Archive
Monthly
Go
|
|
DNN Blog
Jan
3
Posted by:
Shaun Walker
1/3/2007
As an open source project, DotNetNuke is available under an enterprise friendly BSD license. Since the license has no usage restrictions, there has never been any requirement for managing license restrictions in the core platform. However, as a web application framework, DotNetNuke has an advanced extensibility model which allows third party features to integrate seamlessly with the base platform. And while some of these third party features are offered under an open source license, there is also a rapidly evolving commercial ecosystem of products being offered under traditional software licensing models.
In simple terms a software license is an agreement where the owner of a piece of software grants permission for others to use the software under very specific conditions. In a commercial model, the license generally needs to be purchased for a fee. Once a license has been acquired, the vendor is then obligated to deliver a version of the software which provides the functionality specified in the license agreement. This is typically done by providing the software on physical media, providing an ability to download the software electronically, or by providing an "activation key" which transforms a limited trial version into a fully working product. Once this process is complete, the challenge for the software vendor is how to enforce the usage restrictions in the license agreement. Most vendors would prefer to rely on a simple "trust" model, where the responsibility for adhering to licensing terms is passed on to the customer. The model requires very little administration; however, it does have the risk of being significantly abused, resulting in lost revenue or even worse implication for the vendor. To mitigate this risk, most vendors generally try to employ some additional techniques for enforcing the conditions in their license.
As part of our ongoing efforts to provide more services for the DotNetNuke ecosystem, we have been gathering feedback and conducting business analysis on how we can assist developers with their commercial licensing needs. The following information represents the set of high level requirements we have gathered on this topic thus far.
Licensing technology needs to integrate seamlessly with the base platform, without extra configuration or environmental constraints. It needs to be reliable and robust. It needs to work in a disconnected manner with no external dependencies which could impose network latency, performance, security, or privacy implications. It needs to work in an Internet as well as an Intranet scenario. It needs to be simple for the developer to integrate with their products and administrate.
Licensing technology needs to be available to individual software developers. It should not require them to bundle their products with other third party products. Brand identity is a very tanglible asset which consumers use to identify quality and value; therefore, developers work hard to build their brand and create recognition and loyalty. Bundling generally leads to brand dilution and other issues based on association.
Licensing technology needs to provide access to customer information. Customer data is an essential business asset which ultimately becomes part of the valuation of any successful software company. It provides the business intelligence necessary to identify trends in your customers and potential deficiencies in your products. It also provides the direct communication which allows you to provide a high level of support, pursue inside sales opportunities, and cultivate relationships and loyalty.
Licensing technology needs to be flexible. Developers require a high level of control so they can adapt their business model to the evolving needs of their customers. A high level of control also provides the ability to automate administrative tasks and deliver real-time solutions. Dependence on a third party can be a significant business risk if not properly mitigated, as it introduces another point of failure which is outside of your immediate control. In addition, developers need to be wary of long term commitments, exclusivity, or other restrictive business tactics which can affect their future opportunities.
In general, DotNetNuke's approach is to provide value added tools and guidance which help developers create solutions to complex problems. At this time, there are a number of areas that we have identified where we can provide assistance to developers. One minor enhancement which is now in scope is to provide unique identifiers at the portal and host level which developers can rely on for generating localized activation keys. In addition, we will include a standard uasability mechanism where customers can enter their activation keys within DotNetNuke, as well as a secure data store and API which developers can use to save and retrieve these keys. In terms of generating keys and validating them within your products, we are in active discussions with a number of highly reputable component vendors who already possess enterprise-grade licensing technology with a long distinguished track record. Our goal is to work with these vendors to create an affordable, robust solution for DotNetNuke developers.
Our current plans are to release these new services in the first part of 2007. We truly want this to be a collaborative effort so we will be working closely with our Benefactor community and Review Program participants. We anticipate that the feedback, suggestions, and beta testing we get from this highly focussed group will ensure an optimal solution for the entire community.
10 comment(s) so far...
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
Great news Shaun! It's initiatives like these that make the DNN community even more worth while for developers
By ErikVB on
1/11/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
This is good news Shaun - I spent a few weeks developing a licensing system as per my blog here:
http://www.smart-thinker.com/Blog/tabid/1070/EntryID/8/Default.aspx
The biggest problem was licensing by Portal which I believe is essential for us vendors - some people buy a module and then use it on a site with 5000 child portals and effectively "resell" our modules to their child portal customers to add value to their product without us being compensated.
I look forward to updating my modules to work with the core licensing and tools. Let me know if you have any questions about the licensing system I chose (based on ASP.NET LicenseProviders...)
Thanks
Rodney
Smart-Thinker.com
By rodneyjoyce on
1/11/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
For many many of us out here this is a very touchy subject. I am personally very skeptical of DRM. Microsoft's continued intrusion in this area is very frustrating for me.
I think the opens source community is actually more skeptical than me.
I actually have quite a bit of empathy for the companies working to make a living as DNN developers. It is a challenge.
If people can come up with fair use for their modules I think the acceptance of the licensing model will be more widely accepted.
Please take a look at the licensing setup at:
http://www.smart-thinker.com
This is one of the most balanced and fair use I have seen. It is fair to the developer and the buyer.
