Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER General Discussion Forum

View Poll Results: Do you think REAPER should stop working after the trial period?
YES! 33 11.58%
NO! 252 88.42%
Voters: 285. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-09-2013, 05:27 PM   #81
rictheobscene
Human being with feelings
 
rictheobscene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Right between the resonance and the cutoff knob
Posts: 1,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
i'm pretty tech savy but at 53 have still never had a cell phone. This guy at work with no money just bought a $600 phone because he said in business people judge him by his phone. I thought that was hilarious.

The older I get the less technology I want. My electric garage door is my most reliable device besides my cd player. Most other technologies disappoint. I have a 58 plasma tv I use to watch black and white Hitchcock movies on.
Didn't I see you on an episode of Mountain Men
__________________
R(†)O
http://www.therazorwireballet.com
TAL32.
rictheobscene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 05:48 PM   #82
naythinjuromeh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 84
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
We need to keep in mind that this works because for $60 (non-pros) you're getting software worth 10X that amount. It's piggish not to pay for it.

If Pro Tools offered the same trusting deal for their $599 software, who would pay for it?
But isn't it slightly elitist and "piggish" to say if some one cant afford it then they cant use it when it is sitting there staring them in the face available for use.
People have already mentioned that there are many places in the world where $60.00 is too much money to spend on software. Should these people that cant afford to pay be stripped of an opportunity to create music and maybe make a better life for them selves because of $60.00.

To me its wrong to tell a person who cant afford software that they cant use it nor educate themselves with it beyond the demo since they cant pay the inflated price for it (not talking about reaper here) especially since the software is not tangible and the software company is not losing anything like a car company would if some one was to just take a car.

Now if the person who uses the cracked software become's employed later through learning this software and they are now in a position where they can pay for it then they certainly should, Until then I find it perfectly acceptable for a kid or a person in poverty to be able to use the same tools freely to better themselves as some one who has the money to afford them on does.

For me telling a person they cant use some thing because they are poor is just the same as telling them they cant go to school because they are poor.
naythinjuromeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 05:52 PM   #83
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
i'm pretty tech savy but at 53 have still never had a cell phone. This guy at work with no money just bought a $600 phone because he said in business people judge him by his phone. I thought that was hilarious.

The older I get the less technology I want. My electric garage door is my most reliable device besides my cd player. Most other technologies disappoint. I have a 58 plasma tv I use to watch black and white Hitchcock movies on.
You may be 53 now, not that old, being judged by electronic devices, may be silly.

But, if you stay away from such things, you may not remain tech savvy for too long.

You do use computers though and DAWs so it may not be so bad, but i used to not have facebook, and not want windows 8, and then i was wondering also:

When does it happen that people are like "fuck this, i draw the line here, no more technology." and then get lost. I mean, when does it come to that day? and then i realized that i had begun doing that with my resistance of windows 8 and facebook.

I remember when i was at my nan's in england, her gas went out, and she was complaining as to how shit technology was, and how much better her coal stove was because that shit didn't EVER break down. She had a good point.

We are in an odd period of computing imo.

I think one day, your home will have a computer like your house has a furnace, and you'll have portals into it.

Computers will take a much more cell-phone like UI, and touch/ kinect style interface, and only real more hardcore folks, like the photoshoppers and the DAW guys and the gamers will have independent machines like we have now for that heavy duty stuff.

Idk, i could be wrong, but i could definitely see it going that way, and that doesn't bode too well for microsoft i think. But i may be wrong about that also.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:18 PM   #84
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by naythinjuromeh View Post
But isn't it slightly elitist and "piggish" to say if some one cant afford it then they cant use it when it is sitting there staring them in the face available for use.
People have already mentioned that there are many places in the world where $60.00 is too much money to spend on software. Should these people that cant afford to pay be stripped of an opportunity to create music and maybe make a better life for them selves because of $60.00.

To me its wrong to tell a person who cant afford software that they cant use it nor educate themselves with it beyond the demo since they cant pay the inflated price for it (not talking about reaper here) especially since the software is not tangible and the software company is not losing anything like a car company would if some one was to just take a car.

Now if the person who uses the cracked software become's employed later through learning this software and they are now in a position where they can pay for it then they certainly should, Until then I find it perfectly acceptable for a kid or a person in poverty to be able to use the same tools freely to better themselves as some one who has the money to afford them on does.

For me telling a person they cant use some thing because they are poor is just the same as telling them they cant go to school because they are poor.
I think I like this argument but let me see if I've got it right....

So because I can't afford a BMW why should I be denied the right to use one?

I'm down with this so far

And of course if I have one it might make the opportunity for me to get a better job and naturally I would be contributing to the economy because I would now be buying petrol and paying taxes that I wouldn't have done before - unless of course I couldn't afford the petrol or the taxes but hey why should I be denied the right to having free petrol and not paying tax - right?

Problem is of course that cars and petrol are a lot harder for schmucks like me to steal but software is easy and of course the software company isn't going to miss the software so that makes it ok.

Hmmmm but why should we limit this logic to software?

It seems that it therefore follows that its ok to kill someone provided that no-one is going to miss them.

Makes perfect sense - if you're a criminal
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:22 PM   #85
braveness23
Human being with feelings
 
braveness23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 296
Default

I read questions like this and I wonder why on earth anyone would care enough to write a post. Let the Reapers run their business The way they want and let's you and I record music
braveness23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:25 PM   #86
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound asleep View Post

I think piracy can play a positive role, for industries that use the software, and for the companies themselves even. If people pirate them, and don't use them for profit, I'm ok with that. It's not a lost customer, most people wouldn't buy 700$ software if pirating wouldn't be an option.
While I agree that Adobe can benefit from people pirating it, I respectfully disagree that we as the consumer can then decide to make the leap and do it. It's up to Adobe to make that decision. Not us.

I see a benefit of keeping electricity on in my studio. But if I don't pay the bill, they turn it off. I can't decide to steal electricity and then rationalize that it's better for the electric company in the long run because with electricity, I'll be able to produce more music and then pay that bill.

We're bound by the rules of the people who make the product. The way to do it is to reach out to Adobe and explain the situation. Write them a passionate letter and plead your case while explaining the benefit to them. Perhaps they'll give you a discount or even a free promotional copy.

Then it's a win win. They can write it off and you can feel like you did the right thing.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:32 PM   #87
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by naythinjuromeh View Post
But isn't it slightly elitist and "piggish" to say if some one cant afford it then they cant use it when it is sitting there staring them in the face available for use.
People have already mentioned that there are many places in the world where $60.00 is too much money to spend on software. Should these people that cant afford to pay be stripped of an opportunity to create music and maybe make a better life for them selves because of $60.00.

To me its wrong to tell a person who cant afford software that they cant use it nor educate themselves with it beyond the demo since they cant pay the inflated price for it (not talking about reaper here) especially since the software is not tangible and the software company is not losing anything like a car company would if some one was to just take a car.

Now if the person who uses the cracked software become's employed later through learning this software and they are now in a position where they can pay for it then they certainly should, Until then I find it perfectly acceptable for a kid or a person in poverty to be able to use the same tools freely to better themselves as some one who has the money to afford them on does.

For me telling a person they cant use some thing because they are poor is just the same as telling them they cant go to school because they are poor.
How do you feel about people pirating music?

The rub becomes when someone who pirates software draws no line in what they can take. If you pirate a Waves plugin, why not pirate the whole Mercury bundle?

The TDM version is about 10k. Is this person in question going to ever be able to afford that realistically?

So now someone like me is forced to use a 2k bundle (if that's all I can afford) yet a poor artist gets the 10k one. How does that work out?
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:38 PM   #88
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,817
Default

Software is not a physical object to people. It's just data and that data has no value.

Because it's possible, because it's easy and you can't stop it. Ever. It's no longer a physical good. You don't have carry it, you don't have to unpack it, you don't have to make it, but you have to produce it once.

All the analogies from the real world simply don't work. So you use a serial, or a license file and a nag screen, or an iLok or some other form of "pay us because this represents value to you" argument. You put up a barrier, which in itself is an incentive to aquire it.

So in the absence of complete and total police state that watches everyone, everywhere at any time you balance trust, consumer/customer-perceived value and real value(production cost). Serials, license files and dongles do seem to confirm value.

And you can't sell to people who don't have the resources. No sale lost. Adobe is in part banking on those people being able to one day have those resources and be exposed enough to in part then also guilt them in to a purchase. At some point, the person will feel that ones own services have value, so the tools you use to perform them do as well. That is just one case, because lots of software sells well, like Fruityloops and Reaper, but that many folks use for their hobby.

It's a lot more complicated than that I'm sure, but again, data has no value beyond the effort it took to aquire it if you don't pay for it. Even then, those files seem insubstantial and it's more of an inconvenience I find if I lose a file. The data I value greatly is that which I backup.

And quite frankly I'd rather leave this subject to professionals like psychologists and social scientists. We here might as well be a sowing circle with asholes and opinions, 'cause we all have both.
__________________
Using Latch Preview (Video) - Faderport 16 setup for CSI 1.1 , CSI 3.10
Website
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom

Last edited by airon; 06-09-2013 at 06:46 PM.
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:45 PM   #89
naythinjuromeh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 84
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
I think I like this argument but let me see if I've got it right....

So because I can't afford a BMW why should I be denied the right to use one?

I'm down with this so far
Did you even read what I wrote about cars there ?
I said a car is something tangible and it would be an obvious loss with software there is no loss. Should anyone need to explain that to you? The fact is software is available for everyone to have wether they pay or dont pay and if they dont pay it is still available because its a digital copy. there are not enough cars out there for non paying customers. If the software is there who are you or anyone else to tell a kid of a person in poverty not to use it since they cant pay the inflated fee? That is nothing but elitism and I find it maddening. IF the resources are plentiful and there are people who could use the resources then why should these people be held back from using them. they are there its a digital copy not theft.
The future holds no place for old elitist way of thinking.

