Hello, A response to the flurry of questions and concerns surrounding the Poser 5 installation process is in order. According to most EULAs, software is something like renting a sofa: You pay for the privilege of having a piece of furniture in your house subject to certain conditions, however the sofa remains the propery of the rental company. The software company retains full ownership of the code sitting on your computer. This is hardly unique to Poser: Read the EULAs for all of "your" software and you'll see the same thing repeated over and over again. Your daily life is rife with security measures designed to keep people from stealing your property (door locks, window bars, alarms, access cards, passwords, firewalls, virus scanners, etc.). Crime is something we must all live with. You complain about being honest people who have to pay for crime by being forced to register Poser 5. It's a valid complaint and I personally agree with you in principle. The mere concept that honest people must alter their behavior and spend resources to guard against crime is abominable. Here again, Poser is very far from unique: Ever get a key duplicated? Talk into an intercom before being buzzed into an apartment? Pay your insurance bill (some 20% of which goes to nothing but covering the cost of fraud)? Go through airport security, etc. What's the first thing many of us do when we move into a new place? Change the locks? Also, didn't you have to register in order to be able to use this very site? The point is self-evident: Your daily life is filled with safeguards of varying degrees of effectiveness, many of them far more repetitive than occasionally having to register software. Here's how the Poser 5 registration process works and the most common special cases: When you install Poser 5, you will be required to input your contact information and serial number. The installer generates a unique Challenge Code that requires an equally unique Response Code to unlock. You can register online via the Web or via email, phone, fax, snail mail, carrier pigeon, smoke signal, etc. Curious Labs values our customers' privacy and takes steps to safeguard that information. For example, we do NOT sell your information. The entire process takes only a minute or two. I myself have used it numerous times during testing and it has worked flawlessly every time. The Challenge Code is tied to the machine you are installing Poser on. Thus, the Challenge Code used for Computer A will not work for Computer B. What about upgrading your computer? Provided you use the same hard drive, I don't think you'll need to re-register (but don't quote me on that). What if you change hard drives? No sweat. Simply send us your new Challenge Code, confirm your registration information, and you'll get a new Response Code. Think of it like locking yourself out of your car: The locksmith will verify that you have a legitimate reason to enter the vehicle, open the door, tip his hat, and send you on your way with the absolute minimum hassle. What about multiple installations? The EULA clearly states that you can install Poser 5 on more than one machine at a time provided that only one copy of our software is running at any one time. No problem. Simply install and register each new installation. In fact, you have a certain number of "free" installations before any flags are raised. And if you exceed that number? Contact Tori (Starlet) with your registration information. Shemay ask a few questions about why you're installing Poser so many times, verify your information, and issue a new Response Code. Got a desktop and a laptop? Go for it! Just please don't have Person A running Poser 5 on the desktop while you or Person B is using Poser on the laptop. We built in this leeway precisely to address your very legitimate concerns. What if Curious Labs closes down? I truly don't see that happening in the forseeable future! However, Curious Labs has previously stated on this forum that we will not leave our customers hanging should this occur. If we do go out of business, you will still be able to use all of our secured products. What exact form will that take? I'm honestly not sure, but our commitment remains. As you can see, we have implemented a balanced system that will protect our investment while minimizing the impact on you, our honest customers. I believe this post addresses the concerns I've seen raised in previous threads and hope you can see that our measures are far from Draconian. :-) Anthony Hernandez Curious Labs

I came so close to pre-ordering day before yesterday and I decided to ask about this first...I am so glad I did because I won't be purchasing P5. I am all for security but I have never (and never will) purchase software that won't allow me to install it on my desktop as well as my laptop. Nor will I purchase software that allows me to install it on both but dictates when I can use it on them... nor will I purchase software that I have to contact the company after I install it before I can use it..every time I have to reformat....sorry but if consumers don't draw the line somewhere, I'll have to contact Ford Motor company everytime I want to drive my car to verify I am the owner of it and have the right to drive it.....

Hi Anthony After the last debate about this type of protection in the service pack for PP, CL pulled the plug on it and Steve asked us users to report warez sites and help CL fight warez. Well I kept up my end of the bargain and went hunting on the net and reported several sites and even one place selling pirated copies for 50 bucks a pop. I doubt I am the only one who reported warez to CL. Forgive me but I am feeling a little betrayed right now, I made an effort to help CL and wound up getting paid back by this protection scheme. When I bought the Avatar Lab, I was slightly irritated when I saw this scheme implimented there too. But the worst part was the fact that my work machine is not connected to the internet, and when I mailed CL from another PC for the code, it didn't even work. This was disappointing, espescially since Steve had invited me to meet him at CL's Atmosphere site. Yes I could have called long distance to the U.S. late at night or e-mailed support and complained and waited a few days, but at that point I just gave up. I'm not gonna burn my bridges and say I'm never going to upgrade to P5, I'm just not going to now. Though I do appreciate CL's other effort to please it's customers any all of the employees posting to the various forums keeping us up to date, I still fell this is very poor payback to loyal customers. :-( David Lara

From Microsoft's EULA Q&A: The End-User License Agreement (EULA) for many Microsoft application software products contains the following sentence: "The primary user of the computer on which the SOFTWARE PRODUCT is installed may make a second copy for his or her exclusive use on a portable computer." If your EULA contains this sentence, then, subject to the conditions mentioned, you may make a second copy of the software. Note that you must be the primary user of the computer on which the software is installed. The primary user is the individual who uses the computer most of the time it is in use. Only that individual is entitled to use the second copy. Furthermore, the software must be installed on the local hard disk of your computer; you are not entitled to make and use a second copy on your portable computer if you run the primary copy of the software from a network server. Finally, only one secondary copy may be made; you may install this copy on more than one portable computer. Please note that many Microsoft products are copy protected and it will not be technically possible to make a second copy of the disk. FROM APPLE: This License allows you to install and use the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled or Apple-licensed computer at a time. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time. You may make one copy of the Apple Software (excluding the Boot ROM code) in machine-readable form for backup purposes only. The backup copy must include all copyright information contained on the original. Except as expressly permitted in this License, you may not decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, rent, lease, loan, sublicense, distribute or create derivative works based upon the Apple Software in whole or part or transmit the Apple Software over a network or from one computer to another. This license allow you to install or operate the Apple Software only on a computer system that came bundled with a licensed version of the Mac OS at the time of original manufacture. By your standard, Dizzie, it seems you're out of both an operating system and most of the software you use. As I said, the Poser EULA is far from unique.

ahh man with all the trouble I have with my dam HD and haveing to reformat...I dunno. Am I gonna have to contact you all everytime I reformt? In the last week that was 5 diffrent times. :( I really want poser 5, but I now I just dont know.

Reformatting the drive should not require re-registration.

Thank god! Im haveing a hell of a time with my dam HD. :(

Hi Mr.Hernandez,

Thank you for the information.

Warm Regards

I plan on having it on my desktop and laptop, now at least I know I can. Yippee...Sharen

Just to back Anthony up (although he may not like the storm that this brings): My God, all this complaining over something that is a MINOR inconvenience on a very few occassions. This issue will only impact you when you first install the software and (maybe) if you make enough changes to your system and/or reinstall the software, or if you reinstalll your entire system. Otherwise it is a ONE TIME THING. The only valid complaint is "what if CL goes under", which of course something will have to be done. People, get used to it. All software companies will be following the lead set by Microsoft. For those of us with legitimate copies of XP, we already have to deal with "checking in with Microsoft" and this is after making only a few changes to our systems (both hardware and software changes). Other companies are taking the lead from Microsoft and doing the same thing. You may try to "vote with your dollar" and not support the software, but eventually you will have to use something that uses this or a similar method since the pace of software development marches on. Face it, with the tougher economic times right now, and the hysteria with which content companies are complaining to Congress (in the US) about lost revenues to piracy, this is not going away. If it is not this method, it will be another. Companies will continue to try all sorts of schemes to protect their content from piracy. Of course it will always be a losing cause, but they have to do something. Also, CL's EULA is very similar to that of almost every other software package out there. As Anthony posted, check copies of your own. They are not asking for anything too unreasonable, and they are being generous in allowing us multiple installs (although single use at a time) of the application). And, no, I am not a CL employee. I am a realist. - Ray

I was just going to ask about that. I just had to do a format c: and reinstall my win98 plus Poser, propack, etc. This happens to me a LOT and if I'm going to have to contact the company every time, this is going to be a major PITA. So far, since May, I have had to re-install Poser a total of 5 times and my OS twice.

Bug, you're right, except that Steve did say that security measures would be implemented in future products. The original Avatar Lab installer did have a few issues that have long since been fixed. The electronic Pro Pack package is secured in the same manner as Poser 5. I receive tech support emails and have seen no installation/registration issues. Further, I have seen no issues with Poser 5. I should also add that the registration process includes a grace period, which means you aren't stuck if you can't reach us immediately. Again, we are going out of our way to make this process just as painless as possible. And it's pretty danged painless. I also receive and act on piracy reports. I cannot speak for individual reports except to offer our sincerest thanks to everyone who tipped us off to theft. I can, however, say that the overall volume of piracy reports did not increase. Meantime, piracy remains one of our largest challenges. I am sorry that anyone feels betrayed. That said (removing my CL hat), I personally feel betrayed at having my hard work and that of people I care about rewarded by being stolen.

Overall, it sounds a lot less involved and inconvenient than (for instance) mailing in a change of address card to the local PostOffice & waiting for your mail to catch up to you. Thanks Anthony, I appreciate the clarification.

LOL Kate - I thought I was the only one who knows what PITA means :-).

Reformatting the drive should not require re-registration.

I doubt that this wouldn't require re-registration. My P4 sits on it's own drive, D. Each time I made format C the registry is totally cleaned. Starting Poser after I made format C it asks for the serial number for P4 and PP, just like all the other software that is installed on the other three drives of my PC. Why should P5 do anything different from that - or does this mean I can make use of my old challenge code in this case?

Friederike

Here we go again...I'm confused....why would a reformat NOT require a reregistration if every time you install, it creates a unique code that requires another code from CL to make the program function?

Reformatting the drive should not require re-registration. Your hard drive has a unique serial number which is often used in software key schemes like this; it does not depend on the registry or even the operating system, so you should be ok until you buy a new HD. Anthony - looking forward to registering my copy of Poser 5 by smoke signal. Will that work from the UK? :-)

I believe English Bob nailed it. I stress I am not 100% sure and thus do not want to spread misinformation. I'll ask the engineers and will be glad to post any updated info if needed. Keep in mind, this is a long weekend so it may be a few days. :-) Anthony H.

"My God, all this complaining over something that is a MINOR inconvenience on a very few occassions." It may be only a minor inconvenience, but what you have to realise is that it leaves a very bad taste in the mouth. Customers are people, they aren't just statistics; they have feelings. I have every sympathy with people like Dizzie. It's not right just to dismiss such feelings out of hand. In the case of Microsoft (but not CL), these increasing "security" measures have the semblance of being the thin end of a wedge. Get people to accept one level of intrusion and then impose on them a little bit more, and a little bit more. Under such circumstances, consumers have every right to complain about something minor, because many "minor inconveniences" add up to a major imposition eventually.

My aim was to show that Poser is not unique, not to dismiss anyone.

OK ... I understand about those registration unique key and it's necessity - it's OK if a company try to protect itself ... but it is also right that also the customer should be able to do this and that thing. So - one or two questions: First: I'm working with Poser I'm working on a PC that is NOT connected with the internet (YES, exactly for THAT reason noone can maybe work with my PC-datas) ... So, am I somehow able to install (and work) with Poser on a PC that is NOT connected with the internet ?? Second: When do I have to ask for the registration key ?? What if CL is not available (maybe during weekend, maybe just because of the fact I'm 8 hours away from CL) ?? Third: I'm using more than one PC's at the same time 'cause of the simple fact one PC is rendering and on the other I'm (let's say) doing poses - Would such a registration key implemented with P5 make that impossible ?? - Am I wrong when I'm saying I bought a licence for myself and then I should be able to work with more than one instance of a programm simultaneously ?? If so, so where is the sense then to store maybe a common runtime folder in a network ?? (OK, I know storage reasons, but if I want to work like I want, do I have to buy 2 or more versions of Poser5, just to be able to doing this ??)

I assume Dizzie is perhaps running Linux and has virtually little if any commercial software written in the last 10 years (or more) on his/her system. I sympathize. I haven't upgraded my Windows Media Player because I don't want the new DRM control, despite the fact that I've never downloaded a commercial MP3 or video and don't plan to. I don't have XP because 2000 works fine, but I will eventually upgrade to Microsoft's next OS which will undoubtedly have some form of security built in. The product is more valuable to me than avoiding inconvenience. The point is that software protection is reality, it is not going away. To think that CL wouldn't use it is completely unrealistic. They may be nice folks, they may be more warm and fuzzy than Microsoft but they're in business to make money like everyone else in the world. If you want this to go away then you'll have to come up with a new economic system first. Technology is wonderful but it comes with a pricetag. Ask the people who pressed vinyl records for a living. We can try to minimize the negative impact on our lives, but at a certain point, you become like the apocryphal workers throwing wodden shoes into the machinery in attempt to stave off modernization. Great idea but it didn't work. If anyone is interested, I have an AMD K6-350 and two 100 MB drives I'll sell cheap, including a copy of Poser 2 and Windows 3.11 on diskettes. No copy protection, no activation, no hassles.

I agree with Phantast. Every "minor inconvenience" eventually adds up into a major intrusion. CL has an opprotunity with every new release to play leader instead of follower to trends, as does any software company. Instead of being a leader and saying they're not going to insult their legetimate customers or subject them to additional hoops to jump through, looks like ya'll are doing the "We're just following MicroSoft's lead like everyone else, and everyone else is doing it so live with it" bit. A software purchaser pays good money for the useage of the software package - in the case of graphics software, anywheres from $300+ to 3 or 4 thousand dollars plus - and recieves a CD, and a serial number unique to them. At those kind of prices, insert CD, input serial number, run program is a reasonable expectation for the purchaser. Not "install program, insert serial #, login on web, get authorization code, input code, email company repeatedly when code fails.... [As I've seen happen on numerous ocassions]". Do I think that a software company has the right to protect themselves from piracy? Of course. Do I also think that software piracy is a cost of doing business in these days and times for a software company? You bet I do. Do I think that legetimate purchasers need to accept being subjected to additional hoops and proceedures to protect your software from piracy, over and above the money they're already paying for the right to unpack it from the box and install it? Let me think about that one. Ummm... Nope. It's your cost of doing business, not theirs. Live with it. And find a way to deal with piracy that doesn't punish your customers.... and that doesn't automaticlly assume that your customers are theives, which is what you're telling them with "authorization schemes". Following MicroSoft's lead is for sheep.

Well, at least there is no hardware dongle, like the poor Lightwave users have. I used to own Lightwave, and If the dongle became damaged or accidentally fried (as it did in my case ), the software would not work. It was a case of send it back and wait for a replacement. A new one took 3 weeks to arrive.

Personally, I think Maxon have the right idea with Cinema 4D XL 7, the 3D software I now use. You only have to register once, by email or post, and you are sent a permanent serial number that can be used no matter how many times you reinstall, change your PC or format your hard drive. And this software is far more expensive than Poser 5, and I would have thought, be more attractive to piracy problems. Just my personal opinion.

Maybe it is a sign of the times, that we now have to accept dial home software, remote registration, key code interrogation and all the other warez bullshit prevention stuff. It doesn't work, it'll never work, why bother? Poser 5 like all the other software out there will be cracked, probably within a few days of it's release so really, all the complaining isn't going to achieve anything. CL have and will continue to utilise these measures as will other companies. Meanwhile the code breakers will continue to release itsy little fixes to stop the nonsense. Those who want P5 and don't want the hassle of all this contact CL stuff. Fine, wait a few and download the patch. Everyone else can carry on with their lives happy in the knowledge that any time this security becomes a real PITA they can remove it. Personally I won't bother with P5 but only partly because of this security thing. My computer is in a constant state of flux. I move and change parts every couple of months. I've had seven hard drives in the last eight months and I've moved software from one drive to another. If P5 is going to make me dial home every time I upgrade or change something then quite frankly I don't want or need that extra hassle. I haven't purchased XP for the exact same reason though that has been cracked and was prior to it's release. Security in software is there to make the shareholders feel better, the programmers feel superior, the company execs feel safe. It's bullshit, it's always been bullshit, simply because there are too many people out there who fancy their programming skills and have something to prove. It's a shame that honest customers have to jump through an ever growing series of hoops and obstacles just to use something they've paid for when someone dishonest prat can carry on without a care in the world. Poser 4 is cracked Avatar Lab is cracked Pro Pack is cracked Pro Pack upgrades are cracked. Will Poser 5 be any different to those who don't give a damn? I seriously doubt it. Such is life neh? Serial number and activation code is no different to a Cdilla or FlexLM dongle. It doesn't and won't work to stop piracy. End of story. Live with it, deal with it, stop screwing honest customers in the ass with bullshit excuses.

