[ilaksh]

I have a different take. I think it's a warning to people that use the software: they can either chip in a little bit, or have no expectation whatsoever for there ever to be another release. I think that there is an ethical obligation here on the part of active users to donate at least $2 each, assuming that the developer isn't making up a story.

[smabie]

There's no ethical obligation to help someone who decided to upload code you can use to the internet.

[dimask]

If one needs the code to be maintained, not supporting may mean that the code may stop being maintained, which may mean that one will stop being able to use it in the future.

This may or may not be related to ethics, depending on what one calls or defines as ethics, but the reality is that free rides always carry a risk, even if there is no ethical obligation to pay for the ride. Of course, that depends on what value one gives to the code, and stuff like the cost of not being able to use it in the future due to lack of maintenance, or the cost of having to put in effort to maintain it oneself. But while there are no such ethical obligations tied to the use of some free software per se, imo there are ethics (or "ethics") tied to the interdepedencies and connections within such a social system in the sense of it being sustainable and able to self-perpetuate.

[Towaway69]

Now that's brutal. Of course there isn't and you are quite right but there are such things as morals.

[sneak]

Free software is a gift. It does not create an obligation when one receives it.

[osmsucks]

Free software is generally considered "free as in free speech". Doesn't always imply gratis, as people still need to pay their bills.

[sneak]

It’s both, as a point of law. If it’s free as in speech, it is also necessarily free as in beer. That’s what the freedom to redistribute means.

[Towaway69]

Life is a gift that also comes with no obligations. Pity everyone takes it so seriously.

[Temporary_31337]

You should read about psychology of gifts and how it helped the white man to conquer America. Native Americans were such honourable people that they felt every gift must be repaid and more.

[carlosjobim]

> ...assuming that the developer isn't making up a story.

Even if the developer is a millionaire, it's proper to chip in a few bucks for free stuff that you use and enjoy. Sob story or no sob story.

But honestly, the real solution is for people to stop with this open source nonsense and start charging for their work. There are thousands of potential customers for every boutique app or code solution.

Nobody is entitled to free code, especially not the billion dollar companies who are the main beneficiaries of the hard work of open source programmers.