Jump to content

Digital ID Hell (a paying customer gets the shaft on copy protection)


amplayer

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I recently started using a laptop for most of my music stuff. I also *sometimes* use an external HDD with it. Problem is, one of my music software bundles uses a "Digital ID" to validate my copy of the software. Unfortunately, after many frustrating reauthorizations and eventual exhaustion of "available" authorizations, I discovered that my problem was that the software generates a unique digital ID for the two cases of when there is or is not an external HDD present. Now, I actually use this external drive for data, and not for the software in question. I don't know why this F&%king software needs to use the external drive as part of the "Digital ID" equation, but it sure is a royal PITA.

 

Anyone else have similar experiences?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Toontrack use a digital ID that takes into account my wireless card. To instantiate a plug-in, I have to turn on my wireless card, get the plug-in going, and then turn the card back off.

 

Actually, Ableton Live looks at that too (or did in 8.0), but they sent me a config file to tell Live to ignore that aspect of my setup.

 

I recently had another new piece of software give me grief over an update to Vista SP2. I authorized in SP1, and when I updated, I lost the auth.

 

I usually don't mind a bit of copy protection as long as it doesn't interfere with my workflow. These sorts of things tend to irritate me. I mean, really, if someone is gonna look at a hardware "ID" of sorts, what more do they really need than hard disk and motherboard combo?

 

I never thought I'd say it, but this stuff makes me appreciate my dongles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CMS Author

 

I recently started using a laptop for most of my music stuff. I also *sometimes* use an external HDD with it. Problem is, one of my music software bundles uses a "Digital ID" to validate my copy of the software. Unfortunately, after many frustrating reauthorizations and eventual exhaustion of "available" authorizations, I discovered that my problem was that the software generates a unique digital ID for the two cases of when there is or is not an external HDD present.

 

This is pretty typical of the way a "computer digital ID" works. A number is generated based on all the hardware that it can find when the program is installed. When problems such as yours occur, they're usually (satisfactorily) dealt with on a case-by-case basis by the manufacturer, but you have to get on the phone, usually.

 

Windows is the classic example. It's authorized to run on the computer that you installed it on. It's fairly tolerant of things like upgrades, but if you do too much, particularly at once, like replace a hard drive, motherboard, and RAM, it will think you're installing it on a different computer and you'll need to make a call and explain yourself before you can get a new authorization code.

 

Really, I would think that the copy protection segment of the program has enough information to know that it's not installed on the drive that it found was different from the last time they checked, but in a world where new hardware products come out so fast, software designers are notoriously slow in updating their products to accommodate the changing hardware world. You're probably using a program that uses a segment of purchased code for the copy protection, and it's that software designer that isn't keeping up with the way people configure and change their hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Actually, Ableton Live looks at that too (or did in 8.0), but they sent me a config file to tell Live to ignore that aspect of my setup.

 

 

I initially had to call Ableton up to receive additional authorizations when I moved Live to my new computer. Since I got Live installed and running, it hasn't had any issues involving the presence (or lack thereof) of my external HDD. I'm totally OK with Ableton's policy in my case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Really, I would think that the copy protection segment of the program has enough information to know that it's not installed on the drive that it found was different from the last time they checked, but in a world where new hardware products come out so fast, software designers are notoriously slow in updating their products to accommodate the changing hardware world. You're probably using a program that uses a segment of purchased code for the copy protection, and it's
that
software designer that isn't keeping up with the way people configure and change their hardware.

 

 

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Get a clue: If you badmouth them on the Internet they will have more incentive to cooperate.
:idea:

 

I don't badmouth manufacturers unless I really have a reason to do so. Actually, I just received an email back from them today. They said it was an issue with Mac OS 10.5.8 and that they are working on fixing it. Also, they gave me a couple more unlock codes, so I'm good to go (at least for now). Since this is only a bug and not a normal way of doing things, I am happy with this manufacturer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

From what I have observed, this best works only as a means of last resort. I'm with Mr. Player on this one.

Will you tell us about your personal experience where you exposed a manufacturer's identity and as a result you were ultimately worse off than if you concealed it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This kind of draconian copy protection is just crazy imho.

 

And all to no avail because the copy protection doesn't work!

 

It's been cracked!

 

Just do a google search of the Toontrack stuff

and see how many links there are to torrent sites

rapidshare etc etc etc !

 

The only people suffering are the legitimate users.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...