|
People Steal From Artists, Artists Steal From Programmers (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| cronodevir |
| quote: | Originally posted by RichieV
I doubt Pirate Bay is really considered a scene. And i'm almost certain syncrosoft is still uncracked. I think the audio industry really needed piracy to stop for a little bit. Things were getting a little insane. I think half the developpers at KVR wanted to kill themselves. |
Who referred to the pirate bay? Cubase SX3 [which uses syncrosoft] is cracked. 4 is also but works only 25% of the time. I think with the reputation of how bad 4 is, there was not much incentive to do 5.
But its really just a false victory, because everything else out there is cracked, usually within a day or two after its released. And cubase by far offers nothing so unique that it balances out the need for a dongle.
Devs at KVR? Well, they should known before hand when they get into a certain industry that it is full of people who will undermine their efforts. Though a lot of it is perceived turmoil, and not real. They look at how much their product is being shared and they consider it "potential lost sales", when the reality is most of those people wouldn't have paid for anything anyways. And further more the reality IS that they loose nothing, they still have their product. Because it can be distributed easily is a side effect of having a virtual environment.
Also software isn't a physical good. You do not loose any assets regardless to how copied it is. |
|
|
| RichieV |
| quote: | Originally posted by Beatflux
You're making assumptions you can't prove, and that nobody against pirating has really proven. Anybody can quote sales numbers and download statistics, but nobody is really studying how crack software/pirated music is affecting sales. People download pirated software to use as trials, and some people download software because they are 15 years old and have no money. How could you count that particular download as a "loss" if the boy wasn't going to purchase it in the first place? Just because someone downloads something, it does not mean it was worthy of a purchase. That's one concept most people don't understand.
From a consumer standpoint, copy protection is a hassle and it's not benefiting me as a consumer. The code dedicated to copy protection is wasted harddrive space on my computer. In the grand scheme of things, it's not really a big deal, but I'd still rather not have to deal with it. |
i agree to a certain point. But sales are much stronger now and it will result in better products. I've never been bothered by dongles. Except for UAD and powercore cards. |
|
|
| RichieV |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Who referred to the pirate bay? Cubase SX3 [which uses syncrosoft] is cracked. 4 is also but works only 25% of the time. |
it uses the syncrosoft design from like 7 years ago. And cubase 4 sounds similar to how often your brain seems to work. I think i will pass. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
But its really just a false victory, because everything else out there is cracked, usually within a day or two after its released. And cubase by far offers nothing so unique that it balances out the need for a dongle. |
Yes it does. The people who built it need to be able to pay for their food and houses. Without a doubt this synchrosoft protection costs 1000s of euros. But it weighs up to the increase of sales. Can't blame em. |
|
|
| RichieV |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Also software isn't a physical good. You do not loose any assets regardless to how copied it is. |
let me phrase this in a way you might grasp.
Software is like your crackwhore mom. Sure , no matter how many people might it without paying, she still has her twat but she definately has lost an asset and that is time. Make sense ? |
|
|
| cronodevir |
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
Yes it does. The people who built it need to be able to pay for their food and houses. Without a doubt this synchrosoft protection costs 1000s of euros. But it weighs up to the increase of sales. Can't blame em. |
Where is this record of increased sales do to the use of a dongle?
What I was saying is whether the person buys or downloads the software, the dongle is considered a downside. And in the eyes of a producer Cubase doesn't offer anything so amazing than anything else available [flstudio, logic, ableton, reason]that the dongle downside becomes irrelevant.
Another way to say it: What feature does cubase offer that would make someone who otherwise hates the dongle, not mind the dongle, and use Cubase, instead of another DAW that has no dongle? |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Where is this record of increased sales do to the use of a dongle?
|
Come on are you that stupid? What other viable reason is there to use a dongle?
You keep on amazing me! |
|
|
| cronodevir |
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
Come on are you that stupid? What other viable reason is there to use a dongle? |
A company that thinks its helping them? A company that knows nothing about copy-protection software?
EA Games used copy protection in Spore, it didn't help their sales. So how do you know a dongle helped Cubase sales? You don't.
Just because a company uses copy protection, doesn't automatically mean their sales will go up. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
And that's the exact reason EA stopped doing so and Steinberg doesn't.
k.thx.bye. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by Beatflux
You're making assumptions you can't prove, and that nobody against pirating has really proven. Anybody can quote sales numbers and download statistics, but nobody is really studying how crack software/pirated music is affecting sales. People download pirated software to use as trials, and some people download software because they are 15 years old and have no money. How could you count that particular download as a "loss" if the boy wasn't going to purchase it in the first place? Just because someone downloads something, it does not mean it was worthy of a purchase. That's one concept most people don't understand.
From a consumer standpoint, copy protection is a hassle and it's not benefiting me as a consumer. The code dedicated to copy protection is wasted harddrive space on my computer. In the grand scheme of things, it's not really a big deal, but I'd still rather not have to deal with it. |
The same could be said about music, we all like to "preview" stuff right ? well... people are downloading music and software illegally simply because they CAN and will always get away with it.
I do not believe there is a single doubt that Cubase is benefiting on their uncracked super protection.
Its a hassle yes, all copy protections are hassles, if you loose your dongle then you are ed, and need to buy the program again. |
|
|
| cronodevir |
Because they [Stienberg] still use it isn't proof that their sales are going up.
That is like saying because the movie industry still uses blur-ray copy prevention technology, that the blu-ray copy technology was successful. [Blu-Ray copy prevention failed miserably]
Starforce is still used by many companies, and its utterly horrible, its basically malware. Many companies still use it, and its incredibly easy to crack. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
That is like saying because the movie industry still uses blur-ray copy prevention technology, that the blu-ray copy technology was successful. [Blu-Ray copy prevention failed miserably]
|
Actually it did not fail, for movies yeah everything fails there, same with music.. you just cannot protect something that can be recorded.
But the fact that you cannot get Playstation 3 games cracked shows that Blu Ray protection is really good. |
|
|
|
|
