You've been heard. Response re: 4.9 and Encryption

Havos

There have been some pretty bad real world analogies in this thread by both sides of the argument.

The only really meaningful analogy for this thread is the DRM of content used by software programs, and in particular those imposed by other 3D apps like Unity, Vue and iClone.

nicstt

j cade said:

wiz said:

Havos said:

timmins.william said:

My coupon, that I won't be using, is also 25%. Up until now I've been buying a bunch at a fairly consistent rate for the last year (though I had a dry spell over the summer due to a move and assorted costs)

I spent over $1000 last year, which is clearly not enough to be considered a loyal customer.

They seem to be defining "loyalty" in terms of last month, or maybe the first ten days of February. Which strikes me as curious, at best. That's "having a good week" or a "bad week". "Loyalty" is sticking with you for years, through good and bad.

I'm pretty sure its just a sales gimmic to encourage some spending, not a political statment on the definition of loyalty. I think this thread has a lot of reading into motivations that just aren't there.

 

I think DRM was instituded because at a meeting they said 'hey all this piracy kinda sucks, lets do some stuff to make it harder'

Likewise this recent sale the maketing people probably went 'hey that 7 dolars for buying gianni or gia worked pretty well, lets do something similar, but with percentages rather than a flat rat, since that encorages people to buy more items'

Emotional decissions in business are often very costly.

nicstt

lx said:

Havos said:

lx said:

Havos said:

TesseractSpace said:

Daikatana said:

This thread has completely devolved from a mostly serious discussion of  the various DRM issues  to a mess of upset over what was possibly a randomly generated discount on virtual goods.  

We may not like it that DAZ3D finds it necessary to do something about piracy but apparently the piracy situation is such that they feel that some steps are necessary.  Do I like it? No.  But the fact remains that DAZ3D provides higher quality assets than just about any other company out there AND they do it at a price that does not lock the casual hobbyist out of the market.    

Maybe taking some sort of steps to cut back on financial losses is necessary so that DAZ3D can continue to keep the price points as reasonable as they are?  Have any of us thought seriously about that aspect?  I have been and while I don't like the implementation of DRM at all, I would much rather be part of a serious and forward moving discussion on how to best meet the needs of both the consumer AND the company so that we can all continue to enjoy and profit from digital art.

A company is in business to make money.  If it does not make money it goes out of business.  

 

The discussion kinda stalled when we were told pretty much that every possible alternative had been discussed, and we don't get an answer as to why DRM was the only possible choice. Or even an answer to Why Now? I still wonder why they didn't just put it in the very first version of Studio. It's not like DRM is somehow new. It's not like piracy is new either. Again, we're not going to get the answer.

All that's left is tossing around random ideas and questions in the hopes that maybe one will be ok to answer,  and the occasional sidetrip when something like this 'loyalty' discount has the bad timing to be done in the middle of people questioning whether or not they even want to stay.

DAZ could never have put DRM into the first version of DS as at that time the bulk of its content sales were to Poser users. Adding DRM to DS would have killed DS, as well as ruined the company since 90%+ of its sales would have gone. It is only now, with Poser (+ Cararra and Bryce) users considered to be a very small part of its customer base that it can think about DRM. The launch of Genesis 3 and iRay certainly persuaded a number of Poser users to look again at DS, and this has helped DS cement its more dominant market share, and opened up the possibility that DRM could work.

Not doubting you, but question:

How do you know that Poser is a small part of the customer base, and that DS has a dominant market share - other than that SM is known to not be doing great financially?

I don't know that what I said was the case, but that is DAZ's own assumation, as some of them have stated. However there is little doubt by looking at postings in DA and other places that DS renders are beginning to dominate. How much of a share the others are left with is tricky to say.

Ah right, good points. So Poser now considered irrelevent, Hexagon and Bryce last updated (when???) Carrara apparently in closed beta for at least 3 months. There are no other programs that run Daz content right?

