Child Item

I'm out of space. However, the content isn't mine - it is shared.

Dropbox Plan
N/A
Device
N/A
Operating System/Browser (if using the web)
N/A
Dropbox App Version (if using the app)
N/A

Dropbox indicates I'm out of space, but that's only true if you count things shared with me. That user has already paid for the space. Requiring all users to "buy-up" based on shared space feels exploitative - a rent-seeking practice where Dropbox collects payment multiple times for the same stored bytes.

Google Drive handles this more fairly by only counting shared files against the original uploader's quota. That approach actually encourages collaboration instead of penalizing it.

The current Dropbox model breaks the basic logic of file sharing. One person pays to store a file, shares it with their team/community/family, and suddenly Dropbox is collecting revenue as if they're storing multiple copies. It's double-dipping that turns a collaborative feature into a revenue multiplier.

How about another look at this sort of case?

Thanks/Rob

Find more posts tagged with

Storage space

Shared Folders

Active

Comments

Megan

Hi there, @rmhines, let's jump right into this!

If you have edit access to the folder, it'd need to take up space in your account as well, so that you can edit it.

Keep in mind that if you no longer need the folder or its content, you can remove your own access by following the steps here.

Otherwise, you can always access a folder without affecting your own space. You'd have to ask the owner to send you a "view-only" link instead.

And lastly, if you need to upload files to someone else's account, they can also send you a file request, which won't affect your space either. In any case I'll forward your feedback to the appropriate areas so we can continue to improve.

I hope this helps!

Mark

rmhines wrote:
suddenly Dropbox is collecting revenue as if they're storing multiple copies. It's double-dipping that turns a collaborative feature into a revenue multiplier.

But it also costs Dropbox multiple times to do it - paying for the up/download sync on each share, the software development, the support teams etc.

Lets not forget that Dropbox doesnt have another income stream. It isnt like Microsoft or Google where you have adverts or other software or Apple with hardware.

rmhines

An incremental charge might be fair. A total duplication is not.

While I appreciate solution suggestions, I'm not interested in paths that require me to negotiate special conditions with other parties - that's just life-sucking friction. Dropbox is supposed to be friction reducing.

Appreciate if the product management team is fully aware of this awkward situation.

Mark

rmhines wrote:
Appreciate if the product management team is fully aware of this awkward situation

They are - its been like this since its inception and previous official communication is that there is no plans to change it.

Obviously I dont work for Dropbox and things can change, but, I'd not expect this to if I'm honest. The only concession they've made is it not counting twice on paid for business plans. -

Neal

Hi @rmhines,

Just wanted to check in and mention we cover this scenario in one of our FAQ pages.

It will be covered under "Shared folders take up space in my Dropbox account".

rmhines

Thanks to everyone who engaged on this thread. I appreciate the explanations and acknowledge that Dropbox does incur incremental costs when handling shared content.

However, I remain unconvinced that those incremental costs justify the current 100% duplication model. The operational overhead simply doesn't scale linearly with storage usage in the way the pricing suggests.

More practically, this approach creates an unworkable situation: as long as shared folders are pushing me into overage territory, I effectively cannot use my own Dropbox space for anything. And as one member of collaborative groups, I'm not going to start negotiating special arrangements like requesting read-only access – groups don't function well with those kinds of individual demands, and frankly, that's the kind of friction Dropbox should be eliminating, not creating.

When I compare this to alternatives like Google Drive, which only counts shared files against the original uploader's quota, Dropbox simply isn't competitive. Google's approach actually encourages collaboration rather than penalizing it.

Going forward, when colleagues ask "where should we share this?", I'll be recommending Google Drive with clear, data-supported reasoning.

I do appreciate the responsiveness in this community forum – that's a genuine positive for Dropbox. But ultimately, this thread has helped me conclude that Dropbox is no longer a viable option for my use case. It seems like an opportune time for product management to reconsider whether "this is how we've always done it" is still the right approach in today's collaborative work environment.

Best, Rob

Megan

Hey @rmhines, we appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with us.

We'll make sure your voice is heard.

In any case, if you need something else, please let me know and I will be more than happy to help every step of the way. Thank you!