No matter how much you think you are taking the moral high road by saying "people who cant afford it should'nt use it even though it is there to use and will cost nothing more and will not be a loss if they use is " you are taking the low road.

Once again a car is a car currently people are not digitally printing cars to be given away but I bet if some one digitally printed your dream car for you and said : here take this car i copied it for you, you would have no problem taking it.. and you shouldn't have a problem taking it.
naythinjuromeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:54 PM   #90
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

My feeling has always been that we're not paying for the medium it's recorded to. We're paying for the time and energy in creating it.

Everyone agrees that we shouldn't steal a cd but it's OK to steal what's on it?

The CD cost pennies. The music or software could have cost millions to make.

While it's true that you can't stop piracy and probably never will, we do need to change how people feel about it. If we're going to steal, admit that we're stealing. Don't rationalize that it's not really a lost sale. Because it is.

Somebody made that and put it up for sale and now we're enjoying the benefit of that work without compensating the creator. If the creator decides that they want to share it with us, they have that right. But we don't have the right to take it and decide that it's OK.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 07:02 PM   #91
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by naythinjuromeh View Post
IF the resources are plentiful and there are people who could use the resources then why should these people be held back from using them.
But the resources aren't plentiful. Let's use a book for example. Let's say you wrote a great novel and decided to put it out digitally only. And millions of people pirated your book, read it and absolutely loved it. But your publisher dropped you because you didn't turn a profit. Even though you were a huge success.

So now you can't write another book. The resources aren't plentiful because the advance for book number 2 never comes and you never write and release another book.

The problem with consumers and this mentality is that they see it only from their perspective. If you can't afford that book, what difference does it make? It makes a huge difference. First of all, who's to say that you really can't afford that book? Is it possible that life would just be easier if you didn't have to pay for the book?

Also, when people who can afford the book find out that many others are not paying for it, they feel stupid paying for what others get for free and simply steal it as well. Even if they can afford it.

A perfect example is with music. When I was a kid (I'm old) we didn't have cell phones or iPods. We bought music on records for about $10 a piece and I bought about 2 or 3 per month. Now it seems that we have generations of kids who can't afford to buy music but not only do they find a way to buy an iPhone, they can also afford to pay $100 per month to have that phone. How does that work out?

Simple. People can always find a way to buy what they want and can't steal yet can rationalize all the reasons they can't afford to buy what they can easily steal.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 07:15 PM   #92
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,817
Default

Just imagine a kid sitting in front of "Waves v9 cracked - over 100 plugins used by professionals", and that kid is starting to compose and record because of curiosity and for fun. The kid checks the Waves website and sees lots of cool stuff. Now the kid's intrigued. Gets it. Tries it. Plays around with it, maybe even for more than a day.

That kid and engineers like us place very different value in a Waves plugin package. To the kid it's a tinker toy. A mystery to unwrap and explore. When the kid is experienced enough it might get demo licenses, because it no longer requires a $50 iLok, but only a $2 USB stick or HD authorization.

To the kid, the plugin is a toy and data until it makes use of it and maybe begins to value it.

I'm not worried about that kid, and I'll explain to the kid that these tools are valuable in the right hands and deserve to be purchased if they're useful. One should always support people who make stuff of value.


The people I am worried about are those that are selling ads on websites pushing cracked software and people who build up their profession or hobby entirely with deprotected and copied software when it clearly is of enormous value to them. I can understand some use of such software, but all of it reveals serious character flaws or outstanding inability to organize their own life in some way.

Other than that, I would rather see technology and apreciation for it spread, than fear of reprisal for being too curious. The rest to me is speculation about what is a lost sale and how to get people to appreciate and value tools that someone decided to spend resources on making. I do wonder what the Reaper example can teach us. I hope someone studies it one day.

My observation has been that you cannot force anyone to appreciate tools or music. Won't stop me from trying of course.
__________________
Using Latch Preview (Video) - Faderport 16 setup for CSI 1.1 , CSI 3.10
Website
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom

Last edited by airon; 06-09-2013 at 07:21 PM.
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 07:35 PM   #93
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post

To the kid, the plugin is a toy and data until it makes use of it and maybe begins to value it.

I'm not worried about that kid,
I am, because one day that kid (and all the other kids) will be the market and they won't be willing to pay for something that they had for free as a kid. It's human nature. Do you value water? Probably not. Fast forward ten years from now in a world where water is more rare than gold and suddenly you're not leaving the sprinklers on overnight anymore. You might even send your sons off to war to get more of it.

We have generations of kids who have NEVER paid for music. I have a hard time believing that when they get older and can afford music that they will pay. Some of them have 30,000 songs on their phones. Are they ever going to pay for that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
My observation has been that you cannot force anyone to appreciate tools or music. Won't stop me from trying of course.
I think the market can. It's only because pirating is easy without the fear of getting caught that it's done on a regular basis. It's actually scary when you think about it. The only reason people don't steal everything is because of the fear of getting caught. Right and wrong has almost nothing to do with it. We're born thieves and we're trained to fear the consequences of acting on that natural instinct.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 07:37 PM   #94
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
I said a car is something tangible and it would be an obvious loss with software there is no loss.
^This is a very common mistake. Hardly anything you have ever purchased, was paying only for the tangible. You are only addressing cost of physical goods which is a minute piece of the equation. I'm not sure how people can suddenly zone in on tangibility when it has nothing to do with value and "its only 1s and 0s" is an extremely weak argument where either the person quoting it is either simply not thinking things through or knows very little about buying/selling/business or is simply trying to justify their own less than honorable actions.

You could send me some tracks (assuming you didn't know how to mix), I could spend a week mixing and mastering them and return you worthless 1s and 0s but at the same time great value because what your received in return you can't do without me.

If someone creates something, whether you can touch it or not is completely irrelevant, what gives it value is whether or not you desire it. Once that is established, touchy/feely is out of the picture. Whatever that creator wishes to receive in compensation for their work that created that value is 100% up to them. The buyer has two options, purchase it because they think the asking price is worth what they receive in return or they refuse. This is a pretty simple concept since the value/desire dictates the price. Not purchasing is a very powerful option.

Beyond that, is none of the buyer's business. Whether he/she thinks it is tangible or thinks the price is reasonable can only be exercised by his/her right to not purchase the product. The tangibility argument is extremely shortsighted and completely irrelevant beyond the fact that all it really means is there is nothing to stop a thief from taking someone else's hard work, just because there are no such things as locks will never ever make it OK to walk into someone's home and take their hard work. The missing locks don't drive the value down, the thefts do. If everyone was honest, the value would not change one bit whether 1s and 0s or gold nuggets.

In other words if the software you (the proverbial you) are stealing is so worthless, write your own and get back with us. If you can't pull it off even if its because you don't have the time; value it has.

Last edited by karbomusic; 06-09-2013 at 07:46 PM.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 07:40 PM   #95
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by naythinjuromeh View Post
Did you even read what I wrote about cars there ?
I read everything you wrote

Quote:
Originally Posted by naythinjuromeh View Post
The fact is software is available for everyone to have wether they pay or dont pay and if they dont pay it is still available because its a digital copy.
Digital or not is irrelevant - if you use something that doesn't belong to you or you obtained it via a non-legitimate source then it is theft

No matter how much you justify it to yourself you have no right to use something that you obtained illegally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by naythinjuromeh View Post
If the software is there who are you or anyone else to tell a kid of a person in poverty not to use it since they cant pay the inflated fee?
Who am I to tell them not to steal my software - not to benefit from the months or years of my effort?
Who am I?
I'm probably the owner of that effort and as such it is my right to give it away or charge a fee and not yours

And what right do you have to say any fee is 'inflated'?
None - you have no right to say wether a fee is 'inflated' or not - you only have the right to not purchase and that is all - you certainly do not have the right to use it without the owner's permission and yes let's not mince words it is theft if you use something that you didn't pay for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by naythinjuromeh View Post
Once again a car is a car currently people are not digitally printing cars to be given away
Correct nor are they digitally printing software to 'give away' but apparently you are ok with giving away with software that doesn't belong to you.

If you want to spend a few years writing software and you want to give it away then you go ahead but that will be your decision but do not be presumptious to make those decisions for me or anyone else.

As someone said earlier -'you have no dog in this fight'
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 07:44 PM   #96
Justin
Administrator
 
Justin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Runaway View Post
Having said that, hats off to Justin but just because he can afford it doesn't mean I (or others) can.
Aside from the investment of a year or so of time early on, there's no "affording it" about it.

Having said that, our business does have a (likely uncommon) combination of qualities that allows our business model to work (size of audience, size of company, scope and depth of product, and so on -- I'd like to think this is completely intentional, but who can say how much luck is involved in these things).

Obviously our practices wouldn't work for all developers and all products.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 07:50 PM   #97
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
^This is a very common mistake. Hardly anything you have ever purchased, was paying only for the tangible. You are only addressing cost of physical goods which is a minute piece of the equation. I'm not sure how people can suddenly zone in on tangibility when it has nothing to do with value and the "its only 1s and 0s" is an extremely weak argument where either the person quoting it is either simply not thinking things through or knows very little about buying/selling/business or is simply trying to justify their own less than honorable actions.

You could send me some tracks (assuming you didn't know how to mix), I could spend a week mixing and mastering them and return you worthless 1s and 0s but at the same time great value because what your received in return you can't do without me.

If someone creates something, whether you can touch it or not is completely irrelevant, what gives it value is whether or not you desire it. Once that is established, touchy/feely is out of the picture. Whatever that creator wishes to receive in compensation for their work that created that value is 100% up to them. The buyer has two options, purchase it because they think the asking price is worth what they receive in return or they refuse. This is a pretty simple concept since the value/desire dictates the price. Not purchasing is a very powerful option.

Beyond that, is none of the buyer's business. Whether he/she thinks it is tangible or thinks the price is reasonable can only be exercised by his/her right to not purchase the product. The tangibility argument is extremely shortsighted and completely irrelevant beyond the fact that all it really means is there is nothing to stop a thief from taking someone else's hard work, just because there are no such things as locks will never ever make it OK to walk into someone's home and take their hard work. The missing locks don't drive the value down, the thefts do. If every one was honest, the value would not change one bit whether 1s and 0s or gold nuggets.

