Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Startup Assembly Banks On Paid, Open-Source Style Development

Posted by timothy on from the sign-on-this-dotted-line dept.

enbody writes A year-old startup, Assembly, is built on the premise of creating products using open-source style development, but structured in a way that you get paid for your contributions. Open-source development is well-known in the Slashdot community, as are a variety of ways to earn a living around open-source, such as support. What is new here is being paid as part of the development, and not just for coding — your contribution might be as project manager or sales. A nice description with video showed up today on the Verge. Of course, the devil is in the details, but they have products so someone in Slashdot land may be interested. (Bias warning: I know one of these guys.)

18 of 33 comments (clear)

  1. Re:How much does it pay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Idk the exact rates, but I heard a project like that thing Linus Torvalds heads could net someone a few dozens bags of cheetos and some cases of mountain dews per month. Honest!

  2. Re:How much does it pay? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Based on reading their terms of use, etc., in the majority of cases it will be zero.

    Searching the whole site, I was unable to find a single example of a successful "assembly." Not good after "a year of operation."

    Also, under their Terms, they can sell your project out from under you at any time:

    selected App Ideas will further be developed by the Community and may ultimately be commercialized, produced and licensed or sold by Assembly

    ... and ,,,

    THE COMPANY RESERVES THE RIGHT, FOR ANY OR NO REASON, TO .... (IV) SELL OR LICENSE A SOFTWARE PRODUCT, AND/OR ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RELATED THERETO, TO ANY THIRD PARTY.

    There goes any illusion that you're in control.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  3. Re:How much does it pay? by Greyfox · · Score: 2

    And if you write useful open source code, you can always negotiate alternate licensing and support terms with any company that might want to use your work without having to release their code back to the community. So really, releasing your copyright to a company for an ambiguous promise of future payment is doubly silly.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  4. Re:Hard Headline to Parse by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why you have difficulty? Easy reading I can do for you, look! Is bank for assembling startups get it? Is open, turned on electricity, and paid job for you lookers of career get it? Is source style development no funny business! Great opportunity! Do not miss ok? Good for you.

  5. Re:Assembla by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    Are we taking bets on how long they have before they get sued over the name?

    Pro-tip: When you start a company, don't give it a common word as a name, otherwise when people search for your company, 99.99% of the hits are for something else. If they made such a basic and obvious mistake, I doubt if they are going to get much else right.

  6. Re:Titles by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    The capitalisation of Slashdot titles is incorrect by American standards as well, as anyone with a copy of the Chicago Manual of Style can tell you.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  7. We took your name, now give us your code too! by LoneTech · · Score: 1

    Nothing breeds trust better, right? Assembly is almost as well known as assembly in programmer circles; and the first one is also an assembly in the dictionary sense. I think this slashvertisement might not end up as well received as the advertiser wished.

  8. Re:Assembla by znrt · · Score: 2

    you got that wrong. searching for a company name is anecdotical. what you want is that people searching for *the stuff* your company provides lands on your site instead of the competitors'. odds are those people don't even know that your company exists in the first place.

  9. Re:Assembla by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    There is also the Finnish demoscene event Assembly.

  10. Even "Donkey" would be better, could be trademark by raymorris · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Even if you're going to pick a common word, it is another mistake to pick a word that has a commonly understood meaning specific to that industry. If the had picked any random word, such as Donkey, they could defend a trademark for Donkey programming or Donkey software. Can't quite claim a trademark for assembly programming - assembly programming has been around for decades.

  11. Open? by drolli · · Score: 1

    Sorry somehow i could not get a list of products without signing up.

    And there are no written examples on the html5-web2.0ish HP.

    1. Re:Open? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      You can bypass the sign-up by using this link, but it's not exactly obvious (bad UI design, or if it's "by design", they hope to collect your email address by making it non-obvious that there's a back door that doesn't require you to join first).

      Remember, they want their ~10% "platform costs" (gross, not net revenue, so it comes off the top). So, you create an app, the app store takes 30%, Assembly takes 10%, and they can, as per their terms of service, sell the product out from under you at any time (so, you've worked to create a great product, they make some closed mods, close down your "Assembly", and sell the modded product to a third party. And since you gave them a copyright assignment, there's nothing you can do about it).

      If Assembly terminates this Agreement with you in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, any unpaid amounts in your account will be forfeit.

      .. and here's the poisoned term:

      THE COMPANY RESERVES THE RIGHT, FOR ANY OR NO REASON, TO (I) REFUSE TO POST ANY SUBMITTED SOFTWARE PRODUCT TO THE SITE, (II) TERMINATE THE DEVELOPMENT OR ANY PHASE RELATED TO A SOFTWARE PRODUCT, (III) TERMINATE THE SALE OF ANY SOFTWARE PRODUCT RELATED TO ANY SOFTWARE PRODUCT, OR (IV) SELL OR LICENSE A SOFTWARE PRODUCT, AND/OR ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RELATED THERETO, TO ANY THIRD PARTY.

