Yeah but I am adding royalties.
> On 11 Jul 2015, at 03:00, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: > >> On Friday 10 July 2015 18:35:24 John C. Turnbull wrote: >> Have ONE Qt product which includes all the bells and whistles and all the >> ports but TWO licenses; an in-house license for those who do not sell their >> products and a commercial license for those who do. >> >> The in-house license could be sold for about $50 per month and includes >> support and upgrades. >> >> The commercial license is either free or something nominal like $10 per >> month plus 5% of sales. >> >> That way *everyone* can afford to use Qt, *everyone* has access to all the >> features and platform, *nobody* has to worry about lawyers and The Qt >> Company can make a fortune even if just a few of the resulting apps make it >> in the big time with massive sales. >> >> It's a win-win-win-win situation! > > That's win-win-lose. It still fails the math test. > > The Indie licence that generated this discussion was $25 per month plus a cut > and it did not generate enough revenue to cover the costs of The Qt Company. > You're proposing to lower it to $10 per month. > > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