By pspeth on
1/11/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
I'm unwilling to pay per portal/installation and am always looking for licensing models such as -
http://www.ventrian.com/Subscribe/LicenseDetails.aspx
Especially when they provide excellent products/service.
Now you have me wondering how they make money...
By tbaker000 on
9/28/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
Great idea Shaun!
Randy Walker
By vonlar on
3/18/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
Great news! An API is exactly what's needed here. If we could add some API to allow for automatic Update check (the way core has it), it would be ever more awesome.
As far as touchy subjects, this area is hardly the place to discuss it - take it to Forums. I just want to mention that if a vendor is looking to be compensated for their work, to call it unfair... Socialism already failed everywhere. No reason to debate it here again.
By vitkoz on
3/18/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
When developing the licensing model, don't forget the point of view from the many users out there! Then I think: If a module holds what is promised, DNN users in generally are willing to pay the mostly very small license fees of e module.
But there is a main problem with the actual selling model: Too many modules available offer not what is promised (quality, functionality, support)! If you are looking for a module that solves a specific problem – every DNN user has certainly bought already modules that can’t be used then… a review function such as offered in snowcovered, the market place or the community module section isn’t too valuable because it is not objective.
In my mind, so one focus should be on an easy to use trial model – certainly with an easy to use function to convert a trial module in a fully licensed module. Then user can decide what is worth a module for them and the market will spread good modules/service from the less good. At the end this helps finally to raise quality of DNN and additional modules.
By bennowyss on
9/28/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
I guess I will play devil's advocate on this one. I have worked with Atari corp., Sierra, Dynamix, Electronic Arts to name a few in development, quality assurance etc. Licensing/Activation/Piracy have been and still are ENORMOUS issues in this technology. The bottom line however still remains the same. The prospective consumer will generally pay and be honest. The others simply never will.
Product activation through DNN itself simply makes no sense. For the cracker they will always find ways around it, these would never be sales to begin with. Activation can readily be done as part of the actual modules... nothing new. DNN core should not assume the responsibility of protecting 3P's just as MSIE, Netscape, Opera assume responsibility for proper registration and purchase of plug in's or access to say pay web's. The DNN core should be VERY concerned however with the prospect of DNN itself being taken. That is to say someone re-works code in China, slaps some eCommerce this/that to it and decides they are going to market it as a commercial venture running DNN into a variety of prospect problems. Unfortunately international copyright, even patents these days are simply being ignored. In China as an example commercial software is mass replicated and flooded unto global markets where publishers and developers never see a red cent of the end sales. This stuff can readily be found at places such as eBay. Your $50 new release game at Walmart has about a $42 dealer cost, yet there it is at eBay for $29. Its organized crime and billions (yes) dollars.
DNN does need (IMHO) to place concern with 3P's. 3P's can protect their modules from attempted piracy/misuse through the same mechinisms that publishers/shareware authors currently do. Again, for the purchasing consumer they will always purchase. The crook will always find a way not to. DNN core IMHO should not take on the responsibility of this. However, DNN core (IMHO) should consider 3P's as I noted in another blog. That is to say the quality assurance. When the customer who will pay for modules purchases 3P module(s) that are garbage this will affect that consumer buying any other module, it breaks the trust. This ultimately impacts the good 3P's and ultimately DNN.
Some form of "certfied developer" vs "not" is necessary IMHO. This will do more for 3P's than integrated activation ever could do. As I explained in another blog entry, we purchased a forms module. We set up some forms. When we entered data we found that we could not view what was entered, cant delete it. In contacting the developer we get 1 line responses and a feeling of basically "Oh well, too bad so sad..."
As a programmer I realize the 3P risks. However, most DNN webmasters are not engineers. When they end up in such a scenario the trust gets broken. As I stated in the other blog, "How many prospective DNN webmasters have given up on DNN due to modules they purchase that do not work or do not work as advertised?"
DNN evolves and this for any development house is an accepted reality just as Electronic Arts accepts that Windows 98 would eventually be replaced. If EA wants to stay in the game they do new development for the platform. They do not just kludge together some goo code in the hopes, "I can still make money at this".
If I create a module today and vend it and three months from now DNN 4.6 comes out and my module does not work then I have a responsibility to the customers, DNN and ultimately other 3P's to fix it. If my module is completely incompatible with DNN 5.0 then I need make a new one perhaps salvaging what I can from the previous. But I dont just slap a bunch of goo in and say, "there done".
I would put forth that for end user quality assurance needs a actual certified developer commission need be established. It'd take some thought on how to go about all this and I'd be happy to add any input I can. But thus far from what I can see and knowing how end users of software purchases think a problem exists in the 3P development community of those who create true quality modules vs those who just ride the wave negatively impacting DNN, webmasters and the DNN community. As they say, a few bad apples can ruin sales of bushells.
By rgtss on
9/28/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
Nice one Shaun.
That would be just what i would be looking for.
By cambot on
9/28/2007
|
Re: DotNetNuke Commercial Module Licensing
Great idea.
I am currently developing a number of commercial modles and was wondering when this mght be available.
Adrian Loughman (cambot)
By cambot on
9/28/2007
|
|