|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 2, 2015 10:05:31 GMT -6
I've been thinking about the practice of licensing plug-ins lately. I can't think of many things that I spend hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars on, yet have no official ownership.
Say I buy some hardware that cost $500. If i want to loan it, I can, sell it, I can. Now, I realize in the digital world companies must find a way to protect their proprietary property, but I'm not talking about cracking code and then releasing it for free.
I bought some UAD plug-ins. There was a kind of pressure to buy within a deadline, or lose a special offer. That's OK, annoying, but I understand, they have a business to run, and a profit to make.
Where I find myself questioning the validity, and perhaps the legality of licensing, is when I'd like to sell or trade something I no longer use. I'd have no issue with a small exchange fee, but see no real reason why I shouldn't be able to sell my Fatso, especially if I'd like to use the money from selling toward buying something like the Ocean Way plug instead.
Instead of them seeing me selling a plug as a loss, I think they should see it as a normal customer service they can still benefit from.
A trade in with a fee, or a higher fee to sell, keeps me interested in their newer plugs, and might encourage me to try something I'd otherwise pass on, knowing I won't get trapped if I don't like it in the long run.
I know, they have a liberal demo policy, and that's cool, but still, do you guys find there's just something that feels wrong about this?
I've wondered, what if a company goes out of business, or decides to drop supporting plugs, and new computer updates means I can no longer use them. There are all sorts of pitfalls I can see.
I'm not even saying that companies like UAD and Slate are definitely wrong, I'd just like to know if it's only me that feels a little trapped by such policies.
Of course I can always take my business elsewhere, but after buying into the UAD platform, I'd rather not if I can help it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Sept 2, 2015 10:10:35 GMT -6
That's the world of computers and software. It's not just plugins, it's all of the software world. You bought Photoshop 7 years ago and new you have a new computer? Time to buy it again. Just the way the world works. You have to look at computers and software as a total loss when purchasing (anything digital for that matter, converters, phones, etc). The value is going to diminish to 0 at some point and you have to be ok with it. Just be aware going in.
|
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Sept 2, 2015 10:29:37 GMT -6
I've been thinking about the practice of licensing plug-ins lately. I can't think of many things that I spend hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars on, yet have no official ownership. Say I buy some hardware that cost $500. If i want to loan it, I can, sell it, I can. Now, I realize in the digital world companies must find a way to protect their proprietary property, but I'm not talking about cracking code and then releasing it for free. I bought some UAD plug-ins. There was a kind of pressure to buy within a deadline, or lose a special offer. That's OK, annoying, but I understand, they have a business to run, and a profit to make. Where I find myself questioning the validity, and perhaps the legality of licensing, is when I'd like to sell or trade something I no longer use. I'd have no issue with a small exchange fee, but see no real reason why I shouldn't be able to sell my Fatso, especially if I'd like to use the money from selling toward buying something like the Ocean Way plug instead. Instead of them seeing me selling a plug as a loss, I think they should see it as a normal customer service that can still benefit from. A trade in with a fee, or a higher fee to sell, keeps me interested in their newer plugs, and might encourage me to try something I'd otherwise pass on, knowing I won't get trapped if I don't like it in the long run. I know, they have a liberal demo policy, and that's cool, but still, do you guys find there's just something that feels wrong about this? I've wondered, what if a company goes out of business, or decides to drop supporting plugs, and new computer updates means I can no longer use them. There are all sorts of pitfalls I can see. I'm not even saying that companies like UAD and Slate are definitely wrong, I'd just like to know if it's only me that feels a little trapped by such policies. Of course I can always take my business elsewhere, but after buying into the UAD platform, I'd rather not if I can help it. Couldn't agree with you here more, man. Exactly how I've been feeling with UAD lately. I buy something from them and can't sell it later, unlike Waves, Slate, Plugin Alliance, etc. Now that they've apparently dropped Roland, who knows how long my Dimension D will still function/be supported as future updates are released? I'm done with buying plugins, for the most part, and especially with UAD. I don't care how much they are on sale for and how many vouchers they give me. Money is money, and it's a black hole with those guys. I'm moving on to hardware. Just gonna take longer cause it's far more expensive. But at least I can sell it if I want. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 2, 2015 10:30:02 GMT -6
I understand jcoutou, thanks for posting. I still don't see why UAD wouldn't allow me to trade or sell though. Even if they make more profit in the short term, I believe they'd make more in the long run with an exchange program in place. I know that I'd buy more plugs that way, and most likely keep more of them.
Just saw your post indiehouse, good to hear from you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 2, 2015 10:42:55 GMT -6
It's every book, phonograph record and CD too. Such is the nature of all intellectual property. In fact it's the only constitutional property ownership right there is!
In personal computer software we learned after just a few years that the "honor system" simply doesn't work. I'm not sure why anybody still trots the theory out that this is how things should be done.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 2, 2015 10:43:03 GMT -6
Its important to understand the legal agreement between you and a company. Software code is not a physical asset like something else we buy and we have a limited license to use the plug, we don't own it, in the way you and I would prefer.
p.s. ua plugs can be sold , just not individually, and they have to be on a uad device. CS trys to accommodate these requests and will transfer a device into your account just to faciliate the transfer of plugs.
This is another of those arguments that favors buying OB gear.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 2, 2015 11:27:56 GMT -6
Good to hear from you Bob, kcat.
I'm thinking out loud on your statement Bob. I own a record, and as long as I have a turntable that works, and a phono preamp, I can play that record, and can always sell it if I want, or give it away as a gift. I own CD's and as long as I have a CD player working, I can play them, and sell them or trade them or give them away as gifts.
I purchased the rights to use someone's software, but have no guarantee I can use it for long. Books may wither, but that might take 50-100 years, CD players might stop working, but I'm probably good for 25 years, but plug-ins? , maybe the company might fold next year, and unless I leave my computer dedicated to them, it will probably go away at some point. They're similar, but not quite equal, I think.
I'm OK with some of this, I just find it too limiting, not being able to trade or sell them. I wish there was a law saying if I buy the rights to use a digital product like a plug-in, I have the right to transfer it to someone else.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 2, 2015 11:33:23 GMT -6
move to Europe !  |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 2, 2015 11:40:54 GMT -6
Musicians have been on the short end of the law for a long time now. When we've reached the point where my friend got a $45 check for 1.4 million downloads of hs song, something's clearly gone haywire. I sincerely hope that congress acts to protect our basic performance rights.
Plug-ins are a minuscule issue compared to that, but they are related in the sense that digital files have changed how we function, and sometimes I think we're the lesser for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 2, 2015 12:00:54 GMT -6
It annoys me too, but just like buying a song, you own a copy of that song - not the song. Basically, we've allowed it to happen, even there is zero physical overhead...so, until demand dries up, we won't see changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 2, 2015 12:13:41 GMT -6
My landlord owns more 100 large rental buildings in Manhattan. They're worth somewhere between $100,000,000 and $150,000,000 each, some of the large apartments with a river view in my building rent for $15,000 a month. You can do the math to approximate their worth. In my "luxury" building, there were three porters, two day, one night shift. There are over 100 families in the building. To maintenance alone is enough work for 4 or 5 people, yet, management cut one porter, and basic services suffered, all in the name of cost cutting. My point is there's room for huge profit, without cutting service to the point of it being a burden on customers.
I have no issue with people making lots of money from their enterprise, but there comes a point where gouging is taking place, and that's how I feel about a policy of preventing sale or trade of my purchased right to use a plug-in. Companies are more profitable than ever, since so many of the products they sell require no space, hence much lower cost to "produce".
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 2, 2015 12:39:45 GMT -6
If you bought a record and you buy a new player that uses a completely a different format, you aren't owed a new copy by the artist. Software will work indefinitely on the computer it was designed for. Upgrade support is expensive. As for "profitability," I'm unaware of any audio software developer, especially of plug-ins, that is highly profitable especially compared to real estate. Compared to a decade ago the price has come way down however development labor costs probably haven't changed very much at all.
Moore's law applies only to the cost or integrated circuits and not labor!
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Sept 2, 2015 13:30:37 GMT -6
I feel scammy about software licensing too, but what's to guarantee my hardware won't break irrevocably either? I feel like I have more control over hardware, but that's partially wishful thinking. I do tend to consider whether hardware is within my capacity to repair, and obviously plenty of things are not. I simply feel a little better about the ones I can repair should they go down. I can take dead hardware to the scrap metal place, but that's also just good karma recycling, definitely not worth the opportunity cost.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 2, 2015 15:16:47 GMT -6
I think I mainly would appreciate the ability to trade with someone for a reasonable fee, or at least, offer a trade in. After all, it's not like a used product. I'd be much more inclined to say.. buy the Ocean Way for $150 with a trade in of my Fatso. UAD would get more money from me, and I'd continue to feel like a valued customer. I haven't purchased the Ocean Way yet because it's too expensive for me, considering the higher priorities I have.
I guess I'm having trouble shaking the odd feeling I get when purchasing plug-ins. I understand my purchase doesn't grant me ownership of the code, of course, but I feel that once I've purchased something, it's mine. Audio companies say "buy" in their ads all the time, but in fact, it's much more like I'm just renting.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Sept 2, 2015 15:20:06 GMT -6
Computer hardware and software... Is a consumable.
That's up the mindset you have to have...
It is a big reason why I started to go hardware.
The cost of some plug ins borders on the ridiculous.
Cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 2, 2015 15:29:18 GMT -6
I plan to eventually have a main group of hardware for tracking, a DAW for recording and editing convenience, and who knows, maybe a summing mixer and some outboard for mixdown, if I'm in the chips. Having plug-ins of classic pieces like the 1176, LA2A, or Pultec, might come in handy in situations where I might have wanted multiple hardware units.
|
|
|
|
Post by winetree on Sept 2, 2015 15:31:40 GMT -6
I've owned audio hardware for over 40 years and never really had a piece go down or taken one to the scrap heap.
