>Sorry, but the increasing numbers of pirated software says >otherwise. Not everyone sees the same lines that form right and >wrong and there are many that can be swayed to either side >depending on how they justify it to themselves. The popularity of >bit torrent file sharing sites and PtoP sites proves this.>In a perfect world, yes, everyone is honest. I am a realist but not >naive.It didn't say 'everyone' was honest, I said 'most' people are honest.Despite the bit-torrent sites, Ptp etc. The Record/CD, and DvD stores are still in business, the IPod's still sell, downloaded software delivery is fast becoming the norm.Of course you have to take steps (legislative and copy protection wise) from making it 'too easy'. But after that 'most' people are basically honest and if they want the product, believe it is a good value for its price, and can afford it, they will have no problem paying for it.Regards.Ernie.

Well, to me, I see it as not only do they not want even make an attempt (ok fine another debate), but from a potential customers' point of view; it looks like they have no interest in making the developer money which is their job as a publisher. That's the undertone.Now, I'm sure that's not what they meant in their heart of hearts but that's exactly the message they're sending.You just don't tell anyone in an open and public statement what you're going to do with security of this nature or manner. To me it is like telling all the bad guys to come on in and take whatever you want because we just can't do anything about it.The ironic thing here is that I'm sure even their downgraded scheme will work just fine, so once again I have to wonder why.You see my point yet...hehe :-)Edit: You have to realize that just because you and I may understand what they're saying most will not. Not everyone reading these forums or visiting their site are as deep into the hobby as the rest of us our that are honest.

JTEK,How many times do I have to explain what happened. You know what. Tough! I could care less what you think. How's that for respect?And I fully understand the intrusivness of some schemes. Read my friggin posts."Honor amongst thieve" Give me a break.I hate to outright attack anyone here, but you sir are off your rocker.Edit: You got a problem with us that's totally off topic with this topic then take it up with me directly if you want to attack me like this.Edit 2: We aren't a publisher either, we are a developer.Edit 3: ROFL, I see you've disabled your profile as well, so I guess we can't discuss the in's and out's of how to make a business work and the pitfalls associated with it. Time for you to go to school my friend.

Jeff:Thank you very much for your last post.It just saved me oodles of time endeavoring to show what your "standard" style of response is like.Know what the best part of your response is?(drum roll)I wasn't even talking about OSS when referring to those "sceneries". :-eekCongratulations on your outstanding perspicacity in retaining customers for your admittedly OUTSTANDING scenery. See you in class.

Its unfortunate that companies these days have to take pretty drastic measures to combat those who choose not to be honist and do the right thing.However with the advent of cheap CD burners, and now pretty cheap DVD Burners, Something is bound to happen.I do have to say, I am not a big fan of the system that cloid9 uses for protection, I think it places to much unecessary control, for the company, and I think that kind of system, can be frustrating sometimes.Zach Bender K7LTF

well said. Aerosoft has basically told people it's OK to pirate their products as long as they don't expect to be given support.They might as well stop selling anything and releasing their entire product base as open source, the effect won't be that different.

<>Personally, I don't think your macho statements about fighting piracy will do you any good. And I absolutely don't think your references to people's parents, upbringing and degrees of literacy are either justified, appropriate or particularly intellegent.Is that clear enough for you?Jim

<>I have rarely read any more belligerent, arrogant, condescending, wrong-headed and pompous posts as those you have chosen to litter this thread with.If you exemplify the type of person involved with your company, then you can certainly count me out as a potential customer...not that you would care...and trust me, I could care less that you care less.Have you considered counseling? I really mean that. You seem to have significant anger management and self-image issues that should be addressed as soon as possible.Jim

Well, it says you replied to post #5 which was mine so that's the way I took it. Sorry if I was wrong.And we did announce about 5 sceneries and then had a major personnel switch over amongst a gazillion other things which I had to constantly explain over and over again before we got things aligned again.

Uh Jim,You saw what I was responding to, correct?

Jim,This is an issue I've said that I am going to be real pain about. Sorry if you don't like it. I'm willing to live with that.Clear enough for you?

