What is the big deal about dongle hate?

[Jamzone]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

I've had several - but the law as it is currently implemented does not do a good job of protecting small inventors against corporate interests.

Talking US?

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Mayor999 - I'm not certain which of your asinine questions you are referring to, but -

Yes, I am dead serious.

Yes, I know what an EULA is - it is an abusive quasi-legal document that attempts to force customers of software companies to relinquish their rights to a product that works properly, as advertised, and does the job it is sold to do. It also attempts to absolve said companies of any responsibility for damages resulting from the use of their product. Most EULA attempt to require consumers to repudiate certain rights that have traditionally been theirs either by federal statute or by common law.

Maybe you don't understand it, but this is, in fact, the civil rights question of the new millennium. It has direct parallels in both the Civil Rights Movement of the last half of the 20th century and the miner's and railroad worker's movements of 50 and 100 years before that, and EVERY TIME THE PEOPLE HAVE STOOD UP FOR THEMSELVES THE DISPUTE HAS BEEN SETTLED IN FAVOR OF THE PEOPLE, sometimes after considerable bloodshed on the part of those standing up for their rights. Nobody said it was easy.

Asinine? Are you kidding? I call bullshit on your "civil rights dongle movement" and you call ME asinine?

No one is forcing you to buy or use their software or ANY software.

You are creating parallels between the civil rights movements and a optional piece of software to install?


You are nuts.

Stop crying like a little baby about not wanting to plug a dongle into your computer and use some software which does not require it. I make great use of my iLok. It actually HELPS me do my job.

No one is "selling the rest of you out" by using software which requires a dongle.

[Nuno_F]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

There is existing evidence, but posting it here would be contrary to site policy. I'll leave it up to you to figure out why.

Ah, how convenient!!

You sir, are full of crap.

[JustinAiken]

One of the cracking groups did benchmarks pitting their dongleless Cubase SX 3 and the legit version, and the dongle junk the legit users were paying for took up 30 percent of the performance!

Probably safe to mention that, as long as there's no links involved.

That's why some people used to use a cracked SX3, even if they legally owned a copy!

[manning1]

if some people like dongles so be it.
i will never purchase a product with dongles.
cos its just one more thing to worry about.
and possibly loose or that might break .

one reason i use the daws in my sig is no dongles.
also they both come with their own suite of fx.

[GearGuy]

Originally Posted by ark

If you don't think that's enough of a downside to avoid, I doubt I can convince you. Nevertheless, I will add that my laptop has three USB ports, and dongle manufacturers often design dongles so that they will refuse to work with a hub. If I have software from two vendors that use two different dongles, that leaves me a single USB port for everything else.

So as far as I'm concerned, the optimum number of dongles is zero. So far I have had no difficulty maintaining that state of affairs.

There are no problems with hubs. I have a 4 port hub that has my 4 dongles on it, and they all work fine together. 1 iLok key, 2 Syncrosoft keys (could combine all on 1, but I have a reason to keep 1 separate) and 1 Yellow Tools WUBI dongle key. What other dongles are out there that will not work with a hub?!?

[Nuno_F]

Originally Posted by JustinAiken

One of the cracking groups did benchmarks pitting their dongleless Cubase SX 3 and the legit version, and the dongle junk the legit users were paying for took up 30 percent of the performance!

Probably safe to mention that, as long as there's no links involved.

That's why some people used to use a cracked SX3, even if they legally owned a copy!

Oh, if they say so, then it must be true...

[Ashermusic]

Lets' face it, notwithstanding all the other reasons people list, the MAIN reason people do not like dongles is that they cannot steal what the dongle is protecting as easily.

[Yoozer]

Originally Posted by Nuno_F

Oh, if they say so, then it must be true...

No, you can actually measure this. See Tried Cubase Today - ACK! .

You simply take a legit version and put it against a cracked version; then you look at how many instances of plugins you can run at the same time. Alternatively, you can use an USB monitor which shows you the traffic.

Each call requires your CPU to pay a slice of its attention to it.

[Nuno_F]

Originally Posted by JustinAiken

One of the cracking groups did benchmarks pitting their dongleless Cubase SX 3 and the legit version, and the dongle junk the legit users were paying for took up 30 percent of the performance!

Probably safe to mention that, as long as there's no links involved.

