The whole "unofficial business model" and needing a "CYA" clause to go after the worst offenders is merely a way to try to soothe their conscience. They have falsely assumed the lack of anti-piracy measures as an unofficlal "OK" to pirate it, even to the point of ignoring the explicitly stated 60 day trial period, and the requirement to delete it (on the honor system, mind you) after said period should they not like it. Perhaps you would like to give some specific examples of other businesses that "do this all the time." But if they just said "you can use it as long as you like, and pay us if you want" then they would have much less legal basis to sue. It's not that they don't know (they write the software. If a tiny user pirates it and uses it for 4 years, but writes a handful of songs, they aren't going to care. If they find a pro studio using the pirated version for years, of course they're going to enact the policy and sue that studio. That way they can operate a certain way 90% of the time, but for the major abusers, they have their asses covered legally. The official policy has to be written a certain way, just so it allows them to exercise some judgement. The unofficial business model covers this. I have quoted it here for your convenience: However, maybe you did, seeing as your original comment is one GIANT assumption. But unless you have something proving that you're right and everybody else is wrong, don't try to tell us how to decide If you personally feel that you need to pay for it, or that you want to pay for it, then by all means pay for it. Stop trying to shove your viewpoint down everybody else's throat. You simply have no more evidence backing up this claim than anybody else does. Just because you'd LIKE to not pay $60 doesn't change what Cockos chose as their business model. But statements like this don't leave any room for alternate possibilities: I'm certainly agreeing that there are all kinds of possibilities. Maybe Cockos would like people to have a fair chance to confidently buy their product? Maybe they offer a free 60 day trial, officially, as socially-conscientious software developers that don't want software pirates getting viruses from cracked versions? Do you have any evidence to suggest that your theory is any more correct to make these definitive statements? I and others have explained that businesses very commonly make an official policy that doesn't directly line up with their internal model. You don't know what their business model is. You are, again, making huge assumptions without actually backing them up. The simple facts on their website and Reaper itself LOGICALLY point to them wanting to make that $60 off of you if you use it for longer than your 60 trial period, no "wink wink knudge knudge". They don't even have a free version for educational or non-profit organizations yup, it's still $60. If we're going to speculate about their motivations, read my other comments. Cockos is a company that produces Reaper, a DAW product that costs $60 for personal- or low-volume commercial use and $225 for high-volume commercial use.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |