Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Rune wrote:
>> Still, there are people who both can and will
>> pay for a license to use my files commercially,
>> and I'd like to take that opportunity for *me*
>> to make a few bucks on the work I have done.
>> And I think it's only fair.
>
> I don't think it will work.  Think about what you
> will actually be selling: You sell the right to
> use a program to make money.

Sounds sensible to me.

> Do you know any product that successfully followed
> such a concept?

I don't know what products have *successfully* used that concept, but
there sure seems to be a lot of programs that use it.
<http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=%22non%2Dcommercial+u
se%22>
(I know that not *all* of these are programs.)

Oh, and I've sold some commercial licenses for my other include files in
the past, so that would count as a successful example too.

And I don't see how it's so different from for example a poser mesh,
that you pose and texture yourself and then put in your scene. In both
cases, it is something that you can place in your scene, and there are
some things given, and some things that can be customized by the user.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision:  http://runevision.com (updated Oct 19)
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message