PDA

View Full Version : Autodesk suit is going to court



hrgiger
09-30-2009, 03:26 PM
http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/government-law/legislation/news/index.cfm?newsid=16847

Well, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't hoping for Autodesk to lose big. The fact that you can't resell their software because they're merely licensing it to you is such crap.

calilifestyle
09-30-2009, 04:05 PM
i hope they lose.

shrox
09-30-2009, 04:06 PM
Wasn't this question already decided?
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/05/court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.ars

May 23, 2008

"A federal district judge in Washington State handed down an important decision this week on shrink-wrap license agreements and the First Sale Doctrine. The case concerned an eBay merchant named Timothy Vernor who has repeatedly locked horns with Autodesk over the sale of used copies of its software. Autodesk argued that it only licenses copies of its software, rather than selling them, and that therefore any resale of the software constitutes copyright infringement.

But Judge Richard A. Jones rejected that argument, holding that Vernor is entitled to sell used copies of Autodesk's software regardless of any licensing agreement that might have bound the software's previous owners. Jones relied on the First Sale Doctrine, which ensures the right to re-sell used copies of copyrighted works. It is the principle that makes libraries and used book stores possible. The First Sale Doctrine was first articulated by the Supreme Court in 1908 and has since been codified into statute."...

Dexter2999
09-30-2009, 04:35 PM
Autodesk can win only if they screw over more of their users. If they insist that it is a lease agreement and further reinforce that with a terms of use set to a time period, I think they can prove their case.

But, without a time table assigned the line between "sale" and "lease" is a matter of symantics only. I don't know if you can have a "price" or "purchase" of a lease item. I'm not saying you can't, but it has never been my experience. A lease may require a deposite or a program may require an enrollment fee. Really just a change of terms then cracking down on users who have let their annual support accounts lapse could win them future cases. Not sure how it would affect past transactions because the perception is that the software is a purchase/sale no matter what the EUA says.

Who knows?

hrgiger
09-30-2009, 04:38 PM
Wasn't this question already decided?
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/05/court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.ars



I had thought so too but the story I posted was dated today so perhaps it hasn't been settled yet?

shrox
09-30-2009, 04:51 PM
I had thought so too but the story I posted was dated today so perhaps it hasn't been settled yet?

Some the courts seem pointless, "we don't like that answer and we want another."

OnlineRender
10-01-2009, 02:36 AM
There's no chance he will win ,I see his point and case , but there' far to many technical loop holes / weakness for AD lawyers to exploit .....would be nice if he did win , but it would open up so many laws that it probably just won't happen .
"mind you. the judge might have got laid the night before and be in good mood ,here's hoping "

hrgiger
10-01-2009, 04:12 AM
"mind you. the judge might have got laid the night before and be in good mood ,here's hoping "

Well, someone should let me know where I send the hookers to.

IMI
10-01-2009, 06:11 AM
Well, someone should let me know where I send the hookers to.

Is that a new USPS service? :D

cresshead
10-01-2009, 07:17 AM
if you use the driving liecence analogy then it makes logical sense...

see in the u.k. >>
you have to pay for a liecence to drive...
you cannot 'sell' your licence to anyone else..
your licence is for YOU not anyone else..
your licence may not be valid in other countries so you may have to buy a licence to drive in other counties

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/DriverLicensing/NeedANewOrUpdatedLicence/index.htm

personally i'd 'prefer' autodesk allow you to sell software but i was completely aware that you could not
before i spent my cash on 3dsmax and combustion...i'd sooner have 3dsmax than not was the bottom line for me.

littlewaves
10-01-2009, 07:25 AM
if you use the driving liecence analogy then it makes logical sense...

see in the u.k. >>
you have to pay for a liecence to drive...
you cannot 'sell' your licence to anyone else..
your licence is for YOU not anyone else..
your licence may not be valid in other countries so you may have to buy a licence to drive in other counties

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/DriverLicensing/NeedANewOrUpdatedLicence/index.htm

personally i'd 'prefer' autodesk allow you to sell software but i was completely aware that you could not
before i spent my cash on 3dsmax and combustion...i'd sooner have 3dsmax than not was the bottom line for me.

imagine if you had to pass a test before you could legally use software?

Renderosity's gallery would be a lot smaller.

cresshead
10-01-2009, 07:32 AM
imagine if you had to pass a test before you could legally use software?