In other words if the software you (the proverbial you) are stealing is so worthless, write your own and get back with us. If you can't pull it off, value it has.
This may be the best response to piracy I've ever read. And I've read a lot. Great job.

The idea that music's value hasn't been destroyed by piracy is so silly it's almost ludicrous.

Music has no value anymore. Thanks to the 1s and 0s, the demand can never keep up with infinite supply. Never.

And the kicker is that no one buys music anymore. And I mean no one. If you're paying for music from iTunes (like I do), you're not paying for the music. It's still worthless. You're paying Apple for the convenient way they deliver it to you.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:00 PM   #98
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post

Having said that, our business does have a (likely uncommon) combination of qualities that allows our business model to work (size of audience, size of company, scope and depth of product, and so on -- I'd like to think this is completely intentional, but who can say how much luck is involved in these things).

Obviously our practices wouldn't work for all developers and all products.
I was actually about to say something along these same lines but I didn't want to come off as assuming to know the company or how it works.

The example I was going to use was a plugin company that charged $20 per plugin and also offered a 60 day no copy protection scheme.

The rub is that they don't appeal to as many people as Reaper probably does. So even if their rate of people actually paying for the product is the same as Reaper's, it might still put them out of business.

Quantity is important when you're trying to absorb the losses of people NOT paying for your software.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:04 PM   #99
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

@naythinjuromeh
You arguments are slanted and for someone who is accusing others of elitism and piggishness, you are acting like an entitled spoiled brat. I apologize in advance here, but your entire premise is so off-base and self serving, I have a hard time believing that you are doing anything besides ruffling peoples feathers here. IF you are serious, then the rest of my post addresses that.
I do quite a bit of software testing for many plugin developers from all over the world. During the duration of testing of any given product, I am in very frequent communication with the developer or development team. Because I am verbose and friendly, this communication invariably gets a little more personal than strictly talking about their work. Also inevitable is the topic of software piracy because it is so rampant these days. Interestingly, most of them talk about the sort that feel like "anti-piracy" is twisted into "anti-creativity", "anti-poverty", "discriminating", even "piggish" and "elitist". It is specifically your attitude that scares them most. When you steal this tiny little packet of 0's and 1's, you are not staling a "nothing" file, you have stolen their time, their work, and yes, their attempts to feed their own mouths and their family. How often do you go to whatever you do for a job and walk into your employers office and say "Don't pay me. You need to eat, and if you pay me I am being piggish and elitist"? I bet that you have never done that. Software is someone's work.
If you really need to learn and have tools, there are MANY free plugins that are extremely good, so you have zero excuse to use pirated software. So all of the people here that you are accusing of taking the "low road" are indeed on the high road. Snap out of this ridiculous and selfish mind-set and behave in the human race.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:10 PM   #100
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Aside from the investment of a year or so of time early on, there's no "affording it" about it.
Probably a poor choice of words.

You are currently still in business so your current business model appears to be keeping the company afloat (which is a good thing) but in a worst case scenario and everyone thought 'hey lets not pay for Reaper because its not stealing' I would suspect there would be less and less incentive to keep developing and soon there might be no more Reaper.

That is certainly the case for most firms as enough income has to come in in order to pay for both fixed and variable costs and still have enough to feed their families.

I know I sometimes put effort into a few side projects (because I want to) but I could not sustain these efforts without income from other sources.

As I said probably a poor choice of words - well except for the
"hats off to Justin" part
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:13 PM   #101
ChunkyBustout
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 23
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Byre View Post
The thinking behind the 'honesty box' business model is the same as for the old serial number protection, which was, of course, almost no protection at all.

It allows a SW package to spread rather like a virus and in particular, spread to young users who would not have the money for a legitimate copy. Everything from Page Maker (now InDesign) to MS Office spread like that.

The competition does something very similar, in that professional software is sold to schools and students at ridiculously low prices - get 'em young and get 'em hooked.

Once you have spent years working with a specific package, you cannot afford to learn something new, just because it is cheaper. You have 'invested' years of training in, say, ProTools and jumping ship is more than just buying CuBase or whatever - it means dumping all those years of learning.

Reaper is marching inexorably into the bedrooms of youngsters who are never going to pay for it - until one day, they find themselves in a corporate situation and having the words 'Evaluation' and a nag screen becomes embarrassing.

"What the hell! Sixty Bucks ain't much! I'll pay this time!"

And slowly, bit-by-bit, Reaper replaces other packages as these youngsters enter the workplace.

It also means that all the many, many people around the World, for whom $60 is a real burden, they have access to the best recording/editing SW available.

The alternative is to make more money (possibly!) in the short run, by selling a dongled version for c.a. $250+ and having to put half that into marketing to pay for fair stands, magazine ads and sponsorship deals. That leads to a far, far smaller user base and therefore a less well-researched and QC'ed product.

