"Testament" Suggestion for Abandoned Products

In an era of fast-paced innovation and continuous development, some software products inevitably become abandoned. Although no longer supported, these products can still hold value for developers or users who wish to repurpose or improve them. This proposal outlines a clear and fair approach to managing such cases, promoting transparency and opportunities for reuse.

🔍 Public Availability for Abandoned Products

Abandoned products should be made publicly accessible, but clearly marked with the following information:

• Project Status Information
• ⚠️ Caution: Unsupported
• 🚫 Not Supported (i.e., abandoned and no longer maintained)
• 🛠️ Maintained only by the community

This approach ensures that users can still access the code. Any future contribution from the community can then serve as a foundation for continued development.

💡 Why This Matters

Even if a product is no longer maintained, it may still be valuable to someone who sees potential in the concept and wants to build on it. By granting access to such products:

🌱 We foster innovation – others can expand upon the original idea.

🤝 We support collaboration – users can help each other grow.

🔧 We enable ongoing updates – even without the original developer.

📜 Proposed Clause for Software Marketplaces

If a product is #abandoned and the developer no longer provides support, the product shall become publicly available at no cost under an MIT commercial license.

The source code should be published (e.g., on GitHub) and clearly marked as “abandoned.” The original creator will continue to be credited in the license, but the community will be free to fork, update, and extend the product for personal or commercial use.

Users who have already made a purchase could be acknowledged as sponsors and mentioned in the source code of the license or in a separate file.

This clause should be integrated into all digital product marketplaces, ensuring that end-users are not left unsupported and that valuable projects are not lost.

🤲 Supporting Existing Customers

This policy also protects users who have already purchased the product. If it becomes abandoned, the community will have the opportunity to:

• Collaborate on fixes and updates
• Hire developers to maintain or upgrade it
• Extend the life of the product beyond the original support window

🧾 Real-World Example

A concrete case:

🔗 TikTak Short Videos – a product that, despite being outdated, could still be revived and maintained by an interested community or developer. But this suggestion would also be valid for many other abandoned products, which can represent a gold mine and a foundation for future products that can be loved by the community.

📬 Final Thoughts

This approach strengthens the open-source and ethical tech ecosystem, ensures transparency, and safeguards the investments of users and customers.

If someone develops commercial products for open-source platforms like UNA CMS, they should also agree that, in the event support is discontinued, the product will be released under an MIT license and made publicly available just as UNA itself is open-source MIT license .

💬 Personally, I am willing to purchase the license for such a product and update it myself, even if it is currently non-functional.

• Since I registered on boonex.com, I've seen numerous valuable products and users upset that the product they purchased was abandoned by the original developer, leaving customers without support. With this clause, we could offer those who purchase products on UNA the chance to ensure that their investment is not lost and remains viable.
• It is true that we cannot force developers to publish their privately licensed software under an MIT license. However, we can offer them the freedom to leave a software testament a declaration that outlines their wishes for how the product should be treated if they can no longer provide support. This #testament could specify whether the product should be released to the community under an MIT license or remain private and archived.
• Such intentions should be made publicly visible to customers so they can understand whether their investment is protected in the long term. This level of transparency allows users to make informed decisions about the future of a product and its sustainability, even under a private license.
• The customer should also have the option to check a box indicating that they wish to be reminded as sponsors if the product becomes open-source, ensuring their privacy preferences are respected.
• In order to encourage the original creator to optionally grant an MIT license upon abandoning their product, they could be given the opportunity to include a PayPal address or another donation method. This would allow anyone who finds value in the released code to make voluntary contributions. By offering this gesture of support, creators may feel more inclined to leave their software to the community under a permissive license like MIT, knowing they can still receive appreciation even after stepping away from active development.
• This way, everyone benefits the community gains access to valuable resources, and the original creator receives support for their contributions, preserving the lasting impact of their work.
• So, when a product is abandoned, it will no longer be removed from the market. The product page will include a link to its GitHub repository, allowing anyone who wishes to donate to do so. This way, everyone can continue using the product and contribute to its development if they choose to.
• Creators of abandoned products can be made aware of the option to open-source their portfolio of products. They may choose to make these products available to the community under an MIT open-source license, thereby allowing others to contribute, improve, and maintain the software. In return, they could receive donations from individuals or organizations who find value in their work. This approach not only ensures that valuable software does not become lost but also provides creators with a way to continue benefiting from their contributions even after they can no longer provide active support.
• By open-sourcing their products, developers can tap into a broad community of collaborators who can carry the project forward, ensuring its longevity and continued usefulness. The open-source model fosters a sense of collective ownership and responsibility, encouraging individuals to contribute code, bug fixes, and updates. This arrangement benefits both the creator, who may receive financial support through donations, and the community, which gains access to tools and solutions that might otherwise have been lost.
• Since UNA already has a payment system in place, donations can be facilitated through existing platforms and/or github donation. This allows supporters to show their appreciation for the project, even after the original creator has abandoned it. Although the creator will no longer provide support, donations can still be received, and the responsibility for support and maintenance will be transferred to the community.
• This approach creates a sustainable ecosystem where the software remains available and functional, with the community taking on the role of maintaining and updating it, while users can continue to benefit from their investments, knowing they are supported by an engaged and collaborative network.

For those who believe that every contribution to UNA holds value even if it’s not ongoing and eventually abandoned I believe creators should not be punished. On the contrary, their efforts should be acknowledged and respected. Developers facing difficulties should not be stigmatized; after all, any of us can encounter setbacks in life that prevent us from continuing our work.

A developer’s past contributions deserve appreciation. That’s why I believe a solution like a " testament" for each product listed on the market could be a viable approach. It offers clarity and dignity both to the developer and to the users who invested in the product.

Please take a moment to answer the questionnaires, comment and share your thoughts. You may even have a better idea i welcome it. No one has a monopoly on truth, and everyone deserves a second chance. Every line of code that once served the UNA ecosystem has the potential to continue offering value as open source. And those who choose this path truly deserve the community’s respect.