Hi everyone,

Unfortunately we seem to be in a situation where the interests of vendors is pitted against those of integrators (specifically those that rely on ODL). Let me reiterate why module vendors are keen to keep DNN Corp out of the CE market.

1. Level playing field.
DNN creates a quality platform. But there would not be the adoption there is today without the availability of the addons the vendors make. This interdependence is evident to both sides, and valued. We (the vendors) know DNN is not going to screw us over, and DNN knows we won’t screw them over. Keep in mind they could make changes to the core that benefit one or the other extension. The architectural development of the platform is not a trivial matter and as time goes on more and more livelihoods are at stake. DNN Corp acknowledges this and has always tried to be fair to the community in this regard. Although I may regret not having seen changes I proposed introduced into the core, I applaud them for this impartiality. Becoming a vendor themselves, next to us, would shatter this. In fact, the vibe I was picking up from a number of (successful) module vendors was that they’d consider putting energy into migrating to another platform. If the “separation of power” is destroyed, it might be better to go somewhere else where it’s less risky.

2. Contribution to DNN effort.
I am a core team member and have contributed countless hours, free of charge, to DNN's open source software. I am not the only vendor that has done this. In fact, many of us saw this as a way to do something in return. We sell some closed source stuff and give away some free stuff to help the platform. In my case I also help out with user groups, internationalization, general DNN community health, and conferences. When DNN enters the market we are in currently, it means I will be making contributions to my competitor. This feels awkward to say the least. I wouldn't be surprised to see a withdrawal of part of the eco-system from contributions to the core effort if DNN abandons the separations of power. So what benefits some of you in the short run will end up hurting you in the long haul.

Until now vendors have not been very publically vocal in this debate. In part because (1) we are far fewer than integrators, and (2) the relationship with DNN is delicate and we handle it with care. But I can tell you the last week has seen a lot of (emotional) emails back and forth between vendors and between vendors and DNN Corp. It is up to DNN Corp to weigh the interests of one group within the DNN eco-system with another. This is not an enviable position to be in. I appreciate Shaun's efforts in explaining our side of the story.

Finally: no one can guarantee you'll have module XYZ at your disposal forever. The ODL purchase was just one scenario. I have been approached by an entity in the past that wanted to acquire the IP for DMX and then use it in a proprietary product and completely pull it from the market. You must realize that it is hard to build a sustainable and growing business on a 100 dollar module on SC. I found a solution by complementing sales with services. When you purchase a module for a business critical application you should ask yourself: is this vendor able to live off what I am paying him? It may not be easy to answer, but given that single digit SC sales per week can put you in the top 10, you might get an indication of what it returns.

Peter

I felt I had to chime in on this thread. It's a difficult one to be involved in but I think it is indicative of where the community may head in the future.

As with many significant issues, there really is no good or right answer. Yet, those who favor one position tend to fight so fervently for it, it becomes difficult to fully appreciate the perspectives of others in the community.

Part of the problem, I think, stems from the fact that there was no warning from DNNCorp about this move. Individual customers and integrators feel that the carpet has been ripped out from underneath them and are understandably frustrated. The biggest concern is: will existing customers be well cared for. From what I understand, DNNcorp/Xepeient will continue to support them.

Assuming that happens, it would seem the anxiety and tension seems to revolve around the future: will future customers be able to purchase ODL outside of PE and, if so, is that a valid role for DNNCorp to play in the ecosystem?

From an individual customer/integrator perspective, the answer is "yes, yes, yes!". This makes sense. If you know a product, it's much easier to keep using that product and if DNNCorp now stands behind it, that makes it all the more rational to support it's continue sale.

Consider for a moment the perspective of the module vendors. Module vendors are not funded by VC's. They  are rightfully concerned by the possibility of DNNCorp stepping into their arena and competing directly.  They produce the modules that individual customers and integrators rely on for their businesses and they take that responsibility very seriously. Many of them work 16 hour days and are on-call for the remaining 8, so that they can provide quality modules to their customers.

As the owner of Snowcovered, DNNCorp now has near complete control over how modules are sold. This gives them enormous power to control the market. It is essential that they be neutral in this endeavor. If they were to start selling modules directly, they would cease to be an impartial player in the marketplace and would now have motivation to favor one module over another. Would you want to compete with a well-funded corporation who also controls the means of distribution? This state would drive existing vendors out of the market and prevent new vendors from entering it. The market as a whole would suffer.

So, now that the IP has been purchased and no one seems to be happy, what should be done to try and mitigate the damage?

I think DNNCorp should do now what they should have done earlier. First and foremost, existing customers should be supported. Second, the company should give 2-3 months notice that the product will be removed from the market. The warning should be displayed prominently on the product's page. This gives potential customers and integrators the ability to make a reasoned decision about whether to buy into the product.