I've not picked up Blender for about three years - cose to that at least. Now it's working for me, as I have time; I'm learining how to integrate what I've bought as opposed to buy more; great for me, and bad for Daz.

I'd love to know what the cost will have been to Daz, and how long it will take them to recover that cost from the hoped for benefits of DRM; that's the crux: 1) It does accrue at least some small but measureable benefit. 2) New customers take up the slack from the long-standing customers offended by how this was handled, or by DRM.

nicstt

j cade said:

Havos said:

lx said:

Havos said:

lx said:

Havos said:

TesseractSpace said:

Daikatana said:

This thread has completely devolved from a mostly serious discussion of  the various DRM issues  to a mess of upset over what was possibly a randomly generated discount on virtual goods.  

We may not like it that DAZ3D finds it necessary to do something about piracy but apparently the piracy situation is such that they feel that some steps are necessary.  Do I like it? No.  But the fact remains that DAZ3D provides higher quality assets than just about any other company out there AND they do it at a price that does not lock the casual hobbyist out of the market.    

Maybe taking some sort of steps to cut back on financial losses is necessary so that DAZ3D can continue to keep the price points as reasonable as they are?  Have any of us thought seriously about that aspect?  I have been and while I don't like the implementation of DRM at all, I would much rather be part of a serious and forward moving discussion on how to best meet the needs of both the consumer AND the company so that we can all continue to enjoy and profit from digital art.

A company is in business to make money.  If it does not make money it goes out of business.  

 

The discussion kinda stalled when we were told pretty much that every possible alternative had been discussed, and we don't get an answer as to why DRM was the only possible choice. Or even an answer to Why Now? I still wonder why they didn't just put it in the very first version of Studio. It's not like DRM is somehow new. It's not like piracy is new either. Again, we're not going to get the answer.

All that's left is tossing around random ideas and questions in the hopes that maybe one will be ok to answer,  and the occasional sidetrip when something like this 'loyalty' discount has the bad timing to be done in the middle of people questioning whether or not they even want to stay.

DAZ could never have put DRM into the first version of DS as at that time the bulk of its content sales were to Poser users. Adding DRM to DS would have killed DS, as well as ruined the company since 90%+ of its sales would have gone. It is only now, with Poser (+ Cararra and Bryce) users considered to be a very small part of its customer base that it can think about DRM. The launch of Genesis 3 and iRay certainly persuaded a number of Poser users to look again at DS, and this has helped DS cement its more dominant market share, and opened up the possibility that DRM could work.

Not doubting you, but question:

How do you know that Poser is a small part of the customer base, and that DS has a dominant market share - other than that SM is known to not be doing great financially?

I don't know that what I said was the case, but that is DAZ's own assumation, as some of them have stated. However there is little doubt by looking at postings in DA and other places that DS renders are beginning to dominate. How much of a share the others are left with is tricky to say.

Ah right, good points. So Poser now considered irrelevent, Hexagon and Bryce last updated (when???) Carrara apparently in closed beta for at least 3 months. There are no other programs that run Daz content right?

There are a few that can read DAZ formats (like Blacksmith 3D) but these are not renderer apps like the others you mentioned (neither is Hexagon), so can not be considered as alternatives to DS.

Ooh! and someones working on an importer for blender, I'm so very excited about that one

Oh that's good news.

I'd pay for that. Then again, I made a post stateing just that months ago - whilst I was still a happy Daz customer.

argel1200

Havos said:

The only really meaningful analogy for this thread is the DRM of content used by software programs, and in particular those imposed by other 3D apps like Unity, Vue and iClone.

I have some experience with Cornucopia3D/Vue, but not with Unity. I really wish somone with exerience with the Unity store could chime in on how it works.

I mentioned it before, but for Cornucopia3D (e-on's store, so mainly focused on Vue) products are typically sold locked at a lower price and unlocked at a higher price. And the Cornucopia Club $5 vouches are mainly only useable on the locked version, though it's worth noting that many items are not voucher friendly period.

