QL56: Nick, About the Copy Protection

[Deep White]

Nick,

Before saying anything, I want you to know that this is one of the greatest sample library I\'ve ever had. I have a POD and also the ReValver DXi (full version) plug-in, and both of them make the QL56 sample as real as can be. Thank you for making this library.

Furthermore, I hate pirate copies as much as you do. Being a song writer, it breaks my heart everytime I see those cheap copies sold along the street. So I\'m not here to tell you you shouldn\'t use any copy protection.

But, is there no other way?

I just received and installed the library, so I don\'t know yet how long the system will ask me for the original disc for verifacation, but that can be bothering sometime, especially if the system stops and asks you for the disc during the middle of the 2-track to DAT procedure.

Also, I always store my discs (samples, programs, backups, etc.) in an electric closet that keeps them away from humidity (I\'m not a native English speaker so I don\'t know its name, but I\'m sure you know what I\'m talking about). Opening it from time to time is not good. And I can\'t imagine if from now on every sample library producer add this to their work - we\'ll be spending more time finding the discs than doing musical arrangement.

As for the digital watermark, I\'m for it.

I don\'t know if there\'s other way round, and I\'m fine with the current solution as long as it doesn\'t bother me too frequently; but if you can, please use another method for copy protection.

If not, alright. The library\'s so great that I\'m willing to take this.

Best Regards,

Arys Chien
Composer & Musician
Deep White Studio
Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.

[Munsie]

WWWWWWWWWHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTT???? ????????????????

Please explain what is happening in more detail, it almost sounds like something is asking you to \"place the original cd\" in the cd bay once in a while?????????????

Tell me this is not happening.....

[donnie]

Now wait a min. guys. What Nick/East West has done on these cd\'s is the best thing that could happen for legit use of sample cd\'s. Look this copy protection scheme is NOT going to ruin a session or hurt you in any way. It\'s just like Wavelab does....from time to time (not that often) it just asks that you put the original disc in the drive for verification. This is NO BIG DEAL!!!

Like everyone else, I keep all my original discs on a shelf in my office. When I need one for verifcation I get up out of my chair walk across the room and pop it in and I\'m done. This is a SMALL price to pay for the all the hard work that developers put into these products.

I am always very skeptical when I hear guys complaining about this because \"they keep their originals in a another house in a another town\".....come on http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

Donnie

[Sam]

How is a sample protected? What is the running application that stops running and waits for you?

> What Nick/East West has done on these cd\'s
> is the best thing that could happen for
> legit use of sample cd\'s.

What a retarted statement. How is impeding the creative flow of a legit owner the best thing for sample owners? Copy protection sucks, it only damages the legit owners, everyone else that wants to pirate will find the cracks, and it sucks when legit users get less functional version than pirates.

> Look this copy protection scheme is NOT
> going to ruin a session or hurt you in any way.

You can\'t figure out why unecessary session interruptions hurt the session? Maybe this dogma serves your business needs, but it doesn\'t fly here.

> This is NO BIG DEAL!!!

That\'s your opinion, mine is copy protection sucks, and disk requests are the most intrusive form. I avoid such software whenever possible and know others that feel the same. I\'m glad to know in advance that these products are crippled, too many developers try to sneak this crud on their users, and never mention the point until they have your money. It\'s not just that the \'solution\' is worse than the problem, it burdens legit users without substantially addressing the problem.

> I am always very skeptical when I hear
> guys complaining about this because \"they
> keep their originals in a another house in
> a another town\".....come on

Do you believe the original poster is a pirate, come here to address the sample author? This logic is about as dumb as the rest of your post.

[donnie]

Sam,

What a witty little remark to my post however here\'s the bottom line. In the year I\'ve had Wavelab it\'s asked me for the original disk twice. That is hardly putting me out.

Let me ask you this...do you think it\'s fair if you pay $399 for a sample disc and someone else gets it for free? Now thats something to get mad about.

Oh, and if you loose your concentration and your creative genious in a session because of a 1 min. process then you obvioulsy have much bigger things to worry about.

Donnie

[KingIdiot]

I have VotA and it also has this copy protec tion....however I have yet to be asked to put the CD in. To me its not a big deal, however it could be problematic if I\'m working away from the office on my laptop, and I\'m asked to insert the CD. Before anyone says \"jsut put the cd in your laptop case...I have to say you\'ve got to be kidding me.

Still its the quality of the sample library that makes me decide on whether I want it or not, not the copy protection...

Tho dongles can be an issue for me...firewire ones will be the way to go if you\'re going dongle http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif atleast in the futre. Daisy chaining will be QUITE easier, and out of the way http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif I\'ve seen Proprietary USB dongles, these are simple to use as well. I have no problem with copy protection jsut so long as it doesn\'t hassle me all the time. Once in a while is no problem at all. Even if its once a month. With the amount of tiem it takes to load HUGE gigs, its not like its making abig difference http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

as for the watermarking. THIS is awesome http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[Munsie]

I had a massive reply to this, because as a Windows software developer I have major concerns, but first I would like these questions answered by someone from East/West or Nick.

1) Is this copy protection a feature of GigaStudio?

2) Are you installing a TSR (terminate and stay ready) program or similar app that runs from time to time on the end user\'s computer?

3) Assuming the answer to #2 is yes, are you telling the end user before the purchase about this copy protection?

4) Assuming the answer to #2 is yes, are you notifying the end user at the time of installation about the copy protection and giving the end user the option to \"not agree\" and return the software?

I look forward to your answers.

[This message has been edited by Munsie (edited 12-08-2001).]

[Nick Phoenix]

This is being blown WAY out of proportion. In the distant future, one day when you open up gigastudio, you will be asked to insert disk # 1. It takes 5 seconds.

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
This is being blown WAY out of proportion. In the distant future, one day when you open up gigastudio, you will be asked to insert disk # 1. It takes 5 seconds.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Isn\'t it the customer who gets to decide the proportions you think it\'s way out of?

If you\'re going to make customers visit the parole officer from time to time for buying your products, they should be told AND as Munsie pointed out, they must be allowed to decline your kind offer and return the software.

I agree with Sam and Munsie. This isn\'t an argument where Donnie or you can tell anyone whether it matters or not; it should be up to the customer. How dare you hijack people\'s PCs. It is a bloody disgrace. It is an infingement on human rights. It is theft of hard disk space, memory and the customer\'s patience and good will. Blowing it out of proportion? Really? This comes from a guy who said \"People are pigs\" in a previous thread regarding all those nasty pirates who\'re supposed to be stealing your precious treasure

Please answer Munsie\'s question while you\'re at it. I noticed you posted 50 minutes after he asked, but couldn\'t be bothered; prefering instead to demonstrate your precognitive abilities.

If Kingidiot thinks it\'s okay that\'s his business. It is not okay. It is your own paranoia that has been blown out of proportion. I can still hardly believe that it\'s true

And please tell me this is not the case with Rare Instruments. I enjoy the library enormously. It is fine work. But if I have to insert it anywhere at your behest after paying good money for it, I will check the license agreement and (in the absence of notice) I will sue your *** .

Great posts Sam & Munsie. This is what this group is for.

[KingIdiot]

You are told about it during the install. I believe you are allowed to cancel the install. I can\'t remember, but I believe so. However. I doubt you are able to return the software \"easily\" due the the current way most distributers handle sample liscences.. \"once they are opened, they can\'t be returned\" It may be different with new libraries tho.

Rare Instruments, I believe, does not do this. It probably hasn\'t been implimented until VERY recently.

Its not hidden from the user. You are told about it during install. The install procedure is not just simple copying gigs in VotA\'s case, its a self extracting RAR file. Im sure its similar to the way giga asks for original disks when installing certain Gigs. Its always been a \"feature\" of giga, and I Have seen the dialog box come up before, but due to user error.

and yes, again, its not a big deal to *ME*. Its all about the music and the sounds that is important to me.

Why hasn\'t anyone complained about digital watermarking? It usually DOES affect the actual audio file, whether its discernable will be up to the end user and his/her methods of audio analysis.

Anyhow, I\'m guessing that the copyprotection will be similar to the way Giga asks for the Gigapiano CD from time to time, before you register.

This group is for everyone, not only for people who disagree with copy protection, so DAMNMIT TELL ME I\'M PUTTING UP GREAT POSTS TOOO!!!! :P

BTW I NEVER said this protection was OK for everyone, I just said it wasn\'t a big deal to me. It obviously is to other people.

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot


[This message has been edited by KingIdiot (edited 12-08-2001).]

[Munsie]

Nick,

As a previous customer (QL Guitar And Bass and potential new user of your QL Strat, I feel entitled to ask you again, to please answer my posted questions.

KindIdiot - \"DAMNMIT TELL ME I\'M PUTTING UP GREAT POSTS TOOO!!!! :P\"

King, you know you da man! Your posts all always great!

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KingIdiot:

DAMNMIT TELL ME I\'M PUTTING UP GREAT POSTS TOOO!!!! :P


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You do, you do. Sorry I left you out. Really, I look forward to your posts - that one cracked me up. (And I wouldn\'t really sue anyone, but I felt a bit of righteous indignation was in order.)

[Chadwick]

Copy protection which requires once in a blue moon CD insertion is a PIA - but only once in a blue moon.

This is WAY preferrable to having to live without libraries from guys like Nick who sweat blood trying to make it right and have the talent to do something inspiring.

Not having access to libraries like these would be a DAILY pain in the arse.

Hmmm, is that US or UK spelling?
Down under we just spell it like a donkey, mule or a s s.

[This message has been edited by Chadwick (edited 12-08-2001).]

[noenoeil]

Guys, I\'m bored with this protection schemes thing.
I have a dozen off apps (virtual instruments mostly) from Steinberg and third party developpers (i.e Native Instruments), that costed me an arm and a leg, and yes, these apps ask me to put the CD in from time to time.

IT IS BORING AS HELL!!!!!!!

Imagine you have 7 or 8 virtual instruments, and the half of your sample CD\'s that asks you for this, and you\'ll be asked for original CDs several times, EVERY DAY!!!!!
I\'m afraid I will ask before buy the next products, and I\'ll avoid the CDs protected with the \"ask CD thing\" in the future.
Anyway, let\'s open our eyes, this kind of protection seems useless since pirates can download the entire CD images and insert the pirated \"original\" CD when asked.
So please try another protection scheme, because we, legal owners, are bored.
Please no dongles, it sucks worst, 5 or 6 FW or USB dongles daisy chained behind the computers is not serious. (or make the dongles glows, with different colors, for example http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Digital watemarking seems to be the only pain-free system, or if you use the CD verification, pleeeaaase make it ask once when installing and one another request several weeks after, but no more!!!

[Deep White]

Well...I just posted this topc for a day....

The following is what I think.

If GSt only asks me twice during several years, to put the original discs in the cd-rom drive, great! fine! ok! Twice a year? Ok! Twice a month? Hummmmmm... Twice a week? No way.

But I do agree on one thing: Nick is a great developer that creat great and very usable libraries that I don\'t want to live without during my career. (I hate those producers that only do great demos with their lousy libraries and make me feel I\'m cheated with my hard-earned money on their useless work.) So if he wants this kind of copy protection on his libraries, fine.

But you should let me know before I paid and opened the CDs. I\'d still buy this library, but if other libraries use the same method without quality like yours, I\'d consider. And I think I deserve the CHANCE to consider.

Donnie, I know you hate pirate copy uses, like I hate illegal CD buyers myself, but please don\'t say things like \"I put it in my office/ in another town\". You\'re making us legal and loyal users feeling very bad.

Just imagine: if Miroslav strings/ Bob Clearmountain drums/ Liquid Grooves/ GigaHarp/ Garritan\'s Orchestral Strings - and many other legal sample libraries I own - ask me for original CDs, it\'s not just once in a blue moon; it\'s many times in a blue moon. And just think that I\'ve paid for all the above! It\'s half of my life! And you think I deserve this? When watching people using crack version carefree?

This is another important point, Donnie. Restrictions on legal users just make us feel really really bad when we see illegal users\' creation flow go smoothly without bothered. I\'m not asking you to stop this or stop the pirate copies, just like I myself cannot stop illegal copies of Chinese albums, but just think about it. Just think about it.

At last, to Nick. I don\'t regret buying your QL56, after knowing about this copy protection. In fact, I\'m glad you created if, and I want to thank you again for that. Yet you really should let the users know.

Best to All,

Arys Chien

[Aaron Levitz]

We\'re not talking about six or seven sample libraries forcing you to dig up a CD every day for the rest of your life. If verification for a single title takes place on a weekly basis, that would of course be too much. Donnie says it doesn\'t happen \"that often\", and Nick described the timespan as \"in the distant future.\"

These gentlemen provide great libraries, and as much of a boon it is that they take the time to answer questions here, the practice represents a level of PR and customer relations that I don\'t believe they\'d ever throw away by lying to us. It\'s just not pragmatic.

They\'re in this for the long haul, and if they, musicians themselves who will be subject to the same inconvenience as new libraries come out, tell us the CD verification is non-obtrustive, I\'m prone to believe them.

I shared Munsie\'s TSR concerns, but am put at ease by KingIdiot\'s GigaPiano example. Well, mostly anyway. It does seem like Nick\'s evading that particular question, but I can\'t say I blame him given the general tone of this thread. Nonetheless, I offer benefit of the doubt. If there\'s a problem, it will be dealt with.

Sadly, I lack money to put where my mouth is, but I\'ll be buying VotA and \'56 Strat without a second thought. Someday.

