Business ethics

[deleted]

DELETED

[trimph1]

Who is going to supervise if they will stick entirely to the protocol? It will be a hell of a job.

i would love that job...

Would that be a sort of QA type of thing?

[fanfarecircuit]

Who is going to supervise if they will stick entirely to the protocol? It will be a hell of a job.

i would love that job...

Would that be a sort of QA type of thing?

it might be... what's QA?

[Music Engineer]

i was refering to your keyfile issue - not every customer who sells a license is a scammer ...

yes, sure. and i don't want to imply that. but you asked which developer might have such means (to do safe transfers). and so i replied my impression (which might be incorrect) that safe transfers might be possible with C/R and dongle technologies. i - for one - don't like either of the two (neither from a user's nor from a developer's point of view) which was the reason for me to go with an as-simple-as-possible keyfile scheme which in turn ruled out safe transfers.

of course, one might take the stance that i could disregard the safety thing and just trust, but that's a different question. maybe someday i will change this policy. let's see what comes along this thread...

edit: ah - OK, i guess i misunderstood you. i thought, you were referering to all developers in general when in fact you only meant those that use keyfiles?

[trimph1]

Who is going to supervise if they will stick entirely to the protocol? It will be a hell of a job.

i would love that job...

Would that be a sort of QA type of thing?

it might be... what's QA?

QA---Quality Assurance, I do this sort of thing at work here.

[fanfarecircuit]

QA---Quality Assurance, I do this sort of thing at work here

oh.. we like to call that FA (Fanfare Assurance) around my neck of the woods.

[trimph1]

QA---Quality Assurance, I do this sort of thing at work here

oh.. we like to call that FA (Fanfare Assurance) around my neck of the woods.

[pj geerlings]

A code of ethics would be a worthwhile goal
Even if it exists only as an opportunity for compliance I think it would have some merit

[xoxos]

1) i've been gang stalked, or "actively encouraged not to participate" for the last five years. i, and anyone like me, who is not strongly established, am not going to want to elicit my address and other "immediate contact" information. bullying exists, and any codex makes small developers subject to the same conditions as large developers. i don't have a secretary to defer "intrusive calls" or "visits," which could be significantly deleterious to someone on my scale.

2) immoral behaviour.

rather than attempt to discourage poor behaviour a draft of sportsmanlike principles (not another manifesto!) we could instead assist the consumer in exercising greater discretion, by bolstering our own behaviour. this benefits everyone.

yes, i know this goes against every grain of commercialism.. how can we ask people to be astute, yet still set aside doubt when it comes to making the choice we want them to make.. well, make bloody sure you're honouring customers with the best product you can offer. that's not really so hard, is it? do you read my product releases??

..as someone widely considered to be well-behaved in the marketplace, urs, i think you will agree that the better solution is evident: be a gentleman. persist.

opportunists, and others who wish to exert influence for various reasons, happen (after all, this is the music business). a manifesto would only provide would-be detractors with another framework to abuse people by.. false claims, it doesn't matter. you can't deter people with more rules.

the best way to discourage poor behaviour is to maintain your own standards and thereby raise public expectations. you make good products, you speak openly, to an extent, about the technology you use, and help consumers understand what they are purchasing.

to "put you in the picture" i've heard someone's BLITs at very low frequencies in a piece by justin.. BLITs happen to be an efficient method of bandlimiting, and there are good reasons to use them. the shortcomings of the method, eg. when used at very low frequencies.. may not be something i'd want a naive customer to be aware of.. they take a fair bit of explanation and violate the customers expectation of perfection.. but which is more sportsmanlike? coddling nescient expectations or gentle, persistent honesty and informedness? which is going to create a population you'd rather purchase products from in the future?

if you see someone giving someone shit or acting shit, get involved. i know you've got a reputation to uphold. i did once as well! (albeit different..) if you see someone who makes solid products and solid statements about their worth, comment on them. there's only one way through this tangle, and that's to teach discernment, or, rather, to encourage people to learn discernment.



you can't make people behave. you can speak openly about what you perceive, and that way, we will all be more aware. and god knows, one day, the merits of virtue may just start to make sense to some people, over time.