Renderosity's gallery would be a lot smaller.

yeah but the overall quality should be higher! :D:thumbsup:

thomascheng
10-01-2009, 07:42 AM
if you use the driving liecence analogy then it makes logical sense...

see in the u.k. >>
you have to pay for a liecence to drive...
you cannot 'sell' your licence to anyone else..
your licence is for YOU not anyone else..
your licence may not be valid in other countries so you may have to buy a licence to drive in other counties

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/DriverLicensing/NeedANewOrUpdatedLicence/index.htm

personally i'd 'prefer' autodesk allow you to sell software but i was completely aware that you could not
before i spent my cash on 3dsmax and combustion...i'd sooner have 3dsmax than not was the bottom line for me.

I'm not sure if this would be applicable. Driver license are issue for the gov. to enforce some type of public safety. Software license is purely to benefit one organization. This will be interesting, because if Autodesk fails, this will impact a lot of companies out there, but will force software innovation in order to sell more software updates.

DiscreetFX
10-01-2009, 07:53 AM
GreedyDesk

:devil:

littlewaves
10-01-2009, 08:00 AM
yeah but the overall quality should be higher! :D:thumbsup:

Public learning editions would be kind of like the UK provisional license which you have while you take driving lessons.

And you could get penalized with points on your license every-time you posted a crap image and an outright ban for posting a picture of a warrior women in a temple with a bloody great sword

cresshead
10-01-2009, 08:05 AM
and you get a 1 year BAN if you add EVER 'WINGS' to a human model or horse!

jaxtone
10-01-2009, 08:34 AM
Autodesk? What´s that?

cresshead
10-01-2009, 08:42 AM
Autodesk? What´s that?
is this a photo of where you live? :D
under the rock that is....:hey:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=77897&d=1254408150

shrox
10-01-2009, 10:55 AM
Well, someone should let me know where I send the hookers to.


Is that a new USPS service? :D


http://lh3.ggpht.com/_EHZsoUS6SIA/Sn9LTqVl5jI/AAAAAAAAEo4/c8SdXM8b2F0/mitchellsbloodyprovedores.jpg

geo_n
10-01-2009, 11:31 AM
if you use the driving liecence analogy then it makes logical sense...

see in the u.k. >>
you have to pay for a liecence to drive...
you cannot 'sell' your licence to anyone else..
your licence is for YOU not anyone else..
your licence may not be valid in other countries so you may have to buy a licence to drive in other counties

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/DriverLicensing/NeedANewOrUpdatedLicence/index.htm

personally i'd 'prefer' autodesk allow you to sell software but i was completely aware that you could not
before i spent my cash on 3dsmax and combustion...i'd sooner have 3dsmax than not was the bottom line for me.

I thought about that too before, but then a drivers license,professional, etc is a skill acquired not a product intangible or tangible so it is not transferable or sellable.
But a product.....my family owns a resto business and we sold off two of our establishments before and that includes the business license to operate and even the name which is a license to use our resto name.
I dont know why autodesk rents their software. Who else does it?

cresshead
10-01-2009, 12:01 PM
I thought about that too before, but then a drivers license,professional, etc is a skill acquired not a product intangible or tangible so it is not transferable or sellable.
But a product.....my family owns a resto business and we sold off two of our establishments before and that includes the business license to operate and even the name which is a license to use our resto name.
I dont know why autodesk rents their software. Who else does it?

just to be clear, transparent and fully disclosed you do not RENT your licence.

when i stopped upgrading after max 4 up until max 7 when i jumped back on i had total rights to use max 4 for as long as i wished...
and did so.
same now also if i choose not to continue with subs i can use max 2010 for as long as i wish to including any updates and service paks.

it's not rental and to put that over is simple untrue, completly untrue.

there's alot of ill informed opinions around here, i'm not sure how they got ahold of such nonsense...
seems to be the thing of late to jump on the "autodesk bash wagon" for some reason.
autodesk are not a perfect company just as newtek has also alot to repair in their image...both companies
are striving to maintain their userbase and expand their userbase also.

geo_n
10-01-2009, 06:54 PM
just to be clear, transparent and fully disclosed you do not RENT your licence.

when i stopped upgrading after max 4 up until max 7 when i jumped back on i had total rights to use max 4 for as long as i wished...
and did so.
same now also if i choose not to continue with subs i can use max 2010 for as long as i wish to including any updates and service paks.

it's not rental and to put that over is simple untrue, completly untrue.

there's alot of ill informed opinions around here, i'm not sure how they got ahold of such nonsense...
seems to be the thing of late to jump on the "autodesk bash wagon" for some reason.
autodesk are not a perfect company just as newtek has also alot to repair in their image...both companies
are striving to maintain their userbase and expand their userbase also.

