Plugins/Companies using serial, a keyfile, or watermark copy protection

[audiojunkie]

Apologies if this is slightly off-topic, but wouldn't a watermark leave a difference in the sound? That seems like a terrible way to do copyright protection.

Not at all. There are different types of “watermarks”. A developer can custom compile the plugin with customer information, such as name, address, etc. It has been known to be done in the past. It doesn’t have to affect the audio at all. Now, if a person were selling samples, they could watermark the samples by adding code to the audio that is outside the range of hearing, and still be undetectable. The watermark could be added to the picture graphics in a picture. There’s lots of ways to identify who it is that originally purchased a plugin that was spread on the net, without affecting the sound. It’s not a very strong form of copy protection, but it works.

[audiojunkie]

I prefer to err on the side of caution.

But its not 'erring on the side of caution' to specifically assert that software is doing something like calling home. That's erring on the side of alarmism.
You're specifically claiming its not okay, erring on the side of caution would be saying 'I dont know so cannot consider it okay.'

There are lots of threads on the internet that state what is or is not protected by copy protection. Assertions are made everywhere—a lot of them not correct. When many people claim that something is (or isn’t) using serial number, etc., I add it to the list. Then, if people correct me, I correct the list. If questions come up about a particular company, I can add it that information to the list. Remember, with almost every one of the vendors listed, many assertions have already been made. There is no alarmism. I already know your stance on the subject, based on comments you’ve made in the past in other threads. You don’t see the point in being concerned about this. This thread is for those who don’t want to buy software unless it meets the criteria in the original post. Those who want the list and only buy from the list would rather me err on the side of caution—how do I know this? Because they don’t want to buy software that doesn’t meet the listed criteria. So, there is nothing to worry about, and no one is being alarmist.

[whyterabbyt]

whatever.

[Jeff McClintock]

If any of you developers meet the criteria on the first page and would like to be included, please feel free to speak up!

SynthEdit

[audiojunkie]

If any of you developers meet the criteria on the first page and would like to be included, please feel free to speak up!

SynthEdit

Thanks, Jeff! I’ll add it!

[Frankie.T]

I'd make a post scrittum for Melda, cause they changed the way to obtain offline installation, and even if is still possible, became too convoluted, so maybe something to be aware of for buyers

[audiojunkie]

Yeah, I had been watching that. I hope they provide off line installers…

[Dunbar]

Agreed.

I won't install "plugin managers" at all. And, my time is too precious to leap through hoops because a software developer has attempted to make things "easier", and failed.

[Frankie.T]

Yeah, I had been watching that. I hope they provide off line installers…

Agreed.

I won't install "plugin managers" at all. And, my time is too precious to leap through hoops because a software developer has attempted to make things "easier", and failed.

Please write it here
viewtopic.php?t=613267

So they see there are other people (not just me) who is interested in this

[audiojunkie]

Added: NuSofting

"Anybody can freely download the demo versions (trials) from this website.
Those trial plugins cannot be authorized.
Once you buy a NUSofting plugin you will receive a download link to the ‘full version’, which is NOT copy protected:
no needs for serial numbers, key files, etc…
We trust in your sensible behavior toward illegally shared software.
You can share the same ‘full version’ you bought in all computers you personally own and use:
from two to five computers is a reasonable number of copies you can make of the NUSofting installer."

[BBFG#]

MusicLab is a Keyfile.

[audiojunkie]

MusicLab is a Keyfile.

Are you absolutely sure? I had looked at that company before and I could have sworn that it was Challenge/Response. It would be fantastic if that is indeed the case!

[BBFG#]

MusicLab is a Keyfile.

Are you absolutely sure? I had looked at that company before and I could have sworn that it was Challenge/Response. It would be fantastic if that is indeed the case!

It definitely has a point to file that is downloaded separately in the installation to authorize. And I'm able to use that on my offline computer.

Oh, and Garritan/Aria is the same.

[audiojunkie]

MusicLab is a Keyfile.

Are you absolutely sure? I had looked at that company before and I could have sworn that it was Challenge/Response. It would be fantastic if that is indeed the case!

It definitely has a point to file that is downloaded separately in the installation to authorize. And I'm able to use that on my offline computer.

Oh, and Garritan/Aria is the same.

I don't believe either Garritan or MusicLab meet all of the criteria. For example, see these messages in the support forum of MusicLab:

https://www.musiclab.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6929

https://www.musiclab.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7079

It may use a keyfile, but there is definitely something there that is tying itself to the hardware, and limiting itself to two installs. If you installed the software to your laptop and your desktop, and your computer failed or became out of date, but the company had gone out of business, you would be stuck, because the system requires you to deactivate licenses from your old system before activating it onto a new system.

Bottom line: If your hard drive crashed or you wanted to update, and the company was gone, you'd be stuck. It doesn't meet the criteria.

[BBFG#]

MusicLab is a Keyfile.

Are you absolutely sure? I had looked at that company before and I could have sworn that it was Challenge/Response. It would be fantastic if that is indeed the case!

It definitely has a point to file that is downloaded separately in the installation to authorize. And I'm able to use that on my offline computer.

Oh, and Garritan/Aria is the same.

I don't believe either Garritan or MusicLab meet all of the criteria. For example, see these messages in the support forum of MusicLab:

https://www.musiclab.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6929

https://www.musiclab.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7079

It may use a keyfile, but there is definitely something there that is tying itself to the hardware, and limiting itself to two installs. If you installed the software to your laptop and your desktop, and your computer failed or became out of date, but the company had gone out of business, you would be stuck, because the system requires you to deactivate licenses from your old system before activating it onto a new system. If your hard drive crashed or you wanted to update, and the company was gone, you'd be stuck. It doesn't meet the criteria.

IDK, You may be correct, I do have them installed on three computers though. And they authorized simply by the Keyfile.

Add: I've had them on several different computers and have never had to deactivate any of them.