Open source, closed, or something else(s) ? Food, Shelter and Health insurance ain't abundant

Random or Off Topic
1

Love Jason’s FluidTouch - Wireless FluidNC Pendant, and appreciate all work Jason does and contributes to the community.

The donation comments in that thread got me thinking about something I keep running into. We usually talk in terms of open source or closed source. I’m wondering what “third option” makes sense for small indie developers wanting to make cool CNC and Maker stuff.

One option:

  • Free binaries for everyone
  • Donations welcome
  • Source and designs shared only with people who actually contribute, either financially or by improving the project
  • Shared under a simple NDA so people/companies can’t just grab it, clone it, and sell it back to the world.

Not talking about locking anything down forever. Mostly trying to stop the pattern where a person (or small group/company…) builds something cool and a bigger company scoops it up and makes the money. I don’t see this middle option used much in the Maker community even though the problem keeps repeating… Reducing the incentive for Indie Devs to make cool stuff…

AI tech bros keep talking about a future with abundance for all. Based on the reality I’m seeing, that’s :ox::poop:.

It’s hard to pay bills by working on open source when the software itself is the product. Most people I know rely on hardware sales or random side work to keep projects alive, until if/when they have enough momentum. Would be nice if makers could build sustainable software without also needing a hardware business glued to the side of it.

For context, I’ve got two kids in college draining savings at ~$100k/yr. Sustainable hobby vs financial black hole is on my mind more than I’d prefer.

So I’m curious if anyone here has tried hybrid licensing models or anything similar. Sponsorware, delayed open source, contributor access only, NDA based sharing, or something else(s) entirely?

Not trying to start a licensing argument. Just trying to figure out what practical models actually work in this space so it’s possible to build cool stuff, still afford groceries, and, ideally fund buying more cool stuff.

2 Likes
2

Great idea @azab2c. Would something like https://www.patreon.com/ check most of those boxes?

3

I’ll chip in on this.

Some people are altruistic enough to share the work they’ve done with everyone. In one sense the work is done, shared or not and to make it available costs nothing. In fact sharing it you take on a debit - the demands, complaints expectations and judgement of others. It would be easier to say and share nothing.

So for me when someone does share, expecting nothing in return, I feel very grateful.

In the same way someone else has shared their effort without expectation of reward I would like to share my appreciation - again with no expectation of anything, no strings attached. It’s the golden rule, treat others how you want to be treated. It’s just nice to be nice.

2 Likes
4

These points are where it all breaks down. Sadly, people don’t respect NDAs and unless you are prepared to litigate like mad, you eventually lose control of the sources.

If you are prepared to litigate like mad, you don’t need the money in the first place.

5 Likes
5

V1 operates in that third option space, pretty much.

Free STLs, free lists of hardware, but no original CAD designs, and no commercial use of the designs. It’s OK to use the machine to produce things that you are going to sell, but it’s not OK to print V1 parts and sell them.

So while V1 machines are not open source, they’re still available for people to make their own, and nobody needs to pay for the designs. V1 (Ryan) has a Patreon account, where people can pay in to support the machines if they want, and of course you can buy printed parts, hardware kits etc for the machines, which also supports the machine development.

Pretty sure though that while there are people authorized to sell V1 printed parts, they still don’t have source CAD work, just a license to build/sell the parts. I presume that V1 gets a cut, and it seems to be working.

And of course Ryan does have open source work out there, like the MP3DP printers, where we got the original CAD to work from.

1 Like
6

And the Jackpot CNC controllers.

1 Like
7

:100:

8

Thanks for the kind words. There are a few reasons I’m sharing like I am but I have zero issue with people wanting compensation for their work. That feels like a crazy thing to have to say but I feel like most people don’t comprehend the effort required for software.

In general, I think the open source model is largely broken because not enough people donate. Then there are always people that demand fixing something or add some enhancement despite not having contributed to the project in any way.

For something I created, I would feel even more of an obligation if someone monetarily contributed, even if that contribution was small compared to the effort required.

For something that is software only, it is a bit tricky. I like the free/premium model of DrawingBotv3. There is an open source free version, and then a closed source premium version.
SonarSonic/DrawingBotV3: DrawingBotV3 is a software for converting images into vector art

At some point, you have to trust people to some degree, even if not everyone complies. You can do some kind of licensing, which is a pain in itself. That’s just another thing to manage.

I completely respect Christian not wanting to share Estlcam source code even with an NDA. Once it’s out there, you can’t get the cat back in the bag.