That's why some people used to use a cracked SX3, even if they legally owned a copy!

Oh, if they say so, then it must be true...

[Yoozer]

Originally Posted by Nuno_F

Oh, if they say so, then it must be true...

Anyone who knows how to program with half a brain can figure this out for you, without even having to go through the effort of cracking the application.

More dongle calls = more cpu load going to something that's not doing what you paid it for. To demonstrate: sorting ten thousand numbers can be done in a few milliseconds: connecting to a webpage to retrieve a message takes in the hundreds. Checking if the dongle is there and validating keys is not as simple as sorting, and when the call is made every time you do something, time is wasted. As if a legit user would replace his software with a non-legit version while the legit one was still running - that's ridiculous.

To Steinberg's credit, the number of calls has been drastically reduced in a later version.

It's very simple: when I have a key to your door, I can let myself in whenever I want to. It doesn't matter if you place a hundred doors in front of me to protect your goods as long as they all have the same key.

Whenever you get a dongle, remember that you pay extra for a failed protection scheme (as long as you can find a cracked version of the software you paid for), and that is considering you, a legit user, to be guilty by default.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Mayor999

Asinine? Are you kidding? I call bullshit on your "civil rights dongle movement" and you call ME asinine?

No one is forcing you to buy or use their software or ANY software.

You are creating parallels between the civil rights movements and a optional piece of software to install?


You are nuts.

Stop crying like a little baby about not wanting to plug a dongle into your computer and use some software which does not require it. I make great use of my iLok. It actually HELPS me do my job.

No one is "selling the rest of you out" by using software which requires a dongle.

Interesting that you feel compelled to resort to ad hominem attack statements.

You talk about your dongle as if software companies are somehow doing you a favor by allowing you to use their product on more than one system by way of the dongle. The fact is that it is YOUR RIGHT under the fair use clause of the copyright act to use your software on any system you desire, as long as only one copy is in use at a given time. The dongle copmpanies are not giving you anything that isn't already legally yours.

[Eric Greedy]

no need to read.
I love my dongle... wouldn't need one if so many people were not dishonest. Works for me... zero issues.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Eric Greedy

no need to read.

Mind closed, I see.

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Interesting that you feel compelled to resort to ad hominem attack statements.

You talk about your dongle as if software companies are somehow doing you a favor by allowing you to use their product on more than one system by way of the dongle. The fact is that it is YOUR RIGHT under the fair use clause of the copyright act to use your software on any system you desire, as long as only one copy is in use at a given time. The dongle copmpanies are not giving you anything that isn't already legally yours.

Its interesting all these "rights" you just make up out of thin air.

You do NOT have the right the use (or even install) the software on more than one machine IF THE EULA AGREEMENT PROHIBITS IT!!

You do NOT have the right to use plugins that require a dongle without the dongle.

You do not own that software; you are merely acquiring a limited right to use it under the EULA agreement.

You have -ZERO- clue as to how software licensing works.

[Mr.HOLMES]

Originally Posted by JustinAiken

Complaints fall into these categories:

-High resale fees ($25 for ilok apps!)

Mh I think this is OK for getting a great plug like the ones from waves.

-Takes up a USB port on a cramped laptop

Use a USB HUB problem solved

-Break easy
-Horrible situations if it breaks or gets stolen and is full of thousands of dollars of software

I have a cheap insurance for this case.

-iLok/PACE drivers are like a virus on the machine

I never had a problem with them on my mac in the last 5 years.

Not everybody complains about all of them... I only complain about 1 and 5 myself.

Thats true some people just spend their life all the time with moaning and they only see bad things in this world.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Mayor999

Its interesting all these "rights" you just make up out of thin air.

You do NOT have the right the use (or even install) the software on more than one machine IF THE EULA AGREEMENT PROHIBITS IT!!

You do NOT have the right to use plugins that require a dongle without the dongle.

You do not own that software; you are merely acquiring a limited right to use it under the EULA agreement.

You have -ZERO- clue as to how software licensing works.

Yes you do. Simply because a company's policy says something does not make it law. Companies are not law making entities and it is illegal for a contract to require a person to repudiate rights granted by federal law.

You are obviously brainwashed by company propaganda or possibly in the employ of the software industry. (A ringer? HMMmmm.....)

