# You will own nothing and be happy about it.



## Macrawn (Feb 15, 2021)

I came across a couple of videos discussing the rental models vs. owning. They were from a guy named Louis Rossmann, who runs a business that repairs electronic equipment. His big thing is right to repair which is a separate issue (well sort of separate but very connected) but that's a new thing too. Make it very difficult for people to repair things so consumers have to buy a new one. Some companies are controlling the supply of things needed for repair of their products thus forcing more expensive company repairs, or for a person to just buy something new. Also a lot of repair jobs are in the USA jobs vs making new things which is a job in China or India. Already off track so back on topic. 

Anyway he was talking about a company that for x dollars a month you rent a washer dryer and get detergent sent to you. Cheap upfront cost. Very appealing to people who haven't seen their wages go up in the past decade but still want to maintain those creature comforts we are used to. 

We all know that vi instruments are starting to move toward that rental model where you never own the thing and perpetually pay for it. It always has a cheaper up front cost but a huge long term cost. 

The nice thing about buying an actual thing is that hopefully you get time with it where you have it paid off and are no longer tied to it financially speaking. 

I've been a subscriber to Spotify, and Apple Music (not at the same time) for the past two years. I just cancelled it because I realized that I could just buy individual songs. If I had spent say 5 bucks a months buying individual songs, I'd probably have enough music to not want to use Apple Music anymore. Just buy a song or two here and there. 

I guess this is the next step in capitalism. At the end of your life, instead of having accumulated anything of value, you will have little to no assets at all. Even your house is just a perpetual rental unit with property taxes. 

I did an inventory of the things I subscribe to and decided I'd had enough. No more Apple Music. I'll buy individual songs. In fact, I'll make myself spend 5 bucks a month doing that. Dropped a few other subs for a total of $75 bucks. 

On the reverse side of it, it's probably very true that I've accumulated a lot of junk in my basement that has essentially zero value now and if I had "subscribed it" it might have been actually cheaper for the amount of use gotten out of a lot of it. 

But the leasing business has always been a rip off from the very beginning (unless it's like a one time use thing like that floor sander). Leasing a car is one f the worst things you can do financially. I wonder if in 30 years people will even be able to buy cars or will they have gone to a full lease forever model. 

Imagine retiring and then realizing on your much reduced income that you rent your car, You rent your house (you pay property taxes perpetually even if you own it), You rent your daw, you rent your libraries, you rent your music, you rent your fridge and dishwasher, you even rent your bed. Then you realize if you didn't have those extra rentals you actually could retire by just using your older and a little bit dated stuff, as you go to pick up a spatula to flip burgers at McDonalds in order to pay your rental costs. 

But the real kicker is, we will own nothing and we will be happy about it because we got to use things for a low up front cost. 

Think about hard hard they will fall, this next generation of non saver renters (most Americans don't even have $1,000 of cash on had for an unexpected expense), who own no assets, and if there is any disruption or reduction in their wages is going to crumble and be on the streets.


----------



## gamma-ut (Feb 15, 2021)

The WEF (which originated the slogan in the thread title AIUI) is not covering itself with glory at the moment between this and the slightly apocalyptic Great Reset, which naturally hasn't turned into fodder for conspiracy theorists everywhere, no sir, not at all.

These thinktanks have waves of collective insanity that generally crash against hard reality. I don't think it's any more than that. However, it's also worth noting that personal ownership of stuff by the hoi polloi is a bit of a recent innovation and it's worth being vigilant against that ability being eroded.


----------



## dzilizzi (Feb 15, 2021)

If you are a business and not a single owner, renting things can make sense. It is an easy to track fixed cost and they usually come with some kind of warranty/support. The other time renting may make sense is so you don't have to worry about the water heater breaking. All emergency expenses are generally paid by the landlord. So when you are young or really old, not having to deal with ownership can be cheaper. 

If you constantly update you car or DAW, sometimes the rental price makes sense. But personally, I like knowing I can stop paying and still use what I have.


----------



## Thundercat (Feb 15, 2021)

I think there absolutely is something to the "crazy" conspiracy theories. Corruption is real. No one can say there isn't corruption. Could anyone argue that rich people in power don't make plans with their wealth and power that benefit them, and not others?

That is what is at the heart of what is going on everywhere right now. In the 1950s the CIA invented the term "conspiracy theorists" to discredit anyone who argued against the official narrative. They also ran an operation Paperclip, whose goal was and is to disinform people. From their own internal documents: "how will we know if we have been successful? When everything the American people believe is a lie."

That applies to the virus, with a 99.74% survival rate ("deadly?" are people dying in the streets? Would you know there was a "pandemic" if you didn't watch the news? No? Then there isn't one.).

Anyway this model of renting everything is part of the WEF plan, and if you don't think there aren't dark plans afoot then you aren't aware. You don't let the wolves guard the henhouse, and then defend the wolves' point of view.


----------



## Nils Neumann (Feb 15, 2021)

Macrawn said:


> We all know that vi instruments are starting to move toward that rental model where you never own the thing and perpetually pay for it. It always has a cheaper up front cost but a huge long term cost.


Just want to point out that we never own a sample library anyway. We just are allowed to use it.


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Feb 15, 2021)

Nils Neumann said:


> Just want to point out that we never own a sample library anyway. We just are allowed to use it.


You can own it if you make it!


----------



## d.healey (Feb 15, 2021)

Nils Neumann said:


> Just want to point out that we never own a sample library anyway. We just are allowed to use it.


You're buying from the wrong developers


----------



## widescreen (Feb 15, 2021)

Nils Neumann said:


> Just want to point out that we never own a sample library anyway. We just are allowed to use it.


But the difference is: When the vendor of a bought library is vanished, you can still use it, no one can accuse you of misuse of the license. If the subscription vendor is gone, their servers are down and your software gets useless.

I never want to imagine what happens worldwide when Steam or Epic go bankrupt and the new owner (if there is one) decides not to run their servers any more. Just to think about it.


----------



## Stringtree (Feb 15, 2021)

Gigastudio. That bit hard when Tascam dropped it.

I have periods when I don't use the gear or the software, so renting anything makes little sense. I'm a lost Photoshop user because of that.


----------



## Nils Neumann (Feb 15, 2021)

You are all correct.

just hate the fact that I can’t sell most of my libraries, like I can with all of my physical instruments


----------



## Macrawn (Feb 15, 2021)

dzilizzi said:


> If you are a business and not a single owner, renting things can make sense. It is an easy to track fixed cost and they usually come with some kind of warranty/support. The other time renting may make sense is so you don't have to worry about the water heater breaking. All emergency expenses are generally paid by the landlord. So when you are young or really old, not having to deal with ownership can be cheaper.
> 
> If you constantly update you car or DAW, sometimes the rental price makes sense. But personally, I like knowing I can stop paying and still use what I have.


I agree especially for businesses. 

What's new to me is subscription services at a consumer level for everyday objects. It's not even rent to own which you always pay more for but at least you should be able to get a few years out of it with no rental cost. It just blows my mind that the subscription plan is moving to actual physical objects that you never own. Hopefully that model doesn't catch on.


----------



## Macrawn (Feb 15, 2021)

Nils Neumann said:


> You are all correct.
> 
> just hate the fact that I can’t sell most of my libraries like I can with all my instruments


There needs to be legislation that allows the resale of digital rights. I wouldn't be opposed to a nominal and regulated transaction fee because the company does have to transfer ownership to prevent fraudulent resale or copying. I imagine that kind of thing could be automated pretty easily as well if companies were forced to do it. 

Actually a few companies have realized that they can actually make a few bucks being the broker for sales and pocketing fees for the transfers. Quite hefty fees for about 30 seconds of actual work.


----------



## peladio (Feb 15, 2021)

Nils Neumann said:


> You are all correct.
> 
> just hate the fact that I can’t sell most of my libraries like I can with all my instruments


Agreed completely..there is some sort of some Stockholm syndome going on here because some people aggressively defend the decisions from some developers to forbid reselling..

I have much more respect for exceptional and free service that developers such as Orange Tree Samples, u-He and Native Instruments provide



Macrawn said:


> There needs to be legislation that allows the resale of digital rights. I wouldn't be opposed to a nominal and regulated transaction fee because the company does have to transfer ownership to prevent fraudulent resale or copying. I imagine that kind of thing could be automated pretty easily as well if companies were forced to do it.
> 
> Actually a few companies have realized that they can actually make a few bucks being the broker for sales and pocketing fees for the transfers. Quite hefty fees for about 30 seconds of actual work.


In EU I'm not sure if it's legal to forbid it - no one probably didn't think it's worth the legal trouble of finding out yet (I know, copyrighted recordings yadda yadda)..but that will probably change everywhere in the future


----------



## dcoscina (Feb 15, 2021)




----------



## JohnG (Feb 15, 2021)

Possessions can be such a burden; we all might benefit from having our residences scraped away by an accident so we could start over. 

If you've ever moved temporarily to remodel a home or for a sabbatical to an apartment somewhere remote, or relocated to an apartment for a few months for a job, it's amazing how much less stuff we really need than we actually have.

Personally, I keep things longer than some people seem too, from cars to computers to -- just about everything. I almost never replace furniture, for example. I replaced my living room speakers not long ago because I'd had them so long the speaker cones had actually rotted away.

Less stuff = good.


----------



## d.healey (Feb 15, 2021)

JohnG said:


> Less stuff = good.


Private property = good


----------



## Nils Neumann (Feb 15, 2021)

JohnG said:


> Possessions can be such a burden; we all might benefit from having our residences scraped away by an accident so we could start over.
> 
> If you've ever moved temporarily to remodel a home or for a sabbatical to an apartment somewhere remote, or relocated to an apartment for a few months for a job, it's amazing how much less stuff we really need than we actually have.
> 
> ...


But you can sell your stuff when you are moving and starting fresh. Or gift a old guitar to a friend. That’s the big point here.


----------



## el-bo (Feb 15, 2021)

dcoscina said:


>


I feel similar every time I read the thread title. "You'll eat your vegetables, and you'll enjoy them!!!"


----------



## Polkasound (Feb 15, 2021)

peladio said:


> Agreed completely..there is some sort of some Stockholm syndome going on here because some people aggressively defend the decisions from some developers to forbid reselling.


I defend the right for any developer to assert, "You cannot resell your license," just as they can assert, "You can only use our product to compose waltzes in the bathtub," because people may freely decline to purchase their product for any reason. The problem is that such restrictive clauses are usually buried somewhere on the website or in the EULA, and the burden is on the consumer to not only search out that information, but to know it may exist in the first place.

Before the Nutrition Facts label became standardized by law in 1990, the burden was on consumers to peruse the information buried on unregulated food packaging and use calculators to determine nutritional content. In my opinion, the no-resale clause is important enough that it shouldn't be buried — it really ought to be visible at a glance. It should pop up as a alert before a product is purchased, or at least become a standardized label that's as easy to spot as "*Calories 170*".


----------



## JohnG (Feb 15, 2021)

I agree with @Polkasound -- I'm not waiting for some governmental intervention to protect my right to resell sound libraries. Besides, we've seen this debate 100x on v.i. control, and no doubt also on the-site-formerly-known-as-gearslutz etc. It's a dead horse.

A much more interesting question to me is stuff in general. You hear of many people 10s of thousands in debt on high-interest credit cards, who nevertheless are paying to keep even more belongings in storage because their apartments are too packed.

Maybe we just can't resist the gravitational pull of decades of advertising that assures us, "you _deserve_ this..."


----------



## Saxer (Feb 15, 2021)

Renting instead of owning is a healthy concept. It leads to better durable products instead of the pressure of fast replacement just to generate sales. And it avoids the hoarding of products. What you don't need you would stop to rent.
But it doesn't really work in our economic system (except for companies with tax write off). May take a few generations to establish such a system but it makes sense in a lot of ways. We are a culture of owners and can never get enough. Main world problem.

But today I like to own software licenses instead of renting. As a musician you'll never know what will happen (as Covid shows). I'm really glad I don't have a lot of running costs today! I can stop buying things and use what I own.


----------



## Macrawn (Feb 15, 2021)

JohnG said:


> I agree with @Polkasound -- I'm not waiting for some governmental intervention to protect my right to resell sound libraries. Besides, we've seen this debate 100x on v.i. control, and no doubt also on the-site-formerly-known-as-gearslutz etc. It's a dead horse.
> 
> A much more interesting question to me is stuff in general. You hear of many people 10s of thousands in debt on high-interest credit cards, who nevertheless are paying to keep even more belongings in storage because their apartments are too packed.
> 
> Maybe we just can't resist the gravitational pull of decades of advertising that assures us, "you _deserve_ this..."


I think it's interesting the the subscription model is moving to actual physical stuff too.

My parents are baby boomers and have always had a keep up with the Jones's attitude as well as you can't take it with you so spend it attitude.

It's an entire generation that spent most of their dough on toys and depreciating assets. That's their response to the austerity of the great depression generation.

I decided for me that I don't want debt. I own my cars and we drive them until they literally go to the junkyard. I own my house which is a two family and I rent half of it. I get paid to live here basically. It's a bit of a sacrifice in terms of privacy but I get security in return. 

How quickly people work themselves into a hole is astounding. I work with people making the same income I do, who say they can't afford to order a pizza on Friday or something like that. Like what do you mean? Why? They got their brand new car, cell phones, immaculate house near the lake, the American Dream. One would see that and think they were rich... and they can't afford a pizza.


----------



## JohnG (Feb 15, 2021)

so true, @Macrawn

I have a good friend who is wealthy, and owns like four houses. I mean, shoot me! I don't care how much money you have, who wants all that? You could go on vacation for the rest of your life, to all-new places instead.

Your example of pizza-on-Friday is, sadly, all too common. iPhone 12, yes, it's shiny, but credit card debt and a big mortgage at age 55, 65? Nightmare.

And not just for freelance workers like ourselves. As you get older, even if you have an apparently secure spot at an apparently secure institution (bank, law firm, engineering firm...), you had better keep producing and bringing in customers, or else.


----------



## youngpokie (Feb 15, 2021)

What a great question. I get the problem with hoarding and consumerism. But I am not sure if replacing it with a cold utilitarian alternative is going to be any better. And it's probably going to be worse.

First, renting eliminates any start up outlay. If you live on fixed monthly income, you will be able to "rent" more things than you own outright today (just like car leasing). The only thing that changes here is how hoarding is financed, not hoarding as an issue in itself. The winners? The banks!

Second, the psychological impact of "renting" mentality. If renting becomes a cultural norm, what are the societal consequences of that? Nothing permanent, everything is transitory, replaceable and nothing really has any enduring value.

In the end, I question if this will actually fix anything at all, since we're not talking about freedom from material possessions. The only material change here is who "owns" stuff and who you will have be dependent on....


----------



## rgames (Feb 15, 2021)

Macrawn said:


> There needs to be legislation that allows the resale of digital rights.


Would that include the right to resell the license that someone paid YOU for YOUR music?

No way. I don't want anyone reselling the license that I sold to him or her.

I think most composers would agree.

Or are you saying that your proposal only applies to other people and not you? 

rgames


----------



## d.healey (Feb 15, 2021)

rgames said:


> Would that include the right to resell the license that someone paid YOU for YOUR music?
> 
> No way. I don't want anyone reselling the license that I sold to him or her.
> 
> ...


Reselling a tool that anyone can buy and reselling a one of a kind work of art are two different things.


----------



## rgames (Feb 15, 2021)

d.healey said:


> Reselling a tool that anyone can buy and reselling a one of a kind work of art are two different things.


OK, so, for you, it is the "applies to others and not me" mentality. 

rgames


----------



## darkogav (Feb 15, 2021)

These threads keep coming up. I am no expert, but I am pretty sure you don't own any software you buy. If you look closely at the agreement, it will clearly state the developer owns it and you have no rights and they have no obligations to you should their software blow up your system or any other data. 

The discussion keeps coming up because we are not used to subscription services for music production software. But we are getting accustomed to subscription model for other services. You do have a choice. You can keep using an old copy until the hardware you run it on croaks or until the software is rendered useless because it's so old. There are many who run an old computer DAW disconnected from the internet. I also run an old netbook with XP what has a old hardware which drivers for it have never been updated to released -- but the hardware runs and works fine. It's your time and effort and money, so it's a choice you make.

The argument that subscription you pay more for the software I am not sure is accurate. If you look at how the marketing and sales work around some of theres corps, once you buy into the ecosystem, there are certain products and incentives and promotions which make you keep paying more to the company. So it's not true that you just pay once and that its. If you look at the total lifespan of owning a particular vendors DAW or VST instruments, you are paying into the ecosystem in little bits and chunks over the years. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## rgames (Feb 15, 2021)

Also, you don't need legislation to deal with this issue.

Go start your own company that sticks with the old-school "buy a perpetual license" approach. Then when everyone buys your products instead of the rental models, those other companies will go out of business.

Or maybe they won't...??? In which case thank goodness we didn't put the regulations in place because that's not what the market actually wanted. And if they do go out of business, then the regulations weren't necessary.

So either way, the regulation isn't necessary if you believe that the people in the market have a right to choose their collective fate.

rgames


----------



## d.healey (Feb 15, 2021)

rgames said:


> OK, so, for you, it is the "applies to others and not me" mentality.
> 
> rgames


----------



## dzilizzi (Feb 15, 2021)

Polkasound said:


> I defend the right for any developer to assert, "You cannot resell your license," just as they can assert, "You can only use our product to compose waltzes in the bathtub," because people may freely decline to purchase their product for any reason.


Hey, wait, I bought your stuff. I can only use it in the bathtub? This is going to get messy and a little dangerous.


