# How to prevent your instrument from being shared



## danilocff (Jan 21, 2018)

Hello all,
how do you prevent your instruments from being shared after being bought?

That is, I made a Kontakt instrument and it is enough to have the nki for it to work, so anyone who purchased a copy could then give it for free to the world. This is... not desirable, from my point of view. 
How do I (or you) address this?


----------



## d.healey (Jan 21, 2018)

You can't


----------



## SirkusPi (Jan 21, 2018)

As far as I know, the only way is to pay Native Instruments lots of money (I’m not a developer, so I don’t know how much, but gather it’s at least in the many thousands) to be an official Kontakt Player instrument, in which event you’re covered by NI registration / copy protection.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 21, 2018)

You're not really covered even then, at all. Any cracked version of Kontakt completely (sic) bypasses the copy protection of Kontakt Player libraries.


----------



## mouse (Jan 21, 2018)

Watermarking?


----------



## d.healey (Jan 21, 2018)

mouse said:


> Watermarking?


Nope


----------



## mouse (Jan 21, 2018)

d.healey said:


> Nope



Why not?


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 21, 2018)

Because it can be worked around by purchasing with a stolen credit card (yet, it has been done many times already).


----------



## d.healey (Jan 21, 2018)

mouse said:


> Why not?


Watermarking links a particular copy to a particular individual. However most professional copyright infringers are not stupid enough to use their own credit cards or other identifiable information to purchase something they intend to share.

To watermark a virtual instrument you have to place an identifier on each copy you sell, usually in a resource file of the library like the user interface graphics. This is fairly straightforward, although time consuming, to implement and also very straightforward and not time consuming for someone to remove. Or you can watermark each audio file, this is very difficult. Assuming we're talking about Kontakt, your samples are usually in Kontak't proprietary NCW format so there is no easy way to edit these to add some kind of watermark. But let's say watermarking is more important to you than file size so you just use WAV files. Then you can run some kind of software that will watermark every single sample (or even just a single sample). Well the same problem as with watermarking the resource files, you still have to do it for every single purchase and then rebundle all of the library files and upload them for the user to download.

There is a company (I forget the name) that will watermark and deliver your sample library for you, and they charge what I think is a very unreasonable fee (considering watermarking is useless).

Now let's assume you've somehow got an efficient system that can watermark your library for each customer and someone shares your library and they weren't smart enough to hide their personal details. What do you do? Well if you're Spitfire or EastWest maybe you can hire a lawyer or two and track this guy down. Then what? What about if he's in North Korea or Timbuktu? whose going to drag this guy into court?

Well let's say you get the guy, you take him to court, the court of course rules in your favor because of your watermarking evidence, now what? Has the guy got any money? Maybe but probably not. So you're left with a few big legal bills, a year or more of your life wasted chasing this guy, and nothing much to show for it. This is pretty much what happened to CineSamples btw.

The only way to "protect" a sample library (is to use iLok and that isn't a perfect solution (because there is no solution) and it's not an option for most developers.


----------



## heisenberg (Jan 21, 2018)

^^ Thanks for posting. An interesting and informative read.


----------



## danilocff (Jan 21, 2018)

All this is very interesting, thanks everyone!
I had an idea it would be hard to protect a library, but I didn't think it was impossible.

Is there at least some (not unreasonably priced) way to prevent effortless-straightforward-Google Drive sharing of the product as I deliver it?


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 21, 2018)

You shouldn't waste time on such solutions... if you have a strong product, it will survive in the marketplace despite piracy.


----------



## d.healey (Jan 21, 2018)

danilocff said:


> I had an idea it would be hard to protect a library.


I'll let you in on a secret... the library doesn't need protecting, it can't feel pain and won't be hurt by being shared 



> Is there at least some (not unreasonably priced) way to prevent effortless-straightforward-Google Drive sharing of the product as I deliver it?


https://vi-control.net/community/th...trument-from-being-shared.68392/#post-4181626


----------



## danilocff (Jan 21, 2018)

d.healey said:


> https://vi-control.net/community/th...trument-from-being-shared.68392/#post-4181626


Lol ok, I surrender, but at least now I know why 



EvilDragon said:


> You shouldn't waste time on such solutions... if you have a strong product, it will survive in the marketplace despite piracy.


