Guys, the question Nemeth have ta ask themselves isn't 'how can we bring down piracy numbers (which we can't see or measure)?'' but instead 'why did/do only few people want to buy our stuff?'And there's a big difference between those two vital questions, a whole world for some.

THIS is the biggee for me, CoolP. Personal moral integrity or cost aside, Nemeth has to produce a helicopter which is at least on par with the DodoSim 206 Jet Ranger. I have two of their birds - the Huey and the MD902, thinking that the Huey would be the aircraft to fly within the Vietnam War Project, and the MD would be a great alternative to the Dodo Ranger. Well... for me - they're not, and consequently they now never get flown. In fact the Huey has turned me off buying the Aerosoft Huey (which has great reviews and is almost as good as the Ranger).

In short, focus on increasing sales (by raising the appeal there) not on decreasing pirate numbers (which you can't count or measure, as shown).

Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted.

In part there’s a fallacy in the idea developers should respond to piracy by increasing appeal. For most developers increasing quality is already first priority.– it’s very much an arms race driven by enthusiasm for the hobby and the potential in the platform.There’s only one way to increase quality, and that is to invest more.Only more money makes a better FS product.Obviously the problem with investing even more money is at some point you will always get a negative return on investment.Very-very-very easy to do in an FS add-on.That’s OK if you’re under say a 1000 hours, but if you’re closer to 3 or 4 or more, you’re talking about livelihoods.But the fallacy is piracy is proportional to sales, so the more you invest the more attention you receive from pirates.You’ve just served to raise the stakes.Obviously the real goal, if you intend to continue, is to build some sort of margin, and sell more than you spend - no matter the stakes.I think the message in many posts is really, don’t worry about theft – there’s nothing you can do anyway.Philosophically, to me that’s dark ages thinking – and dangerous.Piracy is not a trivial thing in an information society....forget about our little hobby :( It’s like cattle rustling…at the turn of the 19th century.Ignoring theft, a tacit approval, has big implications.

I think the message in your posts is really, don’t worry about focus on theft – there’s nothing you can do anyway.

Made a slight correcting about my intended tenor. I can't really influence what people read then, but this sort of feedback shows me that you've got my point wrong.While your paragraph about quality and investments is 100% true, it does not take into account that quality is just one factor of a product's package and its appeal on potential buyers.Since all devs out there produce quality addons with high workload input the diversification happens on the other aspects like price point, sales system, service (including the one after buying), good manuals, and so on (to name a few). And copy protection used, that's what vgbaron mentioned and all following posters ignored. If your only (foreseeable) benefit of being a legal customer is to install some additional watchdog on your system and having paid for simple RTMF! comments in support forums while wondering about the product's features, the attraction on the next buy may be more piracy focused than before.The 'dark ages thinking' therefore is the one which totally ignores all other influences on sales and customer loyalty. If a guy's only answer on questions is 'I'm the dev, I must know' we may also have a different view on what is 'dark" and what is more open minded. :(

Piracy is not a trivial thing in an information society.

True again and I never, in a single line around the whole Net, stated the opposite. It happens that people want to break down my or other's comments to the simple 'he supports piracy' formula (which seems to work on the same people as Jedi mind tricks do), but the existence of such tendencies actually just shows what's/who's really 'dark' in this game. So, dmaher, if you reduce me to a simple piracy supporter, you may also be more part of an industry's problem than any of the guys you blame for 'dark ages thinking'.Feel enlightened by the numerous good examples in this small business (concerning a high package value) and also take a look on current research outcomes about causes, factors and psychological aspects of piracy which are not easily summarized. Some of them are of course mentioned here in this thread and they don't introduce themselves with 'I'm the dev'. :biggrin:The thing isn't a flight sim community special, it's a constant force on markets, even more physical ones.Your philosophical Einstein approach was a good one, maybe read on there and find out that e. g. focusing on just one factor of an equation tends to bias a view. Einstein was a good writer, and listener. :smile:Just above your post, pj describes his personal view on the appeal of some addons from Nemeth. Do you think he will actually buy stuff because their next thing scans your brain and the one of your kids to avoid any filesharing? No, he will get attracted to that company when he gets the impression that it will be a good buy.If he don't gets that impression, he won't buy and he also won't turn into a pirate as a matter of fact.Task for Nemeth: raise that appeal, that's your focus and priority target.This may include looking closer at the image others have of you and your products.

Sorry CoolIP, I had changed; "message in your posts " to "message in some posts", because it wasn't fair or accurate.As I posted, it occurred to me you didn't say that...it's just the tenor of a lot of threads about piracy. - and I made the change right after.I don't know who said that...maybe no one :( - but it's a vague message I'm getting. I didn't mean to make the post personal - it's meant to be general....and a contrast to your comment.And not meant to imply what you actually think :( about cattle rustling or piracy ;)

By the way, great review on the CS 707. The thing went through a major price point correction and we may all guess that this actually helped more on the sales than any protection thingy ever could.

Dd you notice you got a namecheck on it for your efforts on the CS forums? Deservedly so I might add.Al

Sorry CoolIP, I had changed; "message in your posts " to "message in some posts", because it wasn't fair or accurate.As I posted, it occurred to me you didn't say that...it's just the tenor of a lot of threads about piracy. - and I made the change right after.I don't know who said that...maybe no one :( - but it's a message I'm getting. I did't mean to make the post personal - specific to your point of view - it's meant to be general....and a contrast.

Apologies if my stuff then takes you into account for no reason, dmaher. As you may have guessed, that piracy topic is one of my favourites since it shows e. g. why stereotypes and across-the-board statements are what they are, wrong by design, regardless of the speaker.Once again, apologies and a big thumbsup for your correcting post.

Did you notice you got a namecheck on it for your efforts on the CS forums? Deservedly so I might add.

Ah, there it is. Big thanks for that and I might add that there are quite some CS forum people (e. g. Mark and Lou) which really enhance the whole experience for a bunch of guys since they fill the gaps which sometimes form up when the small CS team is working very busy. Not to forget about the talented painters around.That small community "works" for free and enhances the product while doing this. Win-win-win. :smile:I knew why I liked that review, Alan. But seriously, you've mentioned that price point evolution of the fine thing for good reason there and also showed another interesting and correct aspect, the lowering of prices in rather huge steps after the first market appearance.You can actually set people up with this (lowering!), although that CS case surely turned out good and I don't regret being a day one customer there at all.But to stay on that example: They are using a basic protection scheme (serial check online, once), unlimited downloads of fresh installers and manuals, that forum is active, the prices are good and they also do their famous sales actions on a regular and sometimes even "demand" basis with prices close to stealing.So one does not have to like their planes (although I do), but one can take this as an example of an hopefully running business, not focusing too much on the assumed piracy losses but the actual sales.If I buy stuff from Orbx at FSS I mainly have the same package (concerning the protection thingies and limitations) while enjoying another successful business model in just that small flight sim market.Two examples, two great role-models concerning the actual business in my eyes. Just to name a few. So maybe Nemeth goes on that FSS wrapper, checks the current flaws and wishes and continues to produce stuff since they will sit on their PCs either way, may it be for business or for the passion about that hobby (as a part time dev).

No, not really. It's like when your car is photographed running a red light. You have to prove it isn't you... despite the fact it is your car. Evidence isn't slander or libel.

Doesn't apply - you only have one car. A copy of your car cannot be made and used. However someone could hack a system and steal copyrighted software and upload it.It would be difficult to prove that the branded user uploaded the product. My concern is that, IMHO, it could open the developer up to legal issues *depending* on what he did with the information that "xyz's copy was uploaded to pirate site". One good lawsuit and the developer is history. In today's litigious climate, it could get risky.

Wait... on one hand you say there's no proof protection increases sales yet on the other you attempt to claim it hurts sales? Holy imaginary argument Batman! I'm a developer. I have information you don't. I can state, under oath in a court of law that protection increases sales. I can guarantee that I would not purjor myself doing it. However, your counter-claim would indeed fall under the heresay realm and be dismissed immediately. If the court required physical evidence to back my statement, that too exists. It's time people stopped making claims they have absolutely no information regarding whatsoever. Piracy hurts sales. Period.

Reread what I wrote, Ed - i said there's no proof that EXTREME protection increases sales. And I didn't STATE that it hurts sales I said there is 'speculation' that it does. Please stop reading what you want into what I wrote. The discussion isn't about sales with NO protection versus sales with some protection - of course that helps.

Bull. And that's as politely as I can put it. It can indeed be proven. If you have a product that sells thousands of copys per day/week... then seeing a dip in sales might be much harder to quantify. However.. if you have a product that in it's lifetime you can expect 3000 or so total sales... and the sales are steady at 300 per month... then drop to less than 10 per month in the month the product shows up in the pirate board(s)... it's most certainly quantifiable.

And I say bigger bull - you might like to quantify the results based on your scenario but it is only a speculation. There is no way to prove a) how many copies were ripped off and more importantly ,:( even if you could count them there is no way of proving whether or not they would have been purchased. Just because a product shows up on the pirate boards the same time your sales decline is NOT proof of anything except your sales declined. You might like to connect the two but there is NO proof, just speculation and coincidence.The best one can say is that piracy hurts sales but as to how much - take a guess - you'll be as right as the next guy.Vic

Doesn't apply - you only have one car. A copy of your car cannot be made and used. However someone could hack a system and steal copyrighted software and upload it.It would be difficult to prove that the branded user uploaded the product. My concern is that, IMHO, it could open the developer up to legal issues *depending* on what he did with the information that "xyz's copy was uploaded to pirate site". One good lawsuit and the developer is history. In today's litigious climate, it could get risky.

Nope... not even remotely risky. If the 'branding' is done on the purchaser's system at the time of installation... then there is absolutely no legally legitimate explanation as to how their particular copy (which can indeed be marked as 100% unique) was found on the internet available for download. Facts are never, ever libel or slander. Ever. You can't sue someone for stating a fact... well, you can file... but it won't survive long... and the countersuit could be very, very expensive and allow the developer to retire.Piracy has a major impact in the FS addon industry. You and a great deal of others have tried repeatedly to minimalize it by 'speculating' that it can't possibly be that bad. No matter how many times a developer states it's a lot worse than you think... you'll still 'speculate' that your 'speculation' is more accurate than their factual experience.

Piracy has a major impact in the FS addon industry. You and a great deal of others have tried repeatedly to minimalize it by 'speculating' that it can't possibly be that bad. No matter how many times a developer states it's a lot worse than you think... you'll still 'speculate' that your 'speculation' is more accurate than their factual experience.

..and some here have speculated that there's "no way of knowing how many downloads there are from a pirate site"... oh really? Any IT savvy or networking guy worth his salt will argue that one. There are a number of readily available tools that will do this. Ask any police officer involved in tracking international kiddie porn, or the RIAA looking for pirated movies. I suspect most, or at least many of the devs have this knowledge, too. Sniffing upload or download traffic on known pirate's server - giving away the uploading traffic from a port on someone's particular pc is not rocket science. Firewall or no firewall. Those sessions can been seen and can be counted. A dev has only to look at the purchase lists in his accounting software to link a single pirate to a pirate site. Sure it might take a couple of weeks and some new software to do that automatically, but it can be done. It's a "cost of doing business".

