Software Police on Patrol...

[drakewire]

Waves always makes uhh well waves when it comes to securing their fortunes...
I dont blame them.. I just think they ask for it sometimes, by allowing their full product to be downloaded and evaluated.. If they wanted to curb piracy, send registered customers a hard disk thats copy protected that can run on a CD with limitations on use, I hate the ILOK, but its a necessary demon that Waves fell victim to..
The sad part most studios that use the software dont let anyone know, if they do, there just stupid....

[henryrobinett]

I don't have a problem with that at all. They've got to do what ever they have to to protect their interests. I don't have any pirated software. I think there needs to be some sort of "policing" against unscrupulous and unethical users.

[Gear Tramp]

Stealing is wrong.

Killing is wrong.

Raping is wrong.

Are there really any valid reasons to not live by these values?

[Duardo]

I think it's pretty pitiful that people are rooting for others to face large civil penalties because they view them as unfair competition (!). I mean, seriously. You compete on who has the most plugins?

Sure, if you've spent thousands of dollars for the same tools that someone else has stolen, and then lose clients to that other studio (I realize that competition based on who has the most plugins is silly, but we all know that potential clients aren't always educated on what's really important...which, I suppose, is why a potential client asking to see a studio's Waves plugins may not seem all that suspicious) based on that (in part or otherwise) should be upsetting, shouldn't it?

[backplay]

Originally Posted by drakewire

I hate the ILOK, but its a necessary demon that Waves fell victim to..
..

Yeh, but did it help? I don't think so...

It will always be a cat & mouse game. A company has some new protection they payed xxx for, that in the end gets payed by us the consumers, and the crackers have a new challenge.
I use PT, so my dongle is big enough

[heathen]

Originally Posted by adrianex

Well, I do feel bad for who ever got cough (I never like kicking anybody when their down), but even thou I feel its a little bit "sneaky" (not short what word to use), Wave has the right to defend their product how ever they feel works.

Oh well I'm sure the guy will end up visiting the WRONG studio 1 day. Anyway this is just another case of going after the easiest target, instead of busting the guys who do the cracking.
Also investing some cash into better software protection would probably serve them well.

Dsp cards are so cheap to make these days they should have approached this in the same way universal audio did and make all thier plugs run on dsp cards only, that would mean an instant end to piracy of thier products. The price of thier products are extremely expensive so an extra couple of hundred bucks for a super powerfull dsp card would really be no problem for most pro studios to afford.

Seriously there were posts on gearslutz of a cracked waves ssl bundle 1 week after release ,so it does actually boil down to protecting thier interests before the fact, not after it. Same with music, we desperately need better copy protection, maybe waves can invent 1 for music.

[backplay]

[quote=Duardo;1351429]Sure, if you've spent thousands of dollars for the same tools that someone else has stolen quote]


If you think like that, you will get pretty frustrated .
A crime free world is a utopia. You have a clean mind because you bought your stuff, isn't that enough?
If some fools want's to steal their plugs, it's their problem, and let the proper instances work it out!

[Gear Tramp]

Originally Posted by backplay

You have a clean mind because you bought your stuff, isn't that enough? If some fools want's to steal their plugs, it's their problem, and let the proper instances work it out!

[henryrobinett]

I think it's my responsibility. If I see someone stealing I think it's my repsonsibility to let someone know about it. I'd let them know I don't think it's OK, so I give them the opportunity to make good. It's not just "good enough" to stand by and watch some crim take advantage of a weak system. Otherwise I'm part of the problem. As soon as I see it/know it it becomes part of my responsibility.

Snitching? I don't care what you call it. Stealing's not right. That's what I call it.

[APOHStudios]

So based on what I have read, for what ever reason given, it would be okay to steal a Mercedes (with a bad service plan) so you could use it for your delivery service?

Let's break it down into the bare facts.

1. You are using something stolen to make money.
2. You justify it based on the cost of the program and the inconvenience of what the vendor requires.

