Thoughts on Ilok?

[underscoreraven]

So the argument is 'This guy who makes tools to enable theft says that doors work better without locks, and anyway nobody can prove that unlocked doors will mean you could get burgled.'

Are you saying it's not factual? The fact that heavy DRM can impact performance is not only known but self evident and commonly discussed in other markets like AAA games and their usage of denuvo.

The fact that piracy can impact sales of software is not only known but self evident and commonly discussed...
Someone is demanding 'proof' of that, whilst so their failure to adhere to their own standards is being required.

Ok let's just roll with them having lax standards, from this should follow you should also use lax standards? That's absurd and doesn't change you just denying true statements here.

if for the software to do it's job it first needs to perform complex cryptographic tasks for validation then that obviously adds cpu cycles.

The benefit of serial numbers/keyfiles is that you don't have to do all of that, the worst you'll get with that is an unnoticable miniscule increase in load time for the check on whether a license has been provided

So you're comparing the heaviest possible cryptographic load likely with the simplest, most naive implementation of keyfiles? That sounds reasonable, and not even slightly disingenuous.

I could have compared them to completely copy protection free software and it still would be fair. What exactly is disingenuous here? Me not wanting to purchase software made to run worse?

[underscoreraven]

Very long thread. I have 4 products that do use iLok. Out of curiosity I googled them and they are all cracked. How come?

Yep, which pretty much matches what martiu summarised here

What Largos is trying to say is that iLOK is not very effective against piracy, but at the same time is impacting performance.
Correct me if i am wrong

Perfect copy protection is impossible, or may require dedicated hardware, like the infamous dongle. I don't know for sure whether the dongle was ever cracked or whether it was the introduction of using MachineID for validation that is responsible. Intuitively the latter seems like it'd be easier, but that doesn't speak for or against the dongle approach being actually 100% safe, but I am sceptical.

Either way, as widespread adoption of no-dongle-iLok and the necessity of a dongle often being in the FAQs of those products seem to show, requiring additional hardware to be purchased seems undesirable enough among enough people to cause a shift in the market here, so we can safely proclaim that for all intentions and purposes, there is no perfect copy protection

[kritikon]

Fortunately we have a choice, and companies can make a business out of selling music plugins without intrusive copy protection. And of course we can choose intrusive copy protection if we want the sw badly enough. Personally, I don't want any sw badly enough to give my money to anyone who goes into league with a company run by a bunch of masonic lizard people that eat babies on pizza injected with nano vaccinebots who will steal the 2024 US election by terminating right-thinking babies inside wicked commie mothers. Which is all common knowledge, obvs. And I don't like PACE either.

[Ah_Dziz]

I don't have a problem with ilok. Their non USB based CP was absolutely terrible for years for piles of reasons (speaking specifically about windows systems) and adding to that they were known for not being incredibly helpful when/ if someone had a system failure that put them in a position where they couldn't use the software that they'd bought. I understand people having issues with this kind of business model , but once I got a USB ilok, I stopped having issues and over the years I hear they've gotten better about restoring licenses when technical issues arise. It's a bummer that some companies are going to implement CP that has real potential for causing problems for the legit users while doing little to stop people from commiting this extremely easy act of theft. I want companies to be paid for their work in creating tools just like I like to be paid when my music is used. I've lost thousands and thousands of dollars in royalties from unlicensed and unattributed music of mine and it's a bummer watching someone monetizing my stuff (worse than if they were just giving it away) so I feel the pain of any creative person getting boned by random folks on the Internet.

All that being said, I used ilok originally for waves platinum and cycling 74 stuff (around 2005). The system based CP was always a big drag on resources in those days and also more prone to bizarre crashes. So I spent the 20 bucks for the dongle and aside from slow loading, it was perfectly stable and remained that way. It wasn't so grand that I didn't ditch it the second waves moved to "any cheap USB key" instead of ilok. I also wouldn't have ever bought anything that inconvenienced me in that way if I wasn't making my living off of these tools. It just wouldn't be worth the little bit of extra headache in that case. I still have a bunch of Softube plugins , altiverb, and speakerphone (also a few sound toys and eventide things that I don't use) that use ilok. I didn't bother installing the Softube stuff on my last two systems due to their silly CP. I do use cubase and tons of their elicenser based stuff all the time and it's integral to my work.

When I say " I don't have a problem" I mean. I put lots of thought into anything that relies on a dongle (hard or software) and if it's a tool I need I use it. No problem. I'd be happier if everyone just paid for things they use and companies didn't have to license crazy protection systems, but people are kinda terrible when averaged out as a group. Meh

Sorry for the long ramble. Waiting around with little to do this evening.

[rj0]

I think it's fair to say that none of us like copy protection ... but, we would also like to continue to see new and innovative plugins, and companies can't survive very long without people actually paying for their products.

We've seen companies try various options here. Some are a PITA for their paying customers, some are ineffective in preventing copying, some are both. Some are not so bad. What's the best option for them, and for us?

[concealed identity]

My biggest issue with iLok (machine activation) is that if you have a computer issue and aren't able to deactivate your plugins, you have to request deactivation, and then they have to send that request to all of the plugin developers. I guess in the past you had to do this yourself, so being able to do it through iLok is still an improvement, but it would be SO much better if you could just manage your activations and deactivate them remotely. I have no idea how their system works, but I really hope they're considering adding this feature somehow.

[hotmitts]

My biggest issue with iLok (machine activation) is that if you have a computer issue and aren't able to deactivate your plugins, you have to request deactivation, and then they have to send that request to all of the plugin developers. I guess in the past you had to do this yourself, so being able to do it through iLok is still an improvement, but it would be SO much better if you could just manage your activations and deactivate them remotely. I have no idea how their system works, but I really hope they're considering adding this feature somehow.

Exactly this.
Why don't they just change this one aspect and it would be 100% improved as a system

[egbert101]

I think it's fair to say that none of us like copy protection ... but, we would also like to continue to see new and innovative plugins, and companies can't survive very long without people actually paying for their products.

We've seen companies try various options here. Some are a PITA for their paying customers, some are ineffective in preventing copying, some are both. Some are not so bad. What's the best option for them, and for us?

Best option is to stop buying products from people with shady business practices. There is of course an alternative to software which is hardware. And yes, there are shady people in the hardware world too.

[Ah_Dziz]

I don't really equate ilok to "shady practices". I'm not saying anybody else necessarily is either. Most of the music software companies out there are absolutely tiny compared to, for instance, the people who control the power grid or the food supply. I'm sure they've all done the math between what they gain by licensing annoying CP tech and what they lose if they don't. By all means don't buy their stuff until they do what you want, but don't act surprised if they just keep on doing what they have been doing. Being in a niche market where people are both complaining about the already very low prices and complaining that companies are doing as much as they feel they can to protect sales is a precarious position for business.
If people (including people who are making a living off of their music) didn't just steal software willy nilly I don't think there are many companies in the music software industry that wouldn't be happy to drop copy protection of all types.

[superscan]

There’s always room for improvement. Give me ZDT on machine based licenses, and the ability to deactivate licenses on a special needs basis please. The USB based dongle is great. What’s not great is Cloud licensing or bringing my dongle on domestic and international trips instead of trusting my laptop (with a ZDT option).

I’ll take iLok any day over Codemeter, Antares, Roland Cloud and Cradle plug-in licensing when they stop work with no warning, don’t pass audio or give error messages. Roland goes the opposite direction and gives failure notices while logged into the always running app. My studio rig is always connected to the internet. There’s literally no excuse for auth issues.