Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

Disclaimer: I'm not against Ovi. I just don't see a clear picture in how Ovi (Nokia?) wants to position itself with regard to OSS projects in Extras.

Two questions:

1. Why is it taken as granted they have to search in two different places without considering any collaboration between Extras and Ovi ? Again, sounds a bit like a variant of Select. I would not mind Ovi (semi-)automatically listing Extras projects. Is that unacceptable to the Ovi team ?

2. Why is it important then to have a strong and united Extras then ? A lot of effort has been put to making a Extras a better place for end users, and now it is suggested it makes no difference as most people will not go (or, rather, be directed) there anyway.

I guess that's why I suggested improving Select :rolleyes:

EDIT: When I say semi-automatically, I mean something as 'promote to Ovi' alongside of 'promote to Extras'.

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

There is a simple beauty in that. :D

And it gets to my point about liability.

Let's envision this scenario:

A developer creates some nifty app he's willing to share for free. He uploads to Extras but would sure like it to be listed in Ovi as well. So there could be a feature represented by a checkbox that asks, in effect, "do you want this to be mirrored in Ovi?". If the developer checks yes, then his app is published in one place but shows up in two.

Attila, are we thinking along similar lines?

Of course, we're still left with the thorny "what if individual developers want to make money" issue but I think it's best to break this all down into edible chunks...

Anyway, is virtual representation of an app any different than physical representation in this sense? In other words, if Ovi mirrors stuff that's in Extras, without the developer being asked for insurance or other such obligations, is this somehow legally different than having the app actually hosted on the Ovi server?

I ask this rhetorically, but I can see Quim rushing at me with the "take these questions to the wiki" broom... ;)

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

Yes. If Select cannot be made the 'one place to choose them all', pushing things from Extras to Ovi must be dead simple and not a privilege or special hoopjumping operation.

The really interesting thing is that Select is an official Nokia site pointing to particular Extras applications. IANAL, but if that's legally okay for Nokia, Ovi can't be too far.

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

While it looks tempting to "mirror" Extras and have applications show up in Ovi Store as well, I still have my doubts about where this would end.

Ovi = controlled by Nokia
Extras = controlled by us

Both have rules. I don't know the differences now, but it's irrelevant as they may cange any time. The point is that whatever will be searched and found in Ovi will have to follow their guidelines for content. - If all publishers do and you're the only one with an application that they don't want... What will you do? Be happy in Extras? Sure, except nobody will come there anymore once everything is in the Ovi store, too.

It's not only a matter of technical feasibility and "what's easiest for the end user". It's also a matter of who's in control and what does it mean for the whole Maemo ecosystem in the long run.

(The worst case could be that once 98% of the free software can be found in Ovi Store and in Extras, the next SSU will remove the application manager as we know it because "Ovi Store is all we need and users can always use apt-get, anyway".)

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

As long as the Application Manager has the UI it has in Maemo 5, I understand perfectly users preferring to discover new software by browsing pages with screenshots, user ratings and comments instead of one liners with a "Details" dialog.

Having Extras as a proxy to publish in Ovi would bypass the current requirements to become an Ovi publisher. Ovi currently won't approve as publisher one registered individual, so they are consistent not willing to give direct publishing rights to a community of individual developers going through a different filter.

I'll say it again: maemo.org Downloads are enabled by default in our next Maemo 5 release and they are present in our roadmap. Let us complete this Maemo 5 release and sales start and we will go further sharing the Harmattan plans.

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

We understand that Ovi today isn't quite ready for individual (especially non-profit) developers. The question is/was if it WANTS to cater to that crowd in the future or not. If not, I don't see what the point of this topic is at all :)

(PS and yes, that question is already in the wiki as of earlier today :) )

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

But Quim-- don't you see how this doesn't really resolve the main sticking point, ie, the legal constraints?

- developers cannot use maemo.org as a collective for publishing direct to Ovi, ergo they must form some sort of legal operating entity conforming to VAT, et al, requirements;

- developers CAN use maemo.org as an indirect way to publish to Ovi

How is it that maemo.org can absorb liability for the latter but not the former? Is it solely the potenial of profit that is the difference? If so then I don't get that...

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

This is not an aswer about Ovi, but a general concept to help understanding the problem. I'm also not a lawyer and I'm just trying to understand what I understood from reading/listening about this topic:

"Liability" is a tricky concept that has 3 axis:

- Sole individuals vs big corporations with the levels in between. If you are a sole individual then you probably are not very interesting target for a legal demand, while a big corp always is. If maemo.org is (from a legal perspective) nothing more than an aggregation of sole individuals then you see clearly what is the difference between maemo.org Downloads and Ovi by Nokia.

- Gratis vs paid. If you made milions out of something that is actually not even yours then you face different risks than someone that offers the same for free, even if it's also allegedly illegal. Since open source software is mostly gratis, this factor also helps getting it out of the usual areas of trouble.

- Software vs content. The Ovi store is not only a place to distribute apps, but also content. Digital content is in itself easier to copy, redistribute and consume. Nowadays there is a much bigger demand and business than in software itself. Again, open source software usually stays away from "blockbusters content" and frameworks like CreativeCommons are very good at defining who is the author and what can you do with the content.

Look at the combinations and you will see 2 extremes in terms of liability:

- Saucy company gets huge revenue publishing digital content for a price.

- Open source developer publishes software in his free time and all he gets is a Big Thank You.

I am willing to fight for the latter case if open source developers are indeed interested in publishing at Ovi. What I'm not doing is trying to convince you to do so. Either you are interested or not. There seems to be different opinions in the Brainstorm according to the votes, even if the discussion here seems to go more in one direction:

http://maemo.org/community/brainstor...store-ovi-com/

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

just look at symbian users. you've got to give the average users more credit.

Re: [Sandbox] Open source software distributed via store.ovi.com
 

Can you be more specific? There are millions of Symbian users out there and you can find all kins of behaviors in them.