[SamAtt]

Facebook certainly could have handled things better but other than that I agree with you. It seems a little obnoxious to demand free service. Even if it was free before.

If it were more money he might have a better case. But given other platforms cost thousands of dollars (Sony's Playstation program for example) I don't see $375 as that much of a hardship.

[mattmaroon]

You clearly didn't read the article through. I have no problem with them making money (beyond the extra few million ad impressions I generate them each day). I have a problem with the fact that it feels exactly like a Mafia-style protection payment. I guess it's ironic that the most notable game there is Mafia Wars.

If they just said "everyone has to pay us $375/yr once they get over 10k installs" or something, I'd be way happier about making that payment.

[grandalf]

The logic behind the fees is essentially the same as a Pigovian Tax:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigovian_tax

It may not be "fair" but it results in widespread modification of behavior in a socially beneficial way.

Taxes on carbon fuels are not fair -- lots of firms built up huge infrastructure on narrow profit margins before such taxes were imposed -- but if you advocate a different policy what would it be? Every policy entails some "transfer" from one group to another. At least with a tax the incentive is clear and obvious moving forward, and precisely targets the specific negative externality it's intended to address.

[elai]

10k daily active users sounds more like it.