I have converted two engineers to Reaper this week and in the long run, both will un-trouser $60 and one will almost certainly move into a large company and Reaper will spread throughout that company, when the others see what it can do and how quickly you can work.

If Reaper ticks a few more boxes, such as Eucon hardware support and post-prod video tools (I know they're coming!) I can't see how this process of 'infecting' the whole market can be stopped!
Echoes my thoughts exactly.
ChunkyBustout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:14 PM   #102
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

I think that some of the way that people justify piracy can be that they are taking it from people that have a shit load of money already.

If i make an album, and it is so popular that it gets pirated by a relatively large number of people. I won't be too bothered about it because i will have earned a great deal already.

This discussion could go one forever and could evolve into really deep discussion, that would go through all of discussion about capitalism, and all that stuff. big can of worms.

fwiw kenny, i agree with what you said on your last post.

But to be honest, when some guy sitting in his 30 million dollar mansion wines and complains that somebody that makes a tiny fraction of that in their whole life, copies a song off a stranger, I find it hard to sympathize, even though i understand the logic.

Some might say, well he deserves a 40 million dollar mansion, and some might say that nobody deserves anything close to that.

But, our society is as it is, and the law is as it is.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:19 PM   #103
Runaway
Human being with feelings
 
Runaway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,510
Default

It will be intersting to see how the move by Adobe, Microsoft and probably others goes to no longer 'sell' perpetual licences but rather 'rent' them by the month/year.

I just thought I'd throw this into the mix

Edit: The trouble with an interesting thread is that not much development work gets done and with deadlines looming.......
__________________
AATranslator
Runaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:19 PM   #104
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound asleep View Post
I think that some of the way that people justify piracy can be that they are taking it from people that have a shit load of money already.

If i make an album, and it is so popular that it gets pirated by a relatively large number of people. I won't be too bothered about it because i will have earned a great deal already.

This discussion could go one forever and could evolve into really deep discussion, that would go through all of discussion about capitalism, and all that stuff. big can of worms.

fwiw kenny, i agree with what you said on your last post.

But to be honest, when some guy sitting in his 30 million dollar mansion wines and complains that somebody that makes a tiny fraction of that in their whole life, copies a song off a stranger, I find it hard to sympathize, even though i understand the logic.

Some might say, well he deserves a 40 million dollar mansion, and some might say that nobody deserves anything close to that.

But, our society is as it is, and the law is as it is.
I see your point, but when people think that they can decide when to "follow the rules" and when not to things get mired and blurred. That zillionaire shouldn't whine about the pennies, but theft is still theft. It is so much easier to do the right thing than it is to debate it.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:24 PM   #105
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
^This is a very common mistake. Hardly anything you have ever purchased, was paying only for the tangible. You are only addressing cost of physical goods which is a minute piece of the equation. I'm not sure how people can suddenly zone in on tangibility when it has nothing to do with value and "its only 1s and 0s" is an extremely weak argument where either the person quoting it is either simply not thinking things through or knows very little about buying/selling/business or is simply trying to justify their own less than honorable actions.

You could send me some tracks (assuming you didn't know how to mix), I could spend a week mixing and mastering them and return you worthless 1s and 0s but at the same time great value because what your received in return you can't do without me.

If someone creates something, whether you can touch it or not is completely irrelevant, what gives it value is whether or not you desire it. Once that is established, touchy/feely is out of the picture. Whatever that creator wishes to receive in compensation for their work that created that value is 100% up to them. The buyer has two options, purchase it because they think the asking price is worth what they receive in return or they refuse. This is a pretty simple concept since the value/desire dictates the price. Not purchasing is a very powerful option.

Beyond that, is none of the buyer's business. Whether he/she thinks it is tangible or thinks the price is reasonable can only be exercised by his/her right to not purchase the product. The tangibility argument is extremely shortsighted and completely irrelevant beyond the fact that all it really means is there is nothing to stop a thief from taking someone else's hard work, just because there are no such things as locks will never ever make it OK to walk into someone's home and take their hard work. The missing locks don't drive the value down, the thefts do. If everyone was honest, the value would not change one bit whether 1s and 0s or gold nuggets.

In other words if the software you (the proverbial you) are stealing is so worthless, write your own and get back with us. If you can't pull it off even if its because you don't have the time; value it has.
There are many services people will pay for that aren't tangible.

Think of performing music.

A mix you did, or software, is still something sort of tangible that you own.

Paying to hear somebody play for you is not tangible at all. it's not even 1s and 0s.

And when you pay for that, you pay for hearing it, their time playing it, the equipment they bought, the time they spent practising, the time they spent writing, all of that stuff.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:30 PM   #106
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
I see your point, but when people think that they can decide when to "follow the rules" and when not to things get mired and blurred. That zillionaire shouldn't whine about the pennies, but theft is still theft. It is so much easier to do the right thing than it is to debate it.
right. that's true. But, at the same time, nearly all of us will take some law or other into our own hands because of our own philosophies. some people might smoke pot, most people will drive over the speed limit.

But you're right, the law is the law. And also, laws do change, and that begins with people questioning them, and debating thing, and often times, not following them first.

