In the last release in April, they announced the integration of a paid backup service, and since that announcement there was no new release. Three months is a long release gap for immich.
It seems like they are desperately trying to monetise what they have right now. Is the project dead? I mean it’s good as it is, but also quite barebones.
It seems like they are desperately trying to monetise what they have right now
Are the creators not allowed to buy food, pay rent, have money? Why the negative characterization? It’s real free and open source software, AGPLv3.
I didn’t know about the backup service, but it seems very cool that they asked the community what they think: https://www.reddit.com/r/immich/comments/1s1sowe/immich_e2ee_backups_service_user_survey/
How do people expect big, complex projects like this to exist without money? I bought their 1-time license, but I also understand their rent, food, utilities, etc aren’t 1-time payments. And I want them to keep working on Immich.
The backup service seems like a clean separation between the core app and the money source. It’s not like they’re paywalling main features. Subscribe to backups, if they’re genuinely useful to you. Otherwise, don’t use them, they’re not in your way.
I’ll wait to be outraged when they start charging per user or per GB or something stupid.
Anyway, reward open source with money. Fuck evil corpo bullshit.
Why the negative characterization?
Why would it be good news? What happens if the monetisation fails, will they just abandon the project? Will they from now on focus only on monetisation, and all other features are second priority only?
AGPLv3
That’s good, but if the project gets abandoned by the core developers, then that’s not good news.
I bought their 1-time license
I also bought their one-time license. That’s another reason why I hope the project continues to be developed.
April 7 is just over 2 months ago not 3. There’s also been active commits to the repo as recently as five hours ago. By no means is the project dead.
Yeah but if they focus on monetisation now, what does that mean for the project?
It means the developers can focus more on the project without having to take a proper job instead of only work on the project when they have free time.
If the monetization works you will see an increase in development. You might see some new features be paywalled but that all depends on the monetization scheme.
I’ll start by saying that I have some serious misgivings about Futo, the organization that financially supports the Immich core devs. Their non-FOSS license for all projects (except Immich) and their reprehensible method of one-time cash donations and then claiming association to those projects on their website, these things do not decorate Futo in glory. Quite the opposite.
With that said, a quick look at the Immich repo shows dozens of commits in the last 3 days, with plenty of activity from users and apparent developers in the issue tracker.
In the last release in April, they announced the integration of a paid backup service, and since that announcement there was no new release. Three months is a long release gap for immich. It seems like they are desperately trying to monetise what they have right now.
I think you’re jumping to a number of unfounded conclusions. Firstly, the latest release on the repo is v2.7.5 (13 April). The link in your post is to v2.7.0 (7 April). This is a small pedantic observation, so let’s continue.
In the v2.7.0, there is no such announcement of “the integration of a paid backup service”. There is, however, a survey link so that people interested in off-site backup can express an interest. This is a far cry from the fear of Immich becoming enshittified and locked-down except to paid subscribers. If nothing else, it’d be nice to have the option, because integration of off-site backup features would also enable backing up to an off-site that isn’t operated by Futo/Immich.
But let’s explore the worst-case scenario: Immich becomes unusable in the future because it is a mere client that requires a paid subscription. Can this really happen?
No, the simple and short answer is no. Immich is licensed with the GNU Affero GPLv3, which is explicit that network use is distribution. The same code that Futo runs on their servers to enable Immich would have to be distributed to users upon request. So by the license, someone else (even selfhosters!) can acquire the software and use it without having to pay Futo a dime.
But maybe Futo decides to not honor the license? Well, we could go into a discussion of their legal liability by doing so, but one option is always on the table: fork Immich. The license is clear: the grant is irrevocable, so anyone who forks cannot be sued by Futo or anyone after the fact.
But this is all pessimism (a fair position when dealing with a questionable entity like Futo). But we should also answer why Futo would want to offer off-site backup services. A non-cynical reason would be that they recognize some self-hosters do not have good backup hygiene. They do not have a 3-2-1 backup solution in place. Those users are one HDD failure away from misery. A large entity is able to more easily and cheaply acquire rack space in multiple data centers, to provide a supportive service to self hosted users.
I maintain my prior position, that self hosting is an act of harm reduction. If someone can move away from Google Photos but still needs to use an off-site backup service, that’s still a win for personal liberty in my book.
Immich has a blog on their website. Their May update is here: https://immich.app/blog/2026-may-recap
They’re funded by the FUTO Foundation. https://futo.tech/projects
You can “buy” Immich to support the team directly as well.
Thanks, this blog post inspires some confidence?
Shit, if immich goes corporate i am quite screwed on that front.
I am still waiting on the possibility to properly get co ownership of photos and albums on multiple accounts.
Yeah, I’m also waiting on better sharing and ownership.
Right now I shared my library with my wife, and can’t even archive her photos on my side. I mean that they get archived on my side without affecting them on her side.
Also, when someone shares an album with you, you can’t even add all these photos to your own timeline.