TesseractSpace

 

Not really, though usually the EULA is more restrictive than the DRM.  Though I do sorta wonder where we stand vis-a-vis the DMCA. If I'm remembering right, the DMCA has some pretty vicious sections about circumventing DRM, which is pretty clear cut in other media, not so much here. Circumvention doesn't have to be for sharing purposes, and given that it's the section where criminal penalties apply, DAZ may not have any say in whether or not exporting part of a DRM protected product is circumvention or not.  Because DRM does radically change an item's status under the DMCA.

 

Edited to remove quoted posts

Petercat

Khory said:

wiz said:

lx said:

There is no way to know how much money is lost to piracy. Daz knows this. They do how much is being lost to fraud

Pretty near zero.

• Are the people committing the credit card fraud people who would have bought the item if the fraud were more difficult? Unlikely.
• Is there a physical item of value being shipped? No. Is DAZ paying shipping? No, again.

The only "loss" issues are the fees associated with chargebacks, and the lowering of DAZ's standing with the credit card companies.

In that, it's very similar to the antecedent piracy. The people who download the pirated copies are the ones that aren't that likely to buy something in the first place. The goal isn't to "minimize" anything negative, it is to increase sales, pure and simple. Perceived value does that.

It does not actually feel like the only loss is to fees when you look what you have made for the pay period and there is suddenly a large negative to your income. Don't forget it isn't just a company named Daz that is hurt by this. There are also several hundred PA's who are real, ordinary people who have to pay bills and put food on the table.

But it's not piracy that is doing that, it is credit card fraud. So why is Daz fighting the wrong thig?

This doesn't make sense.

lx_2807502

TesseractSpace said:

nicstt said:

TesseractSpace said:

Richard Haseltine said:

argel1200 said:

And OnStar is an optional service, with a contract involved.

As there is with Daz, and that's part of what Steve's opening post was reinforcing.

If you mean the EULA, I'm not a lawyer, but I can't find any case where an EULA was ever binding on the company. It's all one sided to control what the customer is permitted to do. I'm looking through the current one, and there's a lot about what we can and can't do with our licensed content but I see very little about DAZ's side of matters. Not that this is in any way unusual. Most EULAs I can find only contain provisions that apply against the customer or protect the seller from liability.

At least I'm not seeing the all too typical 'we can change the EULA without notice' clauses. But it does state that it supersedes and replaces any agreement that may be presented at content installation, so it retroactively applies over the agreements that some of the content might have had when I bought it. Now I'm not saying this means anything bad about DAZ, their EULA is still more straightforward and easy to understand than the majority. But an EULA is not a guarantee of anything, And it does not protect the customer.

The clue is in the name: End User Licence Agreement. (They are always subject to change.) They are about defining the terms by which the customer who purchased the product may use said item, although it is more accurate to say licensed. In affect we own the products we bought, because we can use them without restriction - within the terms of the EULA.

DRM changes that.

Not really, though usually the EULA is more restrictive than the DRM.  Though I do sorta wonder where we stand vis-a-vis the DMCA. If I'm remembering right, the DMCA has some pretty vicious sections about circumventing DRM, which is pretty clear cut in other media, not so much here. Circumvention doesn't have to be for sharing purposes, and given that it's the section where criminal penalties apply, DAZ may not have any say in whether or not exporting part of a DRM protected product is circumvention or not.  Because DRM does radically change an item's status under the DMCA.

Is this referring to that point about even if you are the creator of the content and own the copyright to it, editing or removing the DRM is illegal? (the thing that happened with the ebooks)

argel1200

lx said:

TesseractSpace said:

Not really, though usually the EULA is more restrictive than the DRM.  Though I do sorta wonder where we stand vis-a-vis the DMCA. If I'm remembering right, the DMCA has some pretty vicious sections about circumventing DRM, which is pretty clear cut in other media, not so much here. Circumvention doesn't have to be for sharing purposes, and given that it's the section where criminal penalties apply, DAZ may not have any say in whether or not exporting part of a DRM protected product is circumvention or not.  Because DRM does radically change an item's status under the DMCA.

Is this referring to that point about even if you are the creator of the content and own the copyright to it, editing or removing the DRM is illegal? (the thing that happened with the ebooks)

No, that is part of the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act).

TesseractSpace

lx said:

 

Is this referring to that point about even if you are the creator of the content and own the copyright to it, editing or removing the DRM is illegal? (the thing that happened with the ebooks)

Pretty much, I'm looking at the relevant section of the DMCA and I can't make heads or tails of what it considers 'circumvention'. But even without being a lawyer the gist comes down to 'messing with DRM is illegal'. And I can't tell where the legality begins or ends. It's not like the ebooks where I'm just going to read it and be fine. These are items people might want to export for use in another software package, or edit severely. DAZ licenses us to use our content in all sorts of ways that would otherwise be considered copyright infringements. That is what the license is for is to allow us that usage. But with DRM in the mix, I worry that as unlikely as a criminal case may be, certain uses of the content that we're accustomed to may actually be outright criminal acts. And that DAZ can't give us permission to use our content that way no matter how permissive the license is.

 

The DMCA is a bit scary in some parts. 

pearbear

argel1200 said:

Of course, no one wants to takcle the $10,000+ portion of the point I was making.

I'm not an overly fearful or paranoid customer. If I planned on only spending a couple of hundred dollars ever in total at DAZ, I'd think of DRM as an acceptable risk I could shrug off just as I would with any other software purchase. Tens of thousands of dollars is too high of an amount for me to take that risk on though, and I can't be the only customer who feels this way. I've spent well over $10,000 here over time quite happily, but no way would I have put that money into DRMed content. The customers who would spend the most money here have that much more incentive to steer clear of DRMed product and the whole DAZ ecosystem in general. The likelyhood that all future products will be DRMed forces those customers to immediately start reevaluating where they are putting their money, looking for other stores, or simply putting their time and DAZ budget into learning 3D modeling software and making their own assets instead.

RobotHeadArt

TesseractSpace said:

lx said:

TesseractSpace said:

nicstt said:

TesseractSpace said:

Richard Haseltine said:

argel1200 said:

And OnStar is an optional service, with a contract involved.

As there is with Daz, and that's part of what Steve's opening post was reinforcing.

If you mean the EULA, I'm not a lawyer, but I can't find any case where an EULA was ever binding on the company. It's all one sided to control what the customer is permitted to do. I'm looking through the current one, and there's a lot about what we can and can't do with our licensed content but I see very little about DAZ's side of matters. Not that this is in any way unusual. Most EULAs I can find only contain provisions that apply against the customer or protect the seller from liability.

At least I'm not seeing the all too typical 'we can change the EULA without notice' clauses. But it does state that it supersedes and replaces any agreement that may be presented at content installation, so it retroactively applies over the agreements that some of the content might have had when I bought it. Now I'm not saying this means anything bad about DAZ, their EULA is still more straightforward and easy to understand than the majority. But an EULA is not a guarantee of anything, And it does not protect the customer.

The clue is in the name: End User Licence Agreement. (They are always subject to change.) They are about defining the terms by which the customer who purchased the product may use said item, although it is more accurate to say licensed. In affect we own the products we bought, because we can use them without restriction - within the terms of the EULA.

DRM changes that.

Not really, though usually the EULA is more restrictive than the DRM.  Though I do sorta wonder where we stand vis-a-vis the DMCA. If I'm remembering right, the DMCA has some pretty vicious sections about circumventing DRM, which is pretty clear cut in other media, not so much here. Circumvention doesn't have to be for sharing purposes, and given that it's the section where criminal penalties apply, DAZ may not have any say in whether or not exporting part of a DRM protected product is circumvention or not.  Because DRM does radically change an item's status under the DMCA.

Is this referring to that point about even if you are the creator of the content and own the copyright to it, editing or removing the DRM is illegal? (the thing that happened with the ebooks)

Pretty much, I'm looking at the relevant section of the DMCA and I can't make heads or tails of what it considers 'circumvention'. But even without being a lawyer the gist comes down to 'messing with DRM is illegal'. And I can't tell where the legality begins or ends. It's not like the ebooks where I'm just going to read it and be fine. These are items people might want to export for use in another software package, or edit severely. DAZ licenses us to use our content in all sorts of ways that would otherwise be considered copyright infringements. That is what the license is for is to allow us that usage. But with DRM in the mix, I worry that as unlikely as a criminal case may be, certain uses of the content that we're accustomed to may actually be outright criminal acts. And that DAZ can't give us permission to use our content that way no matter how permissive the license is.

 

The DMCA is a bit scary in some parts. 

The DMCA didn't stop DeCSS from being created and widely distributed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeCSS

Once it was released there was no way for them to go back and change the encryption algorithm either since all the DVDs and players that had already been produced were out there.  DAZ could be put into a similar situation should someone write a DeDAZDRM.

McGyver

I blame Apple for all this... Even if it's not them entirely, it's that they get away with whittling down the users rights, funneling you into having to except limited choices and creating a closed market in such a spectacular, control freakish and glaring white fashion that everybody wants to be like them and figures "Megh, customers are stupid, lazy and apathetic... What choice do they have... Accept or Decline... Pffft, who declines?"...  Everyone out there, no matter what their niche, wants to be an Apple... Flashy, slick and our way or the highway... I think even when they are not directly being compared to, on some level the influence, the mindset and that desire to be glossy cool and plastic creeps in.  But then again I blame them for global warming and the dinosaurs dying off and I'm pretty sure they killed Lincoln too, but who or what I believe is the role model in this debacle is of no consequence at all... What is and what will ultimately matter is if people who don't want DRM don't give in... Stick to your belief, stay loud... This thread won't amount to pile of hamster pellets in the long run, nobody that makes any real decisions will ever read it and even if they do they will discount it as the rantings of madmen and disgruntled lunatics (none of my posts help improve that view), but in the end while your opinions and thoughts might not matter, your monetary input does... If you really don't like DRM, don't give in... I wish that could have rhymed, it would have made a nice tee shirt slogan... Ultimately getting little nudges and pretty orange banner offers of percentages off will tempt you... But will you stand firm?  Will you join in our crusade? Who will be strong and stand with me? Beyond the barricades is there a world you long to see?... Then join in the fight that will give you the right to be free... Do you hear the people sing, singing the song of angry men... Oh... Sorry, my daughter was playing the song from Les Miserables on her piano and that sorta seeped in there... But seriously, bad decisions only get reversed if there is an incentive to do so. If you don't believe in encryption or DMR, don't buy it. Dollars speak louder than words baby... How will you make your voice heard?

j cade

McGyver said:

