Community effort to replace iLok?

[Benutzername]

Just to summarize:

When the copy protection works fine then the closed source guys get all the money and the honor and the open source guys get nothing.

When the copy protection causes trouble then the open source guys get all the hate from the users while the honored closed source guys step back and point at the open source guys too.

All this just to make proprietary closed source products even more closed and proprietary.

And you are expecting that the open source guys happily spend their precious spare time for such an arrangement. Seriously?

[Doc Brown]

I really don't see the point of this thread but in a way I do. For me and a lot of other people it just boils down to go or no go. I don't use any iLok software but I did at one time, the risk and hassle was not worth the reward. Companies that use Pace know this and are willing to alienate a segment of potential customers regardless. I am simply doing the same thing.

[mystran]

I still don't understand, whether it'd be reasonable to develop such GNU alternative or whether it's not necessary.

Also, it sounds like you're using "GNU" to mean open-source. These are not synonymous.

Speaking of which... I'm seriously frustrated with Google's search treating "open source" as synonymous to "free" which then usually results in trial-ware of commercial software... not that I have anything against commercial software, but the results are not very useful when you're trying to search for some source code to read.