Now that everyone seems to be pissing and moaning about the licensing fees for MovableType 3.0 (or migrating to WordPress), I see that Mena has posted a clarification of sorts. Not only that, they've made a few adjustments to their plans based on all the feedback they've received. (Gee, just maybe they're not evil after all?)
As Brad notes, their definition of weblog for licensing purposes is different than the definition of weblog in MovableType. That seems to have been a big source of confusion and frustration for those who didn't actually know that. (Duh, right?)
As for me? Well, I've been perpetually slow when it comes to upgrading my MT install anyway. I'm sure I'll get around to upgrading to MT 3.0 at some point. But first is has to be released. And even then, I need to understand why I should bother. The MT 2.5x and 2.6x versions have served me well for quite a while and with the addition of MT-Blacklist, I really don't find myself wishing for features that don't exist.
Besides, I place a high enough value on my personal time (yes, actual dollars per hour) that switching to another system will certainly be far more expensive than staying where I'm at or paying for a full-blown MT 3.x license. I'm sure the switch would be a multi-hour process and that's after I evaluated and selected from the popular options.
But maybe that's just me.
I was one of the folks who donated to Ben and Mena way back whenever it was that I sent them some cash. Why'd I do it? Was it to get the key that allowed my weblog to be noted on their site every time it updated? Hardly. I was impressed as hell with what they built and were giving away for free. And I still am.
I'm not in High School making $5 an hour anymore. I can afford to pay for stuff that saves me hours every single month.
I never realized how many folks in the blog echo chamber were so cost-sensitive and willing to jump the gun and turn their backs on a fantastic piece of software.
Well, now I know. So much for loyalty. The judgment has been largely instant and harsh.
Does this mean I'll never leave MovableType? Of course not. Don't be stupid. If something far better comes along or something else evolves to the point that it's worth my while, maybe I'll switch. But for the time being, I've got more important stuff to do and that includes writing here rather than trying to figure out how to replace a perfectly good piece of software that I have the source code for anyway.
Posted by jzawodn at May 15, 2004 08:51 AM
You write "As Brad notes, their definition of weblog for licensing purposes is different than the definition of weblog in MovableType. That seems to have been a big source of confusion and frustration for those who didn't actually know that. (Duh, right?)"
Ignoring the fact that this is wholly at odds with the most obvious reading of their license where they write:
“Weblog” means a single Web site viewable at a single URL (Uniform Resource Locator), consisting of one or more weblogs as generated by the Software via the “Create New Weblog” function of the Software.
There's no "duh" here except on the part of MT.
The more I read that part of the license the more I have to laugh. Hofstadter should use an example of that kind of linguistic containment as an example when talking about sets, supersets, and set confusion... and it could have been so easily avoided.
I'm still trying to decide what I think about the 3.0 stuff, mainly - oddly - because I don't think I like MT that much. Unlike you and Kasia and everybody else I know who runs MT, I have had nothing but trouble with it (installing, upgrading, tracking down "undefined variable" warnings from perl). It is probably "just me", but I've burned so much time on it that I dread touching the thing.
Because I'm a consultant and write about stuff in my work, I'm pretty sure I couldn't honestly claim a noncommercial license, so I'm looking at $200 (minus my contributions) for the upgrade. I expect to spend much more than that in my own time dicking around with it. If it worked as well for me as it does for you, I'd just cut a check and forget about it.
One of the downsides of Open Source (which MT is not) is that it's created a whole generation of cheapskates with a sense of entitlement to the products of the labor of others.
Steve,
It's not an "entitlement" attitude, it's simply a (for me anyway) "this is priced outside the realm of what i am willing to pay" situation.
For me to have the flexibility I have now, in creating blogs for friends on the fly with a couple clicks of the mouse, etc., requires paying a craptastic amount of money (especially since I don't actually *see* any of that added value).
The "base price" to support my current existing users, 17 authors over seven or eight blogs, would be $189.95 for the first 13 authors, and $39.80 for an additional 4 authors, totalling $229.75.
Sorry, for someone who does this "just to put their words up on the web" and isn't making money off it, that's just way far from being "even" on the cost/value ratio - to me anyway.
At that cost/value ratio, I'm much better off spending $230.00 worth of my time installing different software with no artificial limitations, and then not having to worry about ponying up $9.95 because a fifth friend wants me to click three URLs and add them a blog (a transaction, I might add, which incurs *no* additional resources from SixApart to do).
