As you might - or might not - have already heard, CuriousLabs is about to start a copy protection as soon as the forthcoming PPP bugfix, which will seriously limit the way how you can install and use your Poser. You will need an activation key which only works with your current configuration, and you will have to re-register whenever it changes. Steve Cooper made some very cryptic remarks at some other thread recently, which leaves you guessing when exactly the new code is needed - first it looked like every Poser install, then he claimed that it would even survive a disk format (which - frankly - doesn't seem to be likely). I'd like to make very clear that I support every reasonable way to fight warez, and have backed - as good as I could as a simple member by keeping an eye on suspicious activity - all MetaCreations, CuriousLabs, Zygote, DAZ, and independent artists whenever they got attacked by pirates. However, I also strongly believe in consumer rights, especially those of legal, loyal and honest users. This new "copy protection" has a couple of serious consequences which should and must be considered by every legal user: 1) You can't install your copy of Poser just on your own any longer - never again. Whenever this "protection" notifies a change, you are dependent on a contact with CuriousLabs. If this can't be established (because the server is down or you are without a connection), your use of Poser will be temporarily limited, and permanently cut off in the long term. This is especially critical if you depend on Poser as a source of your financial living. 2) You are dependent on CuriousLabs' grace when a new Poser version is released - if they stop to supply older activation keys, they (or any company that buys them) can force you to buy the update by stopping the old codes. 3) If CuriousLabs goes out of business, your Poser becomes worthless and all your money that you spent in both Poser itself and supplementary files (figure purchases) becomes void. The fall of MetaCreations clearly proved that a fading company does not care about their users, e.g. when they left localized RDS users in the wilderness. If none of this affects you personally - fine! However, if it does bother you, it's probably good to read on. While Mr. Cooper's statements make it seem pointless to argue or protest against it (because it obviously is a finally decided fact), it raises a lot of legal questions which are not entirely within CuriousLabs' influence. By chance, the recent copy of the German c't magazine (9/2001 on sale till 6.5.2001) has two articles which are of highest interest for all German Poser users, and I can only recommend to get hold of a copy. First of all, there is an extensive article about the forthcoming WindowsXP which is supposed to include a similar type of activation key as Poser (although still weaker, because they claim it is completely anonymious and does not force the user to register with personal data). To cut a long story short - it is very likely that this activation key will break German law, and that the lawsuits against them (which are already under construction) will be successful - like similar final court decisions in the very recent past. The result would be either the forced removal of the codes, or the users are entitled to claim back their money. Even more interesting, on page 46 there is a short note on the German Poser ProPack. According to Egi.Sys, the German localized PPP will not include the copy protection due to "uncertainties of the legal situation". Unfortunately it does not mention whether the initial German PPP already incorporates the bugfix. This raises another problem: Any protection like this will be clearly illegal without a significant warning before the purchase - WindowsXP will have a warning sticker for customers (which is not at all sufficient according to c't's lawyers). Anyhow, the initial PPP does not have any warning like this, and it is essentially lacking because of the number of bugs. But releasing the necessary bugfix with the protection would then definitely break local law. Apart from this - selling the initial version as a "normal" piece of software, and then suddenly adding this protection with the first bugfix could be seen "questionable" in every other respect, to say the least. An important thing that should be considered in future is the place of purchase. I'm not a lawyer, but I guess you should make sure to buy PPP from a local based re-seller, because this will significantly improve your chances for legal action and possible re-claims, while direct purchases from overseas resources will certainly make your position weaker. According to your own local consumer rights, this might be equally true for other European countries. Now the world is really getting smaller every day. The fact is, that local re-sellers must grant minimal consumer rights on their own, even if their goods originate from different countries which do not protect their people - and they are liable for it. If they dont't want to take that risk, they can't sell the product. I'd like to add a personal remark at the end. As said above, I tried to support everyone's rights in the past, but "everyone" includes honest users as well. CuriousLabs has earned an amount of sympathy and support by their user community which is rare in today's world. This support - which goes far beyond average moral behaviour - has certainly helped to fight the darker sides of the net in the past, we all witnessed the degree of support and solidarity whenever it has been needed. However, if they now think they can hit pirates by kicking honest users, they start to act like a doctor who fights cancer by killing the patient. We all know that certain other software companies are rather seen as "enemies" by their own customers, which significantly influences the way how they react upon infringements against them and their attitute towards the abusers. If a significant number of potential users everywhere stops buying it, because they draw their very own dividing line right here & now, and if no local re-seller deals with it anymore (because they are afraid of damage re-claims) and magazines recommend to avoid overseas orders (like they already do) the result could be nothing less than disastrous - for all of us.