# Pace anti-piracy announces Eden 5.0 for iLok protected software



## catsass (Jan 26, 2019)

PACE Anti-Piracy has released a major upgrade to their Copy Protection and License Management toolset and end user software Eden 5.0.

Overview
The Eden 5.0 release includes many updates and enhancements for PACE’s Publisher Partners—software publishers that use iLok to protect their intellectual property and their end user customers. The new version has major increases in security, performance, and ease-of-use for software developers.

For PACE’s publisher partners that use the Eden SDK, several new Windows security countermeasures, as well as enhancements that enable faster build times of protected products are included in Eden 5.0.

Periodic license checks have also been added to the Eden 5.0 Wrapper to provide an additional level of protection.

The Fusion parser has been updated to provide improved support of C++11 through C++17 language standards.

PACE is also announcing that the iLok Cloud feature is enabled for all publishers that want to offer their customers the ability to activate without a dongle.

For convenience, iLok Cloud-enabled Eden Tools licenses are now available for Eden 5.0, so developers can authorize the Eden 5.0 SDK tools without an iLok. Developers that use PACE’s Digital Signing Service will also be able to sign their binaries without an iLok by leveraging Eden 5.0’s iLok Cloud licensing feature.

For End-User Customers, Eden 5.0 Features


Auto-updating of the iLok License Manager
Automatic download and installation of License Support by the wrapper, as needed
Notification of iLok Cloud use
Faster load times of protected products
Availability
Eden 5.0 is available today to software publishers as an option when updating their products.

https://tinyurl.com/ycmyrzvz


----------



## d.healey (Jan 26, 2019)

Booo


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 26, 2019)

d.healey said:


> Booo


Really?

I am down for faster load times of my protected products!


----------



## d.healey (Jan 26, 2019)

JonSolo said:


> Really?


I have no love for DRM


----------



## wst3 (Jan 26, 2019)

Right there with you Mr. Music Monkey! DRM/Copy Protection tends to punish the honest user more than the pirates. HOWEVER, I think it is only fair to allow individual developers to chose the path they take with respect to protecting their rights.

As CP schemes mature, and they do seem to cause less trouble than years ago, I hope that they do a better job of protecting software, or provide fewer hassles for legitimate owners, or both. 

This announcement could be good news.


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 26, 2019)

It feels like good news. No one is a fan of DRM, however it is an evil necessity in a world corrupt with theft. I can respect that.

This might ease the future pain of continued CP policy with a product that actually cares for the legit users.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 26, 2019)

JonSolo said:


> It feels like good news. No one is a fan of DRM, however it is an evil necessity in a world corrupt with theft. I can respect that.
> 
> This might ease the future pain of continued CP policy with a product that actually cares for the legit users.


You're half right. It is evil. It's not a necessity.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 26, 2019)

JonSolo said:


> however it is an evil necessity in a world corrupt with theft



Not really. u-he shows the proper way it should be done. Completely unintrusive, not requiring additional hardware and drivers, yet still working perfectly.


----------



## babylonwaves (Jan 26, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> Not really. u-he shows the proper way it should be done. Completely unintrusive, not requiring additional hardware and drivers, yet still working perfectly.


authorise 200 plug-ins on a new system and let me know if you still think that serials are the better way ...


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 26, 2019)

Man it feels like KVR over here sometimes.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

I'd be interested to know if DRM improvements could encourage more developers to allow resales, since piracy fears seem to be the reason some don't allow it.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 26, 2019)

babylonwaves said:


> authorise 200 plug-ins on a new system and let me know if you still think that serials are the better way ...



If it is offline serial check only, I'd rather copy&paste the 200 serials and be sure the stuff will still work in 10 years, no matter what happens to the servers of the developers. It's a price I'd be willing to pay to avoid online activation hassles. But really it's a price I shouldn't be required to pay in the first place if I paid for a product. DRM imho is a waste of time and an economy based on fear. I bet 90+% of the stuff that has DRM is being pirated regardless.



Land of Missing Parts said:


> I'd be interested to know if DRM improvements could encourage more developers to allow resales.



Resales are worse for developers than piracy, because that's money not going into their pockets that someone was willing to spend on their product. The vast majority of pirates isn't at all willing to pay any money to anyone. Those are not lost sales, but a resale is usually a lost sale to the developer.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> Those are not lost sales, but a resale is usually a lost sale to the developer.


What I meant is that developers are concerned that the person selling the instrument doesn't delete their own copy. I'd have to check, but I think Fluffy Audio and Indiginus Samples have said this on VI Control.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 26, 2019)

babylonwaves said:


> authorise 200 plug-ins on a new system and let me know if you still think that serials are the better way ...



Yes, I do think they're better, particularly the u-he's method which is perfect. It's a serial that gets stored in a file within the plugin's data folder. Their plugins are entirely portable, along with the file with the serial, so as soon as you transfer them on another machine, they are all working as they used to. The plugin itself does checks if the serial is in the valid format, and if pirates try to circumvent that, the plugin does all sorts of things to make it unusable and "guide" the user to purchase. Urs has discussed a lot about what they do out in the open back on KvR, it is genuinely interesting, and he has numbers to back his method up. Every time a supposed crack appeared, at some point their plugin would timebomb and they get a spike in sales. It's the perfect method. Read Urs' posts in this thread, some insights and later on some graphs that support his method.

You don't need a dongle to do this. It's the best copy protection system that exists, and it is curious that practically no other developer is interested in doing it.



MartinH. said:


> Resales are worse for developers than piracy, because that's money not going into their pockets that someone was willing to spend on their product. The vast majority of pirates isn't at all willing to pay any money to anyone. Those are not lost sales, but a resale is usually a lost sale to the developer.



Excellent point!


----------



## jbuhler (Jan 26, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> You don't need a dongle to do this. It's the best copy protection system that exists, and it is curious that practically no other developer is interested in doing it.


Any speculation as to why?


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 26, 2019)

I've no idea. Better ask devs.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jan 26, 2019)

Never mind the age old debate - what does this announcement mean in practice? Faster loading - good, iCloud for any developer who wants it (which I thought was already the case)... anything I missed?


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> Resales are worse for developers than piracy, because that's money not going into their pockets that someone was willing to spend on their product.


Maybe you're right. But most developers charge a transfer fee that recoups a percentage of the sale. And it would encourage a lot of additional sales that otherwise wouldn't be possible.


----------



## ionian (Jan 26, 2019)

JonSolo said:


> CP policy with a product that actually cares for the legit users.



>PACE
>Product that actually cares for legit users

Pick one.


----------



## ionian (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> Resales are worse for developers than piracy, because that's money not going into their pockets that someone was willing to spend on their product. The vast majority of pirates isn't at all willing to pay any money to anyone. Those are not lost sales, but a resale is usually a lost sale to the developer.



Most of my hatred toward the companies that don't allow resales isn't really because I want to sell the library later when I get bored of it. I tend not to do that because I understand that they need to make money so if I get bored of a library I just file it away because if I don't touch it long enough, usually I ended up missing something about it anyway. Most of the bitterness is because quite frankly, a lot of these companies (and yes, I also mean some of the major ones) put out GARBAGE. It isn't until you get it in your hands that you realize how much mangling had to be done to get the library to sound half decent in the demos and that the product really isn't anywhere near as good sounding as the demos without a lot of work. Then right away the company is like, "NO RETURNS! NO RESALES!"

Demo songs don't tell the whole story. More often than not, the minute you get the product in your hands and find the faults (and I seem to have a talent for finding everything wrong with a library within minutes of using it) when you go to the demos it becomes painfully obvious to see that the demo songs are crafted to either underplay, cover up, or skip entirely whatever inconsistencies and problems there are with a library. 

Let's put it this way, Kontakt already has a 15 minute demo period built in that automatically locks an unregistered library after the 15 minutes. The fact that pretty much no manufacturers use it is very telling. It's because if a lot of sample companies let you demo their stuff, probably a good portion of their catalog wouldn't sell.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 26, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> Their plugins are entirely portable, along with the file with the serial, so as soon as you transfer them on another machine, they are all working as they used to.


This and what he has written over on KVR sounds great:


> With all that you want to generally keep the protection code small and clean. Don't try to be super elaborate. Avoiding false positives is the highest priority.
> 
> 
> [...]
> ...



Reading some of what he has written (very interesting indeed, thanks for the link) in that thread, I can appreciate the creativity and craftsmanship he puts into his approach to DRM, while also thinking of his paying users first. And using his system to gently funnel pirates towards a legit purchase is very smart. Kudos to him! If I'm ever in need of a new synth plugin I know where I'll look first. 
And on the u-he website I just saw another very intersting approach in terms of "thinking-outside-the-box-development":
https://u-he.com/products/protoverb/



I googled a bit to find out if iLok protected play engine stuff has been cracked yet, and I've seen a mix of people that said the content isn't worth the effort and others that said they'd buy it, but not as long as it uses iLok.
Also there were conspiracy theories that some things _have _been cracked, but the hackers instead of releaseing it, just extort the devs for money 0_o. If they really do that and pay it, I think it's pretty dumb. It's like worst of all worlds, I'd have rather given up on using ilok altogether, but that's just me.


----------



## jbuhler (Jan 26, 2019)

ionian said:


> Demo songs don't tell the whole story. More often than not, the minute you get the product in your hands and find the faults (and I seem to have a talent for finding everything wrong with a library within minutes of using it) when you go to the demos it becomes painfully obvious to see that the demo songs are crafted to either underplay, cover up, or skip entirely whatever inconsistencies and problems there are with a library.


I agree with your basic point, but the function of demos is typically to demonstrate the strengths of a library. I actually see nothing wrong with that, don't expect developers to show off what a library can't do well (as there an almost unlimited number of things that any particular library, even an excellent library, will not do well), and I've long learned that you can't expect a library will do more than has been shown in a demo or walkthrough. If the demos and walkthroughs avoid certain things, then there is probably a reason for that. 

What does bug me is when a library takes considerable processing of plug-ins, etc. to sound like the demo. At that point, it is no longer really the library that is being demoed, and we are in the territory of misrepresentation. "Oh, to sound like the demo, you need to buy thousands of dollars of plug-ins and other gear..."


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 26, 2019)

ionian said:


> Most of the bitterness is because quite frankly, a lot of these companies (and yes, I also mean some of the major ones) put out GARBAGE. It isn't until you get it in your hands that you realize how much mangling had to be done to get the library to sound half decent in the demos and that the product really isn't anywhere near as good sounding as the demos without a lot of work. Then right away the company is like, "NO RETURNS! NO RESALES!"


A consumer-friendly refund policy (like 30 days money-back no questions asked) is the right answer for that. I know of literally no one who ever offered this and regretted it. 




ionian said:


> (and I seem to have a talent for finding everything wrong with a library within minutes of using it)


My sympathies, I feel the same. Found issues with Ark 1 within minutes of using it...




ionian said:


> It's because if a lot of sample companies let you demo their stuff, probably a good portion of their catalog wouldn't sell.



I think data from the games industry when Steam introduced refunds doesn't really support that theory. There also are plenty of new sales generated where people feel like taking less of a risk "trying something new" when they know they can just refund it if it isn't their thing.




jbuhler said:


> "Oh, to sound like the demo, you need to buy thousands of dollars of plug-ins and other gear..."


I try not to even listen to anything other than the "naked & without processing" demos. Or better yet patch walkthroughs on youtube made by independant reviewers. I find those reveal some issues much more clearly.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> A consumer-friendly refund policy (like 30 days money-back no questions asked) is the right answer for that. I know of literally no one who ever offered this and regretted it.


Right, but how do the developers know that the buyer isn't keeping the instrument and saying they deleted it? This is what I was thinking of, and how it relates to the DRM discussion.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> I googled a bit to find out if iLok protected play engine stuff has been cracked yet, and I've seen a mix of people that said the content isn't worth the effort and others that said they'd buy it, but not as long as it uses iLok.
> Also there were conspiracy theories that some things _have _been cracked, but the hackers instead of releaseing it, just extort the devs for money 0_o. If they really do that and pay it, I think it's pretty dumb. It's like worst of all worlds, I'd have rather given up on using ilok altogether, but that's just me.



Play is using iLok, but there's also an additional level of protection there since their samples are Blowfish encrypted. I'm assuming if iLok layer of protection is cracked, then Play engine might detect that and make the samples unplayable/unlistenable, or something...


----------



## whiskers (Jan 26, 2019)

So much salt over product protection lol


----------



## robgb (Jan 26, 2019)

d.healey said:


> Booo


Does copy protection even work? It seems to me it simply makes life more difficult for honest people. The pirates don't seem to be fazed by it.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Right, but how do the developers know that the buyer isn't keeping the instrument and saying they deleted it? This is what I was thinking of, and how it relates to the DRM discussion.



I can't imagine that to be a high enough percentage to be worth worrying about. I think it was
@Mike Greene who made the case for refunds instead of resale a while ago. Maybe he can tell us what percentage of purchases gets refunded. I would bet it's vastly smaller than typical piracy rates for anything piratable. And I also bet that only a tiny fraction of those who refund keep using the thing even if no DRM is involved. And then you need to take into account how many people might not have purchased the thing without the refund policy in the first place. Like I said, I can't imagine anyone to be worse off with that approach on the bottom line, and I have yet to hear someone say they tried this and regretted it. Let me know if you find one!


----------



## robgb (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> Maybe he can tell us what percentage of purchases gets refunded.


Well, the one product of his that I bought was far too good for me to want a refund. So I don't imagine he gets a lot of requests. I could be wrong.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> I can't imagine that to be a high enough percentage to be worth worrying about. I think it was
> @Mike Greene who made the case for refunds instead of resale a while ago. Maybe he can tell us what percentage of purchases gets refunded. I would bet it's vastly smaller than typical piracy rates for anything piratable. And I also bet that only a tiny fraction of those who refund keep using the thing even if no DRM is involved. And then you need to take into account how many people might not have purchased the thing without the refund policy in the first place. Like I said, I can't imagine anyone to be worse off with that approach on the bottom line, and I have yet to hear someone say they tried this and regretted it. Let me know if you find one!


