IMO there's 2 problems in all these discussions about the legality of things
and whatever:
- Honesty/fairness of users (or the lack of such), and as a result of this:
- Developers harming legit users with totally bloated copy protection
schemes.
I am by no means saying that this should be a general law or whatever - and
most likely the various license agreements are saying something completely
different too, but here's how I see it:
When I'm buying an instrument, I will be able to do with it whatever I want.
I will be able to take it with me, borrow it out, modify it, whatever.
Now, when I'm buying a software instrument, things are getting more
complicated allready. I won't be able to borrow it out for instance - the
license agreement won't allow me to (let alone that things such as C&R
protection schemes will make it technically impossible too).
Yes, I can clearly see the moral and legal background behind this: In case
license agreements would say something else and in case things were freely
transferable, (unhonest) people would just copy instruments and samples to
their likings (which is exactly what happened with, say, AKAI CDs).
OK, fine with me, developers are concerned about loss of sales due to copied
versions of their work - I can perfectly understand that.
Still, from a user point of view, it's harming me, sometimes even majorly.
Let's assume I used, say, something like Stylus (or any other C&R protected
library + player instrument, there's just tons of them these days) on a song
that I preproduced in my home studio. Now I want to take things with me to
some larger studio to finish the production. The only way this can be done
would be to either bounce all tracks down (which means I won't be able to
alter them later on) or to carry my home computer with me. The latter will
defenitely result in a LOT of problems, carrying things around (that are not
made for that purpose) being the smallest of the problems. I would have to
connect things and sync it up with the larger studio's equipment - we all
know what a pain this could be.
Had I done this with a hardware instrument instead, all these problems would
almost be non-existant. I would just connect a MIDI cable and plug the audio
outs in. Let alone hardware instruments usually are made to be carried
around as well.
As said, I DO see the difference between *buying* some hardware and
*licensing* software - but, from a user point of view, it doesn't make much
of a difference. Buying a software instrument (or a library) for me is just
the same as buying a new guitar - seen from the impact it has on my
instrument arsenal. I mean, it's just a new instrument.
Yes, I also know that companies like to make sure only ONE person is using a
licensed product at a time - this is pretty easy with hardware, almost
impossible with unprotected software, because of a high chance users would
be illoyal and simply spread copied things around.
Still, it DOES harm me as a legit user.
Another example: Had I purchased Komplete 2, say, 2-3 years ago (well, it
didn't exist back then, but anyways...), I think I would have experienced
more down- than uptime, because back then I was re-configuring computers on
an almost weekly base (for various reasons, one of them being that this
is/was part of my job). Impossible to get all that C&R protected stuff
licensed as often/quickly.
I could still use my guitars instantly - no computer asking for a new
authorisation. Almost the same is true for Logic/Cubase, I just had to plug
in the appropriate dongles.
Bottomline: While I DO understand companies in a way, all their lincense
agreements and copyright schemes are doing is harming ME (or any other legit
user for that matter) - the most obscene thing being that, once hacked
versions are released, crack users are harmed WAY less as they can simply
copy/install things freely.
I wouldn't happen to know about any satisfying solution either, but
personally I'm really getting p****d about the current state of things
occasionally.
Anyways, enough of those ramblings, happy new year to you all,
- Sascha
