Return-Path: Received: from eu1sys200aog107.obsmtp.com ([207.126.144.123] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with SMTP id 5186426 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 21:55:46 +0200 Received: from mail-qa0-f54.google.com ([209.85.216.54]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob107.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKUhfBIS/Y1stgjFzuyTDSEqogmt2V/Vtz@postini.com; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 20:08:01 UTC Received: by mail-qa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id bv4so561630qab.6 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:08:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:references:from:content-type:in-reply-to :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=4TPbZf6LI8KWiXPQkEQF+gPk7M478TkqXC/Gt0Sxq9Q=; b=nPJ70x6Kw5mt8OeloxzB9o9AUDcRv1q1Pj01ObRPY3aEk3A+WaslGB7R5sDRfUWxLF jV9Cav1zPmXbiizAh/mD3HR2KsX92c59qVzTEK8mb3p+70qCiV3uNu3S4X+iCKMaUGqE O+tjtlwmiRfrALlLsAFbvO+ZxBBXEij+RHUv8pP5tkoo6qyUsIblorU+GSk/TmPlD/jG lBghafp+xkfAM8uei411/uUeAsSzsompMbbJYRSdVbaFVWDzN/TiE3RCROM2HEESioGm 9L6qA7epHzMNTZ7V3GlfdnwP5fyj6giFJ2JQdFMPGH+cLJTkYAwWZk9cVqOH2KyWgq3/ gZ1A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnxMnNsls09G+f3LMrLVOHUN2RKNHAjVeO6SPGdnk+THSQN7D7jHoe4M7FyvP0h+fLtXwX8NkZ+LZ5TqO8EWNzJ6Apb8xtXIMtRUxTRH/bRgFyc9MHoKT1zvbvvbk+yostnYmdWhOzeFl445zM1WhvWM3ytUfv9wk8xSy1f3I1wUApUBGI= X-Received: by 10.224.20.136 with SMTP id f8mr806840qab.73.1377288481061; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:08:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.224.20.136 with SMTP id f8mr806831qab.73.1377288480950; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.0.14] (cpe-024-163-096-160.nc.res.rr.com. [24.163.96.160]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w8sm2058024qej.3.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:07:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [AE] USA and the emerging 'Software Piracy Gap'!! References: From: Ross Shain Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-EF21109D-E4DD-4E77-9D5F-ED942D00022C X-Mailer: iPad Mail (10A523) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <5DAAD981-9E90-417B-9502-84B26272F839@imagineersystems.com> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 16:07:56 -0400 To: After Effects Mail List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) --Apple-Mail-EF21109D-E4DD-4E77-9D5F-ED942D00022C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I fully support Jeff Kreb's email. Software piracy really should be brought i= nto the equation when discussing all the recent VFX solidarity, outsourcing a= nd union issues. It is surprising that the issue is not raised when we hear t= alk about shrinking budgets and VFX companies going under.=20 This is even relevant for smaller markets not related to Hollywood or featur= e film effects... If you work anywhere in VFX, animation and post, you are p= robably competing with sites that do not pay for all their software tools.=20= Putting aside the software prices or the technical part of the conversation,= the real point to emphasize is responsibility. In my opinion this does not f= ully lie with sfw developers, but with the entire post-production industry. A= rtists and users of software can simply help show support by reporting softw= are piracy and abuse to the companies that create the products. If you know o= f facilities or even freelancers that use pirated software on paying jobs, p= lease report them. Every little bit helps.=20 -Ross Sent from my iPad On Aug 23, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Steve Oakley wrote: > adobe'se activation was cracked rather easily for CS5-6. generally speaki= ng copy protection only inconveniences the legit users since users of cracke= d versions have bypassed it. at one point, I had $25K worth of USB dongles o= n my keychain. not fun to think of loosing that. those can be cracked too. o= n the extreme, there was a serial number generator for combustion 3 floating= around back in the day. so in the end its generally a waste of resources...= user education that you should pay for what use. >=20 > oh, and netlfix ? there are a lot of mov's they don't have which is a dri= ving force in people simply wanting something and getting it anyway they can= 't he. if the only place a film you want to see is torrented.... perhaps the= studios should just get better at licensing more of their content so its av= ailable. better to make something rather than nothing. >=20 > S >=20 > On Aug 23, 2013, at 1:50 PM, Jim Tierney wrote: >=20 >> >> but doesnt the responsibility to protect the software lie with the dev= eloper?... If it is too hard to crack people will just give up and buy it? R= ight? Maybe?=20 >> =20 >> No=E2=80=A6 it just becomes a bigger challenge and more props to the firs= t one that can do it. >>=20 >> 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 p= rotection is a waste of engineering resources. You have to have something, b= ut there is nothing that is =E2=80=98too hard to crack=E2=80=99. And usually= the robust systems become a pain for paying users=E2=80=A6 dongles anyone? >>=20 >> >> I have to say that I think Adobe's method of business with creative cl= oud is the best idea so far. Make the purchase price of your product more at= tainable at a longer stretch profit and more people will be inclined to purc= hase. >>=20 >> Given that they=E2=80=99re giving away a year of CC to people that attend= certain conferences, I have doubts that this is currently working out great= for them. There are also a significant number of users that are REALLY host= ile 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 vers= ions. Pissing off your existing customers is a questionable strategy. Long t= erm it=E2=80=99ll probably work out for them, but right now, who knows. >>=20 >> For professional products, there are the folks that are willing to pay fo= r the software and then there are folks that won=E2=80=99t pay for it. There= are very few that fall into the =E2=80=98I=E2=80=99m going to pirate this, b= ut if it was cheaper I=E2=80=99d pay for it=E2=80=99 category. Most software= companies do sales on a regular enough basis that if price is your main con= cern, just wait a few months and you=E2=80=99ll get a deal. >>=20 >> As a software developer, it is disappointing when studios and people maki= ng 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 would b= e up in arms if anyone used some of their creative work without their permis= sion or paying for it. Karma can be a bitch though (or so I hope). >>=20 >> 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. >>=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-EF21109D-E4DD-4E77-9D5F-ED942D00022C Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I fully support Jeff Kreb's email. Sof= tware piracy really should be brought into the equation when discussing all t= he recent VFX solidarity, outsourcing and union issues. It is surprising tha= t the issue is not raised when we hear talk about shrinking budgets and= VFX companies going under. 

