The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Anti-Piracy tools impact on legit users
Old 19th May 2009
  #1
Lives for gear
 
TRA's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Anti-Piracy tools impact on legit users

I'm very anti-piracy, but I get very frustrated with some of the anti-piracy protections that have negative impacts on legit users, but they don't circumvent piracy. Can I get some opinions from the anti-piracy folks on this?

Examples:

Steinberg Dongle Key - I paid for the software and have to worry about loss or damage to the dongle which will shut down my business if that happens.

Internet authorizations (IK Multimedia, Toontrack, etc) - I own EZDrummer and there are four authorizations available. When I bought it I owned an iMac G5, and a Powerbook G4. I then sold those systems (wiped the drives first), and bought an iMac Intel, and Macbook Pro. That brings me to my four authorization limit. I'd like to dual boot XP and have another instance of EZDrummer, but I can't.

These are just two examples
Old 20th May 2009
  #2
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRA View Post
I own EZDrummer and there are four authorizations available. I'd like to dual boot XP and have another instance of EZDrummer, but I can't.
You can......you write to Toontrack and they will in almost all cases issue you with further authorizations. This is clearly stated by Toontrack and has been discussed many times on the Toontrack forum.
Sorry your example is quite wrong and unfortunately badly researched.
Old 20th May 2009
  #3
Gear Head
 

[QUOTE=TRA;4201507]I'm very anti-piracy, but I get very frustrated with some of the anti-piracy protections that have negative impacts on legit users, but they don't circumvent piracy. Can I get some opinions from the anti-piracy folks on this?


The truth is that software protection is both necessary and annoying. I have a recording studio myself and as an end-user of music software, I do get frustrated with copy protection from time to time. I also get annoyed when I have to unlock two locks and disarm my security alarm before entering my house.

However, I also understand that copy protection is needed in order to protect someone’s property, just like a lock on my front door protects my property.

It is unfortunate that legitimate users like you and I are inconvenienced by such protection.

Paul
Old 21st May 2009
  #4
Lives for gear
 
James Lehmann's Avatar
 

All due respect and all but I have long since held that copy-protection is both invasive, insulting and costly both financially and temporally for end-users.

Let me say right off the bat that there is no illegal software, music or video content on my computer any more than there is illegal hardware in my rack or microphones in my locker, and there never will be. I am a professional end-user - I have no interest in compromising my business by operating illegally, another reason why I am quite happy to use my real name on Forums such as this.

But enough is enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMSTA View Post
The truth is that software protection is both necessary and annoying.
Annoying yes - necessary no.

I pay my money
I buy an Install Disc and a serial number
I am free to install my software on my computer(s) how when where I wish

End of story - or so it should be, and indeed is in the case of the following software:

Apple iLife
Apple iWork
Apple Logic Studio

As far as I'm aware I do not require either a dongle or a strictly limited number of installs on any of the above software. I have paid for it and now I own it. Of course I understand there are various rules governing resale to or profiting from other users etc, but the presumption in the terms of sale and usage of the above is that I am innocent until proven guilty. I am not being made to jump through hoops in order to use the software I have just purchased.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMSTA View Post
copy protection is needed in order to protect someone’s property
Can you explain how this applies to a book? I can theoretically photocopy a book as many times as I want and yet it doesn't suddenly refuse to open after I've read it 4 times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMSTA View Post
It is unfortunate that legitimate users like you and I are inconvenienced by such protection.
We are. Or rather we have been.

I have got burned one too many times over the years (and that's around 20 in the music biz) from failed installs, damaged dongles, unobtainable 'help' desks and broken registration procedures.

Nowadays there's a choice and I have vowed not to add a single cent to the $$$ I have thrown away over the years by buying copy-protected software that has 'inconvenienced' me far beyond what any honest user should have to tolerate. If that means I don't have the latest and greatest gizmo EQ plug-in - so be it. I'll vote with my wallet and make do with whatever I can purchase honestly in a trade that won't come back to bite me a year or two later.

I am of course a very small fish in an infinitely vast pond. I daresay my opinions and actions will be of little interest and have no effect any anyone at all. I post them here merely in the interests of registering opinion from a wide range of perfectly honest end-users, some of whom are fed up with being tarnished with the brush of criminality and being presumed guilty until shown to be innocent.
Old 21st May 2009
  #5
Gear Head
 

[QUOTE=James Lehmann;4206882] Can you explain how this applies to a book? I can theoretically photocopy a book as many times as I want and yet it doesn't suddenly refuse to open after I've read it 4 times.



