←back to thread

160 points MattIPv4 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.517s | source
Show context
pierat ◴[] No.36407913[source]
This applies to the SaaS Gitlab ONLINE. This doesn't apply to Gitlab you install on your hardware.

I mean, online resources on other peoples' servers cost money.

A better law would be to forbid "free" offerings by companies. They all are fraudulent "free", since you pay a commercial entity with either money or data. And, corporate "free" rarely stays free.

(This also doesn't have to be a new law, but application of false and deceptive advertising relating to the FTC, around the term of "free".)

Edit: Found the rule, already in FTC's federal regs: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-B...

replies(4): >>36407982 #>>36408024 #>>36409104 #>>36409718 #
freedomben ◴[] No.36408024[source]
The real world is way more nuanced than this. Many "free" offerings are not monetization through ads or likewise, they are marketing strategies, and they're good for both company and consumers as they allow evaluation periods with no committment, and in some cases use the business/enterprise revenue to subsidize individual users, which benefits individual users.
replies(1): >>36408590 #
1. deely3 ◴[] No.36408590[source]
Agreed. And they should be marketed as 'temporary free', 'limited free' not as 'free'.
replies(1): >>36408695 #
2. wruza ◴[] No.36408695[source]
Shouldn’t paid plans then be “temporary $4,95”? I mean, they still can screw you with “$5,45” any time.