I was just curious as to what proof you have that PPP was downloaded through Warez sites as much as you claim? In my routine searches for sites giving away Poser (I already explained my reason for this, I don't feel I need to again, or that you need to question my actions in doing this when Anthony knows I try to email him with a couple of URLs per week), I came across a few Warez message boards.... ones that I found out have been up for a long time, and run by people who have played the warez game even longer then that. I posted questions on these boards asking about Poser Pro Pack. I posted these questions quite some time ago, not just yesterday or anything, but a few days ago, and before that, actually; a few days after Pro Pack was released. Why did I do this initially? Well, because I believe that Curious Labs IS a good group of people, and that they have made a great effort to keep Poser alive for the community of Artists who use it. I wanted to know if they were getting scammed, and hopefully help them locate these scammers. When doing my searches, I got a bit bewildered. "Pro Pack? What's that?" It took me 3 days of searching to find a site that even claimed to have it, and their's was really just a bulls%&#; gateway to some porn site. I found plenty of people who knew what poswer was... a couple of sites giving away Poser. No Pro Pack. None. Nadda. Nowhere. When this initial search came up inconclusive, I was very pleased. The hackers didn't CARE about Poser, so why would they bother cracking and distributing Pro Pack. They didn't think anyone would want it? Who knows. The important thing is, they weren't giving it out... at least not in anywhere NEAR the numbers I expected. Then, this whole protection thing pops up. I read the post on Curious Labs' website claiming that Warez is the reason for their sales dropping. I for one recall several.. not just a handfull, but SEVERAL users posting on these very forums, after the bugreports about Poser Pro were mentioned here, that under no circumstances would they purchase Pro Pack until the bugs were fixed, and the investment was actually in a full, working piece of software, rather then a broken one that destroyed their backwards compatibility and didn't do some of the stuff it claimed to do. I don't blame them, I felt the same way. It is my opinion that THIS is what caused their drop in sales, not otherwise. As has been stated before... 95% of the people who download Warez wouldn't have been purchasing the product in the first place. And I never saw ANY evidence of this massive distribution that CL claims happened. I don't think they are lying, not at all... I believe they are trying to rationalize their product's market failure, and are unwilling to blame themselves for it. Yes, Curious Labs made a mistake releasing a product that didn't include some level of protection, but they also made a mistake by releasing a product that didn't do what it was promised to do and didn't allow backwards compatibility. I personally think the latter is the part they have blinded themselves to, out of the love for their product, and out of the human need to always blame anyone other then yourself. I do it, you all do it, whether we realise it or not. It is important to look internally for the sources of your problems before looking externally, but we are not always willing to do that, because it is a very difficult thing to do. And most of us don't. If this was the case with Curious Labs, as I personally believe it was, and as some of you may believe it is but didn't want to say it, then we definately should not crucify them for it. They are human, they make mistakes. We're human also, the same thing happens. What we should do is everything possible to help them make a better product that WILL meet the expectations users had when they purchased the Pro Pack, and to correct the failed promises and bugs that caused many people NOT to buy the product. That is what both ourselves and CL should be concentrating on. I don't agree with the method they have chosen for Authorization... and I can understand why, if they have truly made themselves believe that the product's failure was due to Warez, that they have chosen to do such a thing. But I also think they should consider the possibility, even for a moment that I'm right. And if I am, then all of the users that didn't buy ProPack because of the bugs already had every intention of buying it once the bugs were fixed. I know several people who have expressed in the past the reasons for their rejection of PP was the bugs, and almost all of them have previously claimed that they WILL buy the software, providing they can afford it, as soon as they will be able to buy a fully working product.... even if it required downloading an update to make it work right. Now, take a look at what has happened here in these past few days. We've had lots of people state publically that they now refuse to buy another Curious Labs product. There be might be several others who have held that in private opinion. They have risked cutting their customer base extremely through a product upgrade that otherwise probably would have brought sales back up to exceptional levels. Think about it. All of these people were waiting for this update, so that they could finally rationalize for themselves spending the money to purchase PPP. Now, a lot of these same people, as well as people who already have purchased, have vowed not to purchase another CL product. EVER. Now, this may have just cost Curious Labs a large number of sales of Pro Pack, and most likely of anything else they release. simply because they were being human. I think it's a tragedy... but I must apologise for my previous, less calm and thought out posts. I sounded as if I was attacking CL for being human, and I wasn't trying to, I was just a bit angered and annoyed at their decision, because of the overall inconvenience it presents. Like I said, they were being human, as we all are, and as we all only can be. We shouldn't persecute them for it, nor should we boycott them in the future because of it. It is something many of us would likely have done in their situation... lay the blame elsewhere, and then try to protect ourselves from it ever happening again. I still feel that CL's focus should be the product itself, not fear of the unknown. Not paranoia. And I feel that if they had reflected upon these things fully, rather then be a little arrogant of the circumstances, that that is exactly what they'd be doing.... Making better products for it's clients and for themselves. But please, don't persecute them for it. Don't put them up on a cross and lynch them with hammers and nails because they made a mistake. I just hope it's not too late for them to correct this mistake and win back the support they should have had, both financially and morally. These are just my feeling on the issue. My true, heartfelt feelings. I think we all need to give CL another chance, but I don't think that we should give it over without reason. I ask simply for consideration, and for people to at least wait it out, the way you did with the original release of PPP, before you go off and condemn them. Enough people who own PPP will upgrade and be able to tell us what the experience was like. Perhaps we should wait at least until then.- - - - - -