If your legit software refuses to open, it is a different story; however, if your copied software refuses to open, that is how it should be.

I am sure if there was a way to place copy protection on a book, the publishers would have done so.

However, there are ways that software could be protected. And the publishers are protecting their property, just as you lock your studio door and turn on the alarm every time you leave.

Paul
Old 21st May 2009
  #6
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
End of story - or so it should be, and indeed is in the case of the following software:

Apple iLife
Apple iWork
Apple Logic Studio

As far as I'm aware I do not require either a dongle
You do. It's called a Mac. Apple's software is pretty much a loss-leader to sell more hardware.
Old 21st May 2009
  #7
Lives for gear
 
rhythmtech's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMSTA View Post

However, there are ways that software could be protected. And the publishers are protecting their property, just as you lock your studio door and turn on the alarm every time you leave.

Paul
thats all very well but when i return home my house doesnt dissapear, if i want to sell my house my alarm doesnt get in the way of the sale, if i want to move my belongings to a differant house my alarm doesnt make it harder for me to do so.

the arguement is not having the ilok (which can sometimes be handy) but the restrictions that are placed on legitimate users.

as ive said in previous posts, surely keeping those who pay a devs wages happy should be a higher priority than crippling us with intrusive copy protections?
Old 21st May 2009
  #8
MMI
Special guest
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRA View Post
I'm very anti-piracy, but I get very frustrated with some of the anti-piracy protections that have negative impacts on legit users, but they don't circumvent piracy. Can I get some opinions from the anti-piracy folks on this?
I have a laptop with 4 USB ports and there are 3 different dongles sticking out on the left side. I have to always keep an eye on them to make sure they don't get stolen - just like my car keys or house keys. The difference in that I can go to the local hardware store and make copies of my house keys and my car comes with a spare set of keys.

I beleive that music software companies should establish lost dongle policies and make it part of the licensing agreements so that customers know what to do when tragedy strikes. I think the biggest complaint is the huge amount of improvisation that is part of each 'lost-dongle' incident.
1
Share
Old 21st May 2009
  #9
nkf
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMSTA View Post
I also get annoyed when I have to unlock two locks and disarm my security alarm before entering my house.
This example is a sophisticated twist. The software copy protection is not a protection for the user being robbed but for other people not loosing money. It would be more like you have to unlock your house for the safety of your neighborhood.
I have nothing against copy protection but the truth is, staying in the picture of the locks, the more you buy the more locks you get that take work and life time away.
The more I bought e.g. iLok protected software (I own 7 iLoks) the more time it takes to start software to load a plug in and so on. This all adds up the more I buy my legal software. Because I bought a lot of software I have now reached the point where I hesitate to buy new stuff because of the time all this management and time cost me. It's therefore not a financial reason to hesitate but an ergonomic one.
Old 21st May 2009
  #10
Lives for gear
 
TRA's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
These copy protections do nothing to even slow down piracy, but instead create headaches for those that want to be legit.
1
Share
Old 21st May 2009
  #11
Lives for gear
 
Volodia's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRA View Post
I own EZDrummer and there are four authorizations available. When I bought it I owned an iMac G5, and a Powerbook G4. I then sold those systems (wiped the drives first), and bought an iMac Intel, and Macbook Pro. That brings me to my four authorization limit. I'd like to dual boot XP and have another instance of EZDrummer, but I can't.

These are just two examples
I think you have to remove the authorizations for the computers you're not using ( on the toontrack site) .
Old 21st May 2009
  #12
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by IMSTA View Post
I am sure if there was a way to place copy protection on a book, the publishers would have done so.

And yet, not having it is exactly what allows public libraries to exist and what allows you to borrow your book to someone else. But this is a comparison with a physical object, and one should always be wary of that - since the physical object is automatically scarce and can't be duplicated. Software changes all that because a computer can't help but copy.

Quote:
However, there are ways that software could be protected
Every time you make a new release of your product, go look at the well-known warez or torrent sites to see how long it takes for a copy to turn up.

If it's there in a few days, you know your protection has been useless. If it does turn up (and for giggles, download it and see how they've bypassed your security) - you've spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours making protection or buying protection that doesn't work. It's a bulletproof vest made out of jello.