If you can't sell it indefinitely how can you own it, illogical. everything you own you can sell, your car,old clothes, even your body parts:D, autodesk software is only rented indefinitely as it is now no matter how sugarcoated.
drivers license analogy doesn't apply if you think more than once. again it is acquired skill. you can't sell your skills to be magically transferred to another. software is a product.
If people decide to sell their software to get back some money if they want to change pipeline,etc, it is their right but autodesk doesn't allow this. You lose a lot of money.
I make my living out of using max but I'm not going to be biased towards software(autodesk or newtek) if something is wrong.

shrox
10-01-2009, 08:00 PM
...drivers license analogy doesn't apply if you think more than once. again it is acquired skill...

A skill? Where? Not on the road I drive...

hrgiger
10-01-2009, 08:28 PM
just to be clear, transparent and fully disclosed you do not RENT your licence.

when i stopped upgrading after max 4 up until max 7 when i jumped back on i had total rights to use max 4 for as long as i wished...
and did so.
same now also if i choose not to continue with subs i can use max 2010 for as long as i wish to including any updates and service paks.

it's not rental and to put that over is simple untrue, completly untrue.

there's alot of ill informed opinions around here, i'm not sure how they got ahold of such nonsense...
seems to be the thing of late to jump on the "autodesk bash wagon" for some reason.
autodesk are not a perfect company just as newtek has also alot to repair in their image...both companies
are striving to maintain their userbase and expand their userbase also.

Well not to push any buttons, it's really not my intent but I really have a problem with this issue of licensing with Autodesk. You say that you aren't renting because you had a version for as long as you liked. Well that still doesn't negate the fact that you cannot sell your license. Why can't you sell it? That's right because you don't own it.
So, I wouldn't agree with someone saying that you're renting Max, I don't think it's an apt description. But you don't exactly own a license of Max either since you are not free to transfer the ownership of that license. And paying $3500 for something you can't resell or ever get any value from should you choose not to use it any longer, well... I don't know about that.

Silkrooster
10-01-2009, 09:53 PM
I think thats why Autodesk uses a subscription method so they can argue that they are renting the software.
If they are saying that they are leasing it and the purchaser does not own it, that would mean that Autodesk has the right to order the purchaser to stop using the software.
Frankly I don't see this issue stopping any time soon for any medium or company. Music and Video are just as bad.

probiner
10-01-2009, 10:07 PM
if you use the driving liecence analogy then it makes logical sense...

see in the u.k. >>
you have to pay for a liecence to drive...
you cannot 'sell' your licence to anyone else..
your licence is for YOU not anyone else..
your licence may not be valid in other countries so you may have to buy a licence to drive in other counties

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/DriverLicensing/NeedANewOrUpdatedLicence/index.htm

personally i'd 'prefer' autodesk allow you to sell software but i was completely aware that you could not
before i spent my cash on 3dsmax and combustion...i'd sooner have 3dsmax than not was the bottom line for me.


ROFL you taking the "seat" thing too seriously...

Now say you want to sell your car... You can't... cause the papers of ownage of the car are attached to you and you only.
So you can't sell the car because Volkswagen says you no one can have the ownage of that car but you...

But ok... you probably don't own the car in the first place. AD just lets you ride in it for a big buck :P

IMI
10-01-2009, 11:52 PM
And paying $3500 for something you can't resell or ever get any value from should you choose not to use it any longer, well... I don't know about that.

Well, just for the sake of playing devil's advocate...

Unless you have money to burn or really want the software, Autodesk products aren't something for your casual user.
So one could make the argument that they're selling it for professionals who use it to make their living.
So in that context, if you've fed your family and paid your bills for a whole year off an Autodesk purchase, I wouldn't really say you've not gotten any value from it.
How much should one expect to get in a resale, anyway? I wouldn't pay anywhere near the original price for a software that was one or two years out of date, especially if it can't be used to upgrade to the latest version.

hrgiger
10-02-2009, 04:19 AM
How much should one expect to get in a resale, anyway? I wouldn't pay anywhere near the original price for a software that was one or two years out of date, especially if it can't be used to upgrade to the latest version.

Well, it's like a car. You might drive the hell out of it and it might make you a lot of money by getting you back and forth to work for several years, but in the end, most people expect to get something out of it when they sell it or trade it in. But nothing for it?
Yeah, that's right. It's a car analogy. And a damned good one too.

IMI
10-02-2009, 06:22 AM
Yeah, that's right. It's a car analogy. And a damned good one too.


Car analogy, eh? And from you of all people. :tsktsk:
Well OK, i'm not in it to argue, I was just bringing up what I thought was a very valid point. I'm about to get mired in the Autodesk mess anyway, and am trying to be optimistic about it. ;)

lwaddict
10-02-2009, 08:14 AM
Is that a new USPS service? :D

Nope, FedEx...
because they absolutely have to get there overnight. :D

shrox
10-02-2009, 08:17 AM
So if I subscribe to a magazine, are not the copies I recieve mine to do with as I please?

IMI
10-02-2009, 08:19 AM
So if I subscribe to a magazine, are not the copies I recieve mine to do with as I please?

Depends on what you're planning to do with them. Nothing weird, I hope. ;)

cresshead
10-02-2009, 08:33 AM
If you can't sell it indefinitely how can you own it, illogical. everything you own you can sell, your car,old clothes, even your body parts:D, autodesk software is only rented indefinitely as it is now no matter how sugarcoated.
drivers license analogy doesn't apply if you think more than once. again it is acquired skill. you can't sell your skills to be magically transferred to another. software is a product.
If people decide to sell their software to get back some money if they want to change pipeline,etc, it is their right but autodesk doesn't allow this. You lose a lot of money.
I make my living out of using max but I'm not going to be biased towards software(autodesk or newtek) if something is wrong.


try selling your birth certificate...you own yeah?
try selling your national insurance number?
try selling your driving liecence...

actually if you bothered to check my link you'll see that to get a provisional licence costs £50...that's a licence for someone with NO SKILLS at driving...

bottom line here is, why is there a thread here at all?
if you are okay and agree to the autodesk licence you'll maybe buy the licence to use it and get on subscriptions...
if you don't agrree with Autodesk's way of licencing software then don't buy it...
BUY a liecence of lightwave, houdini, modo, cinema4d, messiah, formz, sketchup, 3dcoat or
get some open source software like blender, wings 3d etc..

sounds to me like alot of people really wish they had Autodesk software just so they can sell it...
pardon me but i thought the idea was to use the software not to sell it as soon as you get it...

if you want to jump around and buy/change software on a whilm then you'll have to abide by how autodesk does it's business.
it's THEIR software not yours, simple as that.

seems by the number of threads that people want the aps but do not wish to pay the cost Autodesk puts on them.
you have plenty of other options...try them and maybe move on to slam somone else for a change.

just to note that Autodesk moved from a Hardware [parallel] dongle after max 3.1 and combustion 2.0 over to a softlock
that can be moved via email or a usb key.
so whilst key errors went waay down to nr zero and turnaround for a new key became almost instant in most cases to concept of
transfering a licence also became much more difficult task 'if' Autodesk decided to allow a sale of second hand.
last time i looked into it the only way to get second hand versions was to buy the company who used to use it then you
inherit it as part of the aquisition.

also note 1 of my students bought max3.1 second hand...this was when 3dsmax was hardware dongled though.

shrox
10-02-2009, 08:34 AM
Or what about a "subscription" to an email newsletter, like one that AutoDesk sends out (even though I have requested unsubscribe several times...) what's their legal take on that?

probiner
10-02-2009, 08:54 AM
LOL cresshead

For you the AD license is so natural as
birth certificate
national insurance number
driving liecence

Wich by the way, none has to do with a PRODUCT and BUSSINESS (unless you are a taxi driver) but with citizenship, health care and the ability to drive.

Oh yeah, but AD is like the goverment. If you want to (have your citizenship, health care, driving ability)--->modeling... you got to have their permission...

They got you good ^^

Ducking for cover...

cresshead
10-02-2009, 09:00 AM
LOL cresshead

For you the AD license is so natural as
birth certificate
national insurance number
driving liecence

Wich by the way, none has to do with a PRODUCT and BUSSINESS (unless you are a taxi driver) but with citizenship, health care and the ability to drive.

They got you good ^^

license is not natural...it's a control mechanism...

a 'liecence' is what people are talking about here...they appear to live in an alternate reality where you can sell birth certificates on ebay...:D

just get over it..
if you don't agree don't buy.
just how hard to understand is that?
do you need a picture?:devil:

shrox
10-02-2009, 09:07 AM
What about the magazine analogy? Does it have merit?

manholoz
10-02-2009, 09:22 AM
What about selling a driver's license after somebody's dead? To a museum or a crazy collector? That is, assuming that person in life was famous, someone might like to buy something like that. In which case, it was owned, right?
But then, your kids could be able to sell your 3dsmax license... after you're dead.

Lightwolf
10-02-2009, 10:38 AM
What about selling a driver's license after somebody's dead? To a museum or a crazy collector? That is, assuming that person in life was famous, someone might like to buy something like that. In which case, it was owned, right?
But then, your kids could be able to sell your 3dsmax license... after you're dead.
And they wouldn't be able to actually use it either.

Seriously, I'm quite astonished to see how many people that actually work in the media business have no or little clue about what licensing actually is - or how it works (and by this I don't only mean people in this thread).

This should be your bread and butter if you work in the industry.

Copyrights, licenses, the whole she-bang.

Cheers,
Mike

Dexter2999
10-02-2009, 11:24 AM
What about the magazine analogy? Does it have merit?

Not really. You can't do "whatever you wish" with them. You can't reprint or reproduce the articles or artwork of the magazine without the consent of the publisher.

cresshead
10-02-2009, 11:39 AM
use blender..alot less 'issues' huh...

erikals
10-02-2009, 12:17 PM
what about a war?!

"The Autodesk War"

...sounds good to me! ... let's kick some a***!!

Intuition
10-02-2009, 12:26 PM
Actually Chaosgroup has this same policy. You can not sell your license of Vray to someone else. If you buy a copy of Vray w/dongle then its yours forever.

What confuses me about AD is the idea that I may want to re-install maya 2009 in say 4 years due to a job that needs assets from a job I did in Maya 2009. I think it may be possible that unless i kept up with subscription, that my 2009 license may be expired and I would have to purchase another one to use it in 4 years.

Thats where I disagree with the policy. I think that once you buy the software you should own the right to use said version forever.

As far as reselling goes, I think that a user should be able to sell his/her copy of software and license to another user.

The reason this still works in AD's favor is that a license one user may have may never be upgraded if that user has switched packages, where as a new user may then buy upgrades from then on forward which extends the purchasing life of the original license.

AD's marketing is of course looking at it from the view that new users should pay the initial large purchase price to have the rights to buy upgrades.

Yet, I think there is a large market for users that would buy in at used prices to get to jump on the upgrade bandwagon. I think AD is missing an opportunity here. If they make the licensing/software ownership more user based they will only expand thier sales.

As of now it just feels like your talking to the IRS and trying to figure out how to get less screwed instead of just plain screwed. :devil: :D

Cageman
10-02-2009, 01:13 PM
The reason this still works in AD's favor is that a license one user may have may never be upgraded if that user has switched packages, where as a new user may then buy upgrades from then on forward which extends the purchasing life of the original license.

AD's marketing is of course looking at it from the view that new users should pay the initial large purchase price to have the rights to buy upgrades.

Of course, this is only valid for 3 years? If you don't upgrade within 3 years, you have to reboot, so to speak, so it shouldn't really matter for AD if I would transfer a non-upgradable version of a license, since I'm, obviously, not interrested in using their product any more. However, the guy who get the lic I sold him, may very well be interrested in forking out for the latest version, and become a subscriber himself.

Lets look at the LW-community... how many havn't actually bought a second hand version of LW and then decided to support NewTek by upgrading? How many oppertunities would NewTek have lost if licenses were not transferable?

Speculation asside, I really don't like ADs policy, it does create ripple-effects, even where I work....

MooseDog
10-07-2009, 07:35 AM
the lawsuit has been "decided":

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/autocad-resale-ruling-a-messy-win-for-first-sale-doctrine.ars

i used quotation marks as apparently the decision is a very messy one.

the re-seller was cleared, i.e. autodesk lost, but the judge was very clear in stating that the matter is not at all settled in the legal world.

Titus
10-07-2009, 07:45 AM
So if I subscribe to a magazine, are not the copies I recieve mine to do with as I please?

nope, the content is copyrighted.

BigHache
10-07-2009, 08:15 AM
For me, I don't agree with AD's license terms so therefore I wouldn't purchase their software. But their attitude of how they come down on people like in this Vernor case will prevent me from ever purchasing their products.

Cracking down on piracy is one thing. Suing someone for reselling an item that's effectively useless is not controlling piracy.

jaxtone
10-07-2009, 08:19 AM
How did you manage to track my house like that? Toxicated by too many 007 films or some magic spells from Agent 666? :D


is this a photo of where you live? :D
under the rock that is....:hey:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=77897&d=1254408150

jaxtone
10-07-2009, 08:27 AM
Nope... not if the authour was connected to AD´s slave machinery because then you would only be able to read this magazine if you used a lamp from AD, glasses (if needed) from AD and articles connected to the AD agenda! :D

Otherwise you are of course allowed to sell your magazines second handed even if some pages in that old Playboy magazine seems to be glued together... but that may be because of all tears most men have shared with these beautifully airbrushed chicks... :D

Most people know that they are not allowed to copy copyrighted content or sell it as their own material but the way AD frame their users with lifetime licenses are way over the edge of greedinezz. I know this is an old behaviour of contracting that mostly where connected to industrial deals. But one man companies or smaller units actually have very little to earn on these #¤%&¤ deals. The only one that makes profit on this is AD and I don´t wanna think of future sceneries when they´we taken over the world... at least not in 3D. :hey:


So if I subscribe to a magazine, are not the copies I recieve mine to do with as I please?

jaxtone
10-07-2009, 08:31 AM
I agree 100% on these very well written words! Are you a lawyer? :thumbsup:


LOL cresshead

For you the AD license is so natural as
birth certificate
national insurance number
driving liecence

Wich by the way, none has to do with a PRODUCT and BUSSINESS (unless you are a taxi driver) but with citizenship, health care and the ability to drive.

Oh yeah, but AD is like the goverment. If you want to (have your citizenship, health care, driving ability)--->modeling... you got to have their permission...

They got you good ^^

Ducking for cover...

shrox
10-07-2009, 08:32 AM
nope, the content is copyrighted.

I meant the intact copies. I know the material inside is copyrighted, can't I sell the intact copies?

jaxtone
10-07-2009, 08:33 AM
Nope! ... the kids can´t of course not selling the AD license after the owner died. The license is private business and nothing you can sell if you are not the sole owner. We are talking abou a life long slave contract!


What about selling a driver's license after somebody's dead? To a museum or a crazy collector? That is, assuming that person in life was famous, someone might like to buy something like that. In which case, it was owned, right?
But then, your kids could be able to sell your 3dsmax license... after you're dead.

jaxtone
10-07-2009, 08:44 AM
I respect your advocate ambitions but as I told before we almost lost $17000 on this "#%"#% slavery license when couldn´t sell off the overrated AD product because we didn´t own it. This was before XSI were hijacked by AD and owned by another company well known to anyone that are aware of video editing. XSI could do the job as expected and we thought it was just to sell of the AD products. No way Jose! So there is always another aspect of what we believe is true.

But I actually wouldn´t tell anyone with a wallet thick enough to skip AD´s products. Its´their opinion and choice, I just can´t stand greed when it´s so transparent that you see that there ain´t no soul and heart connected to a product or service.


Well, just for the sake of playing devil's advocate...

Unless you have money to burn or really want the software, Autodesk products aren't something for your casual user.
So one could make the argument that they're selling it for professionals who use it to make their living.
So in that context, if you've fed your family and paid your bills for a whole year off an Autodesk purchase, I wouldn't really say you've not gotten any value from it.
How much should one expect to get in a resale, anyway? I wouldn't pay anywhere near the original price for a software that was one or two years out of date, especially if it can't be used to upgrade to the latest version.

Titus
10-07-2009, 09:14 AM
I meant the intact copies. I know the material inside is copyrighted, can't I sell the intact copies?

I think it wasn't a good analogy.

Since the 90's my former university has been collecting Cray supercomputers for their scientific needs (Cray C, Cray X, Cray YMP, and other models). These computers cost millions and millions of dollars and guess what, they don't own the machines! they only have a right or license to use them for a limited amount of time (5-10 years). After this time they can no longer use these machines, then some Cray employees visit the university, dismantle the expensive machine and destroy the board circuits and all they have left is the big hollow cabinet.

Some computer software and hardware sucks :P.

manholoz
10-07-2009, 10:04 AM
I thought Cray went bust.

cresshead
10-07-2009, 10:55 AM
Cray was aquired by silicon graphics years back

Intuition
10-07-2009, 11:12 AM
.....and now SGI is owned by Rackable Systems.

Yet Rackable Systems use the SGI name.

Now if they could focus on getting workstations out that actually outperform low cost 8 core rigs then they would start turning a profit.

cresshead
10-07-2009, 11:38 AM
btw, Autodesk lost their case.

OnlineRender
10-07-2009, 11:51 AM
btw, Autodesk lost their case.


yeee counter-sue ?

animotion
10-07-2009, 01:06 PM
if you use the driving liecence analogy then it makes logical sense...

see in the u.k. >>
you have to pay for a liecence to drive...
you cannot 'sell' your licence to anyone else..

No, but you can sure sell the car, and thats the only thing that is usable to anyone else. The software is the car. Your registration is your personal license, nobody wants that. It will get re-licensed when sold.

Autodesk should get set on thier ARSE on this one.

JonW
10-07-2009, 05:21 PM
Re: not being able to own super computers.

This makes sense why there are now so many PC Clusters!


Whether its software or hardware, if a supplier makes their customer’s life too difficult, the customer will find an alternative way to do things.

monovich
10-08-2009, 10:33 AM
I'm running into a related problem with Autodesk now. I supposedly won Max 2010 in a competition earlier this year. I finally got it in the mail (six months late) and its the NFS version. Guess what NFS means?

1. 30 day expiration in EULA (not coded in software)
2. No upgrades
3. No commercial work
4. No reselling
5. No support

Gee... thanks Autodesk, literally for nothing! If I wanted a 30 day demo I could have downloaded it from your website, not worked hard to win it.