Thank you for taking the time to listen. Hopefully my words are actually considered, rather than blown off. Thank You, Ron 'DraX' DeFreitas

Ron Curious Labs has proof and reason to be concerned about the Pro Pack and warez sites. I for one have seen two sites that were offering it for download. Both sites have been shut down. The sites not only contained the Pro Pack but Daz and vendors of this sites products. One was a secret club charging for the service. What amazed me is I also received by e-mail the Pro Pack for free as it was being distributed around the net. It totaled 15 e-mails in zip and rar format and was mailed to several people. So you know I did not search for these sites nor did I ask any one to mail me the Pro Pack. As far as the Pro Pack is concern I purchased it from Curious Labs and it has paid for itself 10 times over in my line of work. I highly recommend it. Does it have problems? The answer is yes. However I do not consider them to be serious and Curious is working to fix them.I can say the the Pro Pack is very stable on my computer. Frankly I am surprised it has taken Curious so long to implement more security. If it was my company I would have done it immediatly. Ron

Remember when we all vowed never to buy microsoft products? Whatever happened to them!

Very purty Speech DraX..now shaddup and sit down..your fifteen minutes are up..and fer gawds sake...choose what side of the fence your on..your givng my neck a cramp!

Angola, in the case of Microsoft, the world is in a state right now where are pretty damned near close to having absolutely no choice. You almost HAVE to buy Microsoft products if you use a computer at all. I am afraid, however, that with CL being a small company and the situation being as it is, that people may stick to their words and never purchase another CL product. That would disastrous for both CL and the Poser community. Ron... you show one example that you received by accident, apparently. And another one example that has since been remedied. I have since the time of my initial search I have found 2, maybe 3 sites that had PPP, sent off an email, and haven't seen them back. And those exclusive clubs are not quite as common as people here have assumed. If anything, I doubt that there are more then 2 or 3 remaining ones on the net which exist and actually have Poser or PPP. Not to badmouth Poser. I love and adore it. But there isn't quite the demand for it that there is for others. I will guarantee you that within 1 hour of searching I can provide at least 200 URLs which claim to have 3D Studio MAX and about 40 of those actually will have it. I actually have done this recently and notified Discreet of it. In one hour of searching, I will be "lucky" to have found 3 or 4 sites that offer just Poser 4, and if I'm really "lucky", 1 of them will have it (and of course I email Anthony the second I "luck out") These are the things that leads me to my belief that the warez distribution of PPP has not been as significant as CL claims it has been. But I think you have missed my point, Ron. SeaRose... I think my post shows obviously what "side" I'm on. I'm on the side of the community. There shouldn't be a fence. If we make a fence then we are considering CL as an outside party and not part of this community, much the way most Microsoft customers see them. I disagree with the amount of security they are choosing to enforce, because it will inconvenience the legitimate end users. I also believe they are being overparanoid and not taking the time to consider other possibilities then "Pirates". It's very easy to blame thieves for your problems... not as easy to even consider that it may be in part due to your own actions. If I had seen tens of thousands of copies of PPP flying around the net, then I'd agree that they were being harmed immensly by warez. As it stands, from what I've seen, I do not. But I'm still willing to help them locate anyone dishing the program out. But I also refuse to believe that they should be boycotted because of it [the security methods]. That's just plain ridiculous and will only serve to harm the community in the end.

