Lifetime when the license says when we feel like it is lying. Enforceable in court or not, they’re liars.

Liars surrounded by a sea of liars, but still liars.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#289

Post by emodendroket »

Nexxxeh wrote: post #285
emodendroket wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not saying it’s right but the reasoning is easy to understand: offering updates forever for someone who’s never going to give you any more money is profoundly unappealing from a business perspective

But the costs of that customer are generally negligible, whereas the potential loss of advertising from fucking them over may be significant. You're potentially converting your customer into an evangelist for your competitor.

It’s not the costs from the customer so much as permanently foreclosing a large portion of your potential revenue.

Re: ManyCam dishonored my lifetime license

#290

Post by slavik81 »

Veserv wrote: post #263
dahart wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you believe the contract with the customer isn’t legally enforceable? The new owners may just be choosing to break the law because they believe nobody will attempt to sue them over fifty bucks or whatever. I guess you can decide to blame whoever you want, but the legal responsibility for upholding a contract lies with the company , and a change of ownership doesn’t change that from a legal perspective. It also…

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.

Post reply on HN