Jeff,I find your reaction somewhat strange. I think its a great experiment by Aerosoft and I hope that they will be proven right. Don't discount Mathijs Kok. He is a professional that has worked for a long time in the online add-on business.It's not like there are already other online retailers that work this way. Most SimMarket add-ons come with minimal protection and it seems to work for them.In the not flightsim related software entertainment business we have the example of Stardock with their unprotected rerlease of Galactic Civilizations II.As you yourself are knowledgeable about piracy and how it works you must know that getting any add-on for free just requires a little knowledge (where to look) and no skills (no need to go into detail here in an open forum).The no/little protection approach simply considers the added costs of authentication/protection checking servers or programs. Aerosoft seems to have reached the conclusion that the cost of such systems is higher than the benefit they get from the extra sales.Its good marketing from them to spin their new policy as we care for our genuine honest customer. It works for me anyway.If you want to win the war on piracy I have bad news for you. This war has been going on for a long time. I myself remember as far back as the early years in the Commodore 64 era. The only thing ever achieved against piracy has been against the casual copying for friends kind of pirate. Untill now every new protection scheme has had a period of relative succes until it is eventualy cracked.Don't get me wrong. Piracy is stealing and it must hurt when its your own liveswork that is cracked and shared on the net. I just think/hope that a beter relation between the honest customer and the developer is the way forward.Maybe FS-X will come with buildin DRM. That way we can go back to just bickering about which add-on is 'best' or most accurate. :-) The piracy issue is so full off negative feelings and experiences its depressing me.

Boshar,I still think you're misunderstanding the gest of my reaction.It's not really about the war against piracy in this particular case, it's the 2 sided statement Aerosoft chose to make for no reason at all.Like I said in one of or serveral of my replies hehe: I don't see anything wrong with their setup and I applaude them for taking measures to further streamline their particular process, however, to say in the same breath that it is because we can't stop piracy is absolutely ludicrous and further more because they are such a large publisher it does have future ramifications on the rest of us in that it sends an open invitation and message to everyone that we in the FS industry feel as though we can't do anything about it so we're just going throw our hands up and say come and get it.I couldn't disagree with you more that's it's good marketing. In fact it could hurt them really bad when it comes to looking for future developers to attract to their store if those developers think that their stuff is just going to get stolen. Further more it could harm exisiting relationships as well and that's sad because I think they are great people over there.Do you see what I mean when I say I think they have made 2 seperate and even contradictory statments?Let me put it another way:Any time a publisher or developer makes a change to their system it should be for the customers' benefit and not for the benefit of the bad guys. If you read their statement it sounds like they've done this also because they bad guys are simply too good and are winning. In fact that's exactly what they've said and that's a horrible attitude. I'm sure they didn't mean it to come out like that but it really did, and I really get bent when I see stuff like this.Alot of people have gone to alot of trouble to try and continue to fight this battle and when we see statements like this come from publishers who have alot of our friends' business, we are going to get very upset.It has nothing to do with what their actual protection scheme is, it has everything to do with the how they portray this industry, and I don't like it one bit.I'm also certain that they do not wish to have anyones' stuff stolen so why they would say something like this is just beyond all comprehension.Like I said before, this is one issue that I'm just going to be a royal pain in the you know what about and probably alienate alot of people who may have considered me to be a friend. I think we just saw a good example of that with Jim's responses to me. I am just not going to aplogize for being so harsh on this issue though and I'm going to have to accept the fact these people are probably really hating me right now.

It seems like the piracy issue is an obsession to FS developers.All software or files, and a lot of them way more expensive and way more poipular than any FS addon are pirated every day, so it's kind of impossible for anyone in the software business to prevent a certain degree of piracy. It should be assumed as part of the business itself.Nonetheless I agree that certain measures are necessary to prevent a free interchange of files or software.Flight1 and PSS are the ones I like the best. They do take some measures, but they are not a big hassle. I can live with those installers perfectly well.Leo

The way I read this (between the lines) is that they are phasing out their online registration checking server. Not running such a server saves them operating costs and they guess that the extra loss in piracy is less than the cost of running that system.Their new protection seems to be on the same level as that of the FS Addon products that I can buy via SimMarket so I don't see why you would have a problem with that. (juding from your banner)I fully understand the problem with piracy but as a knowledgable observer I can see the folly of trying to get money from someone thats broke or from the other guy that never ever bought anything besides the hardware he uses to run all those stolen programs on. Both will show up in the piracy statistic both will never be a source of income for anyone. They are criminal they are thiefs but they will never ever be customers like you and me.Stronger protection methods alienate some customers. It certainly alienates me. They will lose me as a customer over this just because I don't like the extra hassle. I sure hope that those stronger protection methods get them lots of extra sales from the former pirates / thiefs. I could even make the statement that they seem to find the pirates / thiefs more important than me the lazy buying all the add-ons I can get my hands on customer. But its their choice.My main reason for starting this thread was to advertise Aerosofts new customer friendly copy protection. To me this is an important feature for an add-on. I hope that lots of people that agree with me vote with their money and get Aerosoft the income they deserve.