I think you are assuming that they have been completely paid for the effort put into the application. More likely, they are spreading the cost over several sales that they hope won't be jeopardized by piracy. I don't think they should be lumped in with the software giants who put out bug... ahem... new versions annually.
I know you are putting you altruistic views across and I'm sure you have got your point across.


>>I think that Harsh is trying to protect the investment in time and effort his
>>company put in to the application.
>
>He's doing so for money. To date, he's either 1) volunteered his time to complete the project, or 2) been paid for his time. Regardless though, the project is done, debugged, documented, ready for release.
>
>Now what's next is Harsh desires to continue bearing fruit (earning money) without additional labor (since digital copies are free). Instead of giving a copy to everyone to benefit from, he wants to erect legal walls around his finished product to create a monopoly. In such a condition, nobody can enjoy his product unless they pay. And people everywhere do this result in the world we have where you have to do this sort of thing or you just can't live (as Harsh indicated, it's about sandwiches).
>
>The alternative is to release the software as copyleft, and "post a sign" saying "I'm available for hire to work on the software" and those desiring to use it in some alternate way can either do it themselves, or pay him for his labor to extend / modify it.
>
>>I do doubt that the original/current sales put him in the "pina colada on the beach"
>>scenario.
>
>It does because digital copies are literally zero cost. They use the computer, electricity, and networking resources you're already paying for. Nothing more is required anyway except your personal time, and that can be discounted because we all have time with which we have to do something anyway.
>
>Nothing else in history has been like digital data. It is a gift from God allowing all of us to share our knowledge, abilities, gifts and talents, and all those widely -- as wide as is possible, to literally everyone on the planet.
>
>Such a gift to be used rightly. Instead what has our system in place given us? Control. Monopolies. The DMCA and other legal restrictions design for nothing more than empire building. Look at Apple Inc, their cash on hand is larger than many nation's GNP. And they're market capitalization is approaching $1,000,000,000,000.
>
>Empires. And legal frameworks we see being erected are designed to maintain those Empires and not to help the people, but to enslave them into a form of control where ultimately, no one will be able to buy or sell anything unless they're part of that system.
>
>>If we all lived equally and altruistically we'd be in the Star Trek era. Even then
>>we'd have spoil-sports like the Klingons and Cardassians to deal with. And
>>Tribbles...
>
>We wouldn't because those things don't exist. What DOES exist is this ability today. The framework for sharing is complete. The only thing preventing it use is men's sin, and their personal pursuit of personal empires rather than in sharing and giving away for the benefit of others. Men seek personal advancement rather than corporate (the masses, multiple people's) advancement.
>
>It's like a building. By hoarding, you build up your building however many stories. But by giving it away to everybody, they all build up their buildings somewhat, and to varying degrees. But the net result gained is far more than a single erected building of many stories because of the number of people involved. In this illustration the resulting height of the sharing building would be miles, distributed over gains ranging from zero, to millimeters, to several stories by others.
>
>>I do like the Utopian concept; it would be fun to create for the creativity's sake.
>>With almost 7 billion people and counting... on a very finite chunk of real
>>estate... very unlikely unless the former decreases and/or the latter increases.
>
>All the people in the world would fit into one upper-average-sized U.S. county with elbow room. We are not so crowded as we are led to believe. And we have tools, technology, manufacturing and distribution abilities to feed, clothe, educate, and provide medical care for all people worldwide, and in one generation. The only reason we don't is because people are building personal empires (like Harsh's) in all walks of life and in all areas of production. It requires we all fight against each other, and do so for the benefit of a few people (the powerful, the rich, the elite).
>
>Men seek personal fortune more than helping others, and we have the result of the world we have today.
>
>>In the meanwhile he is looking for a means to ensure he can get his cup of
>>Chai. Never mind the Pina Coladas....
>
>The system we have in place by the "powerful" people through their personal empires (which involves all of us and our labor working for them) demands that all of the people follow that same system. The only way to buck the system is to start bucking the system and to operate as we should be operating, as Jesus asked us to -- to help one another, to love our neighbor as ourself.
>
>We're ALL being robbed completely blind by the powers that be. It's weighting all of us down with a burden of debt that literally dimishes us in every aspect of life. And it needs to stop. Men of conscience need to stand up and do what's right for the sake of doing what's right. And it has to be founded upon Jesus Christ, for he is the only one who has given us this model of life.
>
>Watch the movie "Ecuador" on Netflix. Their new Constitution places people above capital, the requirements of the needy above those of gaining wealth. It's it's the first step in stone in that society you'd like to see built. And the mechanisms and models of that system are completely foreign to anything we've been taught outside the classroom or churches. Ecuador's leaders are looking to learn from past mistakes and make sure that in the future no such mistakes happen again. It is a process of learning.