Rumours in another thread about financial problems at CL prompt the following fantasy: Dec 2002 - CL go bust, Poser is bought up by Company X. As part of the licensing deal, Company X take over responsibility for registration issues. Jan 2004 - Company X starts shipping Poser 6, which has new features but also contains an EULA that grants Company X ownership of all images produced with Poser 6. The informed community is horrified, but those who buy stuff without knowing what the EULA says buy it anyway. You, dear reader, will not want to accept such an EULA, will you? You resolve to stick with Poser 5. Mar 2004 - You upgrade your PC. You have to reinstall all your software. Which means phoning Company X for registration. "Sorry," they say, "we've stopped supporting Poser 5. Here are details of our upgrade offer to Poser 6." You say, "But I don't want Poser 6!". They say, "Sorry, we've stopped supporting Poser 5." So you are left with an unusable program. Either you stick with your old PC (unless it's bust) or you look for your old Poser 4 disks. It couldn't happen could it? Or could it?

Somone has too much spare time on their hands.

Phantast, what the hell did you have for dinner!?! Something you ate MUST have caused you to have that nightmare.

Although it could happen, along with millions of other possible scenarios, I think that the vast number of P5 users could successfully argue that a "universal reg code" - as promised by CL upon their demise - would be warranted. Also, there will be, if there is not already, a sufficent workaround to the registration so that P5 could remain a usable product, despite Company X's refusal to support it. I believe that "reverse engineering" under such a scenario is justified, at least from what I have read; just as it is for providing "interoperability" with other programs, dissipating the "non-compete" clause.

As my mom use to say, isn't this like putting the cart before the horse?

toasted cheese always makes me have nightmares like that.

"As my mom use to say, isn't this like putting the cart before the horse?" Personally, considering how close the back of the horse usually is to the front of the cart, I think this would be the most prudent setup. :0)

Two minutes from now, there could be an alien invasion. Ten minutes from now, Planet Earth could resembel a Filet Mingnon wrapped in sizzling bacon. Probably too late to start building a space ship to escape with, but we should all start doing it anyway.

And in 5 minutes I could finally understand the plot of the film "Mulholland Drive" and Daz might support Poser 5 and CNN might finally start to report some news...and...and... Jeez. Some of you won't be happy until that worst-case scenario actually occurs...

Here's a much more likely scenario: Poser is bought by a responsible, able software company. They dump that stupid protection scheme, fix the other problems, and re-issue it. I don't care what happens from there. And it dosen't matter if the re-issue is free or $150, I'd get it anyway.

I'm not one to usually join this kinda rant, however I think it's a justifyable question.

remember Fractal? Anybody been to Metacreations site lately? what, nuttin there? As of yet there really isnt much competition for Poser, and IF curiouslabs has a hicup, drug using accountant that runs off to the beach with the money etc...well then it poses the question (pun intended), what about the users?

Hey, I'm still waiting on content room to open, word on plugins that DID and STILL work with poser 4 and pp.

I like Poser 5, I bought it. I payed the FULL price, and 20/20 hindsight, I should have bought poser 4, pp and then upgraded to poser 5...it would have cost me the same as what i payed for poser 5 (when they had the sale going and I bought). So am I pissed, yes. Do I believe CuriousLabs will eventually fix these and my opinion swayed, yes. I have faith and more important I think that they have shown that they are responsive to users needs and great people who love what they are doing.

I'm a show me kinda guy...so far..CL is trying, I'll give them credit...but they need to update their web page with more info, and give us the poser community more assurances that things are being worked on.

my 2 cents

Err, CL already stated that they have a patch already packed away that will flush the registration requirements for P5 should CL go bust. Their last act would likely be to release that patch, and there are mroe than a few who would be more than happy to mirror it just in case, including myself. Also, there is the niggling fact that no company in their right mind would alienate the existing customer base of a company they just bought... that would be sheer idiocy, not to mention a prescription for fiscal suicide. /P

"And in 5 minutes I could finally understand the plot of the film "Mulholland Drive" and Daz might support Poser 5 and CNN might finally start to report some news...and...and..." ... and monkeys might fly outta my butt. ; )

Hope not. Could be painful.

and rather messy... ;o)

Well, for me Poser ProPack works better than Poser 5 anyway. :P

Attached Link: http://www.weirdass.net

Scenario 2 CL goes bust. Through middlemen, Al Qaeda purchases the software and publishes a new EULA that states.... Scenario 3 CL goes bust. A front organization for a ring of child pornographers dos away with all clothing for the millenium girls and... Scenario 4 CL goes bust. Corel buys it and destroys... sorry, this already happened with Bryce Scenario 5 CL goes bust. The people who run Renderosity go to a Venture Capitalist and... It boggles the brain Mitch

Now that's messy...

oooh filet mingnon Sounds great 1 serving please!

OHHHH!!!! You mean I'm the only one who didn't get Mulholland Drive? Okaye.... What was that cowboy all about and what the hell was he talking about? :)

Scenario X: R. Shamms Mortier acquires CL and Poser 6 is stripped down to making characters with names that sound like Adam Sandler routines.

Scenario XI: The great god Minash-Bar, finally deciding he doesn't like being ignored, destroys existance. P5 Patch II put on a 7 day delay, but who really cares at that point?

If CL went bust wouldn't the creditors be likely to seek an injunction to stop anyone reducing the value of its main asset (which is how many prospective purchasers would see breaking the copy protection)?