Se Connecter:     

Forum: General Discussion

Sujet: Legal and safe way to sell VirtualDJ - Page: 2

Cette partie de ce topic est ancien et peut contenir des informations obselètes ou incorrectes

Just a question : if you resell a Traktor license (everybody can) , are you inmoral ?
 
cstoll wrote :


A very recent article by our friends at digitaldjtips.com raised the same topic but directed at the industry issue of selling (stealing) music - http://www.digitaldjtips.com/2012/10/is-it-now-ok-for-djs-to-steal-music/

Do people really believe that there should not be protections for the originator of the good - music, software, etc.?


AS a dj , i'm a music consumer . 10 years before , i selled a good collection of vinyls (money problems)

I feel , as consumer i losed rights . Now i can buy a Bob Marley album in Itunes , I can burn it on Cd , but I can't resell it later (they said I have the same rights buying an Itunes album than a physical cd )
BTW : they are doing a really good bussiness , selling cds in digital , without cover art , no plastic ,no distribution , etc .
I know is not easy but They must to find a way (the companies) , not the consumers .

 
 
SuperAceMan wrote :
DjCaro wrote :
Just a question : if you resell a Traktor license (everybody can) , are you inmoral ?


According to the EULA from Native Instruments, you can't resell or duplicate the software either.

http://www.native-instruments.com/en/company/legal-information/end-user-license-agreement/


Speaking to the 'immoral' question ... it depends on how you go about selling it. And unfortunately there are more immoral people these days than ones that actually take the question of morality seriously. So companies, and even individuals; are required more and more to protect themselves from those type of people.

So it's not the act of 'selling' that would make one immoral - it is the manner in which they go about doing it.

And that is the real point of all these discussions that I think people forget.

It not a question of does the consumer have the right or ability - it is a question about how the originator of the good stays protected from the ease of 'mass' distribution by the immoral majority than the moral few.
 
 
cstoll wrote :
unfortunately there are more immoral people these days than ones that actually take the question of morality seriously.


please , don't put "ALL" the consumers in the same ship - This is the easy way !

Vdj is the easiest software to find fully crack just doing a Google search ...but the people are buying it . SO , not ALL are inmoral .
And you can also find people like me with 2 licenses in the family .
 
Did I say ALL are immoral ?

What I said is that there is a majority people that are immoral when compared to those that actually have morals.


Big difference between 'majority' and 'all'.
 
cstoll wrote :

Big difference between 'majority' and 'all'.


I understand your point . BUT ... companies should not hide behind the most immoral people to defend their interests .
It's easy to say : "most people are inmoral" , "because of this we need to save our rights" , My question is : what about the rights of the people who supports the software ?
 

What?

Why are there 'rules', 'guidelines', 'policies', and/or 'laws' ?

Are they to protect the those that are innocent, ethical, and moral people of the world ?

Or are they there to protect the ones that have no ethics or morals -- the immoral ?


I hope you say the first one and not the second ...

And are companies by default 'immoral' so they don't deserve protection as well?
 
My simple view is that if you have bought a tangible item then you should be able to resell it. where it becomes difficult is with software because there is no easy way you can move the licence over unless the company allows it to be transferred.

If I gave up being a DJ tomorrow and was never going to use VDJ ever again then why should I not sell it ..... but how does the company that originally sold it to me and the new buyer know I have uninstalled it from all my machines and will never use it again?. Look at the amount of crack copies of software on Ebay pretending to be legitimate.

Bit easier with BPM studio and the hardlock dongle, but with a purely digital sale then it's not that simple. Also bear in mind Atomix and many other companies make a lot of money and support development with new sales, thay also don't want second hand versions floating around denying them selling a new product.

Looking at it further ..... what happens to all your Apple music and apps, Google play apps and anything else purchased online when you die. Does this get transferred to the people you name in your will or just disappear ........

Keith
 
DjCaro wrote :
cstoll wrote :

Big difference between 'majority' and 'all'.


I understand your point . BUT ... companies should not hide behind the most immoral people to defend their interests .
It's easy to say : "most people are inmoral" , "because of this we need to save our rights" , My question is : what about the rights of the people who supports the software ?


Agreed.

Also, I think it's a bad sign when a company distrusts the "majority" of it's customers, and especially potential customers. It sets a bad precedence, and makes us genuine customers feel like the company's doing us a massive favour just providing us with the product we've paid for.

The cost of Virtual DJ is high. Potential customers are making a huge risk by investing in the product as the cost is non-refundable, and non-transferable. So customer have to be absolutely certain they are getting the product they want. They won't know this for sure from the LE version because it is missing a whole load of features. The only way a potential customer can experience these features is to either:

1. Pay up front to a company that doesn't appear to trust it's user base. Or,
2. Get a cracked copy and try those features out for real.