Whats more frustrating is that Autodesk Asia, which is an autonomous division, gave full commercial licenses to the winners of the competition from Asia, but the USA division was so scrooge-worthy and worried about actually giving away a few bucks that they decided to go NFS.

P.S. Newtek: thanks for not being Autodesk, please never get bought by them.

JonW
10-08-2009, 06:15 PM
We have a government department called Fair Trading. I have on a few occasions over the years, just mentioning Fair Trading to suppliers & they have fixed the problem. Although it should not even get to this.

You may have something similar.

Firstly, any communication you do on this matter. If at all possible do it in writing in a real letter only, also never get angry & always stick to the facts, (also if you get angry it will only affect you).

Get a large diary & write down details straight after every conversation you have related in any form to the topic. Get copies of any & all the promotional information you can.

If there has been a suggestion of giving away a full licence (even if no suggestion of a full licence its still not an issue) & you are well armed with all the facts, including what you had to do to win the competition & what was given away in other regions. You will have a better chance of resolving the issue by yourself.

Once armed, write a very polite letter to the CEO (find his name on the web site, or ask an employe etc.). Draft & redraft your letter & bounce it off some friends. Also whether the region is autonomous or not, its a non issue, they are all selling the same product, same name, doing the same job. It reflects on the entire organisation. (For example, If say a customer got food poisoning in McDonalds Australia, the whole world would know about it & it would reflect badly on every employee around the world) The dodgy promotion & pathetic delivery clearly states that the entire world wide group of companies is incapable of any form of customer service.

This will take a long time to get right & resolve, be patient & get in right from the beginning. Being polite & starting at the very very top & only using facts is the best approach. Communication via letter & starting at the top will cost the company a lot more in administration & the top people in the company should come down on the this stuff up like a ton of bricks & they may just (will, hopefully!) resolve it quickly because they see someone who means business & may see the “light” in good public relations.

If you take it one step further with a letter from your solicitor, you will have prepared all the ground work. Maybe a simple well prepared letter from your solicitor will do the trick. Although, if it gets to this it would be very disappointing on every level, extremely unimpressive in every single respect.

Its probably not worth the time & effort to go further than this, but it will have made it blatantly clear that an international company is incapable of a profession approach to public relations & promotion of its products & services. One would seriously ponder the integrity, ongoing service, ethics & customer focus any business would have if they couldn’t resolve this issue quickly & simply with a fully working product. & on top of this , an extra apology for the stuff up for your time wasted on their ill-conceived promotion, which I’m sure on ather level has very likely broken laws on promotions & give-aways.

The simple fact that it has got to what you pointed out, is just plain pathetic.

My view, if a company is giving away some software in a promotion. Its not a trial. Its to be a fully working version of the product with upgrades etc, it should not be crippled in any form. Is the company promoting crippled software? or is it promoting what it can do? I think any professional organisation promoting itself would be promoting everything it is capable of to the fullest extent. If you see the capability of the product & are very happy with the service. you will end up buying upgrades over the years. In the end they will have got a new customer & they would have received a return on the initial give-away. The initial promotion probably didn’t cost them that much to start with, as advertising etc were most likely freebies with their suppliers.

Decades ago my Father won about 20 power tools in a competition because he came up with a good answer for their competition. It would not be a good look for the company if all the tools broke down 30 days later. Also all the tools came with full warranties & service as if they were bought from a shop. The net result of my Father winning these tools is that over the years he than bought about another 10 products from the same manufacture because he was so impressed.

In anther situation years ago I had bough a camera & extra batteries. There was a stuff up, they sent the wrong batteries. They were replaced very quickly & the company even threw in a pair of binoculars for the stuff up, & they were surprisingly good as well.

Since the appalling public relations of your situation it would be impressive if the company also send a full copy of some add on software to apologise for their initial poor judgement & inherent bad management.

They may just get a new customer in the long run who is impressed & will be upgrading for years.

Silkrooster
10-09-2009, 12:23 AM
We have a government department called Fair Trading. I have on a few occasions over the years, just mentioning Fair Trading to suppliers & they have fixed the problem. Although it should not even get to this.

You may have something similar.

Firstly, any communication you do on this matter. If at all possible do it in writing in a real letter only, also never get angry & always stick to the facts, (also if you get angry it will only affect you).

Get a large diary & write down details straight after every conversation you have related in any form to the topic. Get copies of any & all the promotional information you can.

If there has been a suggestion of giving away a full licence (even if no suggestion of a full licence its still not an issue) & you are well armed with all the facts, including what you had to do to win the competition & what was given away in other regions. You will have a better chance of resolving the issue by yourself.

