PSS Press Release - January 16, 2008

[jdk2 1]

Just thinking out loud here, but I wonder why Microsoft doesn't offer the product activation scheme to third-party developers to help with the issue?Regards,Jim Karn

[McCrash 3]

How on Earth can anyone figure out how many copies of a product have been illegally used?

[virtuali 4,421]

>I'm curious whether you can speak more to the cost/benefit>analysis you did to determine that 15% of gross was a>reasonable price. Wowzer. Hollywood agents only take 10%!>>Did you really see sales volume increase to make this>worthwhile? Or was it more peace of mind?It's not "just" Activation. We choose Esellerate for many reasons, not simply protection, but mainly as a complete way to sell the software, without being hampered in administrative chores. We are software developers, and not very comfortable with admin/financial tasks. The biggest mistake a developer might do, is to improvise itself as an admin, financial, webmaster, security expert, etc. We prefer to concentrate to what we do best (Flightsim programming) and pay 3rd parties to do *their* job.With Esellerate we got:- Order processing, all using powerful redundant servers whose costs are spread over thousand of customers- Credit card processing, handling of sales, refounds, CC fraud, etc.- Split payments between developing parties, without having to fill sales reports, make calculations, make payments, paying bank fees.- Sales reports to all parties involved- Bandwidth- Activation servers, again using a powerful redundant infrastructure that doesn't go down the day of a successful release, so activation are always available 24/7- Precise monthly payments and all invoicing, tax, VAT rules, all covered out.That's all included, in their fees, that's why I think it's reasonable, because it saves us from having a staff member dedicated to that. Regardless if we used or not activation, the cost would have been exactly the same, so it make sense using it.It's *very* difficult to estimate piracy impact. Sometimes, you can have an idea if you offer freely downloadable updates, by crossing the sales numbers against users download the patch. Not 100% accurate (legit users might need download the patch twice, for example), but you roughly get the general trend.When we were publishing under the old LAGO, we had a 5:1 ratio for patch downloads against actual sales. And that was for the less expensive product we had, the Terramesh at 5$ at piece. By the most conservative estimates, I'd say that having an effective protection will probably double sales.

[Ramasurinen 0]

This is always such an interesting topic when it comes up, it's always enlightening to me to see peoples' views on it.I think the cloud9 system is a really good idea overall, and though I don't love Flight1's method, I can deal with it. I think they're both a little invasive but I can understand the rationales behind them. While I don't think every pirated copy equals a lost sale I certainly don't begrudge developers their desire to protect their investments, not at all. I was one myself once.The main point though is that at least in cloud9's system I get to try their products before paying for them in a time limited demo. I can't count how many times I've purchased FS addons based on screenshots alone and been totally disappointed with them. I've been at it long enough now that I know which products to avoid and only support the developers who consistently create quality addons for the sim, but for a newcomer it can be a minefield of lost cash and disappointment. Regardless, when cloud9 brings either their MB339 or F-104 over to FSX, I'll be there hehe.What worries me most though is this concept of 'licensing'. I firmly believe this is a breach of the basic merchant-client agreement. This isn't a service we're purchasing, nor something we're leasing with an intent to return it after a certain time of use, it's a product that we're buying whole. I'm dreading the day that my legally purchased FSX no longer fires up because I've made just one too many hardware changes. I believe developers should think very hard about this personally. The way I see it, when I buy something I *own* it, end of story. The first time I saw a coke ad in a movie theatre was the last time I went to a movie theatre. I think that was somewhere around 1992. I haven't given a dime to a theatre since and I used to go quite often. That's how strongly I feel about breaking such unwritten contracts between merchants and buyers. I didn't pay to see ads as a form of captive audience, I paid to see a movie. Similarly I didn't lease my FS addons, I bought them. :)Cheers,-Mike

[Guest fsxmissionguy]

That's great info, Umberto. I had assumed that you were receiving a multitude of services for the 15% fee, but your original reply didn't expand on these much.Thanks for taking the time to educate us.Cheers,Kevin

[Guest fsxmissionguy]

Mike ... yea, the ads in the movies is one of my pet peeves as well. Interestingly, Hollywood still gets my money (I just buy the DVD now.) But the movie theatre doesn't. And we all know that the movie theatre's don't make any money showing movies.Movie theatres only make money selling popcorn and Coke! So, its surprising that they believe long-term they'll make money forcing their audience to sit through ads.As to the "try before you buy" distribution method: That's OK for some types of add-ons, but for mission developers it really isn't an option. Missions are inherently different from say an add-on plane.Missions are more like movies (once you've seen them, there is a limited number of times you will want to see them again). Add-on planes are more like buying someone's car. You'll keep driving it after you've driven it three or four times.

[Guest Seadog]