It is absolutely fair that these companies find legal ways to re-coup the lost money. They did not kidnap you or a loved one to force their way in, they did not break in or kick your door down. If you are foolish enough to use stolen equipment/software/merchandise (what is the difference?), not to mention in a business setting, then you need the face the music. How much else have you stolen? Do you buy stolen gear off the street? Why should you not have to pay your dues like all of the other legitimate business people?

The studios and engineers that have paid for and legitimately own the program, someone worked hard to get the money together to pay for it. Yet here you come with your cracked copy thinking "Fools". That is "unfair advantage", illegal and unethical.

I guess anything to make a buck, even if it hurts others. Sad. There is NO justification for this.

[drakewire]

Lets face it... Software plugs are cool for quick production and surgical style recording, but analog sounds better no matter how you shake it. I would rather have a real neve than a v-comp or URS, I would rather use the ssl super analogue channel than the SSL Plugs. The only software I own is Nuendo and some of the URS plugs.. I dont need anything else because I have the hardware and personally I dont think the SSL plugs sound all that great, they captured some sonic character but not the heart. What Waves charges is irrelevant and not important, if you steal something that cost 99 cents or 9 million its still stealing.
As a musician, it is flattering to see my music being shared on P2p sites, but upsetting at the same time. Although as Ive realized if you can hear it you can record it, now days I only post a flat two minutes of a song. If fans want the music, they will download it off a myriad of sites, and they do...
As far as DRM, its a redundant debate that wont go anywhere unless the Software and Computer Manufacturers are on board, which they are not. They want to sell more mp3 players and computers. The old Sony Beta Max Debate, staple of commerce my ass... Point is, no one bitches that Myspace gets away with out right murder, under the guise of promotion and publicity, all the while blanketing piracy throughout its site and never paying a penny to its artist, which make the crux of a huge part of its site. But thats a whole other issue...
ILOK does not work, there are software dongles around it, because after all its software its self. The fact that it plugs in anywhere, is retarded and just a waste of valuable space in the studio. If they wanted to curb piracy, they should use remote software technologies. Where as you could use the software via the internet and pay membership, this way its ip and password encoded, it would have to be a small enough file that it could be used in a webplication 2.0 manner such as Active x or something. Its very plausible to use Java and the VST platforms together. The simple fact is that most waves software programs are not that sizable so running them remotely seems to me like a no brainer, if thats not possible, then perhaps it should be issued a dynamic IP address of its own (the software that is) that way everytime you use it, it confirms you are the owner.
I dont know what the answer is..

[Free The Bee]

A story... This guy just set up a studio in the UK, spent nearly £10,000 on it in software and equipment. Didn't advertise too well, just yellow pages. a few months later he receives a phone call from a woman asking questions about the studio... she wants to book her band in to finish off recordings while filming a video in the UK.
Great the guy thinks, finally gonna see some return on the studio. Then she says "We need Waves plugins" Sh!t - I don't have any, the guy thinks to himself but says "Which ones you after?" "All of them" she replies "I think we've got something" Says the guy thinking that if he can secure a contract then he can get software required. "Great," replays the woman "we'll come round tomorrow and see the studio".
Sh!t Sh!t Sh!t, thinks the guy - I need this client... bing! I can get a try before you buy version of the software from the internet.

And so it all goes as planned but they never called back - thank god I never purchased that software, would have been out of business for sure, he thinks to himself.

1 month later, the recording studio is closed due to lack of interest and a rehearsal studio is but in its place.

2 months after that a letter arrives from a solicitors sayings Waves Audio Ltd are demanding nearly US$10,000 for breach of copyright. Solicitor has told that due secret filming of the visit the guy doesn't have a leg to stand on and is having to secure a loan to pay for it. End of story so far.

OK, the guy shouldn't of got the copy of the net, that’s true but he wouldn't of got it if they didn't said they really needed it and what if he did pay for it and it ruined he's business because they never called back. Ya damned if you do and ya damned if ya don't!

[slaves666]

If you own a commercial studio, and charge clients......and make a living from your recordings.....you should own the software you use. Period.

