Recycling unwanted themes and stacks

I’m wondering whether it’s possible to dispose of themes, stacks etc to other RW users? and if so how would one go about it?

I’ve bought numerous stacks, etc that I never use. It would be a waste to delete them when others might be interested in having them? Amongst my unwanted is Foundations, for example.

I’m looking to start with Foundation - if possible I’ll buy it off you! No idea what the mechanism for this would be however. better ask JW what he thinks :slight_smile:

1 Like

I guess that this won’t be able without the approval of the respective developer.

You should see Themes and Stacks like any other digital good, such like movies or tv shows you bought on iTunes. Would you sell copies of these to friends? :wink:

Always remember that digital goods aren’t physical, so you wouldn’t lose them once you sell them, except you delete them on your behalf, including all your saved copies on external HDDs etc - but no one could monitor this.




I can see many issues with this:

  1. It is a digital good and the developer of the product has NO proof that you did not delete this from your computer or even if you did, you did not copy it to an external or flash drive.
  2. Most developers send out an invoice with a download link, this link allows for the user to redownload the product when or if they delete it, or hard drive crash or purchasing new computer or etc. If the developer does at least not know you transferred a product, they can not change this information so the original owner can never download it again.
  3. Some developers offer discounts to new versions of their products if there is an upgrade fee, if the client information is not changed because it was sold to someone else, the new person misses out on the upgrade deal and the previous owner can get a discount on the new update if they decide they want it again.

The FIRST thing that should be done in a situation where you want to get rid of these is to at least contact the developer so they can tell you their policy. Do not ask me what Joe’s is at this time, as this has never come up and he is enjoying some time away from the computerized world to celebrate his anniversary with his wife. I have posted a link to this thread to him though, so he will know about it.

My personal thoughts on the subject, if I was a developer (which I am not) is I would NO WAY accept this situation, it is way to hard to police and to tell who the legitimate owner is. My own PERSONAL opinion on the matter, NOT the opinion of Joe.

1 Like

I’ve re-read my op and there’s no mention of selling. Yet the replies so far seem to think sale is implied. I don’t want any money for the unwanted items. Happy to give them away if feasible.

When I have time, I’ll list the ones I don’t want and then if anyone is interest they can contact the developers and find out whether transfer is ok.

My response doesn’t mention selling either, so my points still stand. Contact the developer first and see what their policy is.

1 Like

your[quote=“caffeineinjection, post:8, topic:6038, full:true”]
Sale, transfer, is there really any difference? Result is the same. Someone gets to use a product for which the dev hasn’t received any recompense, so to all intents and purpose, it’s as good as pirated. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but that’s what it boils down to. I suspect it’s what many are thinking, just are too polite to say.

Most devs I suspect put loads of time into making stuff to make our lives easier, don’t be cheap, just buy the stuff you want.

Hmmm - is this the case? Clearly if you buy a product, get use out of it and then later sell then your point is definitely correct. But what if you pay for something, find it to be less suitable than you expected (easily done when there is no trial on offer) and then sell to someone for whom the product is suitable.

Pragmatically speaking, it’s hard to prove someone hasn’t got genuine use out of the product so this could be academic, but it is definitely the case that people realise AFTER purchase the the product is not what they thought. I can give some specific examples if needed

Maybe the answer is to encourage ALL RW developers to allow some sort of trial period or trial versions that can’t be published etc.

Most software is “licensed” as apposed to “purchased”. And there are often stipulations about limiting transfer of the license, for sale or otherwise in order to limit piracy which can be a bit too tempting in those sort of situations.

That said, if you do want to give or sell any products that I make you have my permission. :slight_smile:

Please just be reasonable and considerate. If you’re reselling to try to make a quick buck or to try to cheat someone out of something, then… well… no, you don’t have permission to do that. just stop. don’t do that. :stuck_out_tongue:


[quote=“caffeineinjection, post:11, topic:6038, full:true”]
Your treating digital the same as physical, which doesn’t really work. [/quote]

No, I fully understand the difference - which is why i said usage is hard to prove and therefore could be academic. And this is why building in a trial feature is a good idea because then shoppers have the chance to make a proper decision and live with it - negating any justification to resell.

Sounds all well and good, but have a free trial is only free to the customers. There is support of the free trial, cost to store the free trial, creating links and or pages for the free trial can take time (which is money), last but not least, creating the free trial can be time consuming (again, money). There is a LOT that can go into a free trial. I understand what you are saying, but it can be a lot of work for the developer


“Someone gets to use a product for which the dev hasn’t received any recompense, so to all intents and purpose, it’s as good as pirated.”

Taken to its logical conclusion, anything that’s sold second-hand, third-hand, etc is doing the product-maker out of recompense over and above the original price.

My understanding of software is that the buyer only has the right to use the software, but doesn’t actually own the software as such. the same principle applies to recorded music, books, etc. A CD of music, a printed book, for example, is simply a portable container for the composer’s sounds, the author’s words, etc. Which means that anyone who transfer a purchase to someone else has no right to do so, unless with permission of the person with the authority to give that permission which, in the examples give would probably be the book publisher or record company.

Stacks4Stacks manages to overcome the lot of work for the developer by offering free trials!

As do most developers of other forms of software. Also Realmac offers a free trial of RW - no time limit and up to 3 pages website. The agenda might be a sprat to catch a mackerel but since one, two or three page websites can be and are done, to be able to create a website using RW is both a generous offer and goodwill gesture.

I have a different opinion that most Ive seen here. If I buy software and I later decide that I don’t want it, I would absolutely have no problem in my heart giving or selling it to someone else. The problem would be that no one else would want to buy my used software. If it isn’t boxed, it was probably very cheap and a serious user will want to get it from the developer and have the product registered to them.

Also, I don’t buy the argument that a book, CD or vinyl belongs to the publisher. The work inside does belong to them but THAT book belongs to me. Amazon sells used books, CD’s and vinyl and Im sure its within their legal and moral rights.

Didn’t say it was impossible, just listed things that make it hard. You can list many companies/developers that offer free trials and I can list just as many that don’t.

1 Like

Let’s stay on subject. I know you didn’t bring it up, but books, dvds, etc are not what we are discussing here.

Amongst my collection I have over one hundred stacks that I’ve never used and I never shall. (Bloody stacks thing is a bit addictive - I’m on the wagon now).
They seemed like a good idea at the time of purchase but now just fill my library.
Some of them are pretty old but they are in ‘as new’ condition and I quite like the idea that I could give them to someone starting out.

Nice one @isaiah

1 Like

[quote=“ricinport, post:19, topic:6038, full:true”]Bloody stacks thing is a bit addictive - I’m on the wagon now).
They seemed like a good idea at the time of purchase but now just fill my library.
Nice one @isaiah

Ha ha - so very true…

1 Like

Completely agree. Some won’t like this because they want everything for next to nothing, but I say build cost of free trial into the price. Better to pay a bit more and have useful stacks / plug-ins / themes rather than a bloated library.

  1. Prune your library.
    I keep a few library folders that swap from time to time for different tasks. Some are spartan, some are complete, some are purpose-built around a specific project (Foundation).

  2. Make sure you check with the developer, and/or license.
    I think it’s safe to assume that license are NOT transferable unless that is specifically stated.

  3. “build cost of free trial into the price”
    There is no “trial” for stack or a theme since once you have it, you have it. It is very difficult to build trialware around assets like images in a theme, in an open system like the web, or interpreted languages (HTML/CSS/JS). Perhaps someday I will think of a good way to do this. :wink:



Yep, but they’re dealing with license keys, which, unfortunately, don’t work for Stacks.