Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 325144

Summary:	Add the words "Royalty Free" on the downloads page
Product:	Community	Reporter:	Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton>
Component:	Website	Assignee:	phoenix.ui <phoenix.ui-inbox>
Status:	RESOLVED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	P3	CC:	denis.roy, donald.smith, ian.skerrett, janet.campbell, mike.milinkovich, pwebster, remy.suen
Version:	unspecified
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	PC
OS:	Linux
URL:	http://www.eclipse.org/downloads
Whiteboard:
Bug Depends on:
Bug Blocks:	404861

Description Wayne Beaton

2010-09-13 13:58:32 EDT

I get a few emails every week asking for a pricelist for Eclipse software. I think that adding a couple of words to the hints on the /downloads page will reduce this number (the actual amount of work is small, but the frustration level is high).

While we're at it, the hint actually two hints. I recommend that we split 'em up into two separate paragraphs.

--
Hint:
You will need a Java runtime environment (JRE) to use Eclipse (Java 5 JRE recommended). 

All downloads are provided *royalty free* under the terms and conditions of the Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement unless otherwise specified.
--

Comment 1 Wayne Beaton

2010-09-13 14:17:40 EDT

Janet, I think we need your thoughts on this.

Comment 2 Janet Campbell

2010-09-21 12:42:29 EDT

I suspect that at least some of the questions we are seeing with respect to this question originate from people in supply management organizations that didn't actually do the initial download themselves.  We'll add an item to the Legal FAQ to address this question. That may help with that portion of the audience. 

If we were to consider including something along the lines of what you are suggesting, I'd like to see us cross-reference the notation to our donation programs - both individual and corporate.  Adding a few others for their thoughts on that front.

Janet

Comment 3 Janet Campbell

2010-10-06 10:48:55 EDT

We've updated the Legal FAQ to include a Q&A to address this - see #12 at http://www.eclipse.org/legal/legalfaq.php.

Janet

Comment 4 Wayne Beaton

2011-04-24 17:14:54 EDT

(In reply to comment #2)
> I suspect that at least some of the questions we are seeing with respect to
> this question originate from people in supply management organizations that
> didn't actually do the initial download themselves.  We'll add an item to the
> Legal FAQ to address this question. That may help with that portion of the
> audience. 

I have no doubt that you're correct. This change probably won't have any impact on the number of requests we get for price quotes. Still... I think it adds clarity.

> If we were to consider including something along the lines of what you are
> suggesting, I'd like to see us cross-reference the notation to our donation
> programs - both individual and corporate.  Adding a few others for their
> thoughts on that front.

+1

Comment 5 Mike Milinkovich

2013-05-06 15:13:10 EDT

I don't think I would want to say "royalty-free". If we want to add a descriptive phrase, wouldn't "free and open source" be a better description? "Royalty free" does not necessarily mean non-proprietary.

Comment 6 Wayne Beaton

2013-05-06 16:05:38 EDT

(In reply to comment #5)
> I don't think I would want to say "royalty-free". If we want to add a
> descriptive phrase, wouldn't "free and open source" be a better description?
> "Royalty free" does not necessarily mean non-proprietary.

What I'd like is an unambiguous statement that no money needs to change hands. I'm not convinced that "free and open source" is clear enough for some people.

Comment 7 Mike Milinkovich

2013-05-06 17:37:13 EDT

(In reply to comment #6)
> What I'd like is an unambiguous statement that no money needs to change
> hands. I'm not convinced that "free and open source" is clear enough for
> some people.

Well, the audience is primarily developers. I would wager that that more of them understand "free and open source" than they do "royalty free".

Of course this is just a matter of opinion. 

I also wager that no matter what we put there, we will still get odd questions in our inboxes.

Comment 8 Ian Skerrett

2013-05-06 17:42:42 EDT

(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > What I'd like is an unambiguous statement that no money needs to change
> > hands. I'm not convinced that "free and open source" is clear enough for
> > some people.
> 
> Well, the audience is primarily developers. I would wager that that more of
> them understand "free and open source" than they do "royalty free".


I tend to agree.  We design the web site for our primary audience not the exceptions.

Comment 9 Denis Roy

2014-07-16 16:00:51 EDT

Closing based on the last comment.