** sigh **

[Franky]

I hate software pirates, but you can\'t do squat about it with these checks.... cd checks are the easiest to crack for these guys, piece of cake.
So basically the only one it hinders is the paying lawful owner of the library who has to once in a blue moon put the cd in the tray, this can be a problem I imagine if you\'re using many libraries, but I guess if it makes developers feel safer it\'s their right as long as the customer is well informed of it.
Watermarking however, is something very interesting and a worthy deterrent specially for high profile users, I will myself be looking at this avenue in my next libraries.

This has been discussed to death and I don\'t want to start it up again but this is just my tiny perspective on the problem of piracy.
At the root of piracy lies the mother of all issues : Pricing and quality... to me these are the two beasts that plague the industry, I have bought many many subpar libraries in the past that cost me hundreds of dollars ( nothing to do with today\'s Gigasampler libraries which are top notch high quality libraries for the most part, this excludes AKAI libraries that have been transferred to GIGA format...) per item with only often times very few usable sounds, this can seriously make a buyer think twice about buying a legit library after being had with cheap quality libraries that cost a fortune.

Also, I sincerely believe pricing is a big part of piracy, often times if pricing is reasonable, someone will be deterred from getting a pirated copy if he can get it for a reasonable price. Setting A high price may seem reasonable to a developer when he calculates his costs, losses to piracy and estimated sales but, if it\'s way overpriced, he will ultimately lose out to piracy every time that\'s a fact.(this of course is my own naive little perspective on this, I am no expert).

Also, the best example of a good way to deter piracy is to do like Scarbee has done, offer a good product and keep buyers coming back to you and your site by offering updates to registered owners and so on.

Piracy will never go away, developers have to protect their interest and their investment in their products, believe me a library of this size takes a lllllooonnnggg time to create, and it\'s hard and tedious work that wears you down *shivers at the thought of editing a single other note of a massive guitar library*.

I think that watermarking, offering a good product at a fair price and investing in a long term relationship with your clients is the way to go, it won\'t stop all piracy but, nothing ever will........

Francisco Lobato
Vintaudio Productions.

[donnie]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron Levitz:
We\'re not talking about six or seven sample libraries forcing you to dig up a CD every day for the rest of your life. If verification for a single title takes place on a weekly basis, that would of course be too much. Donnie says it doesn\'t happen \"that often\", and Nick described the timespan as \"in the distant future.\"

These gentlemen provide great libraries, and as much of a boon it is that they take the time to answer questions here, the practice represents a level of PR and customer relations that I don\'t believe they\'d ever throw away by lying to us. It\'s just not pragmatic.

They\'re in this for the long haul, and if they, musicians themselves who will be subject to the same inconvenience as new libraries come out, tell us the CD verification is non-obtrustive, I\'m prone to believe them.

I shared Munsie\'s TSR concerns, but am put at ease by KingIdiot\'s GigaPiano example. Well, mostly anyway. It does seem like Nick\'s evading that particular question, but I can\'t say I blame him given the general tone of this thread. Nonetheless, I offer benefit of the doubt. If there\'s a problem, it will be dealt with.

Sadly, I lack money to put where my mouth is, but I\'ll be buying VotA and \'56 Strat without a second thought. Someday.

** sigh **<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Aaron,

Thank you for your comments. It is nice to see someone who \"gets it\" and understands what we are going through. It\'s users like you that I love to make products for!

Donnie


PS...please email me I have something I would like to send to you

donnie@dssoundware.com

[thesoundsmith]

While I unequivocally agree that piracy is an issue that must be addressed, and would definitely not want to lose developers like Nick and Scarbee because their disks could be downloaded for free from crackheads.com, I do need to address the issue of creative flow.

If a library is going to request the master CD when I fisrt load the gig file or open the gsp, I don\'t really mind. But if it will interrupt a session in the middle to request the master, I have a huge problem with that.

Creative inspiration is a fragile thing, and the first time I lose a composition idea because my software gets in the way is the last time I use that package! I\'m not talking about complex learning curves, I\'m talking about buggy, incomplete or otherwise poorly designed products. I have a couple grand worth of programs that fall into that category that I can\'t get rid of.

I don\'t have time in my life (nor do my clients) to deal with arbitrary interruptions of the work flow. I have spent years building my studio into a smoothly operating SYSTEM, where everything knows its place and is predictable (system crashes excluded, but ONLY until the update arrives...) I expect to be able to sit down in my workspace, boot up and begin working. If part of that boot/startup process involves retrieving a CD or two to feed the drive, so be it. But once I have started actually writing, creating, recording, anything that interferes is asking for the trash can. There had better be a REALLY good reason-from MY perspective, not the guy that\'s got my money!

If I am going to spend a few hundred dollars on something to enhance my creativity, I need to know that there is a gotcha BEFORE I even ORDER the package (my time IS valuable to me, isn\'t yours?)

On the other hand, if this security is only enforced during the load, that typically is not going to break my creative flow, and while I don\'t like it, I can live with it. But even then, I want to be told before I break the seal on the package or otherwise perform an action that renders the purchase irrevocable, else I have been abused, and my consumer rights have been trampled upon.

Probably not deliberately, in the case of QL and EastWest, but VERY definitely.

Here\'s what the externally visible fine print has to say:

\"This library is protected by a digital watermarking system. Each copy is serialized and has been automatically registered in your name. You have purchased a license to use the samples contained on these 4 serialized disks, and shall be held legally responsible if these samples appear in music other than your own.\"

NOWHERE does it say that my workflow will be interrupted, no matter HOW infrequently, by a digital cop installed without my knowledge into my computer. By the time I find this out, the box is opened, and it is TOO LATE to return them.

This is, I believe, a violation of the Consumer Protection Act, although technically, the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act may have found a way to \'legally\'? overthrow the right so consumers regarding shrink-wrap licensing. See http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2620615,00.html (\"http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2620615,00.html\")

However, this page: http://www.haledorr.com/db30/cgi-bin/pubs/2000_09_idi.pdf (\"http://www.haledorr.com/db30/cgi-bin/pubs/2000_09_idi.pdf\")

states \"Shrinkware agreements for software and data licensing were validated in \'Pro CD v. Zeidenberg (7th Cir. 1996) if -
their terms are \"commercially reasonable\" and not otherwise unconscionable or subject to any other defense available under contract law;
-user has right to reject terms upon opening package and to receive a full refund.
-rejected argument that all terms must be printed on the outside of the product packaging.

This is obviously not a resolved issue, and legally is still a treacherous path to travel.

But for me, the bottom line still comes down to the question-when am I going to be asked to verify the product?

If it\'s only during the load phase, I\'m OK with it. But if it\'s going to interrupt when I\'m about to record that take that I know will capture the feel, phrasing and dynamic I\'ve been working on for the past hour, it\'s a problem. And if it\'s going to pop up in the middle of a recording pass and force me to stop a session with six hourly-wage musicians, it\'s \"unconscionable\".

So how about it, vendors, (and in particular Nick, as this thread seems to be aimed at him primarily) When will the popup occur? Totally random at any time at all, any time there is no activity (between takes) or only when I\'m first loading the gig file?

I\'m a professional- If a tool enhances my product, I\'ll put up with minor quirks, but if it impedes my work, I start immediately looking for a substitute.

Some of your products are way out of my price range for the use I have for them, but that doesn\'t mean that I feel you\'re overcharging. Porsche costs more than Ford for many good reasons, and if someone really needs the Porsche, they\'ll find the way to get it.

But please, set our concerns to rest, or at least acknowledge them. We (at least most of us) want to continue to buy your products, and I\'m sure we all want you to receive your just due monetarily. If for no other reason, so you\'ll continue to develop these great libraries!

And while I totally respect your concerns about piracy, and completely agree with your feeling the need for protection, I have to request that you be aware of the needs of your customer base, and their right to non-intrusive protection schemes.

Thanks for \'listening\'. If this seems a little vehement in places, it\'s not directed at you personally, rather it reflects my deep concern for the rights of both consumers and developers of intellectual property.



------------------
David \'Dasher\' Kempton
www.thesoundsmith.com

[Nick Phoenix]

The authorization will ONLY EVER occur when you start up gigastudio....!!!!!!

[Bill]

Coda used this type of protection with Finale for a while. Due to the considerable outrage of users, they discontinued it.

What was wrong with the water mark scheme?

[Lance_M]

Glad I\'m not the only one that sees Nick (and others) are only trying to protect their products.

\"Creative workflow\"? Come on, people... as if your computer hasn\'t crashed time upon time and destroyed your flow THAT way. Who are you gonna jump on then?

No personal offense intended, but I just think that\'s laughable, really. I simply see no problem with being asked to insert the original CD every so often. If it even slightly keeps hackers and crackers from using, for free, the things I have spent so much money on, then I\'m all for it. Hell, I don\'t just consider it the developers protecting their product. I\'d also call it protecting MY investment.

But hey, to each their own.

[This message has been edited by Lance_M (edited 12-08-2001).]

[SteveHanlon]

Arys Chien, I live in Taiwan, too!!!! I\'m in the north in a small town called Yang Mei. It\'s very close to Chung-Li. I\'m an hour south of Taipei.

I didn\'t think anyone else used gigastudio in Taiwan. I also didn\'t think anyone in Taiwan (besides me) bought legal sample CD\'s and software. Great for you!!!!!

I also agree with you about the inconvenience about having to get the original CD. I too have a de-humidifier box for my software just like you. TC Native bundle asks for the original CD...and I think \"oh, now I have to get in my box and find that CD. Really it\'s not convenient and can kill creativity on that kind of notice.

If you\'re ever interested, maybe I can come and see Great White Studio.

[SteveHanlon]

Arys Chien, I live in Taiwan, too!!!! I\'m in the north in a small town called Yang Mei. It\'s very close to Chung-Li. I\'m an hour south of Taipei.

I didn\'t think anyone else used gigastudio in Taiwan. I also didn\'t think anyone in Taiwan (besides me) bought legal sample CD\'s and software. Great for you!!!!!

I also agree with you about the inconvenience about having to get the original CD. I too have a de-humidifier box for my software just like you. TC Native bundle asks for the original CD...and I think \"oh, now I have to get in my box and find that CD. Really it\'s not convenient and can kill creativity on that kind of notice.

If you\'re ever interested, maybe I can come and see Great White Studio.

[SteveHanlon]

Arys Chien, I live in Taiwan, too!!!! I\'m in the north in a small town called Yang Mei. It\'s very close to Chung-Li. I\'m an hour south of Taipei.

I didn\'t think anyone else used gigastudio in Taiwan. I also didn\'t think anyone in Taiwan (besides me) bought legal sample CD\'s and software. Great for you!!!!!

I also agree with you about the inconvenience about having to get the original CD. I too have a de-humidifier box for my software just like you. TC Native bundle asks for the original CD...and I think \"oh, now I have to get in my box and find that CD. Really it\'s not convenient and can kill creativity on that kind of notice.

If you\'re ever interested, maybe I can come and see Great White Studio.

[Munsie]

Nick has avoided my questions two times now, this greatly concerns me. I didn\'t want to speculate about this until Nick answered my questions but it looks like he is going to avoid them. I have also posted my questions on the Tascam board, no answer from them yet either. hmmm..

What concerns me is what\'s NOT being verified here. I want to know if there will be some kind of external program running on my machine. Ok, so now we know it gets \"triggered\" when GigaStudio is opened, then the protection app does \"something\". Is it scanning your hard drive for .gig files and then sending the file names somewhere if there is an internet connection open? Is it getting your email addresses from your email list? Is it getting your system digital id from your processor? etc, etc. Alot of things could be going on, ok, ok, chances are it is just waiting for a time period to expire from the time the cd was installed and then it\'s going to ask you at some point to find the cd or else. (what, report you?, delete the .gigs?, etc..)

It is sounding more and more like something has been installed on the target machine when the original cd is installed.

We the buying customers, DESERVE to know what the hell is going on with our machines. As a software developer I would pay a severe price (legal actions for sure!!) if I was installing ANYTHING on my customer\'s machine that they were not aware of.

For the record, Wavelab and other programs have this form of copy protection method BUILT INTO the fricking program. This is not the same at all!

Again, if this protection is built into GigaStudio (which it looks like it is not..) then this is a pointless argument, however if there will be a clever little program installed on my machine when I install Nick\'s Strat, and as an end user I\'m not being made aware of that, then we as GigaStudio end users, the buying public, should be very concerned. I for one, will not purchase anything from Nick (no matter how bad I want that fricking Strat!!) until we get a definitive answer how this is working.

Nick, I don\'t blame you for having the protection, you are probably the most gifted sampling artist the Giga community has! It\'s obvious this is a way to back at some of those commercial composers who use your pirated works. I recall a post you mentioned about your water marks nabbing someone. Cool! That\'s awesome! But, if you\'re installing something on the end user\'s machines and they are not aware of it, this could be a costly mistake in the long run.

[Nick Phoenix]

I am not willing to go into details, because I don\'t want to provide any info for hackers. Rest assured this will NEVER cause any problems for your system. Also, there is no extra program running when gigastudio is running.

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
I am not willing to go into details, because I don\'t want to provide any info for hackers. Rest assured this will NEVER cause any problems for your system. Also, there is no extra program running when gigastudio is running.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


So, when does the program run? It must run sometime and telling us it doesn\'t run while giga is running isn\'t telling us anything, is it? You know that answering Munsie\'s questions wouldn\'t make a blind bit of difference to a hacker. Your stuff will be hacked. You do know that. This extra security might even attract hackers. They love this stuff - making a monkey out of over-protective developers.

It\'s not like anyone is asking you for the source code. I work in a software security company; telling the world that it\'s a program, and when it\'ll run, isn\'t giving anything away.

The library should have a WARNING sign on it.

This is a bigger pain in the arse than telemarketing.

Hey Nick, Hackers have cracked everything but triple DES strong encryption. You are kidding yourself, alienating potential customers, and hobbling your fine products with this ineffectual strategy.