But, at least you have the choice of your protection. The movie industry is off worse, since they get someone starry-eyed promising the ultimate protection - Macrovision Says This Time It's For Real, Seriously - and every time it ends up being cracked.

After you see this happening 3 times or so, it is perhaps a better idea to save yourself the effort; the rate of piracy hasn't changed since software could be copied. See Coding Horror: My Software Is Being Pirated

By doing that, you:

- reduce software costs because you don't have to buy an ineffectual protection every time or invent it anew
- reduce support costs, because a serial or online activation works or doesn't, instead of frustrating users to send dongles to be reactivated or whatever
- please users immensely, since they won't have to keep track of which bits of encrypted, vulnerable plastic they carry around

Which means more profit and higher levels of satisfaction and no significant difference whatsoever in terms of sales since those who are going to download it will be doing that anyway.

In that case, any promise to make things uncrackable is an empty promise, and reducing it to a simple serial or online activation rewards your legit users. The illegitimate users don't care for the protection anyway, since they're not bothered by it.

Quote:
And the publishers are protecting their property, just as you lock your studio door and turn on the alarm every time you leave.
With the difference that locking the door and turning on the alarm actually can have an effect - not so with warez (it does not alert you, and the lock doesn't lock for long). With the difference that the entire planet is trying to beat that lock just for the kick of it. Again, analogies with physical things are dangerous.

I wonder why, that if I buy a DVD with a movie or rent it, I get an unskippable reminder that I am supposed to pay for the privilege of watching the movie, telling me I can't show it in public. This is odd (the fact that one can't skip it). Obviously, non-legit users would never leave that tidbit of information in there, while the legit users are bothered with it.


Ditto with software. The only people who will be bothered by the protection are those who buy it, so you want to please these people and reward 'm for doing the right thing - by making it simple and painless.

I'm a fan of the online activation/serial bit (Ableton Live, Native Instruments) - particularly those who keep track of my serial so I don't have to. The downside of that is of course when said company tanks I'm completely lost.

If the software industry gave customers a better - no, make that completely solid guarantee in terms of software longevity and not being completely left in the cold when the company tanks or the activation servers go down (and it happens to the best of us) you'd get more respect from the existing users, too, plus gain people who hold off now because of the risk of having software die on you for no good reason.
Old 22nd May 2009
  #13
Lives for gear
 
j-uk's Avatar
 

I'm guessing that there are a number of software devs hanging around this forum.
Don't you guys find it strange to be working under the assumption that people in general are thieves?
Apologies if that comes across as an accusation, it's not meant to.
I'm curios how you manage to work long hours on a product and not be creatively crippled by that thought?

Btw since they haven't been mention yet. Audio Damage seems to be doing alright with only a serial number as protection and instead using reasonable pricing as a deterrent.

Cheers

Johan
Old 22nd May 2009
  #14
Lives for gear
 
colinmiller's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nkf View Post
This example is a sophisticated twist. The software copy protection is not a protection for the user being robbed but for other people not loosing money. It would be more like you have to unlock your house for the safety of your neighborhood.
I have nothing against copy protection but the truth is, staying in the picture of the locks, the more you buy the more locks you get that take work and life time away.
The more I bought e.g. iLok protected software (I own 7 iLoks) the more time it takes to start software to load a plug in and so on. This all adds up the more I buy my legal software. Because I bought a lot of software I have now reached the point where I hesitate to buy new stuff because of the time all this management and time cost me. It's therefore not a financial reason to hesitate but an ergonomic one.
But that protection IS for us end users. I want to know that I will get good support with a company and that they will continue to support the product I bought. Piracy threatens that support. Pirates bring the sales down and threaten to put companies out of business. If that company goes out of business then my product will last only so long. Or it could affect their support. If they aren't making the proper income, then they will have to cut corners and there won't be as good a support. Or updates may take much longer to fix bugs because they can no longer afford the engineers to do the coding.
Old 22nd May 2009
  #15
Lives for gear
 
colinmiller's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRA View Post
These copy protections do nothing to even slow down piracy, but instead create headaches for those that want to be legit.
Before the ilok, pretty much every studio in LA and every rental rig had pirated software on it. Now none of them seem to anymore. Same with NYC. Th two capitals of recording. I would say that's a huge impact.
Old 22nd May 2009
  #16
Lives for gear
 
James Lehmann's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by colinmiller View Post
Pirates bring the sales down and threaten to put companies out of business.
The problem is that it's so difficult to provide hard evidence for this, isn't it?

