Got Fu**ed by FabFilter (Got fixed by FabFilter, cause after all we're only human)

[Jac459]

You don’t want to pay the developer the value of their product. That’s pretty much the beginning and end of it.

All these justifications remind me of people arguing that pirates help developers by acting as “brand ambassadors.”

So you never ever bought anything second hand ? That's a pretty hard stance... I don't think that's something you should be proud of by the way... Not for software in particular, but in general.

Your parallel between something that is legal and accepted by the vendor and something that is illegal is just plain stupid, I will not comment it...

I buy all of my software directly from the developer. Because I want to support their work. Buying secondhand does not support the developer. They see the same amount of income from your secondhand purchase as they see from piracy (zero). It is no different from that standpoint.

Well, I think that's a reasoning that is not taking all the factors into account.
If you are on the piracy side, you have to leave underground so you will never buy anything else from the vendor.
If you are buying secondhand, you are entering the ecosystem of the vendor and it is a gateway to many other purchases, like I explained with the expansions I bought (and continue to buy) for UVI Falcon and VPS Avenger...
Another point is that the capacity to sell your purchase means the capacity to make a mistake and then legitimate "impulse buy". It is very comforting for a buyer to buy something knowing that it can be resold if it was a mistake... So this "resell-able licence" are actually part of the marketing of the companies...

Actually, I was very happy to purchase the pro version of Vital because I consider it fantastic even if I don't need the text to speech, and I do agree with you that we need to support the software vendors, I was one of the only one you bought the spectral add-on on Bitwig when it was a paid add-on even if it was not really fair, just because I wanted to support Bitwig Studio. But saying that I should support all single audio vendors is a stretch ( and I don't have the financial means).

So basically I don't think you should shame people because they buy second hand. That is not where we should draw the line. The line is "is it legal or not". End of the story.
If you start to shame people buying the second hand, then where to draw the line ? Why not shaming also people trying to get discount or sales as a next step ?

[Proteinshake]

Has Fabfilter not yet replied to OP?

I've not received any further response from them since their "official" first one I posted. I've just now reached out to them a final time, offering to fix this by allowing me to know precisely what I am accused of, what licenses, transfers or action of mine has led to them simply disabling the account altogether - without any kind of notification prior or after. I explicitly mentioned I am willing to cooperate and do the things I can do to set it right.

I don't see what more I can offer them - but it certainly won't be more money, that's already set in stone for me.

I will post if anything new comes up. Thanks to everyone bringing up new insights or comments, and also the critics.

[Jac459]

Good luck!

[jamcat]

Another point is that the capacity to sell your purchase means the capacity to make a mistake and then legitimate "impulse buy". It is very comforting for a buyer to buy something knowing that it can be resold if it was a mistake... So this "resell-able licence" are actually part of the marketing of the companies...

I’ve never seen any company do that. I’ve seen companies give money back guarantees, but outside of multi-level marketing pyramid schemes, I’ve never seen any company advertise the reselling of their products as a selling point.

“Go ahead and buy our product, and when you figure out it’s crap, go ahead and make it someone else’s problem!” isn’t a great sales pitch.

I have made a few purchase mistakes. Expressive E Arché Collection was a $120 mistake. But I’m not going to sell a product I know is bad on to someone else. Why would I want to be that person?

So basically I don't think you should shame people because they buy second hand. That is not where we should draw the line. The line is "is it legal or not". End of the story.

Many things that have exploited and abused people have been legal throughout history. Many still are. But those things have always been wrong, unethical, and immoral, regardless of what the law said. “Is it legal” has never been synonymous with “is it right.”

If you start to shame people buying the second hand, then where to draw the line ? Why not shaming also people trying to get discount or sales as a next step ?

This is a very good and valid question. And I think the deciding factor is the developer. Any price the developer sets is fair game. That is the amount they are willing to take for their work. It is their choice. The problem arises when you take it upon yourself to take that choice from them, along with their rightful revenues.

[Jac459]

Another point is that the capacity to sell your purchase means the capacity to make a mistake and then legitimate "impulse buy". It is very comforting for a buyer to buy something knowing that it can be resold if it was a mistake... So this "resell-able licence" are actually part of the marketing of the companies...

I’ve never seen any company do that. I’ve seen companies give money back guarantees, but outside of multi-level marketing pyramid schemes, I’ve never seen any company advertise the reselling of their products as a selling point.

I have made a few purchase mistakes. Expressive E Arché Collection was a $120 mistake. But I’m not going to sell a product I know is bad on to someone else. Why would I want to be that person?

So basically I don't think you should shame people because they buy second hand. That is not where we should draw the line. The line is "is it legal or not". End of the story.

Many things that have exploited and abused people have been legal throughout history. Many still are. But those things have always been wrong, unethical, and immoral, regardless of what the law said. “Is it legal” has never been synonymous with “is it right.”

If you start to shame people buying the second hand, then where to draw the line ? Why not shaming also people trying to get discount or sales as a next step ?

This is a very good and valid question. And I think the deciding factor is the developer. Any price the developer sets is fair game. That is the amount they are willing to take for their work. It is their choice. The problem arises when you take it upon yourself to take that choice from them, along with their rightful revenues.

Well, let's agree to disagree, I have made my point and you made yours, no big deal.

For re-sellable license of course it is known. Even if not in the front page. Should I remind you that licence transfer is generally not free (ilok is 25usd per licence).

[robindrieghe]

did u buy stuff from this fraud guy?

https://www.dontpostlinkstowarez.com

You're not supposed to post links to warez here.

i was thinking some more people would report him on that site

[billcarroll]

Has Fabfilter not yet replied to OP?