The installer generates a unique Challenge Code that > requires an equally unique Response Code to unlock. Anthony, is this a one-time response or must I enter it each time I start Poser? Michael

I think most people in this thread are forgetting something: software protection doesn't work. I, and probably many other legitimate buyers, wouldn't be so upset about this scheme if it actually did prevent piracy. But as stated in previous threads, all it does is incovenience honest buyers. The pirates won't have to go through any of this and will have a better and easier time installing P5. As far as this being the "coming thing," it may or may not be. I think things like this push people to piracy who normally wouldn't do it. I know a computer vendor who gives away his copy of XP with every computer he sells so his customers don't have to register. He's never done that before. If people get mad enough software sales will plummet but software use won't.

Ooops! Cross-post with Questor.

All I know is I stopped using all Microsoft products (Except the OS) because of this registration scheme. I upgrade my machine once every quarter (Gotta love my job) and having to call Microsoft to activate the software every time because I had long since used up my 'grace' installs was a complete PITA. A 5 minute phone call might not mean much, but when you multiply it by 8 programs and being questioned like a criminal was too much. I'm sorry CL decided to go this method. I pre-ordered Poser 5 and I will let it go through, but the first time I have to call to re-register it, it won't be reinstalled. There were better methods of copy protection out there than this and this is a very poor mechanism to do it. BTW, people crack Microsoft products all the time now with their activation scheme. So much for this method working. JDexter

I feel I have to post here for one reason only. I think I was the one the brought up the scenario of CL possibly going out of business sometime in the future. Face it, no one wants to believe they will but nearly all companies do at one point or another. I'm glad to know that there is some plan in place to handle this situation if it ever occures, not having the details on this plan is good as it shouldn't really be discussed or released until such a time as it is needed. As for this kind of copy protection in general; it wouldn't be a problem if it really did stop piracy as was mentioned earlier in this post. Keep in mind that under the hood this is nothing more than a function call, usually returning either a 1 or 0. A small edit to this can force that call to always return 1 and pass a registration regardless of the number entered. With this in mind, the protection isn't any different from any other registration scheme. A cracker only needs to force a pass on this one function whether it be a challenge-response, straight serial number or hardware checking form of copy protection. It doesn't make it harder for the crackers to pirate, it only makes it more obvious to the paying customer and a bit more inconveniant. Now with all that said, I will add one more thing here that might put it all in perspective: "Locks are only there to keep honest people honest."

KattMan... research "Virtus Software" and "ConceptCad" sometimes. They used a similar PITA authorization, and then stopped production of ConceptCad and support of it without any warning to their customers... and that was a $1500 Cad/3D prog. A lot of people who didn't catch the minute blurb on it in a thread on one of the Cad forums got left with unworking copies of the prog that couldn't be reinstalled...

"The registration process includes a grace process". Does this mean we can Install and run Poser 5. before we complete the registration.? If so how long is the grace period.? Or perhaps I misunderstood the post

Well...MAYBE WE CAN ALL RELAX.... I just had a hard drive crash...am using WIN XP HOME... Installed a new hard drive....formatted and installed XP... It has to be activated...thought to myself, here goes trouble...hit the send button...it went right through, no problems...I didn't have to call anybody. So if the Poser 5 security is similar, depending on what portion of the hardware the security is keying on, it all may be a moot issue. It is a fact security measures do not work...there are cracked copies of Microsoft products, and every other product imaginable. Again, the only people annoyed and having to deal with the security measures are the honest people. The others just keep hacking away until they get what they want. Same as your house/property. Believe me, even if you have 10 locks, bars, whatever on your house, if someone wants in badly enough, and if your security is that tight it just invites entry, someone will get in. The new issue, however, is that software companies ARE NOT DOING THIS TO STOP PIRACY PER SAY....they are doing it to stop consumers, and mainly home consumer/hobbyists, from installing the software on more than one system. How many of you use an operating system such as win 98 on all machines in your house....installing it from a CD that came with perhaps the first system you bought...I"m sure nearly everyone. OR from the one copy of Win98 SE that you bought....the new MS scheme stops that type of useage...it doesn't stop piracy such as hacking, cracking etc.... Even this CL security is the same...laptop and desktop of same user..sure, but what about the system my kid uses networked to mine down the hall...can I slap it on there for him to use? Its still MY system....I wouldn't mind paying perhaps a small licensing fee to be able to use a product on all my systems, but I refuse to buy 5 copies of a program to install it on all my computers.

