Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bigbone]

 http://www.audioprointernational.com/news/1976/Waves-Audio-w ins-lawsuit-against-two-NYC-studios


What do you think !!!!




JN

[Bill Mueller]

bigbone wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 15:47

http://www.audioprointernational.com/news/1976/Waves-Audio-w ins-lawsuit-against-two-NYC-studios What do you think !!!! JN

Fair is fair. Don't crack software or condone IP crime.

Every company I have worked for or owned knew well of the legal dangers of using pirated software.

Bill

[bigbone]

Bill Mueller wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 15:52

bigbone wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 15:47   http://www.audioprointernational.com/news/1976/Waves-Audio-w ins-lawsuit-against-two-NYC-studios What do you think !!!! JN Fair is fair. Don't crack software or condone IP crime. Every company I have worked for or owned knew well of the legal dangers of using pirated software. Bill

Agree 100 %.


JN

[Podgorny]

FYI, this news is from May of last year.

[Fletcher]

If Skyline and Quad were indeed using cracks then its cool that they lost the suit... anyone in OUR industry that violates ANY intellectual property law in the slightest also forfeits the right to bitch about the state of the industry from "illegal downloads"

HOWEVER... I have a very dear friend who had Waves on his computer that was a legal "authorized" copy [complete with dongle] that belonged to one of his regular clients.  The software wouldn't run unless the client's dongle was installed, but Waves sent letters and threatened a suit just because he didn't purchase the program and it was on his machine.

I've heard from several other studio owners about similar scenarios... Waves coming in for a "studio tour" seeing the icon on the desktop and a week later a notice of legal action comes via certified mail [while its a perfectly legal copy that is owned by a regular client... which is kinda like leaving your Fender Twin in the hallway and everyone at the studio knows its yours and not to use it].

Peace.

[DarinK]

Fletcher wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 16:01

If Skyline and Quad were indeed using cracks then its cool that they lost the suit... anyone in OUR industry that violates ANY intellectual property law in the slightest also forfeits the right to bitch about the state of the industry from "illegal downloads" HOWEVER... I have a very dear friend who had Waves on his computer that was a legal "authorized" copy [complete with dongle] that belonged to one of his regular clients.  The software wouldn't run unless the client's dongle was installed, but Waves sent letters and threatened a suit just because he didn't purchase the program and it was on his machine. I've heard from several other studio owners about similar scenarios... Waves coming in for a "studio tour" seeing the icon on the desktop and a week later a notice of legal action comes via certified mail [while its a perfectly legal copy that is owned by a regular client... which is kinda like leaving your Fender Twin in the hallway and everyone at the studio knows its yours and not to use it]. Peace.

This would depend on the licensing agreement that Waves uses.  Many agreements authorize use on one machine only, rather than use by one owner.  Generally speaking, I think licensing agreements should authorize use by owner, not machine.  I shouldn't have to buy multiple copies of something if I have more than one computer.

[Wireline]

What?!?

If the app won't run without a dongle, it might as well be the launch codes for Chinese nukes...why would Waves or anyone else care where it was being stored, as long as it was only licensed users actually using the software?

About the Twin - I used it to get a special vocal effect last week, so....

[bigbone]

Podgorny wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 17:57

FYI, this news is from May of last year.

Is that mean it's not part of the audio community......

JN

[jrmintz]

If the license resides on an ilok, doesn't that mean the license goes wherever the ilok goes?

[Fletcher]

jrmintz wrote on Tue, 18 January 2011 18:25

If the license resides on an ilok, doesn't that mean the license goes wherever the ilok goes?

That would make sense - but who the hell really knows what kind of evil shit is actually hiding in the "license agreements" that you have to accept to use the product(s)... and from what I've seen from Waves [as a company] whatever kind of evil shit they can perpetrate to squeeze out a buck is something they'll go for in a heartbeat... rational thought and "letter of the legal agreement" are very often diametrically opposed!!

