Wow, even if me and my users aren’t using relays?
That’s just… wrong.
Come on, Plex. You’re better than that. This is just going to drive more people to Emby and Jellyfin.
5 Likes
Not an apposite metaphor, but to correct it: you should be able to buy MS Office one time and have unlimited use of those features without a subscription.
Office 365 is part of the same enshittification trends, shoehorning SaaS into things that have no inherent reason to be SaaS, with no appreciable benefit to users who don’t need feature updates. I get that those trends exist, and in fact agree that many people are getting used to them - Plex may make more money this way. That doesn’t make the trends right, and again, I thought better of the Plex devs.
Just to point out in my reply: So make the existing feature set available at the existing prices/free-to-use criteria, and let people pay extra if they want to fund (and reap the benefits of) ongoing development. That at least is coherent.
Why is the current process incoherent? First, many of the new features are in fact bugs to many users - I have no interest in making Plex a hub for other streaming services, for instance, and get annoyed at every new device setup having to turn off all of that dark pattern integration. Recently, a substantial amount of development is clearly being driven to create a “legitimized, investor-friendly” product not focused on self-hosting - the Roku-like free TV channels, the SVOD integrations - while abandoning users who wish to just stream their own media.
It leads to an impressively wrong-headed result: if development is focusing on those features, then on top of Plex not focusing on self-hosted development, the self-hosted users are being transformed into a bankroll for the very features they don’t want or need. It’s actually a pretty insulting policy, if you accept what I think are the very fair premises above.
6 Likes
and are now expected to pay for the privilege, too
5 Likes
Good point - I think a lot of users would be more accepting of increases in prices if the ongoing development of the product was truly for personal hosted content/servers only. But who knows how much $$$ that users provide in licensing fees will be going to development of features that are unrelated to that? After all, there is zero cost to a user that just wants to watch Plex streaming services - but who is paying for the development of that? I can guarantee it’s some of us…
5 Likes
Plex team, this is going to kill your userbase and ultimately lose the company money.
First off, as has been mentioned, the cost of brokering connections between your apps and user-hosted servers is negligible. You’re not using your network bandwidth for video streaming or for hosting content, that’s entirely on your users. I recognize that those aren’t the costs you’re trying to cover here, but honestly that just makes it worse. Charging for the ability to connect to your own server is blatant rent seeking and anyone with enough technical knowledge to host a Plex server will see that. You will lose users on principle alone.
Second, how do you expect to sell Plex Passes after this? Most people try Plex in the first place either because they want to stream their own media remotely or because someone shared a library with them. The fact that this is free right now is how you’ve ended up with a bunch of users, all of whom are potential Plex Pass subscribers. People got drawn in by the free offering, saw what extra stuff you have to offer in the Pass, then subscribed because they like what you offer. You will not get nearly as many new users if there is a paywall up front to use Plex’s single best feature (especially because charging for it has zero technical justification).
The second that Jellyfin gets easy network traversal and library sharing features - which is all but gauranteed to happen now that there is an incentive to implement them - Plex will lose a ton of users. Nobody with enough knowledge to host a Plex server in the first place is going to choose Plex over Jellyfin after that.
I got a lifetime Plex Pass because I like your software. I would not have done so if I hadn’t already used it to remote stream for free. I do not know a single person who has bought a Plex Pass for any other reason.
11 Likes
And there it is. That really sums it all up
4 Likes
Nobody cared. It came, flopped, and went.
3 Likes
So you have enjoyed Plex for years and not paid them a cent. I don’t feel bad for you.
1 Like
You have Plex Pass. You won’t be affected at all.
I’m going to add my two cents. 
I’ve gone through a good part of this thread, and times are tough for everyone.
Plex is still a company with employees that need to be paid, so money has to come in one way or another.
Now, let’s be realistic. Plex’s initial model was based on open source, so of course, at the beginning, they couldn’t ask for compensation for remote access. But if you think about it, the Plex Pass, as it stands, has very little added value, so sales must be quite low.
It seems logical to me that server owners should have to pay for the Plex Pass in order to stream their content for free to their users (I might make some enemies by saying that ^^).
When I set up my server, I got the Plex Pass to contribute, and it seemed normal to me.
In that sense, there’s nothing shocking about it. However, more funding should also mean more investment, particularly in bug fixing, because there are a ton of them…
In my opinion, Plex needs to focus more on fixing bugs and implementing features requested by users.
If they don’t and instead focus on their advertising content, then Plex is doomed to fail.
I just hope the executives are aware of that!
As for the issues I’ve read about regarding the employees, keep one thing in mind: they are suffering just as much as we are. This strategy is not necessarily – and most likely not – their decision, yet they are the ones getting attacked.
I understand why many people are unhappy, but unfortunately, the Plex employees who interact on the forum are the ones facing this backlash, so try to be a bit lenient with them.
