Various points around snap monetization

[G.S.1]

@popey

Again, the Terms & Conditions don’t state 20-30% anywhere. You’re likely looking at the wrong document.

Woops! I initially posted this in a separate topic, where it turns out there are an old and a new Terms of Use floating around, the old one on Ubuntu.com, the new one on Snapcraft. My bad for putting it in again by mistake. Edited.

@popey

Canonical is a privately held company with numerous revenue streams, as you’d expect. Like most well run private companies we don’t generally have a policy to enable random people on the internet to dictate internal revenue allocation. I know of no other privately (or indeed publicly) held companies which do that. While it’s possible that Canonical may ring-fence revenue generated from one product towards financing that department’s activities, I don’t believe that’s something we’d get into publicly.

Of course. What I meant by this was to show to the community that if Snap takes commissions, Canonical isn’t going to funnel them to Ubuntu (making Snap payments benefit Ubuntu instead of being distro-neutral). I just mean, it would be a good idea to show that funds are going to Snap (or at least, say that somewhere) and not favoring one distro over another. Again, if Snap takes commissions.

Finally, my thoughts on a non-invasive DRM… do you think this is a good idea, or should it be stronger/weaker?