If I make a high-end EQ costing $500, then my target market is upper-end project and solid, professional studios, staffed by folks who neither want nor can afford downtime from cracks screwing up their OS or the legal consequences of getting caught.

My business plan might be to try to sell into 5% of such studios in a year.

So if we hypothetically take 1,000 studios, then I am hoping to sell into 50 of these in the first year in order to break even. That is, 50 honest and professional users who will pony up $500 for a good-quality product that they will use daily.

Of course, I've got to provide a full trial version (one that doesn't cut-out or beep or not allow me to save or ask for my mother's maiden name) just to get my product properly evaluated by as many of the 1,000 as possible in the hope that 50 like it enough to buy it.

Now of course there's a 'dishonesty margin' in any business - most shops lose something to lifters every month. So how many of of my target 50 professional end-users, after trying the demo, are going to go out and actively seek a cracked version of the software they just tried to use in their studios every day, risking OS failure and legal action? Call me naive but I believe there are few serious professionals who go to work every day relishing the fact that they have stolen software on their computer.

How can we possibly put a figure on this that can determines whether or not my business model is viable?

My view is that pirate activity will have little long-term effect on the actual market for a $500 EQ. If 1,000 17-year-old college kids get off on boasting that they have cracked it, big deal - that is not translating into lost sales, in my opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by colinmiller View Post
Before the ilok, pretty much every studio in LA and every rental rig had pirated software on it..
Well, I can't speak for LA, but even if this was the case I think this phenomenon can be partially explained, if not justified.

I think a few years ago, let's call this the plug-in boom years, there was, how shall we say, a crazed enthusiasm for 'acquiring' a plug-in list as long as your arm in a sort of game of producer one-upmanship. "Yeah - I've got all those plugs, yeah I've got all that bundle." Part of the thrill of the chase for these misguided people was finding the latest and best crack too. However, after a while, folks realised it was totally impractical to have such an infinite number of tools available that all did more or less the same thing, so they narrowed down their choices and purchased one or two bundles that did the job for them. All those cracks had really only functioned as demos. I think now companies have got smart to this and made their demo versions more properly useable and easily available, such as there's really little point in toying around with cracks just to try something out that may end up buried in your plug-in folder for ever more.
Old 22nd May 2009
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Rednose's Avatar
Speaking of the Steinberg dongle...
The other day my GF moved my computer a smashed my dongle.
It still works, but I'm wondering how I would go about getting a new one?
Thanks
Old 22nd May 2009
  #18
In my experience a lot of software plug in producers are very small operations, say 2 to 12 people.
It's a competitive scene and the margins are pretty tight I think.
The government don't give you a grant to work for 6 months developing a new soft EQ, and banks don't throw money at small software companies who've just hired Air Studios for a week at $2k a day to record drums for their new drum sample product.
So in my experience some products do not get made, some projects do not get off the ground. If all software was legitimately bought perhaps there would be more money available to throw at marginal ideas. Ever wonder why almost all the software drum sample products are big sounding, glitzy, recorded at the top studios in big rooms? That's what the product producers think the most customers want. And you have to sell a lot of product to get your investment back.
Old 22nd May 2009
  #19
Lives for gear
 
James Lehmann's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rednose View Post
I'm wondering how I would go about getting a new one?
Wait, the GF or the Dongle? heh
Old 22nd May 2009
  #20
nkf
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by colinmiller View Post
But that protection IS for us end users. I want to know that I will get good support with a company and that they will continue to support the product I bought. Piracy threatens that support. Pirates bring the sales down and threaten to put companies out of business. If that company goes out of business then my product will last only so long. Or it could affect their support. If they aren't making the proper income, then they will have to cut corners and there won't be as good a support. Or updates may take much longer to fix bugs because they can no longer afford the engineers to do the coding.
I haven't said that I'm against copy protection at all. To paraphrase my thought differently, I would say the implementations are often very sloppy when it comes to usability and ergonomics. iLoks especially slow down work flow for people like me using many different programs and plug ins - so it hurts the legitimate customer of legal software. The only goal seems to be to make it hard for those stealing software.
What I demand from companies protecting their interest is to make it easy, fast and painless for their customers to deal with additional stuff that takes resources, time and money from them. The problems and drawbacks of copy protection is forced upon the legitimate customers. Blackmailing the honest customers doesn't help here a bit.
Old 22nd May 2009
  #21
Special guest
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rednose View Post
Speaking of the Steinberg dongle...
The other day my GF moved my computer a smashed my dongle.
It still works, but I'm wondering how I would go about getting a new one?
Thanks
Should be no problem to get you a replacement. Which region are you in? If you send me a PM I'll get you the contact for the right people to help you out.