[Stratgirl]

Originally Posted by Free The Bee

A story...<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
1 month later, the recording studio is closed due to lack of interest and a rehearsal studio is but in its place.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
7 months after that a letter arrives from a solicitors sayings Waves Audio Ltd are demanding nearly US$20,000 for breach of copyright.

If he closed his recording studio, he has nothing to worry about.

[backplay]

Originally Posted by Free The Bee

A story...<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
This guy just set up a studio in the UK, spent nearly £10,000 on it in software and equipment. Didn't advertise too well, just yellow pages. a few months later he receives a phone call from a woman asking questions about the studio... she wants to book her band in to finish off recordings while filming a video in the UK.<o:p></o:p>
Great the guy thinks, finally gonna see some return on the studio. Then she she's "We need Waves plugins"<o:p></o:p>
Sh!t - I don't have any, the guy thinks to himself but says "Which ones you after?"<o:p></o:p>
"All of them" she replies<o:p></o:p>
"I think we've got something" Says the guy thinking that if he can secure a contract then he can get software required.<o:p></o:p>
"Great," replays the woman "we'll come round tomorrow and see the studio".<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Sh!t Sh!t Sh!t, thinks the guy - I need this client... bing! I can get a dodgy version of the software from the dodgy looking computer man in the market.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
And so it all goes as planned but they never called back - thank god I never purchased that software, would have been out of business for sure, he thinks to himself.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
1 month later, the recording studio is closed due to lack of interest and a rehearsal studio is but in its place.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
7 months after that a letter arrives from a solicitors sayings Waves Audio Ltd are demanding nearly US$20,000 for breach of copyright. Solicitor has told that due secret filming of the visit the guy doesn't have a leg to stand on and is having to secure a loan against his house to pay for it.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
End of story. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
OK, the guy shouldn't of got the dodgy copy, that’s true but he wouldn't of got it if they didn't said they really needed it and what if he did pay for it and it ruined he's business because they never called back.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Ya damned if you do and ya damned if ya don't!<o:p></o:p>

Keep those FAKE stories comming Waves guys, just one more and every studio owner that uses your pirated software will buy a legit copy .

I just heard a story of a guy who had a dream about someone visiting his studio and asking if he had Waves plugins, witch he had but they where pirated... Next morning he woke up in a pool of sweat.
You'll never guess what happend... 7 months later he got a letter from a solicitor asking for $1.000.000.
After a few weeks in court the guy had to pay the fee because the dream was used as evidence .

Moral of the story... Never use Waves plugs... they suck! And there are much better alternatives out there.

Sorry but this is getting out of hand

[FossilTooth]

Originally Posted by Free The Bee

A story...<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
This guy just set up a studio in the UK, spent nearly £10,000 on it in software and equipment. Didn't advertise too well, just yellow pages. a few months later he receives a phone call from a woman asking questions about the studio... she wants to book her band in to finish off recordings while filming a video in the UK.<o:p></o:p>
Great the guy thinks, finally gonna see some return on the studio. Then she she's "We need Waves plugins"<o:p></o:p>
Sh!t - I don't have any, the guy thinks to himself but says "Which ones you after?"<o:p></o:p>
"All of them" she replies<o:p></o:p>
"I think we've got something" Says the guy thinking that if he can secure a contract then he can get software required.<o:p></o:p>
"Great," replays the woman "we'll come round tomorrow and see the studio".<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Sh!t Sh!t Sh!t, thinks the guy - I need this client... bing! I can get a dodgy version of the software from the dodgy looking computer man in the market.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
And so it all goes as planned but they never called back - thank god I never purchased that software, would have been out of business for sure, he thinks to himself.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
1 month later, the recording studio is closed due to lack of interest and a rehearsal studio is but in its place.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
7 months after that a letter arrives from a solicitors sayings Waves Audio Ltd are demanding nearly US$20,000 for breach of copyright. Solicitor has told that due secret filming of the visit the guy doesn't have a leg to stand on and is having to secure a loan against his house to pay for it.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
End of story. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
OK, the guy shouldn't of got the dodgy copy, that’s true but he wouldn't of got it if they didn't said they really needed it and what if he did pay for it and it ruined he's business because they never called back.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Ya damned if you do and ya damned if ya don't!<o:p></o:p>

So greed and laziness are good justifications for stealing?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Admittedly, when I was first getting started learning computer audio, I had a few illegitimate plugs on my personal home computer. I ended up buying all the ones I liked when I turned pro, and getting rid of the rest.... and I always felt superbad for using the good ones until I had cash to buy them.