I blame Apple for all this... Even if it's not them entirely, it's that they get away with whittling down the users rights, funneling you into having to except limited choices and creating a closed market in such a spectacular, control freakish and glaring white fashion that everybody wants to be like them and figures "Megh, customers are stupid, lazy and apathetic... What choice do they have... Accept or Decline... Pffft, who declines?"...  Everyone out there, no matter what their niche, wants to be an Apple... Flashy, slick and our way or the highway... I think even when they are not directly being compared to, on some level the influence, the mindset and that desire to be glossy cool and plastic creeps in.  But then again I blame them for global warming and the dinosaurs dying off and I'm pretty sure they killed Lincoln too, but who or what I believe is the role model in this debacle is of no consequence at all... What is and what will ultimately matter is if people who don't want DRM don't give in... Stick to your belief, stay loud... This thread won't amount to pile of hamster pellets in the long run, nobody that makes any real decisions will ever read it and even if they do they will discount it as the rantings of madmen and disgruntled lunatics (none of my posts help improve that view), but in the end while your opinions and thoughts might not matter, your monetary input does... If you really don't like DRM, don't give in... I wish that could have rhymed, it would have made a nice tee shirt slogan... Ultimately getting little nudges and pretty orange banner offers of percentages off will tempt you... But will you stand firm?  Will you join in our crusade? Who will be strong and stand with me? Beyond the barricades is there a world you long to see?... Then join in the fight that will give you the right to be free... Do you hear the people sing, singing the song of angry men... Oh... Sorry, my daughter was playing the song from Les Miserables on her piano and that sorta seeped in there... But seriously, bad decisions only get reversed if there is an incentive to do so. If you don't believe in encryption or DMR, don't buy it. Dollars speak louder than words baby... How will you make your voice heard?

Don't blame me, I have a Zune.

 

When it finally dies, I'm getting something that plays flacs.

murgatroyd314

Richard Haseltine said:

argel1200 said:

And OnStar is an optional service, with a contract involved.

As there is with Daz, and that's part of what Steve's opening post was reinforcing.

The thing is, Daz can and does change that "contract" with some regularity, retroactively applying the new terms to all previously purchased content.

Remember that time the new EULA said "if you don't accept these new terms, you must delete all your old content"? Legally meaningless (if you don't accept the new EULA, you don't accept that clause either), but I think it's a good demonstration of how much we can trust Daz to use the EULA for the customer's best interest.

pearbear

j cade said:

McGyver said:

I blame Apple for all this... Even if it's not them entirely, it's that they get away with whittling down the users rights, funneling you into having to except limited choices and creating a closed market in such a spectacular, control freakish and glaring white fashion that everybody wants to be like them and figures "Megh, customers are stupid, lazy and apathetic... What choice do they have... Accept or Decline... Pffft, who declines?"...  Everyone out there, no matter what their niche, wants to be an Apple... Flashy, slick and our way or the highway... I think even when they are not directly being compared to, on some level the influence, the mindset and that desire to be glossy cool and plastic creeps in.  But then again I blame them for global warming and the dinosaurs dying off and I'm pretty sure they killed Lincoln too, but who or what I believe is the role model in this debacle is of no consequence at all... What is and what will ultimately matter is if people who don't want DRM don't give in... Stick to your belief, stay loud... This thread won't amount to pile of hamster pellets in the long run, nobody that makes any real decisions will ever read it and even if they do they will discount it as the rantings of madmen and disgruntled lunatics (none of my posts help improve that view), but in the end while your opinions and thoughts might not matter, your monetary input does... If you really don't like DRM, don't give in... I wish that could have rhymed, it would have made a nice tee shirt slogan... Ultimately getting little nudges and pretty orange banner offers of percentages off will tempt you... But will you stand firm?  Will you join in our crusade? Who will be strong and stand with me? Beyond the barricades is there a world you long to see?... Then join in the fight that will give you the right to be free... Do you hear the people sing, singing the song of angry men... Oh... Sorry, my daughter was playing the song from Les Miserables on her piano and that sorta seeped in there... But seriously, bad decisions only get reversed if there is an incentive to do so. If you don't believe in encryption or DMR, don't buy it. Dollars speak louder than words baby... How will you make your voice heard?

Don't blame me, I have a Zune.

 

When it finally dies, I'm getting something that plays flacs.

That sounds like an oddly familiar train of thought... :) After my 2nd Zune died I eventually got a FiiO specifically so that I didn't need to deal with Apple and could listen to flac files. (I've gone through my share of iPods too) Plus the FiiO looks cool and has removable storage. Love it. 

The desire to want to organize your own music library folders by your own system free of another party's overreaching "file managing" and to have no strings attached to your files... it makes sense that I would want that sense of control and ownership over my collection of 3D models too.

