VPS Avenger moving to dongle protection [or maybe not...]

[Guy Rowland]

Posted by Manuel of VPS Avenger on their Facebook page:

Unfortunately the appearance of recent warez really hurt us hard. Using NOT the elicenser protection for VPS Avenger was a bold decision we made, listening to all those customers, who want to travel with their laptops, or dont want to plug a dongle permanently in general - but finally it turned out it was the wrong decision. Now we basically have to start from zero again. Its sad, that nowadays you are forced to do such protection measures, but unfortunately thats the world. I had a long talk with Rene and different solutions were on the table and I want to be completely honest here with you guys: One of them was, that version 1.5. becomes dongle protected and therefore NOT a free update. But since we already told you, that it will be free for our customers, we will stick to this promise - although the circumstances have changed. Version 1.5.X (+following bugfixes) will be the last bigger free update for Avenger with new content. It will contain the guitar module, a free XP, new analog filters, new skin, new factory library stuff and much much more. After this, I am sad to say, that it will be impossible for us to continue the way we did so far. We were happy, that we could spend the last 2 years mainly working on fun stuff, such as bringing you new features and sounds - but as the situation is now, much time is needed to maintain the copy protection. It will start with Avenger 2.0, which has to be a paid update (no price set yet) and will introduce (beside new features) the eLicenser dongle again, which was the only 100% secure mechanism for us yet: Our Dongle protected plugins were never cracked in any way. It will take quite a long time and effort to switch to the new protection system, so dont expect this update anytime soon. Furthermore each license key for the elicenser will cost money, so the update can't obviously be free. Updates after 2.0 will be free of charge again of course.

I know that some of you may not want to do the change to version 2.0 then, because they want no dongle, but unfortunately we have no other choice at the moment. They can of course still stick to their 1.5.x which will get bugfixes if necessary. There already have been more free updates and features for Avenger, than other products get in their entire lifetime. So no need to complain about sticking to 1.5.x. since its a fully fledged Avenger.

There was a similar situation with Nexus 1 > 2 if someone remembers.

Thanks to all loyal and nice people here in this group, who accompanied us so far!

Once it is 100% sure again (with v2.0), that only our customers who paid have acces to it, we will continue to make gifts in form of free sounds or new features. Looking forward to it!

I would strongly advise not to use any illegal XPs, especially not with your legit versions...

As some may have read, we planned to move our older plugins to a non-dongle protected system, but atm this plan is no longer valid obviously.

ps: only thing which could make us move away from the dongle plan would be, that 1.5.0 (which will get some copy protection fixes) will be secure and uncracked during the year of development for 2.0. »

EDIT - update 9/10/19, looks like they are now going to trial Codemeter (used by Properllerheads), which can use either dongle or soft elicense, for the 1.5 release. If this works, they will ditch the plan to use eLicenser.

[wst3]

Pity, but you can't condemn them for protecting their intellectual property.

[tack]

This is why we can't have nice things.

[Guy Rowland]

Indeed.

It's the age-old arguments I guess on the pros and cons. I do know that a lot of developers I like somehow stay in business and seem even to thrive without using any physical dongle - Spectrasonics, iZotope (iLok optional), U-He, Waves etc. I don't know if its because their copy protection is better, or if their model shrugs off piracy. Ironically, Steinberg I know are looking at going the other way and finding a better solution than one license / one licenser.

This does make me sad and not a little concerned for the company. I think Avenger has proved so popular and cannibalised Nexus' market share in no small part due to being dongle-free. I also think that this market is far more susceptible to this issue putting off customers than a pro user base who will largely shrug and just use whatever a product they want comes with.

[Stakk]

Sad news. I know this likely is a very unpopular opinion, but I see more companies will move on to a subscription-based model (aka offline software as a service model) because of general piracy issues.

You can of course throw a hard protection like physical dongle, if one wants to keep the same business model, but I honestly never want to use a physical dongle again after having my iLok 2 (always plugged in) suddenly died without any precursor.

Piracy can make a software popular for younger people (who won't/can't afford to buy $100 software anyway) as well; but for this to be "positive" the software also needs to be VERY popular, like Kontakt, Waves, Photoshop, etc. Because those people are vocal, but do not buy stuff, you only see a positive effect once there is enough internet buzz and adults start to notice your software's popularity. In other words, piracy can work for you in a roundabout way when your business is already doing well, but it works against you when your business is struggling.