To labour an earlier point: What if making Virtual DJ a tenth of the cost increased sales tenfold? What if making it a hundredth of the cost increased sales a hundred fold?

People wouldn't crack a piece of software that cost only $10. It wouldn't be worth the effort or risk.

If you want to ensure people don't use pirated versions of your software, then remove the reasons for them to prefer a pirated version over the genuine article.

Has Virtual DJ ever been available at a 'Sale' price, even for a limited time? If sales increased while the price is reduced, then you know people are willing to pay. Just not at the price it is offered at normally...
 
djnanite wrote :
Also, I think it's a bad sign when a company distrusts the "majority" of it's customers, and especially potential customers.


And that is the perception of the consumer and not the company - do you really think that a company that wants to protect it's own interests has a distrust in the people that buy their product?

Do you have a front door on your house? Do you have a lock on that door? Do you actually lock it when you are not home?

If yes to all three then, why?

Do you not trust the majority of people out there?

Or, do you distrust that the majority of people would do the right thing and not steal your possessions?

djnanite wrote :
It sets a bad precedence, and makes us genuine customers feel like the company's doing us a massive favour just providing us with the product we've paid for.


I think my previous questions and the reality of those answers is what has set the precedence. Not companies trying to protect their interests and products.

And does one think that a company is doing them a 'massive favour' when they buy the company's product?

djnanite wrote :
The cost of Virtual DJ is high. Potential customers are making a huge risk by investing in the product as the cost is non-refundable, and non-transferable. So customer have to be absolutely certain they are getting the product they want. They won't know this for sure from the LE version because it is missing a whole load of features. The only way a potential customer can experience these features is to either:

1. Pay up front to a company that doesn't appear to trust it's user base. Or,
2. Get a cracked copy and try those features out for real.


Tell me one CORE feature for being a DJ, that VirtualDJ doesn't give a user the opportunity to experience with an LE product that ONLY comes in with buying VirtualDJ PRO FULL?
 
djnanite wrote :

The cost of Virtual DJ is high. Potential customers are making a huge risk by investing in the product as the cost is non-refundable, and non-transferable. So customer have to be absolutely certain they are getting the product they want. They won't know this for sure from the LE version because it is missing a whole load of features.


This statement is incorrect. Atomix offers the Home Free version of the software in order for users to make an informed decision in regards to their software needs before making a purchase.

It is also a very small investment for the Full version of the software in the grand scheme of things as it is only paid for once, but you can use it for all your gigs and get paid by your clients over and over again.
 
Usually I don't defend "companies rights" but user rights.
That being said I don't find VDJ expensive given the fact that you pay for it ONLY ONCE and you get constantly free updates.
I legally own both VirtualDj since March 2010 and Traktor since June 2009, both of them up to their latest version.
Guess what: Traktor has cost me more than VirtualDj in the long term!
It's not about Traktor VS. VirtualDj. It's just an example of how a "cheaper" program can cost more.
VirtualDj has a COMPLETELY free version to run and see if it fits your needs. Of course there are some things limited to 10 minutes functionality but that happens with every DEMO version in the world.

Back to our subject about reselling:
A software title like VirtualDj morally (by ethic means) can't be reselled from my point of view, and here's why:

In March 2010 I spent $300 to buy the software. I buy version 6.0.0. I use the product to produce profits for me. (That's the purpose of buying it in the first place)
In December 2012 I decide to resell the product for $300 (it's current price) and I sell the latest version: 7.1.0.
You'll wonder what's wrong with that?
I used a professional product for 2.5 years to produce profits for me completely for FREE! Now that's immoral IMHO. Even if I was about to lease the program (since I'm not going to own it on the end of this 2.5 years period) I would have to spend an amount of money on it in order to get my profits.
If VirtualDj didn't provide updates for free then maybe I could see the subject under a different scope:
If I was about to sell the version I originally bought (6.0) without a direct free upgrade path to the latest version then I would surely sell it in a smaller price than what this (the latest version 7.1) costs. Which morally means that at the end, I personally as a user would have spend some money that would stay as "profit" on the company.
If VirtualDj charged for every Major update then I could also see it under a different scope:
You pay $300 to get 6.0 then you pay another $100 to get version 7.0 and you sell it (v7.0) for $300. The producing company still earns $100 from me which for most of us is less than a day work, for all the bills the software allowed ourselves to pay!

I hope you can understand my point since English is not my native language (I'm Greek)

P.S.:
My views above are solely MY OPINIONS as a person, and have NOTHING to do with my participation on this community. I don't speak behalf Atomix or anyone else. I just express MY OWN personal point of view!
 
cstoll wrote :
djnanite wrote :
Also, I think it's a bad sign when a company distrusts the "majority" of it's customers, and especially potential customers.


