School Article...WAREZ, what is the effect of them...
-
- KVRer
- 8 posts since 9 May, 2002 from Vienna Austria
For me one of the best reasons not to using illegal software is that it limits me into using what I have (or learning to use what I have) instead of just downloading some new toy that usually just wastes my time. I've spent too long just testing software instead of actually making music with it. How many synths do I we actually need to make a good song?
-
- KVRist
- 120 posts since 7 Sep, 2004
You don't really think that I will read hundreds of pages someone I don't even know suggests me to read? Sorry, but I've got a real life. I never did read the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. I think I might never do it.herodotus wrote:...
If you're interested in letting me know what you're talking about, that would be cool.
And sure: Not everybody who has a different point of view than me is intentionally stupid. But maybe you intentionally misunderstood (or simply didn't understand) my point view? I seems to me that yours and mine interpretation of "piracy" is different?
Best wishes, FRitz
P.S. Do you think that even according to the (as YOU say) so bad american copyright laws piracy is OK? I hope not.
-
- KVRAF
- 2608 posts since 26 Aug, 2002 from here
this is true - but sx 3 is not cracked after 7 months - and don't tell me they don't want to crack it - it's just steinbug have got a copyright scheme that is too much work to crackpopsych wrote:As long as there is code to be modified warez will always be a possibility. No matter how you obfuscate, hide code, make clever serializations. It's just a matter of how skilled and determined the cracker is and and if it's worth his trouble.
and even if it was all they do is change how the dongle works (ie a new driver) and the crack is useless again
and look up starforce - the currently uncrackable, but very bad for your system, games protection
I honestly beleive that the protections are now getting so good that cracking will become less and less prevalent as long as you can afford the licence fee for the protection
net result is all the small developers, who need the money, have their stuff cracked while all the corporations keep hold of theirs - don't know what that would do to economics but i suspect it leads to higher consumer prices
I believe every thread should devolve into character attacks and witch-burning. It really helps the discussion.
-
- KVRian
- 1411 posts since 25 Sep, 2003 from The Dirty South, USA
I have a very big clue:aciddose wrote:"4. New commerial softwares will continue to rise in price ranges (Think: Tracktion 2 being at least $50 more than Tracktion 1.6) because the labor of making quality products will increase as computers' CPU-Power increases."
O, M, G.
so, basically you have _NO_ clue.
here is my version:
4. New any type of software will continue to suck more as "developers" (syn; cockthieves,) do less work making lower quality and slower code, and expect to get more in return for it. The only hope is that consumers will somehow wise up to how easy software development has become and start refusing to pay such rediculous prices.
That you (or a friend of yours) got screw by Sony!!!
Yes, Acid Pro sucks now!
-
- u-he
- 30222 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Hiya aciddose,
I couldn't disagree more.
Take the case of Ardour. Wow dammit, a full blown DAW for free. The main developer has spent 5 years of full time work into it so far. He says somewhere on his website it has cost him 250.000$. Go, ask Paul how many support contracts he gets, how much money he got back and how his projections are for earning any money with it...
Why, you say, in your business model it should've been payed for in advance, like a small group (studios?) kinda orders a new software for their use and then he creates it upon request and afterwards it's free so more people need more features and it grows by contract work. D'oh well...
Simple answer: The music software business is a pretty small niche, compared to i.e. Webservers (Apache being one of the few examples where your model seems to work). There is no "Cisco" in the audio software industry who can afford to make a budget to get improvements to the open source software funded.
There are a couple of open source developers though who make great software for free in order to recommend themselves for contract work. Guess what? - The contract work they're hired for is for the software companies, not for any musicians/users. They help creating software that's in turn sold to musicians/users.
We don't live in an ideal world...
I think that one problem we have here is the very high level of *invention* (Research) that goes into audio software, compared to the sheer amount of writing code (Development). An audio developer can easily spend 2 months on 50 lines of code, in order to create a good sounding filter algorithm. In your model, how would one justify the salary of 2 months of hard work for only 50 lines of code? - It certainly doesn't work this way. Instead, the effort to create this small snippet of code directly translates into a business asset, which will be marketed as just that - rather than setting it free for exploitation by others.