If it's broken it can be fixed. And i've been able to sell vintage pieces for huge profits.
Has there ever been a way to fix obsolete computers or software?
I've wasted 10's of thousands of dollars on software and plugins and computers that have become obsolete or broken that have gone to the eco waste.
The only voting power we have is voting with our dollar. If you don't like the plugin software policies, don't buy plugins.
When the companies don't have the money coming in, see then if they'll change their policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Sept 2, 2015 15:51:15 GMT -6
20 years ago I would have given my left nut (not the right it's my favorite ) for the DAW I have now It's truly remarkable what we can do at home. The power we have at our fingertips and the improvement in plugin's even in the last few years amazing. Their is downward pressure on plungin price's because a good programmer can code at home and some of their stuff is great. I know its vaporware but considering where the outlay has got us i am happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 2, 2015 15:55:06 GMT -6
I agree winetree, UAD must be aware that even with their "coupons", I'm still not buying lately.
I understand the coupons being like a sale item, they should have an expiration date, but the coupons they issue for answering a questionnaire or as a consolation for some difficulty should remain in your cart for at least one year, I think.
Slate digital is changing their policies and offers a lot too. I think Bob made a good point about Moore's law, but to me the days of plug-ins being a cash cow are waning, and hopefully some companies will adjust to keep their customers coming back.
The Apollo is a form of a loss leader, but with a few choice UAD plugs, as well as all the others I have, I don't really need to buy many more. That's one reason I think they should make it easier to sell or trade in.
* formatcyes, I hear you, and every day I appreciate the fact I don't have to have multi-track tape recorders in my house, even if I miss their sound a little, as well as having the incredible editing power a DAW offers. Of course there's still some differences between hardware reverbs and software, but since the digital reverbs were always digital, the plug-ins, like Relab's XL480 are incredibly close, and I appreciate not having to spend $8,000 to have a Lexicon reverb as we did in the 80's.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107 
|
Post by ericn on Sept 2, 2015 16:48:12 GMT -6
The lesson is read what you are agreeing to before you buy, is it time consuming , unintelligible leaglize yes! But the first lesson we all learn as consumers is buyer beware! We can vote with our wallets, but I fear it is far to late we have excepted this as the norm because we agreed via neglect.
Yet this is why my PT12 lic is not in my real name, and it and my Ilok are registered to a disposable email acct. I can just sell it all, if you think before you buy, understand the rules you can find the wholes in their armor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 2, 2015 23:05:20 GMT -6
Plug-ins were never a cash cow that I'm aware of.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickcarson on Sept 3, 2015 6:59:14 GMT -6
Bob, with all respect idk about that. When Forbes is writing articles about how dudes sell $500k in the first day of release on certain plugs I think they may be cash cows for some people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 3, 2015 8:08:56 GMT -6
I meant cash cow in the sense that it keeps delivering with little or no maintenance for as long as people are buying. My Relab reverb hadn't changed for something like five years, long after development costs were recouped I think. I'm not against cash cows, I wish I had one in my barnyard!
I was just thinking that it must be much less costly to do a software rollout than to actually get hardware designed, built, marketed, and shipped. I'm no expert on these things though. That's one reason I think it would be a fair deal to be able to exchange plug-ins. The company only has to transfer files digitally, their customer would be much happier than when feeling stuck with something he doesn't use, and hesitant to do the same thing again. They could charge a relatively steep fee, and it still would be worth it in some circumstances.
My mentioning my multi-billionaire landlords earlier was meant to show how some business people think. Keeping an "extra" porter made everything nicer. Floors were cleaned and polished regularly, garbage picked up quickly, the atmosphere was more pleasant. Their "customers" were happier, and felt they were getting treated well for all the money spent. Take that one guy away, and the floors are dirty, garbage lingers, people are a little grumpier, and don't feel quite the same about how much it costs to live here.
Why billionaires feel the need to cut maintenance costs to the bone escapes me. When I produced jingles in the late 80's. I paid everyone 25 - 40% above scale. Giving someone say.. $200 instead of $136 made everyone happy, I still made a great profit, and had less problems when hiring musicians for sessions. That little bit went a long way.
That's why I think UAD, and others might be able to do better by it's clientele.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickcarson on Sept 3, 2015 8:12:00 GMT -6
I dont think relab was as big of a release and alot of other things. Before it was free I knew 0 engineers using it. I do have ssl x-verb which was made by the same dude and is very similar but I only got it as part of a bundle.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Sept 3, 2015 8:35:00 GMT -6
I meant cash cow in the sense that it keeps delivering with little or no maintenance for as long as people are buying. My Relab reverb hadn't changed for something like five years, long after development costs were recouped I think. I'm not against cash cows, I wish I had one in my barnyard! I disagree with this. The original code might be there, but the code needs to be continually massaged for all of the different operating system upgrades, otherwise it goes obsolete with your old machine. The companies that are staying in business, need to keep addressing these changes even if people aren't buying more plugins. Just because the plugin is already created, it doesn't mean the costs are gone. |
|
