Hello, I am curious if Renderostiy could set up a poll on the new security issue for Poser 5, if Poser 5 is as big an upgrade as Poser 4 was to Poser 3. - I would never buy poser 5 with the security features. - I would proably not buy poser 5 with the security features, but want information. - I want more information, but may or may not buy it. - I would likely buy poser 5 with the security features as described. - I would buy poser 5 no matter what. People may complain about the mob mentality, but it is the mob that buys the program. If Curious Lab will loose 200+ of heavy customers with security features, it may not be a good thing.

Why am I under the eiree suspiction that there will be 300 threads attached to this post? ..->[ aMP-3 ]<-.. .."What's your world look like?"

Considering that the number of people who post here represents only a small percentage of the total community it looks like CL has a big problem on their hands. I for one already have a program that uses this kind of security and it is a pain in the a#*. Those of us who work on computers on a daily basis already have more than enough to deal with as it is. And I resent being hasseled by a product because someone else has been naughty. At some point you have to draw a line with what you will put up with. Hopefully CL will think about this and won't cross that line. I for one won't pay for someone elses dirty deeds.

I honestly don't understand what the problem is here. Companies institute this sort of copy protection all of the time. We (a company of one) have: -World Construction Set - comes with a dongle (costs about $650) -LightWave - comes with a dongle and you need a registration number (costs about $2000) -Mimic - Poser plugin that requires the CD in the drive EVERY time you run it (cost about $180?) -Onyx Tree Pro - comes with a dongle and you need a registration number (costs about $500) -RPC Lightwave plugin - you need a registration number and it will only work with THAT machine (cost about $200) -assorted Lightwave plugins - many are attached to the LW dongle and are VERY difficult to switch to another dongle should the original one fail(check out Dynamic-Realities) -Poser 4 & ProPack (cost about $220 & $150) The dongle breaks - it can take a LONG time to get the replacement. The registration number can also be a pain to get as well. These programs listed above are EXPENSIVE. Poser 4 and the ProPack are quite a bit less - but for what they were designed to do they do it VERY well. It's not easy to create human models. I work mainly in Lightwave and it's great to go into Poser and modify characters and bring them into Lightwave - and now with the ProPack, integration is significantly easier. Now imagine you are one of the 25 employees at Curious Labs and you feel that unless you deter (somehow) piracy or even slow it down - you won't be around to implement the next version of Poser or the Pro Pack? I think I would want to implement some sort of copy protection - something that wouldn't double the price of the software. I doubt that there is really anyone out there if faced with this situation who would say NO to copy protection. Concerning the problems that many here may have about "not really owning the software since CL has the key" - it's the same with alot of high-end software. And if CL does end up going out of business, Steve Yatson of CL has already said: "I have already stated elsewhere on this forum, and we will publicly state on our Web Site that if something happens to CL we will post a free updater to eliminate the copy protection." Steve Yatson, Product Manager, Curious Labs. The e-mailing for a registration number is a minor irritation - one that many companies have instituted for a VERY LONG TIME; once again, my humble opinion. We can all continue we these sort of threads but the fact remains that every software manufacturer has to deal with piracy one way or another. The protection that Curious Labs has decided on (IMHO) is not "over-the-top" or uncalled for - they feel that they need to do something. It's just what they've decided to do. Would I prefer no copy protection? YES! Will I stop buying their product BECAUSE of the copy protection? NO! Every one will have to decide on their own what they intend to do. I'm used to this sort of annoyance with other software - it's because of the world we live in. Why should Curious Labs be any different? Until the human race becomes completely trustworthy and honest it probably won't change. Now anyone have any idea when that will happen?

HERE..HERE.!! Very Well said.

But what have been the actual benefits of those different copy protection systems? Have they been cracked or not? If they have been, then the companies have not benefited and their users have suffered, or at least, been inconvenienced in the way you describe.

Maya Unlimited is a 16.000$ program with probably the best security features found on any program and there are still cracks for it on the net. The only people these features cause problems for are the paying customers. I work for a very spesialized software maker that creates programs for the maritime industry, and know that an uncrackable software protection scheme is a myth. Can anyone here name a program that has not been cracked? I know our company's software has been pirated but we are sticking to the serial nr. and name setup simply because 1)we know no matter how complicated you make the protection it's defeatable. 2) The costs outweigh the returns 3)You wind up with a lot of pissed off clients on the telephone Need I say more?

It could be that some people subconsciously think:- - Better security of cars means less cars get broken into. - Therefore better security of Maya (or whatever) means that fewer crackers manage to crack Maya successfully. But that analogy doesn't work. One broken-into car is one car and remains one car. One cracked copy of Maya (or whatever) can be easily copied and recopied and rerecopied and is soon all over the world via the internet and people with CD-writers passing CD-ROM's about. And after that has happened the only sensible course for the package's legitimate authors is to get rid of the now purposeless software lock, as after that (keeping the software lock to stop home copying and multiple installation from one CD-ROM) would merely benefit the professional warez sellers.

Okay. 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! 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.

Possibly. Multi-installation has been around since Commodore Pets were the newest thing, and I see no point trying to stop it now except to waste ammunition and make work for the field hospital. We don't want such things as the baseball-type "three loadings from that copy of Poser and then it is dead" or the nuisance inflicted on people who don't have internet access and are overseas. Or refusing to run if the system configuration changes in case it is a different computer. What happens if I install it on my desktop and my laptop, and I never let anyone else use either, so the "one user" rule is still satisfied? And, as I wrote elsewhere, a laptop's configuration often changes several times a week: zipdrive connected or not, printer connected or not, external mouse connected or not. And if I buy a new laptop, my Poser would be up the swanny and I would have to buy another copy of it and the delay and nuisance finding a shop which was selling it then. Oh well, put up with Poser 4.0.3's bugs and limitations forever, or "the trail and the packhorse again", write my own program to do Poser's job, same as I found no 2D graphics displayer / editer satisfactory and so I wrote my own, and before that I wrote my own Emacs-type DOS text editor called AAEMACS.

Just think about it. For one extra task to complete (ie. register via e-mail) That is likely true for the majority, normal people with one computer, which is a desktop, and on the internet, and in the USA, and they never change their system's configuration. Not everybody is like that.

System configuration? As far as I can tell, and taking into account my other programs that use a registration code assigned to my computer, configuration has nothing to do with it. I can move, secondary and tertiary hard drives, zip drives, CD-Roms.... anything - it doesn't affect the programs requiring a registration code. I know that Lightwave and Onyx TreePro run fine no matter how I change the configuration. I am not completely sure but I doubt that the CL protection is any different. I may be wrong, perhaps we should ask CL to clarify? "That is likely true for the majority, normal people with one computer, which is a desktop, and on the internet, and in the USA... Not everybody is like that." And what do these people do with other programs that require that sort of start-up? If they're serious about using the program then they will "bite the bullet" and do the extra work. I don't like having to do it either but it is a fact of life. Perhaps we should ask CL to have a toll free number to register for those who do not have internet access? That would solve that particular problem.

have a toll free number What if he lives e.g. in Europe or Japan? What times of what days will this number be manned? How long will people have to wait to be attended to? Etc.

Okay Anthony, how about the rest of the post? And as I said, other software manufacturers have had similar systems implemented for a very long time. Does that stop their users from using the software? I sincerely doubt that people outside the US DON'T use Lightwave or Onyx TreePro or Archvisions LW RPC plugin simply because they have to get a registration code. That is an excuse in this "have to have it right now" world. They waited a short time for delivery of the product they can wait another short time for the registration code - or call in the middle of the night (or whenever) while CL is open for business. And if they don't have a phone, well, they probably don't have a computer. I have a friend in the Phillipines that bought Onyx TreePro a few months ago. He called them during their business hours and got the registration number. He only just got an internet connection. The fact is, if you're really into using the software, you'll go the extra nine yards!

It might not stop them from using software, but you get to a point where you make a mental list of priorities. If I have to choose between Poser and Lightwave...believe me it's not going to be Poser. Sorry I'm sick of dongles and all the related crap. Every time I reformat I will NOT go through this. I'll hone it down to 1 or 2 or 3 programs and dump the rest figuring I'm cutting my losses (my time IS valuable). I'm not going the extra 9 yards for 35 programs.

If that is the case movida, then it appears that you aren't really into using the software. Find another program that does similar - or even better than Poser (if there is one) and I'd bet it has (or will have) copy protection out the wazoo. Pretty soon every program around will have some sort of copy protection - whether it works or not - to stop the casual copying and make it one step harder for the crackers to crack. So YOU won't go through that every time you reformat. Well, I will because to me it's not a great hassle - it's a minor annoyance. I do understand why you're "sick of dongles and all the related crap." I don't particularly like them either. But unfortuately in the real world there are dishonest people who steal from the honest and hard-working among us. To offer no copy protection at all in my opinion is ludicrous. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens to Curious Labs after they begin releasing Poser and the PP with the registration key. My guess is that they'll be fine - because there will be people like me who understand why they are doing it, sympathize with their reasoning and will continue to buy the software as long as they put their hearts into it and make it better - regardless of whether I like going the extra 9 yards (or two minutes to send them an e-mail for the registration key) or not!

Patronize all you want to megalodon, the point is, there is nothing unique about me. I'm fed up which means probably 80% of paying customers are fed up. We ALL know that software protection schemes are a myth. Who's kidding who?

Megalodon wrote: and make it one step harder for the crackers to crack That may mean that fewer crackers crack it, but it's only got to be cracked once and copying that one cracked copy does the rest.

Movida - it was not my intention to patronize you and I apologize since that is how I apparently came across. The point I was trying to make is that more and more manufacturers are implementing some sort of software protection. It is becoming a fact of life. Newtek and Discreet and Archvision (etc.) all have it and although we complain about the dongles we live with it. We use the software because it's great software. I'll use Poser and the PP because I think it's great software - even though I may complain about the copy protection. And it is MY opinion that there are more people who just recognize this as just one more layer of hassle they'll have to deal with and will still buy the software - not the other way around. But as I said, we'll see what happens. Anthony - an incredible amount of a new software title is sold in the first few weeks of its release. If it takes one more week to crack it, that may be one more week for sales. And you're right, it only has to be cracked once - but it takes time for that cracked copy to make its rounds. I personally don't think it hurts the sales that much because as they have said in other threads: most of the people that use these warez are people who would probably have never used the product in the first place. What I think this copy protection WILL do is stop the casual copying. One friend bought Poser and the other one would - but his friend copies it for him so there is a sale lost. I know this happens because I've seen it firsthand. Were there this copy protection in place that scene wouldn't have been able to happen. It's obvious we all have different opinions and I'm glad we're able to state them. Only time will tell if Curious Labs is doing the right thing or not. My opinion is yes; the two of you say no. We'll see.

What I think this copy protection WILL do is stop the casual copying. It can only do that if it automatically tells CL the configutration and serial number of each computer that each copy of Poser is loaded on, to make a list to compare with later. That is spyware and probably in breach of the UK Data Protection Act.

Anthony, what if the security program is not transmitting actual configuration information and serial numbers, but rather a number based on them? Something like the last 4 digits of your hard drive's serial number, multiplied by your processor speed, divided by (I dunno) the amount of L2 cache you have (or something like that). This would give everyone their own unique code, that could "survive" a hard drive re-format and yet this information could not be reverse-calculated by CL unless they already knew two of the three variables.

That's just a guess at they way they might be handling this I have no idea. But if they A) based the configuration information on major internal hardware components, so unplugging a zip drive or adding RAM wouldn't effect it AND B) handled the code in such a way that they could not reverse-calculate the number into any serial numbers or configuration info, then this is something that I personally would be fine with. And I don't think it would violate the Data Protection Act.

Well, they can stop the casual copying all right. And along with it they'll lose all the customers they would have had, if those "casual" copiers had played with the software long enough to know they wanted it. 30 day evaluation copies are nonsense. People don't have time enough to see if they'll REALLY use it in that time. What they're trying to protect is their sales of software to impulse, uninformed, misdirected, mislead consumers. If someone KNOWS they'll use the software (and hasn't discovered a few weeks or months later that they'd made a mistake and don't need it) they'll buy it. They'll buy it again and again. They're not really interested in SATISFIED customers (and this isn't directed at CL here...it's the industry in general and please don't tell me about perfect worlds or people better than I am)... I wish I could get a 50% refund on every piece of software I've purchased that performed at 50% of the level it was advertised to perform at. End of rant

Movida, I know I must be wrong but the way you worded your reply has me (and probably everyone else) believing that you advocate "casual copying." It gives the "friend" "time" to play with the software. I believe that you are 100% wrong that CL will lose "all the customers they would have had, if those "casual" copiers had played with the software long enough to know they wanted it" First of all it's ILLEGAL. Even when you "casual copy" it's a warez product - the difference is they don't get it via the web. "30 day evaluation copies are nonsense"? How long would you like? 60 days? 180 days? Hey, how about a year? Lightwave hasn't had a demo yet look where Newtek is. They don't have any problem in sales. World Construction Set, Onyx TreePro, Sound Forge etc., etc. do NOT have demos, yet people keep buying the products and they keep getting upgrades. And what does that have to do with CL anyway? And what would satisfy customers? Software for free? And yes, it would be nice to get money back on software that didn't perform up to what it was advertised to do. That is just one of the things that we live we, unfortunately. If we were really truly annoyed with the lack of performance of a product - we could probably spend an incredible amount of time writing to the software provider, etc. and end up getting our money back. But that really doesn't have anything to do with the topic of copy protection anyway.

