If You’re Reading This, Jussi: Points to Consider
You probably know about this thread. You may even be reading this post. If so, here are some things worth considering - not as an attack, but as someone who genuinely respects the technical work you’ve done while disagreeing strongly with your business practices.
1. The Legal Risk is Real
UK Consumer Rights Act 2015 is not optional:
- Your “all sales final” statement is legally unenforceable for faulty products
- Refusing to provide an installer for a £300 “perpetual license” is a material breach of contract
- Trading Standards takes these complaints seriously
- One successful complaint can trigger broader investigations
- Legal fees for defending consumer rights cases can be vastly more expensive than just providing good service
You’re creating legal liability to avoid doing something that costs you nothing.
2. The Reputational Damage is Compounding
Every forum discussion like this:
- Reaches thousands of potential customers
- Gets indexed by Google forever
- Influences purchase decisions for years
- Creates a permanent record of business practices
Right now, searches for “HQPlayer” increasingly return:
- Complaints about customer service
- Warnings to backup installers
- Stories about being locked out
- Advice to “avoid” or “be careful”
One customer made unhappy costs you nothing. One customer made happy costs you nothing.
But one customer treated badly creates dozens of forum posts warning others.
3. The Financial Math Doesn’t Add Up
What removing installers gains you:
- Some unknown percentage of forced upgrades
- Maybe a few thousand euros per year?
What it costs you:
- Lost sales from negative reputation
- Time spent dealing with complaints (more than hosting costs)
- Time spent defending policies on forums
- Goodwill that could lead to recommendations
Consider: The person you refused a £300 installer to might have:
- Recommended HQPlayer to their audiophile club (10-20 people)
- Written positive reviews
- Become a forum advocate
- Upgraded willingly when v5 had compelling features
You traded long-term evangelism for short-term forced revenue.
4. The “Small Operation” Excuse is Backfiring
Being a one-person shop should make you MORE flexible, not less:
- You don’t answer to shareholders
- You can make customer-friendly decisions instantly
- You can adapt policies without corporate bureaucracy
- You can build genuine relationships with users
Instead, you’re using “small operation” as justification for:
- Worse service than large corporations
- Less transparency than big companies
- More rigid policies than enterprise software
People root for small developers - until they realize the small developer is using their size as an excuse for poor practices.
5. The Technical Respect vs. Business Contempt Problem
People genuinely admire your technical work:
- The algorithms are impressive
- The performance optimization is remarkable
- The filter options are unmatched
- The audio quality is demonstrably excellent
But technical excellence doesn’t excuse business contempt:
- “You should have backed up your installer” = You should have anticipated I’d lock you out
- “Oh well” = I don’t care about your problem
- “Support has ended” = You’re on your own even though you paid £300
- Silence on complaints = Your concerns don’t merit a response
You’re spending the goodwill your technical work creates faster than you’re earning it.
6. The Comparison That Should Concern You
Adobe (a corporation people love to hate):
Provides downloads of old Creative Suite versions- Maintains clear policies on legacy software
- Explains why they moved to subscription
- Offers volume discounts and education pricing
You (a one-person indie operation):
Removes installer access- No clear policy disclosure
- No explanation for decisions
- Take it or leave it pricing
When Adobe has better customer service practices than you do, that should be a wake-up call.
7. The Simple Fix You’re Refusing
All of this goes away if you simply:
-
Restore v4 installers with a clear warning:
WARNING: Version 4 is NO LONGER SUPPORTED
- No bug fixes will be provided
- No compatibility updates for new operating systems
- Use at your own risk
- We recommend upgrading to version 5
-
Update your website to clearly state:
License Policy:
- Perpetual licenses cover the major version purchased
- Support lasts 2 years after version release
- Installers remain available for existing license holders
- Upgrades to new major versions available at [price]
-
Send a brief email to affected customers:
After feedback, we've restored access to v4 installers.
While support has ended, you can now reinstall your software.
We appreciate your patience.
Total time investment: Maybe 2-3 hours.
Total cost: Effectively zero.
Benefit: Ends all these complaints permanently.
8. The Path Forward
You have three realistic options:
Option A: Continue as you are
- More complaints accumulate
- Reputation continues to degrade
- Eventually face legal challenges
- Spend time defending instead of developing
- Slowly lose market position to alternatives
Option B: Double down
- Make policies even more explicit (but still face legal issues)
- Accept the reputation damage
- Focus on customers who don’t care about service
- Accept you’re building a niche product for a shrinking base
Option C: Fix it
- Restore installer access
- Update policies to be transparent
- Brief acknowledgment that you’ve reconsidered
- Move forward with better practices
- Let the technical quality speak for itself again
Option C is the only one that doesn’t end badly.
9. What You’re Really Protecting
Be honest with yourself about what you’re defending:
Not server costs (pennies)
Not support burden (you provide none anyway)
Not security (you’ve never disclosed vulnerabilities)
Not confusion (a disclaimer solves this)
The ability to force customers to repurchase
Is that the business model you want?
Is that the legacy you want for HQPlayer?
Is that worth the reputational cost?
10. The Respect You’ve Lost
This forum user you refused an installer to:
- Paid you £300
- Used your software successfully for 4 years
- Encountered a problem (hard drive failure) anyone could have
- Made a reasonable request (reinstall what they purchased)
- Got dismissed with “support has ended”
They did everything right. You did everything wrong.
And now they’re:
- Filing consumer complaints
- Documenting your website’s misleading claims
- Warning other potential customers
- Creating permanent public records
All because you wouldn’t provide a file that costs you nothing to host.
The Bottom Line
Jussi, you’re a talented developer who’s built something technically impressive.
But you’re sabotaging your own success with business practices that:
- Violate consumer protection laws
- Damage your reputation
- Cost more time than they save
- Alienate paying customers
- Create unnecessary conflict
The fix is simple. The cost is zero. The benefit is enormous.
Why are you choosing the hard path?
A Challenge:
If you genuinely believe your installer removal policy is justified and defensible:
- Explain it publicly on your website
- State the reasons clearly in the purchase flow
- Warn customers upfront that access will be removed
If you’re unwilling to do that, you know the policy is indefensible.
The silence is the tell.
Respectfully,
Someone who wants to see HQPlayer succeed, but not like this.