Good points, all. I'll add a couple thoughts.

1) A world with stronger DRM protection is a world in which developers can be more comfortable issuing refunds, exchanges, etc. I can't imagine any developer to be worse off with that approach.

2) Fluffy Audio has essentially said they would be more comfortable with resales if they could be sure the user deletes the library after selling. 

How cool would it be if Fluffy Audio officially allowed resales? Maybe stronger DRM can make that a reality.


----------



## robgb (Jan 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> How cool would it be if Fluffy Audio officially allowed resales? Maybe stronger DRM can make that a reality.


I just don't buy it. I think developers use the lack of strong DRM as an excuse not to offer refunds or resale. But it has little, if anything, to do with that. And I don't think that will change. Just my opinion. I could be wrong.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> 1) A world with stronger DRM protection is a world in which developers can be more comfortable issuing refunds, exchanges, etc. I can't imagine any developer to be worse off with that approach.
> 
> 2) Fluffy Audio has essentially said they would be more comfortable with resales if they could be sure the user deletes the library after selling.
> 
> How cool would it be if Fluffy Audio officially allowed resales? Maybe stronger DRM can make that a reality.



"Stronger" DRM means it is more intrusive and turns people away that otherwise would have bought the thing. Play with iLok is very strong, uncracked even. But you'll find dozens of people on here who say they won't buy anything using iLok dongles. These are lost sales.

And resale is bad for a dev's revenue stream. The DRM issue is just more convenient to blame than saying "We just don't want to do it because it's bad for us".

I've bought and refunded two After Effects plugins once because I wasn't happy with them. They had limitations that were not properly disclosed in all the demo content. They worked around those just like all the sample devs do in their demos. I asked for a refund, they asked me to delete the plugins and mail them back, I deleted them and emailed them and got my money back. All good, no disgruntled customer that will forever trashtalk them on forums and I didn't keep anything I'm not supposed to have either. It's not that hard. Have a little faith in people...


----------



## d.healey (Jan 26, 2019)

I reject the propaganda term "copy protection" and substitute it with "copy restriction". Sharing is not theft and piracy is attacking ships. 

The only way to eliminate unauthorized sharing without trampling the rights of users is to authorize sharing.

And refunds should be given no questions asked (mostly) if the developer is unable to fix whatever issue causes the user to want a refund.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

I can see that my way of thinking about it isn't popular. I apologize for bringing it up.


----------



## d.healey (Jan 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> I can see that my way of thinking about it isn't popular. I apologize for bringing it up.


Neither is mine  Share your opinions they are as valid as any other even if we don't all agree.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

d.healey said:


> Neither is mine


Don't you hate DRM? That _is_ the popular opinion. Not that I love it per say.


----------



## d.healey (Jan 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Don't you hate DRM? That _is_ the popular opinion. Not that I love it per say.


Yes but I also think users should be able to own and have control of the software they buy, most developers disagree with that (and so did I until a few years ago).


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Jan 26, 2019)

Do they still charge you for zero down time if *their* product fails?

Add me to the 'boo' column


----------



## Quasar (Jan 26, 2019)

SimonCharlesHanna said:


> Do they still charge you for zero down time if *their* product fails?
> 
> Add me to the 'boo' column


As far as I know, yeah they do. It's a protection racket that would make even the old-time Mafia crime bosses blush...


----------



## pderbidge (Jan 26, 2019)

robgb said:


> I just don't buy it. I think developers use the lack of strong DRM as an excuse not to offer refunds or resale. But it has little, if anything, to do with that. And I don't think that will change. Just my opinion. I could be wrong.


I think some developers sure, but I think the real issue is that companies like Pace, whether they believe what they are telling developers or not, have something to gain from pulling data and making conclusions to that data that benefit what they do. So when a dev sees the pretty charts and data that sells them on how rampant piracy is and how much money they are losing because of it even though there are so many other factors as to why a product is successful or not, then it scares the dev into feeling like it's a necessary evil. Data can tell whatever story you want it to and I worked for a company for 15 years that did this, though I complained all the time I thought it wasn't honest and didn't tell the whole story, they believed in what they were doing and thus didn't care or want to admit it wasn't an honest depiction of the marketplace. I believe that companies like Pace do the same thing and therefore so many are convinced that DRM is the best solution because of this poor practice.


----------



## robgb (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> But you'll find dozens of people on here who say they won't buy anything using iLok dongles.


I'm one of those people. I used a dongle back when I was a Nuendo user and had another dongle for another app, I can't remember the name of (maybe gigastudio? I don't know). I got rid of both of them. The apps were constantly asking for the dongles and I had to unplug and replug them in. Maybe the tech is better now, but I'd just as soon keep some USB space free. As it is, right now, I only have one slot free.


----------



## ThomasL (Jan 26, 2019)

I've been using iLok since 2009 and have had zero problems. Zero as in none. Had an eLicenser die on me once but VSL helped me out pretty quick.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 26, 2019)

pderbidge said:


> I believe that companies like Pace do the same thing and therefore so many are convinced that DRM is the best solution because of this poor practice.



Reminds me how I've heard someone say that "quitting smoking is super hard" is a lie spread by cigarette companies, and once you realize that, it's actually pretty easy. He was a smoker, and then he just quit. Can't comment on how true it is, but it would make a lot of sense.


----------



## robgb (Jan 26, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> Reminds me how I've heard someone say that "quitting smoking is super hard" is a lie spread by cigarette companies, and once you realize that, it's actually pretty easy. He was a smoker, and then he just quit. Can't comment on how true it is, but it would make a lot of sense.


It took me exactly a day to quit smoking and never crave it again.
Oh, wait. You mean cigarettes.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

ThomasL said:


> I've been using iLok since 2009 and have had zero problems. Zero as in none. Had an eLicenser die on me once but VSL helped me out pretty quick.


Same here, never had an issue with it.


----------



## pderbidge (Jan 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Same here, never had an issue with it.


Same here "except" when I had to reinstall everything on a new computer what should have taken hours took weeks because of all the drm protection and special install (related to DRM) procedures. If this had been freeware, for example, it would be a simple copy and paste and your done. So going from what could take hours to taking "weeks" I would say is a pretty big inconvenience to a paying customer. Of course, I'm not just talking about pace here but all the various drm methods employed by different companies.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 26, 2019)

pderbidge said:


> So going from what could take hours to taking "weeks" I would say is a pretty big inconvenience to a paying customer.


Why the quotation marks around "weeks"?