It's clear that you don't know anything about the fair use provisions of the law.

At any rate, I'm done talking to you.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Mr.HOLMES

I have a cheap insurance for this case.

And how long does it take for your cheap insurance to fill your claim? During which time your system is DOWN. And then you still need to get the companies to allow you to enter your registration into the new dongle - or does the insurance cover completely replacing your now-useless programs? Do you know how your insurance company responds when an actual claim is filed?

As I've said before - would you buy a car if you couldn't have a spare set of keys?

[Nuno_F]

Originally Posted by Yoozer

Anyone who knows how to program with half a brain can figure this out for you, without even having to go through the effort of cracking the application.

More dongle calls = more cpu load going to something that's not doing what you paid it for. To demonstrate: sorting ten thousand numbers can be done in a few milliseconds: connecting to a webpage to retrieve a message takes in the hundreds. Checking if the dongle is there and validating keys is not as simple as sorting, and when the call is made every time you do something, time is wasted. As if a legit user would replace his software with a non-legit version while the legit one was still running - that's ridiculous.

To Steinberg's credit, the number of calls has been drastically reduced in a later version.

To Steinberg's credit, the dongle calls are not done during playback, only when doing things like adding a track. But don't let the facts get on your way. The anti dongle people usually don't....

Originally Posted by Yoozer

Whenever you get a dongle, remember that you pay extra for a failed protection scheme (as long as you can find a cracked version of the software you paid for), and that is considering you, a legit user, to be guilty by default.

lol

Same old BS

Show me the craks for Korg legacy analogue and digital editions protected by syncrosoft.

Show me a FULLY functional Cubase crack. Show me Cubase 5 fully functional crack.

I prefer syncrosoft because if there's going to be any protection, then at least they should use one that WORKS!

[Yoozer]

Originally Posted by Nuno_F

The anti dongle people usually don't....

I use a perfectly fine DAW called Ableton Live (for which I have been paying for since version 5, previously using Cubase SX3 - also paid for) which only requires me to enter a serial number, running plugins like NI Komplete (for which I have been paying for since version 4, previously using hardware synths) which also only require me to enter a serial. From your dramatization I'd expect both companies to have filed for bankruptcy 3 years ago already. Since that's not the case, I'm not so much anti-dongle - more "if they can do it like this, why not the others?".

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by Yoozer

"if they can do it like this, why not the others?".

Best question of the thread.

So many solvent, thriving, non-dongle companies.

How do you explain that?

Dongles are awful. Especially for traveling musicians.

- c

[Bassmankr]

Just a side note to the discussion. Software companies had the genius/greed in the early days to follow the legal model of the tobacco manufacturers and spent a fortune on special legal protection (a nice percentage of the cost of software went straight into lawyer's pockets). This special protection became the legal concept of "Licencing" the software instead of buying it (perpetually renting it), just semantics really but if you buy into that way of thinking the end user is virtually stripped of all their rights as a consumer. Money buys the law, worked for tobacco, and has worked for software. I'm not aware of any high court cases challanging the "Licencing" legal principal but sooner or later one will happen and the party that has the most money will win it. The real genius of spending all that money on lawyers instead of programers is that software companies are not liable for the harm they do nor are they responsible if they deliver a non-working product. I bet every other manufacturer wishes they had that kind of protection. The best an end user can do is not support companies using restrictive copy protection, as others have said, just vote with your wallet. For home users and small studios, using Reaper as a DAW is a great substitute for a dongled product. For all you users that need to use a dongled product start/continue being a squeaky wheel about how it just punishes the legit user so the software company can collect more profit. Now some company stooge is probably going to respond "but these dongled companies need to make a profit or they would be out of business". Here is a reality check, Reaper makes a profit, is not restrictive with it's copy protection and costs a fraction of what the others do, so lets not justify greed. Lastly, I've always found it funny that software basically uses the business model of a crack dealer, you have to keep coming back to them to fix the stuff that did not work in the last release (never a fully working finished product).

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Interesting that you feel compelled to resort to ad hominem attack statements.

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

You are obviously brainwashed by company propaganda or possibly in the employ of the software industry. (A ringer? HMMmmm.....)

It's clear that you don't know anything about the fair use provisions of the law.

At any rate, I'm done talking to you.

You are HILARIOUS!