*edit* and i apologise for my lack of eloquence and general wooliness in the above

[Dominus]

All developers should have a backup plan, where if they decide to exit the game, have an open version of the software without copy protection and contact ALL buyers and make sure they get a copy. (At the very least, one with a simple keyfile to limit copying to a slight degree if they desire.)

edited to add:

I also like the idea of software reviews being limited to those who haven't received NFRs. As a computer builder, I can't give away computers to get glowing reviews.

[syalki]

Nicely said Urs,
I mostly agree on everything, especially pricing info, marketing, but...

1. legal note / contact information
That means each company must post its name, postal address, phone number, email address and tax identification number basically "one click away" on its website.

This is very Europe style business.
Phone is has been. You try to call, but there is time difference... Email is so much easier.
Postal address, well, very has been too in a global world. On a project I used to work on, there were 4 countries involved.
Tax id, well, very Europe style too. In Europe you have to put it everywhere. Not so in the US.

Things are different in different countries. Starting a little business in the US is extremely simple, while it is a nightmare in Europe. In the US you can start this in your garage, adding the revenues (if any) to your personal income, then incorporating when it makes sense to. This allows for a lot of innovation. Thousands of companies have started this way, in an informal way.

As a general rule, I tend to prefer "less rules", more freedom.
There are often way too many rules.
I tend to associate "less rules" with "more creativity".

[tomg]

I agree to certain degrees .... but it's pie in the sky stuff. Not realistic at all. No one person or group can tell another person or group of people how to do their business. Especially in international business where the laws don't conform to any standards, only the market has the power to change bad behavior.

We've been through "thread ownership" many times. Company forums are special cases but in the open forum there is no such thing. Good luck but I think you are pissing into the wind when you expect others to conform to your ideas of fair play/right thing to do.

[Angus_FX]

1. legal note / contact information

For one thing, I noticed that some companies don't have a legal note on their website, that means a proper contact info. In the European Union of course every company has to add such to its website, as implemented in each EU country upon a directive (see link, Article 5).

Of course, not every developer is a company; just because they're charging money doesn't necessarily mean they're even doing it for the profit. Plenty of people do it for 'beer money'.

I think as much transparency is owed to our customers, and websites where you can't even make out the country of origin are less than nice.

I think customers who don't check this for themselves are either ignorant, or taking a calculated risk. Perhaps rather than an ethical manifesto, this could be "safe buying advice" on KvR itself?

2.1. pricing info

I think it's important that product prices plus taxes are visible on the website even *before* clicking on a buy now button or checking out a shopping cart. Also hidden costs such as shipping costs and taxes should be visible immediately (I failed to do this myself, but have fixed it since).

More complicated than you might think, for those of us that have to deal with the steaming pile of BS that is channel politics anyway.

2.2. license transfers

I also think that licenses should be generally transferable, maybe for a little fee to prevent abuse. I think Audiodamage are the most user friendly company in this respect (you can even give a license back and get reimbursed within some time IIRC), but I think it's understandably that not every company will want to go that far.

Companies should be transparent about their policy. We've seen a fair bit of what I'd consider abuse from certain individuals over the years.. but I don't think it's yours or my place to dictate to other developers what the policy should be.

3. fair marketing

That's probably the biggest and most controversial point.

3.1. user testimonials

If I could, I would stop fake user testimonials. Quoting people who have been paid an NFR for a couple of nice words is IMHO a deception. By paying them for their statement they are *not* giving an honest testimonial.

It's more subtle than that. I mean, I fully agree with you that outright bribery and quote-whoring is unethical and undesirable. But if I sell 5 copies of a product partly because of a quote from Artist X, don't they deserve some reward for my commercial use of their name and image? Bearing in mind a lot of these artists (not the shameless quote whores) are kinda reticent about this stuff. If they buy a copy of A and say something nice about it, and I give them a copy of B in return, are they allowed to quote on that? Is it free, or did they earn it?

An even bigger problem as regards fake testimonials is sock-puppet users (both posting fake positive reviews of their own products and fake negatives of others). We've seen some companies caught red-handed with that recently, but I suspect it's a bit more widespread.

I think that demo songs should generally be absolutely dry output of the plugin in question. However, sometimes a limiter, samples, a drumloop etc. are necessary to round up the experience. If anything else than the plugin and the dry host is used, then it should be named in the context.

Full disclosure is more important IMV. I don't see a problem with polished, processed demos to grab peoples' interest to begin with, as long as the method is disclosed. Anyway, if the plugin has a downloadable trial version, that's a much better way to evaluate it than somebody else's demo song.

3.4. marking someone elses terrain

I think we need to revaluate the unspoken rules that say that no dev must pee inside another one's forum thread (no, I don't mean the thread that led me to this). When is it okay to post in a thread and when is it not?

I think that e.g. a thread in Instruments where someone asks about specific products of specific companies is *not* open for other companies to market their stuff in. One can always react if a user innocently drops a product name. But jumping in just out of the blue without *any* invitation by the OP or anything is *not* *cool*.

Except where people are posting false or misleading info.. "Only product that does XYZ", that kind of thing.. surely then it's OK to step in and correct?

One other trademark matter you might want to consider for your ethics manifesto - ethical use of keywords in search driven advertising. I know for a fact one of our competitors is paying for sponsored links and featured YouTube videos based on keywords relating to our products. Not sure whether I should consider it as unsporting behaviour, or retaliate in kind... recent EU case law suggests the latter.

[duncanparsons]

All developers should have a backup plan, where if they decide to exit the game, have an open version of the software without copy protection and contact ALL buyers and make sure they get a copy. (At the very least, one with a simple keyfile to limit copying to a slight degree if they desire.)

I do hear this, but in a way, why should software be so special?

When a car or vacuum cleaner or whatever manufacturer goes out of business, you still have the item for as long as it lasts. It will stop working, parts will not be available, etc no matter how much you cherish it. Should the administrators of the company release all details of parts so that they can be made again; do the previous directors of the defunct company have a duty to service those items? It may be that your cherished electric drill bought from a company that disappeared 5 years ago is accidentally dropped & the motor stops. It had been fine before that, but now it just won't work, and nobody else makes a motor of the same dimensions - should the company have posted all it's designs somewhere just in case?

Technology moves on, so it maybe that you'll never be able to use your favourite Galactix patches in a future operating system. Maybe none of the hosts you use support DX anymore, should BlueLine have released the source code? In the very real case of folk who have had licenses for software from companies that no longer exist, is it their responsibility when you have had to rebuild a machine and have lost the license keys?

It's hard when authentication is by license servers that are no longer live, but I have a Simmons SDS200 where the amp in one of the channels has broken. The warranty card means nothing. It would be great if, after Simmons folded, they'd left the service desk open. I have utter sympathy with folk stung by kjaerhus; but whilst they should perhaps have been more open about their position as a business entity, if they find themselves unable to keep those license servers alive, they cannot necessarily be held at emotional gunpoint for those times when our hardware breaks/reinstalls, etc.

It's a tough call. Folk have got used to the idea that software is just a bunch of 0s and 1s, and can be copied and should 'just work' (if ever there was a phrase cooked up from hell...). Not so, it is a commodity, an asset which becomes obsolete. Even if a company still exists, it is not duty bound to support an old product; in the same way that a defunct company cannot guarantee to be able to service any requests.

I realise that I'm sticking my head above the parapet here, but being both a consumer and a dev, I have thought about this through the years. I'm not sure that I've ever felt that making everything available when you go is right. Sometimes companies do just vanish. It has happened for centuries, and the internet isn't going to change that.

I was always told to turn the lights out when you leave the room.

[duncanparsons]

hmm.. that went on longer than expected..