----------



## pderbidge (Jan 26, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Why the quotation marks around "weeks"?


For dramatic effect. Maybe I should've used Bold letters or underlined, i don't know, I'm definitely not a wordsmith


----------



## dflood (Jan 26, 2019)

I don’t mind registration keys, online activation, registered user accounts, watermarking, etc., but dongles are a deal breaker. They cross the line from DRM to treating you like a criminal with an ankle monitor.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 27, 2019)

Looping in Fluffy Audio -- @paoling

Paoling, I am paraphrasing what you said a few months ago in this post, but essentially you said you'd be more comfortable with resales if you could be sure the user deletes the library after selling.

I'm a little surprised at how quick folks dismissed your comment out of hand as being insincere.



robgb said:


> I just don't buy it. I think developers use the lack of strong DRM as an excuse not to offer refunds or resale. But it has little, if anything, to do with that.





MartinH. said:


> And resale is bad for a dev's revenue stream. The DRM issue is just more convenient to blame than saying "We just don't want to do it because it's bad for us".



I was making the point that if DRM can strengthen protections for developers, they would be more comfortable offering returns, exchanges, or resales.

Paoling, do you have any thoughts on this?


----------



## robgb (Jan 27, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> I was making the point that if DRM can strengthen protections for developers, they would be more comfortable offering returns, exchanges, or resales.
> 
> Do you have any thoughts on this?


Yes. There is no DRM that will ever work flawlessly enough to make developers abandon a business model that gives them all of the advantages. They have the best of all worlds when they don't have to refund or except returns or exchanges, or allow resale. The money is theirs no matter what. Do you seriously think they want to give that up? Sure, there will always be exceptions (as there are now), but...


----------



## Quasar (Jan 27, 2019)

dflood said:


> I don’t mind registration keys, online activation, registered user accounts, watermarking, etc., but dongles are a deal breaker. They cross the line from DRM to treating you like a criminal with an ankle monitor.


Agreed, except for online activation. The right to maintain a private workstation that is not subject to the vicissitudes of the World Wide Web is fundamental and sacrosanct. Developers who do not allow their CP to be ported from a secondary computer are IMHO engaged in an ethically reprehensible business practice that needs to be seen as essential human rights violation.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 27, 2019)

robgb said:


> Do you seriously think they want to give that up? Sure, there will always be exceptions (as there are now), but...


Robgb, let's make a bet, you and me. You say Fluffy Audio @paoling isn't being sincere about the reasons why he won't do resales. I say he is being sincere.

Are you sure enough in yourself that you'd be willing to make a wager?


----------



## robgb (Jan 27, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> You say Fluffy Audio @paoling isn't being sincere about the reasons why he won't do resales. I say he is being sincere.


Apparently I wasn't clear enough. I'm not saying that at all. I was merely speculating, in GENERAL, about developers. I know nothing about Fluffy Audio or who runs it or how sincere he may or may not be. Could be Fluffy would be all too happy to do resales. There are developers who allow it NOW, despite the lack of good DRM. I'm simply saying that it seems unlikely that a developer would want to change a business model that says they get all the money, no matter what. Again, just my opinion. I could be wrong. What part of the "I could be wrong" did you misunderstand?


----------



## kitekrazy (Jan 27, 2019)

ThomasL said:


> I've been using iLok since 2009 and have had zero problems. Zero as in none. *Had an eLicenser die on me once but VSL helped me out pretty quick.*



Pretty quick as in getting your licenses back at 50% charge or their protection plan?


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 27, 2019)




----------



## robgb (Jan 27, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> Yes, apparently you weren't clear.


Again, what part of "I could be wrong" do you not understand? What part of "I think developers" do you not understand? What part of "just my opinion" do you not understand? I mean, isn't the entire point of this forum for people to express their opinions? I couldn't care less one way or another about Fluffy Audio. I'm not sure why you have that stuck in your head.


----------



## kitekrazy (Jan 27, 2019)

I had a problem with one license and Pace responded the next day. Over 20 years ago Pace had a bad reputation and there was evidence of their drivers destroying drives. They've upped their game big time. I prefer them over eLicenser.


----------



## d.healey (Jan 27, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> more comfortable with resales if they could be sure the user deletes the library after selling.


There is no ethical way to do this.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 27, 2019)

robgb said:


> isn't the entire point of this forum for people to express their opinions?


The point of this forum is for musicians to help musicians.


----------



## robgb (Jan 27, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> The point of this forum is for musicians to help musicians.


Yes, by expressing their opinions. Really, dude, find a new cause. I'm not much interested in arguing with you. We disagree about something. Get over it.


----------



## dflood (Jan 27, 2019)

Back to anti piracy measures, I don’t even remember now why iLok in particular is such a show stopper for me. I had to use it many years ago when I had a Pro Tools system and all I remember now is that I didn’t like it. But that was a different time, I hated trying to keep Windows XP running, I hated the instant obsolescence of my Pro Tools hardware, etc..

Maybe it’s just semantics - an ‘activation key’ sounds positive: we’re opening your present for you! A ‘lock’ or dongle seems more like: “we’re just going to put this here because we don’t trust you not to steal it”.

Rational or not, it sounds like I am not alone. When I see the an iLok requirement I just move on. There are always alternatives. I wonder how many sales are lost because of this and if it in any way makes up for piracy losses (remembering that almost all instances of piracy, when prevented, are never converted into sales).


----------



## wst3 (Jan 27, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> The vast majority of pirates isn't at all willing to pay any money to anyone. Those are not lost sales, but a resale is usually a lost sale to the developer.


I am curious - really - do you honestly believe that a pirate stealing a library that they would not have paid for in the first place does not represent a business loss to the developer?

And that does not take into account people who would have paid for a library had they been unable to steal it.

Theft is theft. The only person that can permit the free (as in beer) redistribution of intellectual property is the owner of the intellectual property. If I stole your 1959 Les Paul I'll bet you'd have a different view of theft.

Getting back on topic - the only person that has the right to determine how they will protect their product is the owner. If they want to give it away that is their right. It is also their right to charge for it if they so choose. And if they wish to place draconian copy protection measures in place, or forbid resale they get to do that too.

We get to decide if a product is worth the price, and if we wish to support developers who use copy protection, or forbid resale. Whining about it won't change it - voting (quietly please) with your wallet will.

I don't avoid software with copy protection. I do find the no refund/return/resale policy to be the most troubling because it prevents me from gambling on libraries that might turn out to be useful. That's a loss to the vendor, but clearly not a big enough loss to matter. It may also be a loss to me, but I'll never know<G>!


----------



## ionian (Jan 27, 2019)

dflood said:


> Maybe it’s just semantics - an ‘activation key’ sounds positive: we’re opening your present for you! A ‘lock’ or dongle sounds seems more like: “we’re just going to put this here because we don’t trust you not to steal it”.
> 
> Rational or not, it sounds like I am not alone. When I see the an iLok requirement I just move on. There are always alternatives. I wonder how many sales are lost because of this and if it in any way makes up for piracy losses (remembering that almost all instances of piracy, when prevented, are never converted into sales).



It's like that vibe I get when I shop at Micro center. I pay for my stuff, walk 5 feet from the register to the front door, then the security guard has to look in my bag and check my receipt. Then I ask them, "Really? Are you trying to say I shoplifted something in the 5 feet I walked from the register to here?!" 

I always pass on anything pace / ilok. I had the pace drivers destroy my windows kernal once and I had to completely reformat my drive and reinstall windows to finally fix it. From that day forward, as far as I'm concerned, Pace IS malware, and I find it insulting that any developer thinks their product is important enough to tell me to install malware to use their software. So for me, it's always a lost sale for them. 

What I find hilarious is that developers have to pay extortionate amounts to Pace for the "honor" of pushing that garbage on their users. So not only is it lost sales, but they also lose a good amount of money paying Pace on top of it. I remember when Ilok 2 was cracked, Dave Derr was on another forum crying about how depressed he was that it was cracked because he was just about to release the Arouser, which was iLok 2 protected and supposed to be uncrackable and that Pace charged Empirical Labs $50,000 for the iLok 2 tech for their plug in. I was laughing hysterically.


----------



## kitekrazy (Jan 27, 2019)

One of the biggest rants against dongles was Eric Pershing. You could probably find those at the NSS forum. I've copied one of his quotes. Imagine a developer thinking like an end user. That's messed up.


----------



## d.healey (Jan 27, 2019)

This will be a little ranty - maybe time to move to the drama zone...



wst3 said:


> Theft is theft.


Making/distributing an unauthorized copy is not theft (legally speaking). If you steal a guitar then the person you took it from no longer has the guitar, if you copy a guitar then you'll both be happy 

This may surprise some people but we all have a natural right to copy and share things - developers want to take away that right. Sharing is a good thing, so when people can do something that is good and can do it easily they do it - and they always will.

The problem is software developers try to apply the limits of physical objects to software which is futile. Imagine if it was the other way around and we applied EULAs to physical objects. Every time you bought a chair you would have to agree that only one person would sit on it at a time, that you won't modify it, or repair it if it breaks, you won't let anyone else use it, and you won't sell it when you no longer need it. And if the chair came with a dongle you'd have to call up the manufacturer and ask him for permission to sit on the chair each time you wanted to, and call him again when you stand up. It's stupid. Physical objects have different limitations than software and the two should be treated independently.

Every single proprietary software developer (including me) has had their software shared without permission - and yet proprietary software developers are still around. There are a few cases of developers folding and blaming it on "piracy" but it's very doubtful that it is the major cause otherwise there would be far fewer proprietary software developers (which wouldn't be a bad thing). It's also interesting that the more successful a company gets the more their software is available from unauthorised sources and the more draconian their measures become to restrict their users.

Almost any major piece of software can be downloaded for free, so why do people buy software...

To support the developer
Trust in an authorized source or distrust of an unauthorized one
Prompt updates and bug fixes from the developer
Tech support
Reliable/Fast downloads
People knowingly pay for software they can get for free. For example all wordpress plugins are free software and many can be downloaded without paying but lots of people (including me) pay for them for the reasons stated above.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 27, 2019)

wst3 said:


> I am curious - really - do you honestly believe that a pirate stealing a library *that they would not have paid for in the first place* does not represent a business loss to the developer?


Yes. Especially in the long term. For the same reasons why educational discounts exist. At some point a percentage of those users move into positions where they can and do purchase full legit licenses, and it's advantageous for devs to have them already used to their products. This is a bigger factor the steeper the learning curve is: applies much more to DAWs than to sample libraries, and even more to 3D graphics software, because they are much harder to get used to (not sure if they still do but Autodesk had _free _edu licenses for students, because it's a sensible business decision).



wst3 said:


> If I stole your 1959 Les Paul I'll bet you'd have a different view of theft.


Terrible example, as old as the "you wouldn't download a car" campaigns... See the post above mine.




wst3 said:


> Theft is theft. The only person that can permit the free (as in beer) redistribution of intellectual property is the owner of the intellectual property.


I neither said nor implied that software piracy is ok! Just that it doesn't make sense to "fight it at all costs", because I think those _costs _can easily outweigh the _benefits _for the developer. U-He seems to have found a way to take steps where the _benefits _do outweigh the _costs_. Seems like they have the best experience for legit end users (plugins being essentially portable - just copy the folder over and you're good to go) while even converting some of the pirates over to paying users. Win win.




wst3 said:


> Whining about it won't change it - voting *(quietly please)* with your wallet will.


You are partly wrong (about the quietly part, not the wallet voting), because without telling the devs _why _your wallet vote went against their library, they can not make informed choices for the future. They might instead think "Maybe I better make a string or brass library instead, like everybody else. Those seem to sell like hot cake". How are they supposed to know what aspect of their product failed just from seeing low sales numbers without any context?




ionian said:


> which was iLok 2 protected and supposed to be uncrackable and that Pace charged Empirical Labs $50,000 for the iLok 2 tech for their plug in. I was laughing hysterically.


Oof, glad we finally see some numbers! Very interesting.


----------



## robgb (Jan 27, 2019)

d.healey said:


> To support the developer
> 
> Trust in an authorized source or distrust of an unauthorized one
> 
> ...


Yes. And I think guilt plays a big role in it for some of us. Feeling that you're doing the right thing (buying Reaper, for instance, when you could use it for free forever) is a strong motivator to buy.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 27, 2019)

Found a great post by u-he explaining the cost/benefit thing perfectly and raising an interesting question regarding _*potential *_positive side effects of piracy in the last paragraph:




> The challenge is to put in as little effort as possible on our side for as much annoyance on their side. A noise generator is 3 lines of code. Displaying an invitation like "Click to upgrade to full version" is 5 lines of code. A check for a crack is 10-20 lines. A trigger for a check is 5-10 lines.
> 
> Our software has 10 or so checks, each took a few hours to implement. No group has ever found all checks, but some groups have exploited flaws for which we hadn't had checks. Each time that happens I spend a few hours and add two or three more checks for exactly that flaw.
> 
> ...




edit: source: https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6335302#p6335302


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 27, 2019)

whiskers said:


> So much salt over product protection lol


This.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 27, 2019)

JonSolo said:


> This.


How about a meme to lighten to mood?


----------



## whiskers (Jan 27, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> How about a meme to lighten to mood?



hahaha this fits VI-C so well.


----------



## Polkasound (Jan 27, 2019)

*Masterlock Announces New Anti-Theft Door Lock with iLock Protection*

*In an increasing effort to prevent crime in private residences, Masterlock has teamed up with iLock to create the most secure door entry system ever created.*

When you step up to the door, you'll speak into microphone connected to voice recognition software. If it matches your voice on file, the homeowner will receive a text alerting you to your presence. You will then be prompted to look into an eye scanner to verify your identity. Once your identity has been verified, you will be asked three questions about your childhood. The correct answers will unlock a keypad where you insert a dongle and type in a seven-digit code within three seconds. Upon successfully entering the code, you must then use a provided phone app to send in your GPS coordinates. The iLock system will then begin the door unlocking process. Each of the five door locks will be systematically unlocked at which time you will enter a secure holding area to wait for the homeowner to greet you.