It's true, no legitimate studio worth doing business with is running cracks on their machines. And don't worry kids, I doubt Waves will be knocking on your dorm room door anytime.

With so many cost-effective, great sounding plugs out there, there's no neccessity for a small potatoes studio to invest in Waves software. I bought somre of their stuff because I like the ease of SuperTaps, and I have so many legacy sessions that use the Renn stuff. Otherwise I can't be bothered.

Really need the L2 for free? Go to Massey's site and download the fully working L2007. Chances are you'll like it so much and want to unlock the additional features that you'll be happy to pay less than $200 for it! ....and the penniless college kids and wannabe pros, and digital hobbyists who never spend a dime on software have something to use and rave about without breaking the law.

[blockrockin]

.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
"7 months after that a letter arrives from a solicitors sayings Waves Audio Ltd are demanding nearly US$20,000 for breach of copyright. Solicitor has told that due secret filming of the visit the guy doesn't have a leg to "



"is "sercert video tapeing" legal ? i dont think it is.. my friend has a small studio and he got a letter from waves saying the exact same thing .. but they just said they have evidence not that they video taped but i dont know what kinda evidence they could have? he said the waves may have been on a clients computer that he was working with ,not his computer. but they want 20,000. dollars. or they threaten legal action. so he is not sure what to do ? the whole thing seems supicious , but i did see the letter.

[e-cue]

I just wanted to offer a warm welcome to all the new members.

[Poplab Studios]

Originally Posted by e-cue

I just wanted to offer a warm welcome to all the new members.

[dlmorley]

I do hope all of waves offices and workers have fully registered versions of windoze


Seriously, I have seen this time and time again. Companies whose workers have laptops and desktops with unlicensed software on them...

[manthe]

Originally Posted by dlmorley

I do hope all of waves offices and workers have fully registered versions of windoze


Seriously, I have seen this time and time again. Companies whose workers have laptops and desktops with unlicensed software on them...

Not to veer tooooo far OT, but a lot of companies have this going on without any knowledge of it!. I am consulting for a company now who got completely 'taken' by another consultant, This other guy charged them a fortune in time and materials for pirated software, old, outdated hardware, etc. Your jaw would hit the floor if I told you the whole story.

Anyhow, they put their trust in him and it was betrayed. As soon as they became suspicious, they hired outside parties (like myself) to audit their current situation.

Long story short, this is a VERY ethical company, with a great staff, great corporate morals and 0 intentions of getting anything they did not earn. They are spending a lot of money and time to set things right. It would have been a HUGE shame and, frankly an injustice if they were to have been sued, fined, etc.

I'm no Waves fan. Your comment just reminded me of this situation...

[charles maynes]

I have two words for this- Entrapment., and trespassing. The secret video should not be admissable in court I would think, and the description of the chain of events seem ripe for a judge to award the studio owner significant punitive damages. I think it is high time for a full on Waves boycott. I cannot stand business practices such as these, and I certainly will not give them any financial reward for it.

any lawyers comment?

charles maynes

Originally Posted by blockrockin

.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
"7 months after that a letter arrives from a solicitors sayings Waves Audio Ltd are demanding nearly US$20,000 for breach of copyright. Solicitor has told that due secret filming of the visit the guy doesn't have a leg to "



"is "sercert video tapeing" legal ? i dont think it is.. my friend has a small studio and he got a letter from waves saying the exact same thing .. but they just said they have evidence not that they video taped but i dont know what kinda evidence they could have? he said the waves may have been on a clients computer that he was working with ,not his computer. but they want 20,000. dollars. or they threaten legal action. so he is not sure what to do ? the whole thing seems supicious , but i did see the letter.