And regarding the idea that you build software once and have long time earnings is plain wrong in the case of audio software. A really good selling VSTi will see 500 - 1.000 sales. A few cases go up to 3.000 sales, only a handful of software instruments hit the 10.000 mark. Many, many even really good VSTis sell below 100 pieces. This is all regardless of pricing policy etc.
Typically, one sells good in the first few weeks after release (initial release and/or updates). After that, you sell almost nothing unless you do some decent marketing. But marketing of course costs money and manpower. It's a point comparable to the contract work in your model.
Sorry I got a bit off topic + lengthy, but you might as well see that the audio software industry is totally different from others, and thus is seriously affected by the loss of sales due to warez.
Cheers,
Urs
I couldn't disagree more.
This may work in some areas, but not necessarily for audio software.aciddose wrote:better business model for software development:
software development contracted by companies in need of
software features which are not available.
This may be so in some areas, but does really not apply to audio software.aciddose wrote:the inital costs, though, you say? in reality, to make a working peice of software is extremely simple, for any type of software.
This may be so in some areas, but does definately not apply to audio software.aciddose wrote:the initial costs are minimal,
What are you talking about, in terms of audio software?aciddose wrote:and the long term earnings possible with a peice of software which is often contracted to be ammended is extremely large.
Because it doesn't work for audio software:aciddose wrote:why do we not use this model?
Take the case of Ardour. Wow dammit, a full blown DAW for free. The main developer has spent 5 years of full time work into it so far. He says somewhere on his website it has cost him 250.000$. Go, ask Paul how many support contracts he gets, how much money he got back and how his projections are for earning any money with it...
Why, you say, in your business model it should've been payed for in advance, like a small group (studios?) kinda orders a new software for their use and then he creates it upon request and afterwards it's free so more people need more features and it grows by contract work. D'oh well...
Simple answer: The music software business is a pretty small niche, compared to i.e. Webservers (Apache being one of the few examples where your model seems to work). There is no "Cisco" in the audio software industry who can afford to make a budget to get improvements to the open source software funded.
There are a couple of open source developers though who make great software for free in order to recommend themselves for contract work. Guess what? - The contract work they're hired for is for the software companies, not for any musicians/users. They help creating software that's in turn sold to musicians/users.
We don't live in an ideal world...
I think that one problem we have here is the very high level of *invention* (Research) that goes into audio software, compared to the sheer amount of writing code (Development). An audio developer can easily spend 2 months on 50 lines of code, in order to create a good sounding filter algorithm. In your model, how would one justify the salary of 2 months of hard work for only 50 lines of code? - It certainly doesn't work this way. Instead, the effort to create this small snippet of code directly translates into a business asset, which will be marketed as just that - rather than setting it free for exploitation by others.
And regarding the idea that you build software once and have long time earnings is plain wrong in the case of audio software. A really good selling VSTi will see 500 - 1.000 sales. A few cases go up to 3.000 sales, only a handful of software instruments hit the 10.000 mark. Many, many even really good VSTis sell below 100 pieces. This is all regardless of pricing policy etc.
Typically, one sells good in the first few weeks after release (initial release and/or updates). After that, you sell almost nothing unless you do some decent marketing. But marketing of course costs money and manpower. It's a point comparable to the contract work in your model.
Sorry I got a bit off topic + lengthy, but you might as well see that the audio software industry is totally different from others, and thus is seriously affected by the loss of sales due to warez.
Cheers,
Urs-
- vvvvvvv
- 2595 posts since 24 Oct, 2000 from skelmersdale, west lancs, uk
To prevent warez we need three things:
- Digital Rights Management type systems embedded into all software and all operating systems, making warezing technically much more difficult.
- Improved tracing of IP addresses across the internet to quickly trace downloaders and uploaders so we know who is doing what, and when they did it
- Greater criminilisation of warez users, bigger penalties etc, eliminating the "wild west" culture of the web. In effect, punishing theft in a publicly visible way
The above is a tall order, and will take 5 to 10 years, but I suspect it will happen, because:
- Big business will pour billions into it to make it so, as big business are currently the biggest money losers.
- Government will make it happen as all governments have a big interest in controlling subversion and revolution
- Social groups will want it as the web is host to a lot of sick things that are "morally bad" for people.
What emerges from the above is that warezing is simply one aspect of "Controlling the Web"
Today we are living in a control-free halcyon age.
But it won't last.
- Digital Rights Management type systems embedded into all software and all operating systems, making warezing technically much more difficult.
- Improved tracing of IP addresses across the internet to quickly trace downloaders and uploaders so we know who is doing what, and when they did it
- Greater criminilisation of warez users, bigger penalties etc, eliminating the "wild west" culture of the web. In effect, punishing theft in a publicly visible way
The above is a tall order, and will take 5 to 10 years, but I suspect it will happen, because:
- Big business will pour billions into it to make it so, as big business are currently the biggest money losers.
- Government will make it happen as all governments have a big interest in controlling subversion and revolution
- Social groups will want it as the web is host to a lot of sick things that are "morally bad" for people.
What emerges from the above is that warezing is simply one aspect of "Controlling the Web"
Today we are living in a control-free halcyon age.
But it won't last.
Member 12, Studio One Pro 7, VPS Avenger, Kontakt 8, Spitfire, Sonible, Baby Audio, CableGuys. Recent best buy - EZ Drummer 3 with Bandmate
-
- KVRAF
- 3364 posts since 16 Feb, 2004 from atop a katamari
i agree with an earlier comment; people who download some big cracked software - whilst not necessarily hurting the $1000 charging company as they'd not remotely have bought it anyway - will still hurt other developers with cheaper products.
yes, i did learn some of my 'chops' on a copy of logic several years ago, so i can understand some arguments about people starting on cracked software. the thing is tho, a lot of us here have been in this game for quite some time. the fact is that the scene has changed dramatically. the cheaper and free alternatives are much much better than they were, and fully 100% capable of providing a useful learning environment AND studio at once.
there is simply no need for pirating software. someone who makes do with a pirated sequencer IS taking money and custom away from someone who provides an affordable program that is within their price range. there is no excuse anymore.
yes, i did learn some of my 'chops' on a copy of logic several years ago, so i can understand some arguments about people starting on cracked software. the thing is tho, a lot of us here have been in this game for quite some time. the fact is that the scene has changed dramatically. the cheaper and free alternatives are much much better than they were, and fully 100% capable of providing a useful learning environment AND studio at once.
there is simply no need for pirating software. someone who makes do with a pirated sequencer IS taking money and custom away from someone who provides an affordable program that is within their price range. there is no excuse anymore.
Kick, punch, it's all in the mind.
-
- Banned
- 1842 posts since 4 Aug, 2004 from just right here
Iv got some type of dongle? with traction, which means it can only be used on my machine and no other. I think traction has been heading in the right direction so far, I don't know why they made the NRF?, but if they try to take a cubase path they might spoil it?
-
- u-he
- 30222 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
That doesn't work because 99.99% of the musicians using the tools don't earn any or enough money from their music.dasdeck wrote:You can use Software samples and all virtually endless copyable software as long as you want and with all features, as long as you dont get any money from it.
For most of us on KVR, making music is an essential way to express ourselves, it's almost as important as water, food and sex (and sometimes even more important than that, because it's a way to get there...). Hence it represents a personal and social value.
If you see a point in paying money for a guitar or a piano, even if you don't make any money from playing it, there's no way to say that it shouldn't be so with software. The only loss of reality I see is, people tend to think that software is worth less because it's cheaper. That's wrong. Software is cheaper than hardware because it can. Today you can get a whole studio that would cost tens of thousands of bucks of hardware for a few hundred or a few thousand bucks in software. That's pretty much cheaper, but it's not worth less, neither in musical value, nor in the effort of creating it!
In your model, KVR wouldn't even exist, because there wouldn't be anything to talk about, except for maybe Logic, SX, ProTools etc. Even Native Instruments would not exist. You'd still have to shell out an enormous amount of money for hardware to get only a fraction of the possibilities you have now.
Cheers,
Urs-
- Banned
- 1842 posts since 4 Aug, 2004 from just right here
Here is one idea, do a deal with Bill gates to include your software on Windows operating system, or another could be to include a basic music software on one of these bargain basement computer setups.
-
- KVRist
- 410 posts since 8 Jan, 2004 from Switzerland
wrong...but sx 3 is not cracked after 7 months
wrong again...theses CDs can be copied.starforce - the currently uncrackable, but very bad for your system, games protection
Both system can be actually cracked and are already...
And for hardware protection they are completely useless in a digital environnement. you can always write some code who will let the software think that...the best exemple i have is the DVD zone, there are a lot (if not all: depend your country) of DVD drives that have hardware inside for the region code...that didn't stop this being cracked (with a software).
my point is not to defend piracy but to say that there is no copyprotection that work at 100% and probably there will never be one.
what softwares sellers have to keep in mind is:
-treat well the customers and have a good support
-hearing their suggestions to improve the soft
-allowing license transfert (reselling the soft)if not use anymore.
Finally my point of view about piracy:
- the only thing i can see is that this can increase sales from a developer point of view...yes flame me! But i think that the soft can gain in popularity (and then also sell better if lot of people talk about, it's a good advertising)
Personnaly i have used many crack version of softs that i know have bought...what i gain with that?
-i can use the soft and follow the developement of it (features added, bugs removed etc...)
-during some time i can test intensively the application
and choose to invest in it or to not keep it and search something else.
With this in mind i find myself doing more advisable shopping.
Even if i have bought a license i use sometimes the cracked version...why that?
Troublefree installation and i don't waste 2 days installing a lots of softwares in a non internet computer, (especially with all those challenge response)
Some copyprotection scheme were far from perfect and could cause your computer to reboot...hopefully this is better now but this was a wonderfull gift when you have bought the soft (guess some recognized PACE) So this is the way to bypass that.
I think that there will always be some people who don't buy anything and people who choose to support a software.
(Also maybe students who use everything and later will do their choice and finaly buy what they keep and use)
-
- KVRAF
- 5703 posts since 8 Dec, 2004 from The Twin Cities
Here's my view in a nutshell: Copyright law is expanding to mean things it was never meant to mean. It was conceived to prevent the actual theft of intellectual property. By 'actual theft' I mean something like this: person A writes a song. Person B comes along, says "Hey, thats a good song. Can I see the sheet music?" Person B then proceeds to claim that he wrote the song and get all of the money and glory because he has better connections than hapless person A.rawcan wrote:You don't really think that I will read hundreds of pages someone I don't even know suggests me to read? Sorry, but I've got a real life. I never did read the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. I think I might never do it.herodotus wrote:...
If you're interested in letting me know what you're talking about, that would be cool.
And sure: Not everybody who has a different point of view than me is intentionally stupid. But maybe you intentionally misunderstood (or simply didn't understand) my point view? I seems to me that yours and mine interpretation of "piracy" is different?
Best wishes, FRitz
P.S. Do you think that even according to the (as YOU say) so bad american copyright laws piracy is OK? I hope not.
THAT is what copyright was intended to prevent.
If you read any of that article at all, you would see that today copyright law makes it possible for it to be illegal for an author to read his own book on his own computer.
Does anyone really think this is sensible?
-
- KVRAF
- 2608 posts since 26 Aug, 2002 from here
wrongdramsenik wrote:wrong...but sx 3 is not cracked after 7 monthswrong again...theses CDs can be copied.starforce - the currently uncrackable, but very bad for your system, games protection
Both system can be actually cracked and are already...
get your facts straight - you can find versions of these will vaguely work but neither has been cracked so that they work as the legitimate product
and as someone said it's about making it unpalatable to do - nothing is uncrackable - but if takes as long to crack as for the manufacturer to put a new version out then what is the point ?
I believe every thread should devolve into character attacks and witch-burning. It really helps the discussion.
-
- KVRer
- 24 posts since 23 Sep, 2002 from Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Yes, I agree, it's a good advertising!dramsenik wrote:Finally my point of view about piracy:
- the only thing i can see is that this can increase sales from a developer point of view...yes flame me! But i think that the soft can gain in popularity (and then also sell better if lot of people talk about, it's a good advertising)
Developers don`t very that much about piracy. Why should they?! They have all these guys here to do that... So they can concentrate on developing software and earning money.
P.S. I am against piracy but i don`t understand why some people here sound like idiots from RIAA.