A Considerate Appeal for Fair Pricing of Ksplayer's Commercial License

[cdguy]

I hope you are doing well. I am contacting you regarding the recent decision to introduce a paid license for Ksplayer. While I appreciate the value your library brings to the development community, I would like to express some concerns and make a heartfelt appeal for reconsidering the pricing structure.

1. Emphasizing the Dominance of AVplayer in OTT Applications:

   • Major OTT applications like Netflix and Infuse predominantly rely on the Apple native player, AVplayer, for its exceptional performance in decoding Dolby Vision and Spatial Audio. Highlighting this industry standard could help position Ksplayer as an affordable and viable alternative.

2. Specialized Use Cases for Custom Video Players:

   • Custom video players like VLCKit, MPV, and Ksplayer cater to niche applications, particularly those involving the xtream protocol or developers unfamiliar with FFmpeg. Given their specialised nature, developers using these libraries often struggle to generate sufficient profits. A more accessible pricing model could encourage wider adoption and support from this segment.

3. Ensuring Flawless Performance with Paid License:

   • Introducing a paid license implies a commitment to delivering a flawless player experience. Developers would understandably expect a bug-free performance, making it crucial to ensure that the paid version of Ksplayer is impeccable, providing a strong incentive for developers to invest in the commercial license.

4. Comparative Strengths and Evolving Landscape:

   • While Ksplayer excels in Dolby Vision and spatial audio detection, it's worth noting the strides made by MPV in supporting Libplacebo and Vulkan. As these features continue to evolve, a competitive pricing strategy aligned with the evolving landscape could be more sustainable and appealing to developers.

5. Considering the Audience Demographics:

   • Recognizing that a majority of standard users may not possess home theatres or Dolby Vision-compatible TVs, it's essential to address the potential bias towards Ksplayer. A fair evaluation of whether developers should opt for Ksplayer in such scenarios is imperative.

6. Acknowledging the Developer Community Concerns:

   • I understand your challenge with some developers exploiting the library without proper attribution or financial contribution. While it's crucial to protect your work, a more reasonable pricing strategy could strike a balance, ensuring that genuine developers are not burdened by excessive costs.

In conclusion, a reasonable pricing structure for Ksplayer's commercial license would foster goodwill within the developer community and contribute to the library's wider adoption. I appreciate your consideration of these points, and I look forward to seeing Ksplayer continue to thrive with the support of an engaged and enthusiastic developer community.

Thank you for your time and understanding

[kingslay]

关于GPL协议 有很多人发现KSPlayer的License改了，并通过邮件跟我进行了授权协议的讨论。所以我就在这个帖子里讲下背景和授权方案。大家可以对授权方案提出更多的建议。目前授权方案还没最终定稿。

背景

1. 一月初我把项目里面的Demo上架App Store的时候，被苹果审核人员拒绝了。原因是因为已经有一个app的二进制跟我一摸一样，我猜测是有人把项目的Demo拿去上架了。但是没有知会我。后来是通过证明我是这个项目的开发者，苹果才审核通过
2. KSPlayer目前引入了libsmbclient, libsmbclient的协议是GPL。并且编译的FFmepg产物里面有包含GPL代码。所以按照要求应该是GPL。
3. 目前这个项目主要的维护人太过单一。 所以为了保护这个项目，并让更多人贡献代码回馈KSPlayer，让这个项目能够有更好的发展。我决定把这个项目默认的协议改成是GPL，只有经过授权才能变成是LGPL。

目前我初步确定的授权LGPL协议的方案如下:

1. 授权LGPL需要开发者支付授权费，或开源贡献部分代码。目前默认用github sponsor来支付费用，可以一年支付一次，也可以每个月支付一次。github sponsor支持开发票。所以公司需要发票的话，可以通过github sponsor来开。
2. 项目的README会有一个LGPL协议授权的APP列表。可以自由选择要不要出现在这个列表上。默认不出现，需要的可以提出诉求给我们。
3. KSPlayer 会分为两个版本: LGPL版本和GPL版本，LGPL版本的版本号领先于GPL版本几个版本，GPL版本会是LGPL版本的子集，某些功能只会存在LGPL版本。并且bug会优先在LGPL版本修复。如果GPL版本有严重bug的话，那会同步修复bug。LGPL版本是闭源的，只有经过授权的人才能访问。
4. 这个收费只是用于LGPL版本的授权，不包含技术支持的费用。
5. 授权分为三个方案，开发者只要任选其中一个就可以： 
    1. 根据每个月App Store的收益来进行分成,  并且开发者不用向我们公布App Store收入。分成比率的范围从2%到5%，开发者可以根据自己的情况来决定这个分成比例具体的值。因为分成比率是一个范围，不是一个固定值，所以我们无法得知您在App Store的收入。并且不用每个月都需要调整捐款金额。可以半年或是一年统计下App Store每个月的平均收入。 假设您的App Store每个月的平均收入是 $2000, 那您每个月的捐赠金额只要大于等于 $40 可以了。
    2. 把App里面有调用KSPlayer代码的代码文件贡献开源出来，不用整个App开源。并且允许KSPlayer使用这部分开源代码。
    3. 每个月固定金额$100(这个额度大家可以一起讨论，看多少合适)

改成GPL协议之后，可能还是会有人不遵守GPL协议。但是至少我们拥有了起诉对方，保护自己的权利。可以认为这是一个防御性措施，具体的实现需要靠大家的自觉。授权协议里面的第一个和第三个方案，也是类似的，我们无法知道某个App的App Store收益，无法知道APP里面有哪些文件调用了KSPlayer代码。这些都需要App的开发者自觉的遵守合同。

[cdguy]

@kingslay yes the idea of my post was that you make an informative post, on how people can take the next steps to contribute and use the video library

I personally understand very well why you took this decision as you did not mention one of them :)

I hope those who advertise their apps but not mentioning and sponsoring your project will have common sense