Free apps badge

[SirWobbyTheFirst]

I make use of the Icons8 custom icons for my applications and their requirement, if you are using it for free, is to include a reference to Icons8 and a link to their website About section of the website, app, etc. If you are paying for it, they don't have the requirement but state that a credit is a nice to have.

I'd be down for something like this with LiveCode. Built with LiveCode, link to the website. But also one should temper their expectations as this combined with paying a small fortune for the software and having no form of starter option will not yield the ROI that you are expecting.

[paul@researchware.com]

The FAQ states that the royalty would be up to 5% and no more - but if there is a minimum sum of $500 required, that means for this to be 5% and assuming no one will pay more than $50 for my mediocre software, I would have to sell 10,000 copies of my software!

10,000 copies (over however long) x $50 per copy is $500,000 and 5% of that is $25,000.

At $50 per copy, for the $500 5% payement (I have no idea if the $500 is correct), the units target is 200 copies (200 x $50 = $10,000 x 5% = $500)

Not weighing to the discussion, just correcting the math.

[stam]

At $50 per copy, for the $500 5% payement (I have no idea if the $500 is correct), the units target is 200 copies (200 x $50 = $10,000 x 5% = $500)

Not weighing to the discussion, just correcting the math.

Yeah you are of course right... was on a long drive on my phone at the time. $500 = numberOfLicences * $50 * 0.05 = $200.
(I missed that "50" lol, just a tiny error )

Still, if the $500 minimum royalty is true, I'd have to sell 200 licences just to not go out of pocket.
Now if was to sell on mobile App Store, where average prices is £1 or less, that would be 10,000 or more...

Hopefully LC will confirm if this is true or not. If true that puts a difficult complexion on things... but I've not seen this anywhere else?

[CasaP]

Hello Simon,

The badge is displayed because the app is free. You are not paying us a percentage on that app. We are considering a mechanism where you can pay some kind of fee to have that badge removed (obviously not based on payments for the app since its free). We'll publish that when its ready.

We are open to feedback on the design and positioning of the label. But it needs to be there - otherwise we are wide open to any commercial enterprise that wants to abuse the free apps offering.

Best Regards,

Heather

Simon et al, Let me put this into perspective of my industry, construction, after reading Heather's response;

"We know you "licensed" the tools from us with real money, but as you are not paying us a percentage of the free charitable houses you build, so we ask you to put our brand on the door of each house, and the all the internal doors. If you don't want to do this, you just pay us another fee. But we will decide at some non defined future date what that fee is. In the meantime, feel free to consult with us to get our approval where those labels go. Until we decide their location, just pay for your YEARLY "licence" for OUR tools and carry on"

Is this the logic? Thank you comrade Heather for the explanation.

WEF "You will own nothing and be happy"

[CasaP]

It's as if developers are ashamed of their choice of tools.

I am not ashamed of my choice of tools, but I my nose is put out of joint if people boss me around as to whether I should announce it or not.

Being in the construction field, NEVER be ashamed of your tools. The tool is a tool, the expert is the person who can use a tool to do the unthinkable.

I watched a guy a few days ago use a drill to do something I thought was impossible. When he finished, I looked around and 5 of us were standing looking at him, then everyone cheered and clapped and asked for a demo of how he just did what we saw. It was amazing.

This is how I approach tools, I have tried so many times to start the LIveCode bandwagon, but have always been too busy. I now have a motivation, that has unfortunately been somewhat deflated by the new licence confusion.