I'll take your advice. I just wanted to make sure I was not overlooking anything for my first release (which is going to be so good everyone will want to steal it, I'm sure). 

Thanks everyone!


----------



## tav.one (Jan 21, 2018)

danilocff said:


> my first release (which is going to be so good everyone will want to steal it, I'm sure).



All the best for your instrument man. If its good, you'll find plenty buyers on this forum itself.


----------



## Lindon (Jan 23, 2018)

Wow we've had this discussion literally tens of times, and here I go again:

It *is* worth protecting your product.

Here's how sales work (generally) for Kontakt instruments (well - how it generally worked for the 2 dozen or so commercial releases I've done over 10 years... ).

1. You release an unprotected product for sale.
2. it will sell reasonably for a few(less than 6) weeks
3. At some point in weeks 4-6 someone will post its un-protected ass on a pirate site
4. You sales will go through the floor

Here's what happens if you protect your product:

1. You release your product with the WORST possible easy-to-break protection
2. It will sell reasonably for a few months (at least)
3. eventually some hacker *might* get given a copy of your product to break by a customer of yours
4. Most of the time they will think it beneath them to do, but eventually they *might* hack it
5. The hacked version will get posted on a pirate site
5. Your sales (which have been falling away slowly by now) will again go thru the floor


See the BIG BIG difference here? Yeah 6 weeks vs 3 months...

The not so secret info. here is that kontakt instruments sell most volume in the first 2-3 months, if you can get coverage that period you will see most of you revenue retained.

Any advanced KSP developer will be able to build you a serial registration system, where the purchaser gets the product and has to enter a serial number. Your problem is (partly) finding a distributor set up to issue to the customer both your product and a unique serial number.

So time to head off at the pass those comments we ALWAYS get:

1. Yes ANY copy protection can be broken
2. Yes your copy protection will be broken - though to be honest I'm still seeing requests for someone to hack at least one of my recent releases on the pirate sites - and no one seems to be interested in doing it - so sales are holding up nicely thanks.
3. No hacked versions don't add to your sales - they just don't, I wish they did and then I could give all this copy protection/serial number generation activity away...
4. No this doesn't do anything about stolen credit cards - but that is such a small small problem in your/my world of instrument sales its not worth thinking about.

Suffice to say there will be lots of people who will tell you its not worth the effort. I suggest you ask them "well have you actually implemented copy protection ever?" Nearly none of them have, so its all unfounded opinion - and was mine too - until I actually went away and did it and saw the results.


----------



## beely (Jan 23, 2018)

Yep, my first library got about four weeks before it was shared...


----------



## d.healey (Jan 23, 2018)

Lindon said:


> The not so secret info. here is that kontakt instruments sell most volume in the first 2-3 months, if you can get coverage that period you will see most of you revenue retained.


I may be misunderstanding what you mean but this has not been my experience. I've found, like you, that at first release you get a larger number of sales in a shorter period, however the overall number of sales is much greater over a longer period of time (and I think all my products have been pirated). So yes lots of sales in the first few months then it drops but continues steady (in my case for 5 years). For me this long term income is far more important than the quick cash you get at first release. I find that running sales tends to bring in about the same amount or more as the initial release income too.


----------



## Lindon (Jan 23, 2018)

Dave, yes agreed. So reading back thru my post it I've inferred that sales fall away to nothing, and no they dont, but they do fall away considerably. Sure there's long term sales but we land at the "long-term run rate" a lot quicker with no protection. YMMV


----------



## timprebble (Jan 23, 2018)

For the sake of clarifying what is possible: lets say you do find a way to watermark, and your work is shared and you do find out exactly who shared your work. What would you then do?


----------



## d.healey (Jan 24, 2018)

timprebble said:


> For the sake of clarifying what is possible: lets say you do find a way to watermark, and your work is shared and you do find out exactly who shared your work. What would you then do?





> Well let's say you get the guy, you take him to court, the court of course rules in your favor because of your watermarking evidence, now what? Has the guy got any money? Maybe but probably not. So you're left with a few big legal bills, a year or more of your life wasted chasing this guy, and nothing much to show for it. This is pretty much what happened to CineSamples btw.


