Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

193,940 users have contributed to 42,902 threads and 257,882 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 4 new thread(s), 20 new post(s) and 76 new user(s).

  • I urge everyone who's posted or read this thread to check out the new thread I've started: http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/t/29768.aspx

    I urge everyone who considers VSL's policies to be unethical to send them the following e-mail:



    I support Roger Eichorn and ask that the following statements be evaluated and addressed. If a company is unable to address any question of unethical behavior it is not a company I would want to do business with and would not want anyone I know, either personally or professionally, doing business with either.

    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.

  • Absolutely agree with your letter, except for clause 19. This is really not the company's problem/responsibility. Why don't we start a petition instead to change the way the license works. As stated by someone above, the concept of reporting it stolen should be the logical step. I would definitely campaign for such a petition. PS: I work in the music industry and I'm surprised how many "official" companies/individuals pay for products that sit on their shelves whilst they use crack copies, precisely because of this dongle issue. Perhaps this is an avenue to pursue...?

  • Thanks for the response!

    I do agree with your remarks about Statement 19. Fortunately, it is superfluous -- yet, I think, true, and as a truth, something that VSL should take into consideration when deciding what is or is not an effective means of informing their customers about their policies.

    I plan to launch a website soon devoted to this issue. It will link to a petition. I'll post a url as soon as the site goes live.

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

    Legaly, a déclaration of lost at the police should make it

    VSL could then send another key with a list of new serial number and just charge for it


  • This is why I’ve stopped buying VSL products. I’ve already purchased $2,000 worth of their software, but because of the risk involved I can’t justify buying anymore. I’m at a point now where I can afford to buy the cube (standard) and a few beefy PCs to run it on for a small ensemble of MIDI musicians to play live, using software I’ve written in Max. But the risk of losing the dongles is way too high so I’m researching other companies’ products.

    I spend several thousand dollars a year on music software and hardware, and VSL is losing a lot of money from me, and until they implement a “phone home” type of authorization they won’t be getting anymore of my money.

    Two years ago I lost my dongle while moving which had the licenses for SE and SE extended. I bought a new dongle and emailed VSL telling them I’d lost my dongle and how can I reactivate my software. They told me all they could do is sell me new licenses for $500! I’d like to know where in my license agreement it mentions a 50% charge to replace a lost or stolen license. Luckily I found my dongle after several days of searching and after that I’ve never taken the dongle out of my home. Even though the reason I bought the SE was to use at school.

    VSL makes great products but, with the possible exception of Sony, I’ve never dealt with a company that treats its customer so abusively and with out right contempt.

    Yes VSL does need to have a copy protection system in place, but one that doesn’t penalize their own costumers. If they implemented a "phone home" type system I could easily spend $10k plus on their products over the next few years, but untill then no dice.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Cyril said:

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

    Legaly, a déclaration of lost at the police should make it

    VSL could then send another key with a list of new serial number and just charge for it

     

    Cyril, VSL would still have to charge something, unless Steinberg changes its policy of charging a fee to provide duplicate licenses.

    DG


  • last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    Cyril, VSL would still have to charge something, unless Steinberg changes its policy of charging a fee to provide duplicate licenses.

    DG

    They will of course charge the dongle

    It should not be a big deal to write a little program that will look of what is owning the user and to re-generate a new license number


  • last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    Cyril, VSL would still have to charge something, unless Steinberg changes its policy of charging a fee to provide duplicate licenses.

    DG

    They will of course charge the dongle

    It should not be a big deal to write a little program that will look of what is owning the user and to re-generate a new license number

     

    No, you mis-understand. Steinberg charges for every licence it generates. That has nothing to do with the cost of the physical dongle.

    DG


  • See my post here: http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/p/29768/191466.aspx#191466

  • The fact that Vienna's license agreement is a) unfair but even worse b) lacking essential information concerning the licensing system is, unfortunately, a very old story. Furthermore it is honestly a mess. Just consider that until approx one year ago, the sentence "Lost or stolen Licenses cannot be replaced free of charge by Vienna Symphonic Library GmbH" did not exist at all. They have added it after I asked them to point out where it was stated that I had to pay again for the licenses after loosing the key (I still have the email :-). Before (everyone who bought an older version of the products can check the printed agreement) there was not mention to this problem at all. The only solution, for me, is not to buy anything until they improve the licensing system.

    DG: how much does Steinberg charge for each license?


  • Btw why has this thread been moved to "General and Hardware Discussion"? what kind of section is that? "General and fish and chips"?


  • Wow, this is all pretty scary.  I don't think I want to buy any more dongle protected software or libraries (from any company, not just VSL).  I wonder if VSL will let me sell my current licenses.  I'm sure my handful of licenses don't amount to much in their eyes, but it took me quite a while to save up for them.  It would be nice to be able to recoup some of that.

    I'm so paranoid after reading all this.  I could lose almost 2 months' salary in the blink of an eye due to the loss of that little piece of plastic.  I'm not positive, but I don't think my insurance company would cover non-physical items.  I'm still confused as to whether or not the licenses attached to the key are considered physical or not.  If not, then it would seem that they could be replaced for a minimal processing fee (to cover steiney's fee).  If so, then it seems that you could sell your license(s) like any other physical item.

    Great arguments, btw, I am impressed that you kept everything so civil as it started to look like it was getting heated.


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Another User said:

    I'm not positive, but I don't think my insurance company would cover non-physical items.

    I recently changed my insurance, and checked. Not only were they prepared to cover the licenses, but they did it within my standard cover, so there was no impact on the premiums. On the other hand my dongles never leave the house - I can imagine it's much harder to get cover for hauling them around.


  • I would be fun and useful to ask some expert about these issues, and also about the complete lack of information surrounding the Vienna Key. Who could we ask, is there any association or specialized website?


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Pingu said:

    VSL will, of course, say no, you may not sell your licenses.

     

    Oh no they won't.  [:P]

    Just contact support and ask them.

    DG


  • last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    Oh no they won't. 

    Just contact support and ask them.

     

     Really? Well, if that's the case (and it definitely didn't used to be - I remember Vienna saying they actively monitored ebay and other sites, and had sales shut down) then I would have to admit that at least this is consistent with the dongle and license being the same thing. Such a situation is still not right, but at least Vienna wouldn't be trying to mix the benefits of both scenarios.


  • I agree, but if it's not VSL or EWQL then what? I've done a lot of research and I cannot find any non-dongle alternatives... We just need to convince VSL to change.

  • last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    Oh no they won't. 

    Just contact support and ask them.

     

     Really? Well, if that's the case (and it definitely didn't used to be - I remember Vienna saying they actively monitored ebay and other sites, and had sales shut down) then I would have to admit that at least this is consistent with the dongle and license being the same thing. Such a situation is still not right, but at least Vienna wouldn't be trying to mix the benefits of both scenarios.

     

     Ah, but selling them on eBay is a different matter. They don't allow that, and there is a charge for the licence transfer (just as there is with iLok).

    DG


  • last edited
    last edited

    @clruwe said:

    I agree, but if it's not VSL or EWQL then what? I've done a lot of research and I cannot find any non-dongle alternatives... We just need to convince VSL to change.
     

    To change to what?

    DG


  • I am afraid we cannot convince Vienna to change policy, they would have done already otherwise. But we have the right to ask for clear policies:

    - what is a user supposed to pay in case of damaged/broken key

    - what is a user supposed to pay in case of stolen/lost key

    - that it is impossible to de-activate keys

    - that it is not possible to backup licenses

    All this should be told clearly to costumers BEFORE purchase and BEFORE any problem occurrs.

    Maybe we can ask to the European Consumer Centers. Also, we can try to spread the info: these are information that the costumer has the right to know.