@noldar12 said:
It seems to me that much of the frustration being vented in this thread is at least partially directed in the wrong direction. VSL is really caught in the middle here. They have to protect their assets, while at the same time dealing with both eLicenser and us, the customers.
If people were honest, the issue would simply not exist. What is going on, in large measure, is that the hackers/cracked software users, in essence, are not just stealing from VSL, but also from us, the paying end users. The real cost of theft is much higher than it appears at first glance.
Actually only a small part of the frustration is about the fee for restoring licenses, and only because the thread got slightly off topic. I think most of us get that Vienna have to pay eLicenser, and don't begrudge paying the fee - it would be nice if they would find a better solution, but it's not the priority.
Most of ths frustration is actually about the idea that, when your dongle is lost or stolen, the licenses are entirely lost. It would be so easy for Vienna to provide new licenses (for the nominal fee obviously), and there only seem to be two reasons why they wouldn't. One is that they believe the thief who has taken my dongle has started using it, and restoring my licenses would mean there is now one more Vienna user, but they have received no more money. That I can understand, but it's a massive improbability - most thieves would probably bin the dongle. The second line of thought would be that I am simply trying to get myself a second set of licenses, and the dongle isn't lost at all - this I find massively insulting. Why would I pay for the software once, and then suddenly become dishonest.
The original purpose of the thread was to point out that the notion of the dongle and license being the same thing is highly unfair, and also that it wasn't even pointed out anywhere in Vienna's documentation and advertising.
To be fair, the thread has turned up a number of cases where, at their discretion, VIenna have been at least a little helpful in the case of lost dongles. But the frustration is that it is entirely at their discretion. The dongle protects their interests entirely, but actually provides no protection for the user, even though we are the ones paying for it. Previous solutions have been somewhat random. For instance one user was told he could have new licenses (for the nominal fee) if he also bought more instruments, equal in value to those being restored. You can appreciate how this could be perceived as a little money-grubbing. If Vienna had believed he was being dishonest then the answer should have been a simple no; if not, then it should have been a simple yes; not yes, but only under a bunch of conditions we just thought up on the spot.
The point I've made in the thread, which they repeatedly refuse to grasp, is that, in all probability, their policy is illegal in the UK. In the UK I am allowed to sell any physical object that I own. If Vienna wish to make the license synonymous with the dongle then it becomes a physical object, and I am entitled to sell it on, despite the typical EULA for samples. If the license is not synonymous with the dongle, but remains intangible, then it can't be lost. The license is purely the permission granted me to use the samples, and can't possibly be stolen or lost. They can't have it both ways.
SO you see, most of the frustration is about this situation. The dongle system, as it stands, protects Vienna entirely, but creates a high-risk situation for honest users, and Vienna seem completely unwilling to work towards a better solution. The paying a fee for each license is far more understandable - although, again, it would be better if Vienna would work towards a solution where this isn't necessary. For some users restoring licenses could cost upwards of $1000, which has got to be a bit annoying.