fab_thefab wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 15, 2019 4:09 am
Nobody likes to pay good money for freely available stuff.
You're showing only part of what actually happens in favor of your point.
As I've said in older comments there are many options devs can get advantage of when piracy happens.
By your analogy, a free car can get maintenance only as long as those who repair free cars will do it. If they cease to maintain it, the free users won't get upgrades or maintenance unless they pay for the car they see many people use for free.
Free car users don't have a say about the product, they can only passively complain about what they wish the car had, in other terms paying customers dictate how the product will be (an example would be product forums which you can access only as a customer).
Your case would be valid only when the free product would be better than the paid one (imagine paid cars having tons of trash in the trunk, having a harder steering wheel and installing a camera to see if you're using the car properly, or if you're parking it next to any free car of yours). There is actually some dev who put spyware in their software, and dump random files in the system folder. At least I'm glad Vengeance hasn't reached that point yet.
There are also people who wouldn't have bought the car anyway, and using it for free doesn't harm the car constructor (we're talking about digital products, so the "stealing" analogy is not that solid) because, again, the manufacturer doesn't see money taken away from him.
Some manufacturer see these illecit users as a threat, some others see it as an opportunity to turn someone who is already using the product into someone willing to buy in and become legit.
There are several ways to do so but Vengeance didn't choose many of them, and a change in copy protection affects only the people who bought and are willing to buy. If anything in case someone wasn't going to pay for the software, they have one more reason to not do so.
Let's stop for a second and consider the different potential users:
1) Professional: if they like the software they buy the software, in order to be able to keep working reliably and not depend on stuff that can timebomb or not become reliable anymore.
2) Hobbyists with disposable income: they are very likely to buy, if some conditions are met
3) Hobbyists with not much disposable income: they need to be sure about the product they want to buy
4) People that won't spend a dime no matter what
3 and 4 are more likely to go for the illegal route than the other two categories, but the discriminating factor is the quality of the plugin and what it has to offer, the quantity/quality of the updates, friendlier payment plans (rent to own), the friendliness of the dev, and potentially the community around it (sharing sounds and tips, youtubers making you want to use that plugin in particular to make similar sounds). 3 would care and consider buying, 4 won't no matter what.
If you enforce a third party software that manages your licenses you won't change things for who wasn't going to buy the software to begin with, and you are influencing existing customers more than you influence illegal users (which, btw, will just keep using the old version, and they will be happy with that if the dev doesn't make the new legit version appealing and worth it).
I really doubt that few filters and multiloop are make-or-break deals for those who haven't made their mind up yet.
Let's also not forget that there are softwares that are still safe from piracy despite having a simple keyfile system. How is that? Black magic?
And before we ever get to that point, if there will ever be some stats pulled out of the 1.5 sales report, let's not forget about that 50% discount that happened at the same time.
As others have said, this matter is very polarizing, and even if I don't mind codemeter at all the inability for customers to interact properly with a dev is saddening, and I'm sure that better communication and a different kind of behaviour would have been appreciated by all parties in this matter. There are times where I've been unsatisfied with many things and Manuel managed to fix them, and implement that white skin I've always been so keen about (even if the implementation is far from the quality I was expecting, but I understand they might not want to move elements around and change fonts). Just for listening to me, the software is worth what I paid for it (twice, since I run more than 3 machines), but on the contrary of many others users I can see both points. I just think this matter (both piracy happening, and communication) could have been handled a bit differently.
I think this is the last post I make about this, there is no worse deaf than who doesn't want to listen and this thread seems to be full of deaf people who won't try to see each others points, because everyone has good points, but nobody will actually stop and consider the others'.