When Copy Protection has the Same Effect as Piracy?

Anything about MUSIC but doesn't fit into the forums above.
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

T-CM11 wrote:
aciddose wrote: So only in that sense am I saying we do actually "rent" software. We do not own the software itself any more than we own a rented property along with all the terms and conditions we have for its use.
I get what you're saying; I was thinking of renting in its most strictest meaning. Because nobody owns anything in life for the full 100%. Even your own body...
I own who I am :shrug:

I was thinking, how do you feel about stores locking their stores and warehouses? I mean do you think they are locking the doors to hurt their customers? Do you think they dont trust their customers? I left working for MARs music before they went under (thankfully), after I left I heard about one guy I worked with. He had gone from sales to working in the warehouse. Before closing one night he hid 6 Les Pauls outside behind the dumpster which of course he got busted for right away. Companies put cameras on their employees all the time. The point is there are enough people out there who do steal to make security crucial for business to survive. It's not to punish the honest customers when they protect their products nor to punish honest employees. It's just some people really suck.

See that first thing I said, I own who I am. Blame those who dont, CP is the fault of the thief...blame them. I do not feel punished because just like when I go in a store and see cameras everywhere...I aint got nothing to hide, I'm not one of those it aint wrong if I dont get caught types. But there are plenty of people who do live that way and imo they really suck :shrug:
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.

Post

Hink wrote: I own who I am :shrug:
Though you're not allowed to do anything you want with that body. (like using illegal drugs e.g., euthanasia in some places, etc...)

And how are those stores related to CP? I never bought a license to use the store. And how does security affect our use of a store? (now, if you said US airport... :wink: )
Cameras in the streets would also be a more valid example, since streets are public property.

Post

Once I visited a brand new natural foods store in Munich and all I wanted to do is comparing the prices and looking at the descriptions of the goods but the owner was that distrusting that she gazed at me the whole time and asked me what I'm doing here, and I left the store and never went in again...

That means, whenever I'm feeling being treated like a thief, I won't buy anything... :shrug:

Post

To be fair to Roger Linn, it seems completely unreasonable for a company like Nalpeiron to increase their fees for a service that has apparently been completely ineffective. Since the CP system he has paid for has (apparently) been cracked, surely he is within his rights to terminate that contract. I'd even say he should be owed a refund.

Post

This is why I frame it as a mismanagement or lack of foresight issue. The contract likely does not contain such a clause. He signed it, his issue.
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.

Post

aciddose wrote:
T-CM11 wrote:I know there are different kinds of contracts, but the temporary aspect is inherent to the concept of renting.
Yes but I never intended to say they're exactly the same, only that they're the same thing. A software license is also temporary, as you pointed out yourself it can not be handed down (recently discovered by those trying to pass on itunes accounts and licenses) without a clause specifying this.

I'm only wanting to say that as far as whether you actually own it or not just as you said in your previous post, no, we do not own the content we merely license it.

So only in that sense am I saying we do actually "rent" software. We do not own the software itself any more than we own a rented property along with all the terms and conditions we have for its use.
There's a huge qualitative difference between perpetual software license and renting software. Renting means that you have to stop using your software after the lease period is over. It usually means that you will have to delete it from your machines and your serials or whatever become invalid. In the case of perpetual license you are entitled to use your software forever and no one can do anything about it. You are entitled to make backups and take any other necessary measures to keep using the software. It means you own software in a sense that you can use it however you want (with limit to license count) and however long you want. You do not own it in a sense that the code belongs to yourself. So you can not sell it as your own creation and so on. But perpetual license has nothing to do with renting at all.

Also EULA's contain all kinds of crazy sh1t but as been established by many court cases most of that becomes invalid as soon as it makes no sense or if it is contrary to what local laws say. Local consumer protection laws will always trump any EULA.
No signature here!

Post

There is no such thing as a perpetual contract, so this whole issue with whether or not renting or software licenses are perpetual is just stupid. No, they're not. Neither of them.

Really OT, I don't think this thread is about philosophy, but it makes sense just to note that for something to be perpetual assumes that time is perpetual, while all evidence is pointing to that being untrue. Certainly untrue as far as the fact we seem to live for a limited length of time, can't remember an infinite amount of time into the past or any of that sort of thing. So just the idea that a contract could ever be perpetual is right out if you bother to think about it.

Perpetual means it always has been and always will be. You entered into a contract? This means it isn't perpetual.
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.

Post

When they use the term "perpetual" to describe licenses, they mean simply that there is no clause specifying an end to the agreement by time.

This doesn't mean the agreement is actually perpetual. Definitely not in the "always has been, always will be" sense and also probably not in the "always will be" sense.

http://www.cnet.com/news/who-owns-your- ... r-you-die/
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.

Post

Most clauses in EULA's regarding the duration of the license limit it to "as long as you own the intended operating system. It's there because at any time apple or microsoft may come up with a new operating system where by the program fails to operate inside the environment. Nothing could be more glaring then the OS9 to OSX upgrade. Which destroyed many an independent software provider.


