ToneBoosters: New License Transfer Policy

[samsam]

I gave away all my FXpansion software

Wow, so you paid their (admittedly large) transfer fees just to then give their stuff away to prove a point? I salute you. Last time I had a beef with a dev and couldn't re-sell his stuff easily, I just stopped using it.

[elxsound]

I hope he raises his prices so people can quit bitching about "relative" costs of transferring a license.

These are top quality plugins at insanely low prices. The transfer fee is on par with other developers transfer fees.

Wow, I'm actually shocked at the reactions. He's made great quality stuff at no-brainer prices.

[Michael L]

I am also shocked at the reactions. This is a ridiculous thread

[mcnelson]

Does anyone know Avangate's policy on license transfers? Do they charge their clients for doing transfers for them? (Note: Just wondering/speculating)

Judging from the form you fill out to transfer a licence on the TB site, there must be a manual element involved (free text field for nominating the plugin to transfer). Where there's work, there's cost.

Prior to the "new" policy, licenses were not transferable without the written consent of the dev:
http://web.archive.org/web/201407181513 ... .com/eula/

I imagine he just got sick of the legwork, understandably.

[kmonkey]

Sweet lord what a drama. Ok no need to be Einstein. Dev want to discourage people selling it but come on!!!

These are the most ridiculously priced plugins , they sound amazing and they are great bang for a buck. I can't believe how much drama and how much "i am entitled to say dev should do what i think he should do" this is generating.

I would never piss on myself like some of you guys do in this thread for a such a bargain. This is insane. There is fully functional demo you just try it and see is it working for you. There isn't like any "catch" where you end in situation having plugins you don't want.

No need to be a child and order something which you will trade or sell two weeks later.

[PurpleCatfishBettie]

--If I sell ALL my plugins or just one, I pay the same 10EUR transfer fee.--

wow... really, truly 'much ado about nothing' then.

anyway, who purchases a $25 plug-in then turns around and sells it? maybe someone trying to cobble together enough for a small bag of weed or crack or meth, or a case of beer?

ymmv

[JJ_Jettflow]

--If I sell ALL my plugins or just one, I pay the same 10EUR transfer fee.--

wow... really, truly 'much ado about nothing' then.

anyway, who purchases a $25 plug-in then turns around and sells it? maybe someone trying to cobble together enough for a small bag of weed or crack or meth, or a case of beer?

ymmv

Or maybe someone who just lost their job and is in need of all the money they can get. If you have ever been laid off, you would know what I mean but then you would have to have a job first to understand.

[RockinMillie]

Sweet lord what a drama. Ok no need to be Einstein. Dev want to discourage people selling it but come on!!!

These are the most ridiculously priced plugins , they sound amazing and they are great bang for a buck. I can't believe how much drama and how much "i am entitled to say dev should do what i think he should do" this is generating.

I would never piss on myself like some of you guys do in this thread for a such a bargain. This is insane. There is fully functional demo you just try it and see is it working for you. There isn't like any "catch" where you end in situation having plugins you don't want.

No need to be a child and order something which you will trade or sell two weeks later.

Absolutely

This thread has become exceedingly silly.
Along the lines of: "I expect vendor A to change their license transfer policy to be like the vendor B transfer policy" or "I use DAW A, but I want them to change it so that it is more like DAW B".
The self-entitlement of some of the posts is mind boggling

It's simple: if one doesn't like the transfer policy of vendor A, don't buy their plug-ins

[sin night]

Since the developer is asking 50% of the original price as transfer fee, the seller is likely to recoup a 25% of the original price (the maximum he could get back is close to 50% but... good luck at selling a second hand item at full price when you can buy it new!). And there's also the PayPal fee.

Single licenses are no more worth to be sold second hand (I think it wasn't worth even with the previous policy, since they are so cheap to begin with), maybe it could be still make some sense for bundles, but with a huge penalty for the seller (the seller must be either in desperate need of money or just willing to get rid of the product).

This is NFR de-fact. I don't know why the developer went for a policy like this instead of just saying straight that his software is NFR.


And no, I'm not considering to sell second hand the ToneBooster plugin I own (and I'm not using it). I'm ok with NFR (even though I prefer when it's clearly stated before my purchase - I still don't like it, but I can accept it), I just don't get the wording.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

--If I sell ALL my plugins or just one, I pay the same 10EUR transfer fee.--

wow... really, truly 'much ado about nothing' then.

anyway, who purchases a $25 plug-in then turns around and sells it? maybe someone trying to cobble together enough for a small bag of weed or crack or meth, or a case of beer?

ymmv

Or maybe someone who just lost their job and is in need of all the money they can get. If you have ever been laid off, you would know what I mean but then you would have to have a job first to understand.