I have a question (although I don\'t expect an answer): what was wrong with your \'watermarking\' system? Why wasn\'t that enough?

Maybe instead of all this high tech stuff you could just keep one copy at your house and you could send customers a bus ticket every time they wanted to use it?

[Sam]

I wonder if it replaces GS with a spyware wrapper. When you think you run GS it runs the spyware which decides to let you use GS and then executes real GS. But if spyware decides it\'s time for you to prove you\'re still legit, it hacks the registry like a new GS install looking for gigapiano, only \"gigapiano\" has been hacked to look like whatever cd spyware is looking for.

If some sample developer thinks it\'s acceptable to reconfigure my DAW to suit their needs, they will get an earful.

[SteveHanlon]

Hey!!!!!!

My version just asked me for a blood sample and a fingerprint for verification.

What the hell is going on in this police state of samples!

[Nick Phoenix]

Wow!!! You guys are pretty tweaked over this.
Trust me on this one. Its not going to be a problem. Watermarking is cool, but its hard to catch people, unless you pay a company to do it, which is very expensive. But I am considering that route.

[This message has been edited by Nick Phoenix (edited 12-09-2001).]

[Lance_M]

Z6 -- Nick already answered those. He said there is NO extra program running, and it only will ask for the CD when GigaStudio starts up.

[Lance_M]

Nope, you aren\'t the only one. It\'s just that the people that dislike something are often much louder than the ones that like it.

I mean, I see so little of a problem with this form of protection that it\'s even a little hard to argue my case.

If I don\'t want my \"flow\" disrupted, I\'ll write on sheets, sing and give \"commentary\" into a mic, or do a quick draft with some old GM piano or string patches. As you said, .gig files can take long to load. Not only that, but computers can crash. Phones can ring. Even nature can call you to the restroom. There are just SO many ways to get that flow disrupted. But THIS one, the copyright protection, protects my investment. It keeps other people getting, for free, what I have paid hard-earned money for.

And after that initial \"Hey, I\'ve got an idea!\" stage, I think it\'s a GOOD thing to be disrupted. It gives you a chance to step back and observe what you\'ve done so far.

Either way, Nick said it will only happen when you start GigaStudio. So no big deal.

[This message has been edited by Lance_M (edited 12-09-2001).]

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lance_M:
Z6 -- Nick already answered those. He said there is NO extra program running, and it only will ask for the CD when GigaStudio starts up.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My question was about watermarking. I was also pointing out that he didn\'t answer Munsie\'s questions properly. (And, running at start up is still running - the beef some of us have is with an uninvited program running anytime, whether the person responsible for it thinks it unobtrusive or not.)

Nick wants to make a living. He can do whatever he likes. If he wants to put a padlock on the products or use genetic fingerprinting, that\'s his business.

But it seems to me that Munsie wanted to buy this library and now he won\'t. He\'s lost a customer.

The only issue I have have is being TOLD about it, in the advertising and in big letters on the cover. If it\'s so unobtrusive then there\'s nothing to be ashamed of -it is an important part of the product.

Ironically, this technique ensures that pirated copies are \'superior\' to originals.

This issue won\'t go away, and everybody wants a solution: I\'m just saying that I don\'t believe this is the solution.

This \'solution\' is going to be about as effective as America\'s answer to in-flight terrorsism - put a fat guy in a plane with a gun and a bag of donuts and you might feel a bit better, but you\'ve really just accentuated the problem.

Remember that pirates don\'t give stuff away for free either. Maybe if developers spread the library over fifteen or so CDs, and ensured that when you install it that you must use all of the CDs then it might discourage pirates a bit. Even pirates have to charge ten bucks or so per CD; simple-minded but it makes the pirate copy more expensive; then if developers lower their prices the pirates won\'t be able to get a good enough margin to bother.

Franky hit the nail on the head; get the price/value ratio right and you\'ll make money.

And still, remember we have to buy all of this stuff virtually sight-unseen (unheard?). I want to buy some strings. I asked about the Vitous mini - nobody answered, that\'s not a problem but it means that I won\'t buy the strings. What I NEED is to play with products for a month or so, and then decide. Find a legal way for customers to do that guys. I\'m sick of peering through the cracks then sitting with a cramp in my stomach while I audition the sounds that I own. I\'m tired of begging for opinions; this is no way to practise capitalism.

This scheme hurts the only people who would have actually paid for it in the first place. By all means, go after professionals who use it for financial gain. But a thousand ten-year olds using it at home until they get bored and go on to something else (producing incidentally, a few paying customers in the future) won\'t hurt anyone.

I can tape a movie and watch it at home (an artistic endevor, I would say, magnitudes more \'precious\' than taping single notes), as long as I don\'t make any money from it, nobody cares.

Sample developers should enjoy this kind of protection while it lasts because the law is surely ignorant when it comes to sample libraries.

Price, service, quality products, guaranteed returns, upgrades, all of these things have to be addressed in this sector.

You can\'t assume that all customers are guilty until proven innocent. You will lose them in the long run, just as Munsie might now see the benefits of Franky\'s product over the QL product. It is all too much hassle; wrastling with developers for the product you paid for.

[donnie]

This thing has been blown WAY out of the water! There is NOTHING wrong with type of copy protection for the LEGITIMATE user. As several forum members have posted it is no trouble to them and some even actually like the fact that their own investement is being protected.

As Nick stated this will only happen when you launch GS so what \"creativity\" is there to stop? None---so just get over it!!!!

Donnie

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by donnie:
This thing has been blown WAY out of the water! There is NOTHING wrong with type of copy protection for the LEGITIMATE user. As several forum members have posted it is no trouble to them and some even actually like the fact that their own investement is being protected.

As Nick stated this will only happen when you launch GS so what \"creativity\" is there to stop? None---so just get over it!!!!

Donnie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don\'t worry about creativity, that\'s not the issue, and you know it.

Didn\'t you read Munsie\'s comments? Every time this subject arises this is the attitude potential customers get. If some people like it, then fine. I DON\'T LIKE IT. And I reserve the right to keep saying it as long as I want. I am over it. But I\'m over it in the same way Munsie is over it. We want to be told what we\'re buying. We can\'t test the products (because we\'re all \'thieves\').

Several posters like this? Well, several posters are off their trolleys. Why would anyone enjoy such an intrusion?

Blown out of proportion? If you say so. Just make sure to TELL ME in your advertising and on the box please. That\'s all.

You say: \"There is NOTHING wrong with type of copy protection for the LEGITIMATE user\". So this type of protection isn\'t okay for the illegitimate user? What the hell are you talking about? I\'M A LEGITIMATE USER, AND I DO NOT THINK IT\'S OKAY. YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ALL LEGITIMATE USERS YOU KNOW.

If you think this helps to discourage piracy, then good luck. I think what Munsie and me, and others, are trying to say is that we don\'t believe this works, and if you think it works then TELL us about it instead of telling us what\'s good for us.

And stop telling us not to fret over it like we\'re a bunch of children who don\'t know any better. This kind of intrusion may mean nothing to you, but it\'s punch-in-the-mouthable to me.

I listened to Nick\'s demo. I read all the pre-release hype. I read the bumf at sounds online. I didn\'t see anything referring to this \'protection\' measure.

Well, now you know. It IS important to some of us. HELOO! Can you hear me? IT IS IMPORTANT to some of us! You don\'t get to decide for me.

And stop answering us as if we\'re arguing against the concept of protection.

I don\'t have pirated libraries. I don\'t know anyone who owns pirated libraries. I\'m not part of a musical \'community\'. I hear you guys all the time commenting on each other\'s stuff because you \'tried\' it at a friend\'s place.

I don\'t get to try stuff. I spend hours scouring the web for clues as to how something sounds, and what people think of it. I don\'t have the luxury of finding out if something sucks before I buy it.

At least tell us what we\'re buying. That\'s all. Let me decide for myself what I think is intrusive or not. Please.

[johner]

So Nick says, \"Trust me on this one. Its not going to be a problem.\"

Hmmm, \"trust\" him. So if I call up and say \"trust me on this one, I won\'t pirate your samples, can I get a version without the copy protection\", what do you think his response would be? Right, thought not. He doesn\'t trust me to use his product legitimately, but I should trust him to install some weird little spy program on my Giga computer? I don\'t think so.

And what happens when all the sample developers use their own little programs? Anyone had any experience with the gawdawful Pace protection used by Waves and Antares? To this day it\'s the only thing that ever crashes my Win2K computer.

See Cakewalk and PG Music for music software companies that have thrived without copy protection. It can be done. I support both companies wholeheartedly because they have great products reasonably priced without copy protection (besides a one-time serial number entry).

As Z6 points out, Nick, donnie and whoever are completely free to use whatever copy protection they like, of course.

But it\'s a pain in the butt, it\'s offensive to be treated like a criminal, and any product that uses it I won\'t be buying.

John


[This message has been edited by johner (edited 12-09-2001).]

[thesoundsmith]

\"The authorization will ONLY EVER occur when you start up gigastudio....!!!!!!\"

Thank you, Nick. That\'s all I need to know. Creativity is (for some of us, anyway) a fragile thing, but this is not likely to have an impact.

It\'s a PITA to have to deal with copy protection, but that\'s something I can deal with. I understand the necessity, and while I don\'t like it, I support it (kinda like taxes!)

BUT: I still want to know about it BEFORE I open the package. That\'s only fair. It would NOT have stopped me from purchasing, but I don\'t like surprises.

Donnie: You\'re right-it\'s been blown up out of proportion. But it would have been a non-issue if were on the package. The product was digitally watermarked, and states so on the box. (Almost) nobody is complaining about the watermarking per se. I\'m totally cool with it, as long as it doesn\'t change the sound of the samples (and as far as that goes, if it does change the sound, I would have NO WAY OF KNOWING. They sound like they sound, and I EQ as I see fit...)

But today\'s digital studios are SYSTEMS, not random collections of sort-of-compatible equipment like the old analog days. System conditional testing always MUST include and assume worst-case scenarios, else that system is inherently potentially unstable. As a professional, it is my job to insure that the equipment I use is as stable as I can make it. In the computer-based device, this means insuring no unauthorized TSRs or DLLS are running unnoticed in the background. As one user pointed out, PACE has caused more crashes than Wall Street! In my studio hat as systems analyst, I absolutely MUST consider the worst case possibilities or leave myself open to critical failure during peak deadline pressure. I have not only a moral but a fiduciary obligation to my client.

Consider: I am hired to engineer/produce an album for an up-and-coming young singer who has just been signed by Warner. She\'s recording this album on a slim budget, fully aware it comes out of her own pocket in the end. In the midst of an overdub session with a bunch of union, double-scale first call section guys, the TSR that has been installed by your security routines clashes with some DLL from your DAW program, and causes the audio file FAT entries to become cross-linked. This is all in this afternoon\'s sessions, and this morning the rhythm section had laid down the tracks, so there has been no time to back up. Your little unobtrusive routine has just cost somebody a few thousand dollars. Who pays, and who gets shafted? possible the client. Probably the studio. Certainly not the maker of the inadvertent Trojan Horse that caused the problem.

This scenario is unlikely and overly dramatic? Yes. Probable? No. Possible? Absolutely.

And yes, the computer could crash and destroy those files all by itself without your little TSR having anything to do with it, but why should that make it OK to install yet another PACE surrogate to increase the likelihood of failure?

And even then, that isn\'t the real problem. The REAL bottom lines, as Z6 said, is - tell us up front. I don\'t mind if it\'s in the fine print, as long as it\'s on the outside of the box. If that\'s a problem for me, then I don\'t have to buy.

But don\'t lie to me, and don\'t try sneaking in my back door. I\'ve got big dogs and lawyers to deal with that.

Nick, I\'m sure you had no intention of causing this big of a fuss. You create great sample libraries, and as long as there is no likelihood of your protection schemes interfering with my system, I\'ll support your protection methods. Just tell us up front. Please.

But Donnie, listen up, and listen good. Don\'t you DARE tell me it\'s OK for you to interfere with my creative process. I create art and beauty to bring joy into people\'s lives. You are not qualified to tell me how, where and when I may work.

Dasher

[donnie]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by thesoundsmith:

But Donnie, listen up, and listen good. Don\'t you DARE tell me it\'s OK for you to interfere with my creative process. I create art and beauty to bring joy into people\'s lives. You are not qualified to tell me how, where and when I may work.

Dasher[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Where the heck did that come from???? This thread isn\'t even about me or any of my products. And as far as \"qualifications\" are concerned I\'m pretty confident with my background.

Donnie


PS....oh, and the comment about \"bringing beauty and art into peoples lives\" makes me want to throw up!


[This message has been edited by donnie (edited 12-09-2001).]

[Nick Phoenix]

You are right that it should state copy protected on the packaging. The graphics were done before I was sure it would work.
IF ANYONE EXPERIENCES ANY PROBLEMS PLEASE POST!!!! I am quite confident that no one will.

[KingIdiot]

Actually guys, I dont think Nick is kidding himself by putting this seurity on. There are STILL MANY, MANY people who dont use hacked copies, but actualy copied CDs as their \"pirated\" copy. What this does is hinder the fairly computer illeterate crowd out there....and YES THERE ARE alot of these type of guys using GigaStudio. Nick mentioned that he caught a high profile pirate that actually got his library from a swap meet. Its possible that the guy just bought a copy of the CD. This protection might help stop geeks like that. Just because something can be cracked, doesn\'t mean that everone knows where to go to get the crack.....no matter HOW easy it is to find cracked stuff.