Getting back to Linn and his copy protection provider. RL paid for a service that was never properly delivered. It failed to work and the providers solution was to charge more for a non working product then would have been acceptable. I know this all too well from a time before I worked for my current software company. We had a third party handle our copy protection of which we paid handsomely but it didn't work much of the time and keep legal purchasers lock out from using our software that they had paid for. We tried to rewrite the copy protection to fix the problem but the copy protection company claimed we were commiting piracy against them. Because ALL of our work is in software we finally wrote our own protection software and dropped the third party provider. Again I'll state...all we do is software so...it was worth the money to invest for us to develop inhouse. Roger Linn may not have the resources or expect a return. If you can't get a return on the software to where you can pay for what it takes to develop and maintain it then there is no reason to keep the software out on the market. If it doesn't work now and there is no way to recoup losses there is no sense in throwing away good money after bad. Hiring a developer to write fresh copyright protection code would cost a lot more then 5k Then keeping that coder around for possible future issues that haven't arisen yet would be a financial disaster for Linn. $150,000 a year for something that wouldn't make anywhere near 10k a year? How much good money after bad are you willing to piss away on a failed belief?
Synapse Audio Dune 3 I'm in love

Post

aciddose wrote:Unfortunately though Hink, you do indeed "rent" software. You don't own it any more than you own the music on the album you bought. You merely "rent" a right to use it.

That is how software/music/copyright works.

You own the hard copy, not the software itself.

Just like you own the pages of a book but not the words.
I don't think that is quite correct. I do not rent software, which suggests a time limit or temporary state. What I do is buy a right to use the software, and usually that right does not have a time limit, although it can have one, which I think should be outlawed, though.

Like so often when comparing software to hardware, it just doesn't work. When I rent someTHING, it is only one unique thing. And I rent it because I can't afford to buy it (at least at once) because it would be too expensive. And the high price is not least due to fact the item is unique or limited. With software that is not the case. There I can multiply a $1m penthouse a zillion times so to speak, if so many people want it. Software doesn't become more valuable just because demand skyrockets.

I used to have a software for my job, whose license was time-limited. After a few years I just switched to another software because I hated the dependence. Now I really own the unlimited right to use the software I paid for, so I am still using that old license these days. It was a one-time investment and I do not have to upgrade or renew any license.

And no, I do not rent the right to mp3's I legally obtained. I outright bought the right to listen to them forever without ever paying again. They will never expire.

Post

No one buys software. Buying means you have full rights to redestribute it as you see fit to anyone you deem worth of having it. Camel Audio was Bought by Apple. Now Apple controls what software Camel Audio produced can be used for. If you a purchaser of the product have issues with the software not functioning as intended you'll have to address that with Apple. If you feel that Apple has violated the EULA you'll need to take Apple (not Camel Audio) to court. As Apple bought the software including the distribution and licensing rights when it bought Camel Audio.

It is either subscription based or licensed based. In the later the license allows the purchaser of the license use of the software under the EULA determined by the software vendor. That's the contract you sign when you click the little I agree. It means you accept the terms and conditions of the licensor regarding the usage of the product. It's a contract. Contracts are legally binding. If you are unwilling to accept the terms of the contract then don't sign it (agree) There are a lot of products of which I didn't agree to the terms of the contract hence I didn't sign it. Oh loss for me I don't have superduper because I didn't like the contract and didn't sign the contract/purchase the program. Loss for superduperdeveloper they don't have my money.
Synapse Audio Dune 3 I'm in love

Post

With music plugins it is no problem as there are so many alternatives, but in other areas there is the problem that there are very few options on the market and they all have very similar EULA's (because those are based on standard provisions) so that you are basically forced into something you don't want because you have to use such software.

Post

Companies that are using iLok and with no alternative method, can count me out for sure. UVI is one of them. I guess they afford that. If they can afford that? I've no idea. In the case of UVI they even said, here at KVR, that the amount of potential customers, for who iLok is a no-go, is negligible.

Also - it's remarkable that people wo openly says they use cracks here at KVR are allowed to stay here. Considering that this is a big issue for KVR's partners.

Post

@fluffy. Welcome to life where we don't always get whatever we want just by wishing for it. It's more often then not accepting lesser evils for greater goods.

@sfd
Count me as one of those that will never buy UVI products specifically because of iLok.

A funny story. I've handled over 150,000 support calls for my software company which has a base of well over 2 million customers worldwide and several of them have thousands of licenses(schools large corporations etc). In all my time I've only encountered one poor soul who stated if we supported ilock/pace instead of our locking mechanism he would buy the product. What amused me most is that his support call came a week after the last iLok debacle.

Imagine for a moment you (any of you) are the sole support technician working for a software company that has to provide free support to 2,000,000 people on a one to one basis even if you can't because it's something that was created by a third party. Even when the third party resolved the situation with an update that information may not be easily accessible except through support. Imagine your self as a customer wanting to get the situation resolved Stand in line for a year at a local DMV then you might get an idea of what a customer would have to go through.
Synapse Audio Dune 3 I'm in love

Post

tapper mike wrote: Buying means you have full rights to redestribute it as you see fit to anyone you deem worth of having it.
No it doesn't. Even physical items are subject to laws that can prohibit full free use of those purchased items.

Post Reply

Return to “Everything Else (Music related)”