Btw, I think it's great to be talking about this directly with everyone on the same forum, so thanks to Jules for the opportunity :-)

A number of people have made some great points in this thread. I wanted to say something about effectiveness iof the copy protection. Both us at Steinberg and the guys at Pace have established usb-based copy protection systems that are, for all intents and purposes, secure. They are no longer emulated or bypassed and as such for pretty much the first time in the history of this industry bring about the situation that only the people who have paid for the softwrae products use them. That's a very important development right there, I think. Of course, as a manufacturer it should mean that more people are buying the product and thereby funding more devleopment because they can't get it any other way. As mentioned on the other thread, though, that's difficult to measure. It's also important for me as a customer because when the copy protection works, other people who have stolen the product cannot use its advantages, and my money as a legitimate customer is not funding the enjoyment/business that they have not paid for. I remember talking to a Cubase customer at a trade show a few years ago when the protection was still not 100% secure, and he was (rightly) very upset at the fact that other people were just downloading software that he had been supporting financially for many years. He wanted a copy protection that works, so that his investment is protected, and we're at a point where we can now offer that. I would agree, though, that we have to do more to offer benefits for customers over and above the copy protection itself, and we're looking at ways to do that.

Cheers,
Angus (Steinberg)
Old 22nd May 2009
  #22
Lives for gear
 
Rednose's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Lehmann View Post
Wait, the GF or the Dongle? heh
heh
BTW, can I get a dongle for my home setup so I can edit at home?
Old 22nd May 2009
  #23
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by angusbaigent View Post
and he was (rightly) very upset at the fact that other people were just downloading software that he had been supporting financially for many years.
That's because it's got an indirect influence on what he's got to pay for updates . Before Yamaha took over, the price of the Midex 8 rose to rather unpleasant highs, too.

I'm personally mostly satisfied to know that 90% of the downloaders are usually as motivated to get to know their software properly as much as they were motivated to pay for it - not at all. With plugins, it's probably even worse; they depend so much on having sample libraries and presets given to them that they fail to get the most out of it.
Old 22nd May 2009
  #24
Gear nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
In my experience a lot of software plug in producers are very small operations, say 2 to 12 people.
It's a competitive scene and the margins are pretty tight I think.
The government don't give you a grant to work for 6 months developing a new soft EQ, and banks don't throw money at small software companies .........
In my experience, small developers, -All developers - are perfectly aware of the pros and cons of security systems, hard and soft. Just buying the services of Pace or Synchrosoft costs thousands, and the security routines have to be integrated very early in the development. Serial/machineID/Unlock code systems are cheaper, but still cost the developer to buy in, or man-hours to make your own.
Who would want to do this? I'd rather design a new plugin, no?

When you want to grow your company, you need capital, and it's the investors who need to "know their investment is safe", the "return is more secure".
The VC house or bank will insist that security measures are implemented as a condition of that investment. The banks all know about Warez sites now, and this has prompted a move away from serial no. towards dongle-based protection - even though the only currently uncracked system is iLok on MacOsX.

So, the solution here is simple - we need to educate the investors, with the danger of losing any investment as a bad risk...
You first - I'm buying shares in Pace...

AV
Old 23rd May 2009
  #25
Lives for gear
 

There seem to be so many issues of behaviour going on around software use.

There are people out there who don't believe in buying software! They simpley give their rationalisations for getting away with not buying it. So when I say to these people that I buy stuff because I have made a choice to obtain good tools for my work and I want to enjoy their maintainance and continuation they give me more speil! Why... because they have no attachment to what they are using. They will just move on to the latest cracked piece of software because the people that buy it legit are paying for it.

Unless I can say to someone - you're a cheap bast£%d this software is so affordable and you enjoy using it then they can't be cajoled in making a financial and emotional contribution to the tools they spend time using.

I think on the software authors side there is too much accountant and MBA type interest in % increases of profits and growth and imitation of what is percieve as standard practices. At this time I think that the people writing the full featured expensive DAW's should look into fostering loyalty into the people that are using hacked versions of their software.