As I said in the context of how long it actually takes huge Gigs to load nowadays, popping in a CD on occasion before it loads wouldn\'t make a difference to me. If I dont want to be interupted in my \"creative process\" I use my sound modules/keyboards. Using HUGE gig samples hinders ANYONE\'s workflow already http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif Am I the only one who looks at it this way?


------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[thesoundsmith]

Donnie,

My response is pursuant to your comment \"Oh, and if you loose your concentration and your creative genious in a session because of a 1 min. process then you obvioulsy have much bigger things to worry about\"

I do have bigger things to worry about. They are called \"making high quality music,\" \"delivering musical product on time and under budget\" and \"creating affect in peoples lives.\"

Don Buchla once made a statement to the effect of, \"We are building musical instruments that we expect someone to devote their life to. Therefore, we had better make instruments worthy of a person\'s life...\"

Systems that impede the creative process are disqualified. As composers, artists, producers and other creators, our creativity IS our bread and butter. We can\'t afford to have our ideas stolen by an arbitrary security system that imposes itself on the user.

At the time that post was written, there was no statement that this was not the case, so I had to apply my worst-case-used-car-salesman-scenario hat, which says, \"If something has not been mentioned, it MUST be assumed that this is because it is not in the favor of the purchaser. If there is some feature which makes the product appear to be an improvement over the competition, this WILL be plastered in 72 point bold type on the cover.\" This philosophy has served me very well through the years, and while I have made enemies of quite a few used-car salesmen, I have saved much pain and grief to myself.

And then, you take issue with \"...the comment about \"bringing beauty and art into peoples lives\" makes me want to throw up!\"

I don\'t doubt it, Donnie. Music used to be about the creation of beauty and abstract truth. (Not to be confused with \'pretty\' or \'sweet\' or any other synonym for \'trite.\' Contemporary \'music\' has little of artistic or creative value anymore, and if your bottom line is to produce the next Britney Spears or M&M ear candy (or is that poison) then of course this statement makes no sense.

But I\'ve had many people over the years tell me that my work has improved their lives, made them feel better, all the California hippy-dippy nonsense that sounded so trite in the 80s, and still does today. The problem is, they meant it. Lord knows why. I\'m not a great artist, I\'m probably not even a very good one. But I AM an artist, not a hack, and my product is important to me. And when someone tells me my performance moved them, I have to acknowledge the power of the music. And I have to acknowledge my responsibility as an artist to produce the best music I can.

So I don\'t give you or anyone the intrinsic right to interrupt my creative process. And I can\'t support software that arbitrarily stops that flow. Your right to compensation does NOT supercede my right to fair use.

You\'re right that this thread is not about you as an individual. And you have the right to think and express what you like. I responded to what I consider a personally insulting comment, in a manner I felt consistent with the tone of the communication.

If you want me to believe that you did not mean to deliver a personal attack to those who are concerned with their right to create, then I apologize. Sincerely. I certainly don\'t want to a flame war, and don\'t want to attack you personally, though I will respond to any post that demeans my art, constructive criticism aside.

And if you create a product that has what I need, at a price I consider fair, and that doesn\'t intrude on my right to create any more than Nick\'s does, I\'ll buy it. But that disk verification process really is as far as I\'m willing to go. I\'m afraid that I must insist on my right to create my art, as poor as it may be, without interference from intrusive software police.

Nick\'s statements show me that he will allow me to create in my own timeframe, and still protect himself. So if I said anything to offend you, Nick, (and to anyone else on this list that was offended by my comments,) I apologize to you also. All I\'m trying to do is what most of the rest of us are trying to do, our best.

Dasher

BTW, Nick, thank you for that last post. I appreciate your concern, as do many of us here, I\'m sure...


[This message has been edited by thesoundsmith (edited 12-10-2001).]

[Deep White]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Marty:

I didn\'t think anyone else used gigastudio in Taiwan. I also didn\'t think anyone in Taiwan (besides me) bought legal sample CD\'s and software. Great for you!!!!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hey, great for you too! But the good news is that there\'re more people using legal software and sample libraries here than you think.


If you\'re ever interested, maybe I can come and see Great White Studio.[/QUOTE]
Hum? Where does this name \"Great White Studio\" come from? http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

[Deep White]

As the starter of this topic, I\'m sorry to cause Nick all the trouble and Donnie saying some things he shouldn\'t have but well he was angry.

I\'d like to sum up my point of view here:

1. The verifacation won\'t hinder our creative flow for it only occurs when launching GSt, once in a blue moon. Way less possible than Microsoft.

2. Some legal users are still not happy because if too many sample libraries and vitrual instruments do this we\'re in trouble.

3. Other legal users are ok - or support - this, but would like to know before paying their hard-earned money.

4. QL56 is great. Buy it.

5. If anyone\'s having problem with this copy protection, please post here, Nick would contact you and solve the problem for you.

6. Donnie was expressing his anger for pirate copy users on legal users who were worry about the copy protection, and thus there were these argues that didn\'t have to take place in the first place.

If anyone wants to add or correct anything, please.

BTW, I really don\'t think these libraries are over-priced. Pirate copy users WILL still use pirate copies no matter how cheaper legal copies be. That\'s something we learned in the record market. And I personally, imagine all the sampling and editing work Nick and other guys have been through, think this price is very reasonable and doesn\'t need to be lowered. If you remember Nick said how much paid a player in \"Rare Instruments\".

Arys Chien

[RobertKooijman]

1) Isn\'t it always by definition the User / Customer to decide whatever is appropriate when it comes to copy protection, pricing etc?

2) Isn\'t it always by definition the User / Customer to know best what affects his/her workflow and creativity?

I have no problem with e.g. my Cubase dongle, but I DO have a problem with e.g. Native Instruments VST plugins asking at the most inconvenient times for the original CDs of Pro52 and B4 (and soon the FM7...).

The LAST thing I want is to carry original CDs with me where ever I go.

An example: at the moment I\'m on a several-month contract trip in New Delhi, India, while my home studio is in Sweden. I will spare you the trouble of \"put back the original CD\" copy protection, but I can assure you it is NOT fun!

I also agree with those who state that arguably the best copy protection scheme for sample CDs consists of:
- mutliple, long term upgrade offers
- excellent low price / high quality ratio
- comprehensive documentation

If anything is blown out of the water, it might be the price of SOME of the Giga Libraries.
To avoid further adrenaline burst amongst some, I won\'t mention examples here http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

It\'s dissapointing to see this copy protection being adapted also for sample CDROM\'s.
But it\'s even more dissapointing to see producers blaming users for not getting it. This type of arrogance is insulting and highly unappropriate to the many who\'ve aleady payed a small fortune to their sample collection!

And there\'s another difference: while one for example might use upto a handfull of copy protected VST instrumets, you can easily end-up having dozens of sample CDROM libraries. Imagine what happens if all of these start screaming for original CDROMs?

All the best, Robert

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by donnie:
This thing has been blown WAY out of the water! There is NOTHING wrong with type of copy protection for the LEGITIMATE user. As several forum members have posted it is no trouble to them and some even actually like the fact that their own investement is being protected.

As Nick stated this will only happen when you launch GS so what \"creativity\" is there to stop? None---so just get over it!!!!

Donnie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Munsie]

Nick Phoenix - \"This is being blown WAY out of proportion. In the distant future, one day when you open up gigastudio, you will be asked to insert disk # 1. It takes 5 seconds.\"

That fact is not the problem. The bigger answer to the problem, what app exactly is doing the \"asking\"?

Nick Phoenix - \"The authorization will ONLY EVER occur when you start up gigastudio....!!!!!!\"

So now we know it will only happen when GigaStudio starts, this is a clever statement because it currently makes it sound like GigaStudio is the app doing the verification. (That would be fine then!!)

Nick Phoenix - \"I am not willing to go into details, because I don\'t want to provide any info for hackers. Rest assured this will NEVER cause any problems for your system. Also, there is no extra program running when gigastudio is running.\"

Who cares about the details, all I ever wanted to know is if you took the liberty to install something on the end user\'s machine without their consent?

Nick Phoenix - \"wow!!! You guys are pretty tweaked over this. Trust me on this one. Its not going to be a problem. Watermarking is cool, but its hard to catch people, unless you pay a company to do it, which is very expensive. But I am considering that route.\"

WHAT\'S not going to be a problem? That is the missing link in this discussion!

Nick Phoenix - \"You are right that it should state copy protected on the packaging. The graphics were done before I was sure it would work. IF ANYONE EXPERIENCES ANY PROBLEMS PLEASE POST!!!! I am quite confident that no one will.\"

I believe we have finally found the answer! Nick finally admits that on the packaging it should state that the cd is copy protected. I fear Nick has hired a programmer to do some coding that may get him into a serious legal hassle. If Nick has installed something on the end user\'s machine without the end user knowing it, this is a very serious software crime. And if by some stupid chance Nick has actually modified the way GigaStudio launches, then this should be a MAJOR legal concern for Tascam. (Is this endorsed by Tascam?) The CD should state more than just \"copy protected\", it will need to clearly state that a custom software protection wrapper will be installed that verifies the use of the cd and then launches GigaStudio in a normal fashion, and then after GigaStudio is up and running this protection wrapper will not be running in the background. It will also need to clearly state WHAT this wrapper is doing, verifying the cd, sending information over the internet etc. I\'m just a two bit home enthusiast with a limited budget, so I of course will not end up doing any legal action. But I guarantee, some smart composer with a bank roll who doesn\'t like his pet GigaStudio system being modified is going to have a field day with this one.

Assuming Nick has installed something on the end user\'s machine without their consent, or even worse modified the way GigaStudio runs, he should immediately consult a software lawyer and recall his cd\'s, add some fine print to the cd packaging that clearly states what he is doing. It also needs to be documented online prior to the purchase.

I know I won\'t be purchasing any of his libraries until I know what the hell is being installed on my machine. And at $300.00 for his QL Strat and over $400.00 for his VOTA, I feel I am entitled to know!!

Nick Phoenix - \"IF ANYONE EXPERIENCES ANY PROBLEMS PLEASE POST!!!!\"

And he doesn\'t even have a fricking web page on the internet for official correspondence??

I\'m totally outraged by the thought of ANY software developer installing something on my machine without allowing me to consider the effects of the installation and optionally allowing me to abort the installation and return the software. And I would think other users would feel the same way once they are educated on the subject more.

[Simon Ravn]

This has been an interesting discussion to follow, and I just want to say that I think copy protections are a pain in the *** and should be considered very carefully before implementing them. Nick, Donnie etc - you should know that no matter what you do, your stuff WILL be cracked and copied, so what is the point? I think digital watermarking (however it is done, I don\'t know) is fine since it doesnt hurt the user in any way and it surely should make people think twice (at least) before copying anything to anyone, so I am all for that. But irritating protection schemes like the one VoTA apparently uses now causes me to consider more carefully whether to buy the library or not since I don\'t want to risk any trouble with the product. This is a shame since VoTA was really on my list of stuff to buy as soon as my wallet made it possible. I don\'t hope you\'ll use this protection in Rare 2, because then I might want to skip that one too.

I am really puzzled as to why you implement this kind of protection. You should be bright enough to know that it is pointless - you will just give the crackers a little challenge, which I am sure they will appreciate, so maybe you\'re doing it for them?

[Fishbak]

I\'m a retired musician who\'s just getting into midi and sampling, and I have a couple of questions.

Sonic Foundry sent me a promotional offer to buy Acid pro 3 for $99.00 last year, and ever since then, I\'ve been playing with sample technology. I\'ve bought a couple of SF loop cd\'s and I got a couple of cd-r cd\'s with samples on them when I bought a used keyboard off of Ebay.

Ever since I bought my copy of SF Acid, I\'ve been downloading free samples placed on the web and from the Sonic Foundry sites.

But after reading this discussion, I would like to know....How do I check all my samples for \"watermarking\"?

It\'s not inconceivable that one of my sample pieces could be commercially viable, and I don\'t want to be accused of piracy, just because I download something that is watermarked by someone else.

I have to tell you.....I played every night for many years on bandstands and in studios, and just about every conceivable situtation. If someone would have told me that it would profitable to simply record individual notes on each instrument and sell them for 10-50 TIMES the cost of a real record (cd) of music, played by people with enormous talent, I wouldn\'t have been able to stop laughing... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif....But times change I guess...

Anyway...questions of talent and ethics aside, how do I check my samples to keep from falling into the snare that this \"high profile\" producer apparently finds himself in?

I don\'t mean to sound rude, but the people who hire musicians to play on these sample disks are really just another form of booking agent. They take advantage of the decades of practice it takes to play well, and justify it with the same tired old excuse,\"they knew exactly what they were getting into when they did the session.\"

I wonder how many LA session players would heartily agree with that sentiment?

Thanks.

[Joris de Man]

I would like to add my 2 cents to this topic (one of the biggest I\'ve seen here yet, btw http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif)
Although I can fully understand Nick\'s reasons for wanting to protect his hard (and mostly excellent) work, I think what he\'s effectively achieved is only eliminating peer to peer copying; that is, one person buying a library and copying it for a friend (although why you\'d let somebody copy a library which you just spend 400-500 bucks on is beyond me).
I work in the gamesindustry which has had (and still has) it\'s severe share of pirating problems; one game I worked on got copied even before the goldmaster hit the manufacturingplant! The gamesindustry has tried various methods of copyprotection (as far as Nintendo dictating their own format such as cartridges), but the endresult is that they can only delay their stuff being hacked for maybe a week or two.
Personally, I have had some good and some (very) bad experiences with copyprotection.
Logic and Reaktor fall in the good category; connect the dongle, and you\'re up and running. The only shortfall with reaktor is that the dongle is terminated, meaning I can\'t connect another device to it (and it\'s waaay too small! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif.
Absynth, which seems to have a protection similar to yours, Nick, asks for a CD once in a while. In my case, twice since I got it 3 months ago, which is fine.
Another story is Analog Channel, a Protools plugin. Next to some shabby packaging (a lame green cardboard box with no manual, jewel case with no inlay and a floppy;I really expect more for $500!) this was very cumbersome to install. Macs haven\'t shipped with floppydrives for quite some time now, so I had to buy a floppy drive for the authorisation. It turned out that it wasn\'t compatible with this kind of floppy, so I had to mail MCDSP for a challenge/response code. This worked, for a while... It seems that what you really should do is get an iLok (which is another $50) for which they\'ll ship an authorisation chipcard later on. Phew!
I think this is way too much hassle for a paying customer. And did it help them in the end? Hell no! A crack was out for this baby even before I got my shabby green box in the mail.
To top it off, when I was in Moscow last January for a recording, I went to a local market. Next to an amusing display of army relics (camouflage suits, hardhats, empty shells and I kid you not, pilot and spacesuits) was an alarming display of pirated software. And I\'m not talking feltmarkered golddiscs here, I\'m talking wellmanufactured copies that where virtually indistinguishable from the originals..apart from a typo here and there (on purpose)...Nicrosoft Office anyone?

My point is that yes, you have every right to protect your work, as long as it doesn\'t hamper the honest user too much, and you let him know beforehand. But don\'t kid yourself that these kinds of protection are going to hold up, or work at all in the long run. You might deter the casual copier, but the hardcore cracker is really not going to be impressed (PACE, USB Dongles, Safedisc etc. certainly didn\'t impress them)

My 2 cents,

Joris

[Fishbak]

I know there\'s a real hornet\'s nest of contraversy here, but I\'d sincerely like an answer to my original question:

How can I tell if a sample is proprietary and watermarked?

I\'m considering buying Gigastudio once the driver problems are sorted out, and some sample libraries to go with it. But I really don\'t need copyright headaches, and I hope someone will be able to tell me how to spot a pirated sample that I find on website before I download it because it says that it\'s \"free\". (or doesn\'t say anything)

Thanks.

[SCARBEE]

King Idiot wrote: I believe that Nick\'s reason for putting this copy protection in is for \"peer to peer\" copies.

I believe this too. My own libraries are not copy-protected yet, but then again, Nick has been in the business for much longer time than I and he has probably had some experiences that I don\'t have concerning piracy and money.

I have tried a different approach to my customers by offering free expansion packs for registered users. Sadly I must confess that almost everyday a person tries to make a fake registration to get the expansion for his pirated copy...

Cheers

Scarbee

[KingIdiot]

Also Scarbee, its only matter of time before the updates start showing up on the net as well. I am sorry for all you developers trying to make money off of this stuff. It was much easier before CD copiers and braodband...which puzzles me about the price of some \"older\" sample libraries!

Fishbak, If a sample is atermarked it usually says it somewhere in/on the packaging. Generally you wont have to go through any legal issues if you boght the libraries legitimately. as for ACID loops from Sonic Foundary, they are all copyright free I believe, even the downloadable ones from the sonic foundary website. If they have watermarks embedded for each IP that dowloads them I\'d be surprised, but MA what a way to catch all those mp3.com geeks using pirated loops! Too bad it\'d be too expensive for each developer to constantly check for watermarks.

However loops from other \"free\" sites may or may not be copyright free. Which is why you must keep recods of where and when you download files from. I didn\'t fora while, and have since thought that it may come back to me. I\'ve also deleted files from places I wasn\'t too sure of.

Digital watermarks are generally a new form of \"tagging\" a file. Its also usd in Image files now. Nt all audio is watermarked.


------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[Sam]

> it currently makes it sound like GigaStudio is the app doing the
> verification. (That would be fine then

I disagree, what this means is that GS will periodically be disabled and wait for reauthorization with your QL original disk, whether you use the samples or not. Every protected sample you add increases the likelihood that GS will not start up without some authorization, regardless of whether you have been using the lib. Totally unacceptible!

Piracy is clearly a big problem, and it\'s particularly damaging in smaller marketplaces. But copy protection is not the answer. I seriously doubt you can actually protect sample data, and hacking artificial limitations into the workstations of your legit users just isn\'t an answer - the pirates will still get unrestricted copies (they are probably using pirated samples on pirated GS, copy protection doesn\'t solve the problem)

Scarbee, as painful as it is to be contacted by pirates of your work, I have to believe that that points towards a solution. You know they\'re pirates and they\'re coming to you. Make em leave more of a paper trail before you forward their info to the FBI. Your product support gives you a relationship with all your users, legit and otherwise, I think that\'s the best possible case.

I will be a bit distraught if the GS world veers (further) towards copy protection. We don\'t support this community because we\'re too dumb to figure out how to steal stuff, we do it because it\'s the right thing to do.

respectfully,
Sam

[Munsie]

Just got off the phone with \"Allen\" from Nemesys/Tascam and he 100% verifed that this form of protection is NOT part of GigaStudio and is something the 3rd party developer has developed.

So obviously Nick needs to address this copy protection feature in the fine print and before the point of sale.

Since now I have verfication from Tascam what is going on, let me state that if this form of protection helps Nick nail the b a s t a r d s that caused him to do this, more power to him! But he really took a little too much liberty with us, the good guys, who pay him money, by thinking it would be acceptable to install something on our machine without letting us know about it. I hope he considers recalling his cd\'s and changing the fine print, allowing the end user to \"not accept\" the protection and send the cd back for a full refund. And at the least, mention this online at the time of the sale.

I know he isn\'t getting my $300.00 until I see aheaad of time what is going to be installed on my machine.

As far as this ending the \"peer to peer\" pirating, do you really think the .gig files have embedded security programs? What happens when an end user simply copies the .gig files, after they are installed from the original installer, to another cd or computer? I think Nick\'s protection will stop the process of simply burning full copies from the original cd\'s but I doubt it will stop the more common process of just copying individual .gig files to another folder, cd, or another computer.

Case closed, back to making music. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[PatS]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Munsie:
So obviously Nick needs to address this copy protection feature in the fine print and before the point of sale.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Stating that his library is copy protected should suffice; I don\'t believe he is legally obligated to disclose the nature of the copy-protection method in large or fine print, though I could be wrong. Nonetheless, if you\'re still concerned about a hidden and potentially damaging TSR or service running on your system (despite Nick\'s assurance to the contrary, which you seem to dismiss out of hand), just persuade someone who purchased QL56 to run Process Explorer on his system (Process Explorer is available at www.sysinternals.com (\"http://www.sysinternals.com\")). You\'ll gather all the information you need (assuming you do find something, though I seriously doubt it), and then you can confront Nick and/or EastWest with facts, instead of with worse-case scenarios and innuendos.

Pat

[This message has been edited by PatS (edited 12-10-2001).]

[Lance_M]

As I\'ve said many times before, I\'m all for this type of protection (asking for the CD every so often), but I\'ve got a quick question on it:

If I load VotA .gigs on a system and remove them at a later date (I\'m building a second computer that I\'m gonna stick half of my music/audio stuff on), will it still possibly ask me for CD #1 when I start GigaStudio, even though the VotA files will no longer be there?

[Nick Phoenix]

No it won\'t ask. It is a custom system. Very simple, and full proof as far as system problems..

[ursatz]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
No it won\'t ask. It is a custom system. Very simple, and full proof as far as system problems..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am very puzzled by all this - almost puzzled enough to figure out what\'s really going on, just out of curiosity. If GigaStudio itself isn\'t doing the verificaton, then there aren\'t too many other places the code that does the checking could live. I\'m pretty sure there\'s no \"extra\" executable running. Anyway, if there were, it would be too easy to just kill it. Maybe there\'s code buried inside the .gig files - but then GigaStudio would have to run that code. Very mysterious.

Be that as it may, Nick, I have to ask one question. In another thread I posted that I\'ve had trouble installing my second GigaStudio. It always seems to crash when it gets to the step of building the quicksound database. Here\'s what I\'m wondering: I simply moved my VotA gigs from the old machine to the new, without installing them from the CD, before installing GigaStudio. Is there any way this could be responsible for my difficulty installing GigaStudio?

[Bruce Mitchell]

These Sound Developers are acting like they have invented the wheel. When my Native Instruments kept popping up asking for the original CD I said to hell with it, I don\'t have the time to hassle with this bull****. So I no longer use my NI B4 which they never invented the B3 in the first place.

But then again if I had a CONCERT CALIBRE BRASS LIBRARY ( which doesn\'t exist) I would glady insert the key disk once in a blue moon.

Not to mention the hassle with Win XP.

[ursatz]

Well, I can answer my own question - the trouble wasn\'t with VotA. The problem was that I had renamed some directories that came originally from Akai cd\'s. Apparently GSt can\'t deal with that.

[KingIdiot]

Like Joris, I believe that Nick\'s reason for putting this copy protection in is for \"peer to peer\" copies. There are still a bunch of hobyists who do this for their friends. I have no doubt that Nick fully understands that hackers/crackers will be able to crack the protection fiarly simply. Still to stop SOME copying might help him and East West Rest. I\'d like to stte that I haven\'t had a problem since installing VotA, everything\'s been running smooth on the desktop. I\'ll install it on thelaptop, but I dont think there will be any problem on it.

One thing I\'d hope for people not to let happen, is to let \"principles\" get in the way of bot purchasing a great library, AND alienating Nick from his end users. If you have reservations about what might happen with this copy protection, wait till the library\'s been oiut for a while, and see if any users have a problem created by tthe copy protection.

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[Archangel]

Hey everyone,

you forgot one thing : with that copy protection , you\'ll only annoy the people who buys the product! Is it that you want? to bug your own customers???

Archangel

[thesoundsmith]

There is much food for thought in this thread, and many passionate pleas. Most of which have a degree of validity.

Nick and Donnie want to make money (I don\'t know if you can call it a living, considering the relatively small number of GS users, and the cost of developing a decent library.) This is perfectly legitimate, as long as the musicians employed for the purpose of sampling sessions are aware that this is what is to be done with their work (and I have a hard time imagining a session with a dozen violins with the producer trying to explain how this song calls for just a single C chromatic scale played first pp, then mp, etc.)

As far as the ethics of using samples goes, it\'s a question for the composer. Certainly using samples of individual notes to obtain a realistic orchestral sound is at least as creative as using snippets and loops of performances in a product like Acid. But the Acid product is geared toward a different market, and really isn\'t directly relevant to this thread (although I\'m sure we could generate some lively discussions on the topic!)

What IS relevant is the whole issue of copy protection methods and how they directly impact us as composers/producers.

As long as the copy protection systems don\'t interfere with our production methodologies, I don\'t have a problem with Donnie and Nick trying to protect their investment. (And there IS a significant investment of time and money, even if you are playing all your own samples, try putting together just ONE really comprehensive gig file-all the notes in a variety of dynamic levels, consistent across the board, with passion-it takes some REAL control and expertise.)

Does Nick see us all as potential thieves? I don\'t think so. Do you lock your new car because you think the next-door neighbor will steal it? Nope. But do you lock it anyway? You betcha.

Give the developers some credit-they need us, and can\'t afford to alienate a large segment of their customer base.

But developers, be aware that the best protection schemes are only a challenge for the crackers, and the best you can hope for is a working accommodation for the balance between intrusion and protection.

If somebody has a really safe, unobtrusive scheme to protect intellectual property, let them come forth. In the meanwhile, PACE will break our computers, and dongles will dangle forlornly like the tails of ugly puppies.

And as for those who state they will not purchase software that is protected-in the beginning, when protection schemes were just being developed, I and a lot of my friends said, \"We just won\'t buy any music software that has protection.\" But then ALL of the programs worth owning were protected, so what was there to do? We could all go back to manuscript and quill pens, I suppose, but I\'d rather have the tools.

Dasher

[Archangel]

Your protection is just stupid Nick. Pirates will just post the CD-Image (ISO) of the samples .... so the pirate WILL load CD #1 if asked.

Archangel

[Simon Ravn]

Archangel, I am sure it is not stupid in that way. I agree that having the protection there in the first place is stupid, but I am sure there is some CD-key protection that doesn\'t get copied along with an ISO - just like just about every PC game have today.

[Damon]

Nick,
I think the first thing that could help is to start a Quantum Leap website.

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fishbak:

I have to tell you.....I played every night for many years on bandstands and in studios, and just about every conceivable situtation. If someone would have told me that it would profitable to simply record individual notes on each instrument and sell them for 10-50 TIMES the cost of a real record (cd) of music, played by people with enormous talent, I wouldn\'t have been able to stop laughing... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif....But times change I guess...

I don\'t mean to sound rude, but the people who hire musicians to play on these sample disks are really just another form of booking agent. They take advantage of the decades of practice it takes to play well, and justify it with the same tired old excuse,\"they knew exactly what they were getting into when they did the session.\"

I wonder how many LA session players would heartily agree with that sentiment?

Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You won\'t get much change in this group worrying about the musician. I\'ve broached this subject a couple of times and have basically received abuse.

Apparently, the law allows people to digitally \'record\' the best part of a musician\'s make-up, then make thousands of copies for profit.

I\'m told it\'s a lot of work to produce a sample library (often quite vehemently) and that the \'samplist\' then owns it to the extent that he\'ll wrap it up in all manner of protection lest someone steal a single note.

But if a musician is paid a couple of thousand dollars for a session, and then that session is \'printed\' ten thousand times and sold for a thousand dollars (and perhaps the musician\'s sessions dry up a little due to his new \'availability\'), no-one seems to mind. This is fair game.

I still don\'t get why I can\'t hire someone with experience of a given library and then sampe a new library from it. I can\'t see the difference at all. There\'s no music there only single notes. But then that is apparently stealing.

I\'m told that the musician doesn\'t even really matter too much (and if i don\'t differenciate between pianos and strings etc., people get samart-arsed in their responses as well).

It takes talent and hard work to produce a library, but not that much; otherwise most libraries wouldn\'t be produced by people with access to high quality recording gear who \'have a go\' and then constantly bemoan how they don\'t make any money from this and the nasty pirates are stealing their art.

If it was indeed just a matter of recording and manipulating the sounds, then this wouldn\'t explain why Scarbee\'s basses are so good (often acknowledged with comments that he is a hot bass player).

I shouldn\'t have to keep saying this, and I\'m not trying to demean the skills of samplists (I use libraries myself), but there is theft taking place and hopefully the law will get around to addressing it and giving musician\'s their \'fair share\' (if that\'s possible, given that samples are so \'real\' now that they must lose work in the long run).

I don\'t mean to offend. I\'m just talking to this guy so please; easy on the smart-arsed flames guys.

[Simon Ravn]

Z6, you\'re really putting up your defences all-over here. It\'s not normal to be flamed around here, and I cant remember any flame-wars developing on this subject (there are a few others though). First... why it is illegal to make another sample library out of an existing one? You must be kidding... I don\'t think I should explain that of course this is copyrighted material and you can\'t just copy it, alter it a bit, then slam it in another box and sell it.

Then to the subject on how \'easy\' it is to make a library. Do you know this by experience? It certainly doesn\'t sound that way. Now.. my only experience with a library is my beta-test participation on Garritan Orchestral Strings and I can guarantee you that this library was not done overnight. Just ask Gary and Tom how many months of programming, thoughts and testing went into this, so I find your remarks very insulting on their behalf. I only tried working with the GS editori myself for maybe a couple of hours in total, but even this little insight into it, makes me realize what a huge job it is to assemble samples, program, arrange, organize etc. when you are doing a library. Library makers should receive credit for their work - many libraries requires tons of work - e.g. GOS, Rare Instruments etc - and with the demands being raised since we now all want keyswitching, multiple velocity layers, crossfading, more articulations etc., this job has certainly not become smaller.

[SCARBEE]

Thanks, Simon

Scarbee

[This message has been edited by SCARBEE (edited 12-11-2001).]

[Fishbak]

Z6, you have a real gift for clear articulation. I wish have written those last 2 posts you made myself, but I\'m not that skilled. (maybe I could quote them though, and copy-protect the resulting paragraph...hmm....no, it would be wrong http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif)

Seriously though, I would like to be a fly on the wall when Nick Phoenix opens his \"huge\" settlement check from his high profile producer \"violation\".

Long experience in the business has given me a dose of skepticism when somebody small takes someone big to court. Call it a \"feeling.\" The best lawyers in the world litigate entertainment law. That\'s where the money is.....for them.

And even Nick Phoenix refuses to discuss how a reasonable person can know if the sample snippet is \"owned\" by anyone. (sigh) Sounds uphill to me.

[Nick Phoenix]

F.Y.I.
Jimbo Head played the guitar on 56 strat. He gets a percentage. Voices of the Apocalypse was a buyout/ work for hire/ single paycheck. They had no interest in a percentage. They just wanted their fee (which wasn\'t cheap).

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
F.Y.I.
Jimbo Head played the guitar on 56 strat. He gets a percentage. Voices of the Apocalypse was a buyout/ work for hire/ single paycheck. They had no interest in a percentage. They just wanted their fee (which wasn\'t cheap).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gav and Simon. I come to this forum becasue I\'m interested in the subjects and often enjoy the varied opinions and rants.

When you post (and direct comments directly at individuals) try to imagine you\'re in the room with the person and he\'s holding a baseball bat, otherwise all we get is rude mudslinging.

Apparently Nick doesn\'t think it\'s unreasonable to offer profits to the musicians (nice to hear it).

I do not think this issue is clear cut at all (although with my head up my arse like this, I\'ll admit it\'s hard to tell).

The Law is way behind on all this stuff and we\'ll find out where it leads in the fullness of time (should a musician settle for a fee then find himself \'outside\' a large percentage forever, for example). If a musician decides to sue for loss of earnings, for example, if he is told repeatedly by previous employers that he is no longer needed because Nick, or some other talented samplist has \'imprinted\' him on to a CD.

And no, I haven\'t tried to create a library, but just as you can empathize with the feelings of others so can I \'imagine\' what is involved in creating a library; it is not that much of a stretch (perhaps similar to what everyone feels \'before\' he creates a library?). Not having created a library does not make my opinion completely valueless (well, not me me anyway) - and there is also far too much of this ridiculous \'credential\' checking going on here - let people speak for goodness sake. By all means disagree. But remember, you never know when you might actually meet someone in the flesh; holding that baseball bat I was talking about.

Take it easy guys. The world is a big place, and shouting people down is a waste of time.

(And Simon, please don\'t keep pleading that you were not rude; you were, but I forgive you because I\'m such a nice guy).

[Gav]

I still don\'t agree with you Z6 but I\'ll certainly give you points for good humor.
I\'m sorry but it simply hacks me off when people get themselves into situations (\"Ya sure, you can pay me and I\'ll play these chromatic scales\" or \"Ya sure Lou, I\'ll be in your next BoyBand\") and then realize a year later that they missed out on all sorts of royalties and decide to sue anyone who wanders by hoping to get a piece of the profits.
You can\'t just sue for \"lost income\" because you didn\'t think the sample guy (or the boyband manager) would make any money and \"oops\", he actually did. Sorry but that\'s the gamble.
Sometimes you take that gamble and win (George Lucas) and sometimes you get a nice fat payment up front and you watch the guy who paid you get rich. Bummer, but that\'s the reality of it.
And what?...are all instrumentalists now free to sue any sample developer or composer who uses samples because they don\'t need live players anymore!? Bull**it and you know it.

Gav http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/grin.gif

[Gav]

Now see what you guys have done? I\'m all caught up in this now...thanks a lot.

Gav http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/grin.gif

[Archangel]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
Archangel, I am sure it is not stupid in that way. I agree that having the protection there in the first place is stupid, but I am sure there is some CD-key protection that doesn\'t get copied along with an ISO - just like just about every PC game have today.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You just forgot one thing : EVERYTHING is crackable....those hackers out there are not novice....they managed to crack Bleem , a program with really strong copy protection using a \"Insert the CD\" before running...and they distributed the ISO....I reported that to Bleem, and all they could do is remove that form of protection, to put another form of protection that they didn\'t tell me. So I guess Nick\'s form of protection is already known to all crackers.And I think honestly that copy protection should be used without noticing the registered user , i.e. Not asking the Key CD. Why not install an encrypted serial number that is sent on the internet? You would see doubled-serial numbers, and would be able to nail the hackers, associating the Serial number with the person who bought your library.

Also, I agree when people say \"The more expensive it is, the more privacy you have\". you should calculate your price to maximize your revenue in function of CD sold. I know you must have a statiscic, like \"for every 10 Cds I sell, 1 is gone through piracy\"...

It is calculatable. I believe lowering the price would allow people with less money to buy your library instead of trying to find pirated samples.

Anyways, just a thought.

Archangel

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
I don\'t think I should explain that of course this is copyrighted material and you can\'t just copy it, alter it a bit, then slam it in another box and sell it.

Then to the subject on how \'easy\' it is to make a library. Do you know this by experience? It certainly doesn\'t sound that way. Now.. my only experience with a library is my beta-test participation on Garritan Orchestral Strings and I can guarantee you that this library was not done overnight. Just ask Gary and Tom how many months of programming, thoughts and testing went into this, so I find your remarks very insulting on their behalf. I only tried working with the GS editori myself for maybe a couple of hours in total, but even this little insight into it, makes me realize what a huge job it is to assemble samples, program, arrange, organize etc. when you are doing a library. Library makers should receive credit for their work - many libraries requires tons of work - e.g. GOS, Rare Instruments etc - and with the demands being raised since we now all want keyswitching, multiple velocity layers, crossfading, more articulations etc., this job has certainly not become smaller.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting to hear you can be insulted on their behalf. (This is what I was talking about - voice an honest opinion and somehow, even people with no vested interest get insulted; ayevey.)

But, \"and you can\'t just copy it, alter it a bit, then slam it in another box and sell it\".

So what is it that samplists do when recording a musician? Isn\'t he being copied and slammed in a box (but without royalties). The musician signs away any \"rights\" does he not, so it\'s all OK?

I don\'t think it\'s easy to produce a library. I know it\'s not easy. Although, yes, if I had access to a high-quality studio I could have a pretty good stab at it, whereas you could put me in a studio with a violin or a tuba and I\'d never learn to play it well; that\'s what I mean by \'easy\'. It\'s relative. Even Nick talks openly about the mistakes he made in his early librarties and I\'m sure he\'s still learning: This is a young sector.

But I don\'t think it merits the copy protection the law seems to bestow upon it. That\'s what I think. If you want to extract vicarious insults then fine. (and I have been flamed on this. I happen to believe that the musican should have a right to a share of the profits (when I said this before, all I got was people telling me that I could do that myself if I wanted)).

The fact that many months of programming go into a product shouldn\'t, in itself, offer the kind of protection samplists enjoy. DJ\'s can hack great lumps from songs, but samplists get every waveform protected.

The point I was making about copying someone\'s samples is this: (not that I\'d like to see this happen, because I wouldn\'t). Say someone buys Nick\'s VOtA. It\'s a pretty deep library. I suspect that there will be people who become experts in manipulating that library. When does that person become a \'musician\' who \'plays\' VoTA?

What if I need a choir to produce a series of self-similar pieces of music, but only for a number of phrases. Too expensive. How about a sample library? Why can\'t I hire a guy who plays the VoTA to make up a smaller sample library for me? THEN, why I can\'t I say that this new library is so different from VoTA (many months of programming and beta testing) as to constitute a completely new library? I paid the guy a fee (just like a samplist) to \'play\' his instrument, then spent months programming it (completely new keyswtching etc.) with him or others?

I would like to see samplists protected, and it must be disheartening when, as Scarbee says, people contsantly try to sign up with copied materials. But somehow I can\'t help myself thinking that it\'s different for Scarbee (he played it himself).

I\'m sorry if it\'s insulting, but I believe that when the musician is completely integral to the integrity of the product (i.e. a difficult instrument to play for a session) the law should also protect his rights, and unreasonable gains (and no matter what people say, some of these libraries will deservedly earn a bundle), should be disbursed to the musician.

We may even see instrument makers crying for a piece of the pie when that instrument is \'sold\' so vehemently (i.e. It\'s a Bosie, or a ....).

And Simon: \"Do you know this by experience? It certainly doesn\'t sound that way.\"

As far as insults go; your first sentence here is just a question: the second sentence is an insult.

It would be nice to be able to express opinions without this kind of thing. I did not say anything, I believe to be insulting. Some things are \'easier\' than others, that\'s all. I believe it\'s more difficult to play many instruments than it is to sample them. The law doesn\'t agree with me right now. But things change. One day, a musician might take the hump at hearing himself all over the place while his earnings dry up (and take legal action); that\'s all.

[Simon Ravn]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Z6:
Interesting to hear you can be insulted on their behalf. (This is what I was talking about - voice an honest opinion and somehow, even people with no vested interest get insulted; ayevey.) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It\'s not that odd is it? Just like I can put myself in other peoples places and try to imagine what it feels like. I hope most people can do that to some degree....

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>

But, \"and you can\'t just copy it, alter it a bit, then slam it in another box and sell it\".

So what is it that samplists do when recording a musician? Isn\'t he being copied and slammed in a box (but without royalties). The musician signs away any \"rights\" does he not, so it\'s all OK?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Without royalties yes, but not without payment and not without the musicians knowing what is being done to their material. I can\'t believe you can\'t see the difference here.... There are plenty of situations where you don\'t get royalties. You rarely do e.g., when you do music for a computer game.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>

I happen to believe that the musican should have a right to a share of the profits (when I said this before, all I got was people telling me that I could do that myself if I wanted)).
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is entirely up to the musician. It\'s not like the musicians playing on libraries are forced to play with a gun to their head. If they want royalties, they should just negociate that into the contract - if the developer says no, the musician can just walk away.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>

The fact that many months of programming go into a product shouldn\'t, in itself, offer the kind of protection samplists enjoy. DJ\'s can hack great lumps from songs, but samplists get every waveform protected.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not sure if I understand you right here. DJ\'s as in DJ composers or DJ DJ\'s? DJ\'s play music, the people who composed the music get their royalties, at least in many countries. Composers who sample other composers get permission to do it - probably including some royalties going back to the original composer. If someone takes a piece of music (a sample) from another composer without permission, they can be sued. Sometimes the original composers don\'t bother, sometimes they do. I don\'t know what \'protection\' you\'re referring to here, since the composers who BOUGHT the library can use the waves as crazy as they want in their music without paying any roaylties to either sample developers or sample library musicians.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>
What if I need a choir to produce a series of self-similar pieces of music, but only for a number of phrases. Too expensive. How about a sample library? Why can\'t I hire a guy who plays the VoTA to make up a smaller sample library for me?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess you can. As long has he doesnt deliver raw samples to your, but rather a composition - be that in part or in full. I don\'t think it is illegal to get help from a friend or otherwise who owns a library.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>
THEN, why I can\'t I say that this new library is so different from VoTA (many months of programming and beta testing) as to constitute a completely new library?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please - you can\'t be this naive...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>
I paid the guy a fee (just like a samplist) to \'play\' his instrument, then spent months programming it (completely new keyswtching etc.) with him or others?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A sample library is not an instrument. I think that is the main thing that separates in this case. Different laws are applicable, and if you don\'t like how it works, find your own choir, string players or whatever. Or use the library yourself. Or hire someone to compose for you with the library. All legal, AFAIK.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>
I\'m sorry if it\'s insulting, but I believe that when the musician is completely integral to the integrity of the product (i.e. a difficult instrument to play for a session) the law should also protect his rights, and unreasonable gains, should be disbursed to the musician.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is, as I said earlier, up to the musician. If he wants royalties, he should negotiate for them. It can\'t be the problem of the library-producer.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>
And Simon: \"Do you know this by experience? It certainly doesn\'t sound that way.\"

As far as insults go; your first sentence here is just a question: the second sentence is an insult.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is? You\'re very easy to insult then, if you find that remark personal. And oddly enough, you didn\'t answer the question. I have a feeling I know the answer though.



[This message has been edited by Simon Ravn (edited 12-11-2001).]

[Gav]

Let me just jump in for a minute here:

Z6, get your head out of your *** . It\'s dark in there and you\'ve lost your way.
a) the studio musicians that Nick et al. are recording KNOW why they\'re being recorded and accept it.
b) have you never heard of \"work-for-hire\"? It\'s industry standard buddy. Musicians play/write entire works using skills that took decades to develop and still only recieve a single paycheck while producers put their mistress\'s kids through college with the royalties. Why single notes upset you so much is beyond me. I expect you just wanted something to say so you can join the discussion.

As for all this copy protection stuff...I haven\'t yet formed an opinion so I\'ll hover over things a little longer.

Gav http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/grin.gif

[Deep White]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Archangel:
Also, I agree when people say \"The more expensive it is, the more privacy you have\". you should calculate your price to maximize your revenue in function of CD sold. I know you must have a statiscic, like \"for every 10 Cds I sell, 1 is gone through piracy\"...
Archangel<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don\'t quite agree with that.
In the pop music CD market, we once released a single and cut the price real low (2/3 off), and there are still pirate copies sold, and from what I know, no fewer than other CDs with normal price.

People who use pirate copies have gone into the habit of using pirate copies only, expensive or not. They buy copies from the same source, and since it\'s a one-stop shopping mall, why don\'t they just buy everything they need there? Why would they want to buy the pirate copies of the expensive ones and then connect to East/West again and go through all the shopping procedure again for the not-that-expensive ones?

And, after all, you\'re just not getting any cheaper than pirate copies. No way.

I\'m not trying to be an *** here, and I\'d be very glad if the producers are willing to lower the price; but if only to hope that pirate copy users will \"come back to the right side,\" don\'t bother.

Arys Chien

[SCARBEE]

Hi Deep White:

I think you are absolutely right: lowering prizes will NOT prevent piracy for the reasons you give.

I actually think that some libraries are way to cheap - it is hard to make a living out of sampling and it gets worse, because the demands gets bigger each time - more samples more articulations, etc. It takes half years to complete libraries now and you just have to pay for it otherwise we are out of business.

[This message has been edited by SCARBEE (edited 12-12-2001).]

[Michiel Post]

Let me add a couple of words to this discussion. This discussion about the copy protection on QL 56 Strat has taken a very weird road towards the point where Nick is asked to defend himself why he dares to protect his library against pirates. I can hardly believe people have so little respect for an artist as Nick who made these incredible libraries. Let see.
Is it strange to assume an individual has the RIGHT to protect his property from being stolen? I don\'t think so.
In normal life when an individual wants to protect his property he can take reasonable measures to protect the property from being stolen. How come people in this forum come to believe different when digital rights are involved?
If you read the license on a sample cd it clearly says: you don\'t own the samples on this disk, you are just given the license to use the samples in your music. You own the cd on which the samples are transferred to you. The samples are the property of the producer. The producer has taken measures to ensure no claims from musicians exist on the material that is recorded. It is normal fact of life that people protect their property.

Now consider yourself in other real-life situations: you have a driver license, this gives you the right to drive a car. This is comparable to a license with samples: you get the right to use the samples. When you drive your car the law (who gave you the license) can ask you to show your driver license. They stop your car while you\'re driving and they ask you to show the proof of the fact that you may drive the car. Compare that situation to the use of a sample library. You use the samples and in order to check if you are a legitimate user you are asked to show the proof (in this case the cd) that you may use these samples. Now Nick\'s procedure is very friendly: it does not stop you while you are traveling in your car, no it asks you to show the proof of the license before you start the car. And only once in a blue moon (twice a year???). What\'s the problem? The argument that a sample user keeps his cd\'s locked in a vault in the other side of town is stupid. When you drive your car you take the driver license with you in order to be sure that you can prove you may drive. You don\'t lock your driver license in a vault on the other side of town. When you travel with a computer to the other side of the globe and take a soundlibrary with you, you must be an enormous idiot not to take the original software and data cd\'s with you. Any professional working with computers knows that computers do crash. The only safe way of using a computer outside your own studio or office is when you take a bundle of cd\'s with you to re-install software and re-new the authorisations. Period. The other argument that the divine creation of a musical work of art is brutally interrupted by the authorization process is even more stupid. When you know you are going to do something important you know that you have to prepare yourself. You want to shake hands with somebody? then you better wash your hands first. You\'re going to kiss? better have your teeth brushed. Gonna have with someone you don\'t know? use a rubber. You\'re going to drive a car? take your license with you and don\'t drink too much. Going to use samples? take care you have the proper license. You don\'t want to be disturbed during your divine moments of creating art? have your cd\'s in the studio when you fire up the computer. Call it a form of intellectual hygiene. Period.

When you know what your rights are you also know what your duties are. In the case of using samples you must prevent others to abuse the samples. We producers cannot prevent some of our users to try to abuse the material we produce. You however can help us.
I am a producer myself and it hurts me tremendously that at least 4 different groups that I know of have pirated my my Post Organ Toolkit. We\'ve seen pirates offering my library for $2! Imagine that one even wants to take the trouble of making a illegal copy for $2. The worst thing is that a legal customer of mine must have enabled the pirates to copy the cd (after all I didn\'t give the master to them!). Therefor I believe it\'s perfectly normal that a producer takes the liberty to take reasonable measures to prevent that his property gets stolen. We can discuss further what a REASONABLE MEASURE is. It is normal fact of life that people protect their property.
I know that people in the US believe it\'s reasonable measure to carry a shotgun to prevent that their property gets stolen. I found it shocking that so many people here in this forum believe Nick (and all others) doesn\'t have to right to protect his property against pirates.

With pictures there is a copyprotection technique that makes the photocopy invisible and shows a message like \"this is copyright protected material contact xxx for a license\". Until we get the same technique for audio we\'ll have to live with some other techniques.
With eBooks there is fairly good system. With DVD there used to be a good system. Let\'s do our jobs, be patient and see what happens
next. Let\'s hope there will be better ways to protect sample libraries in the near future but for now let\'s try to stop pirates shall we?
Michiel Post

[Archangel]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Deep White:
I don\'t quite agree with that.
In the pop music CD market, we once released a single and cut the price real low (2/3 off), and there are still pirate copies sold, and from what I know, no fewer than other CDs with normal price.

People who use pirate copies have gone into the habit of using pirate copies only, expensive or not. They buy copies from the same source, and since it\'s a one-stop shopping mall, why don\'t they just buy everything they need there? Why would they want to buy the pirate copies of the expensive ones and then connect to East/West again and go through all the shopping procedure again for the not-that-expensive ones?

And, after all, you\'re just not getting any cheaper than pirate copies. No way.

I\'m not trying to be an *** here, and I\'d be very glad if the producers are willing to lower the price; but if only to hope that pirate copy users will \"come back to the right side,\" don\'t bother.

Arys Chien<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I meant is people with really low budget , in this situation, will be attracted to pirated samples instead of the original. So lowering the price will prevent FURTHER people to go into pirated samples. Because when you got the money and you absolutely want something, you can buy it, so you\'ll do and won\'t bother searching pirate sites. If you don\'t have money (or not that much), if you really want the library, you\'ll search pirated samples. That\'s what happens in the head of people who takes pirated samples . It is only a matter of money.

Archangel

[Archangel]

To Michiel Post:

That reminds me of what I said. You can\'t stop pirating. The fact that pirated samples get on the internet is that someone effectively BUYS the library in a legal way. Now you can\'t do anything about that, he bought the library, he\'s completely legal. But you can\'t know if he\'ll only use it for his own sake or hack the CD to distribute it on the internet. So every people who downloads it will have the same serial number if you use a serial number protection scheme . So how will you find the original pirate in all this, even if you track the serial number (in this case, you\'ll get about a thousand same serials...)?

That\'s the way it is...in the market of pop music, you can buy an Audio CD. But nobody can know of what you\'ll so with it. You can copy the WAV data on your computer, encode it in MP3 format, and send the CD all over the net! But! According to the law you are legal, because you bought the CD. So what can you do about that? Nothing! Sorry. So the point of asking the original CD can be okay if asked once in a Blue moon, but I believe this can be cracked easily. Let\'s take an old 30-days trial demo trick that works btw, I tried it once just for fun with a recent sofware (Animation Shop 3 from Jasc, which I warned Jasc about the hole in this trial version) , and it worked.

I mean, you just have to take the date of your computer and rewind it, and you fooled the program. And this trick is not a hacker trick!

So Nick, if you ever do that form of copy protection, make sure you test all the possibilities before doing so. But remember one thing : if your protection is invincible and becomes a standard , for EVERY CD, I will be asked to put it in. So if they all ask it at the same date, I would see wrong the fact to insert 50 Cds on the same day!
Or I would end with having to put a CD once every week.

Archangel

[thesoundsmith]

Price is not the issue. If I really, really WANT a $1000 string library but don\'t really NEED it, and don\'t have $1000, I\'ll just have to either save my pennies, buy a less expensive library, or do without. Because I\'m a professional, and I won\'t knowingly use pirated material. It\'s bad business.

If I were just a hobbyist, unless I had a LOT of bucks to throw around, I wouldn\'t spend $1000 for a string library. I\'d buy a $199 string library and be happy with it, because it would be close enough for most of my needs. Because I still won\'t use pirated material, out of general principal. (This is me. Your mileage may vary.)

But if I were a hobbyist who was willing to use pirate disks, it wouldn\'t matter if the library were only $29.95. I\'d still use the pirate CD because at least a part of the allure is \'getting away with it.\' And my stuff won;t go any further than the nearest MP3 freebie distribution site, so it\'s unlikely that anyone that mattered would ever hear it.

I\'m sure that at least some of the sample developers have charged more for their product than it was worth, back when there was little to be had, and 12-bit samplers were the \'hot\' item (remember the Akai S900?)

But today, building a half-way usable library (never mind a really quality one) is a LOT of work, and the market is really quite small. I can\'t afford $1000 for GOS, or $500 for VotA, but that\'s OK. I don\'t NEED them for the music I produce. If I produced film scores or symphonic music, then I WOULD afford the price, because it would be part of my necessary toolkit, and I would prioritize it in my budget, rather than that new Neumann mike.

And if I were the struggling student at Berklee or Julliard, I might try to get together with the other students and professors and try to negotiate a group purchase through the school.

As far as that goes, while I\'m WAY past my \'student\' days, though I hope I NEVER stop learning, has anyone ever discussed arranging a license for a school composition lab where a dozen or more students share time? And I guess the first question is how to keep those students from taking ZIP disks to copy gigs and sample files for their use outside of class-so maybe this isn\'t a good idea anyway. But I think I\'ll start a thread anyway, our local junior college has started a digital recording class and this is a really valuable tool.

Dasher

[Deep White]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Archangel:
What I meant is people with really low budget , in this situation, will be attracted to pirated samples instead of the original. So lowering the price will prevent FURTHER people to go into pirated samples. Because when you got the money and you absolutely want something, you can buy it, so you\'ll do and won\'t bother searching pirate sites. If you don\'t have money (or not that much), if you really want the library, you\'ll search pirated samples. That\'s what happens in the head of people who takes pirated samples . It is only a matter of money.

Archangel<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I\'m going to say might be a bit offensive - though I don\'t intend to - so please forgive me if you\'re not comfortable with it.

Again, I\'m not trying to be an *** here, but if I can\'t afford a Porche but I really want to have one, can I just steal one? or buy one that I know is a stolen car?

Miroslav\'s orchestral sample library is top class, quality and price. If I really want that library but just can\'t afford it, I can buy a pirate copy but SHOULD I?

It\'s always \"to be or not to be,\" never \"I have no choice but....\" For people that can always find excuses for things they want to but should not do, it\'s about conscience, not price.

Arys Chien

[SCARBEE]

Money is not the issue - I agree.

A pirate thinks like this:

1) If the CD cost $199 he think it is too expensive and he will find a pirated copy.

2) If the prize is $39 it is so cheap that it does not harm anyone if he get a pirated copy.

3) If the prize is in between he will pirated it - to \"evaluate\" it before he decieds to buy it. But after a couple of days it will seem stupid to buy something he already \"owns\" so he will never pay...

It\'s only abouit moral and being humble:
I would like a Jaguar but I don\'t earn so many money - so should I ask jaguar to lower the prize to avoid me from stealing it?

The prize of Giga-libraries can\'t go down any further, if it does, all of us developers are out of job. It is NOT a profitable business!

Scarbee



[This message has been edited by SCARBEE (edited 12-12-2001).]

[Archangel]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Deep White:
What I\'m going to say might be a bit offensive - though I don\'t intend to - so please forgive me if you\'re not comfortable with it.

Again, I\'m not trying to be an *** here, but if I can\'t afford a Porche but I really want to have one, can I just steal one? or buy one that I know is a stolen car?

Miroslav\'s orchestral sample library is top class, quality and price. If I really want that library but just can\'t afford it, I can buy a pirate copy but SHOULD I?