_"Although the system does keep bad people away,"_ said Masterlock CEO Morgan Cahill, _"it has one major drawback; it's such an intrusive pain in the ass, no homeowners want it."_


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 27, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> How about a meme to lighten to mood?



FTW!!!!!

Like Clemson (the best team in the country, bring on the haters), you just went 15-0! Good going heh!


----------



## rrichard63 (Jan 27, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> ... particularly the u-he's method which is perfect. It's a serial that gets stored in a file within the plugin's data folder. Their plugins are entirely portable, along with the file with the serial, so as soon as you transfer them on another machine, they are all working as they used to. ...


I don't understand how this provides any protection at all. If the installed plugin is "entirely portable", then what prevents me from giving the installed files to all of my friends -- or posting them on the internet for that matter?

I' don't want to be argumentative here. I'm just trying to understand why this approach gives u-he any protection at all.


----------



## dflood (Jan 27, 2019)

rrichard63 said:


> I don't understand how this provides any protection at all. If the installed plugin is "entirely portable", then what prevents me from giving the installed files to all of my friends -- or posting them on the internet for that matter?
> 
> I' don't want to be argumentative here. I'm just trying to understand why this approach gives u-he any protection at all.


Ya, not sure how it ‘knows’ but if it works properly, then great. However, I’m recalling the multiple occasions when Microsoft decided that my copy of Windows was not ‘genuine’, and what it took to convince them that it was.


----------



## alanb (Jan 27, 2019)

Great. The "Internet of Things," with all of its security pitfalls and lack of meaningful benefit to the end user/customer, comes at last to OUR STUDIOS.



catsass said:


> [...]
> 
> Periodic license checks have also been added to the Eden 5.0 Wrapper to provide an additional level of protection.
> 
> ...




Meanwhile, end-users/customers will lose instantly the relatively iron-clad "protection" afforded by airgapping their computers [except, of course, when forced to connect to The Internets by Native Access, the Spitfire installer, or some other fancy new proprietary PITApp] in order to work without fear of intrusion/undisclosed observation and data-siphoning/forced OS updates/_etc._, and without having to run Norton Internet Security or [insert your favorite "infinitely better than Norton" alternative here] and suffer the slings, arrows, snaps, crackles and pops that come therewith.


_Also sprach PACE_:


> The ‘Cloud Session’ is an open channel from the end user’s computer to our licensing activation server . . . . The activation server sends down packets of license checks that will allow the software to run in short time increments. These increments are long enough that if there is a rough patch of communication, the software will carry on as if it didn’t lose communication. However, it will hit a limit after maybe 5-15 minutes, and the software will require a license check.



So . . . if your gateway/router conks out . . . or a fallen tree, ISP hiccup or slip of a FIOS worker's wirecutter causes an Internet outage . . . or maybe you've retreated to your WiFi-free cabin in Walden for inspiration . . . your software will die in "5-15 minutes."

Feeling "protected" yet?


_Also sprach PACE_:


> When a license is activated from a user’s iLok account to the iLok Cloud, we open a secure, highly encrypted line of communication to our license activation server. This ultra-secure communication line is referred to as a ‘Cloud Session’.



"Ultra-secure." I feel so safe. I hope that the tech isn't based on, say, the Tizen platform.....

And that they'll do a better job of _maintaining_ our individual data than, say, Dow Jones and Verizon.....

Hooray, "protection" ! ! ! ! !


_Also sprach PACE_:


> The only data that passes in this open channel is directly related to the license check.Cloud Sessions are very, very low bandwidth.
> 
> [...]
> 
> They only pass data (license checks) while the software is running.



It'll be fun to see what kind of telemetric shenanigans will actually take place, once someone straps a packet sniffer to his/her machine and sees what data is actually passed, and to whom.

But shouldn't we just trust PACE (and each and every software developer, and everybody to whom we've inadvertently EULA'd the right to exploit whatever data ultimately does get sucked through that "open channel" from our computers, and anyone clever enough to mount a MITM attack, and . . .)?

Yes, we should . . . just as much as we should trust LG . . . and Samsung . . .and Vizio, and Verizon, and . . .

Even if PACE's _current_ policy is to limit their surveillance to data that is "directly related to the license check" — an ambiguous phrase to which only PACE's counsel holds _their_ definition — that policy is almost guaranteed to change eventually.

As Vizio’s CTO Bill Baxter acknowledges, in this refreshingly-and-terrifyingly candid interview, "it’s not just about data collection. It’s about post-purchase monetization of the TV."

It can just as easily be about post-purchase monetization of your software libraries, the contents of your DAW computer, and the contents of every other piece of computer and non-computer hardware connected to your home/studio LAN (_heeeeeeeeeeeere's Dante_!).

The iLok Cloud EULA (like every other EULA on the planet) will presumably contain language similar to that of the ilok.com website's EULA ("PACE may change these Terms of Use from time to time, at PACE's sole discretion"). Stay tuned! **

Oh boy oh boy oh boy protection.......................................

When I read people all over The Internets griping about having to use a stupid %$#@!^ little USB dongle in order to use their paid-for software in peace and in private, when something like _this_ is the entropic alternative into which the Universe will inexorably spiral, it just boggles what little is left of my mind.....


----------



## Crowe (Jan 27, 2019)

iLok is an extremely important factor in whether or not I'll ever buy a certain plugin. Invasive DRM is *not* ok.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 28, 2019)

ionian said:


> Demo songs don't tell the whole story.


THIS. 

In the hands of some very talented composers with plenty of time and excellent mixing and mastering skills, dross can be spun into gold. 

Thorough walkthroughs, however, are more indicative of a library’s crunchy goodness.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 28, 2019)

To the topic, I have never had a single problem with either my iLoks or my Steinberg keys over many years, but then, I don’t move things areound much.

As for data security.....pssssh. That boat has sailed and sunk. I’m not on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Snapchat or much of anything, yet Google knows everything about me. I got sucked into LinkedIn at some point and they have a list of everyone I know or might have known, and I didn’t give it to them. It’s over.


----------



## novaburst (Jan 28, 2019)

For developers who use dongle protection they must be doing something correct, and sales must be doing well because if the dongle effects the plugins sales the simple solution would be to get rid of the dongle and use another protection, 

So it must be working or the theft must be slowing down to a point where sales or loss is very healthy. 

The quibble and niggles of the dongle can be a little frustrating at first but once it's done you forget you ever have them and just get on with it, it's not as if you need to install the protection everyday it's done only once then forget about it. 

Seems that there are many that don't mind the dongle protection or sales with these products would fall dramatically so time has given us the true strory and that is it works and it does not bother a lot of users and it has stood the test of time. 

We do have a choice in what we use and there are as many great plugins with out the dongle as there are with the dongle but we don't seem to mind as long as the plugin is OK. 

So the ones that are haters of dongle protection must be in the minority and this crowd seems to be getting smaller and smaller.

I believe its all about i need a plugin that helps my needs weather it has a dongle or not if you deliberately looking for plugin without dingles I think it's a step to far.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jan 28, 2019)

I'm exceedingly bored of the endless debate, but still interested in discussing the actual OP - any appetite out there for this discussion? Will this news represent a significant change for end users?

I updated PT to 2018.12 the other day on the mac, and since then whenever I open it, I get an iLok notification that it has started a Cloud session. That's new (the notification I mean), and I guess it means that it updated License Manager when it did Pro Tools and will now auto-connect on any Cloud activity. According to the blurb it will always now self-update. All of this slightly concerns me - in the big outage of a few years ago, the only people who were safe were those who did not connect their iLoks to the servers. That option may no longer be available, though right now I see iLok Manager's auto update is thankfully still off.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 28, 2019)

rrichard63 said:


> I don't understand how this provides any protection at all. If the installed plugin is "entirely portable", then what prevents me from giving the installed files to all of my friends -- or posting them on the internet for that matter?
> 
> I' don't want to be argumentative here. I'm just trying to understand why this approach gives u-he any protection at all.



It's not about protecting the plugin from copying on another machine. It's about converting people who use cracked software to people purchasing the actual software - which has worked brilliantly for u-he all this time. Every time their plugins get _supposedly_ cracked, they are never really fully cracked and at some point they timebomb and become unusable, prompting the users of cracked version to purchase a legitimate license to continue working normally.

It is surprising how well this works on so many people. Every time the timebomb happens u-he notes a nice spike in sales. Charts which Urs posted confirm that time and time again.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 28, 2019)

novaburst said:


> so time has given us the true strory and that is it works and it does not bother a lot of users and it has stood the test of time.



Yeah, except when iLokalypse happened in 2013 and put many pro studios out of work for two weeks until they resolved the issue. It has surely stood the test of time, yeah right. That can happen anytime again (and 2013 wasn't the first time something like that happened, as well, IIRC), and I'm sure it eventually will, especially because they're heading for the cloud too.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 28, 2019)

alanb said:


> when something like _this_ is the entropic alternative into which the Universe will inexorably spiral, it just boggles what little is left of my mind.....



Seriously, you guys gotta stand your ground on that one and fight it, this all is batshit insane. I had no idea how much worse this is than those already terrible dongles. Thanks for the detailed and well researched post!




EvilDragon said:


> Yeah, except when iLokalypse happened in 2013 and put many pro studios out of work for two weeks until they resolved the issue. It has surely stood the test of time, yeah right. That can happen anytime again (and 2013 wasn't the first time something like that happened, as well, IIRC), and I'm sure it eventually will, especially because they're heading for the cloud too.



I didn't even know about that. How are they still in business????


----------



## novaburst (Jan 28, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> Yeah, except when iLokalypse happened in 2013 and put many pro studios out of work for two weeks until they resolved the issue. It has surely stood the test of time, yeah right. That can happen anytime again (and 2013 wasn't the first time something like that happened, as well, IIRC), and I'm sure it eventually will, especially because they're heading for the cloud too.



I remember that, it was a very scary time seems people are willing to forget the past,

I guess what's in people's mind is does it work (the plugins) I don't think many are going around saying does it have ilok, or dongle I think its the furthest thing Peoples mind, when something does happen it's very soon washed away and it's back to music as normal, 

There will be things that do and will go wrong, just look at windows 10, and the head bang it can course, VSTs, DAWs and conflicts.

During the space and time before something does go wrong alot can get done and at the end of the day you may never experience any glitches

Never the less we still have options


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 28, 2019)

novaburst said:


> it was a very scary time seems people are willing to forget the past,



Some people perhaps. A lot of people are still extremely pissed off at PACE, and rightfully so.



MartinH. said:


> How are they still in business????



Because of fucking ProTools. It's the number one reason everyone is putting up with iLok shit (and of course, AVID shit). 



For reference, here's the whole iLokalypse thread from Gearslutz. The whole 34 pages of it.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/844460-warning-do-not-install-new-ilok-software.html


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 28, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> For reference, here's the whole iLokalypse thread from Gearslutz. The whole 34 pages of it.
> 
> https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/844460-warning-do-not-install-new-ilok-software.html


Damn. Even though I'm trying to put up a sort of thinking-man's defense of DRM, the iLokalypse is simply indefensible.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 28, 2019)

PACE are crooks, plain and simple. There's no defending that.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jan 28, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> PACE are crooks, plain and simple. There's no defending that.


I like the idea of protecting developers, that's all. And I don't mind making reasonable sacrifices to help that happen. 

But it seems PACE isn't reasonable. Even the devs on this thread are all slamming it. If that's the case, boo to PACE.


----------



## RobbertZH (Jan 28, 2019)

Back to the original post:



catsass said:


> "Periodic license checks have also been added to the Eden 5.0 Wrapper to provide an additional level of protection."



What does this mean??
That I have to login periodically with the iLok client, otherwise all software that use iLok/pace does not work anymore?
That would be bothersome!!
And what will happen when the servers of iLok / PACE are down?
Or that my internet connection is down?

PS: The gaming distribution platform STEAM uses a client application that connects with the Steam server every time I login Windows, and regularly that connection fails and I am forced to retry login sometime later.

PS: Last two weeks I had (after some update?) that Adobe CC (Photoshop) asked me to login EVERY day. Only after two hours searching on forums I found the solution to prevent that.

If you want a stable system, you do NOT want that software requires an internet connection all the time (but only when installing a new product).


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 28, 2019)

RobbertZH said:


> And what will happen when the servers of iLok / PACE are down?
> Or that my internet connection is down?



When that happens you can't work anymore with the "protected" plugins. I think a roughly 5 to 15 minute time frame was quoted that is allowed to pass since the last successful online verification before you get locked out. 



RobbertZH said:


> PS: The gaming distribution platform STEAM uses a client application that connects with the Steam server every time I login Windows, and regularly that connection fails and I am forced to retry login sometime later.



Iirc they actually said years ago that this defacto online-requirement is a bug and not a feature. If you go into offline mode manually (which you only can do if you're logged in / online) you can stay and play offline. That's apparently what it's supposed to work like with failed logins too, but afaik it doesn't work like that.



RobbertZH said:


> PS: Last two weeks I had (after some update?) that Adobe CC (Photoshop) asked me to login EVERY day. Only after two hours searching on forums I found the solution to prevent that.



It should be treated as only an unconfirmed rumor / conspiracy theory, but I've read the pirated version of CC is noticably smoother to work with, because it doesn't do a license check every couple of seconds x]. It would fit sooo well into the image that I have of them. I would ask if anyone can confirm, but I know I wouldn't get a reply...


----------



## rrichard63 (Jan 28, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> It's not about protecting the plugin from copying on another machine. It's about converting people who use cracked software to people purchasing the actual software - which has worked brilliantly for u-he all this time. Every time their plugins get _supposedly_ cracked, they are never really fully cracked and at some point they timebomb and become unusable, prompting the users of cracked version to purchase a legitimate license to continue working normally.
> 
> It is surprising how well this works on so many people. Every time the timebomb happens u-he notes a nice spike in sales. Charts which Urs posted confirm that time and time again.


