Why?

[ms2 184]

3 minutes ago, HUSSAR said:

I have no issues about having to be connected.

Have no issues too actualy because owned mine addons...

but there are limits to bore the buyers with paranoïa.

What seem that you don't understand, with not owning the working codes on your computer, is not far that you shall montly have a rent to have your addons working.

Visit adobe site, each month, peoples working with those products payed to keep access to their own productions... No far... the danger in sim.

As exemple on our sim... the site of aurasim was out this month and the addon don't work any more for a lot of simmers on q400. 

Definitively, I want only owning products with the working proccess on mine computer. 

[CFIJose 5,485]

No developer can force a customer to have an internet connection in order to open up the UI that the customer purchased.

I'm waiting to see how Matt responds to my question. What is he gonna do? I think this is borderline illegal.

Devs worry about piracy. What about the paying customer. This add-on can not be used without an internet connection.

[HUSSAR 263]

3 hours ago, DJJose said:

No developer can force a customer to have an internet connection in order to open up the UI that the customer purchased.

I'm waiting to see how Matt responds to my question. What is he gonna do? I think this is borderline illegal.

Devs worry about piracy. What about the paying customer. This add-on can not be used without an internet connection.

I don't follow your train of thought, as a user of the internet we agree to TOS. EULA etc. it is spelled out in plain sight from your bank to poor Matt here and every service provider in between.  I would have a hard time agreeing with you that this type of activity is illegal.  Can't be borderline, either it is or it isn't.  You have every right not to agree with the TOS or EULA and you would not receive a license to use a product if you didn't.

Remember, you don't own the product, Matt does.  He decides how he wants to structure the license.  

 

[HiFlyer 9,343]

4 hours ago, HUSSAR said:

You cannot blame a developer for trying to combat piracy.

Nope you can't. But you can vote with your wallet about how far you will allow developers fight against piracy to infringe on your own rights and beliefs.

It's a balanced deal. You can't tell developers how to defend their product, and they can't make you buy it.

[CFIJose 5,485]

34 minutes ago, HUSSAR said:

I don't follow your train of thought, as a user of the internet we agree to TOS. EULA etc. it is spelled out in plain sight from your bank to poor Matt here and every service provider in between.  I would have a hard time agreeing with you that this type of activity is illegal.  Can't be borderline, either it is or it isn't.  You have every right not to agree with the TOS or EULA and you would not receive a license to use a product if you didn't.

Remember, you don't own the product, Matt does.  He decides how he wants to structure the license.  

 

You don't have to follow my train of thought. You are not the seller nor the developer of PTA.

It's really simple.

PTA can not be opened and used without an internet connection. It's not specified on the product page and to me this is important. I've been adamant in recommending PTA to every simmer. I think it's a must have add-on, until Matt removes this need to be on line to use the UI, it's buyer beware.

[Dave_YVR 968]

Just how often are you running the PTA ui for it to even be a bother if you are connected to the net?

[PepeBiondi 9]

7 hours ago, HUSSAR said:

You cannot blame a developer for trying to combat piracy.  Ask any dev and they will tell you the staggering numbers.

I have no issues about having to be connected.

Devs have implemented measures to fight piracy for decades, this is nothing new. Requiring a mandatory constant connection borders the ridiculous, and especially because as it has been pointed out numerous times, this only affects the paying customer, pirates get around it anyway one way or the other...

[HUSSAR 263]

I haven't a clue how pirates get around security measures, whatever dev's do to combat theft is up to them.  It is a way for them to try to keep some money in their pockets.  I really don't get this fight against the dev's.  Is it that the OP feels like it is an infringement on his privacy or there is a cost for connection?  Please enlighten me.

[pete_auau 1,154]

whats  the issue  if  you  posting  in here  your on  the internet, maybe  users would  change their  minds  if  their  work  gets  stolen   and  pirated .

[Guest]

4 hours ago, PepeBiondi said:

pirates get around it anyway one way or the other...

No they don't, that's why it's a good way to protect one's work.  

Why people complain about this is beyond me, especially when those same people are using the "internet" to complain about it ... that alone invalidates anyone's objection to the anti-theft methods developers use.

Anyway, vote with your wallet, developers are well aware they'll lose a very small percentage of customers because of their anti-theft policy, but it's the revenue they aren't loosing to theft that far outweighs the negatives as an internet connection requirement doesn't bother the 98%.

What borders on the ridiculous are the complaints about it, and the very fact you can do a simple google search for "XYZ crack" and you'll find 1000's of sites pretending to have cracked software ... what else do you expect developers to do to protect their content?  I don't see anyone here going to those hacking sites and saying, stop doing this because your impacting honest customers???  Do you?  I monitor these sites all the time, and yes I'll often see people using the same userID and IP they use at other web sites ... but I don't see anyone complaining to the hackers?  Obfuscation and impersonation is all I see.

But again, if you don't like it, don't buy it, choice is yours.

Cheers, Rob.

[honanhal 1,420]

But surely the point is that the always-on requirement isn't noted on the product page? If the answer to this issue is "an informed consumer can vote with his or her wallet," it requires the consumer to be, you know, informed.

James

[pete_auau 1,154]

46 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

No they don't, that's why it's a good way to protect one's work.  

Why people complain about this is beyond me, especially when those same people are using the "internet" to complain about it ... that alone invalidates anyone's objection to the anti-theft methods developers use.

Anyway, vote with your wallet, developers are well aware they'll lose a very small percentage of customers because of their anti-theft policy, but it's the revenue they aren't loosing to theft that far outweighs the negatives as an internet connection requirement doesn't bother the 98%.

What borders on the ridiculous are the complaints about it, and the very fact you can do a simple google search for "XYZ crack" and you'll find 1000's of sites pretending to have cracked software ... what else do you expect developers to do to protect their content?  I don't see anyone here going to those hacking sites and saying, stop doing this because your impacting honest customers???  Do you?  I monitor these sites all the time, and yes I'll often see people using the same userID and IP they use at other web sites ... but I don't see anyone complaining to the hackers?  Obfuscation and impersonation is all I see.

But again, if you don't like it, don't buy it, choice is yours.

Cheers, Rob.

actually  Bob i  one  of  those  who  do  go  to these  site  and  i  do have  a go  at  these   pirates   but its  a losing battle  of  words,and i agree  with ya  dont  buy it no ones is  forcing  you  to buy  addons

[MattDavies 320]

Is this really an argument... in 2017?

[MattDavies 320]

15 hours ago, DJJose said:

No developer can force a customer to have an internet connection in order to open up the UI that the customer purchased.

I'm waiting to see how Matt responds to my question. What is he gonna do? I think this is borderline illegal.

Devs worry about piracy. What about the paying customer. This add-on can not be used without an internet connection.

It is a DIGITAL product that requires an active internet to be used - that is the terms of buying the product. Nothing illegal about it.

Can't actually believe I'm having to respond to stuff like this in 2017 lol - what is the world coming to. Next you'll want things like AVSIM to be available to you offline. 

[CFIJose 5,485]

I'm sorry if this debate is a PITA for you. This would not occur in 2017 if devs & sellers would be more transparent with their potential customers.

Buyer beware. This should serve as a public service announcement.

Now I have to learn how to back up & restore my p3d shaders manually, just in case my internet service is lost again.

BTW, I can use my phone's data to post on avsim. I don't need to have my computer on line to use the web.