You're so full of yourself, you couldn't see shit even if you had it in your mouth. No, the point is NOT to brag about all the software we buy. It's about making a point. Wares is a good thing as it serves a purpose. Providing a way for those rich enough to buy to try various products before actually buying AND providing professional tools to youngsters and guys who can't afford them yet.
And on AS, it's an interesting way of pointing members in the direction of software that proved itself worthy enough to be bought.

if you think the whole purpose of business is to provide people like you free stuff all your life long then there's little hope. You probably have a job, would you consider doing it for free?

Developpers are regular people, they eat. Think twice before making fun of respectful members of this community.

 

lol, there is some people here who don't really want to pay stuff, even if this stuff cost like 10$ or even 5. And this same people buying bs like the last iphone for 1000$ ...

Seriously there is a lot of little great company like "klanghelm" which is in fact only one guy, one developper. The most expensive of his plugin is like 22€. and i know that a lot of people use the cracked version of his plugins *no* .

How you want that developpers like him continue to release some great plugins if you don't buy it ?

 

Hi all It's a very good post, BTW I'll try to contribute!

Firstly, I'm not professional musician/producer, but CM-enthusiast (simple hobby at home). No commercial/free productions, no making €, no live (except at home, when I'm alone).

Sure I test (often) warezed softwares/soundbanks, but I buy only what I need, otherwise they're uninstalled and entirely deleted from my computer (PC Windows 7 x64).

Also, some softwares I'm using came as bundle with my soundcard (Focusrite Saffire PRO 14), such Ableton Live 9 Lite (it's more than enough for me), Focusrite effect suites (Scarlett/Midnight/Red) and Novation Bass Station.

I'm using many freeware products (SQ8L, TyrellN6, Obxd) and cheap softwares (jBridge, Kirnu-Cream, Cantabile Solo, VLINN), or waiting for special offers (like Synapse Audio DUNE 2, as nice Christmas gift, after testing the demo version).

Most softwares/soundbanks are too expensive, however! Sincerely, who non-professional can buy Omnisphere, Waves plugin(s) or $1000 soundbank? I'm not a rich guy (I am unemployed computer technician), so maybe software developpers may consider a better (flexible) policy about licensing, exactly like Cockos does with it's REAPER (it will be my next purchase because I'm using it - rarely - as evaluation version). Last words: I'll never buy any software protected by dongle (or too complex protection scheme).

Apologize for my English faults (I'm French, nobody is perfect)...

 

I already said it, but would happily repeat myself .
I am all in for supporting developers, but as long as their EULAs are designed the way they are, I kind of lack motivation to support them.
With warezed software, there are no restrictions, since you're not in legally binding contract with the devs. As an unauthorised user, the license does not apply to you, especially if the soft has been modified by the cracker teams.
BUT when you purchase the product, you'll let developers tie your hands and you'll also pay for the handcuffs. Yes, now you're paying customer, you did your job in supporting the devs, but you're also bind by EULA with which you've agreed at this point. Each sample of your (actually not your) library carries ID. They limit the number of PCs you can simultaneously use, people who can work with the software, iLok (needs no introduction), etc.
So you pay hundreds of dollars for only one thing - license to use their products AND agreeing to ALL their methods, limitations, etc.
Pretty mindblowing once you realize actual human beings made the EULA.

Worth it? I doubt it.

Fortunately, not all devs are the same. REAPER, for one deserves our support.

So to answer thread question, YES I DO. Purchased 2CAudio's B2 this way, and several Kontakt libs.
REAPER is next on the list, once v5.0 becomes available.

 

Yes, definite for Reaper, now they gave in to silly policy of theirs and will include VST3's it will get my use and cash

 

VST3 was and still is very controversial topic, with poorly documented SDK and Steinberg's strict regulations. *yes*

 

No, can`t afford it.
Though music production is a hobby, I`m not making a single cent with it. But if so I`d purchase every piece involved, out of question.
What I bought without trying is NI Maschine (MKII), it was obviously the controler that brings the app to life IMO and reading/watching about it was enough. Maybe because I was very satisfied with many of their products already and I wanted to support this great company (600€ is a pretty big deal for me).
Next I´ll buy Reaper.

 

I probably buy more than half the plugins and libs and if its something I use a lot I'll buy it , but I've done too many impulse buys without trying it out first only to be disappointed and feel like I wasted my money .

 

I'm like you, I bought Cubase once I'd lived with the AiR version for some time and realised that Cubase was the DAW for me.

However, I'm sure about your statement regarding warez hurting software companies. I think they do hurt, because if I hadn't had the chance to try before buying, I would have had to buy software right away, I just would have made some mistakes.

So, this unofficial testing is great for me, but they def would have got more sales the other way. But when you think about how resale/longterm value of software is non-existent, you realise that you really need to be sure before you commit. e.g. if I buy a guitar and don't like it's tone, I can always resell, not so with software. So, I prefer to see what warez plug ins survive the initial honeymoon period and remain in my go-to rack before buying.

 

Stealing is killing the producers, it is okay to try before buying.

 

I usually install a load of plugins, and give them a long trial. I've bought some synths and plugins when I feel that the company is good and that I'll use the software.

For example, I bought Diva as I found that I love it, was using it all the time as a "go to" synth, and wanted to make sure that I get all the updates when they come out. A while back they added more filters and oscillators, and it was nice to get that update straight away.

I won't buy from any company that treats it's customers badly, or any company that uses dongles or other OTT protection methods. Or if I feel that it's not good value, such as Zynaptiq Unveil, a $400 VST that takes a bit of reverb off a sound. Seriously? I could buy a DAW and MIDI keyboard bundle for less than the price of this plugin. So I think that I'll just try the cracked version, and have found that I'd hardly ever use it so far.

And as for dongles - no way. I hate them. I don't want a USB port taken up, I don't want a dongle sticking out of the side of my laptop. I don't want to risk losing it. Cubase uses a dongle, so I still used Team Air's 5.1, although have recently changed to Bitwig, which is a better DAW imo. Steinberg seem to ignore their customers, from what I've seen on their forum.

I don't think that the developers have lost any sales to me, as I wouldn't have bought 99% of the stuff that I downloaded, and have also bought stuff that I've trialled for a while.

 

Yes

 

I stole a car this morning but no sale was lost because I wouldn't buy a car anyway. Strange how people justify theft.

And in case you say that downloading isn't theft; it is, you stole the developer's income.

 

That is the classic wrong comparison with a copyright violation and a theft.

If you steal a car, the owner cannot sell or use the car anymore.
If you make an illegal copy from software you would not buy, the owner is not financially damaged. He can use his software and can sell it.

The point is, if you never ever buy software and others follow your example, there will be no money to develop.

But I can remember that videogame- music- and moviecompanies tell this story of there is no money since the 70ies, and since then, all this markets have grown much.

 

Answer this honestly - do you have some form of mental health problem? Because I fail to see how you can come up with such nonsense, unless you're barking mad. Comparing a car to some digital code? Lol! But please explain to me how the developer has lost money from me using their product that I wasn't ever going to buy?

For example - I download a cracked synth, try it for a few months. Realise that I don't like it that much and it's not for me, uninstall it. How has the developer lost out?


I'm all ears and eagerly await your response. This should be interesting!

 

No, it's called 'conscience'.

It only proves that you don't get the point. You take something for free that wasn't meant to be free. Whether it's a car or digital code. According to the law it's theft. Can you detect an error in this way of thinking? Enlighten me.

Always the same example, ending with 'uninstalling it'. How about Martin Garrix and those other EDM producers (I forgot the name of that guy whose face looks like a pizza EDIT; apparently he's called Avicii) who make 'hits' and videos showing the cracked software? They aren't talking about uninstalling. Downloading a movie without paying, watching it one time and delete it, won't hurt the movie business? Time to get real.

Bottomline: when you take something for free and the creator doesn't allow you to take it for free it's wrong. But people nowadays don't consider things wrong if nobody isn't hurt physically or didn't went bankrupt.

If software developers don't lose money thanks to warez, why do they put that much amount of time/money in protecting their software? I have had talks with developers who saw there sales drop to almost zero from one day to another without a reasonable explanation. Until they found out that their software was warezed at the day of the drop of sales. Can you relate to the fact that those developers feel very disappointed? It's called empathy (something that people consider as a mental health problem?). But now you probably gonna explain to me that warez is free advertisement and that developers should be happy about it, right?

Funniest video I ever saw to defend warez is this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4

One thing; What about the creator of the bike? They forgot to include him in the video!! Copying is without approval of the creator but apparently that isn't important... It's called ethics but who cares about that these days?

It's 'interesting' that somebody who's saying that warez is theft (as stated by law) has to defend himself.

I don't pretend I can change people. If they can get something for free -even if other people are hurt in the process- they stop thinking.

Did you ever had the experience that you had an idea but someone took your idea and got all credits for it, although it was your idea? Nobody went bankrupt or was physically hurt but you probably would feel shitty.

 

Yes, as I suspected, you're two cans short of a six pack.

I see that your reading comprehension isn't up to standard, so I ask you again: HOW DOES A DEVELOPER LOSE MONEY FROM ME USING A PRODUCT THAT I WOULD NEVER HAVE BOUGHT?

You seem to have completely ignored my question and just gone on a big rant about nonsense. If you'd bothered to actually read my post above(the one that you replied to), you'd see that I have bought software after trying it and uninstalled the stuff that I don't use. And I'm still making my mind up about some items.

People who have a career in music and still pirate stuff clearly have no conscience. I don't agree with that at all, if you're making good money then give some back to the people who made it possible.

As for it being the same as theft legally? Lololol clearly you have been smoking too much crack today: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement

Please, as least bother to educate yourself a tiny bit before posting snide and condescending comments. That way you won't be made to look like such a fool.

 

I'll also point out that morals are not set in stone. Should people be compensated for their work? Yes, of course.

But should people who can't afford a program be denied it's use? No way. Everyone should have access to creative tools.