Ron If you want examples I give Anthony my permission to show you or tell you directly that in fact the Poser Pro Pack was being circulated by e-mail. If you would like a screen shot of the Poser Pro Pack on freedrive contact PhilC. He has one. That site was shut down. You may wish to also speak to Bill Bay about this problem. You would be shocked at who some of the culprits are. I will not mention their names. I further do not see any great inconvience in the security measures Curious wants to implement. To me their only other alternative would be to significantly raise the price of their products. Ron

It has to be considered also that probably many people will not buy Pro Pack as it contains far too little to be of interest to them. It really is rightly named as the "pro" pack; I guess it may be useful for high-end pro users, but for the small time amateur dabbler (like me) it's really not worth the cost. I hope CL aren't imagining that they ought to have had comparable sales figures to Poser 4. No way.

Ron, (geez, starting to feel like I have a split personality complex) I have every belief that there were a number of people in this community who decided to gip CL out of a paycheck. I keep my eyes open, and I've seen a few posts about certain people being involved in illegal activites here (as in within the community) The fact remains that the greatest percentage of Warez distribution occurs through warez distribution websites, forums, and those sites get it directly from the crackers via IRC. I haven't made an attempt to do a search in IRC channels as I don't have the time nor the patience to sit in chat room after chat room, asking people if they have PPP, especially when I have no idea how to report them when it occurs in an IRC environment. My simple experience has shown me that there wasn't quite as many copies of poser Pro floating around the net as CL suggests, and posts I've seen here have proved to me that the bug reports may have had a huge factor in the sales dropping. Sales don't drop at rates like that due to warez distribution, I can't recall a single case in history that showed evidence of such a thing... and if this is truly the case with PPP, then why wasn't it all over CNET, MSNBC and CNN, in a report about how hazardous hackers are becoming to company revenues and electronic product sales? I would think that even hearing a whisper, they'd all be all over that. Why? Because telling people that something is a ajor threat gets ratings and gets traffic. Scaring people brings more people glued to their television watching CNN then anything else does. Granted, it wouldn't have been a long article, I don't assume, but I'm certain I would've read it in my CNET newsletter. I have no doubts that PPP was distributed over the net, jsut as any software is. I do doubt, however, that it was that massive that it caused that amount of downfall in sales, especially when the timing of their sales dip seems to concur with the same time these forums and other were flooded with messages complaining about the bugs in PPP. To quote someone's post from earlier (Please forgive me):> I can't afford the Pro Pack, and I've been watching the posts about problems with it. I'm probably sticking with Poser 4 for quite a while.

This basically concurs with my arguement, and I go through the archives of these forums showing probably hundreds of postings saying the same thing. That is what I believe caused the sales dip, not a few people emailing PPP to each other. That's not to say that Warez isn't a threat. I just don't think it contributed as much to their losses as they believe. Somehow I don't think you read all of my post, and only acknowledged my mention of warez. If so, you'd have gotten my point already.

Ron, once again: The point is not software protection, the point is that there are a lot of ways to protect your software w/o violating the privacy of your costumers. "But please, don't persecute them for it .." I think you should consider that CL isn't just 2 or 3 nice guys sitting in a garage making Poser. CL is a quite big Company, so they can't expect any merci from my side. Make a mistake in business and you'll have to pay for it, c'est la guerre. I'm much more sorry for all these people who trust in CL, get dependent on them and now have to pay the bill for CLs idea of a software protection. (OK, actually it's an idea from microsoft) "Don't put them up on a cross and lynch them .." As a human beeing who work with Poser since the first version I'm just sad about this situation. As the owner of a (quite small) company I don't have any emotions. It's quite easy: I see a suplier that is up to violate my rights, I don't like the way he is behaving toward his costumers in this situation, I can't see that he is willing to cange his mind and his products are not irreplaceable for my work. So he's out - fullstop. "But I also refuse to believe that they should be boycotted because of it [the security methods]. That's just plain ridiculous and will only serve to harm the community in the end." I'm not interessting at all in a crusade against CL They made there decision I made mine, thats all. But as you try so hard to understand CLs decision I hope you'll understand my decision too and don't blame me for this situation. Living w/0 Poser might be hard, living w/o privacy is worse. regards Thomas

Thomas, my point, however, though I disagree with their methods, is that people should at least be certain to know all the details before condemning a product and a company. Make your decision after you hear what other have to say that install the new patch with the security features. Perhaps it will not be quite as bad as everyone fears, and I'm certain that CL is looking into the legal implications they would have to face given the methods. Perhaps they will realise that the exact method may go too far, and this entire arguement can be dropped. I am just not about to make a decision until I know what others have to say from experience with the product