I must not understand this at all. If the software can be copied from one computer to another at will, then there is no reason to crack it. I'm missing something really essential here, for which I apologize.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 28, 2019)

That falls under personal usage, and is not something u-he is concerned with. For warez communities you cannot "release" the plugin with actual paid for serial number, because it will trace back to the person who bought it, hence the protection needs to be cracked, in order to input made up serial numbers that cannot be tracked. And this is where u-he's method comes in.


----------



## rrichard63 (Jan 28, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> That falls under personal usage, and is not something u-he is concerned with. For warez communities you cannot "release" the plugin with actual paid for serial number, because it will trace back to the person who bought it ...


Thank you. So the serial number acts like a watermark embedded in a sample library.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jan 28, 2019)

RobbertZH said:


> Back to the original post:
> 
> What does this mean??
> That I have to login periodically with the iLok client, otherwise all software that use iLok/pace does not work anymore?
> ...



Yes, this concerns me too. I'd very much like to hear more about the specific news in the OP.


----------



## ionian (Jan 28, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> It should be treated as only an unconfirmed rumor / conspiracy theory, but I've read the pirated version of CC is noticably smoother to work with, because it doesn't do a license check every couple of seconds x]. It would fit sooo well into the image that I have of them. I would ask if anyone can confirm, but I know I wouldn't get a reply...



This is far from conspiracy. It's been well documented over the years that when a lot of software is cracked and the CP removed, the program showed a marked improvement in performance and less issues and crashing.


----------



## ionian (Jan 28, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> Yeah, except when iLokalypse happened in 2013 and put many pro studios out of work for two weeks until they resolved the issue. It has surely stood the test of time, yeah right. That can happen anytime again (and 2013 wasn't the first time something like that happened, as well, IIRC), and I'm sure it eventually will, especially because they're heading for the cloud too.


 
Even worse, that a lot of people seem to forget is that time PACE screwed up and created duplicate licenses in people's accounts and some unscrupulous people decided to sell the duplicate licenses on ebay. And people bought them because why not? I mean, isn't the point of iLok to make sure that you can't keep your program after you sell it once the license is transferred? So these people thought they were safe and legal. And then iLok found their screw up, and instead of punishing the people who sold the licenses, they deleted the licenses from the people who had bought them on ebay and pretty much told them, "Tough sh*t. You shouldn't have bought it. It was an illegal license. Go ask the guy who sold it to you to give you your money back".

So a bunch of people woke up and found that their legally bought plug ins were now removed from their ilok account while the sleazeballs who sold them were left unpunished. There's PACE for you.

I really believe that people who support PACE / iLok are the same kind of people, that if you sh*t in their hat, they'd say, "Thank you. It fits much better now."


----------



## ionian (Jan 28, 2019)

RobbertZH said:


> PS: The gaming distribution platform STEAM uses a client application that connects with the Steam server every time I login Windows, and regularly that connection fails and I am forced to retry login sometime later.



I've played games when I've lost my internet connection. All STEAM has ever done has told me that there's no internet connection and ask if I want to play offline. I've never had a problem playing offline. I've never thought of it as CP. I always considered it more that it connects to the client for multiplayer stuff or internet stuff related to the game - for example if I play offline in Mad Max, I can't collect the scrap metal that gets gathered while you're offline and given to you when you log in.


----------



## dflood (Jan 28, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> Because of fucking ProTools. It's the number one reason everyone is putting up with iLok shit (and of course, AVID shit).
> For reference, here's the whole iLokalypse thread from Gearslutz. The whole 34 pages of it.
> https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/844460-warning-do-not-install-new-ilok-software.html


I’ve certainly never regretted ditching Pro Tools and Pace. Anybody want to buy a lightly used Digi-002?


----------



## novaburst (Jan 28, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> But it seems PACE isn't reasonable. Even the devs on this thread are all slamming it. If that's the case, boo to PACE.



How can pace still exist after all the negative things said about it and it appears to be gaining ground, so in truth we really are missing something as life just don't work like that. 



EvilDragon said:


> Because of fucking ProTools. It's the number one reason everyone is putting up with iLok shit (and of course, AVID shit).



Industry stranded can we really say that today with files that are able to go from one DAW to another, is PT really that needed taking that risk to put your whole work money on the line something must be going well with pace that attracts so many I am not sure if PT is the blame maybe it could be that the real reason is developers and users have a zero tolerance to thef, stealing and crack heads I mean software quack heads it could be it really is saving developers a lot of cash or putting people on the none theft path. 

Perhaps many have a different side to ilok and not so much the negative things like on this forum and KVR. 

We are the consumers we make the difference and it appears many are saying yes to PACE


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 28, 2019)

novaburst said:


> How can pace still exist after all the negative things said about it and it appears to be gaining ground



Don't wanna get political too much, but how can Trump be the president of the USA?  People are sheep and don't think with their heads, that's all there's to it.


----------



## novaburst (Jan 29, 2019)




----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 29, 2019)

The “sheep” thing is way, way overused and far too simplistic.

Trump people like what he says and what they think he stands for.
People who, like me, aren’t tremendously worried about PACE because our projects aren’t mission critical, just see them as an inconvenience. There are so many of those in life that one could spend all of their time grumbling. I prefer to keep writing music.


----------



## ionian (Jan 29, 2019)

EvilDragon said:


> Don't wanna get political too much, but how can Trump be the president of the USA?  People are sheep and don't think with their heads, that's all there's to it.


Actually I'm not going to get sucked into some moronic political fight here since we shouldn't be doing this to begin with. So here, you get an award...


----------



## EvilDragon (Jan 29, 2019)

Haha. I'm not trying to be a jerk, tho.


----------



## Lindon (Jan 29, 2019)

I assure you (check the Kontakt KSP part of this forum) that Ed is NOT a jerk.

We're a software developer - as ED knows - and we use a similar system to U-he, only ours has no external file, everything is in the instrument itself. Does this stop people sharing it among their friends? No clearly not. Does it stop them posting it on some warez site? Yes it seems to. Is it a pain in the neck to use, your call - here's a thread in the KSP scripting area - there's a video of our system included:

https://vi-control.net/community/threads/serial-code-for-kontakt-instruments.76273/

PACE? I feel it's silly prices for hard-to-use unreliable software that is unloved by users, so we are unlikely to ever go there. 

There *is* a middle ground here - and I wish that was nearer Dave's position - but its not, so *some* sort of authorisation/identification system is required - it makes noticeable differences to sales as I point out in the thread. 

Resale? It's hard to track: So you resell an one of our instruments to Mario and he posts in a warez site - I as the person suffering here(lost sales) have no way to identify Mario... just you, and you dont have the software anymore and can prove you sold it... *sigh* More than willing to consider any way around this.


----------