Ironbear, In that situation I would be breaking out my hex editors fast. A few well placed bits bypasses all registration techniques. Now for anyone wanting to know, I will not share my knowledge on how to do this with one excpetion, you already have the tools installed on your machine when you run either windows or dos. The knowledge would be aquired only by studying machine code directly. With Ironbears example it shows one reason why crackers will never be extinct. Anyone using that program is now actually using it illegally according to the EULA although they could probably win a court case stating fair use as they did have it bought and paid for, only now they need a shadier method of actually using the thing. This example also shows why I am wary of this kind of protection scheme. Legal users were the only ones hurt by this method, so in effect all they got was headaches for giving a company thier cash. If thier business relied on this application, they could have been shut down or lost even more money trying to quickly convert all of thier projects to whatever new application they decided to use.

nosfiratu: "According to most EULAs, software is something like renting a sofa: You pay for the privilege of having a piece of furniture in your house subject to certain conditions, however the sofa remains the propery of the rental company." yes, but rental company wouldn't want me to sign the agreement again when i change my fridge or pictures on the wall. and when i don't want that sofa any more, i get part of my money back. i don't think that cl will pay me back when i don't want to use poser any more. ----- nosfiratu: "Curious Labs values our customers' privacy and takes steps to safeguard that information. For example, we do NOT sell your information." you may not, it may be stolen from you (happens all the time), someone from your stuff may give it away (nothing new) or another company, which is not bound by your words of honour, may buy you and do whatever they want with your database (also nothing new). --- nosfiratu: "Your daily life is rife with security measures designed to keep people from stealing your property (door locks, window bars, alarms, access cards, passwords, firewalls, virus scanners, etc.). Crime is something we must all live with. You complain about being honest people who have to pay for crime by being forced to register Poser 5. It's a valid complaint and I personally agree with you in principle. The mere concept that honest people must alter their behavior and spend resources to guard against crime is abominable." and that's exactly why i don't want to give my data away. you are looking at it only from your point of view. there are thousands of your customers who have the same worries but no meenings or power to do something about it as you do. --- cl is one of those rare companies who are very close to their customers. or so it was. it seems as if cl is heading the same way as metacreations did - forget about friendliness, just grab the money. cl is on it's way to become just another faceless software producer who ignores their customers as long as it's alone on the market. i wouldn't consider it as any kind of proof to show my eula together with the micro$oft's or appl's. those are major players and just couldn't care less about what people think about their product. they monopolised it and customers have plain no choice but to obey. guess why mac version of p5 comes later? right. "call home" didn't work for microsoft, the number of illegal xp installations is roughly the same as with w98 or w2k. why should it work for cl?

heh heh. That's one way, Katt. ;] In that particular case though, we were both members of that particular Cad forum. My roomie and I lit up Virtus's phone lines for a week, all the way up to the VP of the marketing division, once the salesman who sold it to us professed being unable to help. They sent us two no serial, unlimited seat lisence copies just to keep our attorney from calling a second time... Don't know about you, but 2 x $1500 adds up to real money in my household. ;] It's a crying shame too: ConceptCad is probably the simplest, fast 3D architecture program I own - fantastic for doing quick architectural roughs and designs for export elsewhere. It's possibly the most used 3D modeler I own when I have a need for what it does best... Should have been a lot more popular than it was, but it's an Autodesk world out there.

Unless I'm mistaken the code is the system code for you machine, not your hard disk so there shouldn't be a problem. This is usually done to keep someone from just moving the info from the hard drive to another computer or cd. Now: I would feel better about this if I knew that CL had implemented a "crack" that could be sent by email in the case of the company's demise. No cost of shipping cd's out and I would feel better. Please work on that CL, shouldn't be that hard to create and set aside for us. I pre-ordered and I still intend to use Poser5, but it would have been professional as well as courteous to your customers if you had mentioned this before the pre-oreder information went up. Is this why you got everyone in a lather to order? Makes one wonder. Marque

Let's take this in a different direction. We all agree that a company has the right to protect thier software from illegal usage or even multiple usage by a legal user. Let's take it from the standpoint of piracy rather then consumerism. This leaves us with only the task of preventing illegal copies by a non-paying user. How would we actually prevent this? Computer scienctist have been trying to figure this one out for years with no solution. With all good intentions they have come up with thier current schemes, but have failed to actually solve the problem. SO how could we solve this in practise rather than theory? Even the best minds haven't figured it out yet. Until they do, legal users will always be the ones to suffer. Anyone that does come up with a way to do this will be a very rich man indeed.

Oh no, I,m sooo tired of this. Once again, honest people get kicked for their honesty. I was on the way to preorder P5 too, but now .. no, no support from me for this kind of reward. Like Questor and other people said, it doesn,t work and it will not work and you know that CL. So what,s your planning for real? Robert

Anthony said, "I personally feel betrayed at having my hard work and that of people I care about rewarded by being stolen." One of my co-workers, while in Gdansk actually was offered pirated copys of CBT modules that I and others at my company worked on. The thing is, we don't belive our customers betrayed us, and we would never punished our legitamate customers for someone else's underhanded actions. You might think the software company I work for is naive because we would never pull something like this. But just because Microsoft can get away with it, doesn't make it right.

Let me talk about this from a developers viewpoint and namely my own. This should not be considered a general viewpoint held by all or even most developers. When I write a program I feel I own the source code itself. I feel I own my copy of the compiled program. By this same token I feel anyone purchasing my program actually owns thier copy of the compiled program. They can do with it as they please but they only own thier one copy. The problem with this thinking is purely legal and I will break from it when the need arises. A compiled program is still nothing but source code although in a different form. Someone can actually edit the machine code and cause the program to do nearly anything the wish it to do. It also runs into the problems of rights. If you actually do own that copy, what legalities are going to prevent you from maing a copy of your owned copy and giving it to someone else? This is where I would break from it. We can go around all the legal loopholes this provides arguing that you now have a new copy you do not own or that it is simply a copy of what you own and therefore is still owned by you to give away as you wish. This tells you why the ownership is stated the way it is in nearly all software licenses. The company doesn't want to give up ownership in any fashion that will allow an individual to give away all copies for free. Software is a unique product as it is easily copied without change in quality or usability. A car is different as you can't just push a button and make an exact duplicate to give away, if you could then you would never be owning a car of any type, but I bet we would have more traffic then we do today.

My God, all this complaining over something that is a MINOR inconvenience on a very few occassions Fine. When P5 is released for the Mac, tell me how I'm supposed to install it on both my tower and my laptop. This should be interesting.

CuriousLabs got SPANKED when the ProPack was warezed. They lost a ton of money. They are desperately trying to keep this from happening again. And we need to support them. ONLY......... . . . . . . They kicked themselves in the *ss again! I would very much like to take over customer service for them. They just keep getting themselves into trouble when it's avoidable! The proper way to handle a situation like this follows: 1.)Keep the customers very intimate with the company's problems. And treat customers like partners. 2.)Once that is established, and everyone feels like a valuable part of the company. You explain that you need to implement a security system to protect the company and it's users. 3.)Then explain the protection will only be for a set period of time (something like 12 months)until the flood of orders for the new software slows down. Then customers can contact CL for a permanent serial number or patch. . It's not really that difficult of a problem to solve. You ask the users to help. And the users begrudgingly go along with the hassels for a while to do thier part. Then you reward the customer with no registration hassles after the company makes it's initial cash run. All it takes is working together as a team. And not keeping things secret until the last moment. But what do I know? I'm just some strange guy who makes dinosaurs. ;-) ScottA

