[Bf-committers] Add-ons in Blender for commercial services

[Ton Roosendaal]

Hi,

Be careful to not name this 'commercial addons'. It's fully GPL compliant scripts, that just connect to paid services online. Or to special hardware or so.

-Ton-

--------------------------------------------------------
Ton Roosendaal  -  ton at blender.org   -   www.blender.org
Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute
Entrepotdok 57A  -  1018AD Amsterdam  -  The Netherlands



On 8 Aug, 2013, at 16:03, Patrick Shirkey wrote:

> I get the impression that the "commercial" addons will be promoted as such
> and maybe also have a "special" highlighted section in the addons list
> and/or the web archive? (Tastefully done of course)
> 
> A way for companies to say "We actively support Blender *and* we sell
> services around it too because it is a viable commercial platform for our
> business model". Still Open Source Software but with a view towards
> commercial interests.
> 
> IMO, it fits well with the Blender Network model. Commercial Artists using
> open source software. Why not have commercial addons too?
> 
> 
> --
> Patrick Shirkey
> Boost Hardware Ltd
> 
> 
> On Thu, August 8, 2013 11:00 pm, Bastien Montagne wrote:
>> I find it pretty sensible to ask a company that sells products and makes
>> benefits from it to contribute to Blender fund, if they want to use
>> Blender as a kind of support/communication tool (even though banners &
>> co would not be allowed).
>> 
>> Adding their addon into Blender release may attract new users to
>> Blender, but it will first of all attract new potential clients for
>> those companies!
>> 
>> This has nothing to see with addons that are simply adding features to
>> Blender, and which will (mostly) never give any (financial) benefits to
>> their coders.
>> 
>> On 08/08/2013 14:50, Angus Hollands wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Just an initial note; I'm using the batched summary, so I apologise if
>>> I've
>>> missed something, or am reiterating someone else's opinion.
>>> 
>>> With regards to these plans, I struggle to identify how a "commercial"
>>> add-on is different from a "community" developed add-on. Unless there
>>> are
>>> plans to add an interface that provide some additional functionality to
>>> the
>>> commercial developer, I don't think this is the way to go. The reason
>>> being
>>> is this; it looks to me as though we're selectively charging developers
>>> to
>>> use a subset of an open source project that non commercial developers
>>> have
>>> access to. I'm aware that there are scrutinous policies to ensure that
>>> we
>>> don't let substandard works into trunk, so in that respect the
>>> commercial
>>> add-on is treated no differently.
>>> It reminds me of a recent experience, in which people with employment
>>> that
>>> was connoted to be well paid were targeted as part of a fundraiser. If
>>> we
>>> are to introduce a fee to support development, that should be enforced
>>> upon
>>> all contributors, not just those from commercial origin. How do we
>>> determine when someone is commercial etc; it seems to be to be rather
>>> invasive.
>>> I am fully in support of supporting the development fund; no matter the
>>> cause, financial incentives are effective, but I'm not sure that I would
>>> personally agree with using it in this manner. Indeed, apply points one,
>>> two and three to all developers, but not necessarily number four.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Angus Hollands (agoose77)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>> 
> 
> 
> --
> Patrick Shirkey
> Boost Hardware Ltd
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers