Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

191,218 users have contributed to 42,789 threads and 257,330 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 2 new thread(s), 8 new post(s) and 42 new user(s).

  •  This may have been raised before but is it possible to insure against the loss - through negligence or fully reported theft - of the USB key which of course can hold thousands of pounds worth of licences?

    I understand there may be issues with insuring software.

    Re unethical practices - VSL have to be able to protect their product. If it was relatively straight forward to get replacement licences there

    would be a huge black market in VSL products which would benefit nobody in the long term and possibly put the company out of business or make their products prohibitavely expensive.

    They are already bloody expensive!

    Kanon


  • "Re unethical practices - VSL have to be able to protect their product. If it was relatively straight forward to get replacement licences there would be a huge black market in VSL products which would benefit nobody in the long term and possibly put the company out of business or make their products prohibitavely expensive."

    Ultimately, this is beside the point. My statement #1 is that VSL has an ethical obligation to inform its customers regarding the nature of their purchase. Do you disagree?

    I have no problem with VSL "protecting their product." I understand that the purpose of the USB dongle is to ensure that hackers not post their software online for thousands of people to use for free. I also understand that VSL should not be expected to simply hand out Licenses willy-nilly. What I am saying is that they should not treat their customers like criminals who are out to rob them. What I am saying is that they should inform their customers about the nature of their purchases. They could do all of this without in any way risking the future of their company!

    Again I ask: Anyone who disagrees with any of the 21 Statements, please flag the false statements and tell me why it's false.

  • VSL has now refused to respond to any of my questions. And I quote:

    Dear Roger,

    I'm sorry to inform you that after speaking with the CEO of the Vienna Symphonic Library about your case, we've decided that we will not be able to respond to you any more regarding this topic because everything has been said already in the eleven emails that we wrote to you until now.

    Kind regards,

    Stefan Steinbauer

    ----------------------

    I would happily make my e-mail exchange with VSL public, should anyone doubt the following: VSL's "eleven emails" in no way, shape, or form address the issues in question. They flatly refuse even to acknowledge that there is an issue to address. Now that, with my 21 True Statements, I have closed off all the ways in which they could sidestep the issues, they have refused to respond.

    I ask that anyone who agrees with me send the following to support@vsl.co.at

    -------------------

    In order to allay the suspicion that VSL’s business practices with respect to Licenses and USB Licensing Keys is unethical and that, by way of said practices, VSL is unfairly taking advantage of their customers, I ask that VSL review the following 21 statements. If any of the statements are false, I ask that VSL identify the false statements and explain why they are false.

    (1) VSL has an ethical obligation to inform its customers regarding the nature of their purchase(s), including VSL’s policies regarding Licenses and USB Licensing Keys. Should VSL fail to do so, it has an ethical obligation both to take responsibility for that failure and to take steps to remedy it.

    (2) VSL’s eLicensing system works in such a way that, once a License is installed onto a USB Licensing Key (in which case I will refer to the USB Licensing Key as “enabled” with the License), that License is then non-transferrable, meaning that the Customer who purchased the software (and the License) cannot on his or her own subsequently transfer said License to another USB Licensing Key.

    (3) The above, (2), is true despite the fact that VSL’s web-site states the following:

    “Use the eLCC software (eLicenser Control Center) to copy your licenses onto your USB protection device once you’ve received them with the product box or via email. Later on, you can also move the licensing information from one ViennaKey to another, but you can’t store the same product license on two ViennaKeys at the same time.”

    Source:

    (4) The above statement, in (3), explicitly allows that customers can in fact transfer Licenses from one USB Licensing Key to another, on the condition that they are not simultaneously in possession of two or more USB Licensing Keys enabled with the same Licenses.

    (5) If customers lose their USB Licensing Keys, it is VSL’s contention that they have thereby lost their Licenses. They are unable to transfer their Licenses onto another USB Licensing Key since, for all VSL knows, they did not in fact lose their original key. Customers are then required to pay 50% of the cost of the software to purchase a new License.

    (6) It is VSL’s expectation that customers will be informed of these policies solely through having read Item 6 of the Terms of License.

