Beware this type of Sofware security system

[barryward12345 0]

There are now software providers who use a system of anti-piracy security that only allows you to install the software a "limited" number of times. Recently a friend bought an expensive graphics programme which only allowed 2 installations -- he was not really aware of this when he purchased it online , even though we both have to admit that it was implicitly stated to him before purchase - really it was more a matter that the "impact" of this was not immediately evident.Shortly after the first installation , he decided to purchase a new computer as he found that his old one was not performing that well with the new software -- even though it fell into the "minimum specifications" advertised. So, after purchasing the new machine , he had to use his second allowed installation. Then guess what -- the Hdd of the new machine failed fairly quickly requiring a new one -- BUT no amount of explantion to the software provider would allow him to install the software into his new Hdd. So now he has kissed his hard earned cash goodbye -- needless to say, this particular provider is now firmly on his NEVER BUY FROM THEM AGAIN shortlist.Now, I believe that this system MAY be creeping into the payware Flightsim world. All I can say is BEWARE!! and think carefully before you buy!!Barry

[Guest]

well, nothing new about that.Usually when you have a good reason the manufacturer will grant you more installations, like Microsoft has done since the introduction of Windows XP.The only people who are really hurt by this are those who want to install it on their friends' computers, and their friends' friends', and their friends' sisters' as well for good measure.

[W2DR 1,860]

Not just "may be" Barry. It has already arrived in the flightsim world. I know from personal experience there is at least one well-known vendor who is limiting the number of reinstalls and will simply turn them off after a certain point. There is no doubt that what happened to me, based on the vendor's current EULA, is illegal in the U.S., but who has the time, or money, to fool with it. I just chalk it up to experience and buy my stuff somewhere else. But I'm awfully picky about who I buy from these days. Thank goodness there are still guys around like DreamFleet, RealAir, Flight1, PMDG, and a couple others who can fill all the needs. Doug

[Guest Satchmo]

Given the hoo-haa over recent software protection for FS add-ons. I cannot imagine any developers (or publishers) selling an add-on with such limitations. They would be insane to try it, we'd be insane to buy it. *:-*The product would be dead in the water before it started.PMDG relented, after the all the flak they recieved concerning the protection on their 737NG.Which by the way, is a superb product.:-kewlEven before all the P$$ fuss, I'd given up buying their products a because their online installation was, frankly, a PITA. :-erksThe flight-one commercial wrapper seems the most sensible compromise(just don't forget your old credit-card numbers ;-) )Never happen! <-- famous last words?Cheers:-outtaSatchmo

[Guest Ray_CYYZ]

Simple solution:Write his credit card company and dispute the charges. Problem solved!Company looses the revenue, already lost the customer due to their lack of customer service.The consumer has rights too, just have to exercise them.

[Guest jaapverduijn]

"(...) when you have a good reason the manufacturer will grant you more installations (...)"You don't have to give the manufacturer a good reason: under the legislation of your (and my) country you don't have to give them any reason at all. Once the money has been accepted by the manufacturer, he has one main obligation: to supply the buyer with the full and unrestricted enjoyment of his purchase.Hardly anybody takes these things to court, although MicroSoft has recently been VERY willing to, on insisting request, waive the whole Windows-XP activation nonsense for The Netherlands, indicating that either somebody DID take the issue to court and won, or that they (Microsoft) don't want the case to go to court because their position is weak. Software being a relatively new product, consumer protection has to do some catching up. But I guess both you and I will live long enough to see it happen: the explicit PROHIBITION of consumer-unfriendly foolishness like the initial poster described. It will be interesting to follow how legislation will develop, in order not to create a free-for-all for potential pirates. However, jurisprudence in consumer protection legislation indicates that the consumer (as opposed to the manufacturer/supplier) is generally considered the "weaker" party, that should be protected, and should not unreasonably suffer from measurements that said supplier or manufacturer takes to protect his own interests. The keyword is "unreasonably". Considering MicroSoft's not generally publicized leniency when it comes to nullifying the "activation stuff" in case the customer sticks to his guns long enough, it seems that the meaning of "(un)reasonably" tends to be interpreted in favor of the customer. We'll wait and see. Jaap Verduijn.

[Guest sbdwag]

You have a static ip assigned to you by your ISP that stays the same as long as you have a account with that provider. As long as you install to that IP Im sure no Developer would ever limit your number of installs. If however you IP is somehow blocked or you have installs across several static ip's that signals a problem to a developer. Talk is cheap but fortunatly anything you do on the Internet leaves a trail directly back to you. And there is nothing you can do to prevent that.RegardsDennis Waggoner

[Guest Shocky]

yeah , the consumer has rights too! :-8 :-lolAnd I have the right to install it 10000 times if I feel like it.. who are they to decide how many times I reinstall a product.It's like buying a new car and then tell that one can only drive it twice a year. :-rollBest thing is just not to get involved with this kind of companies IMO. :-) :-waveshocky :-hah"You talk so much , but you say so little" :-boom

[qnh 70]

>There is no doubt that what happened to me, based on>the vendor's current EULA, is illegal in the U.S., but who has>the time, or money, to fool with it. Yes, just because it is in the EULA or Terms and Conditions does not mean that it can override the law of the land as Microsoft have already discovered.--qnh

[Guest jmarcure]

The limited install method is old stuff. Lotus as well as others used it as far back as the mid 90s. I remember a Lotus application called Symphony that only allowed a limited number of installations. In fact, you even had to properly uninstall it before you could reinstall it. I remember it caused us a great deal of problems when we had a disk crash on us. The limited installs and issues related to hardware crashes was one of the main reasons we switched from PCs to Microsoft Word and Excel on MACs. As for myself I don

[Guest allcott]

If just 5 per cent of the clarity and lucidity of thought spent justifying an unjustifiable position and moaning incessantly in irrelevant forums was spent explaining to the vendor why the problem had occurred, the `problem` would go away. Food for thought?And for dessert: Some software vendors now share database information on persistent (coff) `reinstallers`.After Eight? Some of those vendors now decide they don't want your money - and it's their absolute RIGHT to NOT sell it to you if they don't want to. Armchair lawyers, whiteknuckle your armrests now. Allcott

[Guest]

In fact the manufacturer is under no such requirements AT ALL.The contract which states the condition of sales says clearly the limitations of that contract.Those limitations are that you can install it twice and twice only, then that's legally binding.Out of goodwill you may get more than that, just as the manufacturer may give you a free upgrade or a discount on that upgrade, something he's under no obligation to do either.The contract could also place a time limit on your use, or provide for a limited number of times you can use it.The moment you accept that contract, which is laid out in the license agreement, you agree to those limitations as to how you may use the product.

[Guest Fortress]

>In fact the manufacturer is under no such requirements AT>ALL.>The contract which states the condition of sales says clearly>the limitations of that contract.Sorry, you're wrong...Not - as noted in the original post - if the terms are "implied", restricting terms must always be expressed (here in the UK at least). Also this EULA is null and void under UK law due - using words in Jaapverduijns post - it contradicts UK legislation regarding "full and unrestricted enjoyment of his purchase".In the UK at least this EULA is not worth the "paper" it's written on!Cheers,Paulhttp://www.strontiumdog.plus.com/cin.gifwww.bavirtual.co.uk/cin.htm - please give generously!!Officially licenced by British Airways plc for use of name and logo[p]AMD XP2800+ Barton, Gigabyte GA-7NNXP nForce2, 1Gig Crucial PC3200 DDR 400MHz, Gainward 128 MB GF4-4200, SB Audigy, 3 x WD Caviar SE[/p]

[Guest allcott]

Quite correct and perfectly sound. A software vendor may choose to restrict the application of a licence through contract, as the misuse of that licence outside the terms of contract may lead the USER to legal problems, but not the vendor. Multiple reinstallation may give rise to such misuse and as the first post in this thread stated categorically they knew what they were signing up for - TOUGH!Allcott

[Guest Fortress]

Uhmm. No. Ever heard of "statutory rights"?"he was not really aware of this when he purchased it online , even though we both have to admit that it was implicitly stated ""Implicitly" is not the same as an expressed statement - too open to interpretation; it does not allow for an informed choice which any contracting party would require before they could be considered fully informed ie. the third UK requisite to a binding contract: "consideration".Cheers,Paulhttp://www.strontiumdog.plus.com/cin.gifwww.bavirtual.co.uk/cin.htm - please give generously!!Officially licenced by British Airways plc for use of name and logo[p]AMD XP2800+ Barton, Gigabyte GA-7NNXP nForce2, 1Gig Crucial PC3200 DDR 400MHz, Gainward 128 MB GF4-4200, SB Audigy, 3 x WD Caviar SE[/p]