Slate VCC will be iLok2

[darthjujuu]

i don't see how that's a rude message, it's totally true o_0 ... a bummer, for sure, but certainly not rude... i mean they ARE buyin everyone free new iLoks, right??

Again, look at drumagog, i'm looking on demonoid right now and it's completes (number of people whom downloaded it entirely) is well over 40,000. that's over a million dollars in revenue for wavemachinelabs, had those all been legit purchases of drumagog instead. OBVIOUSLY most of those kids would not have purchased it anyway, but even 10% of those people would've equated to $100,000 that wavemachinelabs is missing out on. and that's JUST demonoid, who knows how many times it's been snatched off other p2p sites, rapidshares, etc.

 

[BLUElightCory]

For the record, Slate is not the first company to do this - McDSP has been delaying the release of their updated plugs and the 6030 compressor for MONTHS specifically to wait for the updated copy-protection measures to take hold.

The buck has to stop somewhere - the spread of piracy has already gutted the music industry, and the software industry isn't far behind. Large companies like Microsoft may be able to absorb the cost of piracy (but don't let that make you think that their average employees aren't taking a hit) but smaller companies like Slate (and many other plug-in makers) could easily be broken by widespread pirating of their plugs. It's a business measure that they have to take; the risk of leaving their software so exposed to pirates is too much.

People shouldn't be blaming the companies for trying to protect themselves, they should be blaming the people who are supporting piracy. There is simply no justification for doing it.

 

[SickBoy]

With all this "pirates take away our bread" can't help but wonder - what are Cockos guys living from?!
I mean, Reaper is totally unprotected and just has a nag screen until licensed.

Yet, I've heard that there are cracked versions circling around - ain't that funny?

 

[BLUElightCory]

With all this "pirates take away our bread" can't help but wonder - what are Cockos guys living from?!
I mean, Reaper is totally unprotected and just has a nag screen until licensed.

Yet, I've heard that there are cracked versions circling around - ain't that funny?

This is a common but flawed argument - The fact that the company hasn't gone under doesn't mean that it hasn't been negatively affected by piracy. If ONE person steals software, the company has lost income. That income pays not only for the company's overhead costs but also for the lives (bills, groceries, mortgage, gas, whatever) of the people that work there. It ultimately comes down to a lack of respect for the time and effort that people put into creating music/film/software/whatever.

Would you be okay with it if your employer didn't completely pay you for all of the time you worked? Simply because they felt entitled to your time and because they paid you enough to survive (but not the full amount you were entitled to)?

If the people who aren't paying for Reaper actually paid for it, the Cockos guys would have more resources, the ability to hire more employees to improve their product, or even (imagine this) simply more money to reward them for their efforts in providing people like us great software (which many of us even make our OWN money from).

Ultimately it should be left up to the creator of the product - if they want people to have it for free, it's up to them - the Cockos guys let people use their software for free and that's their prerogative. But if the product is created with the intention of people paying for it, people should have to pay for it (or make the choice of going with an alternative).

 

[darthjujuu]

it almost seems that cocko's ultimate business philosophy with reaper is just guilting their users into eventually paying the measly 60 bucks they're asking. and since they give it away virtually for free to begin with, it reaches many more potentially honest (money spending) end-users and gives them the opportunity to "fall in love" with it, so to speak. it's also rather notorious for being more or less a give-away, and notoriety is marketing in itself.

 

[AdamWathan]

This is a common but flawed argument - The fact that the company hasn't gone under doesn't mean that it hasn't been negatively affected by piracy. If ONE person steals software, the company has lost income.

This isn't true. Someone pirating software doesn't equate to lost income unless that person was going to buy it if they couldn't find it online. I would bet that the amount of "would-be buyers that pirate because they can find it" is less than 5% of the people who download something... It's the same with music, very few of the people who download the new 50 Cent album would've bought it at the CD store. If they couldn't find it online they would've just gone on living without it and kept listening to the radio.



Cockos is a bad example to use in this case though... Do a Wikipedia search for Justin Frankel and read up a bit about his past and you'll understand why money is really not a huge factor in Reaper's development It's not really fair to say, "How are Cockos still alive with their business model?" when as a company it really doesn't need to churn a profit.