Look at Virtuali/Umberto's post, #32 above, for an approximation.Two major elements to this interesting discussion being held over the cooling corpse of poor PSS: (1) Whether and how best to copy protect to deter piracy, and (2) how much of piracy is lost sales.Since piracy increases the cost to me, deprives me of the efforts of those whom it discourages and impoverishes those who gallantly sail in the face of it, I say Heck, Yes, please engage in copy protection measures.My experiences with Flight 1, Sim Market & FSAddon, FS Genesis, Aerosoft and Esellerate (Cloud 9) and multiple others are okay, as is my experience with MS activation. Good people will work with you. It helps to read the instructions, make the appropriate copies and maintain digital records.I dearly want some FSD products, but every time I get ready to purchase, I pull back because of the enormously high background noise of how difficult their scheme is to use and how likely they are to assume they are victims. Here's a case, not unique, of the method of copy protection actually reducing income. There's a rule in life - When everybody says it's you, it's you. Guys, it's you. You have too high a confidence level in too poor a system. No matter what you think the truth may be, it no longer matters - the returns are in. The polls are closed.As to how much is being lost, Umberto cites a situation in which up to 80% of the copies in circulation may have been pirated. But it is rank speculation to extrapolate a lost sales figure from such data. My own guess is that it is not likely to be the major portion. A lot of people who would not otherwise buy something, will take it if it is free. In the context, Umberto's guess that sales could at least double with mildly intrusive and reasonably effective copy protection seems a reasonable one.There's a third element and that is the devilishly fluid target for 3PD's that was presented by FSX. Phil has said FSXI won't be out in 2008. The target is frozen for two years. GEX and FEX cure a lot of problems. Most everyone is going to get a fast DX10 card with a lot of VRam and run it on XP as a DX9 application. But that will shift as the end of 2009 nears, Vista matures and DX10 becomes more than a preview.The lessons for 3PD's are to pick a robust but non-punitive copy protection scheme, and decent people will support you. The Death Valley of a non-final FSX is over, both for developers and buyers. The starting bell has rung. Watch out for Lou Betti whose horse loitered in the paddock until that bell rang. Fortunate he could pay for the feed in the meantime, wasn't he?-Doug

[Guest Slides]

"However, I Antony Waterfield son of Graham along with an investment consortium"'However, I Prince Bamabo Okabakau son of Great King Kawakakabiki along with a secret consortium'Why does this "press release" read more like a Nigerian scam email?

[mgh 89]

Check the following link for the worldwide extent of software piracy.http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa40...201/ai_n9069237It IS a serious problem"Software piracy cost the United States economy dollars, jobs, and tax revenue. The United States lost more than 100,000 jobs and over a billion dollars in tax revenue in 2000 due to software piracy (Anonymous 2001b; Johnston 2001). A study of Internet software auctions by the Software & Information Industry Association in March-April 2000 found that illegal copies accounted for 91 percent of the software being auctioned (Anonymous 2000a). It is predicted that if the rate of piracy continues unchanged, the U.S. economy will lose a total of 175,700 jobs and $1.6 billion in tax revenue by 2008...A study by Pricewaterhouse Coopers involved research in 61 countries and concluded that pirated PC business software accounted for 40% of the total PC business software used worldwide. At 27%, the U.S. had the lowest rate of illegal software and Vietnam had the highest rate at 98% for its business software (Johnston 2001)."As far as PSS is concerned it seems it provided good products in the past, then standards dropped, and now it's gone out of business. Why the surprise and concern here? This happens again and again - it's just a fact of life.

[Dougal 165]

Ha ha!I thought it was just me that thought that.

[greggerm 312]

I don't think anyone would condone or agree with illegitimate use of copyrighted/payware software - no matter who the publisher is.But I think as others have said, pointing the finger at piracy as the reason for the demise of a company is frankly comical.The revenue stream didn't stop because people were downloading their airplanes... the revenue stream stopped because casual simmers stopped flying FS2004 and picked up FSX!Most FS2004 airliner pilots *already own* the PSS airplanes. You can't continue to expect a revenue stream on a sunsetting sim platform. Sure, there are lots of enthusiasts who use FS2004, but the reason they stick with it is due to their preexisting investments in things like PSS. Nobody is purchasing FS2004 in stores these days, unless they are rummaging through a bargain bin looking for some cheap entertainment. Those folks are not likely to be interested in addons that cost double or triple the price of the bargain bin simulator.Nearly ALL complaints about PSS being down are coming from PREEXISTING customers looking to reinstall or retrieve their purchases. I don't think any of the complaints have come from "new" customers looking to make their first PSS purchase. That should be a good indicator to the Waterfield family about the current desirability of their product line...If it was piracy that knocked PSS off the market, why the HECK would they want to pick up and start over?Good luck,-Greg

[Guest Binkles]

>Plain and simple, that individual is a supporter of piracy so>he should not go on explaining why he shouldn't have to pay>because he delete's unwanted software after a week, yeah>right, what a load of you know what! IMO It goes against>everything that we all stand for here at AVSIM>>So I ask, why can't we stop individuals like him and people>that use sites to cheat all of us?>>Thanks,Actually not all people who use pirated software are trying to rip the companies off.I have used music torrents/napster for years, and I've lost count of how many albums I've gone and bought because of it, yeah I could be a loser and not pay, but to tar everyone with the same brush is like saying all Americans are arrogant.To blame pirates for your loss of income is a cop out if you ask me, otherwise why don't all companies do it? Dreamfleet, Flight1, LevelD, pmdg - they haven't closed up shop and said oh the pirates oh the pirates.I agree with your statement about support forums, if you're looking for support for the level-d 767, you have to be registered, and to do that, you have to provide proof of purchase.No reason why the software companies can't do that, if's a simple solution, that would certainly pay dividends.

[Guest bertvankampen]

>>If it was piracy that knocked PSS off the market, why the HECK would they want to pick up and start over?<

[Guest DreamFleet]

"Watch out for Lou Betti whose horse loitered in the paddock until that bell rang. Fortunate he could pay for the feed in the meantime, wasn't he?"It wasn't easy either, my "horse" eats a lot of feed!Otherwise, we're pleased with our piracy protection via Flight One, and I do not go to bed at night thinking about how many sales I am losing to pirates.Now, back to getting our products into FSX! :)Regards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...R_FORUM_LOU.jpg

[mgh 89]

It's very simple.Those who take others' property and upload it on a website for others to download without permission have stolen it and are thieves.Those who download it knowingly are receivers of stolen property.T