FAW Circle - EULA

[dsan@mail.com]

Maybe it's a legal get-out-of-jail-card so to speak. They obviously do support Circle but if things got hairy and they couldn't sort your problem out then they've this clause to fall back on..?

That's fine but it gives the developer an unfair advantage if the consumer doesn't know what the contract reads until AFTER they give them the money.

TBH though I have yet to run across an EULA until AFTER I have gave them my money. But this is the biggest reason (no access to EULA) I have not purchased certain softwares.

Fortunately I have not yet run into a problem with a developer that has not been resolved.

These horror stories are wide spread so I tend to stay with known good sources.

Thanks for the heads up on this software!

Happy Musiking!
dsan

[ezelkow1]

just as i feared, have to re-auth since my wifi died and got replaced. Apparently I somehow used all my activations, or their servers are down. I had them give me a clean set of activations when I bought it used, only installed on a laptop and a desktop and I thought you got 3. Either way, SOL until they decide to respond

Wonder if Ill have the same issue when installing it again on the new laptop thats replacing my old one. I dont mind C/R at all, but I really wish all companies that used it gave you control over it through your online account, allowing you to revoke licenses at will like waves and props do

[mcnelson]

Circle activation on Windows (Vista & above) has always been a fustercluck due to UAC (I think), so much that they advise you to run it with your internet connection disabled. Not just install it with it disabled (which is required for the offline activation process), but run the software with it disabled. I call it "2007 mode"

I was hoping that they might address it with the promised Windows x64 update in the pipeline (not holding breath), but I'm willing to bet cold hard cash that it will be the same old fustercluck process but "x64 2007 Mode"

'pologies for the hating.

[ew]

Circle activation on Windows (Vista & above) has always been a fustercluck due to UAC (I think), so much that they advise you to run it with your internet connection disabled. Not just install it with it disabled (which is required for the offline activation process), but run the software with it disabled. I call it "2007 mode"

Support warned me that something like that might happen, but it didn't. Once I got my activations reset, it activated fine online and runs fine without disabling my network adapter. I don't know whether it's due to a change in Circle, a W7 update or sheer luck on my part.

ew

[Gavin@FAW]

Hi guys,

Activation on Windows 7 has been a problem but there is a fix, which we always try to walk our customers through via support email. We will be addressing this in the Windows 64bit update.

On the EULA, this is a standard document, there is no intentional hidden get out of jail free cards. We always try to be fair with our customers and have no problems transferring licenses, adding more activation slots etc. We're in this business for the long haul.

Best,
Gavin

Keep up to date with FAW:
http://www.facebook.com/futureaudioworkshop
http://www.twitter.com/_FAW

[xanderevo]

just as i feared, have to re-auth since my wifi died and got replaced.

just misread a "i" with a "e" and I was like... omg... ...need some coffee...

[dsan@mail.com]

Hi guys,

Activation on Windows 7 has been a problem but there is a fix, which we always try to walk our customers through via support email. We will be addressing this in the Windows 64bit update.

On the EULA, this is a standard document, there is no intentional hidden get out of jail free cards. We always try to be fair with our customers and have no problems transferring licenses, adding more activation slots etc. We're in this business for the long haul.

Best,
Gavin

Keep up to date with FAW:
http://www.facebook.com/futureaudioworkshop
http://www.twitter.com/_FAW

Greetings Gavin,
Thank you for clarifying a couple of concerns.

IMO, while the document may be a standard issue, it still remains an unknown to the customer until after they have handed over the money.

Disclosure seems to be standard too in the industry - none (or very little is some cases) until money is transferred.

And then it is too late as another standard in the industry takes precedent - No refunds on purchased software.

Now while this practice may be understandable it leaves quite a bit to be desired.

There have been times, not a lot but some, that after I read an EULA, after having spent the money, I did not agree with ALL terms and felt I had just wasted my dollars, due to the no refunds clause.

This has caused me to be extra wary when making software purchases and has more than once caused me to walk away from a purchase because I have no opportunity to review the EULA (as well as come to understanding of other aspects of the deal due to lack of information).

All I'm saying is as a company,(any company), with no hidden agendas and wanting to be there for the long haul, do yourself and your potential customers a service and provide the information needed to perform an informed purchase decision.

I think you will find an informed buyer a happy buyer and one more likely to spend at your place of business.

Happy Musiking!
dsan

[chk071]

This has caused me to be extra wary when making software purchases and has more than once caused me to walk away from a purchase because I have no opportunity to review the EULA (as well as come to understanding of other aspects of the deal due to lack of information).

All I'm saying is as a company,(any company), with no hidden agendas and wanting to be there for the long haul, do yourself and your potential customers a service and provide the information needed to perform an informed purchase decision.

As has been said by an employee from another company on this forum: Those guys are no lawyers. The EULA's have probably been written in the best knowledge and understanding of this kind of stuff, so i wouldn't always take them word by word. Some things are also poor worded and can lead to misunderstandings. I remember an EULA for a plugin from the computer music mag's DVD, which said like "You are not allowed to make profit with reselling this", where some people thought they weren't allowed to make profit with music they made with the plugin, while it simply said that you are not allowed to distribute the plugin, making profit with it.

[dsan@mail.com]

This has caused me to be extra wary when making software purchases and has more than once caused me to walk away from a purchase because I have no opportunity to review the EULA (as well as come to understanding of other aspects of the deal due to lack of information).

All I'm saying is as a company,(any company), with no hidden agendas and wanting to be there for the long haul, do yourself and your potential customers a service and provide the information needed to perform an informed purchase decision.

As has been said by an employee from another company on this forum: Those guys are no lawyers. The EULA's have probably been written in the best knowledge and understanding of this kind of stuff, so i wouldn't always take them word by word. Some things are also poor worded and can lead to misunderstandings. I remember an EULA for a plugin from the computer music mag's DVD, which said like "You are not allowed to make profit with reselling this", where some people thought they weren't allowed to make profit with music they made with the plugin, while it simply said that you are not allowed to distribute the plugin, making profit with it.

I concur, they are not lawyers, and likely these EULA's will not hold up in courts; however, most[consumers], myself included, would likely not pursue any action due to costs of litigation and the hassles involved.

I tend to believe those producing these documents really have no interest in litigating said documents but rather have interest in CMA, or the attempt of, and are are likely aware most consumers will not pursue action.

Just my take on it though.

Happy Musiking!
dsan

[chk071]

This has caused me to be extra wary when making software purchases and has more than once caused me to walk away from a purchase because I have no opportunity to review the EULA (as well as come to understanding of other aspects of the deal due to lack of information).

All I'm saying is as a company,(any company), with no hidden agendas and wanting to be there for the long haul, do yourself and your potential customers a service and provide the information needed to perform an informed purchase decision.

As has been said by an employee from another company on this forum: Those guys are no lawyers. The EULA's have probably been written in the best knowledge and understanding of this kind of stuff, so i wouldn't always take them word by word. Some things are also poor worded and can lead to misunderstandings. I remember an EULA for a plugin from the computer music mag's DVD, which said like "You are not allowed to make profit with reselling this", where some people thought they weren't allowed to make profit with music they made with the plugin, while it simply said that you are not allowed to distribute the plugin, making profit with it.

I concur, they are not lawyers, and likely these EULA's will not hold up in courts; however, most[consumers], myself included, would likely not pursue any action due to costs of litigation and the hassles involved.

I tend to believe those producing these documents really have no interest in litigating said documents but rather have interest in CMA, or the attempt of, and are are likely aware most consumers will not pursue action.

Just my take on it though.

Happy Musiking!
dsan

I rather take the EULA as kind of an insurance for the company, that they can't be blamed for user errors, or users abusing the software code by pirating it etc. Don't think the companies will approach it in such a trust breaking way. That said, i think there's always a chance to get things right, regardless of what the EULA says, if you just communicate with the company. Because their top priority will be to keep you as a customer, not pull the wool over your eyes.

[mcnelson]

That said, i think there's always a chance to get things right, regardless of what the EULA says, if you just communicate with the company. Because their top priority will be to keep you as a customer, not pull the wool over your eyes.

...and when they don't return communication?

NMG

[chk071]

Hint: Some guy from FAW even answered in this thread, up there.

If you're only thoretically speaking, i don't know what to say to actually. Totally up to you what you wish to do in that case. My experience is that company support usually answers.

[dsan@mail.com]

This has caused me to be extra wary when making software purchases and has more than once caused me to walk away from a purchase because I have no opportunity to review the EULA (as well as come to understanding of other aspects of the deal due to lack of information).

All I'm saying is as a company,(any company), with no hidden agendas and wanting to be there for the long haul, do yourself and your potential customers a service and provide the information needed to perform an informed purchase decision.

As has been said by an employee from another company on this forum: Those guys are no lawyers. The EULA's have probably been written in the best knowledge and understanding of this kind of stuff, so i wouldn't always take them word by word. Some things are also poor worded and can lead to misunderstandings. I remember an EULA for a plugin from the computer music mag's DVD, which said like "You are not allowed to make profit with reselling this", where some people thought they weren't allowed to make profit with music they made with the plugin, while it simply said that you are not allowed to distribute the plugin, making profit with it.

I concur, they are not lawyers, and likely these EULA's will not hold up in courts; however, most[consumers], myself included, would likely not pursue any action due to costs of litigation and the hassles involved.

I tend to believe those producing these documents really have no interest in litigating said documents but rather have interest in CMA, or the attempt of, and are are likely aware most consumers will not pursue action.

Just my take on it though.

Happy Musiking!
dsan

I rather take the EULA as kind of an insurance for the company, that they can't be blamed for user errors, or users abusing the software code by pirating it etc. Don't think the companies will approach it in such a trust breaking way. That said, i think there's always a chance to get things right, regardless of what the EULA says, if you just communicate with the company. Because their top priority will be to keep you as a customer, not pull the wool over your eyes.

Actually, I was saying just that (re: insurance for the company).

I agree with your following two statements; companies want to do the the right thing by their customers, and communication, of the proper kind, will resolve many issues.

On the other hand, many companies just do not know how to go about this and often find themselves in a conundrum with customers as a result of inability to provide proper customer service.

If they would just think like a customer often the problems would resolve themselves due to diligence on the part of the company to get it right from within.

Having said this, I'm sure you will agree there are some that do want to pull the wool; but I think all too often a disgruntled consumer sends a misleading message that everyone they do business with is this kind of company.

We, you and I, know better, of course

At any rate, I have taken this off topic and apologize to the OP.

OP: it seems Gavin wants to do the right thing here, and it has been recommended to contact him. Now may be a good time to consider his invitation.

Happy Musiking!
dsan

[mcnelson]

I have contacted Gain via PM in the vain hope that he might respond.

The original point of the thread was to highlight the EULA issue - that by agreeing to it, you're bound by it - and that the odds are stacked clearly in the devs favour when the EULA states that they provide absolutely no warranties and no technical support. I'm not convinced that this is "standard" at all, and I'm not happy to spend my money on products that would disclaim such anyway.

I also agree that most companies aren't so cavalier with their customer service and communication, but when you look at both factors - a EULA that gives no warranties and an unresponsive developer, I think it's right to voice concerns, don't you?

[dsan@mail.com]

I have contacted Gain via PM in the vain hope that he might respond.

The original point of the thread was to highlight the EULA issue - that by agreeing to it, you're bound by it - and that the odds are stacked clearly in the devs favour when the EULA states that they provide absolutely no warranties and no technical support. I'm not convinced that this is "standard" at all, and I'm not happy to spend my money on products that would disclaim such anyway.

I also agree that most companies aren't so cavalier with their customer service and communication, but when you look at both factors - a EULA that gives no warranties and an unresponsive developer, I think it's right to voice concerns, don't you?

Absolutely - warranted and necessary!

I hope you get this resolved and given Gavin's statement I'm sure he wants resolution also. Try to remain optimistic.

Happy Musiking!
dsan