Personally i can't see what the big deal is half of my software is protected in this way or with a dongle and my PC hasn't blown up or any other weird thing.....I really think this is being blown out of all proportion......anyone saying they refuse to use CL stuff if they go ahead can't be seroius about 3d as most other products do similar stuff........Steve

I think what Curious Labs is doing will be for the best, those who really use Poser will continue doing so. Ron is right. I was also sent the PPP in email without ever soliciting it. Thankfully, after the first 5-6 zips I realized it was a program I was getting and not somebody's character to test out and called my ISP, informed them what I was receiving without my permission and spoke to their legal advisor. Because of the fact that this was cc'ed and I could see all the other receipients of the same mail I didn't want to mention names seeing as since I didn't ask for it probably they hadn't either. And I was surprised how easy you could be implicated in something without ever going out looking for trouble.

Ron: " Perhaps they will realise that the exact method may go too far, and this entire arguement can be dropped". I hope so for you, but I wouldn't bet on that. Steve: a quotation from a post below: ------------------------------------------------------- " .. We absolutely do not check the hard drive at all for any software other than our own." Steve Yatson Product Manager Curious Labs ------------------------------------------------------- I can't remember that Newtek ever wants to check my hard drive, nor for their own products neither for anything else. I also can't remember that Newtek (or Maxon, Corel, .. as well) ever wants to know when I change my machine, had a HD crash or buy me a new car. (The last one might be part of the next "software protection" ;)) Hope you see the difference. regards Thomas

Thomas You are incorrect. If you change your computer and are using Lightwave(Newtek) you need to change your dongle to the new machine and call Newtek for a new registration code. Ron

Curious Labs is NOT going too far with their software protection. I have an incredible amount of software that has dongles, registration numbers and machine checks. What they are doing is NO BIG DEAL. It is one extra LITTLE hassle that other software manufacturers have implemented a long time ago. To clarify, below is from a previous thread: I think that most of us agree that most copy protection doesn't work. Just about any programs that people want can be found on warez sites. Perhaps copy protection at CL will only slow down the "warez pirates." It will, however, almost completely stop the "casual duplication" of software for friends - someone who might buy the software but his/her friend has a copy that they put onto a CD-R. That is a lost sale for CL. I would bet that if Lightwave or Max had absolutely no copy protection at all there would be a hell of alot less sales for both companies. What do you think? The fact is: having no copy protection at all is not smart or feasible in todays environment. Perhaps some of the people here are correct - software protection is a myth. I, however, believe that it does stop some people from using the software without paying. And yes, it will be an extra hassle for those of us legitimate customers - but not enough to say "I won't buy their program anymore." They are seeking a way to protect their investment and I do not believe that anyone posting messages in this forum would not do the same (or similar) for themselves if the roles were reversed! Imagine seeing all of your hard work on a warea site for free. I'd be sick. I would say that next time there will be some sort of protection. It probably won't stop them completely, but it will slow them down. Just think about it. For one extra task to complete (ie. register via e-mail) we have a great piece of software! So it won't be as easy as it was before. Well, would you rather have this extra little aggravation and have this great software or no hassle at all - and NO SOFTWARE! I'm used to the hassle as are a great many others. It's part of everyday life. No big deal.

megalodon; You make some very valid points, but trying to argue with people that dissagree with the software protection on the basis that if CL don't do this there will be no more Poser is a waste of time. For us Poser 4 will be our last CL product anyway, so if there is or isn't a Poser 5 does not matter, we won't be getting it anyway. I disagree with the type of protection CL intend to use becuase it places hidden files on my system, that I can not delete through recognised methods. Maybe I'm different to everyone else, but if a format or re-partitioning deleted the protection (and that meant that I had to re-register every time), then I would be all for it and buy the improved PPP tomorrow. If the re-registering was automated on every re-installatin, without having them hidden files then I would have no problem with it. As things stand I do. Regards, Cheers

Cheers, I can see alot of people thinking just as you do. And I do completely understand the frustration and annoyance. But I have the strangest feeling that as soon as CL comes out with Poser 5 and you see all of the incredible upgrades it has - upgrades that may make Poser 4 look alot less attractive - you and a great many others will end up saying that the copy protection isn't that bad and considering how much more you would be getting... it's worth the added aggravation. I may be wrong - but I'd bet against that. I guess we'll ust have to wait and see.

Ronmolina, I just ask the newtek support forum for that: (man, you realy scared me) Of course you have to connect the dongle to the machine you're working on, but there is no further registration needed. You can use your finally serial number as long as you want on every machine. regards Thomas

Hi Thomas.... I'd just like to ask you what your idea of a small company really is? Well, I can honestly tell you, that we ARE a small company. Sure, we're bigger that when we started with only 8 employees. Now we have 25. In comparison to Meta, where many of use used to work...we are still very small. In regards what DraX said about warez sites, we have ligitimate proof that there were an astounding amount of sites distributing P4 & PPP. Luckily, a vast majority of these have been shut down, and it was not an easy process. I know that some people are very upset about the security measures we are implementing, but it's really not going to be as bad as you think; certainly not worth boycotting the products. But if that is what you wish to do, how can we talk you out of it? All we can do is thank our customers for their support and continue to listen to what they have to say. We are working hard to improve the product you all use every day, and a lot of these improvements are based on what YOU have asked for. There are many other companies that have had to do similiar security protection methods. People complain at first and then they deal with it just fine. Maybe you think you are being terribly inconvenienced by the choices we have made and we are sorry you feel that way. But we have made these choices in order to survive as a small company and still be able to offer you a fantastic product at a very reasonable price. Please think about it that way if you can. Again, thanks to all of you who have been supporting us. Regards, Karen Carpenter Editor, Curious Lab Report

Zardoz, regarding post 9. Please point me in the direction of this easier protection. I'm willing to look at anything. Also we are NOT a big company. We have 25 employees right now. It's too bad that it would be more difficult for you to live without piracy than Poser. That's a sad statement. I hope I misunderstood. 18. There is an authorization required in addition to the dongle. Each auth code is tied to a specific dongle as a matter of fact, and it does require contact with Newtek. If you move your dongle to another machine you will have 14 days to re-register that dongle on that machine with Newtek to be legal, but I believe you can use the same auth code. We never tried to use the same auth code so I'm not sure. We had to do this several times during testing. Ours will be much easier. **************************** Steve Yatson Product Manager Curious Labs Http://www.curiouslabs.com ****************************

Steve: I think for me the problem is the allowance of three authorization codes. It seems to few. I do not upgrade hardward as much as others here do, but I can already see a problem. Currently there are two computers in my house. Mind (which has an internet connection), and my sister Verdie's, which isn't connected to the internet. We both are the core of Dreamspinner Inc. I can see a problem with getting an authorization for Verdie's computer since she's not on the Net. And I have visions of someday getting a nice lap top to run Poser on.... I'm not yet ready or have the money to leap to Pro Pack, that's why I had hopes for a true Poser 5 that would be a good upgrade to Poser 4. I was registered with Metacreations as an owner of Poser 4 and I've always hoped this information was forwarded to Curious Labs so that I would be able to upgrade my product for a lower price than if I was a new buyer. I had this point in mind when I upgraded to Poser just prior to Metacreations no longer supporting the product. I had hopes that whoever picked up Poser would have my registration information on file. I aim to be semi-professional, but this is still a side line passion and I don't make the money from my real life job to be able to spend as much as I would like to turn this from a hobby into an income bringer...not yet anyway, but it is an aim of mine. Just don't forget about us 'low end' users. Okay? Liz Pope Dreamspinner Inc.

Well put. All it would take is an email, fax or phone call. And if you were on a project, there's a grace period of 14 days in which time the app will be fully functional. Again it's not you that we are trying to prevent from using the product. We do have the registration info from Meta although I can't search it to let you know if we have yours at the moment. But if you send a mail to me I'd be glad to.

Dreamspinner, Steve's en-route to the office right now, so I'm answering part of this for him. Just to reassure you, we did acquire the registration database from Meta, so I'm sure that somewhere in there we have your information. As for someone not being hooked up to the internet, a simple phone call to our office will take care of getting your sister authorized. Don't worry...we won't forget about you guys. Regards, Karen Curious Labs

Karen you said: "As for someone not being hooked up to the internet, a simple phone call to our office will take care of getting your sister authorized." What about users around the rest of the World who have no internet connection...it's not just a simple phone call for them. Cheers

Well, I never said it would be easy for everyone. That's a really good point and one that we will addressing very soon. I'm going to do a little research and will have to get back to you on that one--sorry I don't have an immediate answer. I appreciate your comments; they really help us to provide the best customer service possible as it's good to know all the potential issues we'll be faced with. Thanks... Karen