----------



## pondinthestream (Feb 15, 2021)

rgames said:


> Also, you don't need legislation to deal with this issue.
> 
> Go start your own company that sticks with the old-school "buy a perpetual license" approach. Then when everyone buys your products instead of the rental models, those other companies will go out of business.
> 
> ...


Unfortunately your view requires some sort of free will where people have another little person inside.themselves who.chooses without reference to their experience. Such a little person does not exist so your view of markets and behaviour is a nonsense. Sorry to break it to you


----------



## Polkasound (Feb 15, 2021)

dzilizzi said:


> Hey, wait, I bought your stuff. I can only use it in the bathtub? This is going to get messy and a little dangerous.


Wait, I can explain...

A couple years ago, a customer who bought one of my accordion libraries told me that he felt most inspired when composing music next to a Lawrence Welk bubble machine. One day the bubble machine broke and he needed to find a new way to create bubbles. So after chowing down a couple burritos, he drew a bath and... errr.... well, on second thought, consider the clause repealed.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 15, 2021)

The problem with subscription software has always been when you let a subscription lapse and then need to open up a cue from last year or the year before. The month to month cost is not onerous, the problem is now every time I open one of these old cues I have to click through 30 seconds of "Hollywood Harp not found," "Hollywood Percussion not found," etc. It's like you have to watch an ad for the sample library company before opening your own music.

I'm not proposing a solution, it's entirely reasonable that they take the software away from you when you stop paying, you know what you're getting into... it's just an annoyance to deal with a lapsed subscription.


----------



## dzilizzi (Feb 15, 2021)

If you do subscription, it is always best to bounce tracks to audio just to be safe and on a regular basis.


----------



## rgames (Feb 15, 2021)

NoamL said:


> The problem with subscription software has always been when you let a subscription lapse and then need to open up a cue from last year or the year before. The month to month cost is not onerous, the problem is now every time I open one of these old cues I have to click through 30 seconds of "Hollywood Harp not found," "Hollywood Percussion not found," etc. It's like you have to watch an ad for the sample library company before opening your own music.


That doesn't happen to you even when you still have licenses for all the libraries?

On the few rare occasions where I've re-opened a project years after working it I got the same kinds of errors. And I still had licenses for everything. That's why I always bounce everything to audio (but I also keep the MIDI).

I get what you're saying - it's a pain - but as a practical matter I don't think it's a valid argument against a subscription model. That problem will still occur regardless of a subscription model.

rgames


----------



## NoamL (Feb 15, 2021)

dzilizzi said:


> If you do subscription, it is always best to bounce tracks to audio just to be safe and on a regular basis.


yup! would have been wiser in hindsight...


----------



## YaniDee (Feb 15, 2021)

Nils Neumann said:


> just hate the fact that I can’t sell most of my libraries, like I can with all of my physical instruments


That's another solution..use real instruments! I've had the same guitar for thirty years..a one time fee, perpetual license..just replace the strings once in a while. Of course, I also have hundreds of VIs.


widescreen said:


> When the vendor of a bought library is vanished, you can still use it, no one can accuse you of misuse of the license.


Unless you want to re-install it, and the license server vanished too..


----------



## kabinboy (Feb 15, 2021)

Thank you all, this is my favorite thread yet on vi-control. I can tell some of you might even be empathetic to my quest to keep my iPad2 in service as a controller, even though by most people's standards I should have retired it years ago.

As an experiment, I subscribed to all of Plugin Alliance's plugins in 2020, and enjoyed them. But in the end I was overwhelmed by too many options. At the end of the year I cancelled, and bought about four of them outright. I'm much happier having fewer options.

The same goes with owning "things." Rent or buy, I'd rather have fewer things of higher quality, and (like one of you said) drive them to the junkyard.

I read a really cool book (I think it was either Steal Like an Artist, or Rework) that said: "Make art with the time and tools on hand." I think it's a great lesson to try to limit your pallet and limit your kit, and try to crank our your best ideas without the distraction of the latest gadgets and libraries.

That said, I'm a terrible procrastinator when it comes to finishing my own music


----------



## widescreen (Feb 15, 2021)

YaniDee said:


> That's another solution..use real instruments! I've had the same guitar for thirty years..a one time fee, perpetual license..just replace the strings once in a while. Of course, I also have hundreds of VIs.
> 
> Unless you want to re-install it, and the license server vanished too..



The 66 Basses and 66 Tubas in my cellar are too wet. If I stay there too long I get 132 arms grown... 🐙 😉

Most of my libs do not need an activation server.


----------