Like marijuana, first lots of people starting smoking it despite the law, then the laws begin to change.

The people write the rules, or they are supposed to.

This one however, i don't see changing. It is too directly tied to capitalism.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:34 PM   #107
bluzkat
Human being with feelings
 
bluzkat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 6,919
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
This may be the best response to piracy I've ever read. And I've read a lot. Great job.

The idea that music's value hasn't been destroyed by piracy is so silly it's almost ludicrous.
I had to agree with this also... Karbo's comments are spot on!!


__________________
Peace...
bluzkat
bluzkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:36 PM   #108
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Some might say, well he deserves a 40 million dollar mansion, and some might say that nobody deserves anything close to that.
They might but... In most societies it is accepted that what one thinks someone else deserves has no relation to what they actually deserve which is a good thing. If everyone gets to decide based on their gut feeling how much money someone else can earn, it then becomes a completely different society.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:44 PM   #109
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound asleep View Post
right. that's true. But, at the same time, nearly all of us will take some law or other into our own hands because of our own philosophies. some people might smoke pot, most people will drive over the speed limit.

But you're right, the law is the law. And also, laws do change, and that begins with people questioning them, and debating thing, and often times, not following them first.

Like marijuana, first lots of people starting smoking it despite the law, then the laws begin to change.

The people write the rules, or they are supposed to.

This one however, i don't see changing. It is too directly tied to capitalism.
Of course we (people) write the laws, and obviously not all laws are good (remember, the USA had legal slavery not too long ago....). But come on, some things are nearly universal, and theft is one that I don't see people wanting to make legal. And that has nothing to do with capitalism, this is not about the "capitalistic pig", it's about people working hard and expecting to not be stolen from.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:44 PM   #110
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
They might but... In most societies it is accepted that what one thinks someone else deserves has no relation to what they actually deserve which is a good thing. If everyone gets to decide based on their gut feeling how much money someone else can earn, it then becomes a completely different society.
indeed. But that's a whole other debate. Different does not imply bad. It's a complex subject.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:48 PM   #111
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
Of course we (people) write the laws, and obviously not all laws are good (remember, the USA had legal slavery not too long ago....). But come on, some things are nearly universal, and theft is one that I don't see people wanting to make legal. And that has nothing to do with capitalism, this is not about the "capitalistic pig", it's about people working hard and expecting to not be stolen from.
No, it has very much to do with capitalism. Capitalism would select by its mechanism key people of the production phase to get a largest share of the profits which may be limitless, and the owners of the means of production, and the key most rare and necessary people their share also defined by supply and demand.

Other alternatives, would compensate people for the work they put in, and the rest would be fair game.

In the case of software and digital information, essentially it would all be free for the public.

The question runs deep.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:50 PM   #112
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound asleep View Post
I think that some of the way that people justify piracy can be that they are taking it from people that have a shit load of money already.

If i make an album, and it is so popular that it gets pirated by a relatively large number of people. I won't be too bothered about it because i will have earned a great deal already.

This discussion could go one forever and could evolve into really deep discussion, that would go through all of discussion about capitalism, and all that stuff. big can of worms.

fwiw kenny, i agree with what you said on your last post.

But to be honest, when some guy sitting in his 30 million dollar mansion wines and complains that somebody that makes a tiny fraction of that in their whole life, copies a song off a stranger, I find it hard to sympathize, even though i understand the logic.

Some might say, well he deserves a 40 million dollar mansion, and some might say that nobody deserves anything close to that.

But, our society is as it is, and the law is as it is.
But that misses so many other cogs in the wheel.

Let's take a band like U2. Clearly, they have enough money that they don't need your $10. But follow that $10 up the chain and you'll realize that all of that $10 isn't going to U2. Fractions of it go to the recording studio, the engineer, the artwork designer, the A&R staff etc etc. Many of these people live on a standard wage. A wage that is no longer being paid because people aren't paying that $10. These are the people that really get hurt when the public doesn't buy music. U2 will be fine either way.

Then there's also the bands that miss the threshold. Nowadays you can have a hit song and not sell enough records to recoup. So the label drops you and you're gone. Or you have a hit record on the radio and you need another job to support yourself. These are real things that are happening. Major labels are not giving tour support to new acts. They're taking taking their merch and their concert earnings.

And above all, labels are signing a lot less and giving much smaller advances with much less time to develop before being kicked out the door.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:55 PM   #113
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound asleep View Post
indeed. But that's a whole other debate. Different does not imply bad. It's a complex subject.
Right which is why making the point about deserving doesn't belong in this debate. It really isn't that complex, it is only made to be in order to increase the noise and shift the focus from just doing the right thing; if someone can't figure out the right thing on their own, again different thread topic.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:56 PM   #114
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sound asleep View Post
right. that's true. But, at the same time, nearly all of us will take some law or other into our own hands because of our own philosophies. some people might smoke pot, most people will drive over the speed limit.

But you're right, the law is the law. And also, laws do change, and that begins with people questioning them, and debating thing, and often times, not following them first.