    Source: Paul Steinbauer, Product Manager for VSL; personal e-mail correspondence with Roger Eichorn, 12 August 2011.

    Source: Stefen Steinbauer, Sales Manager for VSL; personal e-mail correspondence with Roger Eichorn, 29 August 2011.

    (7) Item 6 of the Terms of License states that, should a ViennaKey be lost, VSL is under no obligation to replace the Key. It then states that, upon learning of the loss of a ViennaKey, VSL reserves the right to block any Licenses that were stored on the ViennaKey. The third and final sentence of Item 6 states: “Lost or stolen Licenses cannot be replaced free of charge by Vienna Symphonic Library GmbH.”

    (8) It is VSL’s contention that Item 6 is sufficient to ensure that its customers are informed regarding the policies outlined above, in (2) and (5). Nowhere else, whether on VSL’s web-site or in any of the documentation or communications that accompany purchases or are involved in the licensing process, does VSL state these policies: nowhere else does VSL state that the relationship between ViennaKey and License is such that to lose the former entails losing the latter.

    Source: Stefen Steinbauer, Sales Manager for VSL; personal e-mail correspondence with Roger Eichorn, 29 August 2011.

    (9) VSL intends customers to glean the policies outlined above, in (2) and (5), on the basis of the second and third sentences of Item 6, and their relation to each other. Customers are to understand the following: If, upon being informed of a lost ViennaKey, VSL “blocks” the License(s) on the Key, then those License(s) would have to be replaced. But in sentence three, we’re told that VSL will not replace Licenses free of charge. It is this “blocking of Licenses” that underwrites the move in Item 6 from discussing lost or stolen “ViennaKeys” to discussing lost or stolen “Licenses”: if the loss of a Key entails that VSL will “block” the License(s) it contains, then to loss the Key entails losing the Licenses.

    (10) There is a prima facie conflict between Item 6 and VSL’s statement quoted above, in (3). In the above-quoted passage, VSL assures customers that they can transfer their License(s) from one ViennaKey to another on condition that they are not simultaneously in possession of two ViennaKeys engaged with the same License(s). It is natural to assume that this applies also in the case of having lost a ViennaKey, since in that case, the customer would not simultaneously be in possession of two ViennaKeys engaged with the same Licenses.

    (11) Given (10), there is a prima facie conflict between (a) an apparently straightforward claim made by VSL on a prominent web-page, one likely to be visited by customers, and (b) an ambiguous set of claims buried in the Terms of License. It is far more likely that customers will read (a) than that they will read (b), in which case VSL will have misled them, violating (1).

    (12) Item 6 does not outright state the policies outlined above, in (2) and (5). It says nothing to the effect that the loss of a ViennaKey entails the loss of the License, nor does it state how much money it will cost customers to acquire a new License. Rather, the policies in question are to be inferred from what Item 6 does say, as demonstrated above, in (9).

    (13) As a matter of fact, VSL is unable to block Licenses in the manner discussed in Sentence 2 of Item 6. Were VSL able to do so, then the policy described in Sentence 3 would be unnecessary, for if VSL were able to block Licenses, then they would be able to block the Licenses on lost or stolen Keys, rendering the Keys useless, thereby eliminating the possibility that lost or stolen Keys remain in use (which is the rationale for the policies in question).

    Source: Paul Steinbauer, Product Manager for VSL; personal e-mail correspondence with Roger Eichorn, 11 August 2011.

    Source: Stefen Steinbauer, Sales Manager for VSL; personal e-mail correspondence with Roger Eichorn, 22 August 2011.

    (14) Sentence 2 was inserted into the Terms of License because VSL hoped to develop the ability described. It remains in the Terms of License because VSL does not wish to pay for the Terms to be redrafted.

    Source: Stefen Steinbauer, Sales Manager for VSL; personal e-mail correspondence with Roger Eichorn, 22 August 2011.

    (15) As shown above in (9), Sentence 2 is required in order to underwrite Sentence 3. Yet as shown above in (13), the ability Sentence 2 attributes to VSL vis-Ă -vis ViennaKeys would render Sentence 3 unnecessary.

    (16) Given (9), VSL’s inability to “block” Licenses stored on ViennaKeys entails that the Licenses on lost ViennaKeys are not in fact “lost”: it is only the ViennaKeys that are lost. A customer who lost a ViennaKey still possesses a valid License, but not the Key onto which it was downloaded. Thus, he has not lost the License.

    (17) Given (9)–(16), Item 6 is ambiguous at best, incoherent at worst, and certainly an insufficient alternative to simply stating the policies in question.

    (18) Given (17), it is reasonable to suppose that, even were a customer to read Item 6, they very well might come away from it without an understanding of the policies outlined in (2) and (5).

    (19) It is generally the case that people do not read legal fine-print.

    (20) Given (1) and (17)–(19), VSL has failed in its ethical obligation to inform its customers regarding the nature of their purchase(s); VSL has an obligation to take responsibility for that failure.

    (21) As part of taking responsibility for their failure to inform their customers, VSL should provide those Customers who lost their ViennaKeys as a result of their ignorance of the releveant policies with the means to use the software they paid for.

  • No it wasn't VSL. It was another software company.

  • "This is not the software company you're looking for..." lol I assume this post is a response to a PM I sent you. Still, I encourage you to e-mail VSL asking them to address my questions.

  •  Hi there!

    This is a tricky one!

    Fist: You have to talk to VSL fist. If that's not gonna work and you think VSL is wrong then talk to a person with law experiences. You could as well start a petition regarding hardware dongles, that is your choice.

    I for myself don't like this key-stuff at all and in fact I am quite worried what could habben if something should happen to my key. As far as I understand it right now, my key is more valuable that it's weight in platin! And yes - that is crazy. I hope for a much less risky solution for it in the future.

    But as of right now I simply have to take care of my key and hope it wouldn't brake or something.

    So no one here can really help you I'm afraid. I do feel with you though. Since you are a customer to VSL and not a copycat you should be supported by the company and not be punished over limit for loosing a little plastic thing that could be remotely dissabled as soon as it connects to the web.

    Sorry for not being much help...


  • Thanks for the response!

    I have in fact talked with VSL. They have refused to respond to my 21 Statements. What I am trying to do is urge others to send the 21 Statements to VSL in order to encourage them to respond. In that way, people up here can absolutely help me.

    Demand that VSL explain themselves!

  • Again, I urge people to send a copy of my 21 Statements to VSL, asking them to respond to the statements by pointing out which, if any, are false and why.

    In the meantime, I'm going to develop a web-site devoted to this issue. The web-site will address the following concerns:

    (1) The general problems with VSL's eLicenser technologies. There are alternative systems they could implement, ones that would be better both for their customers and for VSL themselves, since -- as attested by some responses here, and responses I've gotten from others elsewhere -- many people refrain from purchasing VSL products because of their eLicensing technologies.

    (2) VSL's refusal to address the common problem of customers not understanding the technologies as they are currently implemented. As far as I can see, there are only three possible explanations for VSL's refusal to take a few simple steps to ensure that their customers are informed:

    (a) Sheer stupidity or stubbornness.
    (b) They do not want to lose the revenues generated from dupes like me.
    (c) They do not want to scare away potential customers who might think twice about purchasing a VSL product did they understand how VSL's eLicensing technologies work.

    (3) VSL's overall disdain for their customers, whom they systematically treat as potential criminals and whose questions are ignored.

    I'll post back here when the web-site goes live, which should be sometime next week.

  • delvagus - Scenario 1: I buy a piano from Steinway for a lot of money. I do not insure it. While moving house the piano is lost. I contact Steinway and tell them I have lost the piano and ask for a replacement. They offer nothing other than confirmation of registration of my piano and its serial number. Scenario 2: I buy a piano from Steinway for a lot of money. I do insure it. While moving house the piano is lost. I contact my insurer, they investigate and I get the piano replaced. Scenario 3: I buy a piano from Steinway for a lot of money. I do not insure it. While moving house the piano is lost. I contact Steinway and tell them I have lost the piano and ask for a replacement. They offer to provide you with a new piano that is exactly the same for 50% of list price. If you are to argue that a physical piano that is mine is not the same kind of thing as a physical dongle that is mine, I disagree. Scenarios 1 and 2 are realistic. Scenario 3 would take an extremely charitable company. Personally I am surprised and grateful that Scenario 3 might be possible with VSL, should I be in such a situation the future.