 

[SickBoy]

This is a common but flawed argument - The fact that the company hasn't gone under doesn't mean that it hasn't been negatively affected by piracy. If ONE person steals software, the company has lost income. That income pays not only for the company's overhead costs but also for the lives (bills, groceries, mortgage, gas, whatever) of the people that work there. It ultimately comes down to a lack of respect for the time and effort that people put into creating music/film/software/whatever.

<cut>

You've missed the point by telling me all the things I'm aware of anyway
I was just wondering how's Cockos' business doing with their unusual "no anti-piracy module" philosophy...

 

[AdamWathan]

Anyways I'll say it again, my posts here have been sort of misdirected towards Slate Digital when in general it's just how I feel about copy protection overall.

They are doing a very noble thing by approaching it this way. As much as the whole concept of copy protection does make me as a user feel like I'm being treated as a potential criminal, they are at least being really good about it by saying, "Listen, as much as we would love to blindly trust that we have a loyal and honest customer base, it's a scary risk to take. So instead, we are upgrading to the iLok 2 protection scheme, but will eat every dime it costs to get you guys on board with it because you are honest customers who have bought our stuff, so if we're the ones deciding to up the protection scheme, we're the ones who are going to pay the price for it, not you guys."

So good on 'em.

 

[AdamWathan]

With all this "pirates take away our bread" can't help but wonder - what are Cockos guys living from?!
I mean, Reaper is totally unprotected and just has a nag screen until licensed.

Yet, I've heard that there are cracked versions circling around - ain't that funny?

Here's a little tidbit about when the developer of Reaper sold his previous company to AOL

In June 1999 AOL simultaneously acquired Nullsoft and Spinner.com in a combined purchase worth approximately $400 million. [1] In a July 21, 1999 SEC S-3 filing by AOL, the transaction was recorded as a payment of 2,863,053 shares of AOL common stock to the 54 stockholders in the two companies being acquired. On July 20, 1999, the last reported sale price for AOL common stock was $113.1875 per share. Frankel's stake of 522,661 shares in the acquisition was worth approximately $59 million.

 

[darthjujuu]

yowza o_o! atleast he's staying productive instead of just doing lines of blow off of expensive hookers all day.

 

[Jind]

Anyways I'll say it again, my posts here have been sort of misdirected towards Slate Digital when in general it's just how I feel about copy protection overall.

They are doing a very noble thing by approaching it this way. As much as the whole concept of copy protection does make me as a user feel like I'm being treated as a potential criminal, they are at least being really good about it by saying, "Listen, as much as we would love to blindly trust that we have a loyal and honest customer base, it's a scary risk to take. So instead, we are upgrading to the iLok 2 protection scheme, but will eat every dime it costs to get you guys on board with it because you are honest customers who have bought our stuff, so if we're the ones deciding to up the protection scheme, we're the ones who are going to pay the price for it, not you guys."

So good on 'em.

I'll be honest - I think it's an odd statement to make that "copy protection makes me feel like a potential criminal", does auto insurance make you feel like a potential accident, or flour make you feel like a potential baker (sorry that was just being smarmy)? Does a company have the right to protect it's intellectual property? Do they have the right to gain profit from it? If you think either of those thoughts then you should not feel like a potential criminal, you should feel like the honest user of a product owned by a company afraid of those criminals - it's not the companies fault that there are "potential criminals" out there, it's the criminals fault. If you owned a store would you have security cameras? Would you do background checks on your employees? If so are you treating your customers and workers as "potential thieves" or are you just taking measures to secure your work environment from theft.

It's all a matter of perspective and while you are certainly fine to "fell like a potential criminal", I'd rather feel like a customer using a product or a guy buying flour (damnit - ok I am baking a cake)

 

[BLUElightCory]

This isn't true. Someone pirating software doesn't equate to lost income unless that person was going to buy it if they couldn't find it online. I would bet that the amount of "would-be buyers that pirate because they can find it" is less than 5% of the people who download something.