exactly !! i found myself in a really desperate position a few years back, and had to sell everything i could. none of the music gear/plugs i sold were surplus, nor were they things i needed to get rid of due to buyer's remorse. i have, over the last few years, managed to buy back most of what i sold

it's one thing to never have fallen on bad times, and quite another to not even be able to conceive of the possibility. this really is not about bleating on about lost bargains, nor is ANYONE suggesting that the developer not be somehow compensated for his efforts. however, other developers (including those who sell much cheaper product), recognise that the fee should be scaled, relative to the original purchase price

there are a few small developers whose products i have bought 2nd-hand, but in each case i have (or will soon) buy other of their products at full price

incidentally, when i bought 'barricade' in the kvr marketplace, the whole transaction was completed between me and the seller. it was he who sent me the licence key etc. of course, the developer would have had to change the details behind-the-scenes, but to this date i have not received a single email from tone boosters....i guess at least now the developer can afford a minute to send out a courtesy email

[quintosardo]

My view on this is that depends on your (as a producer/seller) rate of development/increase-of-catalog.

We launch new things or main updates really fast and have a huge variety of products.
If a license stays in the dust in an old computer and is not used, it is not good. If it is sold, the new user is probably going to be quite happy and get more products. The overhead of the license transfer (that always requires manual work) is adsorbed in the sea of everyday management.

If you have a different development model, with few products and very slow update/release rate, transfer request may be a serious overload (from no manual work to some). So you may need to get paid for that time. I think it isn't strange.

A note about the sw/hw thing here: no, the world is software. The slowdown we had two years ago with software wasn't for a lack of interest, it was because we were launching more than ten new hw products!
Now you can easily see how I'm heavily back on software


***Edit

Another thought: probably we shouldn't look at transfer fees as a percentage, when price tags are small. Not because low prices should mean liw transfer fees, but because 1$ transfer fee on a 2$ price tag looks like 50% while it is still 1$ for the same effort.

[t3toooo]

Sweet lord what a drama.

Subscribed.

[KingTuck]

--If I sell ALL my plugins or just one, I pay the same 10EUR transfer fee.--

wow... really, truly 'much ado about nothing' then.

anyway, who purchases a $25 plug-in then turns around and sells it? maybe someone trying to cobble together enough for a small bag of weed or crack or meth, or a case of beer?

ymmv

Or maybe someone who just lost their job and is in need of all the money they can get. If you have ever been laid off, you would know what I mean but then you would have to have a job first to understand.

Anyone who leaves their financial stability up to the option to sell cheap plugins without a discouraging license transfer fee are too dumb to ever have a job of value. I'm sorry but what you're saying is absolutely stupid, don't push to be such a firm "stand my ground!" victim. Gosh, even ending it on a "YOU AINT NEVER EVEN HAD A JOB I DUN BET! YOU CANT NOT EVEN BE UNDERSTANDING!" style, stupid stupid stupid statement.

Move on everyone, this is what it is. Developers aren't legally obligated to offer license transfers in the same way that developers aren't legally obligated (or even expected) to follow other real world (ie: physical item) necessities of physical product sales. If that was the case then it would be A OK for all software to exist as single-computer only iLok style copy protection (you can't exactly use a single hardware synth in a million different places without physically moving it, now can you?). Software is different from hardware, consumers are just entitled to believe that only the convenient aspects to them are worth considering and being entitled to. Companies who offer license transfers are nice to do so. This isn't a big deal.

[maschinelf]

So, the people who give away their software, why do they buy it in the first place? Do they buy them to be the moral police, and pass judgement on the ethics of the company, or to use the plugins? Do they actually even do anything music/audio related with the plugins, or are they part of some secret plugin justice league?

Anyway, I'm putting myself up as a volunteer for the next time any of these kind souls want to give away their perfectly functioning software.

[murnau]

So, the people who give away their software, why do they buy it in the first place? Do they buy them to be the moral police, and pass judgement on the ethics of the company, or to use the plugins? Do they actually even do anything music/audio related with the plugins, or are they part of some secret plugin justice league?

Anyway, I'm putting myself up as a volunteer for the next time any of these kind souls want to give away their perfectly functioning software.

Are you kidding? I found thats exactly the other way around. People who produce alot without doubt have their standard stuff but also sell alot especially plugins. Every musician/producer i know sell hard- and software at times to buy new stuff. Workflow changes because of new products is only one thing that happen regulary for example: As the new Softube Console1 came out a friend of mine wanted to concentrate only on this and sold many plugins he used before to buy Softube plugins he can use in the Console1. Whats so special about it? Do you think it's smarter to leave the stuff on his HD or not even install it anymore because one day in his life he bought it?

Another friend bought the Maschine and now Komplete Kontrol and use only NI stuff with a few exceptions. Many plugins he simply don't need anymore. What exactly is so terrible if he try to sell them?

And tomorrow we will have another product and someone out there decide to go this route and sell some stuff he dont need anymore. Thats the most normal thing in my eyes.