I take pride in my work and look to use tools that are well crafted. I don't enjoy software companies cranking up the costs of their products both in terms of impeding my legitimate use of the software and having to foot the bill for them to create measures of protection when it has always been safe in my hands and continues to do so.

I think maybe a little less greed and the legal persuit of sites that trade in hacked versions of software are in order and not the inconveniencing of their customer base is in order.

Peace,
cortisol
Old 23rd May 2009
  #26
Lives for gear
 

[QUOTE=IMSTA;4203863]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRA View Post
I'm very anti-piracy, but I get very frustrated with some of the anti-piracy protections that have negative impacts on legit users, but they don't circumvent piracy. Can I get some opinions from the anti-piracy folks on this?


The truth is that software protection is both necessary and annoying. I have a recording studio myself and as an end-user of music software, I do get frustrated with copy protection from time to time. I also get annoyed when I have to unlock two locks and disarm my security alarm before entering my house.

However, I also understand that copy protection is needed in order to protect someone’s property, just like a lock on my front door protects my property.

It is unfortunate that legitimate users like you and I are inconvenienced by such protection.

Paul
With all due respect Paul - but I just cannot accept that analogy.

Software / virtual world cannot be compared with hard tangible reality. Running off with your TV is NOT the same as a copy of my Nuendo.

The truth is no matter what you bring out the software gets cracked. So dongles etc are only an annoyance for the end user. The legitimate customer. And if we break it / lose it - we lose everything yet the illegal user carry's on as normal.

Agreed something has to be done but I, personally, had the fragility of a £20 piece of plastic protecting my £2000 investment and forced to do so!

The software is virtual. If I crashed my BMW it would cost alot of money to fix or replace. If I lose my Nuendo install disc it would physically cost pennies to replace.

So please - no more comparing the virtual with the tangible.

Paul
Old 23rd May 2009
  #27
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmtech View Post
.... as ive said in previous posts, surely keeping those who pay a devs wages happy should be a higher priority than crippling us with intrusive copy protections?

I totally agree with you. However, I too have a recording studio and use a variety of different software with different copy protection schemes. 99% of the times I have no problems. Once in a while I do, and I can live with it!

Why, because without proper copy protection, there will be fewer paying customers to pay for the developers’ wages, research and development costs, marketing costs, shipping costs, rent, and all the other expenses that a business has. The companies will have to charge more to recoup expenses, which will ultimately hurt the paying customers even more. It is just the unfortunate reality that we have to face.
Old 23rd May 2009
  #28
Gear addict
 
PeeWeeGee's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMSTA View Post
Why, because without proper copy protection, there will be fewer paying customers to pay for the developers’ wages, research and development costs, marketing costs, shipping costs, rent, and all the other expenses that a business has. The companies will have to charge more to recoup expenses, which will ultimately hurt the paying customers even more. It is just the unfortunate reality that we have to face.
Paul - I think one of the points of this thread is that what you assume in the above state has NOT been quantified. I've heard many wonderful anecdotes about how it hurts the developers, but nothing resembling factual data.When you state that companies would have to charge more, what are you REALLY basing that on?

The only real reality is that companies wish to, RIGHTFULLY, protect their intellectual property. The mantra I'm hearing repeated here is that the means by which they are doing that is NOT acceptable to the CUSTOMER. The whole "bend over and take it" mentality because there are some bad apples is just hogwash. If you give half a care about your customer base, you LISTEN to them and develop is the trends that they request. You don't spent much time justifying your failed (in customers' eyes) attempts.

THAT is the unfortunate reality that BUSINESSES have to face. Trust me, the smart ones will find a way to do it and they become the market leader. That is always the case....

Peace,
PWG
Old 23rd May 2009
  #29
ark
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Volodia View Post
I think you have to remove the authorizations for the computers you're not using ( on the toontrack site) .
I think you are mistaken.
Old 23rd May 2009
  #30
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRA View Post
Steinberg Dongle Key - I paid for the software and have to worry about loss or damage to the dongle which will shut down my business if that happens.
Yes, unbelievable. It's completely unreasonable. I mean, I paid for all my fender guitars, yet I have to worry about loss because I won't give another if I lose it....
Loading mentioned products ...
Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
terrytee / Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production
40
w_stylz / Music Computers
9
Dr. Phil / Post Production forum!
17
guitoffee / Music Business
8

Forum Jump