I understand your point; maybe I should have used the term "potential" income - it doesn't matter if the end user says they were going to buy it or not - If they've pirated it and are using it, that makes them an unpaid user - it doesn't make it okay just because they "didn't want to buy it in the first place". I do see your point about this type of person (one who theoretically would have NEVER purchased the software or helped redistribute it) not affecting the company.

What I'm saying is this: If the person wants to use the software, that makes them a potential buyer, and if they acquire it and use it but don't pay for it, it amounts to lost (potential) income for the company. If the person uses the software regularly, then it's essentially lost income for the company (because the person is now acting as a paid user, using the software as a paid user would, without actually having paid). I'd be willing to bet that the amount of people who pirate expensive software first, and then go on to legitimately pay for it, is minuscule.

I realize that some people pirate software that they cannot pay out of pocket for, but that doesn't remove them from the "potential buyer" category just because they can't pay for it. That's what working and saving money are for: to pay for the things we want and need. If someone is using the software, they should pay for it, just as if it is a piece of hardware - this goes triple for those of us who are making money from using the software.

I realize that arguing with piracy-supporters is essentially an exercise in futility, so perhaps I shouldn't even bother, but I guess I must just be some kind of masochist or something because I continue to speak up about it (Adam, I'm not saying you're a piracy supporter - I've seen your contributions to this community, I just meant in general).

 

[AdamWathan]

I'll be honest - I think it's an odd statement to make that "copy protection makes me feel like a potential criminal", does auto insurance make you feel like a potential accident, or flour make you feel like a potential baker (sorry that was just being smarmy)? Does a company have the right to protect it's intellectual property? Do they have the right to gain profit from it? If you think either of those thoughts then you should not feel like a potential criminal, you should feel like the honest user of a product owned by a company afraid of those criminals - it's not the companies fault that there are "potential criminals" out there, it's the criminals fault. If you owned a store would you have security cameras? Would you do background checks on your employees? If so are you treating your customers and workers as "potential thieves" or are you just taking measures to secure your work environment from theft.

It's all a matter of perspective and while you are certainly fine to "fell like a potential criminal", I'd rather feel like a customer using a product or a guy buying flour (damnit - ok I am baking a cake)

Yeah, this is fair... You're right it's just a matter of perspective. If I was a company selling plugins and I needed that income to survive, I would probably take reasonable measures to protect my product against piracy as well. It still is a bummer that developers have to treat every customer as a would-be pirate to protect their income though, just a shitty world we live in in that regard I guess.

Slightly different topic now but look at someone like Steve Massey. That guy sells his plugins for an incredibly reasonable price, using no more protection than a simple serial number he emails to you, and he has been extremely successful and not a single product of his has ever been pirated. Massey plugins are arguably some of the most popular plugins in the entire world, I would be surprised if more than 1 out of every 10 Pro Tools studios didn't have any Massey plugins. So sheer volume of sales can't be the reason why a more "corporate" plugin company can't use his style of protection scheme. I wish I knew more about it to be honest, I've always been curious as to how his stuff could be so pirate-proof where someone using iLok protection isn't safe at all.

 

[drew_drummer]

Thread needs livening up....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psKsXBqbsoE

 

[Melodeath]

I agree a lot with what Adam has said, tbh.

I also think that Slate sending free iLoks to everyone is awesome and definitely the most noble option for them. I respect that. I was, however, pissed to see FG-X and Trigger updates will cost money. I guess I'll have to see how that works out when the time comes.

I was also a little confused by the email, as I fail to see how Slate Digital is claiming that one of their plug-ins being pirated has hurt them significantly. How would they know that? They would have to know that those who pirated it would have bought it if they couldn't pirate it. This is what leads me to agree with Adam's point, in that the email is sort of calling all the customers would-be pirates. I think rather than truly knowing that piracy has already hurt them, Slate is actually just updating the copy protection for VCC to prevent lost sales on this future plug-in (which makes sense, and I do think it will help). In other words, I think the justification given in the email for making VCC iLok2-only is not the real reason. This is a protective measure against potential losses, rather than a "we've seen the damage, and are now trying to fix it." I could easily be wrong, this is just my opinion and impression. I feel like most people who were truly considering buying a Slate plug-in would have already done so, so anyone using the pirated version wasn't going to buy anyway. However, with VCC, it's a new plug-in that hasn't even come out of beta yet, so I feel it's different and more likely to have "lost sales" due to availability of a cracked version.
But in general, I think a lot of piracy is not actually "lost sales."