Until this morning, the license said EXPLICITLY that a "weblog" was a weblog in the software, NOT a compilation of weblogs to make a single site.
This was a CHANGE in the license, not a mere clarification, and it drastically alters the scope of the free license.
And, as I try to tell everyone, much of the furor isn't about being asked to pay, it's about being asked to pay after we were told MT3 would be entirely free and full-featured.. This is all we were ever told, and payment tiers based on the most basic features weren't even mentioned until the day of release. Yes, there are cheapskates among us. But I don't think that's the majority of the uproar. Many of us have long said we'd be willing to pay for MT. It's the deceptive way it was done that has people angry.
Hey, aren't you supposed to have a MT badge on your site somewhere? That's part of the current license.
I found Ben & Mena to be fairly flexible in licensing. I run MT as a non-commercial license, free. I did an online art project that I wanted to offer for sale at the end of the project. But that would put me into a commercial license category. So I contacted MT in advance, with a license-skirting proposal. If my artwork sold, I would put all the funds towards a license, in fact, the artwork was offered for sale for exactly the price of a commercial license, I would keep nothing for myself. But if the artwork did not sell, could I stay as a noncommercial licensee? Mena wrote me back and consented to my proposal, giving me the short-term benefit of a commercial license while keeping my amateur status.
The artwork didn't sell. I'm still on a non-commercial license. I'm still a starving artist.
Loyalty? Ha! That's a rare commodity with software. Good to see that you are putting things in a business perspective, Jeremy. Peggy Sue and Johnny who use MT for blogging with their friends shouldn't be impacted by these licensing changes. The businessowner who is making $$ on their MT-based blog will be, but then that should be a business decision for him/her as well.
Jeremy:
I place a high enough value on my personal time (yes, actual dollars per hour) that switching to another system will certainly be far more expensive than staying where I'm at or paying for a full-blown MT 3.x license. Unfortunately, not everyone has much of an income. For people like me, the situation is that of having a moderate amount of time and little money, but no easy way to convert more time to money, so spending time is much more affordable than spending money. In the shitty economy we currently have (whether here in Germany or in your neck o' the planet), I think it is the same for a lot of people.
willing to jump the gun and turn their backs on a fantastic piece of software. Fantastic it is, but it's not exactly three orders of magnitude better than any of the competition. If a piece of competing software has an MT import function, there is little rational reason to stick to MT at all cost — but then, that's just what you write further on.
And finally, as has been pointed out, the outcry was not so much because of the freeloaders complaining about their beer, but because 6A broke promises and because the pricing scheme is exorbitant.
But the sky ain't falling for those who got MT 2.x under the old terms and who aren't upgrading, anyway. Licenses don't retroactively change from under you (though they might expire or be revoked — if such a term was in there to begin with).
And if they keep offering the 2.x series under the old license, I don't see how this can be a big deal either.
"Hey, aren't you supposed to have a MT badge on your site somewhere? That's part of the current license."
Ergh, yeah. In the middle of redesign, though --- more like the beginning, really --- and none of the supplemental stuff has gone up. I figure all the references to my using MT on my home page right now are sufficient for the time being. ;)
Lanny, actually, I was referring to Jeremy's site lacking the MT badge. I didn't mean to flush you out too. I only commented on it because I was wondering if Jeremy was still running MT, his system is so customized, it's getting hard to tell what it's based on.
I agree -- people should quit complaining or switch to different software. If you have tim to spend hours bloggingm you can afford to pay a bit for blogging software. :)
I developed a weblog for a client on v2.661, not knowing when v3 would be released. I switched a number of templates and plugins over with no problem , it took maybe ten minutes. Granted I didn't have to move entries across...
A lot of the uproar I think comes users who have set up loads of weblogs for friends using MT. In recent versions this has been *a feature*, and perhaps far more instrumental in MT rapid rise then Six Apart might realize. And the new licensing model is way to expensive for these users. From feature to f-you, not exactly the best way to thank the customers that have been pushing MT to thousands upon thousands of people who otherwise wouldn't be using it...
Derek:
It's not an "entitlement" attitude, it's simply a (for me anyway) "this is priced outside the realm of what i am willing to pay" situation.
I gather "what you are willing to pay" is zero.
I suppose you wouldn't be upset if your boss suddenly decided your salary was more than "he was willing to pay" and asked you to work for free? Movable Type has every right to change whatever they want for their products and you have every right to find something else.
If you think your time is best spent researching and installing a different application, so be it. Some people would prefer to pony up the money and get on with their life using a good product that does what they need.
