App Market - People canceling order after paying for apps??

[arcarocket]

So I noticed I sold 2 copies of my software for $1.99 each. In google checkout it says they both "canceled" the order before their 15 minutes is up.

So using Google Checkout developers will get ripped off. People will download the application onto their phones and then with Google Checkout will "cancel" their order and get their money back and keep the app.

Anyone else notice this??

[arcarocket]

Might have posted in wrong forum, can move if needed.

[reference2myself]

Maybe you shouldn't be charging for software on a free and open system???

[CharlieMiddleton]

Originally Posted by reference2myself

Maybe you shouldn't be charging for software on a free and open system???

Yippee weve got a liberal hippy on the forum!!! Yes your right its a open source software. But how would you like it if your boss said because you live in a free and open society we aint going to pay you!!!

It takes more than a little bit of hard work to make an app other than a flashlight!

Back on subject.

I suggest you drop someone at google checkout a email explaining your concerns. I would imaging that your not the only one that is having this problem! They are probably still ironing out the bumps!

[reference2myself]

Originally Posted by CharlieMiddleton

Yippee weve got a liberal hippy on the forum!!! Yes your right its a open source software. But how would you like it if your boss said because you live in a free and open society we aint going to pay you!!!

It takes more than a little bit of hard work to make an app other than a flashlight!

Back on subject.

I suggest you drop someone at google checkout a email explaining your concerns. I would imaging that your not the only one that is having this problem! They are probably still ironing out the bumps!

It's liberal hippies like me why Linux exist. If we really lived in a free and open society people wouldn't require or seek payment or recognition for their contributions. In the words of Lao-tzu "No crime is greater than approving of greed, no calamity is greater than discontent, no fault is greater than possessiveness."

[PunkZanyJ]

Originally Posted by CharlieMiddleton

Yippee weve got a liberal hippy on the forum!!! Yes your right its a open source software. But how would you like it if your boss said because you live in a free and open society we aint going to pay you!!!

It takes more than a little bit of hard work to make an app other than a flashlight!

Back on subject.

I suggest you drop someone at google checkout a email explaining your concerns. I would imaging that your not the only one that is having this problem! They are probably still ironing out the bumps!

I'm a liberal and a hippy, and I'm nothing like this person. I know very well that Android is not a free and open system in that regard. "Android" was free, yes, the updates are free, yes, but Open Source does NOT = FREE. I don't know why so many idiots think that, but open source has never meant free.

You may not like liberals or hippies but using that as a default insult just makes you look foolish.

[CharlieMiddleton]

I vote for the lib dems in the uk. I have lived on several ''hippy'' farms. I use Bio-diversity in my garden for growing my veg. I would call myself a closet hippy!! I have met people that fall in to both categories. The reference to ''liberal hippy'' was/is ment as SARCASM!!!

It would be nice to live in a world where Lao-tzu's idea was widely used. But we dont. This is why the hole world is suffering in a ''credit crunch'' due to a few peoples greed!!

[VanillaTbone]

As PunkZanyJ has stated above: "Open Source does NOT = FREE"

In that case, define "Open-Source" for us there VanillaTbone:

- of or relating to or being computer software for which the source code is freely available

The above definition is exactly what PunkZanyJ was relating to in the above post. The Source code(The Android OS Itself) is 100% FREE, but in the regards of a free OS that does not state that the software is 100% FREE.

Do not get me wrong with my post, but I support both sides in this arguement. I myself am a developer and do not like giving away my hard work for free. In the aspect of me also being a consumer, I like to get stuff for free...

Having said all that, I will leave this thread to the rest of you to argue over after a few more defining lines of Open-Source....

Open Source: (My Source)

There are numerous groups who claim to own the term "Open Source", but in reality the term has not been trademarked. The Open Source Initiative's definition is widely recognized as the "real" definition.

The Open Source Definition is used by the Open Source Initiative to determine whether or not a software license can be considered open source. The definition was based on the Debian Free Software Guidelines, written and adapted primarily by Bruce Perens.

Open source is an approach to design, development, and distribution offering practical accessibility to a product's source (goods and knowledge). Some consider open source as one of various possible design approaches, while others consider it a critical strategic element of their operations. Before open source became widely adopted, developers and producers used a variety of phrases to describe the concept; the term open source gained popularity with the rise of the Internet, which provided access to diverse production models, communication paths, and interactive communities.

The open source model of operation and decision making allows concurrent input of different agendas, approaches and priorities, and differs from the more closed, centralized models of development.[1] The principles and practices are commonly applied to the peer production development of source code for software that is made available for public collaboration. The result of this peer-based collaboration is usually released as open-source software, however open source methods are increasingly being applied in other fields of endeavor, such as Biotechnology.