I work in a big tech company, and believe me, when management makes bad decisions, it’s my colleagues and I who suffer the consequences, not the people who made them…
I also hope that Plex will offer a more practical solution to report bugs and, most importantly, to track their progress. I have reported a few, and I often feel like they just disappear into the void. I had to go through support once or twice (for payment issues) just to get feedback on a reported bug.
2 Likes
Plex Pass users will absolutely be affected if they have any libraries shared with them. What do you think the people without passes are going to do by and large? They’re going to stop using Plex since they can no longer access their own instance remotely without paying. They’re not going to keep their libraries running solely for the benefit of their friends who are paying in.
I have a Plex Pass but many of the people sharing libraries with me do not. More than likely they will be switching to Jellyfin, since they don’t want to pay a recurring subscription or $120/$250 just for the privilege of watching their own self-hosted media libraries. Having no subscription fees is the whole reason they’re using Plex in the first place.
This update makes Plex worse for everyone, even those of us who have paid in.
7 Likes
I have actually paid them before for more than a year, but there isn’t a worthy benefit for me. Skipping intros and hw transcoding doesn’t really matter to me. But putting an already free feature that costs them NOTHING behind a paywall is simply a douchebag move. I don’t use their ■■■■■■ relays, I connect to my server directly, the only thing they do is give the clients the direct IP/url, and that’s kilobytes of bandwidth at most. I should be able to watch MY OWN media from MY OWN hardware with MY OWN bandwidth for free.
4 Likes
That funding will never go to useful feature development and bug fixes. At least most of it won’t. For example mobile downloads have been ■■■■■■ for years now, no fixes whatsoever. That money will go to their stupid plex-hosted streaming licenses, not to stuff that’s actually useful for self holsters.
3 Likes
Hi, I’m not naive. Unfortunately, as things stand, it’s hard to look ahead. If no effort is made to fix bugs or implement user requests, then Plex is headed straight for its downfall. In the meantime, this strategy aims to revalue the Plex Pass, and that’s not entirely meaningless.
Many here talk about alternative and open-source solutions, but a lot of people forget that those also require money and recognition—both of which are sorely lacking in this sector. How many of those complaining here have never donated to an open-source project? How many have never contributed to one?
I’m a developer, and I’ve participated in open-source projects. I eventually let them die because I was more often harassed than thanked. I call these users “leech users.” If you go to work, it’s to earn money. Open source relies on volunteers who dedicate their free time, but they still need recognition. Depending on the project’s scale, progress can take time, and when they need funding, everyone will cry scandal. If your time deserves a salary, so does theirs.
Anyway, I digress. I still hold out hope that bug management and improvements will move in the right direction with this new pricing model. If I’m wrong, I’ll turn to other solutions, and so be it.
2 Likes
If we gain stability and requested, interesting features, that’s for the best. But if it’s only about their licenses, then it will be a failure.
That said, let’s add some nuance. Given how the battle over digital content rights is escalating year after year, this licensing coverage isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Plex actually has a chance of surviving thanks to these agreements, whereas open-source projects are much more uncertain—they can disappear overnight. That’s something to keep in mind.
However, if all our financial contributions go entirely into licensing, then it’s game over.
In the worst-case scenario, a few years from now, we could find ourselves with all open-source solutions gone and Plex either struggling or dead, leaving no alternatives.
This is just my personal opinion, but I’m trying to put things into perspective.
1 Like
Most open source projects don’t disappear overnight - the source code for Jellyfin is available for anyone to compile and use. That’s kind of the whole idea of open-source projects.
3 Likes
Opensource projects are great IF you have active maintainers of the code. If you take a 10 year old source code that’s not been touched in years it’s likely going to be prone to a host of modern bugs and vulnerabilities not patched. Open source is only as good as the devs that provide their time, and users have to trust in the code which if open source is visible, but if precompiled could be malicious. Without eyes actively monitoring for bad maintainers you end up with malware take “xz utils” for example.
2 Likes
Yes and no. GitHub has already removed many projects due to copyright claims from rights holders, for example:
• Popcorn Time and its forks
• youtube-dl
• Many projects related to Nintendo content
…
Even if you still have the source code for a project, you also need to be able to maintain it. Would you be able to compile all the client applications? Because if you don’t have a client, having the server source code won’t do you any good.
The world of media centers with external sharing is very borderline from a legal standpoint.
I’m not saying that the scenario I’m describing will definitely happen, but it remains a possibility. We don’t know what the future holds. Many things we once took for granted have already been taken away.
Anyway, this is drifting from the original topic. I just wanted to share another perspective by giving my opinion and analysis. I understand that this will be an issue for some and not at all for others. Now we just have to wait and see what Plex has in store for us—whether good or bad.
2 Likes
That’s a pretty bold take.
1 Like