Hi Karen,Steve, "I'd just like to ask you what your idea of a small company really is?" You are a part of the egy.sys AG right? But I think that's not the realy important point. "But if that is what you wish to do, how can we talk you out of it?" That's quite easy, here a quotation from my post to Anthony: --------------------------------------------------- "..I'm not very happy about any software protection because they are almost useless but waste my time. But I love poser and would accept any resonable protection system if you can make one thing sure: I don't want to be forced to have any further contact to the supplier after I've register the product. ...." --------------------------------------------------- you can read the full story in the nosfiratu post below. "It's too bad that it would be more difficult for you to live without piracy than Poser. That's a sad statement. I hope I misunderstood." You did, but it shouldn't be a problem to scroll up and read again ;). "...regarding post 9. Please point me in the direction of this easier protection." For PPP you could get access to the Lightwave and Max dongle, there could be a copy protected CD, you could put an individual code on every copy, so its easy to find out where a copy that's on a warez site came from. Just a brainstorming, if you are seriously interested in a discussing about that, no problemo send me a mail. "There is an authorization required in addition to the dongle" Yes once and that's the point "...I'm not sure. So am I, can only repeat what the guys in the support forum told me. " ... We had to do this several times during testing. Ours will be much easier ..." But it will violate my privacy. I can't understand where's the problem to get this point. May let me say it this way: After register your product according to european law I own it and you guys should let me in peace and should not force me to have any further contact to your company. "Don't call me, I'll call you". Hope I could make this clear finaly. regards Thomas

Cheers, We are currently working on customer service plans that will deal with issues like people not having internet connections and will update the FAQ list on our web site. Thanks, Karen

I agree 100%! Pro Pack did not do so well because of all the bugs! Hey... that's the main reason I didn't buy it. The fact that it wasn't backwards compatible with everything meant it was USELESS to me. Otherwise I would have grabbed it immediately. Just ask ANY of the stores how much I drop on stuff! If it's good... I buy it. If it sucks... I don't. The bug reports coming back from people who had bought Pro Pack had a SERIOUS and UNDENIABLE effect on the sales of Pro Pack! Not to mention... many people don't need all the fancy exports. Many of us just render in Poser or Bryce or even Vue.

Egi.sys is actually smaller than us. Keep in mind that this is not released and we are in the process of setting it up. It was very unfortunately leaked to the German press. Next time someone from a software company says they can't talk about future plans, THIS situation is exactly why. We can't get access to the LW and 3Ds dongles. One because the Max dongle no longer exists and my guess is that LW may soon follow, although I don't know for sure and they've made no statement to that effect, and two, that would require us licensing use which again is aproaching $30 a shot. Even if we don't actually purchase the HW itself. Pro Pack CD contains relatively little info, unlike Poser and Bryce. A CD image would be quite easy to distribute and is being distributed. We considered burning a required 200MB file onto the disk but then that would require the CD. Bryce users complained a lot about the fact that that had to put the CD in every time they launched. Iwas managing the QA dept. when Bryce 4 was in development. And that was easy to crack. Egi.sys is currently looking into German law. as far as the rest of Europe, I don't know and can't comment on that. **************************** Steve Yatson Product Manager Curious Labs Http://www.curiouslabs.com ****************************

Very well, if you have proof of this then I will withdraw my arguement that your claims of massive Warez distribution were blown out of proportion (and I wasn't blaming you for this claim, either, if you noticed). I still, however, believe much more that the reason sales dropped of PPP was not because of warez distribution, but because of the backwards-incompatibility and bug reports. As I previously stated, I could go back through these forums and find literally hundreds of posts in which people state either:- I won't purchase PPP because of the bugs.

• I will wait until Curious Labs releases a bug fix before upgrading.
• I'm not too sure about Poser Pro Pack. I guess I'll wait and see what xperience others have before I buy it.

And the rest is history. The articles on the Curious Labs website suggest to me that not once did you (Curious Labs) consider this as the reason for your lost sales, refusing to believe that you could have mistakenly released a bad product. If PPP did everything it claims it's supposed to do properly and was backwards compatible, as well as a couple of other tweaks here and there, then it would be a very good product indeed. And I'm sure that none of us wuld be having this arguement, because instead of forums willed with bug reports, it would have been forums filled with praise of your product. BTW, Cheers, why ave you made this decision to not purchase from CL ever again without even waiting it out to see what happens and what the product is like? Don't you think the mature action would be to base your decision upon actual facts, rather then assumptions?

DraX, when Poser 4 was released there was much more complaining about bugs than Poser Pro received. Many of these bugs were actually just the result of the fact that people weren't used to how to work with new features, like conforming clothes figures. Poser 4 has proven to be a very successful product.

When it came time to decide to buy Poser Pro or not, I saw all those bug reports and I saw that they either didn't effect me (I don't use Max) or I could work around them (cuz I'm smart that way :P). Since I received it, I've been having more fun playing with the new features than having to deal with the bugs. But for some reason, I didn't feel any need to post this.

The thing is, when people are happy with a product, they generally keep their mouth shut. When they are unhappy, they will yell as loud as they can. I bet you if you go back through the forums, you will find hundreds of posts just from Servo alone complaining about the Max plug-in (and rightfully so). But if your using the forums as a basis of whether people are happy with a product or not, you're going to get a skewed number because people tend to rant more than they rave. It's just human nature.

Steve ...Egi.sys is currently looking into German law. as far as the rest of Europe, I don't know and can't comment on that... That sounds good to me - I don't think that you can force a customer in Germany to re-register a software-product everytime he wants to install it on a new PC (or a new drive, or reinstall it after a crash...). And I don't think that you can do that in a bugfix! I bought the buggy product without the copy protection-nonsense and now I want to have a bugfix without the copy protection-nonsense.

Here's the fixed figure BTW. I apologize for not getting this to you sooner. I've been busy. :) The holes that showed up in the "swim trunks" area :)were in the "g spandex" groups. After each of those groups there would be a "g " group which I changed to "g empty" in a text editor. The previous version of the Pro Pack did not read or write empty group names. Poser 4 does. I can send the fixed CR2 file that has been tested in the previous Pro Pack, for you to post so that anyone with the "old" Pro pack will be able to use the content without problems. We really did consider this stuff as a reason. And have never made the claim that no one decided not to purchase because there were bugs. We feel that the biggest problem is warez. Yes bugs are part of it but a different issue. The updater addresses bugs, and that is it's main purpose. I have said that so many times now. But still, no one wants to talk about that. I have not had one request, other than from you privately regarding the holes in geoms, to talk about what was fixed. I have mentioned a few things but still can't go into great detail until we actually FINISH the updater. Again we looked at all the information we had and made the decision on the aforementioned basis. And before anyone jumps on that statement, I said "basis"! There were a lot of factors considered. Thanks again. 3D-CC rocks BTW. Larry loves that stuff. **************************** Steve Yatson Product Manager Curious Labs Http://www.curiouslabs.com ****************************

Thanks, Steve.... I'm certain that if these bugs are indeed fixed in the new PPP update that I will find lots of enjoyment from PPP, as I do have every confidence that you guys can make a kickass product.... While I may not agree 100% with the method you are employing to protect your product, I do realise that you feel a level of protection is necessary and it would be ridiculous not to... Thanks for fixing the cr2... Just oen thing... don't you think Wolvie looks a little wierd with blue genitals showing through his trunks?

Can we take the gloves off now? :) **************************** Steve Yatson Product Manager Curious Labs Http://www.curiouslabs.com ****************************

I think that you definitely need to protect the software Steve. Regardless of what sort of copy protection you end up using, as long as you continue to provide us with software that you constantly improve - I'll buy it! Poser is great and so is the Pro Pack. You "guys" (all 25) are great. Don't let all the CL-bashing get to you. The vast majority of us still supports you - and I'll bet that the rest will fall back into line once they see what you've got in store for the next version of Poser! Too many need something to rant about. I think I'd laugh my ass off (wish I could!) if Newtek ended up doing the exact same thing and got rid of the dongle. Then let everyone rant at Newtek!

Thanks for you rsupport. I know they just love the product. Even the people that complain about bugs and bash us. Otherwise they'd be on a different forum bashing a different company.

