Re: [tlug] kickstarter for open source...

[Edward Middleton <edward.middleton@example.com>]

On 06/12/2013 07:29 PM, Raymond Wan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Edward Middleton
> <edward.middleton@example.com> wrote:
> >   From the point of view of the person sending funds, you are paying to
> > have it done now.  The assumption is that kickstarter sets up some form
> > of contract or legal obligation for the recipient to act and that
> > failing to satisfy the obligation will have a significantly negative
> > impact on the receivers future earning potential.  This looks more like
> > contracting to me then any of the other analogies given.
>
>
> This has been an interesting discussion...  I was just looking at the
> Accountability Q&A on Kickstarter:
>
> http://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/kickstarter%20basics#Acco
>
> Q5 says that a creator is "legally obligated to fulfill the promises
> of the project.  But the agreement looks admittedly weak.  It just
> says that failure to do so will result in "damage to your reputation"
> and "even legal action".  I came across one project which is by a
> single person seeking a modest amount of funding for a software
> project.  Unless you're a larger organization, reputation doesn't
> matter too much.
>
> So, we're left with legal action.  Which, as far as I can tell, is
> difficult to start if the parties involved are in various countries.
> Those cheated may have to start a Kickstarter project to pay for a
> lawyer...  :-)

Making this work is really the problem companies like Kickstarter are 
trying to solve.  If they can't produce an environment were people feel 
the risk of being cheated is sufficiently low they we fail.

> I can see what you mean about it being similar to contracting.  But it
> still seems a weaker contract than (say) an organization signing a
> contract to have a commercial software developer write a piece of
> software, a web site, etc.  Presumably, if the developer does a poor
> job or fails to deliver, it may be easier to take the matter to the
> courts than a contract within Kickstarter.

I don't see organizations viewing crowd founding as an alternative to 
contracting.  It seems to be more a way for large groups to collectively 
contract on work that individually may not worth pursuing.  I guess if 
you are developing FOSS that is only of interest to companies, crowd 
founding might be hard.

Edward