• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Topic: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

  1. #1

    Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    Hi I am reselling my Gigastudio 96 to a friend of mine, as he really loves this program.

    Gigastudio 96 is registered by me, I know that with sample libraries this is a no no, but if I sold my Gigastudio 96 used, is there a way that I could just have Tascam transfer ownership? Anyone knows if it can be done?

    I would really appreciate any input


  2. #2

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    Since the post about the guy that was selling his Advanced Orchestra was taken out....maybe I could ask the question again to the various developers on this forum...

    Why is there no return policy on sample libraries? Is it not logical to assume that if a person that purchased the library to begin with (and doesn\'t need it within a reasoneble amount of time) and returns it, he would take necessary steps to retain his legal status and not copy the library?

    Also, concerning trasferrance of ownership....you can do it with cars, houses, boats, even pets! Why not software???

    I guess the point that I am trying to make is that the legitimate users are being treated like potential criminals....while the pirates are not affected by this in the least!

    Can\'t we all rectify this situation and allow a user to:

    A. Return a product within a reasonable time?

    B. Transfer ownership?

  3. #3

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    I certainly do not want to speak for all the developers so this is just my opinion.

    Unfortunately a return policy with software or sample libraries is just not ever going to work. Yes, I know it\'s a pain for the honest people out there BUT thats just the way the world is now. Unfortunate as that is...

    I do think however that it is up to the developer to put enough information on his/her site to let the user make a wise decision. Several developers such as Kip, Gary, Dan, etc. have tons and tons of demos on their site so the consumer can make a wise decision about the product.

    Thats just my take on it.


  4. #4

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    QUOTE \"I do think however that it is up to the developer to put enough information on his/her site to let the user make a wise decision. Several developers such as Kip, Gary, Dan, etc. have tons and tons of demos on their site so the consumer can make a wise decision about the product.\"

    I think that in some cases demos are just not enough! There\'s gotta be some sort of compromise that makes it fair for end users and protects the developers. There are a lot of criminals in the world, but we can\'t just go around assuming everybody is one!

    How about no money refund but a \"store credit\"?

    The seller has the buyer\'s addres, credit card info, and purchase history...I think he should be able to determine when someone is taking advantage of the system!

    I really think we need some sort of reform to buyer\'s rights here. I\'ve spent way too much money of libraries that I never touch (and whose demos sounded great!!!)
    I want to keep on supporting developers but not at my personal financial loss and by having my consumer rights stepped on.

    It would make me feel enourmously better if the developer that I purchase a product from has some way to address costumer satisfaction (even if there\'s a 99.9% chance I will love the library).

    BTW, concerning the trnsfer of ownership, it\'s not true that it\'s illegal. Some (intelligent) software developers actually support it. It generally involves the seller to send a letter to the developer stating that he\'s selling the product and the buyer\'s name. Then the buyer contacts the developer and generally pays a nominal transfer fee. This is the type of policy that both protects the developer and respects the consumer.

    Am I nuts for asking the software community to adhere to the same laws that regulate all of the other businesses???

    Sometimes I think that the only reason that developers are allowed to continue their distrustful practices is because nobody has ever challenged them in court!

  5. #5

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    There\'s one thing that you are overlooking with your argument. Regarding other businesses; if you buy a skirt at a shopping mall and then deciede you don\'t like it then you can take it back, return it, and get your money back. That is a very simple transaction.

    However, with software, if you buy take it home install it whats to keep you from keeping it on your computer when you take it back to the store? This is not a sudden change in policy. Since the existence of software you have not been able to return it for that very reason.

    Big Fish Audio however does offer a store credit/exchange on libraries if that helps.


  6. #6

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    Donnie, that does help a lot! Kudos to Big Fish for taking the risk of the occasional pirate in return for better customer service.

    I\'m 100% behind the concept that the developer not be ripped off, and that piracy must be eliminated, but as the consumer I do feel unfairly treated sometimes. There\'s just realistically nothing to be done about it, so I live with it... [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]


  7. #7

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    \"There\'s just realistically nothing to be done about it, so I live with it... \"

    Don\'t ever allow yourself to think like that. If everyone believed what you just said we would still have slavery, women wouln\'t be allowed to vote, cigarette companies would advertise on the health benefits of smoking, and Germany would rule the planet!

    Sorry to be so dramatic, but come on people, let\'s not become complacent.

  8. #8

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    Here\'s what we could all do...

    The next time you\'re ready to purchase a library, call the developer and let them know that you\'re not happy with their return policy and let them know that it is affecting your decision to purchase the library.

    Ask if they are willing to change their policy or issue a special condition that would allow you to exchange the product if you\'re not satisfied.

    Money talks! Let\'s stop just blindly sending our hard earned cash to these guys without talking to them and letting them know how we feel.

    If enough people are raising these questions maybe things will change.

    I am in no way implying that developers don\'t deserve our cash, but simply that they need to work on some return/exchange/trade policy that treats the consumer in a fair way.

  9. #9

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    Originally posted by donnie:
    I just have one question....Do you guys demand the same from your local computer stores about software you have purchased? What would they tell you?

    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Just to play \"devil\'s advocate\" here for a second, I\'ll offer that in most cases the consumer has no reason to return software to a computer store other than to replace defective merchandise.

    In addition to working with music software, I also do a good bit of work with graphics software and I play a lot of games. Graphics software can get quite expensive, so making a purchase of such a tool is roughly equal in cost to that of a sample library (or more. typical prices range between $200 and $1500, sometimes more for high end 3D programs). I would never even think of making a purchase of any such software unless I was able to try a hands-on demo of it.

    Nearly every developer of such programs offers a demo version, too. They usually have some limit on them (they expire after a certain time period or number of uses, they have crippled save functions, etc.) Therefore there is no excuse for me not to have a good idea of whether I\'ll be satisfied with the program in question should I purchase it. Combine the demo with reviews of the product and any consumer can make an informed decision as to whether it fits their needs.

    Most games, too, offer a demo to those skeptical of whether they will like the game, or who don\'t know if it will run on their system. Its certainly not a 100% foolproof way to ensure your satisfaction, but again combined with reviews, this can lead to more good purchases than bad.

    Now, obviously sample library developers can\'t offer a \'try before you buy\' kind of demo... but often buyers are left to base their purchase off of word of mouth (via forums like this) and a couple short demo songs. Personally, I find demo songs most useful when a broad range of users with varying skill and equipment present their compositions. I particularly like the Garritan Orchestral Strings site for this, and I used to like the section on Donnie\'s DSSoundware site with the user demos as well, though Im not sure where that went since the layout switched.

    I would like to see more reviews of sample librraies out there as well. I only know of a few places online (I typically don\'t get print magazines) that review libraries at all, and they don\'t always cover ones I\'m interested in. Some developers do a good job of linking to reviews of their products from their website (like Dan Dean), but this varies considerably from one developer to the next. I think alot more could be done on the developers end of things to present buyers with more information about their libraries, which would in turn facilitate less people worrying about returning them in the first place.

    I don\'t have much in the way of constructive opinion to offer on the topic of reselling libraries that have fallen out of use. I\'m sure most people that buy these libraries have one or two that they have either outgrown or simply don\'t have a use for anymore. I have a few like that... and I wouldn\'t mind being able to legally transfer my license to someone else. I don\'t have a solution though, since clearly developers can\'t trust consumers to be honest. It would be nice though to see some kind of move towards helping out the consumer in this area.

  10. #10

    Re: Transfer of Ownership Legal?

    Originally posted by donnie:
    I just have one question....Do you guys demand the same from your local computer stores about software you have purchased? What would they tell you?

    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">But software companies have found various ways we can actually try the product before we buy it.

    With libraries it\'s like what we get is a finished Word document and the developer saying, \"Look at this! You can see how great it is, so if you buy it and don\'t like it; tough.\"

    My overall impression is that many developers spend a lot of time worrying about how to protect their intellectual property but when we get to these discussions, there seems like a lot of intransigence from developers. At least Donnie actually takes the time to respond on these subjects; most just stay out of it. Although Donnie does seem to have taken it upon himself to keep \'pointing out\' why this unnacceptable practise should be acceptable to paying customers, rather than actually \'engaging\' in any potentially fruitful discussion.

    Why keep arguing about how easy it is to buy/copy/return? Again, the customer is presumed guilty.

    No matter how good a library is or how hard the developer worked to create it, sample libraries are about as flimsy an example of intellectual property as could be imagined. Hopefully, some of these ridiculous licenses will be tested in court at some point - just writing it down and calling it a contract is ludicrous. Nick\'s VoTA license comes to mind as the most ridiculous license ever conceived. Whether people mind or don\'t mind is irrelevant. The market will decide in the long run. When you are not even allowed to give away a product - or even if you throw it in a bin, someone finds it and uses it, and you\'re liable; then something is seriously wrong with that product.

    Sample libraries are more than a collection of recorded sounds; they have a physical and logical existence in the market. Again! When you produce a product that has less than zero intrinsic value, you are not producing much of a product at all. It is an invitation to theft, because while the developer thinks he\'s saying \"Buy it, you\'ll love it. You\'ll use it for years. You won\'t want to part with it.\" He is really saying, \"It is a piece of worthless c r a p. After I get your money, you may as well use it as a frisbee, because if you give it away or sell it, I\'ll sue you. It has no value beyond the artistic value you ascribe to it.\"

    If you don\'t allow a secondary market to flourish, an illegal secondary market will develop in its place. You can fight reality all you want, but penalizing the paying customer is not the answer. Even the statement \"It\'s too easy to copy etc.\", is implicitly insulting to potential customers (not suggesting that the guy who wrote it meant it as such).

    The fact that one developer does have some kind of return policy proves that all of this hot air is unnecessary.

    I am no longer prepared to buy a library on \'spec\'. This is no big deal to developers here who might just say, \"Suit yourself\". But a guy suggested that we argue with developers (forget it mate).

    I\'m suggesting we don\'t buy at all. Actually, I\'m not really suggesting that. I\'m saying that I won\'t buy another library until there is a way for me to seriously test it before I purchase. And I\'m suggesting that until developers find a solution to these problems, more and more people will do the same.

    I do have a question for developers (or Donnie, because he seems to be the only one who can even be bothered talking about this): What if there were a thousand potential customers, but only a thousand. What if every single one of them said \"I won\'t buy until I can try.\" Would you rather that you never sold a single library ever again because of this, or would you prefer a pirated copy to proliferate and you then snag maybe 20% of your potential market?

    The deeper problems here exist because of the nature of the \'products\' themselves. I\'ve read a lot of posts talking about the difficulty of producing expression, etc., using samples. Sample libraries are like copying pages of Shakespeare rather than developing a vocabulary.

    The real creativity, the real core of these products exists somewhere else and the product itself is already a copy. That\'s the essential problem.

    The genius of many people has made, and makes, this sector possible, and it is the sometimes virually paranoic response of most of the vendors (methinks they protest too much) that fuels the fire of piracy.

    Donnie, I have no need for any percussion libraries. But should I ever decide to buy one I would want to try yours first because from everything I\'ve read it is probably the best out there. But if I can\'t try it I will never buy it.

    Right now, the market is small, marginal, idiosyncratic, but when there are twenty, thirty, one hundred percussion libraries and a thousand pianos to choose from, some of the more precious developers will either go to the wall, or put their wares up to be tested aginst the competition. Right now, we have to suffer the fact that many developers out there now are not businessmen. They are amateurs in the right place at the right time with the right equipment at hand. They produce some lovely libraries but few have produced any robust products.

    I have another question. Are sample libraries available to borrow from libraries anywhere? Anyone tried their local library? I can borrow lots of copyable stuff from libraries and the world hasn\'t ended yet. That would be the perfect solution for me (and quite a few developers would snag some more revenues from me and many others).

    Until then, I\'ve had it with this ridiculous system. Anyone who runs a business without a sensible return policy is a scheister; a cheap thief; no better than a criminal. I\'m tired of paying to be called a thief. I won\'t let you guys steal any more money from me.

    Try it. Buy it. Return it. Sell it. Give it away. When I can do all of these things, then you are selling me a product; until then it is little more than theft.

    There has to be more to it than \'landgrabbing\' waveforms. If you can copy sounds and sell them, it shouldn\'t be such a stretch to copy good business practise.

    I look forward to trying and buying my next library.

Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts