Who invented the software ransom idea?

The idea was first formally proposed as the Street Performer Protocol by Kelsey and Schneier in 1998. Dropcash -powered software ransoms probably began with David Raynes. There are several examples of Paypal-based implementations (including the use of the “ransom” title) before then.

Whoa! $xyz is way too much!

The ransom amount is a final goal, reached by many people contributing smaller amounts. You can contribute as little or as much as you’d like. Rather than buying software for a fixed amount, you can pay whatever you feel the plugin is worth to you: $5, $50, $1, or nothing at all.

What happens if the ransom isn’t reached?

That’s up to the author. The terms and conditions for meeting the ransom should be stated clearly from the beginning. For my own ransom campaigns, I’ve used the following rules:

1. If the ransom has not been reached by the deadline, the software will not be published.
2. In the event that it is not published, contributions of $US 5.00 or more will be refunded. Smaller contributions will be counted towards the next ransom, if there is one.

Other authors are free to use these rules, or different ones, of course.

Demanding money is greedy, and contrary to the ideals of free software/Textpattern/community

Open source developers are not billionaire benefactors on a mission to save the world. They have to eat and pay the rent, just like everyone else. An hour spent writing open source code, or creating a free page design, is an hour not spent earning money at a paid job. If developers can’t make a living producing open source code, they’ll have to spend their time doing something else.

The Street Performer/Ransom protocol is a good deal all round. Nobody pays more than they believe is fair. The author can’t set unreasonable demands, or nobody will pay at all. And once it’s published, the work is free for anyone to copy, modify, and reuse.

Asking money in return for providing a service to willing contributors isn’t greed, it’s a win-win situation. Both sides benefit. The Street Performer Protocol ensures the community benefits also, since published works are made freely available to all.

Insisting that programmers or designers should produce code for your benefit without asking anything in return – now that’s greed.

Why not provide a copy of the work to those who donate, prior to its public release?

Several reasons:

1. It would create an incentive to contribute only the minimum amount necessary to receive a copy.

2. Pre-publication copies would have to be released under a restricted license. In many cases this is impossible: the Textpattern license requires that plugins are released under the GPL, which prohibits such restrictions.

3. It requires resources for licensing, monitoring and policing restrictions on pre-publication copies – a Digital Rights Management regime. This is self-defeating: the whole point of the street performer protocol is to facilitate paid publication in an environment in which DRM is impossible or ineffective.

Doesn’t this violate the GPL?

No. The GPL requires that GPL-derived software, if published, is also licensed under the GPL. It does not require the public release of privately modified code:

The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization.

But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program’s users, under the GPL.

GPL FAQ, Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the public?

Software that is held for ransom is a privately modified copy. As stated above, the GPL does not require its public release.

Similarly, the GPL doesn’t prohibit (or even discourage) receiving money in exchange for software. In fact, the GPL explicitly encourages charging money for software.