I've not received any further response from them since their "official" first one I posted. I've just now reached out to them a final time, offering to fix this by allowing me to know precisely what I am accused of, what licenses, transfers or action of mine has led to them simply disabling the account altogether - without any kind of notification prior or after. I explicitly mentioned I am willing to cooperate and do the things I can do to set it right.

I don't see what more I can offer them - but it certainly won't be more money, that's already set in stone for me.

I will post if anything new comes up. Thanks to everyone bringing up new insights or comments, and also the critics.

Once again, I'm truly sorry you were scammed by whomever sold you these licenses. I don't think any of us here wants to see someone scammed.

However, in my experience publicly stating that you "Got Fu**ed by FabFilter" when they provide an FAQ with a clear warning about purchasing second-hand licenses, and a free service to verify licenses offered for sale via the wild wild Internet ... not sure this is your winning move here.

You might try a different approach with FabFilter and get better results resolving this. They are a good company with real people working there who care. Present them with a reasonable explanation rather than attacking them publicly and you might get better results.

If you paid via PayPal Goods and Services you should have some recourse to get your money back. I always put terms and conditions in the PayPal transaction re: successful transfer of a legal license for the software being purchased. If you sent the money via "Friends and Family" you will have no way to get your money back.

I hope you get this resolved with FabFilter, and get your money back from the scammer.

[audenso]

A little bit off topic, but aren’t FabFilter plugins supposed be activated offline just using the serial numbers? If that’s the case @Proteinshake might be able to use their plugins for the time being and his serial numbers will eventually get blacklisted in future minor versions, so - updating the plugins might be virtually impossible. Is there any chance that FabFilter blacklisted and deactivated Proteinshake‘s serial numbers if their computer goes online for a while?

Wishing Proteinshake good luck in getting their FF account restored.

[masterhiggins]

If they warn against buying used software they shouldn’t allow it. Problem solved. The fact that they partook in the matter voids that excuse.

A decent company would’ve at least split the difference and eaten part of the loss. Fabfilter merely said, “someone did something bad. It wasn’t you, but f**k you anyway.”

[rod_zero]

Developers operating in the EU not allowing license transfer are breaking EU law, that too is piracy. And this was a court decision for protecting consumers, there is nothing unethical about allowing license transfers.

Developers take advantage of users not knowing their rights and nobody willing to sue them and take them to court, that is unethical.

it is also unethical to revoke licenses without due process, to be part and judge in the decision. If FF are sure OP intended fraud they should denounce him for it to the police.

[MadDogE134]

hope you get it straightened out OP... you sound a bit more reasonable after you calmed down imo. hate to see anyone get shafted but we live and learn

cheers

[biomechanoid]

i was thinking some more people would report him on that site

See #4 here: viewtopic.php?t=44705

[gaggle of hermits]

A little bit off topic, but aren’t FabFilter plugins supposed be activated offline just using the serial numbers? If that’s the case @Proteinshake might be able to use their plugins for the time being and his serial numbers will eventually get blacklisted in future minor versions, so - updating the plugins might be virtually impossible. Is there any chance that FabFilter blacklisted and deactivated Proteinshake‘s serial numbers if their computer goes online for a while?

Wishing Proteinshake good luck in getting their FF account restored.

fabfilter uses a simple text string to authorise the plugins. so far, despite presenting it as such and claiming not to be able to download updates (which are on the open site - no login required), the OP appears to have lost access to nothing other than the online account itself.

there is no way fabfilter can deactivate an existing plugin remotely. they might blacklist a key string in a future update - but they don't release updates all that often – and i don't know whether they blacklist the key strings. if the cracks don't use a keygen, there might be little point.

[teilo]

A little bit off topic, but aren’t FabFilter plugins supposed be activated offline just using the serial numbers? If that’s the case @Proteinshake might be able to use their plugins for the time being and his serial numbers will eventually get blacklisted in future minor versions, so - updating the plugins might be virtually impossible. Is there any chance that FabFilter blacklisted and deactivated Proteinshake‘s serial numbers if their computer goes online for a while?

Wishing Proteinshake good luck in getting their FF account restored.

fabfilter uses a simple text string to authorise the plugins. so far, despite presenting it as such and claiming not to be able to download updates (which are on the open site - no login required), the OP appears to have lost access to nothing other than the online account itself.

there is no way fabfilter can deactivate an existing plugin remotely. they might blacklist a key string in a future update - but they don't release updates all that often – and i don't know whether they blacklist the key strings. if the cracks don't use a keygen, there might be little point.

Yes, I don't get this either. Other than order history and registration keys, there's no reason to login to an account. Downloads are all public. Update news is also public. Unless he never bothered to download his registration keys, I don't get what he's missing out on.

[audenso]

fabfilter uses a simple text string to authorise the plugins. so far, despite presenting it as such and claiming not to be able to download updates (which are on the open site - no login required), the OP appears to have lost access to nothing other than the online account itself.

there is no way fabfilter can deactivate an existing plugin remotely. they might blacklist a key string in a future update - but they don't release updates all that often – and i don't know whether they blacklist the key strings. if the cracks don't use a keygen, there might be little point.

Thank you for confirming that.

Buying plugins that use simple key based authorization was always my main priority. Now cases like this make me feel even more uncomfortable using my RX; Cubase/WaveLab/SpectraLayers/HALion/Groove Agent; Studio One; Monofilter/Stereoizer/Stereoplacer; Melodyne, should one day their respective authors decide to kill my accounts on their servers, because of an unfounded claim that an unicorn had breached their EULAs

Thankfully there still are developers that are using offline key authorization, therefore can’t deactivate your plugins because of claims made out of thin air.