Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL
Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum
Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom
Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Nov 24 8:11 pm)
Subject: Final solution security issue P5
- 1
- 2
What if the potential customer doesn't have a credit card? I didn't get my first until early last year. Wouldn't this require Curious Labs to burn a unique disc for every customer, rather than having them mass-produced? What would this do to price? Sure, CD-Rs are dirt-cheap, but CL will need extra employees to handle the burning and packaging. Delivery time? They can't mass-produce, so you'll have to wait in line, so to speak. Inventory? You could only buy direct from Curious Labs; again, no mass-production, so no distribution of the full product through stores.
Good points, but:
If a creditcard won`t suffice, anything else will, Bank acount no? Social Security number? I can think of more personal info when put my mind to it.
It wont change pricing, most bulk CD burning devices use software to imprint the CDs without unique data per CD. It only would mean using a different piece of software.
And you`re right, this would only work for ordered copies.
How about this one: Curious Labs has the CDs burned with password protected, selfinstalling archive, but with a piece missing so the installer wont work. The buyer has to download a personalized installer from Curious Labs, after a registration process, which only accepts the data entered on registration and a general password given by CL. This installerrepairs` the archive during installation if the personal data is acceptable and the CL password is correct.
So, CL need not worry about their CD as the installation is corrupt without a proper repair installer (as only they know what part is missing). The general CL password is needed to connect the unique buyer to a generic archive. The buyer HAS to get a personalized installer to get the installation going.
Leaves going back to b) in my post:
The buyers need not worry about the password as no personal data is burned on the CD. They can install as much copies as they want without Curious Labs having to worry about EULA issues. What buyer would give away such password? (read installer this time)
CL is protected and the buyer will take good care of the installer.
There are things being done about warez sites, etc. However, there are many obstacles and hurdles in the way. One problem lies in the fact that the Internet is an International commodity and it transgresses any laws governing its usage. What is legal in country X, may be illegal in country Y. There is currently are no clear-cut International laws that would be able to sufficiently stop warez from happening. ("Currently" because I believe that one day, maybe when humankind reaches adulthood, we may eventually learn that by getting along and cooperating vs competing with each other at every turn, everyone stands to benefit from it.) Likewise, the technology used by warez sites also has legitimate uses. Therefore, you cannot single out one particular technology nor can you protect and secure every technology in use. The Internet is also very dynamic as well as extremely transient. With the ease of placing warez on the Internet, copying them around the globe in short spans of time, and/or changing their location at any given time, it is difficult to effectively deal with the warez. Of course, there are many, many other points to ponder, but these are a few I can think of off the top of my head. Although some things are being done by the respective authorities, a lot more needs to be done in order to curtail all illegal activity on the Internet.
Bottom line, the honest will pay the price for the warez kiddies who cause this sort of protection to be necessary. There was a time when the vaporware industry used to put out such crap that it often didn't work at all or worse yet, blow the boot sector on install. There were no demos. No refunds. Industry won. Dot com companies raped the american commerce, sold stock to investors, and got rich. Warez argued that they were providing a service to people by letting them test the software before they bought. That doesn't pass the laugh test, but it did fix the problem of bad software cuz folks didn't buy once they saw how it failed. It also forced many in the industry to release demos. Dot com vaporware was exposed and fell. Unfortunately, a lot of investors lost their money. The stock market has been recoiling ever since. Now there's no legitimate use for warez at all. But folks still continue to do so and thereby causing companies to protect themselves. This protection was simple in the early days, but warez kept on hacking. Now the protection comes with a burden on the legitimate buyer. The buyer must stand on his head for each piece of software he uses in order to make it work. Industry wins again. Get used to it. By the way, did anyone ever think that part of this protection scheme is to prevent the use of a product on multiple workstations? SoftImage, EI, LW, Maya, Max, MS... all of them have an interest in licensing per workstation and there's reason for Poser to join that crowd. Poser is moving to the pro world. Would you expect to pay as much for poser in your home as a large movie production company would pay for a 400 machine environment? No? Well, then, the key would be to charge them more and you less. Charge by machine. The only problem I have with this is that I don't want to buy Poser a second time when I upgrade my machine. So I agree, there has to be a better way. But as long as the better way is controlled by a program such as suggested above, or one that generates a second key based on last name, etc, it can be hacked. Right now the only way to really control is with a hardware dongle. Its easier for the DOJ to arrest folks selling fake dongles than it is to track down the myriad of electronic cracks throughout the world. But hardware dongles cost money for the company. Activation codes shift that cost onto the consumer. So get used to it. Industry wins again.
Eric, Although I do agree with the majority of your post, I disagree that it is either Industry wins, Warez wins, or the User wins. Industry depends upon the User-base in order to make its profits and survive. Therefore, there is a definite necessity to see the Industry-User relationship survive (aka Win-Win) while attempting to "weed out" the Warez part of the equation. My understanding of the warez crowd and their mentality is that it is the challenge to overcome any obstacles and prove that they can do it, and providing the "service" is merely a side-effect. This topic has been discussed time and time again by the industry. The challenge to industry is to prevent the warez crowd from achieving their goal of proving they can do it. Since the underlying technologies and techniques are available to both sides, Industry and Warez, this becomes an up-hill battle. From what I understand, hardware dongles can supposedly be overcome by intercepting, blocking, and/or responding to the call from the OS (or whatever) to the dongle. I have no experience in this, but it does seem plausible if not probable and has been discussed in other threads following this same vein.
But this does absolutely NOTHING about warezing, which is the problem. Warez groups concentrate their hacks on the specific code/executable, etc that is protected. Hacking through a program is very simple. I will use the following simple series to explain: 1. Program load 2. Call program security subprogram 3. If good code - THEN continue install ELSE stop install The warez monkey's just edit the program load to point to the part AFTER the IF THEN, else, and just do the THEN. THe challenge part is never executed. In your example, all it takes is one person to validly unpack the software, and then the warez monkeys just repackage it and distribute, with the hacked EXE. THe copy protection is bypassed. End of story. The only type of copy protection that will ever work is something that is hardware and software related, where the hardware part actaully contains part of teh code that must be used, and can only reference it when called, and even this can be compromised by copying memory buffers, etc. Some company now is touting CDROMs that contain a smart chip built into the CD disc, that must be read to run the software. A good idea, but one that can be bypassed by my example above. All you can do is try to minimize the pirating by the vast majority, and suck up the losses of the pirating/warez minority. - Ray
Maxx wrote: "The password is your CCard number, CVV code, Name on card and expiration MM YY. This info is unique and long enough as a password to prevent finding it out in this millennium..." Um no offense but if that was the case I would never open Poser 5, let alone install it on my system. Though a very well thought out solution, I think two thing you failed to keep in mind... 1.) Not everyone owns a credit card. :o( 2.) Poser 5 has a direct access to the Internet. How it contects, I am not one to tell you because I am not a programer... so where do you think a hacker is likely to first try and attack your computer? Through your Internet connection of course, expecially if you don't have a firewall to protect yourself!! Needless to say, storing and using your credit card number on your computer or using it as a password is a good way to have someone rip off your information and make fraudulant charges on it. Jack
We used to be able to group our'puters in production units (usually 3, working on the same scene or element). We could use one version of the software per production units, with permission from the software producer. It worked fine and actually helped us survive the first few years. Maybe that's a solution to some animators' quandry. No dongle, please. No greater insentive to use my Ccard number either, no need to get people tocome up with more fraudulent schemes. No SIN number either. Certainly, no bank account number... Keep looking, please. Q
Un coup de dés jamais n'abolira le
hazard
S Mallarmé
Quite frankly, i think the discussion is merely academic. What CL did is done. They're not the first, and wont' be the last. I don't mind security like requiring our sn's to get the upgrade, or support, etc., but the type of security that will render the program unuseable on a hardware upgrade flat out sux! I still have some old floppy disk programs that serve a specific function. They are no longer supported by the companies cus the companies are long since dead and gone. But the floppies still work. So what happens when CL decides in the P7 days that P5 just isn't going to be supported any more? Its buy new or die cuz you won't be able to reinstall P5 on a new machine. The point is, if we bought it, we bought it and we shouldn't loose it cuz time passes and some dang company controlled code won't be issued out any more.
Wgreenlee1, you'd be surprised how many companies have multiple copies of MS Office installed and only one copy paid for. Add in the people who take the CD home and put a copy on their own machines as well. I used to work for a federal government entity and I can tell you that even they didn't always have a license for every installed copy. None of this is officially condoned (in most cases) of course, but it happens. EricofSD, CL has said that they will implement a solution in the unfortunate circumstance that they suddenly go tits up. Likewise, if you still want to run Poser 5 when Poser 7 is out, I'm sure they'd say they'll take care of you. In both instances, you have to trust them. It all boils down to that. If you don't trust them, if you think they're going to screw you, them why would you want to buy their product in the first place? If you're a professional whe 'has' to have Poser to make a living, it's a tough choice. For the rest of us, there's always real paper dolls instead of digital ones, and no one has died from Poser withdrawal yet.
"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken
lmckenzie, you are right. but the truth is, otoh, that you seldomly get a new pc without a windows installed on it (at least in germany). i have my old p1 75hz still around with a legit copy of windows on it. so it happened to every new pc i bought, there was always windows there. so i have some 5-6 bought systems where i can use only one on my current pc. in the end it's equal... :)
Lightwave has a hardware dongle and you have to contact newtek to get your permanent Serial Number a short time after installation. Cinema4DXl has no hardware Dongle but uses the temporary serial number that expires unless you get your permanent number from Maxon. 3DS MAX has a hardware Dongle as well i think ALL of these protection schemes have been EASILY!!!! Defeated by software hackers. :-/ I know of a legitimate Lightwave owner who has his USB Dongle installed on his home workstation but is running a KRACKED copy of lightwave on his Laptop that he carries to client sites because he is concerned about his Dongle getting lost or broken during travel. and there is even a Fake update CD going around for cinema4DXL that enables you to install free program updates that require your "Factory" CD to be in your CD rom Drive. While they are welcome to try, Curious Labs Can Not prevent warezing of poser5 any more that Newtek,MAXON or Discreet has prevented illegal distribution of Their expensive high end programs. its just a sad fact of life
...This idea that 'we'll-never-stop-piracy-so-let's-just-let-them-get-away-with-it' is becoming a royal pain! We'll never stop crack dealers either, but do you want them in your neighborhood and the cops doing nothing about it? I think you missed the point. I was not suggesting that nothing should be done about piracy (and said retailers "do what they can."). I am saying that copy protection is an attempt which does not work so time is better spent investigating other avenues. Crack sales or terrorism are poor analogies as the harm caused cannot be compensated for monetarily. But lost sales can be balanced by other means. Forcing software protection upon me is like making me wear a chastity belt just because as a male I have the equipment for rape. Whatever happened to the idea of "innocent until proven guilty? This is not a difficult concept. ...Life's a bitch and then you die. While it is true I will die, life need only be a bitch if I let it be. I have been using Poser since version 1. I like it. Is it indispensible? Of course not. Does the production of art revolve around it? Hah! If necessary I can always return to canvas and paint. I also like the people at Curious Labs. In my experience they have always been both courteous and friendly, even considerate. (in fact, I once beta tested for them though circumstances were such I fear I was a poor tester) In the past I have written defending them when I thought the public reaction against them was unfair. This time I disagree with them but that's all it is- a disagreement and nothing more. ...There are people in this world who've never seen decent food and clothes in their lives, so who am I to bitch? There are probably also people in the world who have considerably more than you. By your logic this would give you the right to bitch and I am exercising that option. This issue is about CL and their customers, nobody else. Non sequiturs are not constuctive. It is a sad but true fact that the world is governed not by right and wrong but by reality and public opinion (not always the same thing.) Piracy is very much a reality just as a dislike of copy protection is a significant part of the public's opinion. Let us hope that Curious Labs proves to be an adept tight rope walker. - Jack
CyberStretch,
My second example is not quite the same as with CL`s challenge code, in their setup all complete files would be stored on the CD and a hacker only needs to figure out a way to circumvent the security. In my example, however, the data on the CD is willingly corrupted by the manufacturer and will only run with a personalized installer.
Usage of CCard, CVV etc. would only be used to get the installer going, after installation it could be backed to diskette by the buyer and safely removed from the harddisk.
With an initial diskspace usage of 500Mb there are zillions of places to hide personal data, not necessarily CCard info, pointing to the buyer.
No routines that check if P5 is legally installed, just (encrypted) buyer info put anywhere in the P5 files by the installer. Hackers wouldn`t know where to look and what to look for as there is no en/decryption code available anymore.
So, still CL have their software protected, buyers still can install whenever/however they want after a single registration process.
I still think this (in a proper worked out form, of course) will be a good way to secure software.
MaxxArcher
To all, Well at least all this has gotten me to actually read the EULA for Poser 5. I don't find that it's all that bad after reading it. The only part that disturbed me was the CR2 issue, and that only having to do with what is an acceptable encoder for commercial stuff which as I understand it has been or is in the process of being resolved. As far as using my personal - numbers SSN, credit card, etc or coming onto my computer periodically to check stuff is out of the question. (you might check with your congressman on that later issue.) Security is one thing. Invasion of privacy is quite another. Requiring an internet connection is also absurd, but as I understand it this is what Microsoft is about. I am waiting for the day when Microsoft is the least popular operating system because of all of their undue 'security'. Reasonably, you are not going to stop a dedicated cracker (hacker), and the law is or was before Ronald Raygun er Reagan, based upon the consept of what is reasonable and prudent. With this in mind it is prudent to verify usership rights, do what you can without placing an unreasonable burden on users to insure all but the most dedicated cracker is stopped and know when enough is enough. I think that Curious Labs has done this and I forsee no problems with what they have done so far. At some point, as Imckenzie notes, it bcomes a matter of trust. Unfortunately, we live in a world of thieves that subsequently causes companies to impose security measures upon the rest of us. I don't think this will ever change. I just hope it won't get any worse for those of us who try to be open and above board. - TJ
Legume, Poor Kupa probably needs some rest right now so I won't try to bother him - but I would expect as much. Poser is very popular now. Until the security technology improves, we're pretty much stuck with what we have unless you want to have to log on ever time you use Poser to verify your right to use it, or allow random checks of what is on your hard drive or use 'doggles'(is that the right word) which is a really bad idea(they break or burn out too easily and add expense to an application). It's also an issue of privacy. It's bad enough we have another little petty dictator in the White House that wants to erase your rights without it coming from the corporate level as well. Surely the answer is out there and I would very much like to see Poser remain profitable for Curious Labs for a long time to come. - TJ
Hey Jack, Look under the section Content Distribution. (Page 13 of the low res Poser 5 reference manual.) subsection A defines CR2 as restricted content. subsection D restricts the right to distribute restricted content. There's more to that - but should do for now. My point was that as the CR2 distribution issue has come up before, a lot of people were using Objaction Mover or something like it to distribute CR2s but that restricted you to non-comercial usage. From what I read in the past in threads on this forum, the author of Mover suspected that someone else perportedly used his source code to make something like Mover that was usable for commercial files. That is where I lost track of that subject. I would like to know if the issue has been resolved but have no furhter information on it so I had to leave that part of it obscure. hope that helps, - TJ - TJ
Just my 2 cents... I will buy Poser 5 because it seems to be a good software at a reasonable price. I have to admit that I hate this registration stuff because CL makes it harder for their customers than for the warez guys. I'm pretty sure that the patch will be out in the net before my birthday (October the 6.) so that everyone who don't care about legal software will have it easier. To say that it makes things more difficult for hackers is not true - it will be cracked and then it will be easier to get the crack than the software.
A ship in port is safe;
but that is not what ships are built for.
Sail out to sea and do new things.
-"Amazing
Grace" Hopper
Avatar image of me done by Chidori.
Errr... I hope that I am reading this wrong, but is this saying that all Poser file formats are restricted? If this is the case, then reading Subsection B & C AND D means that anything in the file format is copyrighted and owned by Curious Labs. Subsection D specifically states: "You can not sell, resell, distribute, cause to be distributed, or allow any portion of the Restricted Content to be distributed under any circumstances, via any public [I am assuming this means Renderosity, Rotica and any other online store] or private medium, without Company's prior written consent, a copy of which must be furnished with all Restricted Content distributed in accordance with this section. Barring such consent and you ongoing compliance with the terms of such consent, you may only use Restricted Content for your own use on your computer. You may, however, distribute rendered still or animated images derived from Restricted Content without restriction or royalty to Company, provided you do not violate the non-competition clause below" If this is the case, then allot of the vendors and Freestuff contributors are going to have a tough time with copyrights and distribution of their works. Because according to that paragraph, the vendor needs to contact Curious Labs and ask permission before the distribution of the product and Curious Labs can reject that product from being uploaded to any FreeStuff area or Store, particularly if it may conflict with Content Paradise or Curious Labs. Furthermore, later on, the use or sales of Restricted Content is further convoluted by Subsection J... No offense meant, and I am going to ask our attorney about this, but isn't the same thing as Microsoft saying that anything in a .DOC format is Microsoft's and therefore can not be copyrighted? Since Curious Labs is claiming ownership of the Restricted Content (PZ3s, FC2, CR2, PZ2.. etc). ALSO... none of these restrictions seem to be in the Poser 4 manual... so why the change??? Not very happy anymore, Jack
Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=838934
http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=838934 In general. That was Anthony. I just assume he spoke for Steve.Un coup de dés jamais n'abolira le
hazard
S Mallarmé
Thanks Quixote, heading over there to look now. No offense to Anthony or to Steve, but I've had bad experiences of people speaking on behalf of another. Leads to confusion and never solves anything. I just sent an e-mail to Steve and will back off this subject till I've heard from him. But I am not happy about this. Jack
Jack, Unfortunately I am not a lawyer and make no claims as such. Therefore on a legal basis I can't advise you, but You need to look at the first part of subsection A. My understanding is that any COMPLETELY ORIGINAL cr2 etc. would be ok to distrubute but you should ask your lawyer or the CL people on tuesday. The people at CL and for that matter at DAZ work hard to maintain their business and I think that they have a right to restrict any original work that they provide irregardless of format. Therefore the P5 female to cite an example (and probably P4 female) would be considered the same as we now consider Vicky. Likewise any original models that you create or morphs thereof(in the latter case only the morph) should reasonably speaking be yours - but again ask them. What is hard for me to understand is how all of this would relate to a model used for say a commercial 3d game. Obviously I wouldn't use the Obj, Cr2 or derivative formats(hr2,pp2 etc) for that, but would a directX x-file be usable commercially? I think from CL's point of view this may be o.k. but I'll have to ask them about that. Also using DX8 or any microsoft product commercially seems a bit iffy to me. - TJ
"Did you know that Poser is one of the MOST warezed apps today? Ask Kupa. " --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not likely :-) MS office is the most pirated world wide and on the 3D side 3DS MAX is likely the most pirated application due to its widespread use in the gaming industry
TJ, I can understand if it was their content (the models included in Poser 5) but what about Dina? According to what I've read, any CR2 distributed of Dina is owned by Curious Labs because they own the CR2 format and the program generated the .CR2 to which is needed to distribute the character so she will work in Poser. Jack
"Did you know that Poser is one of the MOST warezed apps today? Ask Kupa. " --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not likely :-) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- He said "...one of...", not the most. This may be true but I'm not really sure how this is determined. After all, it is not as if we could take a survey and trust the respondents' answers. Marketers have already learned that when people take surveys they often just say what they think the surveyer wants to hear. Nor am I sure what asking Kupa would prove. I have no reason to question his integrity but he is hardly an unbiased party. The best I am willing to say is that a lot of people have pirated Poser. A lot of people have pirated almost anything else too. - Jack
In section J, it clearly says what's OK to distribute. What I think is more interesting is the section later down that says that, although you can sell them, you cannot claim copyright or ownership (emphasis mine) of internal settings. They list light and camera settings explicitly. Guess Bebop's off the hook.
Jack, Regarding the CR2 issue I guess the best thing to do is get a clarification from CL. Please let us all know what you find out. I can wait until tuesday - It's a holiday after all. And on this one especially we should be remembering our fallen war heros. I will be getting together with some friends tommorrow to do just that. cheers, - TJ
Wolf359 -> "Not likely :-) MS office is the most pirated world wide and on the 3D side 3DS MAX is likely the most pirated application due to its widespread use in the gaming industry " ------------------------------------------------------------ Hmm, I'd think winzip would be up there as well on the most pirated software list.... all those people using it after its 20-30 day trial period without having paid for it...
Dreams are just nightmares on prozac...
Digital
WasteLanD
I'm not a lawyer, but this one is pretty obvious, folks - something in my gut tells me that cr2s for new characters with geometries not owned by Curious labs (such as Daz characters and DSI's Dina) are not going to be under Curious Lab's copyright. You can own the copyright to a file format, under certain conditions. Let's take SWF for instance. Its owned by Macromedia, the ever so famous Flash format. So, Macromedia owns the format. They own the copyright - to the format ONLY. From their FAQ about the SWF format, it says: -- Is a licensing fee required for access to the Macromedia Flash file format (SWF)? No fees are required for access to the Macromedia Flash file format (SWF) or for the creation of products based on the SWF format. SWF files can be created with many leading software packages, including Macromedia's Flash, FreeHand, Fireworks, and Generator, as well as third-party tools. -- Isn't that nice of Macromedia to make their format free to the developer world? IF you own Flash, and make Flash animations... YOU own the copyright to the particular SWF files you make. NOT Macromedia. You don't have to ask Macromedia if you can distribute your SWF animations! If you export SWF animations from Poser PP, same deal. Its your work. Its the same when you have Photoshop. Adobe doesn't own your PSD artwork files, either - even though the PSD format is their creation. So, if you have modelled a new character from scratch and set it up in Poser - in all likelihood you own the CR2 to that character too, despite who owns the format. I'm sure that Curious Labs understands this concept, well at least I HOPE they do!
I am afraid I owe Anthony an apology. I was in a hurry to get off the computer and grossly misstated his words. I didn't mean to. It is obvious that he was quoting the EULA and therefore stating company policy. Please forgive me Anthony. I meant no disrespect nor did I have any ill-intentions. Please accept my humblest apology. Q
Un coup de dés jamais n'abolira le
hazard
S Mallarmé
Maxx, No offense, but playing semantics was not my intent. Basically, the way I read your post was that "corrupted" would mean "something that intentionally not allow the program to run". Therefore, from that perspective, your suggestion is quite similar to the current activation scheme. Only by recieving the response code (or "patch") to the "corrupted" file, can you use and operate P5. All in all, I can see you point-of-view as well. But warezers/hackers are very creative and would be able to find and most likely decipher any information within the file structure regardless of placement. === I, too, noticed a lot of, um, questionable legality to CLs EULA and mentioned it in one of the previous threads. (Or maybe this one, I did not reread it.) Hopefully, they took my suggestion and will pass it through some form of "legal filter" before commercial release of P5. To me, the EULA looks like a "brainstorming session" to protect their IP without application in the real world from a users'/lawyer's perspective. I think that it could be misconstrued from many vantage points, creating a lot of legal misundersdtandings. Again, it would be interesting - to say the least - to find out what CLs' "official" response will be upon their return.
Who knows but I doubt any serious company would create a EULA without having it read with a fine tooth comb by one or more attorneys. Another point to remember in all of this is that CL is not an independent company. We don't know how much, if any input EGISys has into such things as copy protection, terms of use, etc. I imagine the boys in Tingen keep an eye on things.
"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken
While I am not a lawyer (IANOL), I don't think you can claim copyright after-the-fact on things like CR2s, either. Nor can you put the cat back in the bag. They would have to come up with some new formats, like CR5s. I do know that a lot of companies claim things in their licences that aren't enforcaable under copyright law, too - they don't make the laws, remember. Or maybe we would just be better off forgetting about Poser 5! ;-)
All, I think I will buy Poser 5 as soon as I get the money for it. Like I say nothing about the end user agreement disturbs me that much - and you have to remember something else too -contracts are an agreement between two or more parties and thus CAN be renegotiated. Anyway I am sorry that mentioning the CR2 Issue has opened up such a can of worms - I'm sure that there will be a reasonable resolution to it. We're dealing with reasonable people in the end the result will be reasonable. But I'd rather discuss Jim Burton's new boat. (There is a reason bikermouse doesn't wear a suit and tie. The tie could get caught in the rigging and the suit would get all that saltwater on it.) - TJ
...- and you have to remember something else too -contracts are an agreement between two or more parties and thus CAN be renegotiated. mmm... isn't that what all this commotion is about- a large group of us trying to renegotiate the contract? If so many unhappy users cannot influence a change as a group I doubt that a single user will be able to negotiate better terms on her/his own. (Jim has a new boat? Far out... we've been living on our sloop for the last thirteen years.) -Jack
jval, No. Since no one from CL has yet responded to this thread it could not as yet be termed negotiation - Rather an airing of grievences based on interpretations of the EULA that may or may not be correct. We should wait for clarification from CL before jumping to conclusions. Jim Burton is discussing a new model sail boat he is working on in another thread. It looks pretty good! BTW It must be interesting living onboard a sloop. - TJ
- 1
- 2
Privacy Notice
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12356&Form.ShowMessage=848545
This is the copy of my reply to the above thread regarding **Positive suggestions rather than negative complaints** about the registration process for P5:During the CD burning process ALL P5 data is ZIP'ped (or SIT'ed) with password protection.
The install program simply accepts the password to unpack the data and install. If the password is wrong, well, installation will fail.
The password is your CCard number, CVV code, Name on card and expiration MM YY. This info is unique and long enough as a password to prevent finding it out in this millennium (or the next!).
Resulting in:
a) Curious Labs needs to store the info in 3) anyway to bill your card so no extra effort, but changing their installer has to be put into the matter. (Should take only a few hours of programming).
b)The buyers need not worry about the password as no personal data is burned on the CD. They can install as much copies as they want without Curious Labs having to worry about EULA issues. What buyer would give away such password? (Legit user anyway...)
c) No challenge code, no callback robot, no phoning, no hassle.
If only life were that easy...
Cheers everyone!
MaxxArcher