5 Likes
9

Tbh if you offered those 7 inch panels with a case, preinstalled with your firmware I am confident people would buy them. Even if you only added 10 of 20 bux per unit markup. Because 20bux for something that ‘just works’ is worth it to an awful lot of people.

2 Likes
10

I always share all of my files in build threads and my website, but education is also free in Germany. :stuck_out_tongue:

3 Likes
11

I tend to agree. That is why I ordered my LR4 through Jonathan as well ordering a prebuilt pendant as a handheld controller. Could I have built both, yes. I love tinkering with stuff, but my problem is I have limited bandwidth to learn by trail and error. I just need to purchase a working product and then modify and upgrade from there as I am learning to use the product vs learning to build the machine with which make the products I am needing. Don’t get me wrong, I love to learn and to then re-share that knowledge, but I think there is a consumption market for completed products vs just supplying the plans from which to assemble/construct.

4 Likes
12

I’m not sure I could make it any easier short of doing that. We’ll wait for the firmware to stabilize a bit and then maybe I’ll reach out to the Elecrow contact I got from Bart.

4 Likes
13

Wouldn’t it be neat if they offered an option of preflashed with your firmware and when someone selected that you got the affiliate commission automatically!

1 Like
14

Okay so I watched this video during breakfast from shopnation, buying a new building, just finishing a custom house and shop build. I was kinda shocked when I looked at the shop page. I mean they have heaps of 3D printers I figured it was some sort of similar biz.

A few dollars for digital plans and a solid markup on 3dprinted parts…but no print your own files or licenses. Really makes me wonder if I am doing business all wrong. Do I need some open source and some fully closed source stuff to keep paying bills?

1 Like
15

Motivations are everything. It is also not a fair world. Some projects end up with a glut of support while others (with equal potential) end up with nearly nothing.

If you are a software developer trying to build wealth or pay for large college tuitions, you would be best to maximize your income by going to a FAANG company or similar and just investing fully there until your needs are met. There is a substrategy that aligns well with this, which is the FIRE movement to use that wealth to build perpetual wealth through a boglehead-like investing strategy. If you have earned enough that you won’t spend the money on your next paycheck, you’re working for free (see the book Die With Zero).

If you are trying to maximize your fulfillment from a project, then partially open source would mean you might be able to force yourself into the pilot seat of a project, share it with everyone, and gain fellow contributors while keeping greedy companies from being able to replicate your results. Very few projects would be able to give you long lasting profits from a project like this. They do exist (and without thinking too hard, I would say V1 is in this category).

If you want your project to have the largest chance to survive, in some form, at all costs: Fully open source and a lot of altruism is an effective strategy. If you release something with MIT or even GPL, then a commercial company can decide to pick up the reigns and bring your project further than you were able to. You can also get malicious contributors that would push your project in a direction you’re not comfortable with. But the contributions that will endure are the ones the users will pick up. Sandify has never made a profit, but Sysiphus has pulled it into their user app (with my permission, but they didn’t need it). That project will continue even if I get hit by a bus today. Bob makes a ton of contributions to sandify and he wants my review and approval. But if he wanted to make Bobify and push stuff I don’t approve of, he can. If people prefer that, then I’m out. I didn’t choose MIT for my benefit. I chose it for the project’s benefit.

There are some good examples of projects that are open source, and make money. But honestly, they are more like winning the lottery or having a successful startup → IPO. It is rare. Very rare. Home Assistant is a really good example. The main software is open source, but there is a component that depends on a cloud server and that component costs real money to operate. HA offers a subscription to the cloud component and they make enough profit from that to pay a couple of dedicated developers to stay and perform maintenance and new features. They also gain a TON of free support for a lot of hardware integrations. There is no chance a for profit company like Amazon could do the workload of all HA development for the amount that it pulls in from subscriptions. For every one HA project there are 100k projects without any traction.

Another great example is FluidNC. Bart had already made a couple of huge contributions to CNC. He made grbl_esp because he loved it and he started making boards because no one else would. But he chose open source because he didn’t want to do it alone. His boards and the support from board manufacturers pay for his time and Mitch’s now and the project has substantial life. It wasn’t always clear that would work. I’m sure at some point he was working 40+ hour weeks and selling 2 boards per month. He would have made a lot more money working at a startup if he had known he was going to have a successful business. He’s not doing it for the money. But the money plays an important role in keeping the business motivated.

Some other huge projects like ubuntu, mozilla or redhat make money by either selling support or including google as the default search engine and charging for that. Blender is another weird case that is huge because it is the industry standard and businesses that depend on it know to pay for it. These are super rare and operate more as a business that has to be open source because of rarly legal decisions.