3dOutlaw

j cade said:

Don't blame me, I have a Zune.

 

When it finally dies, I'm getting something that plays flacs.

LOL, I have a Zune too...its like a cockroach that just keeps on living. The thing is indestructible :)

Petercat

Sun Over Beach! I've said before that none of this makes any sense, but... I just looked at Daz's home page and saw this:

"“...accurate character tolerances made Daz a go-to solution on CAPTAIN AMERICA, THOR, and IRON MAN.” - Ron Mendell"

Could it be that the film studio is pushing Daz into DRM because of products used in the movies?

I dunno... Seriously, I don't know. Could someone shoot some holes in this idea?

lx_2807502

Petercat said:

Sun Over Beach! I've said before that none of this makes any sense, but... I just looked at Daz's home page and saw this:

"“...accurate character tolerances made Daz a go-to solution on CAPTAIN AMERICA, THOR, and IRON MAN.” - Ron Mendell"

Could it be that the film studio is pushing Daz into DRM because of products used in the movies?

I dunno... Seriously, I don't know. Could someone shoot some holes in this idea?

I don't know the answer to that, but some shots in the dark:

- That's been there for ages.
- They're only used in very minor ways.
- Alternatively, nothing would surprise me from that film industry considering the many other things they've done.

Kerya

lx said:

Havos said:

TesseractSpace said:

Daikatana said:

This thread has completely devolved from a mostly serious discussion of  the various DRM issues  to a mess of upset over what was possibly a randomly generated discount on virtual goods.  

We may not like it that DAZ3D finds it necessary to do something about piracy but apparently the piracy situation is such that they feel that some steps are necessary.  Do I like it? No.  But the fact remains that DAZ3D provides higher quality assets than just about any other company out there AND they do it at a price that does not lock the casual hobbyist out of the market.    

Maybe taking some sort of steps to cut back on financial losses is necessary so that DAZ3D can continue to keep the price points as reasonable as they are?  Have any of us thought seriously about that aspect?  I have been and while I don't like the implementation of DRM at all, I would much rather be part of a serious and forward moving discussion on how to best meet the needs of both the consumer AND the company so that we can all continue to enjoy and profit from digital art.

A company is in business to make money.  If it does not make money it goes out of business.  

 

The discussion kinda stalled when we were told pretty much that every possible alternative had been discussed, and we don't get an answer as to why DRM was the only possible choice. Or even an answer to Why Now? I still wonder why they didn't just put it in the very first version of Studio. It's not like DRM is somehow new. It's not like piracy is new either. Again, we're not going to get the answer.

All that's left is tossing around random ideas and questions in the hopes that maybe one will be ok to answer,  and the occasional sidetrip when something like this 'loyalty' discount has the bad timing to be done in the middle of people questioning whether or not they even want to stay.

DAZ could never have put DRM into the first version of DS as at that time the bulk of its content sales were to Poser users. Adding DRM to DS would have killed DS, as well as ruined the company since 90%+ of its sales would have gone. It is only now, with Poser (+ Cararra and Bryce) users considered to be a very small part of its customer base that it can think about DRM. The launch of Genesis 3 and iRay certainly persuaded a number of Poser users to look again at DS, and this has helped DS cement its more dominant market share, and opened up the possibility that DRM could work.

Not doubting you, but question:

How do you know that Poser is a small part of the customer base, and that DS has a dominant market share - other than that SM is known to not be doing great financially?

A small part of the customer base HERE at Daz3d - not in the whole market.