You are aware that the RIAA is a music industry organization? Just asking, because you think they are tracking movies now.Also, the RIAA is THE driver of the constant 'we have pirate numbers' approach and has failed to show reliable data in every lawsuit they've run so far. They assume numbers as Mr. D does (while calling it "measurement" too) and the only success they've had is that, in the civil law process, a basic lump sum is taking into account when speaking about the assumed financial impact which an illegally shared file may have.Why does one need such lump sums? Well, the "weight" of a lawsuit depend on that margin in financial matters. And why don't they use "real download numbers" then, being measured in every single case? There aren't any.That lump sum depends on the state/country the lawsuit runs in. Some US states are more generous there than others so you may guess where the RIAA likes those things to take place. Where money is involved, lawyers are too (in large numbers) and you can of course move some party's (legally relevant) location within some limits when a company is involved.Still, especially in criminal law, you can watermark stuff and later see who bought it, but you can't say who's uploaded /shared it and since that, you can't sentence the owner of the car, but you have to prove that he was the driver in that accident. This is easy if he jumps out of that car, but it isn't if the car is there and the guy was never seen. Owning a car isn't illegal, but driving it into other people is. Owning software isn't illegal, but sharing it with others is, so you have to prove the sharing process and can only sentence that an owner did not properly look over his WLAN or something. These small sentences (in criminal law) aren't the ones e. g. the RIAA is looking for.You may ask your local lawyer about this fact, not the flight sim gauge dev. Ask that dev about some references if you like, he seems to constantly avoid any while you can easily google my statements and facts. ' Facts are never, ever libel or slander.' :Nerd:We've all emphasised more than once that nobody questions an impact of piracy, but he answers as if we all would say that there's is none. Grumpy ol' man syndrome? Maybe, I don't know.From my personal viewpoint (which includes legal education, so I may fail on flight sim gauges :(), he never ever attended any criminal law process regarding piracy. Otherwise knowledge would show up, not avoidance or simple 'I'm the dev' prayers. At least some ability to read what people say and not just getting upset if they do so.Now, what usually happens on the industry's side is that they avoid getting into any criminal lawsuit at all. Those aren't the lawsuits to earn money.Since they don't have numbers, don't have tracks and also can't generate them with legal methods (since setting up a 'honey pot' (google that!) isn't a good idea, they've failed there more than once and received fees for that).You may also google the phrase 'copyright trolls' to catch a glimpse on that industry having established there throughout the years. That's an industry focusing on the civil law outcome only and to be more precise, on the pre-stage of it (so ain't no judge involved there) using masses of imprecise "measures" to get behind some IP addresses and hoping that there large numbers of warning letters forces every 1 or 2 out of thousands to pay those 500+ Dollars without asking questions.They even promote those services with the slogan that you can earn more money out of illegal downloads from e. g. songs than with selling them for 1 Dollar each. And, when looking at their growing business and numbers, there seems to be some truth involved. Grotesque!The simple stereotype believe that everything can be tracked, that watermarked installations are so easy to do and to use in lawsuits of criminal law nature or that even much more severe law enforcement works are so easy to do is just that, a stereotype thinking. This (sadly) not only proves in those small flight sim soft cases, but also in those cases you've mentioned.Mr. D. is happy that some of his stuff may watermark installations, while pirates then share the installers only (no installation run), remove the marks or just install them with some fake data. Just to give some examples.Looking into the history of the whole industry against piracy thingy, that process of "clever" protection and sometimes even more clever pirates is running since decades. See a winner there? On the dev's side?How often have we read that secure/unbreakable/easy to track/that's the solution statement (countless times, from very confident guys) and how often has it proven wrong? Yeah, you name it.So we may conclude that Mr. D. (still) is in the strong believe that heavy protection leads to good sales. That's an opinion one can take as such and also respect. If he doesn't know any better, nobody accuses him of lying, only of not knowing better or opening his eyes, so to speak,Now most people already know that good product packages (with a not too intrusive protection) actually do enhance sales, while only some pirates around care about the protection itself then, may it be basic or heavy.If protection only bugs the valid customers while the pirates go without activation limits or iris scans, too much of that protect-o-thingy of course can hurt sales, at least on the next buy. We don't have to assume there, just use the forum search to find some cases. :wink:Or do you buy stuff because protection forces you to? This would mean that people are born as pirates while I'd say that some seem to die as stereotype followers only. -_-Basic protections are as clear as the heavy ones when it comes to showing that this thing is meant to be bought before using. Just sayin'.

To be closer to the topic, I'd say that the FSS wrapper and download service (Orbx uses it for example) and some very close look into the forums on wishes and demands looks like the most practical solution available for Nemeth.I don't know about the license costs there (which have to be taken into account of course), but maybe other systems like Flight1 (which would also offer a trial option) may come in handy too. Raise the appeal, not the hurdles for valid customers.That piracy complain is read, understood, respected, but it won't increase sales at all, especially when you announce to stop all development (which may be read as "full stop" and doesn't come in appealing to potential customers looking for after-buy-services).

Nope... not even remotely risky. If the 'branding' is done on the purchaser's system at the time of installation... then there is absolutely no legally legitimate explanation as to how their particular copy (which can indeed be marked as 100% unique) was found on the internet available for download. Facts are never, ever libel or slander. Ever. You can't sue someone for stating a fact... well, you can file... but it won't survive long... and the countersuit could be very, very expensive and allow the developer to retire.Piracy has a major impact in the FS addon industry. You and a great deal of others have tried repeatedly to minimalize it by 'speculating' that it can't possibly be that bad. No matter how many times a developer states it's a lot worse than you think... you'll still 'speculate' that your 'speculation' is more accurate than their factual experience.