So on the whole there seems to be a concensus. Anti Piracy schemes are always unpopular with legitimate users and while they may reduce the amount of piracy, they don't eliminate it. Also there is no real evidence that they generate additional sales from people who otherwise would have pirated copies of the product, and certainly not enough to counterbalance the loss of legitimate users who have been put off. And, although it may not be legal or ethical, there are certain people who use warez to like to "try before buy" their products rather than taking advantage of the return options. CL were discouraged from implementing this scheme with ProPack by reasoned arguments. I am sorry that they seem not to have taken them to heart. It will probably be as much to their own (financial) disadvantage as the purchasers. Bill PS. Schlabber, I believe it is strictly against the EULA of Poser 4, let alone Poser 5, to render on one machine while working with the main app on another, so in that respect nothing has changed. However, in the absence of network rendering or second processor support, and considering that Poser will effectively lock up your machine during renders, it would have been nice if the EULA had made a special (book analogy) exception in this case.

I understand the arguments against the security measures, however, I have received emails "out of the blue" from warez sites and most every other software company with significant investments in high quality software are moving toward the security or monitoring of the installs. There has to be an industry balance between the obvious cost of the software and the number of computers that can "house" the programs. I have had several upgrades and hard drive changes which require me to spend hours reloading the software. it becomes another step to get new permissions to install on my computers; I rearrange the software over two computers because I want to keep my software uses together....graphics as opposed to my general use; what with viruses and warez the honest computer user is put into a defensive mode over the extra work they have to do just to enjoy the investment they make in software, or at least that is how I feel. the software industry has listened to the consumers and I think that CL is not being intrusive at all. In fact I think that with an identifiable customer base it is clearly more manageable than say windows....I mean in terms of monitoring extra installs. I think we as consumers are making as much of an investment in the software as the software company is making in us so we need each other to understand the limits to our financial investments. I for one would rather put up with any hassle with contact with CL to have great value for my investment. I would like them to understand that I just cannot aford to buy x copies just so I can use the program on different machines; they have listened to that aspect it seems. What I am reading is that I can install on several machines for convenience. I read that they will be offering Multi-user licenses which I think is excellent so a company can afford to have several people working on projects with the program. I think those who are not going to "buy in" on the security are going to miss many great features....I believe that CL has been more than kind to its customers and I am willing to extend them the courtesy of interacting with their attempts to monitor installs. Bring on Poser 5!!!! I love Poser and am ready for the new features!!!

Crossed posted with you there Scott. * CuriousLabs got SPANKED when the ProPack was warezed * This was an assumption. There were also, at the same time, widely discussed concerns regarding the value for money of the ProPack for many users. Bill

I see CL's new protection scheme as a way to stop or hinder the "common pirate", not the crack/hacker. I can't tell you how many times I've been contacted by folks who have ported Poser over to their friends/cousins/brothers computer to make wrestling/comicbook/porno images... and have asked me for help with the program. I can't hold anything against CL for taking their protection up a notch. Hopefully it will slow down that sort of activity a bit.

As it's been stated, there's no way to stop the hardcore hacker, but why not try to slow down Junior next door? I don't see it as a way of hurting the honest person... I'd rather have all of this verification then a huge price hike any day.

There are other methods of copy protection just as effective(ineffective?) as this method, yet they are not as penalistic. This was the easy way out for them and the harder way out for the consumer. It's a bad move and does need to be re-examined. JDexter

What about moving Poser5 to another drive? I frequently install Poser on my C: Drive and then move it to a Firewire Drive when I need space of something. Then move it back when I can. Can I still do that? Can I pay an extra $100 and get copy with a registration number hard coded in that I can use as I please. (As long as it isn't piracy of course.)

Hello Anthony, just a short question about that 2 PC thing ... I have 2 PCs (not a PC and a notebook) ... one is at home one is at office. Can I install Poser 5 on both mashines? (hehe ... for sure I cant use both PCs at once :) ) Or is it only allowed to install it on a PC and a Notebook? Thanks for your answer ... Chris

stirkwurk: "As it's been stated, there's no way to stop the hardcore hacker, but why not try to slow down Junior next door?" it's unpopular, but let's face it, that junior next door will never spend 1000 $ for poser + additional figures/textures. i'd really want to know what are the gains software companies achieve with these method (if any). i'm afraid that what they are after are information about customers, what hardware/software do they have and thus to know in which direction to invest the money for further versions.