Glad you brought Lightwave up. It's pirated all over the net, and in your own words look where Newtek is, gee how'd that happen??? (I bought Lightwave and will again). Casual copying doesn't affect me at all. Nobody I know cares about graphics software, I'm floating all alone in my own sea. Nobody I know even cares about computers. So much for that insinuation. (I'm posting from the United States where in theory anyway, we have freedom of speech and innocent until proven guilty and blah blah blah). The point I'm to make to you (and of course, the unseen millions g) is that software protection schemes do not stop anything, only make it more inconvenient for the people who do pay for the software, and create a few jobs along the line (which possibly is the driving factor). I will buy Lightwave upgrades (and hopefully it'll be the only dongle I ever have to deal with). If it was my product do you really think I'd care if it were pirated...hell I'd be flattered. I'm glad you so willingly accept paying money for products that do not perform...it rather upsets me (I have to work for mine...at a day job). I'm glad you have time to burn calling and getting serial numbers everytime you reformat or build a new machine. Kind of gets on my nerves because I have a time schedule and do this in my "spare" time. Let's do talk about honesty here. Do you really think that when buggy software is released it comes as a suprise to all? When someone takes someone's money and hands them a product that they KNOW won't perform (even if the patch is in the works) that's pretty dishonest don't you think? Or is this honesty we're discussing here relegated to certain societal classes? i.e., the "buyers" I paid $300 for WIN2K and it won't install or run with 1GIG of RAM on my machine (768MB is ok though). Linux had no problem (thought I'd beat you to the "it's your machine" argument...Linux runs pretty close to hardware). I'd like to do a study of the financial growth of software companies and graph it vs. the amount of pirating of their software. I suspect it's a directly proportional relationship but I'm not that interested and it's a hell of a job, and not something I'd undertake just to prove a point that nobody would pay attention to anyhow. This whole discussion is for naught because it doesn't matter what I think or say because they'll do it anyway and I'm not buying anymore dongle crap...my mobo will develop varicrose veins with all these freaking dongles hanging off of it.

Movida, -Yes, lightwave is pirated all over the place and Newtek is doing fine. This says NOTHING about casual copying. I bet you wouldn't have as many sales if there were NO copy protection with Lightwave at all and the people who don't know about the warez sites COULDN'T make copies. -I wasn't insinuating that YOU copy software and give it to YOUR friends; doing it and saying it's okay are two different things. -As I said earlier, software protection (in my opinion) DOES stop casual copying. Just because YOU have no friends who are into graphic software doesn't mean that there are 50 other people in your neighborhood who are - and know each other. - And what if Newtek decides to implement a similar protection scheme? What if you have to call in every time you reformat your machine? Will you still buy it? -"If it was my product do you really think I'd care if it were pirated...hell I'd be flattered." I should be so lucky too. But what if your livelihood were at stake? What if you needed that software income to survive (ie, make a decxent living?) -There probably isn't one piece of software that performs perfectly as advertised. There is always a glitch or a bug - although obviously some more so than others. If you can't find it someone else has. If we had to return every piece of software that didn't perform preceisely as advertised we wouldn't have any software. And I like Poser 4 and PP - they both do what I need them to do. Sure there are glitches, but they will be fixed. Nothing in this world is perfect. -Time? I just started my own business and I HAVE NO FREE/SPARE TIME at all. I check out Renderosity just to take a break. So it suffices to say that time for me is a precious commodity. I don't need to waste it but I understand that companies like CL feel they need to protect their investment. I will spend the extra MINUTE (yes, minute, if that) e-mailing them for the registration number. And if every piece of software ends up like this, well, it's something we'll all have to live with if we want to use the software. As they (CL) stated, the software will be fully functional for two weeks anyway. What happens if/when all software becomes (as so many are predicting) "borrowed" over the internet - you just use it when you need it and pay for it when you use it? I hope this doesn't happen but it may. Then where will we be? And you thought calling or e-mailing for a registration number was bad...