I've seen loads of references to judgmenets which are completely wrong. They have made comments without actually understanding how the EU Court of Justice works in these matters. ** Update : Can I transfer my Sonic Charge plugin license? ** That would put this entire issue in a different perspective. For example, we are (somewhat reluctantly) thinking of giving in and implementing a challenge response system. After all, we want 100% satisfied customers. We simply feel that our current copy protection solution isn't good enough to support the amount of transfers that we saw earlier this year. A fully automated public procedure would be too easy to abuse. As things are, each transfer needs to be made by hand. Most of our upgrades haven't even required you to enter a new serial number to use the new version (the only exception being MicroTonic 3.0, but it was still a free upgrade). Our "short" registration keys are personal and based on your real name and email address (emphasising that they constitute your personal right to use our software). We wanted to keep the copy protection hassle-free, simple and not requiring a dongle or internet connection. However, the main reason why we do not allow license transfers is because we do not have the technical means to actually deactivate a license. They are coming.) We have actively supported our small product catalogue with free upgrades and content for nearly 10 years now and we do not intend to quit. You buy our "blessing" to use our programs for a reasonable one time fee and in return we regard it almost as an "obligation" to offer support and updates so that you can continue to use what you payed for as long as you need it. I almost regard a sale as entering a mutual contract. The latter is actually how I (and many other software developers) have thought about software for a long time already. Most of what you do today on a computer is more or less online already and in the future I think software will rarely be viewed as something you pay to own (delivered to you on a DVD or via download), but rather something you pay to use (either with money or with ads). This makes the law toothless and personally I have a feeling that despite its noble cause (strengthening consumer rights) this whole deal might run into a bit of a dead end. If a company employs a challenge response protection there is nothing that forces the company to implement a technology for transferring licenses. DRM and copy protection is not within the scope of the law or the trial in question. These laws are (as so often) a few years behind in the rapid changing world of technology and no one knows how to apply them to modern software markets like mobile app stores or to games that are tied to specific user accounts (e.g. I also think eXode may be correct in that the case isn't even settled yet and that media jumped a bit quickly on this. It basically makes a "download" equivalent to a CD/DVD and therefore EU customers should be allowed to sell their "downloads" second hand just like they are allowed to sell used DVDs. I am far from an expert but the way I understand it is that there is no new law, only a ruling in a specific case that sets a precedent on how to interpret an existing law (concerning software on physical media) when applied to "downloads". But let me elaborate a bit on the EU law before I share my thoughts further on resales. The floodgates just opened wide as soon as the word hit KvR. Unfortunately it caused us a lot of work. We did for a short time earlier this year as a test after not allowing them for nearly ten years. Sonic Charge does not currently allow license transfers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |