'reFX license transfers not allowed'

[liars&ashes]

----I don't see where ya live at being relevant at all. You either agree to the terms or you don't, and if you don't, or don't want to because you feel you don't have to, then ya have not agreed to the terms of use, and paid for or not, you have no legal right to use the item (so obviously best to just not buy it if yer not in an agreeable mood eh). The idea that where you live somehow exempts you is ridiculous. You gonna claim diplomatic immunity ? And furthermore, whatcha gonna do, sell yer license to someone, then sue ReFx (or whoever) to make them provide support and updates ? Certainly yer not suggesting something as idiotic and financially retarded as that, so what's the point ? "I can sell off whatever I want to whoever I want", sure, go for it, ReFx isn't gonna hunt one retard down, not any more than they are going to get sued by that retard who can't read the EULA. It's a catch 22, and both sides should just grow up and quit trying to screw each other over. And this message is not calling any one specific person a "retard", it's to illustrate the situation, and the "retard" is just anyone who thinks they can rewrite the rules to best fit their situation.

Jeff

[jens]

----I don't see where ya live at being relevant at all. You either agree to the terms or you don't, and if you don't, or don't want to because you feel you don't have to, then ya have not agreed to the terms of use, and paid for or not, you have no legal right to use the item (so obviously best to just not buy it if yer not in an agreeable mood eh). The idea that where you live somehow exempts you is ridiculous. You gonna claim diplomatic immunity ?

I think it's clear that you do not have understood the concept of law.


Perhaps you live in a country where cocaince is legal. I live in Germany where cocaine is illegal - and if you sell it to me here in Germany you are breaking German law and it doesn't matter in the least whether you might come from a country where this would not be illegal.

Likewise of course I have only to act according to the law of the country i reside in - what court other that the German one would you appeal to if you thought I had broken your license even though I agreed to it?

Yup, the German one of course.


Is this difficult to grasp?

[liars&ashes]

Is this difficult to graps?

----Yeah, no, hey, let's go from software to an illegal street drug sure, that's a logical comparison. There is no contract, or terms to adhere to when buying cocaine, so no, I wouldn't expect to be able to return it unless the drug dealer I bought it from told me that was totally kosher. (Yeah right.)
----Let's use a realistic, or even, dare I go this far, logical comparison. You go to buy a guitar at a local music store. Certainly the store has a return/exchange policy, and if it does not, then you can inquire as to what that might be, and ask for it in writing. Later on, if, within the time frame of the alloted terms, you want to return the guitar, and they say no, then you will most likely win a judgement against them in small claims court. If you find out that guitars cannot be returned at all, for any reason, then buy one anyways, and then change yer mind, you cannot return it. This is all very simple and basic, don't let the computernet fool you. You are still bound by the seller's terms at all times, as long as they are legal, meaning as long as they do not break any of their own laws (in their governing country). If they happen to fall outside your local laws, then it's up to you to act like a grown up, and walk away from the deal if you don't like how they run their business, you do not get to change the rules to your local favorites as it were. There is no precedent for that yet, and logic willing there never will be, or else it will be teh nu world order if we are all following one set of comandments eh.

Jeff

[jens]

I'll make this easier for you:

say I write a letter to Cakewalk telling them I use pirate copies of their software - what court (if at all) do you think they should appeal to? The Us-American one or the German one? (reminder: I live in Germany)

[DevonB]

If you don't like it, don't buy it

This argument has never sat comfortably with me. I'm sure you have heard of a little thing called a 'patent', which means a company (generally pharmaceutical companies though) can patent something, then f**k you over left right and centre, because they know there may never be an alternative for you to choose. I know were only talking about software here, but the same applies.

The only thing you NEED are water, food, and shelter. Beyond that, the rest of the things in the world are wants. You don't 'need' any software that you don't feel you like their transfer policy. Just because there is no alternative doesn't mean you need to have said software. I don't see why people feel that they have the right to sell anything that they pay money for when there is so much we pay money for and *NEVER* see any real benefit or return from. How about a refund from the auto insurance if you go accident free for 3 years? After all, all's they did was collect thousands of dolalrs from me for absolutely no reason but to fund paying for somebody else's car crash. How nice.

Devon

[liars&ashes]

I'll make this easier for you:

say I write a letter to Cakewalk telling them I use pirate copies of their software - what court (if at all) do you think they should appeal to? The Us-American one or the German one? (reminder: I live in Germany)

----Look man, maybe we should just agree to disagree, because as long as yer gonna use rather nonsensical comparisons and examples, (as opposed to say software instrument vs. real world instrument, like my example for instance), then I don't have any more to say really, I feel my example is solid and the "arguement" speaks for itself in this case. You know, that no one is gonna just write a note to Cakewalk and tell them that, so what's the point of even talking about it.

Jeff

[jens]

You know, that no one is gonna just write a note to Cakewalk and tell them that, so what's the point of even talking about it.

[ugo]

You're comparing a product with services,

according to most software eula's...many of which you never get to see until after you have bought the software...they are not selling a product at all. instead they are licensing the use of the product, which essentially equates to a one time payment rental agreement for that version of the product. so it really is a service and not a product.

i suppose that is as valid a business practice as any other, but the annoying part is that the status quo is for devs to market software as if we are selling a product, and not at all like the service many actually intend it to be. (btw, the same thing goes for most sample developers.) if software companies were more upfront about this in their marketing, and it was clear to customers right from the beginning that they are essentially pre-paying rent on their software, it would make a bit more sense to them when license transfers are not permitted.

if you rent a car, it is accepted that you cant resell your rental agreement to someone else. they'd have to go sign a rental of their own. but if the marketing is such that you actually think you are buying your car, then you find out that its a rental and you cant unload it, you'd have a good reason to be pissed off.

imho, this error in marketing is the primary source of the license transfer conflict between users and developers/distributers.

personally, i allow license transfers with no fee. new users get all the benefits that the previous user had too. i am also going to work on simplifying my already easy going eula and i will post it to my site. as far as i am concerned these days, if someone buys my software...they bought it. they are not renting it from me. its a product, not a service, and as such they can resell it if they want to. i only ask that i be told who is selling it and who the new owner is, so that i can update my records and give support/updates to the new owner. imho, this mindset is a bit more like selling hardware with a transferable warranty, than it is to the usual software license.

i've bought/owned a hell of a lot of second hand stuff in my life...cars, clothes, furniture, instruments, etc., and i've resold plenty of things i bought new too. (or used.) it just makes sense to me that if you buy something, you should be allowed to resell it or give it away. i see no good reason why software should be any different.

[YBaCuO]

Ugo - that all sounds reasonable.

But despite your easy license transfer policy - there is no way I'm selling my Metallurgy. Hands off!

[Chris Walton]

you know what i think about refx current popularity (or lack there of) when marcus left refx thats when things seemed to go down the toilet. marcus was responsible for most or all of the filter algos in vanguard (one of the best if not best selling vstis of all time) and anybody who knows a thing or two about synths, no filter, no sound.

I know so much but I'm not allowed to say anything ....

that would definitely explain the popularity of firebird vs the unpopularity of nexus...

Nexus is unpopular? On KVR maybe...

[Reverse Engineer]

If you don't like it, don't buy it

This argument has never sat comfortably with me. I'm sure you have heard of a little thing called a 'patent', which means a company (generally pharmaceutical companies though) can patent something, then f**k you over left right and centre, because they know there may never be an alternative for you to choose. I know were only talking about software here, but the same applies.

The only thing you NEED are water, food, and shelter. Beyond that, the rest of the things in the world are wants. You don't 'need' any software that you don't feel you like their transfer policy. Just because there is no alternative doesn't mean you need to have said software. I don't see why people feel that they have the right to sell anything that they pay money for when there is so much we pay money for and *NEVER* see any real benefit or return from. How about a refund from the auto insurance if you go accident free for 3 years? After all, all's they did was collect thousands of dolalrs from me for absolutely no reason but to fund paying for somebody else's car crash. How nice.

Devon

Personally, i have never sold a piece of software, and it's unlikely i would (i make sure that it's what i want 100% before buying, as with most things i buy). With auto insurance, if you go a year/s without making a claim, you get a no claims discount, same with house insurance, and again, it applies to other services too...but we are talking about products, not services anyway. There is NO hardware (be it a car, computer, synth, fridge/freezer, pair of shoes, packet of toilet roll, used/unused toothbrush...anything) i could buy that i couldn't resell (it doesn't necessitate it WILL sell, but there's nothing stopping me from trying, legal or otherwise), none whatsoever.

[whyterabbyt]

share-it specifically say, on the one I see, that that's their regulations based on German law, and that local law may override any parts of it.

odd that

odder and odder, then.

[bluedad]

share-it specifically say, on the one I see, that that's their regulations based on German law, and that local law may override any parts of it.

odd that

odder and odder, then.

here's what I see if you think that's odd:

17 GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION
17.1 The construction validity and performance of these Conditions shall be governed by Minnesota Law and the parties submit to the exclusive jurisdiction in a state or federal court located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and waive any right to object to jurisdiction based on forum non-conveniens.

[whyterabbyt]

jeebus. that means just about every customer location has one set of conditions almost certainly guaranteed to be different from the vendors.

in other words, any vendor not declaring their own conditions quite categorically (and thus relying on a mixed bag 'default') really is doing their customers a misservice; nobody's going to know WTF is going on with the vendor making it explicit.

[User3]

Hello,
Has reFX recently changed the EULA? If so, what has been changed? It would be more convenient to have the information about the changes. I have not found previous versions of the EULA on archive.org. Who has the reFX EULA for 2022 or earlier years? Could you please post it here? I would like to compare one of those with the current EULA.