Open letter to companies still using iLok ( looking at you Slate Digital )

[meloco_go]

No, for instance I don't see how an offline name/reg. key combination (see Cakewalk) would automagically stop being "acceptable".

It may not work simply because the software itself stops being compatible with a new hardware/OS. So you need a company to produce an update for you. If you don't make updates your are safe with ilok.

2) Offers nothing but drawbacks to the end user (various, ranging from driver problems to limited platform support [see Slate's PPC drop])

It allows you to work on different studios and take your plugins with you not having to worry that somebody can use your stuff afterwards. It also makes reinstalling your software and updating your hardware easier.

[recursive one]

A developer can do lots of things to keep cash flowing, and those things can be for the customer, not against him, starting with a non-intrusive copy protection.

"Non-intrusive copy protection" and "working copy protection" is not something mutually exclusive, as proven by U-he.

[subsynq]

I wasn't referring to challenge/response. Registration codes based on customer's name always work, no matter what you do. As to taking the dongle in different studios, that's a feature that I, and most likely many amateur bedroom producers, will never use. So when a developer selects his copy protection, they have to consider what they want their customers to be.

edit: Spot on. Urs did it, let's hope other programmers follow his example.

[whyterabbyt]

My personal arguments against dongles are those:
1) It costs to the dev AND the end user/adds to the price of the final product

strictly speaking thats also true for any challenge/reponse, or serial number setup, and any other copy protection mechanisms. They dont spring out of nowhere.

2) Offers nothing but drawbacks to the end user (various, ranging from driver problems to limited platform support [see Slate's PPC drop])

Its already been said by one user here that the portability of licenses is a distinct benefit to them, so to claim that its 'nothing but drawbacks' is false.

3) It's more failure-prone than the final product itself, considering it's a plastic thing sticking out of a port

That doesnt sound like a verifiable claim. What kind of failure are you talking about? We have iLoks that are about 6 or 7 years old and they work fine. Do you have actual statistics on the failure rate of iLoks, or is this ass-pulled?

[momalle3]

Count me among the the Ilok haters. Although I have an Ilok2 (it came with VCC) and have had no problems with it, I've gradually found plugins that don't use the ilok, and have phased the ILOK plugs out of my workflow.

Why? It's primitive. It treats me, the legit buyer, like a criminal. It's prone to failure (see recent Pace software "upgrade"). It's prone to loss or physical damage. It takes up a USB slot that could go for something useful. And of course, LOTS of software doesn't require it. DMG Audio, U-He; 2C Audio; Airwindows, Valhalla, Waves, NI, Klanghelm--these are some of the plugs I use everyday that don't require an ILOK. And of course I've got a hard drive full of non audio software that requires no ILOK. Software made by huge companies, and software made by small startups. No ILOK. How can that be, Steven Slate?

When I come across a product I like (or might like) that requires the ILOK, I have politely written to the maker and said that while I certainly understand their concerns about piracy, and sympathize, they've lost a potential sale. I don't mean them any ill will, but they should know that the ILOK is widely disliked.

[Lotuzia]

Just a few points : I use Ilok1/2/Synchrosoft/Challenge/Response, Watermarked, and finally serial protected instruments and effects. And a couple of freeware.

1/ The only software that do not work anymore in my system were Challenge/Response protected. And it wasn't always small companies ( Like TASCAM/GigaStudio ). This is for those who prefer NI or similar systems ( I'm just scared at the idea that NI could ever go bankrupt, as I use a lot of their products )

2/ There are evidences everywhere that once one of your products is p_rated, the sales drop instantaneously. I have evidences of that myself for one of mine, but this has been stated clearly by many other people.

3/ Ilok2 has never been c_acked. Xils-Lab products have never been properly c_acked as well, even the ones that only require serial numbers. ( except one or two appetizers small synths in the first versions )

At the end of the day, I only see what I need for my music, and no little piece of plastic will separate me from that. I understand and respect those who make different choices, based on philosophy, souvenirs of bad experiences, and well, every reason they have. There are GOOD reasons NOT to use dongles ( USB ports, extra cost etc)

However, there are also GOOD reasons to prefer dongles : Nomadism ( go to anther studio, install your software in a flash from the key in 1mn, just play and forget), Migration ( reinstall all your software on your new computer in 5 minutes, without havingto connect to the internet for hours ( C/R) ,- whoever have installed Komplete several times will understand me-, research all your serial numbers, beg for new autorisations and wait for the support answers because you have exceeded the number of authorised installs, etc etc )

Then, in the end, I think I have and use ALL the possible protection systems available on the planet. Why ? 1/ Nothing will prevent me to get the instruments I *think* I need for my music 2/ I like to support the developpers who I *think* help me to make the music I like, and spend their life trying to offer to musicians the best possible intruments, no matter if they use dongles, or not.

