Comment by hutzlibu | Hacker News Reader

Comment by hutzlibu | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Yes but some companies think they need trade secrets and or licence fees. And GPL companies somehow have not replaced them. So they maybe have a point in todays capitalistic world?

I mean, how many articles and blogs are there about how to make money with foss and how many desperation and frustration is around that topic? How many games exist, that are donation funded?

I mean, please tell me, I want to publish a game, how could I make money with it with the GPL?

Selling it to only one person, who then can publish the code?

Having the code open, but serve ads or ingame purchases, rewarding addictive behavior? Sounds not so ethical either.

That leaves only donations and traditionally people do not value things they get for free. Some do and I hope their number will grow. But as of status quo the majority does not. Some GPL games I know make money, because they sell at steam and the users do not know they could also download it. Is that really ethical? What other GPL buisness modells exists?

A game is not a professional software, people would be willing to buy support contracts for.

I know how you might make money. You build a game. Maybe its fun and ripe for mods like minecraft. Open source it under GPL. Build a community of hackers/gamers who want to learn and collaborate. Have an awesome collection of mods for your game. Once you build a name for yourself, take donations or release a new game or talk at conferences.

Soo, assuming I build something like Minecraft, something that made the developer millions (I think over 100) via the conventional way.

And your proposal for how to make money with such a moneymaker game and the GPL is eventually down the years take on donations and talk at conferences? Was that irony? Then I missed it. Because the context was someone above claimed that it is only the stupid lawers fault, that companies reject the gpl.

If you don't like the idea, you don't have to do it. I mean you're making games. There's not much money in that to begin with.

>I mean you're making games. There's not much money in that to begin with.

I know you mentioned Minecraft, but it's not 2010 anymore. That "poor" indie creator sold off the game for 2.5b dollars and it seems like he still got the short end of the stick given how big the game is.

I'm fine with open source games, but the fact of the matter is that mods need a community and community is hard to build. If you're trying to replicate MC's success, note that it also wasn't made with modibility Orr convinent licenses in mind. You gotta make something appealing first and then you can futz about with nodding support if people bite.

I also hate the "make a name for yourself" angle. I guess even amongst programmers there will be people "working for exposure".

Nah, by that point I may as pitch to some billionaire studio and make a hefty salary that way. Or you know, sell your IP for actual millions if it's that valuable. If "exposure" is the alternate currency I'll happily sell out. I'm not my game IP.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com