How does Appcelerator know who wrote the app? They see an app from a company that offends their licenses, they contact the app owner (not necessarily the developer). Seems legit to me.
To be perfectly clear why this is downmodded, in the OP the developer's agency is contacted and asks for clarification. Titanium then contacts his client instead, it was not unnecessary do to so to contact the developer because they were already corresponding.
I guess I still don't understand how Appcelerator knew who the 'design agency' was for the end client. Was the app advertised as being built in Titanium by XYZ firm for ABC firm?
To follow up on my original point: The OP makes it seem like Appcelerator is shaking them down after the fact (and breaking the licensing/pricing model advertised for the product) yet there is no evidence of it. No one at Appcelerator has confirmed this has happened nor has anyone else in the comments had a similar issue.
It sounds more like Appcelerator reached out to upsell and it was taken/communicated badly.
We cannot pull an App from the App Store and would never do that if we could. We are drafting a response. Please give us a few minutes to get something up on the Q&A thread on our dev site.
please also explain how/why the final customer was contacted. knowing nothing about this, it seems like the licencing issue could be a misunderstanding with the developer. but contacting the people that developer was selling to seems very odd.
[edit: and... you avoided the issue completely. pity.]
Thanks for responding here Jeff. The license on https://github.com/appcelerator/titanium_mobile is Apache 2.0. How can you possibly ask for money from a developer who used Apache 2.0 code? It seems like a black and white issue and that you are in the wrong. Please address the Apache 2.0 license in your response.
They don't. I've used Appcelerator for a number of projects that are now on the App store(s) and haven't ever worried about this. The source code is on Github under the Apache license as you mentioned. This is enough for me and my lawyers to not worry about it.
Yes, that was my intent. I was asking for the other side to make a clear response and specifically to mention the Apache license in their response. They made a vague, long winded, PR-speak response which did not address any of the issues. I continue to judge them for bad business practices and ethics. If they provide more evidence that paints a better picture I'll listen.
the new "accepted answer" by jeff is a very very poor statement and makes me to never touch Titanium ever. the statement didn't answer any part of the question at all, and does nothing to clarify the situation. marketing speach par exellence.
if they debug their code the same way they debug their business processes than titanium would be the windows vista of mobile development frameworks.
I agree, the answer was changed after I accepted it, which was an initial response saying they would respond shortly.
If we have broken any licensing terms, then I would like to have been contacted, and Appcelerator to tell us and exactly what we were doing wrong, so that we can resolve it.
Unfortunately this response doesn't address any of my problems - it's the usual "we care and we are growing" spiel. I empathise to some extent as I know it's hard to build a technical business, but this didn't address the trust issues, and I'm still no clearer about whether Monday morning we're still expected to license from them?
Worst of all for me, I now have a damaged relationship with a not particularly technical client who sadly is likely to associate "open source" with "legal problems".
"To be crystal clear here, our intentions are that we will not charge for development that happens under the “App Explore” product (i.e., the free version). Usage of the Appcelerator platform (Titanium Mobile SDK, Titanium Studio, Analytics and Cloud Services) at this level is permitted for all applications, both commercial and free, with no financial obligation to Appcelerator."
Again, APL code on Github. APL is a permissive and "biz friendly" license as we all know.
Appcelerator is open source for the sake of being considered open source. They certainly are not in business to promote businesses using their open source for free.
I'm going to just say that I was never a fan of the way that Appcelerator handled their framework from a tooling standpoint. To create an app, you have to register it with them. It felt a bit creepy and unneeded if I wasn't going to use any of their other services.
I'm much happier using Phonegap, Knockout, and Kendo Mobile to build apps.
Not only that, but each time the app launches, it phones home to Appcelerator. This is by default, and you can only disable it by turning off Analytics in the config.
Maybe if the developer is not complying the opensource license [1]
e.g. Apache 2.0
>> Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
you could get an app pulled from the appstore using the DMCA - however if all he did was using the appcelerator module which is licensed under a permissive license (apache v2) - they would have no ground.
He's using something else there (perhaps their cloud services who are probably free for free apps and costs money for paid apps).
I agree. If the guy's story is correct, it doesn't seem that Appcelerator should have even noticed their usage of the framework at all.
Unless it was for a huge client that's gotten hundreds of thousands of downloads(which I don't think is the case), it seems like there's something else going on here.
It doesn't appear to be a scam, more a case of an over zealous sales department.
However, even if it is to do with displaying the Apache license as mentioned below, the behavior is pretty aggressive and financially orientated when a simple request could resolve it.
I will post a follow up comment when I know more, but for now the dev relations team has reached out to us...
Waited for the official answer. It's bad, there's no answer. As someone who started learning Titanium, this is really deal-breaker for me! Off to phonegap, xamarin, or native ...
I never buy this line of reasoning - I've seen too many instances of this to think otherwise. Every time a "rogue" sales person does something bad, it is in response to tacit encouragement and acknowledgment of management, and have been incentivized to behave badly.
The "rogue employee", in almost every single case I've ever seen, is just an arms-length way for companies to behave badly while keeping plausible deniability. See: Yelp.
I think the most recent discussion here about 'blame it on a rogue employee/contractor/etc.' on HN revolved around Visa in Brazil: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4396414
If you expand the hidden comments on Jeff's apology, Jeff "co-founder and CEO of the company" explains how proud he has been of the sales people despite "a few complaints":
>Was the sales rep over eager and trying to hussle to get a deal? Probably. In my opinion, that's the job of the rep and we work with hundreds of new paying customers each quarter and we've only had a few complaints about it.
True, but only when it's not an isolated incident. I know or have spoken with many unpaid Titanium developers and this is the first time I've heard of something like this happening. I haven't seen comments on this thread from someone else experiencing this.
I have been using Titanium for about a year. My past painful experience tells me to never ever use Titanium again. It is buggy. Q & A support sucks big time unless you pay for it. For any advanced project, you will absolutely need to develop custom IOS modules. It will save you so much time and headache to just use objective-C. (note: for simple projects, it might work for you)
I have the exact same experience. I've also reported more than 30 valid bugs, none have been fixed... You wouldn't believe how buggy it is, and the docs are just as bad.
[sorry]
we will not charge for development that happens under the “App Explore” product (i.e., the free version). Usage of the Appcelerator platform (Titanium Mobile SDK, Titanium Studio, Analytics and Cloud Services) at this level is permitted for all applications, both commercial and free, with no financial obligation to Appcelerator.
[sorry, we aren't transparent enough]
Anyone who uses these glorified WebView wrappers is doing themselves a disservice.
I've never used it, but my understanding is that Titanium does not run in a web view. It compiles the JS down to C/ObjC, then that gets compiled to native code by Apple's compiler.
It could also be that an appcelerator salesman was a bit aggressive on that front but I bet this is not the case - 99% of the time, people are breaching licenses without even knowing it.