[0dbfs]

Who knows what the license actually states, but many of these things allow running the SW on one machine at one time. ie; you can install it on several machines but it may only be used on a single machine at once. The dongle allows that to be the case. ie; it won't run unless you have the licenses on the dongle. Waves would have a hard time winning a case where someone had the SW installed but could not even use it without a dongle. If they wanted it a different way, then they would use a different technology other than the ilok. For instance something that referenced the installed CPU/HW-ID checksum. Part of the responsibility is on them and if studio owners are responsible for employees, contractors, clients, then the SW developers are also responsible to license their SW in such a technological way as to prevent and protect honest users.

More and more, I am just using the included digi plugs and staying away from third party if I can. Makes session transfers between machines less hassle.

Cheers,
j

[ktownson]

Just to play devil's advocate, I recently had a situation where my studio computer picked up a nasty bug that somehow got around the virus protection.

It required me to run registry sweeps and other malware removers to clean it up, but I got it back up and running quickly. Except that on the next boot, I got a nag screen (with a countdown locking the computer for a few seconds) from the tyrants of Redmond saying my computer no longer passed Microsoft Genuine Advantage tests.

I've owned this computer for years, qualified for regular MS updates, and never had a problem until now. I tried entering the reg key from the label on the case manually, I tried editing registry scripts, the auto phone authorization, nothing worked. Microsoft adamantly declared I was using unauthorized software, locked me out of the update website, hassled me with nag screens at startup, regular taskbar popups, a constant admonition that my computer may be at risk on the desktop and they blacked out the desktop background image. The only solution, according to these screens, was to update to a genuine Windows 7 license at $149.

It finally took a call to Microsoft Tech Support to point me to a tool that rescans the registry and resets the computer to pass the Genuine Advantage tests. (Thank you to the outsourced MS techie, a fellow with a heavy Indian accent who insisted his name was "Homer.")

A lot of trouble and "guilty until proven innocent" for someone with a legitimate license, don't you think?

[Podgorny]

bigbone wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 18:24

Is that mean it's not part of the audio community......

Jean, I know you're not a native English speaker, so perhaps I'm misinterpreting you; Some of your posts come off as supercilious. You might want to be careful about that (unless you're doing it intentionally, in which case, cut it out).



So no, it DOESN'T mean it's not part of the audio community.  I just thought for the sake of avoiding confusion, it should be noted  that this event happened nearly a year ago.

[kats]

I'd like to mention that most software companies outside of the music business require separate licenses  per terminal, not per user/owner. This is to make the software more affordable for small companies who use one terminal compared to a company that uses 20.

So I don't think this is a justification to crack Waves. It may however be a good justification to not buy it in the first place.

[jetbase]

I own one Waves plugin but I had to download the entire Waves 7 package to install that one plugin. How could Waves sue when they require you to take possession of the installers for plugins you don't own so that you can install the ones you do own?

[bigbone]

Podgorny wrote on Wed, 19 January 2011 10:07

bigbone wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 18:24 Is that mean it's not part of the audio community...... Jean, I know you're not a native English speaker, so perhaps I'm misinterpreting you; Some of your posts come off as supercilious. You might want to be careful about that (unless you're doing it intentionally, in which case, cut it out). So no, it DOESN'T mean it's not part of the audio community.  I just thought for the sake of avoiding confusion, it should be noted  that this event happened nearly a year ago.

I don't need a lecture about my post, if you don't like it don't read it.

I don't like the way you said English is not my native language, i'm not supercilious,  but your answer sound like it........

JN

[Fibes]

It said they were using cracks.

Waves is fucked in the head but in this case it appears they were justified.

I now have Waves stuff on the studio computer because my assistant insists we have it there but he owns it and it's legit.

I will not buy their software again their practices are mindboggling and not worth the price of admission and downloading giant bungles for a few plugs every few months.

[rphilbeck]

WAVES is smart enough to know where the money is in this business....litigation:)

[joeyhavoc]

rphilbeck wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 07:59

WAVES is smart enough to know where the money is in this business....litigation:)

Unfortunately, that may be true for album sales as well.

joe

[MagnetoSound]

Fibes wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 00:54

I will not buy their software again their practices are mindboggling and not worth the price of admission and downloading giant bungles for a few plugs every few months.

