KVR Audio

ATN69 · Post by **ATN69** » Thu May 25, 2017 7:18 am

Solution to the described scenario would be not to allow Paypal then. It's a fact in your story that the developer sold licenses to someone that used a hacked Paypal. It has very Little to do with license transfers because that is not the root of the problem.

kmonkey · Post by **kmonkey** » Thu May 25, 2017 8:43 am

ATN69 wrote:Solution to the described scenario would be not to allow Paypal then.

Who want to buy without paypal these days...noone

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Thu May 25, 2017 8:46 am

kmonkey wrote:
ATN69 wrote:Solution to the described scenario would be not to allow Paypal then.
Who want to buy without paypal these days...noone

Not that I have any dog in this fight, and if I understand correctly that licenses are hard locked to a hardware config, nor will I, but, I buy without paypal all the time.

Zaphod (giancarlo) · Post by **Zaphod (giancarlo)** » Thu May 25, 2017 9:15 am

ok our main idea is the following one (it will be officialized on next days):

seller
- we allow license transfer at a low fee, around 10 eur
- the license transfer price is increased by the amount of discounts he received from acustica for buying that particular item (presale discount + personal discount); that way we prevent illegal reseller, and we have a license fee fair in terms of paid price

buyer
- it's their responsability to understand if the seller is a good one. If there are frauds he will loose the item, PERIOD.

Faland · Post by **Faland** » Thu May 25, 2017 10:12 am

Honestly, it seems to me that the problem here is not so much the fraud as the lack of earnings for AA...

Zaphod (giancarlo) · Post by **Zaphod (giancarlo)** » Thu May 25, 2017 11:07 am

Faland wrote:Honestly, it seems to me that the problem here is not so much the fraud as the lack of earnings for AA...

Why do you think the problem is all about money on our side? (Granted we have to fill the fridge). We have dealers, they are small ones and we need to protect them (first point). For the fraud itself I think the second point is enough, I don't see why we should pay because the buyer wants to buy from a risky seller when even PayPal - way more rich then acoustica is not covering properly frauds on their accounts! You could choose between this solution and the model other companies are adopting for "fixing" the law, based on expiring licenses.

Faland · Post by **Faland** » Thu May 25, 2017 11:30 am

Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote:
Faland wrote:Honestly, it seems to me that the problem here is not so much the fraud as the lack of earnings for AA...
I don't see why we should pay because the buyer wants to buy from a risky seller when even PayPal - way more rich then acoustica is not covering properly frauds on their accounts!

This seems obvious to me, you do not have to pay for the mistakes of other people. No one would ask Apple to provide compensation to anyone who bought an used iPad and was cheated. What I can not understand is because this problem is related only to the transfer of licenses and not to the sales of the new products. I say this without any controversy...

poshook · Post by **poshook** » Thu May 25, 2017 12:30 pm

Zaphod (giancarlo) wrote:Ok I think I have a good idea and possibly a very fair set of rules on next days you'll see the announcement on our forum

I am sure that this response could come much earlier (instead of MS Office). Anway I thank for this approach

poshook · Post by **poshook** » Thu May 25, 2017 12:42 pm

ATN69 wrote:Solution to the described scenario would be not to allow Paypal then. It's a fact in your story that the developer sold licenses to someone that used a hacked Paypal. It has very Little to do with license transfers because that is not the root of the problem.

exactly. the problem has nothing to do with license transfer.
No paypal is bad solution as it would be deal braker for many customers

journey33 · Post by **journey33** » Thu May 25, 2017 12:48 pm

kmonkey wrote:
ATN69 wrote:Solution to the described scenario would be not to allow Paypal then.
Who want to buy without paypal these days...noone

Lol everyone who buys Spitfire stuff. Spitfire don't accept Paypal...they're not exactly a small company

poshook · Post by **poshook** » Thu May 25, 2017 12:54 pm

journey33 wrote:
kmonkey wrote:
ATN69 wrote:Solution to the described scenario would be not to allow Paypal then.
Who want to buy without paypal these days...noone
Lol everyone who buys Spitfire stuff. Spitfire don't accept Paypal...they're not exactly a small company

What is Spitfire?

Burillo · Post by **Burillo** » Thu May 25, 2017 1:53 pm

a machine gun.

VariKusBrainZ · Post by **VariKusBrainZ** » Thu May 25, 2017 3:17 pm

Burillo wrote:a machine gun.

Actually it's a fighter plane

Burillo · Post by **Burillo** » Thu May 25, 2017 3:22 pm

VariKusBrainZ wrote:
Burillo wrote:a machine gun.
Actually it's a fighter plane

actually it's both.

bungle · Post by **bungle** » Thu May 25, 2017 4:03 pm

I dont ever leave my house, because somebody somewhere once got run over by a car !!!!

Software developers are not special little pixies that need protecting, all businesses face the possibility of scams and fraud, but software developers believe they have this special right to laud it over paying customers.
If you want to sell in europe it is the law to offer free licence transfers, if you dont it is YOU that is pulling a scam, did you ever even consider that, YOU are breaking the law the same as scammers break the law.

Acustica Audio still does not allow license transfers and violates European laws