And for reference, I own every Slate software product. SSD Platinum 3.5, Trigger Platinum, FG-X, VCC Beta

 

[Slate]

Hello guys.

I know its boring to accept things for what they are, and more fun to imagine secret hidden agendas.. But it's just not true.

Here's the reality:
We have two plugins out. Both of them cost a large sum of money to develop. They were selling very well. Then one day, one of them was cracked. The sales of that plugin immediately went way down. If that plugin was cracked when it first was released, assuming it would have sold as low as what it has been since getting cracked, it would not be a profiteable plugin.. and then i can't pay my developers, sales staff, support staff, office space rent, accountants, shipping clerks.. Running a company is expensive, and the obvious idea is to make more money then you spend. Not gonna happen if your products are getting pirated.

So using that as a model, its pretty easy to conclude that if we don't protect future plugins from piracy, then we won't be able to make enough money to exist as a software company.. especially since the customer base of this industry is TINY.

I think that the policy I've created is fair and revolves around our core business model, which is, customers come first.

 

[Melodeath]

I didn't intend any disrespect or imply any conspiracy theory. I was simply stating my impression and said I could easily be wrong.

As you said, that's pretty good evidence then that the piracy has hurt a plug-in that has already been out. That definitely sucks, and I have to admit that I am surprised, because it implies that a huge portion of people on the cusp of buying it were habitually/actively scanning for a cracked copy. That's pretty crazy. I typically imagine piracy as being people checking out stuff they can't afford/weren't going to buy anyway, as opposed to people deciding they want to get something, and then searching for a crack before spending the money.

P.S. Slate, not to add any more stress (haha), but make a tape machine emulation plug-in after VCC is finalized. Please. Maybe a Studer. I bet that would sell like hot-cakes. Or is FG-Q still in the works?

 

[006]

The only problem I have with this whole deal is that PPC Mac users are being subjected to the absolute shit end of the stick here. They will be forced to pay $1300+ for an Intel Mac just to use the new plug-ins - and, even worse, now updates to plug-ins they already own. PPC may be old, but it can still run perfectly fine. There are tons of major studios and little guys still running PPC. iLok2 will eventually be cracked just like the original iLok was. All PACE, and plug-in developers going along with them, are doing is wrapping a rag around a leaky pipe and hurting PPC customers in the process, although I am not going to say I have a bright idea on how to stop pirating. I demo'ed FG-X and VCC, FG-X I have no intention of getting as it just didn't do much for me, VCC is cool but now I have no interest because of this iLok2 bullshit, and definitely won't be updating TRIGGER - awesome. Truthfully, though, this is not PACE or Slate's fault in the slightest, anybody bitching, myself included, have nobody to blame but pirates. I totally understand why this is happening, it's just really fucked up.

 

[Lasse Lammert]

The only problem I have with this whole deal is that PPC Mac users are being subjected to the absolute shit end of the stick here. They will be forced to pay $1300+ for an Intel Mac just to use the new plug-ins - and, even worse, now updates to plug-ins they already own. PPC may be old, but it can still run perfectly fine. There are tons of major studios and little guys still running PPC. iLok2 will eventually be cracked just like the original iLok was. All PACE, and plug-in developers going along with them, are doing is wrapping a rag around a leaky pipe and hurting PPC customers in the process, although I am not going to say I have a bright idea on how to stop pirating. I demo'ed FG-X and VCC, FG-X I have no intention of getting as it just didn't do much for me, VCC is cool but now I have no interest because of this iLok2 bullshit, and definitely won't be updating TRIGGER - awesome. Truthfully, though, this is not PACE or Slate's fault in the slightest, anybody bitching, myself included, have nobody to blame but pirates. I totally understand why this is happening, it's just really fucked up.

Perfect post!

 

[drew_drummer]

I think PPC users are going to have to spend some cash eventually. Pretty much all plugin and host developers are slowly phasing out their PPC support.