-   International Music Software Trade Association Q+A (
-   -   Anti-Piracy tools impact on legit users (

NeoVXR 1st June 2009 09:07 AM

actually I believe we have an overproduction of software and music, because we can never consume what is already there.
deflation is natural in this case.

the poor quality of _some_ of that stuff does not mitigate the fact..

soulata 1st June 2009 01:33 PM


Originally Posted by Nuno_F (Post 4234731)
Please stop spreading lies. It has worked. It is working. Most of the syncrosoft protected apps are not available on the net for free. In fact, all but one. It may be convenient for your argument to say that it doesn´t work, but its a lie.

You'd understand if you'd read further (this quote was really out of context).

Synchrosoft actually prevents people from stealing Cubase, that is (as far as I know) true - although someone on this forum says it's cracked, I don't know.

I only said it's a hassle when it stops working, in that case it's a PITA for the LEGIT user.

As I said before, congrats to Steinberg on Cubase 5, I really want you to sell enough to keep on doing what you're doing even if it takes a dongle to make it but make it easier for the legit customer in times when the key stops responding. It can mean a massive downtime for some, not to mention what happens when you keep products from different vendors on the broken key.



soulata 1st June 2009 02:19 PM


Originally Posted by Sid Viscous (Post 4234955)
The sooner software companies stop making the stupid hardware comparison the better off they'll be, and only music creation software companies make it AFAIK.

Yep, it's mostly music related software makers. Microsoft surely doesn't go all the way to compare excell to abacus and a pile of paper...


Originally Posted by Sid Viscous (Post 4234955)
I can't help but notice that you failed to mention the development costs of the keyboard, which are most likely way higher than the software. It also takes more employees and actual factories to make the keyboard. It also can't exist in more than one place at one time. With hardware (even computer hardware) you can take it anywhere you want. You can lend it, rent it, and sell it.

Well, developement costs could be equal, but there's a fixed cost per keyboard (+ cost of distribution...) that software companies just don't want to hear while comparing themselves to hw counterparts.


Originally Posted by Sid Viscous (Post 4234955)
The problem is that software companies want to pick and choose when it wants "hardware" and software rights. Take Cakewalk for example. Their EULA requires very hardware like rights (only one computer install at a time), but it says you can't sell or transfer it. How many pieces of hardware can you not sell, rent or transfer? Companies make hardware every day that doesn't ever get close to making money and they have to make thousands of actual units and ship them to stores. Software companies don't have these issues.
Then, also like Cakewalk, you have the developer saying that although the EULA says that, you can really install it on more than one computer you own as long as you only use one copy at a time. If the developer picks and chooses what rules to enforce, are there really any rules?

I asked around and heard it from lawyers - software EULAs are mostly BS and not valid for one reason on another in various parts of EU and would not stand action in courts.

The thing is, compared to hw, you never really own a pice of sw, therefore we shouldn't give the same rights to both automatically.


IMSTA 1st June 2009 03:59 PM


Originally Posted by Sid Viscous (Post 4233940)
I think this post shows the problem.
1. Hardware is hardware. Software isn't. You can try to convince people otherwise if you want, but it just makes you look bad.
2. Ever hear of ADATS? Tons of people had them and somehow they were able to make records with them.

Thank you for proving my point.

Yes, some people could afford ADATs, but when was the last time you plugged your mic directly to ADATs?

And you are telling me that you mix all your songs dry with no effects? And where is the EQ section, compressors, etc on the ADATs?

That is right; you need a mixing board, a patch bay, and thousands of dollars of outboard gear to do that. Not to mention all the editing features and all the creative things that you can do with software but not with ADATs?

Additionally, I guess your music is made up of only 8 tracks (or 7 if you use one for time code). I don’t know but even the simplest song I ever recorded had at least 20 tracks.

Again I ask you, how many people could afford even 1 ADAT (let alone 2 or more), a good quality mixing board, and a whole bunch of outboard gear to accomplish what could be done with software at a fraction of the cost? And how would they fit all that in their bedrooms? : )

No matter how many excuses you try to come up with, you cannot win this argument my friend.

Last, no one is saying that software is hardware; we just say that it has to be treated with the same respect. Again, a product is a product, no matter what form it takes.


soulata 1st June 2009 09:25 PM


We've come to the point where IMSTA posts make it and the ones who politely try to shed a different light on it do not.

Noone's condoning piracy here, but since when aren't we allowed to even question what's been said?


(Its a moderated posts forum! - GS Admin)

24-96 Mastering 1st June 2009 09:43 PM


Originally Posted by chrisso (Post 4235859)
Uuuurgh, this is going the same way as much of the discussion in the music piracy threads on the business forum.
People seem to want to blame the software producers for all ills, and the crackers nary get a mention.

As one would expect in a thread called "Anti-Piracy tools impact on legit users"... most people are talking about the impact anti-piracy measures have on them. Where is the surprise?

If you rather want to talk about piracy itself(or the impact thereof), I suggest:


I'm coming to the conclusion that everyone who works hard to produce a product for consumers (music, music software) should just stop.
I think your conclusion is counter productive.


The threshold for survival is just being set too low by consumers - software should be less protected and therefore roll with the piracy punches. Software should be free or very, very cheap and maintained by these small producers for many years.
That would be great, thanks.

But seriously, if that was really the case, then there'd be no market in music software and then, business wouldn't be possible. But as far as I can see, it is. And those in it (well, the few that I know) are making a decent living. I'm sure that's not true for everyone, some will be struggling, but that's the same for all industries. The music production "business" itself (overall) is probably be one of the most instable and least gain driven, lowest yield industry there is.

Back to this thread: This is just dialog between users and manufacturers, or rather an organization that represents them. Dialog is good. And so what if some vent? If I have grief with a product, I want the manufacturer to know. Whether it's a bug or an anti-piracy feature doesn't make a difference to me. Blame is irrelevant. I may be understanding and sympathetic as to why such measures are necessary, but I still need a product that works. Full stop. And I'm quite sure the manufacturer wants it to work too (otherwise my custom will be lost), so I'd assume they are (to an extent) actually interested in the customers' grief.