Kerya

argel1200 said:

This DRM is potentially devaluing Geneis 3, since G2 and earlier stuff does work in Poser and there are PBR alternatives to Iray available for Poser (native in Poser 11 and Reality+Lux is there as an alterantive and the only option in earlier versions). I installed GameDev and now I need to use DIM to install a bunvch od DSON stuff, poser companion files, etc. I still like the DS interface better, but DAZ appears to be headed into a very closed, restrictive ecosystem, so Poser let's me keep my options open.

http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/2877/

mcjTeleBlender:Daz Studio scenes/animations w/Blender's Cycles Engine

And for Poser there is still another render engine - Octane (there is a Poser plugin for that one) https://home.otoy.com/render/octane-render/purchase/#plugins-collapse

Kerya

Richard Haseltine said:

And OnStar is an optional service, with a contract involved.

As there is with Daz, and that's part of what Steve's opening post was reinforcing.

Daz encryption is an optional service?

Kerya

Murgatroyd said:

Richard Haseltine said:

argel1200 said:

And OnStar is an optional service, with a contract involved.

As there is with Daz, and that's part of what Steve's opening post was reinforcing.

The thing is, Daz can and does change that "contract" with some regularity, retroactively applying the new terms to all previously purchased content.

Remember that time the new EULA said "if you don't accept these new terms, you must delete all your old content"? Legally meaningless (if you don't accept the new EULA, you don't accept that clause either), but I think it's a good demonstration of how much we can trust Daz to use the EULA for the customer's best interest.

And until you DID accept the new EULA you was stopped from going to your product library and redownload something ...

nicstt

Petercat said:

Sun Over Beach! I've said before that none of this makes any sense, but... I just looked at Daz's home page and saw this:

"“...accurate character tolerances made Daz a go-to solution on CAPTAIN AMERICA, THOR, and IRON MAN.” - Ron Mendell"

Could it be that the film studio is pushing Daz into DRM because of products used in the movies?

I dunno... Seriously, I don't know. Could someone shoot some holes in this idea?

It has been there a while. I don't put anything beyond 'that lot' (films/music/media); but in this instance it seems unlikely.

tl155180

Kerya said:

Murgatroyd said:

Richard Haseltine said:

argel1200 said:

And OnStar is an optional service, with a contract involved.

As there is with Daz, and that's part of what Steve's opening post was reinforcing.

The thing is, Daz can and does change that "contract" with some regularity, retroactively applying the new terms to all previously purchased content.

Remember that time the new EULA said "if you don't accept these new terms, you must delete all your old content"? Legally meaningless (if you don't accept the new EULA, you don't accept that clause either), but I think it's a good demonstration of how much we can trust Daz to use the EULA for the customer's best interest.

And until you DID accept the new EULA you was stopped from going to your product library and redownload something ...

That can't be right can it? If you bought products under one EULA and then they later changed it, surely they wouldn't have the authority to withhold your previous purchases because they should still be subject to the previous EULA under which you received them. Otherwise thats classic "bait and switch". Sounds legally dubious to me...

tl155180

Odd... The last couple of posts in this thread didn't update the "Most recent" timer on the Commons forum page.

Mods - is this a bug, or a sly means to try to bury the thread?

shadowhawk1

yours didn't update it either

tl155180

shadowhawk1 said:

yours didn't update it either

I know. I'm beginning to suspect foul play

The other threads are updating fine. It must be an attempt by Daz to hide this thread away without just shutting it down and causing an uproar. Sneaky...

Perhaps its causing them too much negative publicity?

shadowhawk1

Well mine didn't update it either and at this point I don't care anymore. Between daz's bribery friday freebie and thier perceived stance of "We hear you but are not listening" my perception is they care more about their profit margine and not the customer base. See you later daz it was fun ... but now its just gotten painful.

lx_2807502

Before last post:

You've been heard. Response re: 4.9 and Encryption

36.5K views 1.6K comments Started by DAZ_Steve January 30 Most recent by tl155180 6:50PM

After last post:

You've been heard. Response re: 4.9 and Encryption

36.5K views 1.6K comments Started by DAZ_Steve January 30 Most recent by shadowhawk1 6:50PM

(I should probably point out it isn't 6:50pm anywhere that I know of and there were 5 minutes between those posts.)