JohanSebatianGremlin

azslow3
So now I have switched to the (only) DAW which has no online/hardware authorization. We should at least try to protect our freedom.

Protect your freedom? Oh puh-leeze. I don't recall seeing where anyone invented a USB dongle that is able to hold a gun to your head.

Please do not worry, my freedom is protected now. I have switched to "no authorization" DAW.
 
But "the measure of the freedom is the length of the chain" (one famous Russian satiric). Even in case you have no feeling your are chained...

Jeff Evans
I have a friend who runs a pro studio.  Once some time ago his iLok went faulty at the same time as the iLok server went down.  It took him well over a week to even be able to use his software. He lost clients, reputation and thousands of dollars.

If I remember right, during that time people that were trying to update authorizations for one product had all of their authorizations wiped at the same time.  Search for iLokalypse on KVR and you will find all sorts of horror stories like that.

azslow3
 
Please do not worry, my freedom is protected now. I have switched to "no authorization" DAW.

It always amazes me the new creative definitions of the word freedom people manage to come up with. Funny but I don't recall reading anything about being guaranteed the right to break the law when it comes to software license agreements in the Constitution. Perhaps you can point me to correct paragraph?

JohanSebatianGremlin

azslow3
Please do not worry, my freedom is protected now. I have switched to "no authorization" DAW.

It always amazes me the new creative definitions of the word freedom people manage to come up with. Funny but I don't recall reading anything about being guaranteed the right to break the law when it comes to software license agreements in the Constitution. Perhaps you can point me to correct paragraph?

This forum rules forbid political discussions. So I use the word "freedom" in terms of the measure for customers freedom how they can use the software and  "degree of freedom" (mathematical domain). Nothing "creative" from my side.
 
License agreement is only one part. If the agreement is to use particular software by particular person on one computer per time, that is not a problem. But:
a) producers of "dongle ware" from the beginning on do not trust you follow the rule, so they extra protect themselves. Forcing you to pay for that protection, in terms of extra money and inconvenience
b) you are ready to pay for the possibility to use the software. But they add a component which can prevent you can do so, explicitly without (!) any guarantee it will not break or malfunction
c) some producers bind you even more. You possibility to use what you have paid for is directly bound to unrelated (in respect to the product functionality) hardware device. If that device is broken/stolen/malfunction, the agreement is explicitly void.
 
I pay a lot of money and after that I do not own anything, I pay for a Possibility to use something, already under quite restricted conditions. And that Possibility is even further restricted by "a dongle", without any benefits for me. So I see that as unnecessary limitation of (degree of) my freedom.

azslow3
This forum rules forbid political discussions. So I use the word "freedom" in terms of the measure for customers freedom how they can use the software and  "degree of freedom" (mathematical domain). Nothing "creative" from my side.
 
License agreement is only one part. If the agreement is to use particular software by particular person on one computer per time, that is not a problem. But:
a) producers of "dongle ware" from the beginning on do not trust you follow the rule, so they extra protect themselves. Forcing you to pay for that protection, in terms of extra money and inconvenience
b) you are ready to pay for the possibility to use the software. But they add a component which can prevent you can do so, explicitly without (!) any guarantee it will not break or malfunction
c) some producers bind you even more. You possibility to use what you have paid for is directly bound to unrelated (in respect to the product functionality) hardware device. If that device is broken/stolen/malfunction, the agreement is explicitly void.
 
I pay a lot of money and after that I do not own anything, I pay for a Possibility to use something, already under quite restricted conditions. And that Possibility is even further restricted by "a dongle", without any benefits for me. So I see that as unnecessary limitation of (degree of) my freedom.

It always amazes me the new creative definitions of the word freedom people manage to come up with. Funny but I don't recall reading anything about being guaranteed the right to break the law when it comes to software license agreements in the Constitution. Perhaps you can point me to correct paragraph?

Reposting the same response because it still applies. You can 'see it' anyway you please. But it doesn't change that fact that you're citing an infringement on your freedom when no such infringement is taking place. At least under any reasonable definition of the word freedom.

You simply don't like dongles? Fine. Say you don't like them, cite the reasons you've stated above as support for your opinion and move on. But none of what you've stated gets anywhere near the realm of impinging on your freedom.

They are 'free' to choose whatever licensing scheme they want. You are 'free' to take your dollars elsewhere if you disagree with their choices. That is exactly how freedom is supposed to work. It is also the only time the word freedom actually applies in the discussion.

I use to hate dongles, now I think iLok is a blessing.
The gods of fate have decided that for the 3rd time within a 1year & a half that I need to completely rebuild my Windows installation (graphic chip burned out on MB, lemon PC, Window 7 update issue created by Microsoft).
When you have a lot of plugins reauthorizing everything using the various techniques & schemes, including authorization limits is a major time consuming pain in the rear.
In general, my iLok plugins are the easiest to deal with and cause me the least grief.
 

azslow3
 
I pay a lot of money and after that I do not own anything, I pay for a Possibility to use something, already under quite restricted conditions. And that Possibility is even further restricted by "a dongle", without any benefits for me. So I see that as unnecessary limitation of (degree of) my freedom.

Right on.  People who read opinions through the lens of their agenda aren't reading what you wrote.  Your freedom point here is entirely appropriate and valid.  You're not talking about freedom of choice or any sort of legal structure, rather you're talking about choosing products and services that bring you the most freedom of use.  Simple.
 

Can I use two dongles and run laptop and desktop Cubase same time? (New Cubase owner)

Voda La Void
Right on.  People who read opinions through the lens of their agenda aren't reading what you wrote.  Your freedom point here is entirely appropriate and valid.  You're not talking about freedom of choice or any sort of legal structure, rather you're talking about choosing products and services that bring you the most freedom of use.  Simple.

Agree to disagree. Go back and read the first post where it came up. Then explain who exactly is threatening any 'freedom of choice' to the point that the phrase 'my freedom is protected now' makes sense in the context of your interpretation.

Joe_A
Can I use two dongles and run laptop and desktop Cubase same time? (New Cubase owner)

Only if you own two licenses.