----------



## Mike Greene (Jan 24, 2018)

Lindon said:


> Suffice to say there will be lots of people who will tell you its not worth the effort. I suggest you ask them "well have you actually implemented copy protection ever?" Nearly none of them have, so its all unfounded opinion - and was mine too - until I actually went away and did it and saw the results.


Great post. My experience is similar to yours, in that (I'm afraid to jinx things by even saying this) my products seem to get pirated at a much slower rate than other people's. I know someone else who takes his CP very seriously who has similar results.



timprebble said:


> For the sake of clarifying what is possible: lets say you do find a way to watermark, and your work is shared and you do find out exactly who shared your work. What would you then do?


For me, this is the biggest reason I watermark. I may or may not pursue legal action, but the bigger benefit to knowing who pirated is that then I know who to not send updates to!

RealiDrums was pirated after a few months. In an incredible stroke of luck, this was just days before I released Version 2, which was a major update. It was quite enjoyable reading the comments on the warez sites from people complaining that "their" copy didn't have the features in my video. Since I knew who the original uploader was, he never got the update, so Version 2 remained un-pirated for over a year.


----------



## Mike Greene (Jan 24, 2018)

By the way, it's not my place to name names here, but the FBI is actively on a case right now with another developer. It seems they're taking this very seriously.


----------



## timprebble (Jan 24, 2018)

It becomes a very philosophical issue - a few years ago I had a situation with my sound libraries (not Kontakt) being shared on a torrent site - someone tipped me off, took screenshots etc... The person was stupid enough to use their band name as their user name, and I found their email in my sales database for a few purchases (but that wasn't all that they shared of mine). Same torrent site listed how many people had downloaded my libraries. At full price = US$45k (yes, yes I know that isn't the 'true value' - pirates don't buy etc... but if it came to a court case, it would be at least a factor in assessing the seriousness and potential damages)
More research & I have the guys home address - he's got a small studio in the UK, doesn't work in post so no sure why he even bought some of my libraries. I got legal advice & could have taken him to court & the result would likely be he loses his studio to pay legal fees & damages, and/or is declared bankrupt - I did not have the heart to do this. People make naive mistakes & that would be an incredibly high cost to pay...

The only positive factor in the entire waste of time & energy was that a local piracy organisation contacted a similar organisation in UK who paid him a visit & gave him a serious wake up....

I think its worth considering what outcome you want before you invest too heavily in retribution. Having the piracy/sharing stopped by the original offender is a small step... and terminating their access of course. But liquidating someone is quite another.


----------



## beely (Jan 24, 2018)

If there is a customer who is purchasing and then sharing those products online, and you are certain it's this person doing this, you can also be certain that if nothing happens, that person will continue to share stuff on an ongoing basis. No consequences, no reason to stop.

So at least terminating access, and giving some kind of slap on the wrist warning might wake them up that there are consequences for doing this, and it would probably stop that one person from sharing in the future. I don't think going after damages makes much sense in most cases.

Yes, it's a constant battle, as other people will leak from time to time, or if one person is determined, they will re-register under a new name (and sometimes with stolen CC details) and continue to leak - but as a lot of this stuff is done by only a few people, making some efforts to stop it can have worthwhile effects I believe.

I think that in future, over and above what I already do, I will likely include some kind of serial unlocking system, together with displaying the user info somewhere in the interface, and those things will likely deter the casual user from sharing their copy, together with making it enough effort to crack that most people just wouldn't bother. And if someone really wants to crack it, they will anyway.


----------



## Lindon (Jan 25, 2018)

beely said:


> (snip)
> I think that in future, over and above what I already do, I will likely include some kind of serial unlocking system, together with displaying the user info somewhere in the interface, and those things will likely deter the casual user from sharing their copy, together with making it enough effort to crack that most people just wouldn't bother. And if someone really wants to crack it, they will anyway.



- yep that's what we do (serial unlock system) and it works well (enough) - and discourages posting in the first place, then gives you access to identifying the culprit. Your choice what to do at that point - warning letter/email tends to work as does banning them from the site.


----------