Like marijuana, first lots of people starting smoking it despite the law, then the laws begin to change.

The people write the rules, or they are supposed to.

This one however, i don't see changing. It is too directly tied to capitalism.
Marijuana and driving over the speed limit are basically victimless crimes. Although the latter can be more dangerous, it doesn't result in accidents 100% of the time. Piracy always has a victim. And instead of the law changing, we have labels basically bowing to the thieves by agreeing to services like Spotify or allowing songs to be posted to youtube just to make some ad revenue. These are things that never would have happened before piracy.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 09:00 PM   #115
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
They might but... In most societies it is accepted that what one thinks someone else deserves has no relation to what they actually deserve which is a good thing. If everyone gets to decide based on their gut feeling how much money someone else can earn, it then becomes a completely different society.
Yes. And it is all too convenient to picture all of our favorite artists living in a mansion. Rarely is it the truth. And even the few that do make a pile of money now, rarely can keep that going year after year. So it does run out.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 09:02 PM   #116
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Right which is why making the point about deserving doesn't belong in this debate. It really isn't that complex, it is only made to be in order to increase the noise and shift the focus from just doing the right thing; if someone can't figure out the right thing on their own, again different thread topic.
Yup!!
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 09:06 PM   #117
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
But that misses so many other cogs in the wheel.

Let's take a band like U2. Clearly, they have enough money that they don't need your $10. But follow that $10 up the chain and you'll realize that all of that $10 isn't going to U2. Fractions of it go to the recording studio, the engineer, the artwork designer, the A&R staff etc etc. Many of these people live on a standard wage. A wage that is no longer being paid because people aren't paying that $10. These are the people that really get hurt when the public doesn't buy music. U2 will be fine either way.
I don't think that's true. Those people are paid a standard wage because that's the wage the market defines. It's the large surplus at the end, that goes mostly to the artists, songwriters, and label that loses the money. They have to cover their overhead always. those are the costs of production. It's the profits after all that that makes the artists and labels so wealthy. That's where the money would go. If i go and buy a U2 album, they're not gonna call up the people making fixed wages, and send them a checque.



Quote:
Then there's also the bands that miss the threshold. Nowadays you can have a hit song and not sell enough records to recoup. So the label drops you and you're gone. Or you have a hit record on the radio and you need another job to support yourself. These are real things that are happening. Major labels are not giving tour support to new acts. They're taking taking their merch and their concert earnings.
Sure, but the less successful bands also receive the least piracy.

I'll tell you what, if i found out people were pirating my music, i'd be the happiest guy. i'd be like: "I made it" lol. I mean shit, i'm giving my music away and very few people are taking it. Very few people know about it. If enough people know about my music, that it is shared on peer to peer networks, then I'll celebrate.

Quote:
And above all, labels are signing a lot less and giving much smaller advances with much less time to develop before being kicked out the door.
And people are not buying albums, but are buying singles. Many things are changing in the music industry. Some of it may be due to piracy, and some of it other things.

Youtube is a source of profit music didn't used to have for example. I mean, that's very close to giving the music away for free.

what happens when internet is everywhere, and cheap, and fast, and you can make youtube playlists.

the industry is changing. Piracy is a factor, but there are other factors as well, and still a lot of money music can make in a variety of ways.

after i make my first million, i'll let you know what it was like
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 09:09 PM   #118
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Marijuana and driving over the speed limit are basically victimless crimes. Although the latter can be more dangerous, it doesn't result in accidents 100% of the time. Piracy always has a victim. And instead of the law changing, we have labels basically bowing to the thieves by agreeing to services like Spotify or allowing songs to be posted to youtube just to make some ad revenue. These are things that never would have happened before piracy.
piracy doesn't always have a victim.

If i go and pirate some random thing right now. nothing will change anywhere.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 09:13 PM   #119
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,052
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Right which is why making the point about deserving doesn't belong in this debate. It really isn't that complex, it is only made to be in order to increase the noise and shift the focus from just doing the right thing; if someone can't figure out the right thing on their own, again different thread topic.
well no, people have different ideologies and different philosophies, and will act upon them.

There are various ways things can be justified.

One belief is strongly tied to capitalism, and one more tied to socialism.

that's a big debate.

the "right thing" is all about perspective. and it would be a whole big can of worms, if you want to start debating the "right thing" with me.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 09:33 PM   #120
Omarkum
Human being with feelings
 
Omarkum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Castlemaine,Australia
Posts: 252
Default

Definately No. I used Reaper for two years before I bought it. I just had NO money at all...things were so tough and had been like that a long time. That Reaper allowed this was amazing..but it won my thanks and respect..MANY people feel like they count for nothing purely because they cant pay and are always excluded on this basis. I am still pretty poor..but if the dev's needed any more financial support to keep Reaper going ..I would pay just out of sincere respect. I love Reaper..it shines in this rotten capitalist dominated world. Thank you Justin and Co.
__________________
i7-2600k. 16 Gig Ram. Win 10. Arturia Keylab mk11 Controller. IconnectAUDIO4 Interface.
Omarkum is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.