I think we agree ED, maybe it's my way of explaining my point. *IF* a branded product shows up on a torrent site and *IF* all thre developer did was post " These are the names of the users whose product showed up on the site" - I agree - there is no issue BUT if the post were to say "These are the pirates who are uploading my software" - THAT is a whole new ballgame and might make someone a bunch of $$.Also, I suggest you look up the definition of speculation - it is exactly that - a theory - with as much validity as any other theory - usually based on some fact but mostly supposition. There are entire industries designed to "speculate" and predict trends based on partial fact, theory and speculation.And I am not speculating that my speculation is more factual then their actual experience - I am SPECULATING that some of their interpretation of their experience is flawed. I'm sorry but to quantify a decline in sales as caused by a pirate upload is as much a speculation as any other theory. Might be true - might not be true but CAN NOT BE PROVEN. The operative word is PROVEN. No matter how much you wish it so, it can not. I'm not saying that piracy is good. I am not saying that it has no effect. I AM saying that the effect, so far, has noty been quantified by anyone beyond supposition (speculation).It has been my experience that "pirates" fall into 3 basic types:1) The true pirate who makes boxed and software copies of your product and sells it.2) The script kiddies who download anything and everything so they can upload it all over and get L33t points3) The person who either can not afford to pay or chooses not to pay.Yes, they are all thieves but I speculate (<--- that word again) that the majority of pirates in our communbity fall into category 2.About 40 years ago when I was actively developing shareware these same arguments were being bandied around. Back then, it was the honor system - you had a nag screen but little else. Yes, a LOT of software didn't get paid for but there was no way then and there is NO WAY now to quantify how much - period. Did I LIKE the fact that my stuff was being stolen? Hell no and I really sympathize with todays developers - that is why I have hundreds of $$ worth of product that I paid for and didn't like.So again, I didn't say piracy doesn't hurt the developer, I said you can not tell how much it has hurt.Vic

Tough decision. You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. The problem is, there is no fool proof protection against piracy. If the pirate is dedicated enough, any protection can be cracked. The idea is to find that balance between offending the end user and making it more difficult for the casual hacker. I wouldn't want to be a developer in this market.Vic

Well said! Wish them luck too!

Whilst I don't doubt that sales are hurt by piracy, I think developers/publishers are perhaps ignoring other factors which are almost certainly damaging their sales:i) FS addons are a niche market and we have too many developers chasing too few customers. There's a certain amount of product duplication going on as well - I'm sure we can all name several aircraft or airports which have been released by two developers.ii) The economic situation which is affecting most of us means a lot of us are tightening our belts. My pay has been frozen since last year but taxes, bills and the cost of living continues to rise. I'm sure a lot of other people are in the same boat.iii) The customer is far more savvy these days and not so easily sucked in by pretty screen shots and product descriptions filled with hyperbole. A lot of us don't buy on the day of release, we sit back and wait for the feedback from others and perhaps wait for the inevitable patch or service pack.iv) Some developers offer very poor support, some adopt adversarial or unbecoming attitudes with their customers or in public forums such as this - which inevitably turns the customer away from making future purchases.Interestingly enough, there is a similar thread over on SoH and Michael Davies (formerly of Alphasim, among others) has some very interesting comments on the piracy situation.Now as for Nemeth, as someone said very early on in this thread the early adopters of the latest addon - the piracy of which has been the catalyst for their suspending development - were pretty unanimous in their condemnation of the flight model. I would suggest that at least part of the reason for poor sales has been word getting out that the flight model on this product was sub-par. I know in my case I was planning to purchase until I heard the flight model was poor. I wonder if Nemeth will release a patch for the flight model of the AW109 or will they just leave their paying customers in the lurch?I also noticed a comment early on in this thread too about the loss of PSS being down to piracy. As someone who has been using MSFS for 13 years and owned *ALL* of the PSS products I will say piracy was just an excuse for their demise. Starting with the release of their A330/A340 (in 2004 I think) their products were very shoddy and they let themselves down very badly. The A330/A340 flight model was very bad until eventually a *customer* made some new cfg and air files for them. The 777 release wasn't too good - it was released before it was ready and properly tested, buggy panel and systems programming, atrocious flight model which wasn't fixed until some months later when PSS hired Rob Young to make a new flight model. PSS promised they learned their lessons and would get it right with the 757 in 2006, but again that release was a disaster and they made the same mistakes all over again, releasing an aircraft which was not ready for the prime time. We were missing the promised load editors and fuel planners for many months. Then of course there is the rather subjective opinion on my part that starting with the Dash 8 PSS 3D modelling and textures were far surpassed by contemporary freeware groups such as Project Opensky and IFDG. Don't forget back in the day these were all "premium" MSFS addons at the upper end of the price scale, PSS had the very unpopular practice of charging the customer for each individual repaint, and they had that ridiculous support forum where each and every message had to be submitted to a moderator for screening before it would be posted.So it's not really hard to see why by the time FSX rolled around PSS were well on their way to crashing and burning. In my opinion piracy was just a convenient scapegoat.