[Guy Rowland]

Sad news. I know this likely is a very unpopular opinion, but I see more companies will move on to a subscription-based model (aka offline software as a service model) because of general piracy issues.

Actually that raises an interesting thought. All the subs-based products that are not using a physical dongle for licensing... presumably these are as vulnerable as any software-based CP? So unless these are tied to, say, a physical iLok, I don't see how they make things any better for the developer as far as piracy is concerned.

[wst3]

Bingo - in fact I think it might be easier to hack a subscription based service, but until someone tries - and gets caught - we won't know for sure.

There are developers that do well with copy protection, there are developers who do well without. Ultimately a company's success has more to do with the quality, and applicability of their tools.

Piracy can kill of a small developer, or one that is just starting out. It is less likely to do substantial damage to an established company.

My opinion only - but I am so tired of hearing the weak, lame excuses for piracy. It is theft, and it is wrong, and even if there is some unexpected benefit (buzz, whatever) that does not excuse it.

If one is clever enough to create something that others would enjoy then one ought to be able to control how that is distributed. If you want to give it away that's fine. If you want to sell it that is also fine. It should be your choice.

Aside - long time ago I was very skeptical that piracy was a real thing. At the time Garritan Orchestral Strings was distributed on nine CDs, and ISDN was about the fastest link someone could get for their home. Why would anyone upload the library, and how could anyone download it? Seemed impossible to me<G>!

At a NAMM show in the 90s I ended up chatting with Gary and the topic came up. I shared my opinion. It sort of ticked him off. He challenged me to visit any of the "binary" newsgroups to see for myself. So I did, and low and behold, I found several posting that purported to provide free access to GOS. I had to try, I figured it would be garbage designed to run up my phone bill.

Once downloaded (which took forever) I extracted the files and created a GOS directory. I compared it to my legally purchased copy. I don't remember specifics, but there were a only handful of files that differed slightly. I ceased to believe that piracy was not an issue.

Back then it required some skills, you had to have access to the Usenet, you had to know how to assemble the pieces, and so on. Today it is simple. That's scary!

I don't believe we will ever eliminate piracy, but I do applaud anyone that tries to slow the flow.

I respect folks who refuse to use any software that is copy protected. I respect folks who refuse to use dongles.

For me? If the tool I wish to use is protected that is just part of the cost of doing business. I've been dealing with dongles since Waves used serial port dongles (and you had to stack them if you had more than one product!) I've used a UA DSP card since they were distributed by Mackie. I have both the e-Licenser and the iLok.

With the exception if UA cards it is an added step, and a bit of a hassle, and it seems almost criminal that developers end up expending time, energy, and money to implement something that has nothing to do with music.

On the other hand, it helps the developer survive, maybe even develop something new. And dongles let me carry my licenses from machine to machine painlessly. Not a frequent exercise for me, but when I need to do so it is wonderful to be able to plug in the dongle and use the tools.

I wish the folks at VPS the best of luck. And I sympathize with the folks using Avenger. Can't win!

[EvilDragon]

They should just use u-he's system and that's it. It doesn't prevent normal user from using things normally, but for pirate user there are random inconveniences showing up (i.e. melting the GUI on random triggers like every millionth sample processed, clicking a random hidden dot on the GUI etc.), which have proven to be successful and actually boosting the sales when they happen.

[Tanuj Tiku]

They should just use u-he's system and that's it. It doesn't prevent normal user from using things normally, but for pirate user there are random inconveniences showing up (i.e. melting the GUI on random triggers like every millionth sample processed, clicking a random hidden dot on the GUI etc.), which have proven to be successful and actually boosting the sales when they happen.

Very cool! Did not know that!

Pardon my ignorance, but if a software is cracked then how does this still happen?

My understanding (very poor) is that once a software is cracked, you have bypassed authorisation and now the software will function as normal.

On another note - sad to see the developers have had trouble with piracy.

I can tell you first hand that it’s not just young people. Many, many successful artists use pirated software. And younger people to join to assist or work there see that doing so is OK.

They then proceed in the same manner.

I personally do not have a big problem with dongle based protection. As long as there is immediate coverage like the one from iLok.

Though I can understand that for people who move a lot, it could be a problem.

[Guy Rowland]

Just as an update - over on KVR, Manuel has said they're actually exploring the system Propellerheads use for Reason. Others mentioned U-He's system which sounds fantastic, but for some reason he seemed less willing to explore that. Anyway, there is perhaps hope that a better system than dongles might yet appear.

Tanuj - I think among Pro users, dongles are far less of a concern overall. As we all know, the bedroom market is the largest, and here resistance is far stronger. So for a product like Avenger, which is strongly appealing to that bedroom set, they have more to loose.

My main thing, as you alluded to, is mobile use. I just hate dongles on the road. I hate moving them, I hate carrying them, I hate risking losing or breaking them, I hate finding I've forgotten them and I hate them sticking out of the damn laptop taking up a port. They are a menace on the road. But my studio rig - no problem whatsoever.

[wst3]

Guy - I know, I'm repeating myself, but having survived parallel port dongles I find the current crop to be just fine, and in some ways even beneficial. I share your concerns for losing or breaking one, and I do wish the companies would be a little more kind with respect to that, but all in all I'm fine with them. As an added bonus, some of my favorite developers have a better shot at staying in business.

Tanuj - cracked is not always 100% cracked. FIrst off, the little snots that crack the software are, as a rule, lazy, and not terribly bright. Most of them are following recipes they found on the web (you will hear the term "script-kiddies" used to refer to stupid, lazy hackers, it also applies to stupid, lazy crackers.) This means they do not always find all the authorization code, at least not on the first try. That gives folks like u-He and Propellerheads a fighting chance, which is good.

Aside - once upon a time developers used to embed malicious code into their authorization routines - probably pretty funny to watch (from a distance), but alas it turns out that here in the US it is considered illegal. May be folklore, but there is tell of a kid whose computer was bricked by a cracked game, and his parents sued the developer, and won. That is a judge or jury that is not fit for citizenship!

[EvilDragon]

Pardon my ignorance, but if a software is cracked then how does this still happen?

Because they never cracked any u-he plugin fully, there are tons of honeypots with even more reactions to cracker infiltrations (like you click some place on the GUI and it opens your browser with u-he website and Buy page for the plugin you were using, psychological stuff like that ), and if they manage to sort those honeypots, well u-he just add new conditions based on the way they cracked things on next update, etc.

It's a pro-active solution that is a living entity which develops on every new iteration - it's not a fixed solution like iLok or whatever (once they emulate the dongle driver, all plugins using it will be without any defenses, unless they have additional home-grown protection, like EW's PLAY). It doesn't penalize legit users, but it inconveniences pirate users. Which is why I consider it the best thing ever devised for IP protection.

[Tanuj Tiku]

Bill and Mario,

Thanks for the detailed explanation! And I am sure it goes deeper than that.

I am glad to know that u-he has figured out a good system. I agree that it seems like a robust solution for now.

Long ago, a friend of mine told me that the crack software would not always work well and he had a feeling that it did not ‘sound’ as good as the original.

May be some developers built that in as well?

[KyleJudkins]

Pity, but you can't condemn them for protecting their intellectual property.

also I why I dont moan too much about it

as long as companies stick to either elicenser or ilok (max 2 dongles) I'm okay with it.

[Stakk]

What EvilDragon mentioned about u-he is called "time bomb" or "degradation" among some developers - video games have most interesting use of it (like, make some battle impossible to win, throw a fake error message, add loud vuvuzela sound to the bgm etc. when piracy is detected). Overall, it seems pretty effective.

As for subs-based model, it probably won't contribute to defy pirates by itself (though constant content update could be an incentive to have a real ID). It is more like just a different business model.

[kgdrum]

They should just use u-he's system and that's it. It doesn't prevent normal user from using things normally, but for pirate user there are random inconveniences showing up (i.e. melting the GUI on random triggers like every millionth sample processed, clicking a random hidden dot on the GUI etc.), which have proven to be successful and actually boosting the sales when they happen.

U-he's approach IMO is brilliant(as are their products) Urs even offers to show other developers how to use their method.
IMO the U-he team are amazing on every level,I hope more developers follow their lead.

[Guy Rowland]

Posted today by Manuel on KVR re 1.5:

It will have new protection system: "Codemeter" (online or dongle for choice). If this works, no eLicenser (dongle enforcement) planned for version 2.0!

[EvilDragon]

Codemeter is somewhat better than iLok at least. But still, u-he's system is the best.

[FriFlo]

Funny how uHe copy protection works. I also remember reading about Wallander Brass having a very smart protection, involving your credit card number and a water mark. Not sure, wether this method has kept working till today, but I remember it being praised back then for being an easy yet effective method without dongles.