A lot of people focus imho on the weakest points when they say they support developpers. Like on the copy protection scheme. Its only a small part of what is an instrument. Let's be clear : I think all developpers 1st fight to offer what they think are "unique and interesting instruments for musicians". And this is exactly what I'm waiting. And I'm very thankfull for that to them ( And to illustrate this, I finally made the jump to ILOK2 for the Exponential Audio reverbs, who are just superb )

My 0.002

[whyterabbyt]

they should know that the ILOK is widely disliked.

if only KVR had a new thread every other week on the subject so they could get the message....

[subsynq]

strictly speaking thats also true for any challenge/reponse, or serial number setup, and any other copy protection mechanisms. They dont spring out of nowhere.

How does the cost of licensing a dongle development kit, with all the royalties included, compare with an in-house made protection?

Its already been said by one user here that the portability of licenses is a distinct benefit to them, so to claim that its 'nothing but drawbacks' is false.

I explained it above, which one of the words "personal arguments" don't you understand?

We have iLoks that are about 6 or 7 years old and they work fine.

If this applied to everybody, no one would ever complain about dongles. You must be forgetting the simplest user error, stepping on it

[momalle3]

3) It's more failure-prone than the final product itself, considering it's a plastic thing sticking out of a port

That doesnt sound like a verifiable claim. What kind of failure are you talking about? We have iLoks that are about 6 or 7 years old and they work fine. Do you have actual statistics on the failure rate of iLoks, or is this ass-pulled?

I've never had an ILOK fail, but I've had several USB drives fail, to the point where I don't count on them for anything important.

[Doug1978]

'Open letter to companies still using ilok' thread, so far featuring:

5 pages,
69 posts,
3 horses,
0 companies using ilok.

[Teksonik]

If you are using iLok now, you are losing business. I, and many like me, will never ever buy your product.

+1........ iLok = No Sale..........

[whyterabbyt]

strictly speaking thats also true for any challenge/reponse, or serial number setup, and any other copy protection mechanisms. They dont spring out of nowhere.

How does the cost of licensing a dongle development kit, with all the royalties included, compare with an in-house made protection?

Are you asking for specific figures, or trying to imply that the one you dont like is indisputably more expensive?

Its already been said by one user here that the portability of licenses is a distinct benefit to them, so to claim that its 'nothing but drawbacks' is false.

I explained it above, which one of the words "personal arguments" don't you understand?

The one where you making a 'personal argument' which you extend to other people somehow means that no-one can respond to it with the existence of anyone else's experience? Or do you just think using that phrase gives you the final word on speaking for everyone else?

We have iLoks that are about 6 or 7 years old and they work fine.

If this applied to everybody, no one would ever complain about dongles. You must be forgetting the simplest user error, stepping on it

Well, maybe I just know fewer clumsy idiots than you, then, if thats a common problem amongst your peers.

[whyterabbyt]

I've never had an ILOK fail, but I've had several USB drives fail, to the point where I don't count on them for anything important.

Ive had USB drives and flash memory sticks fail too. iLoks seem more resilient, in comparison, although obviously Im not going to state that they are without evidence.

[The_Hidden_Goose]

There's also the track-record of Pace to consider. Which isn't that great, albeit possibly better in recent years - apart from the recent iLokalypse of course, which is still fresh in people's minds. More than a few previously happy customers lost, I would guess too.

I don't like 'em. I don't want one. But again - if something comes along that I want enough, I'd swallow my pride and suck it up. There just isn't...yet.

This debate isn't going away any more than iLok/similar is going away, and that's ok. We've still got plenty of choice when it comes to just about every aspect of audio, both commercial and freeware. If Slate can live without the sales that I'm sure they know they aren't getting because of iLok, and still come out on top of where they think they would get without it - you can't really blame them for sticking with it.

While I'm sure they see these debates and their strategy is informed by them, I don't expect them to bow to every bit of forum or blog pressure they encounter. Personally, their stuff is out of my price range for what they are so I wouldn't be a customer of theirs anyway, but I don't feel I have a god-given right to have their software on my terms at a price that I'm happy with. I know that their stuff comes with iLok, so that can inform my decision too - but likewise, I don't want to box myself in on principle if I don't have to. Unless I find out they fund fascism or child-slavery or some such (which I hope is unlikely for an audio developer, but not entirely beyond possibility!), then I think I can relax my principles for more worthy fights. Otherwise I think I'd just be banging my head against a wall that won't budge, and wasn't really in my way in the first place.

[sqigls]

iLoks suck balls. But honestly, if I needed to hang a f**king squirrel's ball-sack out of a usb port in order to use Slate's Virtual Buss Compressors, i'd be a squirrel-sack dongle dangling man.