I was literally rolling on the floor laughing at that last one.

Fair use provisions:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

What part of that says that you can't be required to have a dongle to run the software?

Keep grasping at straws and being dismissive instead of actually answering my questions.

Don't you think that if the EULA agreements were illegal that someone much smarter than you or I would have had a successful case against the software companies?

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

Best question of the thread.

So many solvent, thriving, non-dongle companies.

How do you explain that?

Dongles are awful. Especially for traveling musicians.

- c

I love Abelton. Their software is heavily pirated though.... I wish some of their illegal users would step up to the plate and support the company which gives them great tools.

[tommyd123]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Yes you do. Simply because a company's policy says something does not make it law. Companies are not law making entities and it is illegal for a contract to require a person to repudiate rights granted by federal law.

You are obviously brainwashed by company propaganda or possibly in the employ of the software industry. (A ringer? HMMmmm.....)

It's clear that you don't know anything about the fair use provisions of the law.

At any rate, I'm done talking to you.

You are on the right track here.........But really it sounds to me more like mayor999 is part of an alien race here on the planet to infiltrate the software rebellion movement, which we all know by now that software companies are controlled by a hostile alien race, to put a stop to this dongle madness.
Ring a bell mayor999? Ha! Gotcha!

[Eric Greedy]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Mind closed, I see.

not at all... the title of the thread lays out the debate. I prefer my authorization on a dongle. I have the insurance and my gear is insured too. I am prepared. MUCH better than having to load software on a computer when i book a room and have to password authorize...

.. and as to mind closed... your seems pretty cemented on a variety of subjects.

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by tommyd123

You are on the right track here.........But really it sounds to me more like mayor999 is part of an alien race here on the planet to infiltrate the software rebellion movement, which we all know by now that software companies are controlled by a hostile alien race, to put a stop to this dongle madness.
Ring a bell mayor999? Ha! Gotcha!

Ding ding ding!

You caught me!

Trust me if I had my way we would be on an honor system and EVERYONE would pay for their software and music, and movies etc etc etc... if we have to have copy protection I really prefer a dongle seeing as it lets me use my tools on ANY computer.... all I have to do is waltz in with my ilok. No serial codes to enter or anything.

[Bflat]

I work for a school and purchased Cubase 4 for our edit labs. 3 students accidently walked off with dongles and lost them, and we were without 3 editing stations until I just went out and purchased copies of Logic 8 to replace it. Lost profit for Steinberg... oh well. Logic 8 smartly handles copyright protection over the network so no additional users can use the program than we have licenses for. It just displays a notice and quits. Its efficient, effective, and we don't have to spend a fortune everytime a student becomes absent minded (which never happens, really. ).

I guess the good question would be why would any end user want one? So there's more market share for the wealthy? Thats all I can think of.

[Nuno_F]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

Best question of the thread.

So many solvent, thriving, non-dongle companies.

How do you explain that?

Dongles are awful. Especially for traveling musicians.

- c

I don't have to explain anything, neither do companies that use a dongle. Maybe they just prefer to only have the people that actually pay their salaries using their software?

As a matter of fact, I prefer to buy software that I know is not available for free. As simple as that.

The existence of cracks decreases revenue. Steinberg ex distributors in the UK have stated on this forum that there was a significant drop in sales after the SX3 crack came out. Some people confuse this with greed, to me is just running a business rationally. Ableton may make money, but they'd make more if there was no crack. And don't tell me users come clean and all that when they have the money, it's a load of crap as well. Most only come clean when there's no crack available!

Dongles are terrible for those who hate the thought of being responsible for their own property and actions. The rest of the arguments against it stated on this and all the other threads are, as far as I'm concerned garbage. Hardware failure? Well, computers fail as well, hard drives, etc, yet dongles suck but hardware based registration is fine. Doesn't work? Yes it does, better than any other method so far.

If you play live, guess what, you need spares for all your critical equipment, that is the professional thing to do. That's what I did when I played live.

[Nuno_F]

Originally Posted by Bflat

I work for a school and purchased Cubase 4 for our edit labs. 3 students accidently walked off with dongles and lost them, and we were without 3 editing stations until I just went out and purchased copies of Logic 8 to replace it

Marvellous. The students are thieves, therefore dongles are bad and steinberg is no good.....