Hi All
I've been following this - what an almighty cock up this all sounds.
I personally do not have an issue with the iLok concept - for me it's an ideal solution (I have two small little studios in different continents!)
I do have an issue with PACE who seem beyond incompetent.
As I see it at the moment, if I DO NOT buy any further iLok reliant products and NEVER upgrade / update my iLOK, all will be OK with my system as it stands at the moment - is this correct?
If this is correct, we could write to all manufacturers who utilize ILok and tell them we can no longer buy any further products from them as we may lose what we already have and have to use daily....can you see where I am coming from with this? If I was say Softube, I think I might be pretty pissed if future sales of my products were being adversely affected by PACE's incompetence. What does anyone else think?
 
Nigel
 
 
 
 
 

Well...Andrew's solution looks like it worked for my Melodyne.  If I find any more anomalies I'll try the same.  It's interesting to me that Andrew said they handle literally "tens of millions" of licenses.  I didn't know there was that many plugins...or dimbulb studio owners!!

I was one of the fortunate ones....all my licenses are intact and the software client is working fine...
 

I was also one of the fortunate ones as I no longer own an ilok...

yorolpal
Well...Andrew's solution looks like it worked for my Melodyne.  If I find any more anomalies I'll try the same.  It's interesting to me that Andrew said they handle literally "tens of millions" of licenses.  I didn't know there was that many plugins...or dimbulb studio owners!!

 
Think about it. They may be managing licenses for people that don't know or care. Between old age and natural disasters many iLocks and computers end up in boxes and landfills. If nobody says anything, the security codes could be out there, carefully tended, until the company closes its' doors. And then, it's only a maybe.
 
Who takes out the digital trash in the world, and what do they do with it?

From what I've just read on Facebook, as posted by Slate: Please be aware that the new ilok client is having issues communicating the server. We apologize about this inconvenience and will work with PACE to make sure we are kept updated on the progress of the resolution.
 
If I were a plug-in manufacturer, and if I'd been dumb enough to use iLok as a copy protection mechanism in the first place, I'd seriously reconsider it. 
 
I'm quite sure that pirated software users didn't even notice that there was an issue w/ iLok during this last week.

Rain
 
I'm quite sure that pirated software users didn't even notice that there was an issue w/ iLok during this last week.

And that is the absurdity of iLock in a nutshell. Misguided attempts  like iLok only seem to affect the actual paying customers. It's a backwards sort of "piracy tax" that does not benefit software companies or consumers.  I'm hoping this fisaco will make more companies wake up to how this system actually has the opposite result of what is intended.  iLok will not convince one pirate to suddenly buy something they had no intention of buying but I am certain there are plenty of people who have passed on products strictly because they require iLok.  Not sure how paying a company to reduce potential customers without providing something to make them increase customers is a good business model.

Mine works great. I actually have 2? I need to see about transferring all of the licences to 1 and using the other as a B/U, they have that as a product and it would be worth it vs. losing all of the SW associated with a USB Key failure.