  • last edited
    last edited

    @Reality Check said:

    delvagus - Scenario 1: I buy a piano from Steinway for a lot of money. I do not insure it. While moving house the piano is lost. I contact Steinway and tell them I have lost the piano and ask for a replacement. They offer nothing other than confirmation of registration of my piano and its serial number. Scenario 2: I buy a piano from Steinway for a lot of money. I do insure it. While moving house the piano is lost. I contact my insurer, they investigate and I get the piano replaced. Scenario 3: I buy a piano from Steinway for a lot of money. I do not insure it. While moving house the piano is lost. I contact Steinway and tell them I have lost the piano and ask for a replacement. They offer to provide you with a new piano that is exactly the same for 50% of list price. If you are to argue that a physical piano that is mine is not the same kind of thing as a physical dongle that is mine, I disagree. Scenarios 1 and 2 are realistic. Scenario 3 would take an extremely charitable company. Personally I am surprised and grateful that Scenario 3 might be possible with VSL, should I be in such a situation the future.

    That's not a proper analogy.A proper analogy would be: You buy a Steinway piano that is locked with a key and Steinway only gives you one key to unlock your piano. One day you lose your key or it is stolen, and now you can no longer use your piano. You contact Steinway and they tell you, "Sorry you lost your key. We'll send you a new key for half the price you paid for your piano!" If Steinway did that they would be out of business in days!

    VSL needs to protect their software from piracy, but they also need to protect their customers. The best way to do this would be to have the dongle contact VSL every 60 - 90 days and the user enter a unique password to verify that they are the original purchaser. After the password is verified the dongle would be good for another 60 - 90 days. This could be optional as some people who only use their software in their own studio my see it as a hassle. But for someone that is out gigging or traveling with their VSL products this would be great.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @mschmitt_25212 said:

    VSL needs to protect their software from piracy, but they also need to protect their customers. The best way to do this would be to have the dongle contact VSL every 60 - 90 days and the user enter a unique password to verify that they are the original purchaser. After the password is verified the dongle would be good for another 60 - 90 days. This could be optional as some people who only use their software in their own studio my see it as a hassle. But for someone that is out gigging or traveling with their VSL products this would be great.

    This is a good idea but you can say that your dongle was stolen and sell it to somebody else

    THE solution :

    Every 60-90 days, VSL check if the dongle is not reported as stolen,  If a dongle is reported as stolen, it is erased, the IP is given to the police.....

    I have start to check for an insurance, the answer is  : your dongle will be re-emburse  but not it's contains because it is dematerialized

    The insurance man was saying that what does VSL is not legal, and I should take an "Legal insurance" to be able to sue them if  lose my dongle

    In France the law allow you to do a private copy of any dematerialized stuff like software, music you buy on line....... as you have bought a license to use the product you should be able to restore the product.


  •  This entire thread is wrong.

    VSL is not unethical.  They are using industry standard copy protection.   This guy who wrote the thread is trying to attack that, by attacking VSL.

    I find it irritating, because the company is a fine group of people who have created a tremendous artistic tool.  They should not be subjected to this kind of attack because it is inappropriate and wrong.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @William said:

      the company is a fine group of people who have created a tremendous artistic tool.  

    I agree with you, but VSL have to improve there system of copy protection so in case of a lost, fire and steel you can recover your licenses


  • What is the law in Austria about demateralised things (software, Music you buy on Itunes, Samples.....) ? 

    What is the law in your different countries ?

    Are you allowed to do a private copy ?

    As I said before in France the supplier has to offer a way to do it

    Sony was condammed in France because there music could not be backup by the user and could only played on there player ? http://www.leparticulier.fr/jcms/c_42456/musique-sur-internet-sony-condamne-pour-tromperie (sorry it is in French)

    Apple had to change there copy protection too ?


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Cyril said:

    What is the law in your different countries ?

    In the US I know you are allowed to bypass security on software you own if the company that made it has gone out of business. If the company is still around I don't know. Looks like it's time for us to contact our insurance companies and knowledgeable attorneys in each of our countries.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @William said:

     This entire thread is wrong.

    VSL is not unethical.  They are using industry standard copy protection.   This guy who wrote the thread is trying to attack that, by attacking VSL.

    I find it irritating, because the company is a fine group of people who have created a tremendous artistic tool.  They should not be subjected to this kind of attack because it is inappropriate and wrong.

    I'm not 'attacking' the copy-protection -- though I do happen to think there's serious problems with their methods. Rather, I'm 'attacking' -- what I'm claiming is 'unethical' is -- VSL's utter failure to inform their customers about basic facts concerning the nature of their purchases, even though doing so would be incredibly easy.

    What's so hard to understand about this? There are two separate issues here: (a) The policies; (b) VSL's willful (for it is willful!) refusal to take reasonable steps to ensure that their customers are informed about said policies.

    Defenders of VSL -- and VSL themselves, for that matter! -- can't seem to keep this straight.

  • last edited
    last edited

    @delavagus said:

    What's so hard to understand about this? There are two separate issues here: (a) The policies; (b) VSL's willful (for it is willful!) refusal to take reasonable steps to ensure that their customers are informed about said policies.

     

    What's hard for me to understand is VSL's motive behind this.  What would VSL gain by not informing their customers "about said policies."

    Are you saying that VSL is purposely not informing customers about the dongle policy in the hopes that people will be careless with their dongles, lose or break them, then VSL can make extra $$$$ by charging the unfortunate customer to get his licences returned?  Is that what you are insinuating? 

    I've never met the VSL team personally but, for some reason, I can't imagine Herb, Paul, Deitz, CM, Stefen, etc, all standing around a bubbling caldron perched on a large pentagram carpet rubbing their hands together letting out an evil laugh everytime a sucker, I mean, customer buys one of their products.  Then Herb stirs the caldron and says, "I'll get you my little pretty and your little dog Toto too.  Muha! Ha! Ha!" 

    I don't know I'm just not seeing it Roger.  On the other hand Halloween is just around the corner. 


  • Crap. This will make me think twice about ever upgrading from SE.

  • On my opinion most users will not think about the "worst case scenario". Like: "It will not happen often, so then don´t let it be me!"
    I have seen further discussions about the dongle problem and I can not understand too why there is no pleasing way for us - the users.
    So, if I bought VSL-Software for more then 10.000 bugs his destiny is attached to a little 30 bugs dongle.

    I´m sad about the fact, that I do not have any chance to cover up my licenses. There is no insurence and I can not say that VSL is getting into it to give us,
    the buyer of there products a conclusion where both sides can life with cause 50% of the know price isn´t one.

    I was woundering why there is no eLicenser with a "mac-adress" like it is used for network-cards for example. An unique number and if the dongle then
    gets lost/destroyed you buy a know dongle and change the "mac-adress" on the VSL-Website.
    All you would need is an internet-connection in a period of time.
    I´ve heard some argue that they don´t have internet on the PC where the dongle is connected, but what´s better?
    Going down under your table some weeks in the year and pull the dongle in an internet-pc or getting an heart-attack from the lost!
    And then the second one when you reached the mail from VSL that´s "only the half price" from what you´ve payed before now to get your project finished!

    I´m a little disappointed that VSL doesn´t get into this discussion either in this threat nor in others before others cause all this replys shows that there is need for action.

    regards

    Torsten


  • Thanks, Delavagus, for bringing up this serious issue I could easily be trapped in as well! I was considering buying some VSL stuff, but now learning that if I pay thousands to VSL and loose that stupid key then VSL will simply not care at all for their customer and would even take from me again half of those thousands I'd have already paid to them, just like that, so that I could again use their software I have already paid for... I have no words... I'd never buy whatever from VSL if they won't issue for me an official written guarantee that in case I loose that key they will reactivate it for me for free (except for the hardware of the key). Thanks again for saving me from that VSL trap.