And that is the perception of the consumer and not the company - do you really think that a company that wants to protect it's own interests has a distrust in the people that buy their product?

But don't you want to attract more customers? A company has a right to protect it's assets, sure. But if the *consumer* perception (i.e. your potential customers) is that you don't trust them, how does that make the consumer feel better about dealing with your company?

cstoll wrote :
Do you have a front door on your house? Do you have a lock on that door? Do you actually lock it when you are not home?

If yes to all three then, why?

Do you not trust the majority of people out there?

But I am not selling anything in my house. Are you telling me that you would find it reassuring to go to a shop and find it had closed, locked doors, bars on their windows and 'keep out' signs?

cstoll wrote :
And does one think that a company is doing them a 'massive favour' when they buy the company's product?

If my perception as consumer is that the company doesn't trust it's potential customers then it hardly matters what the company thinks. The sale is lost already.

cstoll wrote :
Tell me one CORE feature for being a DJ, that VirtualDJ doesn't give a user the opportunity to experience with an LE product that ONLY comes in with buying VirtualDJ PRO FULL?

Timecode support - the *only* way to use vinyl turntables on Virtual DJ.

Are you saying that vinyls are not a core feature of being a DJ?
 
Remember, I am speaking in this thread as a user - not a representative of Atomix - remember.

So about your first point - I am glad you agree that Atomix has a right to protect it's assets - because that is what I believe. Now to your second comment - do you perceive that Atomix gives the impression that they do not trust their customer? I don't see it that way. And remember you said you agreed that Atomix has a right to protect its assets. So making the license not transferable is part of that protection right? Which is a protection I agree with and accepted as a licensed user.

Now to your second point - Are you telling me that Atomix has all these things on their product and website that tells the potential customer that they don't want our business? If they did - I don't think you, I, or the rest of the community would be able to be here talking about this issue and specially not as owner's of the VirtualDJ software. I think you are stretching a bit far in an attempt to make some point - just not sure what that point is.

Your third point -- if your perception is that Atomix doesn't trust you - why did you buy the software? I bought the software almost 7 years ago because it was the best product on the market for what I wanted to do. And never got any impression on lack of trust or that trust in me as a user was even in question.

And as for your last point - http://www.hercules.com/uk/DJ-Music/bdd/p/119/deejay-trim-4-6-scratch-starter-kit/
Remember, the LE is shipped with hardware. It is up to a hardware manufacturer to provide that ability first in the product that they create.
And it is up to the consumer to purchase the right product that they wish to experience the right method of DJ'ng - http://www.numark.com/product/n4

And to answer your question of 'vinyl' being a core feature of DJ'ng - No. Even though that is where I started - I don't think it is something that you need to use in order to know what it takes to be a DJ. The concepts it forces you to learn Yes - but you don't need to use vinyl to learn them.
 
I think, partially, the misconception of VDJ's EULA is more about DJ history, than legal actions. For decades, DJs have bought a piece of equipment, grew with it, sold it, and "traded up" to a higher quality piece of gear. How many DJs started out with Stanton turntables, or Numark, planning to buy Technics eventually? The same can be said for CD players and, mixers. So, I imagine that line of reasoning occurred when some DJs purchased software licenses. They planned on starting with one, intending to sell it for another as their skill set grew. I'm not defending any position in this debate, merely pointing out what has been a long standing DJ tradition.

On a personal note, VDJ is my software of choice for a reason. It works, plain and simple. To my way of thinking there is no other software for me to upgrade to.
 
My only opinion on this matter is directed at Pro users who have controllers to sell that come with the LE version. I feel that if you or I were to want to sell said controller we should be allowed to "Unregister'' the LE version in our profile and then be able to pass that software along to the new user. I only agree with this if it is a licensed Pro user as VDJ isnt out money with this, and potentially has the ability to sell MORE Pro versions to these users.

I have seen many of posts by pissed off people who have bought a controller off EBay expecting VDJ to be included.


These are only my views, and doesnt affect my Pro use.
 
discobrian24 wrote :
My only opinion on this matter is directed at Pro users who have controllers to sell that come with the LE version. I feel that if you or I were to want to sell said controller we should be allowed to "Unregister'' the LE version in our profile and then be able to pass that software along to the new user. I only agree with this if it is a licensed Pro user as VDJ isnt out money with this, and potentially has the ability to sell MORE Pro versions to these users.

I have seen many of posts by pissed off people who have bought a controller off EBay expecting VDJ to be included.

These are only my views, and doesnt affect my Pro use.


I would agree with you on this one point - Only if I did not use that LE to get a discount towards my PRO version.
 
Yup, forgot about that too.. Excellent point Chris.
 
69%