With all respects to the fight against warez and suchlike, but there are still are queries and points. JKeller wrote: Anthony, are you reading the responses from CL or no? They already said that it would be simple to authorize installation past the 3rd machine/configuration. All they have to do is check to make sure your serial number is not one of the ones being distributed on warez boards. If all that is done on 4th and later reloads off the same copy, is to check a number against a list, surely that could be done much quicker and more reliably automatically without wasting humans' time at both ends? Each copy of Poser has two serial numbers, X and Y. The user knows X. Y is hidden. He logs in to the internet and loads Poser. Poser contacts CL and automatically tells them his number X (and perhaps other information, see below). A bit of Java or Javascript running at CL automatically checks X against a warez serial number list. If X is valid, CL sends back automatically another number, Z. If Z is that copy's Y, Poser loads. All that humans need do at CL is from time to time put more numbers in the warez serial number list, and the only phone calls they need handle are from that wicked minority who persist in not having an internet connection. If so, will the number Y be the same every time that that copy is loaded? If so, a warez copy could include that number on an extra readme file without the warez user having to phone for it. And if Y changes every time that copy is loaded, according to some rule or another, that is another extra bit of mechanism that can go wrong. If the "three strikes and you're out" phone call can't be replaced by automation because it is needed for other purposes also, what are those purposes? It has been said that checks will be made on changes to the computer's configuration. How and when will those checks be done? When will the load be failed because the configuration has changed? If this involves Poser automatically telling CL what that computer's configuration is (and that would have to be done if CL is to find if the same copy has been installed on several computers), that is spyware, and in the name of the UK Data Protection Act many people would be wanting to know what was happening. JKeller wrote: They are not requiring the CD-Rom like Bryce does. Does Bryce now need the CD-ROM in every time it runs? My copy of Bryce 4 doesn't. IF so, thank God I bought my copy of Bryce 4 before that nuisance precaution was brought in. I bought Bryce 4 and Poser 4 together and they came with their manuals and are certainly legitimate copies. I prefer to leave my load CD-ROM's safely away in a drawer. I seem to remember my Bryce 4 needing the CD-ROM the first time I ran it after I loaded it. JKeller wrote: Email, faxes and telephone calls can get from the UK to the far side of the USA fairly quickly ... Email: if the server doesn't get overloaded and go slow. Phone and fax: if there are enough manned phone lines so people are not left hanging in a queue while their phone bill builds up. Etc as in other people's messages. Having the same work hours as CL could be a nuisance for many users also; there are many who can't get to a phone during working hours.

Thanks for answering, Steve. I am still not onboard with this yet. I have a few other questions I need to see clarified. But I don't want to risk getting another thread shunted off to C&D by the Powers here, so I guess I'll have to wait and see what is answered and what is not when you guys get your FAQ up. But I do appreciate your response. It does calm one major fear I had.

So that everyone knows the Forum Moderators appear to be moving new messages about this topic over to the Complaint and Debate area. In particular CLSteve could you please go there and respond to some of what is posted there. --I am not objecting or challenging their right to do so I am simply informing so that others can know where to look.--

JeffH and ScottA, This is a problem for me. If you're moving messages I'm missing them. I am incredibly swamped and am trying to apease everyone. With the daily work that I already have going 12 hours or more it's difficult to read all these threads in one place, let alone several. If you could make an exception and leave the messages here for a while it would help me out a great deal. Thanks

Don't worry about it Steve, what was moved was pure C&D material.

Don't worry about it Steve, what was moved was pure C&D material.<<< In your opinion. And I've never done anything in my life that was "pure." :-0

"Casamerica, I would consider 4 or 5 installs reasonable and would not want to prevent uou from doing that if needed." - clsteve I'm not casamerica, but I don't feel a 4 or 5 install limit reasonable before regresistering a product. If I buy it, and I purchase a legetimate serial nuumber with the copy that I just shelled out what, $250+ for... then I should be able to install it/unistall it/reinstall it to my little hearts content. I just went through a spate of problems on my workstation that required not one, not two, but FIVE reformats and two boot drive replacements to sort out. If any of the programs that I'm having to reinstall had a 4 install limit to aggravate me on top of the hardware headaches, they'd be coasters right now and I'd be on the phone to a software company biting chunks out of someone. We [the purchasers "we"] do not spend upwards of $200 on software for the purposes of purchasing hassle and aggravation. If a software companies protection scheme makes it more of a headache to keep the product operating than normal computer problems already are - I'll look for another tool that does the job without the headaches. If you honestly think that incorporating a trojan virus in the software is going to prevent warez, someone is deluding themselves. All you'll do is alienate your loyal consumer base. You'll slow down software crackers minimally if at all.

DITTO!!!!! I am sorry to be rude or accusatory, but to me this copy protection scheme smells strongly of professional business consultant, or of someone trying to sell protection schemes, and not at all of someone who knows much about being an ordinary hobby and small business computer user. I suspect that CL have been misled by some visiting bunch of professional consultants who are out largely for profit. I don't blame CL: business rep types can be very persuasive. It was so with the "Sun" computer firm's logo: Sun ran a competition among its staff, and the logo was invented by a man in its packing department; but after that, a bunch of professional business consultants charged Sun over $10,000 merely to tell them to have that logo blue and standing on one corner. I don't know what heated online discussions like this are happening on other Poser and Bryce related email groups and forums across the internet, and in personal emails, but I suspect that it is a lot. CL should pull out of any agreement to use that copy protection, or at least be propared to have it go so badly wrong in PPP that they will have to drop it for Poser 5. To me, in police work there is no magic wand and no substitute for the "man on the beat"; in anti-warez policing there is no substitute for endlessly persistenly patrolling the web for warez sites and having them one by one closed down. And as regards trying to stop casual copying or installing on several computers: it happens, it has always happened, and it won't be stopped without such severe measures that it will discourage users. To many people, $500 is a lot of money, and likely very namy sales of Poser etc happen only because several people can club together to buy a copy, and if they couldn't copy or multi-install, that sale wouldn't have happened.

Or else, someone loads from a friend's copy, tries it, likes it, and because of the nuisances of not having a manual and not having the CD-ROM to hand, goes out and buys his own copy of the program after all.