Once armed, write a very polite letter to the CEO (find his name on the web site, or ask an employe etc.). Draft & redraft your letter & bounce it off some friends. Also whether the region is autonomous or not, its a non issue, they are all selling the same product, same name, doing the same job. It reflects on the entire organisation. (For example, If say a customer got food poisoning in McDonalds Australia, the whole world would know about it & it would reflect badly on every employee around the world) The dodgy promotion & pathetic delivery clearly states that the entire world wide group of companies is incapable of any form of customer service.

This will take a long time to get right & resolve, be patient & get in right from the beginning. Being polite & starting at the very very top & only using facts is the best approach. Communication via letter & starting at the top will cost the company a lot more in administration & the top people in the company should come down on the this stuff up like a ton of bricks & they may just (will, hopefully!) resolve it quickly because they see someone who means business & may see the “light” in good public relations.

If you take it one step further with a letter from your solicitor, you will have prepared all the ground work. Maybe a simple well prepared letter from your solicitor will do the trick. Although, if it gets to this it would be very disappointing on every level, extremely unimpressive in every single respect.

Its probably not worth the time & effort to go further than this, but it will have made it blatantly clear that an international company is incapable of a profession approach to public relations & promotion of its products & services. One would seriously ponder the integrity, ongoing service, ethics & customer focus any business would have if they couldn’t resolve this issue quickly & simply with a fully working product. & on top of this , an extra apology for the stuff up for your time wasted on their ill-conceived promotion, which I’m sure on ather level has very likely broken laws on promotions & give-aways.

The simple fact that it has got to what you pointed out, is just plain pathetic.

My view, if a company is giving away some software in a promotion. Its not a trial. Its to be a fully working version of the product with upgrades etc, it should not be crippled in any form. Is the company promoting crippled software? or is it promoting what it can do? I think any professional organisation promoting itself would be promoting everything it is capable of to the fullest extent. If you see the capability of the product & are very happy with the service. you will end up buying upgrades over the years. In the end they will have got a new customer & they would have received a return on the initial give-away. The initial promotion probably didn’t cost them that much to start with, as advertising etc were most likely freebies with their suppliers.

Decades ago my Father won about 20 power tools in a competition because he came up with a good answer for their competition. It would not be a good look for the company if all the tools broke down 30 days later. Also all the tools came with full warranties & service as if they were bought from a shop. The net result of my Father winning these tools is that over the years he than bought about another 10 products from the same manufacture because he was so impressed.

In anther situation years ago I had bough a camera & extra batteries. There was a stuff up, they sent the wrong batteries. They were replaced very quickly & the company even threw in a pair of binoculars for the stuff up, & they were surprisingly good as well.

Since the appalling public relations of your situation it would be impressive if the company also send a full copy of some add on software to apologise for their initial poor judgement & inherent bad management.

They may just get a new customer in the long run who is impressed & will be upgrading for years.


I would seriously think of contacting the Better Business Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission. If a group of us had NOT contacted the BBB and they contacted Autodesk about NOT supporting MotionBuilder Standard (i.e. allowing us move the software to another machine), then AD would not have supported it. Essentially they were forced into it. Your situation seems to be similar. They advertised the prize as one thing and then changed it afterwards. Seriously dude, I would check it out. You can contact the BBB on the web and fill out the form relatively quickly.

Excellent advice...

monovich
10-09-2009, 10:41 AM
thanks for the advice guys! I hadn't actually thought of writing autodesk, but I think I will now. this is just so utterly lame.

geothefaust
10-09-2009, 11:41 AM
thanks for the advice guys! I hadn't actually thought of writing autodesk, but I think I will now. this is just so utterly lame.

Seriously. That is utterly outrageous of them to do. I know they are complete ******bags at AD, but I never would have thought they would do something like that.

A new low for them...

jaxtone
10-10-2009, 07:19 AM
... reading this is just another evidence of how AD became AG!

AutoGreed! :devil:


I'm running into a related problem with Autodesk now. I supposedly won Max 2010 in a competition earlier this year. I finally got it in the mail (six months late) and its the NFS version. Guess what NFS means?

1. 30 day expiration in EULA (not coded in software)
2. No upgrades
3. No commercial work
4. No reselling
5. No support

Gee... thanks Autodesk, literally for nothing! If I wanted a 30 day demo I could have downloaded it from your website, not worked hard to win it.

Whats more frustrating is that Autodesk Asia, which is an autonomous division, gave full commercial licenses to the winners of the competition from Asia, but the USA division was so scrooge-worthy and worried about actually giving away a few bucks that they decided to go NFS.

P.S. Newtek: thanks for not being Autodesk, please never get bought by them.