31 Dec 09 10:46 pm
I personally don't promote products that I feel are of a poor quality or potentially illegal.
When it comes to FlightProSim, firstly, I'm not recommending that you guys promote that product. You CAN promote it, but of course there are 1000s of other products and niches out there for you to promote and in my bootcamp I showed you how to research profitable niches.
I used this niche as an example, not necessarily as the niche that you should choose, although you can if you want to.
Regarding the quality of the reviews on my website of FlightProSim, as you saw in my bootcamp, I made sure the writer played the game himself before writing it.
Regarding FlightProSim, I'm not a seasoned flight simulator gamer, however I am well aware of the open source rules surrounding repackaging and selling flight gear as Flight Pro Sim.
From what I can see, it is completely legal for FlightProSim owner to sell this game. That's one of the reasons for open source software existing, ie people can work on it, make additions if they so wish and/or repackage and sell the software. The same is true of books that run out of copyright (e.g. the bible).
Just because it is available for free doesn't meant that people don't want to pay money for a version of it that comes with customer support, the ability to have it posted in the mail, bug fixes that may not come with the original open source version, etc.
From talking to the Flight Pro Sim owner about the matter, he mentioned that the free version doesn't come with customer support, and his version does come with support, it also comes complete with bug fixes, and he reinvests back into his version of the game to get programmers to make more additions and bug fixes.
I will monitor the refund rate closely, talking to the owner it is very low, which means that the users themselves are very happy with the product. So quality is not the issue here, it is a product that people are enjoying, the problem is whether or not it is legal and/or morally ok to repackage open source software and sell it.
From a legal standpoint it appears to be completely ok.
Also, morally, if the programmers who worked on FlightGear didn't want it to be open source, they could have collaborated on it privately. They chose to make it open source, and they chose to allow it to be sold also (they could have put a restriction on that if they had wished).
Furthermore, given that this has been a common practice for many years with open source software (e.g. people sell red hat linux, etc), I don't really see how this is suddenly a problem.
Especially given that it is a high quality product, comes complete with customer support, the owner has fixed bugs in the software and of course there is the 60 day money back guarantee.