KVR Audio

WOK · Post by **WOK** » Sat May 28, 2011 10:44 pm

hibrasil wrote:i don't think it's worth the effort emailing rapidshare etc, i have tried in the past but never received a response and the files stayed up.

Read the info under contact/abuse, use the correct adress (mostly abuse@xyz.com or a web form) and state all the data (link to the copy, link to the original website, name, adress and write that you state the copyright is at yours). At most filehosters it worked for me.

hibrasil · Post by **hibrasil** » Sat May 28, 2011 10:55 pm

but it only takes them 20 seconds to upload it again and then you have to do the same thing!

funky lime · Post by **funky lime** » Sun May 29, 2011 12:43 am

edit: nevermind, seems i missed the point of the thread. sorry.

tapper mike · Post by **tapper mike** » Tue May 31, 2011 1:17 pm

I'm reluctant to talk about this as I work in the software industry. We put a "catcher" that detects when someone tries to alter our software. The catcher reads the hack and disables the software. Would be hacked users cry to us when the software doesn't work. On occasion the would be illegal user purchases the product. I rarely read them the riot act when they come knocking whether it be begging or demanding. Some cry like little girls, some continually enter support calls. I get paid by the response I offer not the hour. The more they whine about not getting something for nothing the more money I make. Which is why I don't get mad when someone calls me every name in the book and threatens my life. I just answer the call and move on to the next one. Nothing pisses someone off more then when they try to piss me off and they get a smile back in return.

In short I win, they lose.

Sometimes I wish we sold our protection service to other software firms because it's so effective.

Nielzie · Post by **Nielzie** » Tue May 31, 2011 1:32 pm

tapper mike wrote:I'm reluctant to talk about this as I work in the software industry. We put a "catcher" that detects when someone tries to alter our software. The catcher reads the hack and disables the software.

Interesting. I'm not asking for any details about this, but is it a seperate process that is always running that "monitors" if the software is being changed?

As a customer I wouldn't prefer to have such a protection on my system if that was the case..

maxxxter · Post by **maxxxter** » Tue May 31, 2011 2:15 pm

DELETED

plauto · Post by **plauto** » Tue May 31, 2011 2:30 pm

maxxxter wrote:You did one thing wrong, Oli: you didn't create a limited feature version of the demo, but instead you've put u full version product with only basic protection as a free evaluation download. Basically you've shot yourself in the leg.
Creating, IIRC, a "separate binary", or a feature-crippled, but fully functioning demo would have given you at least some time to sell a few copies before your retail eventually gets cracked.

Though now you can look at the positive side and see this "distribution" as a form of advertizing and do what I have mentioned above for every new update you're going to release. Let them have this first version "for free", but limit the access to future updates by offering crippled demos showing only a selection of new features, or - if the update just fixes bugs - don't offer the update as a demo at all! Just leave the old one!

Also, you can keep sending watermarked updates to your paying customers on a regular basis via email; these updates can also feature, for example, several more hidden layers of secondary protection, or time bombs, which would take time to get cracked properly, thereby giving you time to sell more copies and hopefully inspire warez users to actually buy the product just to get the stability (the NI Massive example).

just my 2c

You're right, this is the path. many developers are already doing this, because it is much harder to be that a user who bought the product, make the distribution to the world.

tapper mike · Post by **tapper mike** » Tue May 31, 2011 2:32 pm

As a customer you wouldn't have to worry about it, so long as you had a legitimate version of the software installed. If you purchased the program and had an illegal version of the software then we would provide you with a legitimate version of the software and a correction process. Of course we would have tools in place to verify the validity of your purchase.

When someone installs a product there is an end user agreement. You either agree to the terms or you don't. If you disagree with the terms then you are left to your own devices. It is important to read the agreement before installing the software. No one is responsible for your failure to do so except you. If you are no happy with the agreement you have the option of not installing the product.

maxxxter · Post by **maxxxter** » Tue May 31, 2011 2:43 pm

DELETED

tapper mike · Post by **tapper mike** » Tue May 31, 2011 3:07 pm

I handle umteen legitimate concerns a day. The company I work for is well established but not huge. (I'm not in the audio software field) I take pride in helping users connect with their software. Legitimate purchasers and honest trial users love me. I go out of my way to help them with installation issues (new computer, change of account details)and getting to know the product.

If they have had a product from ten years I take the time with them as I would who purchased yesterday.

My Dad thinks the company I work for is nuts because we go overboard helping users whether they are legitimate trial or purchasers get the most of our software. We give better due to our users then products costing 10x as much. He's had plenty of experience with several software firms who promise the world and deliver nill or send users on endless rides to correct a situation.

Honestly it's the best place I've ever worked for bar none.

Nielzie · Post by **Nielzie** » Tue May 31, 2011 5:13 pm

tapper mike wrote:As a customer you wouldn't have to worry about it, so long as you had a legitimate version of the software installed. If you purchased the program and had an illegal version of the software then we would provide you with a legitimate version of the software and a correction process. Of course we would have tools in place to verify the validity of your purchase.

When someone installs a product there is an end user agreement. You either agree to the terms or you don't. If you disagree with the terms then you are left to your own devices. It is important to read the agreement before installing the software. No one is responsible for your failure to do so except you. If you are no happy with the agreement you have the option of not installing the product.

I was talking hypothetically about "as a customer" but if I were I would not like it if a software was running other additional background processes monitoring it's files all the time. Imagine if all software on a system would do that for protection...

I also wonder if customers can exactly understand what the software installs and is processing in the background on a system from reading the user agreement? Like does it say something like "You hereby agree to the fact that this software installs additional processes for file monitoring on your system for protection purposes and the software company can not be held responsible for harm to your system, loss of data, etc. bla bla bla?

IBurstBubbles · Post by **IBurstBubbles** » Tue May 31, 2011 5:14 pm

tapper mike wrote:I'm reluctant to talk about this as I work in the software industry. We put a "catcher" that detects when someone tries to alter our software. The catcher reads the hack and disables the software.

I dont get it.Couldnt the crackers just remove the catcher?Unless it is chain connected to other parts of the code it would be easy to remove by an expert...Isnt that right?

maxxxter · Post by **maxxxter** » Tue May 31, 2011 7:38 pm

DELETED

realmarco · Post by **realmarco** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:14 am

maxxxter wrote:
IBurstBubbles wrote:
tapper mike wrote:I'm reluctant to talk about this as I work in the software industry. We put a "catcher" that detects when someone tries to alter our software. The catcher reads the hack and disables the software.
I dont get it.Couldnt the crackers just remove the catcher?Unless it is chain connected to other parts of the code it would be easy to remove by an expert...Isnt that right?
Whatever is digitally done can also be digitally undone, I guess it's time to accept that and move on.

i dunno if the software contains millions of lines of code..dunno if audio krack group would bother especially if you remover the "/line 744 subroutine filter CC #24 " thinggies.

last time i heard of this stuff was that Krack groups Buy the software with stolen credit card numbers, they dont krack demoes

IBurstBubbles · Post by **IBurstBubbles** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:19 am

realmarco wrote:last time i heard of this stuff was that Krack groups Buy the software with stolen credit card numbers, they dont krack demoes

Do they?Thats some lazy shit over here...

help needed - a little joke from the anti-piracy brigade