      So they can pull the plug at any time, and since your license with them isn't under the AGPL or CC ...

      While we believe that our Members should be able to freely use, modify and distribute the Contributions of other Members, we need a separate license from our Members in order to commercialize Software Products. Accordingly, you hereby grant Assembly a non-exclusive, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, fully-paid up, sublicensable (through multiple levels), transferable license under all of your Intellectual Property Rights, to use, reproduce, publicly display, publicly perform, create derivative works of, distribute, digitally transmit, sell, offer to sell, make, have made, import and otherwise exploit your Member Content, including the right to enforce your Intellectual Property Rights in your Member Content.

      What are those "Intellectual Property Rights>"

      “Intellectual Property Rights” means all past, present and future rights of the following types, which may exist or be created under the laws of any jurisdiction in the world: (a) rights associated with works of authorship, including exploitation rights, copyrights, moral rights, and mask work rights; (b) trademark, and trade names rights and similar rights; (c) trade secret rights; (d) patent and industrial property rights; (e) other proprietary rights in intellectual property, including Inventions, of every kind and nature; and (f) rights in or relating to registrations, renewals, extensions, combinations, divisions and reissues of, and applications for, any of the rights referred to in clauses (a) through (e) of this sentence.

      Wow. What a blanket loophole. Do you really want to give anyone else the rights to anything you've done in the past or may do in the future?

      You agree that the Company has the absolute right and permission to use your name, voice, image, likeness, and your applicable Member compensation information, including for example any commissions paid, App Coins earned, and your Stake percentage in a Software Product, as well as representations made by you, in any media (including, without limitation, television, print, radio and the Internet), world-wide, for the purposes of advertising, promoting, reporting and disseminating information about the Company, the Company’s business or a Software Product.

      Facebook only reuses crap you post on Facebook. These guys want the right to use anything you do ANYWHERE. That's a real over-reach. You should have some say in how your name, image, and words are used.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Open? by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Facebook only reuses crap you post on Facebook. These guys want the right to use anything you do ANYWHERE. That's a real over-reach. You should have some say in how your name, image, and words are used.

      Such an overreach it's not even legal in the US, let alone most other places in the English-speaking world.

      .. and here's the poisoned term:

      You can tell from their terms that the site was founded by some recent lawyer graduates and their scummy MBA friends. The recent lawyer graduates think they can write any terms they like and just because it's written down, it's legal. Their scummy MBA friends think wildly lopsided terms is a great way to make money. They got their MBAs from the Comcast School of Monopolistic Practices. They don't realize that you have to actually be the monopoly first before you can behave like one.

      Whatever they paid Dice for this pathetic slashvertisement, it was too much. Unlike much of the world, Slashdot commenters can read.

      That's not to say they won't make money with this scam. They're bottom feeding scum-sucking algae eaters, but it's a big ocean. There's plenty of bottom out of which to suck money. And who knows. Maybe one of their scummy users tweeting about Helpful (whatever the fuck that is) will hit it big. Kind of like a Kardashian. Doesn't seem likely to do well off of Slashdot though.

  12. Two of four projects profitable, paying contributo by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > searching the whole site, I was unable to find a single example of a successful "assembly." Not good after "a year of operation."

    I saw two of four projects were turning a profit, which would mean paying dividends to contributors.

  13. Re:Two of four projects profitable, paying contrib by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    I saw two of four projects were turning a profit, which would mean paying dividends to contributors.

    They withhold amounts for chargebacks, any services they provide ("platform costs") , etc., which is why they only agree to pay out "net profits", and reserve the right to not pay out until your individual contribution is worth $100.00 or more. The music industry is very good with playing with "net profits."

    What I did find was crap like this:

    This is a recurring bounty that will go to anyone who tweets about Helpful.

    Here's a sample tweet, but you can use any one you'd like. Then, just paste the link below and you'll be awarded some...

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  14. Re:backhanded euphemistry by Mandrel · · Score: 1

    Yes, it's only "open" in the sense of participation. Software released under an Open Source licence won't play well with this because it's much harder to make it pay. Unless the plan is to watch for winners, then close them up.

  15. a nice test of my theory by Kishin · · Score: 1

    I noticed people fighting over FOSS vs proprietary philosophies a long time ago. They acted like these two are all there is. I posted this essay arguing there's a large variety of models with some combining proprietary and open source: https://www.schneier.com/blog/... One of the first mainframes, Burroughs B5000, was sold quite profitably with the customers getting the source code and able to extend it however they wanted. They could also submit changes back to Burroughs to include for everyone. The continued and significant funding ensured the system kept getting improved. The openness has many of the benefits of FOSS. They later closed the source like QNX did, but I could see a contract where the customers get the current and future source indefinitely so long as they pay. So, it's nice to see a new venture that challenges the false dichotomy of proprietary, FOSS, or nothing else. There's lots of mixes. I look forward to seeing how this scheme works out.

  16. Re:Hard Headline to Parse by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

    Definitely, for great justice.