There are many big open source projects that don’t make much or any money. FreeCAD, for example. There are a ton of interested users and developers working for praise and somehow it keeps going. These usually depend on contributors being interested and having the luxury to donate time to a project they love. Slic3r was the gold standard for a long time. PrusaSlicer, BambuStudio, QidiStudio, OrcaSlicer are all that project and they are open source because that original project was loved and the early decision was to force all derivatives to be open.

I don’t hate on anyone choosing any path. Christian making Estlcam and Estlcam firmware closed source doesn’t bother me at all. But if kiri:moto was just as useful, I would definitely praise Stewart much more for his generous devotion to the project. You have to appreciate it when someone donates their time for the love of a project. You can also appreciate a single developer creating something high quality and not wanting to share the source. It isn’t a war, just a difference in motivation.

I do get bothered if a company like bambu or creality sucks in open source and tries to close up any changes to it. That’s not fair or legal. I wish more companies learned about what happened to linksys/openwrt and would respect and include the community from the start.

1 Like
16

If you wanted to go into that realm, I would try to come up with an idea of something you could sell that would add to the value of your business and not compete with it.

Also look for ways to gain money without taking your life from you. ShopNation sells digital plans. It costs nothing to copy and paste those. So he has a revenue stream that does not take his time. I’ve always thought your business is hard because you need to be involved whenever you make a dollar. If there was a way for you to put it almost the same effort if you sold 10 or 10k, then you would have a chance at making a long lasting improvement to the wealth of V1.

That said, one opportunity is being able to sell your support. We give it out for free here. But still, there are several people who wish to pay for someone they can get on a zoom with to troubleshoot their machines. If you could find a way to make yourself, or a few regulars, available for support and charge by the hour, you could have an additional revenue stream that would be aligned with the core V1 business. It would also make the decision easier for a small cabinet business to buy a V1 machine if they knew they could call for support if they were faced with a deadline. B2B support can be lucrative because businesses know the tradeoff between money and time. And sometimes they have a lot more money than time.

I don’t love the idea of making a dust collection closed source add on for the LR. Or making your parametric table plans only available behind a paywall. But if that is how you go forward, I’m still with you. My biggest fear is preverse incentives where the MPCNC TNG has some special feature that makes your table or your dust collector accessory the only viable solution. If the incentives are towards a proprietary component or accesory, then it makes the project weaker.

I do sometimes wonder if you had started closed source if you would be a multimillionaire right now, or if it would have never left the kitchen table. Impossible to predict.

4 Likes
17

I think I need to start with putting the donation links in a few more places with a little more emphasis on it. “$5 goes a long way to keeping this project moving”…or something like that.

I don’t want to change anything but I do have an odd feeling I have never done this right.

I have been urged to sign up for different platforms, github pay, patreon, memberships, and at the time I really hated the feeling of “begging” for support. I feel a little differently now. It is not begging, it is giving it away for free to those that do not have the means and letting the ones that do have the means to give a little to put it at the front of their minds. My time is worth something and donations are clear vote with a wallet. So if I got more from lets say a docs donate link than a cad file donate link I would spend more time with the docs. (p.s. mkdocs material is getting a massive overhaul, I am nervous)

Some people do go way above and beyond with donations, but I think a little bit from a lot of people is more “fair/right”, than a lot from a few.

With all that said, far and away the best way to give back is answering a question in the forums. Fast, friendly, and problem solved is better than money.

5 Likes
18

There are a lot of projects where people give away the project, but charge extra for things like, access to STEP files, etc.

It’s hard to control and you know some bad actors might let them out in the wild for people who haven’t paid, but it gives a way for people who want more access and are willing to pay just for ease of mods or planning, to pay more.

I have paid for CAD access from some projects before

3 Likes
19

Prebuilt sections. E.g. pendants or pre-configured tablets.?

And some plans based stuff. Like tables.

Maybe even a share setup, where community members can publish for low cost plans sets that are affordable to download individually and provide an appropriate share to the creator.

Keep the machine parts files free, keep selling kits, sell premium stuff (like what JJ is doing) under license.

Edit to add

Please do this. It isn’t obvious to folks you’re a one-man shop. People all the time show up here and assume you have many employees doing things like shipping & receiving or community support. Many are mind blown that we’re here as volunteers and you’re the sole proprietor.

I tell you all the time you’re punching way above the single person shop level of capability.
Let folks know.

3 Likes
20

Adding this to my priority to-do list.

4 Likes