Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-f52.google.com ([209.85.215.52] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 5186414 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 21:34:17 +0200 Received: by mail-la0-f52.google.com with SMTP id ev20so792252lab.25 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 12:46:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=1kL52kMHh2OVHyEMp7mq3/TT3P/qoNy7AYKQGv16DVY=; b=XX22u/2+bzriZTS8E0boX7nDLBIrSTKHG4F7OPL/ky0XR6mSEdf/VjgL5aXJqkV2B6 GMH3EH+1ROeBUkGlyKK4ryyfGpZBCRNg1HM7tyMASAIPenG7qXkgpxXqQX7B+qWrCtj0 TrfnKeapN710KimzSE/i5eXT1xHDpaksV4EwMnYIxuHOiyBXE5y/6ergz6VNxrJaSQZW vwmrhE8MIWsKpNRDk1lb0f5A7gLVOZiRzT17tzxe/H18XM7fiaAnEkZAdz4Xg6QAvFDA Lyq2RARgoaUtqMPXzLARzUmCHVM7/0qhEIbWGGaD3GM1xeFpj921pjfrLBeLUSRC6NH8 kwzA== X-Received: by 10.112.158.225 with SMTP id wx1mr392881lbb.37.1377287191727; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 12:46:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.114.182.242 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 12:46:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jeff Krebs Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 15:46:11 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] USA and the emerging 'Software Piracy Gap'!! To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c34932d1131304e4a2a932 --001a11c34932d1131304e4a2a932 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Agreed with Jim, - As a developer we've taken as much action to protect the investment as possible - (dongles and licensing) There is nothing foolproof. Jim's comments are very true - we have the largest studios in the world not only stealing our years of development but turning a blind out to other studios that they vendor out to. It's a sick practice and as a developer (we've spoken to other companies and as a group considering releasing a "shame list". Unfortunately this may be the only way to embarrass the largest studios, broadcasters and post production facilities into becoming compliant. On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Jim Tierney wrote= : > >> but doesnt the responsibility to protect the software lie with the > developer?... If it is too hard to crack people will just give up and buy > it? Right? Maybe? **** > > ** ** > > No=85 it just becomes a bigger challenge and more props to the first one > that can do it.**** > > When I was at Atomic Power, we spent close to two months of engineering o= n > the copy protection. It was cracked within two weeks. By and large, copy > protection is a waste of engineering resources. You have to have somethin= g, > but there is nothing that is =91too hard to crack=92. And usually the rob= ust > systems become a pain for paying users=85 dongles anyone? **** > > >> I have to say that I think Adobe's method of business with creative > cloud is the best idea so far. Make the purchase price of your product mo= re > attainable at a longer stretch profit and more people will be inclined to > purchase.**** > > Given that they=92re giving away a year of CC to people that attend certa= in > conferences, I have doubts that this is currently working out great for > them. There are also a significant number of users that are REALLY hostil= e > to the idea, since for some users the CC is a significant price increase. > It is definitely not cheaper for people that only upgrade every three > versions. Pissing off your existing customers is a questionable strategy. > Long term it=92ll probably work out for them, but right now, who knows. *= *** > > For professional products, there are the folks that are willing to pay fo= r > the software and then there are folks that won=92t pay for it. There are = very > few that fall into the =91I=92m going to pirate this, but if it was cheap= er I=92d > pay for it=92 category. Most software companies do sales on a regular eno= ugh > basis that if price is your main concern, just wait a few months and you= =92ll > get a deal.**** > > As a software developer, it is disappointing when studios and people > making money with your software choose to steal it (or use outsourced lab= or > that they know is not paying for it). Particularly when these same folks > would be up in arms if anyone used some of their creative work without > their permission or paying for it. Karma can be a bitch though (or so I > hope).**** > > Anyways, all of us software developers greatly appreciate those of you wh= o > do pay. Hopefully we can continue supporting you guys doing amazing work.= * > *** > > ** ** > > Cheers,**** > > Jim**** > > --------------- **** > > Jim Tierney**** > > President**** > > Digital Anarchy**** > > Developers of Beauty Box Video, the leading skin retouching plugin**** > > http://www.digitalanarchy.com**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > --001a11c34932d1131304e4a2a932 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=A0Agreed =A0with Jim, =A0- As a developer we've taken= as much action to protect the investment as possible - (dongles and licens= ing) There is nothing foolproof. Jim's comments are very true - we have= the largest studios in the world not only stealing our years of developmen= t but turning a blind out to other studios that they vendor out to. =A0It&#= 39;s a sick practice and as a developer (we've spoken to other companie= s and as a group considering releasing a "shame list". =A0Unfortu= nately this may be the only way to embarrass the largest studios, broadcast= ers and post production facilities into becoming compliant. =A0




On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Jim Tierney <jim@d= igitalanarchy.com> wrote:

>> but doesnt the responsibility to protect the software=A0lie with the dev= eloper?... If it is too hard to crack people will just give up and buy it? = Right? Maybe?=A0

=A0<= /p>

No=85 it just becomes a bigger challenge and more props to the = first one that can do it.

When I was at Atomic Power, we spent close to two months of engineeri= ng on the copy protection. It was cracked within two weeks. By and large, c= opy protection is a waste of engineering resources. You have to have someth= ing, but there is nothing that is =91too hard to crack=92. And usually the = robust systems become a pain for paying users=85 dongles anyone? =

>> I have to say that I think Adobe= 9;s method of business with creative cloud is the best idea so far. Make th= e purchase price of your product more attainable at a longer stretch profit= and more people will be inclined to purchase.

Given that they=92re giving away a year of CC to people that at= tend certain conferences, I have doubts that this is currently working out = great for them. There are also a significant number of users that are REALL= Y hostile to the idea, since for some users the CC is a significant price i= ncrease. It is definitely not cheaper for people that only upgrade every th= ree versions. Pissing off your existing customers is a questionable strateg= y. Long term it=92ll probably work out for them, but right now, who knows. =

For professional products, there are the folks that are willing to pa= y for the software and then there are folks that won=92t pay for it. There = are very few that fall into the =91I=92m going to pirate this, but if it wa= s cheaper I=92d pay for it=92 category. Most software companies do sales on= a regular enough basis that if price is your main concern, just wait a few= months and you=92ll get a deal.

As a software developer, it is disappointing when studios and people = making money with your software choose to steal it (or use outsourced labor= that they know is not paying for it). Particularly when these same folks w= ould be up in arms if anyone used some of their creative work without their= permission or paying for it. Karma can be a bitch though (or so I hope).

Anyways, all of us software developers greatly appreciate those of yo= u who do pay. Hopefully we can continue supporting you guys doing amazing w= ork.

=A0<= /p>

Cheers,<= /span>

Jim<= /p>

---------------=A0 =

Jim Tierney=

President

Digital Anarchy=

Developers= of Beauty Box Video, the leading skin retouching plugin

http://ww= w.digitalanarchy.com

=A0

=A0


--001a11c34932d1131304e4a2a932--