It\'s always \"to be or not to be,\" never \"I have no choice but....\" For people that can always find excuses for things they want to but should not do, it\'s about conscience, not price.

Arys Chien<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don\'t forget one thing : people are more willing to steal a library than a car, because they are less likely to be caught.

[Archangel]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SCARBEE:
Money is not the issue - I agree.

A pirate thinks like this:

1) If the CD cost $199 he think it is too expensive and he will find a pirated copy.

2) If the prize is $39 it is so cheap that it does not harm anyone if he get a pirated copy.

3) If the prize is in between he will pirated it - to \"evaluate\" it before he decieds to buy it. But after a couple of days it will seem stupid to buy something he already \"owns\" so he will never pay...

It\'s only abouit moral and being humble:
I would like a Jaguar but I don\'t earn so many money - so should I ask jaguar to lower the prize to avoid me from stealing it?

The prize of Giga-libraries can\'t go down any further, if it does, all of us developers are out of job. It is NOT a profitable business!

Scarbee

[This message has been edited by SCARBEE (edited 12-12-2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You\'re right scarbee....people wil pirate anyways....I just didn\'t look it that way.

But the original subject was that copy protection.....

Nick, can\'t you use an authoring tool other than an insert CD notification? I don\'t know....maybe an encrypted code that would be in he .gig file , that can only be unlocked if it is unique when sent to the server or something?

Archangel

[KingIdiot]

So nick does it again. This time it\'ll be 100 posts and he didn\'t even start the topic..


Man HOWWWW DOOOOOOOOOO YOU DO THAT? http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[Munsie]

A highly anticipated library gets released, copy protection issues, piracy concerns, profit concerns for sample developers, this thread has got it all! Let\'s add some comments about , politics, war, and their is no end in sight!

[Joris de Man]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Munsie:
A highly anticipated library gets released, copy protection issues, piracy concerns, profit concerns for sample developers, this thread has got it all! Let\'s add some comments about , politics, war, and their is no end in sight!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I must admit getting mildly aroused when I heard Nick\'s Vota demo (especially the high female vocals did it for me http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

Joris

[Deep White]

To Michiel Post,

There was too much to quote so I just didn\'t.

1. CD verification of sample libraries is different from police stopping you and checking your driver licence, for I have only one car, or I have many cars but can only drive one at a time, but I do own a lot of legal sample libraries and often use many of them in one project. Imagine that there are different cops, some stop you and ask for the license of the wheels of the car, some for the license of the steering wheel, and another for the license of the spare tire which you RARELY USE?

2. One has the right to take action to protect his or her property, but when the sample producers put something to bother the legal users while pirate copies are everywhere, it\'s like they are pointing their shotguns at us innocent people but in the meantime letting gansters robbing their houses. A strange picture, isn\'t it?

3. I don\'t have to read the license inside the CD to understand it, but what mattered was that I didn\'t know until I read the inlay of the CD that it was copy-protected. I, personally, have never been 100% against the copy protection, as many others have not; what we were not comfortable with was that Nick didn\'t let us know beforehand.

4. I do carry my driver license when I go driving, but if my driver license were made of 30 CDs I\'d just take the bus. You carry all the original discs with you when you\'re out of town? What do you use? A Palm PDA? Let me tell you what I have to carry with me: a Windows 2000 CD, an Office CD (I wrote lyrics), CDs for SONAR, CoolEditPro and Soundscape soundcard, MOTU MTP-AV, GigaStudio160, NI\'s FM7, 5 CDs for Miroslav, 2 DVDs for GOS, 3 CDs for Nick\'s QL56, and 30+ CDs for other LEGAL sample libraries, and since not all of them are in Giga format I\'ll also need the Translator\'s original disc.
OR, I can backup my PC\'s system files and program files with Ghost, into 2 CDs, so if anything goes wrong I\'ll just ghost them back. This, of course, can only be done if I\'m not to be asked about the original CDs.

5. I myself have no problem with the \"possible creative flow interruption,\" but that is me. If a guy called Newton could even forget to eat, it is very possible that he totally forgot where his original CDs were. So if he had known that the sample library would ask for the original CDs BEFORE he bought it, he might just give it up. Or he might not, but then it was up to HIM, right?

6. One of your customer is the bad guy, but don\'t forget that he or she is also the ONLY one that cracked your protection. We, the rest, are not able to, or don\'t have the will to. So why build a wall against us, while the only bad guy can walk through it with ease? Just who do you think you\'re keeping off?

7. Unless we have more advanced technology with audio, we\'ll live with the not-so-effective methods we have - or we can choose to LIVE WITHOUT things that use them. It\'s all about free will. It\'s fine for you to put up a copy protection, but do let us know beforehand and we\'ll decide.

8. eBooks & DVD? The former are all over the Internet in .txt format, and the latter has been cracked too, hasn\'t it?

9. \"Let\'s do our jobs, be patient and see what happens
next.\" I hope nothing\'s gonna happen next when I use my QL56 samples.

10. \"Let\'s hope there will be better ways to protect sample libraries in the near future.\" I too hope so. AutoTune 3\'s DirectX version crashes during installation under W2K Pro and I can\'t use what I\'ve paid for so far. The Antares people admitted this problem but have not solve it so far AND HAVE NOT GIVE ME ANY INFO SO FAR!!! If I saw a cracked version before they solve this bug I\'ll ask for a refund with a really bad attitude!!! And where does it crash? During the copy protection procedure. Funny, huh? but I\'m not laughing.

11. \"but for now let\'s try to stop pirates shall we?\" Let\'s bomb the terrirists, but in the meantime, TRY not to bomb the civilians, shall we?

Arys Chien

[This message has been edited by Deep White (edited 12-12-2001).]

[Deep White]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Archangel:
Don\'t forget one thing : people are more willing to steal a library than a car, because they are less likely to be caught.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. Actually I think what differs us here is our focus. Yours being - correct me if I\'m wrong - \"giving people less chance to do bad things,\" while mine \"if people do bad things they just do and it\'s pointless to TWIST yourself to merely TRY to keep them from doing.\"

If there were no pirate copies in the world, would the people that can\'t afford legal copies buy legal copies? No. So why lower the price for them?

Piracy is like cancer, stealing nutritions from your body and sucking you up. So what do the patients do? Eat less so the cancer grows slowlier?

Arys Chien

[PatS]

I keep telling myself not to read this topic, but it\'s too late: I\'m addicted. For those keeping score, let me just say I don\'t find copy protection at all bothersome. I can deal with the hassle of finding the CD if that\'s the price I must pay to have a superb sample library. Of course, raising three kids (8, 4.5, and 1) puts a lot of this into perspective for me: what\'s a major pain in the rear for some of you is a walk in the park for me. Heck, I\'ll even let my mildly autistic son insert the CD; he likes to do that . . . as long as he gets to play some weird insect or bass patch on my keyboard.

Pat (saving his pennies for a legitimate copy of VotA and QL56, among other things)

[This message has been edited by PatS (edited 12-12-2001).]

[Thomas_J]

Just contributing to the topic... now nobody can say I didn\'t help reach the 100 barrier this time http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

(Wouldn\'t it be fun with a 200 post topic some day? Obviously we\'d need a more interesting topic http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

Anyway I say Nick does whatever he wants for now. I\'m sure he\'ll reconsider it if he gets enough complaints.

Thomas

[Archangel]

I guess we should make a mass voting....

Nick should ask every user some feedback about his copy protection. And if a majority tells it\'s okay, he has the right to continue with this way of protecting his data.


Archangel

[Gav]

Careful there Arch...let\'s not forget that regardless of whether or not we like it, Nick can do whatever the hell he wants with HIS (and I repeat, for the purposes of clarity...HIS!!!) samples. He doesn\'t need to wait for anyone to vote on it.

Gav http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/grin.gif

[Munsie]

To anyone that has purchased this library: (Nick\'s Strat)

After a year of messing with my GigaStudio dedicated pc, updating drivers, adding sound cards, software updates, etc, this thing is VERY stable. I have no intentions of installing a gig library that uses custom software protection to my giga system. My questions is this, perhaps even Nick can answer but I doubt it...

I want this library, but I do not want to install the custom protection app on my system. Is it possible, or even legal, to purchase it, install the gigs on my sequencer pc, not the giga pc, copy the resulting installed gigs to the giga drive, thus avoiding the installation procedure. Would this work and is this legal? Thanks..

[thesoundsmith]

\"It\'s Nick\'s library, and he can do what he wants\" Absolutely, to a point. And within the realm of what he actually has done, I agree.

But taking it to the absurd, which, in today\'s litgious society, sometimes must be done...

What if what he (or some other developer-this is not about any one person or group) WANTS to do is install a copy protection scheme that, when it detects what it thinks is a pirate copy, formats your hard drive? (This was a much-bandied-about schema back in the seventies.)

There are some who would think this was perfectly acceptable-hey, you bought (or downloaded) a pirate disk, you get what you deserve.

But it is not uncommon to find counterfeit CDs at flea markets (or even regular retail outlets) that look absolutely legal, and are sealed, so there\'s no way know at the time of purchase they\'re pirate copies. Hong Kong/Taiwan pirates have released Windows OS boxes that look absolutely identical to the original, down to the holo stickers on the license.

And what happens if a key hard disk sector goes south? Legit copy, but the verification DLL can\'t verify, so it wipes the disk...

Point being, there are limits to how far you can legally and ethically go (crying \"Movie, Movie\" at a fire...\"

One of those ethical points (perfectly legal) is putting the notice about the verify program INSIDE the box, rather than on the outside, where the potential purchaser can make the decision. This was, to me, the only REAL issue-I also had concerns about work flow interruptions, but those are minor compared to this.

Nick has acknowledged this, and seems to agree it was not the best decision. So we live and learn. (And if we don\'t, we get to read through another multi-page thread like this!) I\'m satisfied. I hope Munsie, Archangel, Deep White and the other posters with serious concerns will also, if no be satisfied, at least feel their concerns have been recognised and validated, if not resolved.

I hate to see bad feelings break up a happy relationship. And I\'d like to see a good working relationship between the developers and the users. THat\'s what makes a product into a world-class standard.

Dasher

[Archangel]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gav:
Careful there Arch...let\'s not forget that regardless of whether or not we like it, Nick can do whatever the hell he wants with HIS (and I repeat, for the purposes of clarity...HIS!!!) samples. He doesn\'t need to wait for anyone to vote on it.

Gav http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/grin.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, that\'s right...it was just a suggestion.I say that because there are ways to prevent copy protection other than things that ask the licensed user to do something.

Archangel

[Archangel]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by thesoundsmith:

\"It\'s Nick\'s library, and he can do what he wants\" Absolutely, to a point. And within the realm of what he actually has done, I agree.

But taking it to the absurd, which, in today\'s litgious society, sometimes must be done...

What if what he (or some other developer-this is not about any one person or group) WANTS to do is install a copy protection scheme that, when it detects what it thinks is a pirate copy, formats your hard drive? (This was a much-bandied-about schema back in the seventies.)

There are some who would think this was perfectly acceptable-hey, you bought (or downloaded) a pirate disk, you get what you deserve.

But it is not uncommon to find counterfeit CDs at flea markets (or even regular retail outlets) that look absolutely legal, and are sealed, so there\'s no way know at the time of purchase they\'re pirate copies. Hong Kong/Taiwan pirates have released Windows OS boxes that look absolutely identical to the original, down to the holo stickers on the license.

And what happens if a key hard disk sector goes south? Legit copy, but the verification DLL can\'t verify, so it wipes the disk...

Point being, there are limits to how far you can legally and ethically go (crying \"Movie, Movie\" at a fire...\"

One of those ethical points (perfectly legal) is putting the notice about the verify program INSIDE the box, rather than on the outside, where the potential purchaser can make the decision. This was, to me, the only REAL issue-I also had concerns about work flow interruptions, but those are minor compared to this.

Nick has acknowledged this, and seems to agree it was not the best decision. So we live and learn. (And if we don\'t, we get to read through another multi-page thread like this!) I\'m satisfied. I hope Munsie, Archangel, Deep White and the other posters with serious concerns will also, if no be satisfied, at least feel their concerns have been recognised and validated, if not resolved.

I hate to see bad feelings break up a happy relationship. And I\'d like to see a good working relationship between the developers and the users. THat\'s what makes a product into a world-class standard.

Dasher<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That\'s great. That\'s why I post messages here. We\'re working together to suggest the best effective copy protection possible on those expensive libraries.

But it\'s true that they are sooo expensive though. I guess they are at their lowest prices. I\'ll wait for years to buy other libraries .. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif . I currently have xSample clarinets, sound great so far. And I\'ll have to build a new system soon, tu support Giga 2.5 and Windows XP, with a GSIF compatible sound card.

Whoooo ... so big cash involvment here http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif . Anyways, what system .... hum..I\'ll post another topic about this...

P.S. Hey I did the 100th post! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

Archangel

[This message has been edited by Archangel (edited 12-14-2001).]

[Damon]

DIE THREAD DIE!!!!

[Francis Belardino]

HA ha ha ha ha ha

[KingIdiot]

I think I\'m going to copy protect my fart library witha stink bomb virus.


I also want to copy protect my eyeball... dunno why..just feel like it

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[Francis Belardino]

LOL King.

I haven\'t read all of this but, I think developers should protect their art in any way they can.

Is that a \"flame\" statement?



------------------
Francis Belardino
fbelardino@audiovisionsonline.com (\"fbelardino@audiovisionsonline.com\")

Sound Designer
Audio Visions, LTD.
Wilmington, DE.

www.audiovisionsonline.com (\"http://www.audiovisionsonline.com\")