[APOHStudios]

Entrapment: Legal Definition of 'Entrapment'

ENTRAPMENT - A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.

However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.

On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime except for inducement or persuasion on the part of some Government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty.

In slightly different words: Even though someone may have [sold drugs], as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty. Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:

- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.

- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.

- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.

On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.

I'm no lawyer, but I don't see how voluntarily having someone in your studio (no trespassing violation if they are invited in and/or not told to leave) and you show them willingly that you are breaking the law constitutes entrapment. Maybe I am wrong, but entrapment only applies to Governmental agencies and criminal actions, according to this definition. Not civil actions. Even if it was a Govt. agency, para 2 excludes it as entrapment. Fair or not, if they were using a cracked copy, or if it was in the studio on another party's computer, you will have to answer for it and prove* you had no control over its use (was it being used in the endeavor at the time? was it stand alone or connected into the system via usb/firewire/audio? And how exactly did they know it was being used in the first place? Did you show them or use it as a "selling" point?). And as a business owner, that will be hard to do. You have to maintain control over your business at all times, and you can be held ultimately responsible for the violation.

* This is a civil issue, therefore innocent until proven guilty does not apply, rather just a weighing of the evidence. If the evidence that you did financial harm to the plaintiff outweighs the evidence you didn't, prepare for a judgment against you.

[charles maynes]

en·trap (n-trp)
tr.v. en·trapped, en·trap·ping, en·traps
1. To catch in or as if in a trap.
2.
a. To lure into danger, difficulty, or a compromising situation. See Synonyms at catch.
b. To lure into performing a previously or otherwise uncontemplated illegal act.
[French entraper, from Old French : en-, in; see en-1 + trape, trap (of Germanic origin).]
en·trapment n.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

I am totally against piracy, so I find it odd to offer any defense in this, but...

If the caller was basing their usage of the studio on the presence of Waves products, I would say that satisfies 2a of the above definition (partially) It does not excuse the use of illegal software though. It just shows stupid behavior on the owners part. Now since there was no intention of booking the studio on Waves part (or their agent) I would say that entry was allowed on false pretense. We are not talking a news expose- we are talking about filming without permission on private property. Unlike the last Waves blowout on Gearsluts- the studio was not advertising that they had the property, so they were not basing future gain in an abstract sense on this illegal software (though in all likelihood they have other illegal software). A fine point, but a point nontheless.

If the software was not in the building at the time of the call, I would say that the case could be argued. It would be tough, but it could be argued. However given Waves behavior in these situations I would see reasons for the judge to rule against them.

Microsoft was criticized for having software which invaded the end users privacy, and I see this to be a related issue- except it is the company, not the software which is doing the invasion.


charles maynes

[APOHStudios]

Charles, using a Webster's dictionary (or similar) for a legal definition is not your usual self. I think we both know what a word means in a regular dictionary is not what it means in a legal sense. Lets look at the word motor. A true motor is an device that turns electrical power into a revolving mechanical force. But the legal definition, well what does a "motor vehicle" constitute? Not just electric vehicles.

Maybe your definition would suffice under Common Law, but it is not really practiced anymore.

And as to the fine point issue, that is what these type of cases are won and lost on. The fine points.

How does a caller asking do you use Waves/Protools/Neumann mikes or any other gear or software and you say yes make it entrapment. You willingly gave the information. If they asked to just come out to see the studio and they saw their stolen goods sitting right there in the open, how is that wrong for them taking action to be re-imbursed at least the cost they are out?

[charles maynes]

You are correct- I am planning to do a little more research on it though-

I am not in disagreement that the owner did an illegal act, but I am very interested in defining the behavior of Waves in copyright violation cases.

Are you sure about motor though? or is engine the accepted description of an internal combustion power plant?

charles maynes

Originally Posted by APOHStudios