Have you used pirated sample libraries?

[Garritan]

In another thread, Nikolas has requested a poll be done to see who has used pirated software.

This poll asks: Have you used pirated sample libraries?

Be honest. The poll is anonymous so we have no way of knowing how you voted.

If you feel inclined pleased list some of reasons that would encourage or deter someone from using pirated libraries. Do any of the current piracy protection methods make someone less inclined to pirate?

Gary Garritan

[J. Whaley]

There's been a couple of libraries I "borrowed" from a friend to look through and see if I wanted to spend the money. But with every circumstance, not one exception, I have bought the library if I wanted to use it.

However, I have saved lots of money because I could try before I buy. It's pretty much impossible now with the NI copyprotection - well, it's probably not, but I'm not a pirate I don't try to hack.

The problem from the user's position on this is the return policy. It doesn't exist. So if you buy something and don't like it - SOL. That's why copyprotection is unfairly weighted.

Let's say the world moved to hardware protection - which in reality is the easiest way to get up and running after a crash. The situation should look like this:

- 2 authorizations allowed, one for two dongles. (This is the equivilent of the old HD auth. system that had 2 authorizations on a disk)

- If someone bought the software and chose not to keep it, they should be able to de-authorize, send a code, and get their money back. (this is fair for the user)

- Ideally, with a hardware authorizataion (like iLok) someone could "rent" samples for a week or month at a time. Many plugin companies are doing it, why couldn't sample companies?

These rental setups could allow a try before you buy - which I for one would be more than happy to do.



As far as I'm concerned CP is more relevant to software. I've never felt a lot of desire to seek out pirated sample libraries. I know they're out there, but I personally have always seen it more as a "am I interested in this" kind of thing.

As for the software - don't get me started.

At the end of the day I don't specifically mind CP IF it's fair for everyone. But developers have made it very developer friendly and have treated all users as theives. I hate calling and trying to work on copy protection issues because I know I'm going to be treated like a theif and I resent that. IF companies must use CP (which they say they must because they're loosing money) then they should also lower the cost of their products because they claim they charged more to cover piracy. Now the piracy is cut down - so charge less.

AND - like I said, the ONLY fair way is to work out a way for users to have valid returns. I've got a couple libraries right now I'd send back. Over the years I can prove I've wasted close to $10k on software and samples I have NEVER USED ONCE. That's one of the BIG reasons piracy is a problem.


But I've said all this before, so I don't overly expect a bunch of people to listen - maybe one other lonely user

J-

[Robert P]

To be accurate, the "No" should be:

"No, I have never used pirated samples."

(some people may have used pirated music softwares but never pirated samples)

Cheers
R.

[wrayer]

To be accurate, the "No" should be:

"No, I have never used pirated samples."

(some people may have used pirated music softwares but never pirated samples)

Cheers
R.

For Shame!

[nikolas]

Actually I have never used pirated libraries...

I would imagine that it's much easier to download a game (older times game), or an mp3, or even Cubase it self, than a 50 Gb library...

If the poll was extented to having used anything pirated, or any music software pirated, maybe the polls would be different...

Gary, thank you for doing this

[Bela D Media]

Bela D Media is a recent victim of the despicable act of piracy and will take the necessary legal action in return.

To those who do pirate samples:

Please allow me the opportunity to speak directly to you. What you are doing is hurting honest individuals who wish nothing more then to make a living with their talents. As we are all musicians, surely one can understand the goal of providing for your family and future by means of talent.

You did not take the risk of being self-employed. You did not secure founds to record musicians for sampling. You did not pay for advertising, promotional materials, web severs, artwork, programmers and so on.

Why do you feel you have a right to use stolen samples in your work?

Because you wish to “try before you buy” or that if you buy and don’t make good use - you are the one who has been ripped off? No. Theses reasons do not fly and you do not make the rules. You feel you have the right to steal for the simple fact that you lack respect for the labors of others.

Because of you, dongles and closed source sampling must bother the honest electronic musician.

Inclosing, please remember two things…

1. You have taken food of off the family table and there is no excuse, rhyme or reason.

2. Continue to steal our work and before you know it, there will not be many of us around to steal from.

Sincerely,
Francis Belardino
Bela D Media.com

[dewdman42]

I don't think any of the copy protection schemes make any difference whatsoever to stop or slowdown piracy. These days all sample libraries are readily available on the internet for anyone willing to do just a little bit of homework to find them. There are people out there who make cracking their serious hobby the way we make music ours. They will never tire of this activity.

My feeling is that people that want to be honest, will be, if not immediately, then eventually after they use the pirated version a while and realize its worth every penny. People that don't want to be honest won't.

Another observation I have made is that some people simply figure out eventually that its often more hassle trying to obtain and use pirated sample libraries than to just go buy it.

Having said all that, I will say that myself I have purchased a few sample libraries that turned out to be complete duds and waste of money. Its hard not to feel burned. There is no real way to fully test a sample library before buying it. Most times the license for a sample library is completely non-transferrable to, so you can't legally sell it if you don't like it.

On a positive note, I feel that some sample libraries and software get more attention by virtue of the fact that they are pirated and put into the hands of thousands of teenagers and other casual users. some of that amounts to "free marketing". The question that is not answered is whether this free marketing generates more new sales that wouldn't have otherwise been gotten, then if the pirating never ocurred? One has to also remember that a large percentage of the folks using a pirated copy of software or a sample library would probably not buy it if the copy protection was better. In many cases they simply can't afford it, such as teenagers and some casual users. Or they would opt for a more affordable alternative, or perhaps another one that is not copy protected....or perhaps something that is free, which there are growing numbers of. In fact, I would argue that if sample library protections became too great, the masses on the internet would unite the way the open source software community has united and eventually you'd see better and better quality stuff floating around that is completely free. Tell me what THAT would do for your bottom line?

So personally, I don't know that adding copy protection is going to raise bottom line revenue. I know that software companies like to talk about all of their lost revenue, but the thing is, that a million pirates over in Thailand are probably not gonna buy MS Windows if they had to pay the current price for it. So really its only "theoretically" lost revenue. But the reality is that these software companies are not losing so much as they would like to think. That doesn't make it right or just, but if you want to talk about bottom line then I think there are a lot of hidden factors clouding the issue.

All that being said, I think certain amounts of copy protection are completely acceptable and a good thing. I hate dongles and some schemes. But a certain amount of it is good because it does deter some people simply because of the inconvience of finding a working pirated version. The crack groups will have it pirated within days of your release and circulating on the internet, but the audio professionals who spend their time making music and don't spend it hanging out in warez chat rooms...they will not be able to casually and easily make a copy for their buddy. And this form of copy protection is not so obnoxious to paying customers. The NI scheme is most of the time ok. I've had a vew issues when I reinstalled windows and deactived my license on NI and then I had to call and talk to someone to get it reactivated it again, which put me out of commission for 12 hours. A bit annoying. Nowhere near as annoying as the card I just got with Notion which said that if I lose my dongle it will cost me like a hundred bucks to get a replacement. Hello... this is the point where copy protection is antagonizing me, a paying customer..and probably doing very little to stop the piracy of their product in the long run.

[nikolas]

Ok,

BTW, something about Bella that made me think higher about the company:

The educational software can be used commercially. Unlike other companies.

This is, for me, a move to the right direction. Students may wish to make some money (but since they are students it's hard to do it full time and get the money a full pro would), and thus still don't have the right ammount to pay. Being a student is not always about learning and only that. Educational software should not only be about learning.

Heck I'm a student (PhD and 29 years old), I do paid works, but the revenues by no means do justify spending the ammounts I would like to (while the EDU could help me towards that end). Furthermore with 2 kids it's kinda difficult to juggle...

[johnmarkpainter]

RE: Student Pirates

There was a student here at Belmont Univ using his $3k computer rig to sell burned CD's to students. He had a massive library built up and did a solid business out of his dorm room.

Of course he also had every cracked music software title as well.

If students were able to pirate HARDWARE...... Instrumentalists all have to figure out how to pay for their gear.

A student doesn't need the Quantum Leap Library to learn. (especially with GPO available).

[wst3ae]

I'm all for discourse about copy protection, but can we please dispense with the lame rationalizations?

"I can't afford" it is NOT a reason to steal!

If you can't afford it now wait until you can, or find a creative, legal means to use it.

"I got burnt" is NOT a reason to steal!

Do your homework! I've spent more on microphones that some sample libraries, and you can bet that I used those microphones in settings similar to the way I wanted to use them long before I plunked down my hard earned cash!

"I wouldn't have bought it if I had to pay for it so you didn't really lose anything"

This may be the lamest of them all because it demonstrates ignorance, or possibly even stupidity, in addition to a complete lack of respect for the intellectual property of others.

"Intellectual Properly law is outdated"

Get over yourself! If the law needs to be changed there are tried and true ways to change them, some of them even involve civil disobediance, in the proper form. Breaking laws does not get them changed!

"I'm helping to expose the product by using it"

Yeah, you are a one man marketing phenomenon... that's why you resort to stealing!

Let's be straight about this... piracy is stealing and it takes money from people that you talk to here on a regular basis. Doesn't that matter to you? These are not giant corporations. You can count the number of truly large corporations playing in the MI and pro-audio marketplaces on one hand, and they are not usually the innovators.

I saved my favorite for last...

"You can't stop piracy"

Hmmm... you can't stop grand theft auto, robbery, or murder either. Does that mean we should all partake of these activities too?

So yes, we can talk about piracy, but let's not make excuses to make ourselves feel better. Let's be honest and admit that piracy is stealing, and there is no rationale to justify it.

And then let's get down to brass tacks and talk about copy protection, and how it can be implemented to at least slow piracy, while at the same time be less intrusive on the honest customer.

There has to be a way, and if there is one group that can come up with it I'd bet on this group. And then let's vote with our wallets.

nuff said!