DraX, you said; BTW, Cheers, why ave you made this decision to not purchase from CL ever again without even waiting it out to see what happens and what the product is like? Don't you think the mature action would be to base your decision upon actual facts, rather then assumptions? Hi Drax, My decision is based on mature action. Over the course of the last few days I have sent private mail to the CL team offering my support for Poser 4 in the future, and there battle against Warez. I'm sorry if this list is a bit formal but it helps me categorise my reasons :o)...and I've only just got up (yes another late night Steve ;) ) 1. Morally I feel that it is wrong for anyone to place hidden software code on my machine. The fact that CL do not wish to tell me how to remove (and therefore loose the use of the software), or let me know where it is even after I have registered worries me. I'm sure you agree DraX, that decision is made on fact. 2. As Karen mentioned above, provisions for overseas customers have yet to be decided, and I don't trust my local reseller with tech support LOL. 2. I do not use Poser characters in my professional work as the main subject, only as a way to produce a sense of scale in the images. Therefore any extra features that are in Poser 5 or PPP, don't out way my moral belief. 3. My character modelling abilities are good enough to be included in the images that I do (even though it means more effort). At the moment I feel very sad. I know that myself and others, have tried to help CL in their efforts against Warez and many times it has been impossible for CL to close down a site. As I have said in private mail to Karen, Steve Yatson and Steve Cooper, I still think the team are a great bunch at CL, and that I can understand and support why they have brought in the security software...I just feel that it is the wrong type. Hope that clarrifies what I have said DraX. You never know, Poser 5 my have so many excellent features that I chuck my moral beliefs out the window...but I doubt it. I render outside Poser (so a raytrace engine will be no good to me), and features that would have appealed to me in Poser 5 have appeared in PPP, but I have decided not to get that. Some of us like to use Poser a bit like a chisel; a tool that you use occaisionally , but if you loose it you can always delve into your toolbox for something else, and I suspect that they will be type of customer that CL loose. For others Poser is their toolbox and can not do without it, and I have a funny feeling that they are the customers that CL will keep. Whoooops...sorry folks that post went on a bit too long. At least you woke me up DraX :O) Kindest Regards, Martin

Personally, I'm kinda glad the German press leaked the info. I feel the same way about NDA's that MaximumPC does - I'm agin 'em. ;] What would you have done had the info not been leaked starting this marvelous discussion, let the new protection feature come as a complete and unwelcome surprise to your product users?

I don't understand that point about a leak at all. All this c't mag did was to translate a letter from Steve Cooper, that he had posted on the CL website weeks before. What makes me realy sad is, they are complaining about that it is harder now to violate peoples privacy because of freedom of the press? Hope I misunderstood this. peace Thomas

Thomas, I agree, you don't understand, so I'll explain. It takes time to gather and format information so that it can be displayed in a clear and concise manner thereby eliminating as many questions and as much speculation as possible. We didn't have time to do that. Had we, the answers to the majority of these questions, and a tutorial on how the protection works, and the process, could have already been available on our websight. This would have eliminated most of the speculation on the forum. I don't get where you think I or anyone else from CL was complaining in any manner. I stated several times that we just weren't ready yet. Not that implementing copy protection would be harder or easier on us. If anything it's harder on the community due to the fact that a lot of you are frustrated because you didn't hear it from us and you don't yet know what will actually happen and how it will actually work. Wouldn't it have been easier for you to get an announcement from us that also included a web link to the answers to your questions, and a clear explanation of the process? **************************** Steve Yatson Product Manager Curious Labs Http://www.curiouslabs.com ****************************

Again, Kupa talked about the new security measures weeks ago in Renderosity's Spotlight Interview. Guess no one bothered to read it ;-) -JH.

As a developer, I understand the need for copy protection. My friends and I depend upon sales and royalties to pay the rent (and buy more hardware, software, to make better products, etc.) However, I hate dongles with a passion based upon 3dStudio's utter disregard of the problems their damnable dongle gave me. When you spend $3000 on a package, only to be repeatedly kicked out to DOS and called a pirate by the software, it is prety bad. When the company finally tells you that they know there is a problem and that you can buy the upgrade in 6 months which should patch it, it is heinous. I transferred my copy of 3ds, and haven't used anything with a dongle since. I don't mind the software checking my computer or my network. I do mind another piece of flaky trouble-prone hardware. We sole proprietors have to upgrade systems all the time. I have 5 nominally working computers, all of which need TLC to do their specialized job. I don't need any more grief. NO dongles!!! Carolly

This will be a software dongle, not hardware.

OK. I'm willing to leave a CD in the drive. I'm even willing to hold a red piece of plastic over a page of fingerprints to find the match or search for the 7th word in the 4th paragraph or whatever hoop I'll need to jump through. If the computer wants to search my LAN (if I ever get the beasties connected) and verify that yes, I only have 1 copy installed, that is fine. I just refuse to have another hardware dongle in the studio, considering that several years later I'm still irritated about the last fiasco. If Autodesk could have given me a patch, or at least some sympathy, I wouldn't have minded so much, but by making my investment worthless, they soured me on the concept of dongles. Carolly