This is even rele= vant for smaller markets not related to Hollywood or feature film effects...= If you work anywhere in VFX, animation and post, you are probably competing= with sites that do not pay for all their software tools. 
Putting aside the software prices or the technical part of the c= onversation, the real point to emphasize is responsibility. In my opinion th= is does not fully lie with sfw developers, but with the entire post-producti= on industry. Artists and users of software can simply help show support by r= eporting software piracy and abuse to the companies that create the products= . If you know of facilities or even freelancers that use pirated softwa= re on paying jobs, please report them. Every little bit helps. 

-Ross

Sent from my iPad

On Aug 23, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Steve Oakley <steveo@practicali.com> wrote:

adobe'se  activatio= n was cracked rather easily for CS5-6. generally speaking copy protection on= ly inconveniences the legit users since users of cracked versions have bypas= sed it. at one point, I had $25K worth of USB dongles on my keychain. not fu= n to think of loosing that. those can be cracked too. on the extreme, there w= as a serial number generator for combustion 3 floating around back in the da= y. so in the end its generally a waste of resources... user education that y= ou should pay for what use.

 oh, and netlfix ? there= are a lot of mov's they don't have which is a driving force in people simpl= y wanting something and getting it anyway they can't he. if the only place a= film you want to see is torrented.... perhaps the studios should just get b= etter at licensing more of their content so its available. better to make so= mething rather than nothing.

S

On= Aug 23, 2013, at 1:50 PM, Jim Tierney <jim@digitalanarchy.com> wrote:

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

No=E2=80=A6 it just becomes a big= ger challenge and more props to the first one that can do it.

When I was at At= omic Power, we spent close to two months of engineering on the copy protecti= on. It was cracked within two weeks. By and large, copy protection is a wast= e of engineering resources. You have to have something, but there is nothing= that is =E2=80=98too hard to crack=E2=80=99. And usually the robust systems= become a pain for paying users=E2=80=A6 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 p= urchase price of your product more attainable at a longer stretch profit and= more people will be inclined to purchase.

Given that they=E2=80= =99re giving away a year of CC to people that attend certain conferences, I h= ave doubts that this is currently working out great for them. There are also= a significant number of users that are REALLY hostile to the idea, since fo= r some users the CC is a significant price increase. It is definitely not ch= eaper for people that only upgrade every three versions. Pissing off your ex= isting customers is a questionable strategy. Long term it=E2=80=99ll probabl= y work out for them, but right now, who knows.

For professional products, there= are the folks that are willing to pay for the software and then there are f= olks that won=E2=80=99t pay for it. There are very few that fall into the =E2= =80=98I=E2=80=99m going to pirate this, but if it was cheaper I=E2=80=99d pa= y for it=E2=80=99 category. Most software companies do sales on a regular en= ough basis that if price is your main concern, just wait a few months and yo= u=E2=80=99ll get a deal.

As a software developer, it is disappointing when stud= ios and people making money with your software choose to steal it (or use ou= tsourced labor 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 w= ithout 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 wo= rk.


= --Apple-Mail-EF21109D-E4DD-4E77-9D5F-ED942D00022C--