@Pingu said:

Certainly in the UK I am entitled to sell

your dongle holds the liceneses, you can sell your dongle but you cannot sell licenses iisued to you as person. at least not without permission of the licensor.

See I still think you're trying to have the best of both worlds here, and are just playing with words to try and make something true that isn't. Trying to distinguish between the dongle being the license and holding the license is specious at best. By definition 'license' simply means 'permission' and is completely immaterial, as you've said later in your post. By saying that that permission lives in a specific place you've still made it into an object, even if it's just the code on the dongle.

[quote=cm]

a license can never be a piece of hardware because it is immaterial by design.

a not transferrable license does not imply a piece of hardware would be unloseable or unstealable

Again your logic is very flawed. You say the license cannot be a piece of hardware, by definition (and I completely agree). In that case, although the hardware can be stolen the license can't. If it can be stolen, then it is the hardware.

As I see it this is a very simple issue. I buy permission to use your samples. You have a record that I have that permission, and, by definition, that permission is immaterial / intangible. So in the event of theft, fire, etc, that permission can't have been lost. I fully understand the costs associated with generating the licenses, which I also fully agree the user should pay, but to simply say that permission to use the samples was lost with the dongle is ridiuclous. Either a license is immaterial or it's not.

More to the point, the main purpose of this thread was to point out that Vienna's stand has simly never been spelled out, so customers are left with whatever decision you make on the spur of the moment, and some of those decisions send out the wrong message. For instance, the only reason I can think of for not restoring licenses when a user reports their dongle stolen, is that you simply don't trust them. And I can at least partly understand this viewpoint, because I'm sure there are some customers who would simply report their dongles stolen in order to gain second licenses (although really that's one of the downsides of dongles that Vienna have laid themselves open to by choosing a dongle solution, and shouldn't be our problem). But I can only understand it if you apply it consistently. If you say to a customer whose dongle has been stolen, 'We'll restore your licenses, but only if you buy more of our software,' I'm not sure what the message is anymore. It sounds like 'We don't trust you, and believe you are trying to get duplicate licenses, but we're happy if we get some money,' or, 'We believe your dongle is almost certainly stolen as you've said, but we're going to take the opportunity to take more money.'

Probably this isn't how you want to come across, but there has never been any clear explanation of why you make these slightly random compromise deals, so we're left only with the impression it leaves.

@Cyril said:

VSL have to find a solution so that they can de-activate a stolen USB key.

that's agreat idea ... we put a GPS receiver, a battery and a GSM module onto every ViennaKey to allow execution of what you're asking for ... unfortuantely the ViennaKey would cost some 100 euro then, but who cares ...

(who' finding sarcasm here is entitled to keep it)

Hello Christian.

You do not need a GPS, just ask every 60 or 90 days to plug your USB dongle and to check if the dongle is not been reported as stolen

By the French laws your sales conditions are illegals you have to give the user a change to backup for it's own use an "inmaterial" stuf like sofware, music, samples, books ......

It has cost a lot of money to Sony that was condamned by the French law. If you do not want that it is happening to VSL you have to work on a solution.

I have ask to my insurance ; they do not cover inmaterial thing, and it is them who told me that what you are doing is illegal in France, and instead to take a law insurance ;) 

I dont know with other countries, as a far as European contries ; this law is valid in all Europe except Cyprus, Luxembourg, Ireland. Malta. England is suposed to have move to it since August 2011

see : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copie_privée

Best

Cyril

If it's the law it's the law. However, I couldn't disagree more with it, and as a composer living in this world you should think the same. When you buy a music CD, you are buying the actual plastic that contains it, not the actual music itself for all time. Sure, you also buy the permission (a very limited licence) to play that plastic to your heart's content, in the privacy of your own home/car. If you break it, lose it, eat it, spoil it, you have to go out and buy it again! If the plastic deteriorates through 1000 plays of your favourite tune, then just buy it again - it seems to be worth the €15... You should just be more careful, and accidents will happen, but just be more careful. I don't know how many hundreds of records and hundreds of CDs I own, but I know that I have damaged in the period of some decades only 2 or 3. I'm very happy with those statistics. As far as software is concerned, again personally I have never had a problem in the same few decades. Once it is installed, there already exists a hard copy from the purchase sitting on the shelf for emergency purposes. [Note: Companies that sell virtual software over the Internet just have to allow for backups]. Now, in case of theft? Well if somebody lifted my whole collection one day and I found my shelves empty, that's it isn't it? Should Sony, Chandos, DG, Phillips, EMI, etc. just re-fill them for me? Of course I would be completely devastated, but it would just be tough luck. Now just imagine that the whole VSL Cube doesn't come in a huge box of DVDs, but just inside a tiny USB key. What if that got lost/stolen (for damage see last paragraph)? It would be the same as if a diamond ring got stolen, wouldn't it? What then? It is from this premise that any discussion should ensue.

Now, the case of VSL (and other sample libraries) is different in that the software costs thousands of €, all virtually contained on a small piece of stupid fragile plastic. I agree that a solution should be found so that no one should be liable for even half the amount of their software should something happen to that key. BUT do you remember the days of the Pro Edition? That library had no stupid little key that had to be inserted anywhere, did it? There was no date with Herb on the Internet for validating your legitimacy every 60-90 days, was there? Vienna Instruments could have easily been available in such a format, but what transpired back then??...

People copied those libraries and sold them or just gave them away to their friends, didn't they? Same as with Logic and every other program.... Is your copy of Microsoft Word registered anywhere? Have you ever done any Peer2Peer shyte (for P2P read F***2F***!!!!)? Has anybody else here shared other people's blood and sweat as if it was their own? If so for "anarchistic" or other retarded political reasons, have they been consistent by also denying remuneration for themselves in their day-jobs?  

Finally, I thought a while back about the Internet validation thing (I would put it once a year or every 6 months at most), but I also thought it a bit too Big Brotherly back then and didn't suggest it - also what happens if a company (not VSL necessarily) closes down? And there are other issues as well... Maybe another idea would be for the key to be a more sturdy, metallic construct that can take some punishment (if heat is no issue?), and then one would just have to insure it against loss, for the value of the cost of re-validation. All this is the result of pure theft (piracy) with which most everybody seems to be so comfortable these days. What cretinism! Those people don't realize this attitude is going to bite them back 1,000,000 times harder than any (presumed) guilt-pangs at the acceptance of some pirated music/software....

P.S.: The diamond ring analogy is valid if we are allowed to transfer our licenses to somebody else at any time, as we should be.

The Law is very clear on this, you are allowed to copy it only for your personnal use !

A CD can be copied to a tape, it is legal. But if you lend your tape to friend it is Illegal !

What you propose in : Maybe another idea would be for the key to be a more sturdy, metallic construct that can take some punishment (if heat is no issue?),...

Is no good  if you get your key stollen or if it burns or it fells out of your pocket !

Your insurance will cover the key replacement but not the licenses as the licenses are inmaterial 

if you are not happy with the solution I proposed of checking your USB dongle every 60-90 days, too bad if you loose your dongle. You will not be covered by the law as you refused the solution and in this case VSL will be able to charge you 100 %

You cannot have the butter, the money of the butter and the farmer's wife ;)

Best

Cyril

There is a difference with copying to a tape; a lot of the resolution is lost (unlike digital-to-digital copies). 

The main point is that the insurance company should be able to cover you for the complete value of the USB key, licences included, as they would in case of loss of a valuable. They just have to raise the insurance cost (sensibly). I don't see what their problem is; regardless of the immateriality of the licenses themselves, you just ask them to be insured for a specific amount and then they'd calculate their fees according to the risk. Like life-insurance. No man's life can be estimated to €1 or €20,000,000; it is immaterial, however they do insure one against some nominated sum. Couldn't the same thing happen with the VSL licences?

As far as the Internet verification, I would agree with that as a last resort, but only in very long intervals, annually or something. Certainly stuff the 60-90 days thing...

 A clarification to some of the copyright mentions made above. Whether quality is lesser or not is mere nonsense. The key important terms are "legitimately own", "personal use", and "no commercial use". This is quoted from the Recording Industry Association of America, not sure if the same exact terms apply in Europe, but I presume so:

Citing:

"Copying (copyrighted) CDs

• It’s okay to copy music onto an analog cassette, but not for commercial purposes.
• It’s also okay to copy music onto special Audio CD-R’s, mini-discs, and digital tapes (because royalties have been paid on them) – but, again, not for commercial purposes.
• Beyond that, there’s no legal "right" to copy the copyrighted music on a CD onto a CD-R. However, burning a copy of CD onto a CD-R, or transferring a copy onto your computer hard drive or your portable music player, won’t usually raise concerns so long as:
  
  • The copy is made from an authorized original CD that you legitimately own
  • The copy is just for your personal use. It’s not a personal use – in fact, it’s illegal – to give away the copy or lend it to others for copying.

..."

@Gusfmm said:

This is quoted from the Recording Industry Association of America, not sure if the same exact terms apply in Europe

OK, we're getting way off topic here, since comparison of purchased music with the type of license that accompanies samples isn't really fruitful....

...but whilst we're here. I can't speak for the rest of Europe - Cyril suggests that a similar law applies in France. In the UK though, absolutely any copying is illegal, to any other medium. It's widely believed that there is a 'fair useage' law, that allows you to copy your own media for your own use, but this isn't the case at all. And at least one test case has been brought, by record companies, against an individual who ripped his own CDs onto his MP3 player.

@Another User said:

A quick search through Google showed me that you can easily get pirate versions of VSL products and Cubase (both Dongle based). So, if they are able to crack dongled software is this really a good security measure?

Have you watched the H2O (a group of hackers) youtube video to Synchrosoft (and to us paying costumers)? 

This is what people using cracked software are telling us paying costumers. So we get both the insults and the hassle of the key, isn't that great?

Errikos :

re-read what has been wrote.

We are not speaking of quality, we are speaking of what is legal or not legal

VSL has to respect the law, this is all !

For insurance, they refuse to insure non material thing, and why is it us that has to pay again !

We are paying the dongle already 

You said : > As far as the Internet verification, I would agree with that as a last resort, but only in very long intervals, annually or something. Certainly stuff the 60-90 days thing...

this is to protect VSL work ! why is it a problem for you ? ?

if this is done at the lauch of VE/VI there is no problem, it will take a few extra millisec ! 

I wasn't talking about what the law says, only my opinion on what's ethical - that's where I mentioned the inferior copy-quality of an analogue tape. So before you say it's nonsense gusffm - or whatever it was - read better.

I don't like the idea of dependence, of having to "report" to a company for my legitimate use of products for which I have paid thousands of €€, simply due to some twirps' unethical actions; especially every so often. However I did say that as a last resort I would perhaps(!) reluctantly agree to have my hand forced to "log-in", but only if all other avenues were exhausted, and only say once a year (so Cyril you also please read my posts better; I didn't reject that idea outright). And like I said there are issues to be discussed before an action like that is taken.

This is a very first draft of some text that could be included in the criticism section of the VSL page on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Symphonic_Library

I am sure it can be greatly improved. Thus any suggestion is welcome, also from people from Vienna: it should not contain non-correct information.

DRAFT #1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Users complained about VSL not providing important information regarding some policies related, in particular, to the USB copy-protection system, called the ViennaKey. This is USB dongle, which is required to run VSL software since the introduction of Vienna Instruments, is required to activate and stored licenses purchased from VSL. However, no information is given by VSL about the following facts:

* There is no way to backup a licenses after it has been stored on a ViennaKey. Also, there is no way to temporally de-activate a license. Once a license is activated on a ViennaKey it has to remain on one ViennaKey (although licenses can be moved between different ViennaKeys).

* If a ViennaKey is lost or stolen, the user will use the ability to use all the licenses which are stored on that ViennaKey. It has been reported that, as a standard procedure, users are propose to purchase replacement for the licenses on the lost/stolen ViennaKey for 50% of the original price. However, no clear standard procedure has been made public by VSL concerning this issue and users some users have reported different procedures such as purchasing additional new licenses in order to obtain a replacement for the lost/stolen ones. Questioned by the users about these issues, starting from April 2010, VSL has added the following statement to its Terms of License "Lost or stolen Licenses cannot be replaced free of charge by Vienna Symphonic Library GmbH".

* If the warranty period of the ViennaKey has expired and the ViennaKey brakes or starts malfunctioning the user will be charged a fixed amount per license to replace licenses after purchasing a new Vienna Key. This amount has been reported by some users to be approximately 30 USD, but no clear policy has been made public by VSL regarding this issue. Additionally, it is not known what the policy is for key that are damaged in such a way that the serial number cannot be read (such as in case of a fire).

* VSL does not make publicly available the nominal fee which needs to be paid in order to sell licenses. This has been speculated to be 10% of the retail price of the license or 70 USD minimum per license. Licenses cannot be auctioned on public channels such as eBay.

@Another User said:

II don't like the idea of dependence, of having to "report" to a company for my legitimate use of products for which I have paid thousands of €€, simply due to some twirps' unethical actions; especially every so often. However I did say that as a last resort I would perhaps(!) reluctantly agree to have my hand forced to "log-in", but only if all other avenues were exhausted, and only say once a year (so Cyril you also please read my posts better; I didn't reject that idea outright). And like I said there are issues to be discussed before an action like that is taken.

propose anoher solution !

The idea that ypu propose of checking every year is no good as the licences can be used for free for a year

you dont need to login into your account as everything is saved by Safari !

But wouldn't even just being given the chance to deactivate the licenses (e.g. before a trip or leaving for vacation) a HUGE step forward? Now, I might be blind, but I don't really see any possible reason for not allowing it!

@Another User said:

I don't like the idea of dependence, of having to "report" to a company for my legitimate use of products for which I have paid thousands of €€, simply due to some twirps' unethical actions; especially every so often. However I did say that as a last resort I would perhaps(!) reluctantly agree to have my hand forced to "log-in", but only if all other avenues were exhausted, and only say once a year (so Cyril you also please read my posts better; I didn't reject that idea outright). And like I said there are issues to be discussed before an action like that is taken.

 Did you agree to your cellular phone company being able to track you down anywhere you are, anytime they want? Second example: do you feel uncomfortable letting Microsoft verify the authenticity of your Windows copy every time you get the latest Windows update? Third example: do you feel annoyed by allowing your insurance company to send an inspector to visit your property whenever they require to ensure the insured assets faithfully mirror what your stated you were insuring? Last example: how do you feel about the dozens and dozens of cookies saved on your harddrive that allow all kind of marketing companies (including Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, ....) to track what and where you browse, or even worse, what, where, when, who, and how you purchase?

A periodical "synchronization" of the eLicenser every two or three months to ensure it's still being used by the same user licenses were sold to should be a very minuscule measure to having to comply with, if that provided means for users to gain the ability not to lose thousands of USD/EUR invested in VSL licenses if something were to happen to your key.

@cesare.magri said:

But wouldn't even just being given the chance to deactivate the licenses (e.g. before a trip or leaving for vacation) a HUGE step forward? Now, I might be blind, but I don't really see any possible reason for not allowing it!

@cesare.magri said:

[quote user=]

This is what people using cracked software are telling us paying costumers. So we get both the insults and the hassle of the key, isn't that great?

@cesare.magri said:

This is a very first draft of some text that could be included in the criticism section of the VSL page on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Symphonic_Library

Avé Cesare

Morituri te salutante [;)] ( could not resist with the joke [H] 😉

May be you could give a few weeks to VSL to give them time to consult there lawier and to find a solution with Steinberg

Best

Cyril

I have just found this about "private copy" for UK

@Gusfmm: Whether you meant any offense by your comment or not, I took some; I usually do when somebody describes what I say as 'nonsense'. I don't take any particular pleasure when I send someone to re-read my posts, on the contrary it takes time to respond to that person and type that suggestion out. However it saves a lot more time as I wouldn't have to type all this in this case. And verily, my comment about 'inferior quality' can be interpreted as having 'ethical' implications, and not even remote ones. When you duplicate/triplicate etc. something from a digital source to an analogue tape for someone else - not that that's ethical - you lose a lot of quality, therefore if that someone really admires the content will most likely go out and buy it. When it's offered to him on a digital plate however, he suddenly becomes lazy, parsimonious, idiotic...

No, I didn't agree to the cellular phone company being able to track me down anywhere I am anytime. No, I don't feel uncomfortable letting Microsoft verify the authenticity of my Windows copy every time I get the latest update for a) Microsoft is not obliged to update pirated copies of their products, b) this is not the same example as what is being said here, as with the Microsoft example it would be up to me whether to upgrade or not, whereas with the VSL products we are talking about verifying ourselves periodically in order to use the products and versions for which we have already paid. My insurance does not need to send someone periodically to visit me for any item I have insured that does not wear and tear during the passage of time. Of course they would have to do it with a home or a vehicle for example. Lastly, to the best of my ability and knowledge I clean my computer system daily from all such Internet garbage you mention that companies force-feed it. Anything else?

As far as the periodical synchronization of the eLicencer, why have it every 2-3 months? Why not daily, or even hourly? If your argument was the only consideration, why should we allow a pirate to finish even one track using our key at our expense?...

@Cyril: DBX? I'll keep that in mind. As far as my proposing something else, I propose that government agencies come down really hard on Internet piracy and prosecute for huge damages. Treat it as diligently as they would child pornography. Any street establishment that is cought selling illegal/stolen goods is immediately closed down and the proprietors not just prosecuted, but arrested! Why should that not apply to Internet illegal sites (some don't sell, they share but have some advertisements or subscription fees for quick downloads)? Anybody who helps with the proliferation of stolen goods has to shoulder the responsibility of their criminal actions; be it the server, the company that assists with the downloads, and certainly the troll that uploads / makes available the merchandise in the first place. Why should we continue to shoulder the responsibility collectively, go out of our way, be penalized (restricted) because the relevant government agencies don't take action, or because the government refuses to legislate properly in order to protect intellectual property as well as any other kind of property?

I would welcome the legal backup laws that you quoted (for personal use), if at the same time strict laws for abusers were to be passed - and enforced - concurrently. Finally, and in that mindset and vein, I would - again reluctantly - consider the annual ping to the mother company (let the thieving turd work for a few months with the stolen key, probably some chugga-chugga composter) if some contigencies were satisfactorily addressed, and apply pressure to the authorities to do the job we pay them to do!!