ToneBoosters: New License Transfer Policy

[JJ_Jettflow]

But if your LTs are exceeding your sales, then there's a bigger problem than will be solved by increasing service costs.

Who says LTs are at that point? They just need to be taking up a significant amount of time to warrant a fee. That is entirely separate from sales.

Well if you feel the need to charge half the asking price to do an LT, then they must be taking up a significant amount of time. Either that or it is being done to discourage second-hand sales.

Toneboosters are completely within thier rights to set the terms and conditions under which they sell their software just as much as I am completely within my right to disagree with Tonebooster`s policies and not buy their products.

[Teksonik]

Jesus Christ people....the plugins cost less than $22 at the current exchange rate......

[fmr]

Toneboosters are completely within their rights to set the terms and conditions under which they sell your software just as much as I am completely within my right to disagree with Tonebooster`s policies and not buy their products.

Exactly! Therefore, no reason the be whining about.

You don't like it, you don't buy it. You like, you buy it. End of story. I also think that the $10 fee is essentially to discourage second-hand sales, but considering the original price, I think it's perfectly justified. It's better than having them close the doors, and leave the users orphan.

[BDeep]

Actually, there's a very simple solution to the problem some are seeing: adding 150% to the price of a plugin, so the transfer fee would then be 20%... There, that's better right?

[JJ_Jettflow]

Toneboosters are completely within their rights to set the terms and conditions under which they sell your software just as much as I am completely within my right to disagree with Tonebooster`s policies and not buy their products.

Exactly! Therefore, no reason the be whining about.

You don't like it, you don't buy it. You like, you buy it. End of story. I also think that the $10 fee is essentially to discourage second-hand sales, but considering the original price, I think it's perfectly justified. It's better than having them close the doors, and leave the users orphan.

Who is whining? What I see here is a discussion concerning a questionable change in the terms of sale...but I don't see any whining.

You really think by charging so much for a license transfer that it makes it no use in selling second-hand is going to generate more sales?

[jsp1979]

You really think by charging so much for a license transfer that it makes it no use in selling second-hand is going to generate more sales?

Yes. I think it would.

[mcnelson]

Just out of interest, is this retroactive? Assume that when I bought my Toneboosters plugins a few years ago, I was bound by their EULA at that time. Is this policy only for future sales (not going to be selling mine, just seeking clarity around changes in terms of business)? Or does the EULA state that terms of business may be modified (not at home, can't check)?

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

by the way, pretty sure that klanghelm charges 5$ xfer fee on his 20$ plugs, which is very reasonable

It may even require additional personnel.

there might be a case of once bitten

I'm sure that the amount charged is the minimum the economics allow.

maybe you know more than all this speculation

either way, to me, it would make more sense to say "sorry guys, it is no longer economically viable to allow license xfer, so please be sure before you buy", as opposed to this kinda half-way measure that is of no benefit to any party involved

[RockinMillie]

I think the posters who said that it is probably a matter of economics over the time spent in license transfers versus the cost of the plug-ins are likely to be spot on. I fully agree

I am a huge Toneboosters fan, they are my 'go to' plug-ins and to be honest I wouldn't contemplate selling them on because of their price compared to their quality.
Especially so given the number and quality of the free updates.

I think that Jeroen is just taking a pragmatic business decision here. I for one would rather he spent his time developing software than messing around transferring licenses.
At least he hasn't gone NFR altogether

I have to say I was more miffed about the Bus Tools bundle being discontinued than I am about this

It certainly won't stop me buying Toneboosters plug-ins in the future.
I'm stuck with a Sonar X2 Studio license which I never use for heaven's sake, just to put it in perspective (my own stupid fault)

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Jesus Christ people....the plugins cost less than $22 at the current exchange rate......

i know, right ?? i mean, wouldn't it be great if you decided something was not worth discussing and everyone had to immediately shut the f**k up about it

perhaps leaving the thread might ease your pain a little

[JJ_Jettflow]

You really think by charging so much for a license transfer that it makes it no use in selling second-hand is going to generate more sales?

Yes. I think it would.

It may but it may also discourage some from buying due to the fact that it removes the ability for the customer to recoup any losses should they decide to sell it second-hand.

Perhaps a policy like SKnote our Boz digital, where a refund is offered would be a better way to slow down the license transfers.

[khanyz]

either way, to me, it would make more sense to say "sorry guys, it is no longer economically viable to allow license xfer, so please be sure before you buy", as opposed to this kinda half-way measure that is of no benefit to any party involved

There are legal ramifications in not allowing the resale of software, except for specific circumstances. There has been a lot of debate within the EU about it. It is always better to do license transfers through the original dev (for both the customer getting support/upgrades and the dev having current customer info).

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

either way, to me, it would make more sense to say "sorry guys, it is no longer economically viable to allow license xfer, so please be sure before you buy", as opposed to this kinda half-way measure that is of no benefit to any party involved

There are legal ramifications in not allowing the resale of software, except for specific circumstances. There has been a lot of debate within the EU about it. It is always better to do license transfers through the original dev (for both the customer getting support/upgrades and the dev having current customer info).

which does speak to the possibility that this move is a way of making products nfr while staying within certain guidelines

it's a shame

[Skorpius]

With any plug-in I buy, I want to have the possibility to sell them for at least a halfway acceptable price (40 to 60 % of the original price) in case I don't need them anymore. This is no longer given due to the new transfer fee of ToneBoosters.

Stillwell, for example, charge 5 $ for the work involved in registering a new buyer. Given a price of around 35 to 50 $ for a plug-in, that's a fair amount IMHO.

However, while I generally find license transfer fees acceptable, I cannot accept fees that prevent me from obtaining a reasonable second-hand price.

This is the main reason why I would never again buy anything from FXpansion. They charge 50 $ per transfer, which I consider totally unacceptable and most definitely won't support.

As I mentioned before, I'm pretty sure the real intention behind TB's change of policy is to stop license transfers altogether. As el-bo mentioned beforehand, it would be more honest to generally make the licenses NFR. For all users who don't intend to ever sell their TB plug-ins, this wouldn't make a difference anyway.

[lachrimae]

Some business isn't worth having... especially from those that publicly throw a dev under the bus for a change in policy that is better for his business.