A Freudian slip worth quoting!  

[Edward Vinatea]

To me this is a personal shock because I've been to both NY studios and I can't believe they would even need to work with cracked software in the first place. Without giving specifics, I visited the Skyline studio when Duran Duran was recording one of their albums in the late 80's {I got star-struck by John Taylor that day too}. That studio and the folks that run it go way back, so this Waves lawsuit seems so hard to believe   . I am a registered Waves user and contrary to what some people on some forums say about their products, I use Waves since the 90's and thus, I am inclined to say that this was something that was really needed to make a big point.

Regards,

Edward

[Podgorny]

bigbone wrote on Wed, 19 January 2011 18:35

I don't need a lecture about my post, if you don't like it don't read it.

How exactly does one know whether they will like a post if they do not read it?

Look, I don't know what exactly your problem is - all I did was make a note about the date, and that doesn't warrant you giving all kinds of attitude.  I'm thinking perhaps there IS a language barrier here, because certainly you're not INTENDING to come across in such an aggressive manner.

[mrufino1]

Edward Vinatea wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 10:22

I visited the Skyline studio when Duran Duran was recording one of their albums in the late 80's {I got star-struck by John Taylor that day too}. That studio and the folks that run it go way back, so this Waves lawsuit seems so hard to believe

I recorded a very small project at Skyline a few years ago (as a musician- my only recording in a big studio like that), and I do know it is different ownership than in the 80's, so not the same people. I do also know there was some issues with one of the former employees who was involved in our project; I have no idea if this falls under that or not. I don't really know any details of that employee's situation but he didn't work there for too much longer and I was led to believe there was some dishonesty on his part that led to his release. I enjoyed working with the studio owners in the few days we had, they knew their stuff and I learned a lot by watching.

[Sean Eldon Qualls]

I've spent some time at Skyline, and it's hard to believe Ron or Jonathan would be directly involved in pirating plugins...if I had to guess, I'd say it was a visiting engineer or an assistant/intern who put the cracks on their machine. But I don't know anything about this situation outside of what the article states.

Plenty of hardware in that room, too...

[faganking]

I worked extensively at Skyline back in the early and mid 80's. When Nile Rogers had a little office there. Great room, staff and gear. But that was a long time ago!

[J.J. Blair]

Nevermind.

[zmix]

J.J. Blair wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 13:09

Nevermind.

Killer album.


...till you hear this...

[joeyhavoc]

zmix wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 17:21

J.J. Blair wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 13:09 Nevermind. Killer album. ...till you hear this...

Or The Damned, Life Goes On...

Back on topic.  Why exactly do people dislike the company Waves so much?  Isn't their successful lawsuit against copyright infringement a "good thing" for our industry?  I seem to be missing some context here.

[J.J. Blair]

Waves has been roundly disliked for their WUP policy, which was horrendously bad business, IMO.  After some intervention by a PSW member, it was made less draconian, but I find it unfriendly enough that I will not buy their products, and I discourage those who seek my advice, based solely on the WUP situation.

I have no problem with their software, but when I have to pay somebody money to make something compatible, not for new features, I find it bad customer service.  They are not the only company.  This happened with Sonnox, too, but Waves embodies this practice for me.  And then when I had an iLock go bad, the only company where it was a pain in the ass to get my licenses off was Waves.  

In terms of what happened at Skyline, their were some tactics on Waves part that showed them to be a little too eager to seek a legal remedy.  I can't even imagine Microsoft sending people in with hidden cameras to get people to show them their cracked software.  

[Jay Kadis]

We used to use Waves software - at the time it was the best.  But I couldn't keep up with the upgrades in a teaching environment due to their user-unfriendly system.  Now there are plenty of great alternatives.

[J.J. Blair]

Jay, absolutely.  Prior to UA's TDM plugs, Waves had the best stuff out there, not to mention they had stuff that everybody HAD To have, like L2.  There's some great sounding stuff out there now, for a lot cheaper, and with a better customer experience.  

[Jay Kadis]

We still use the hardware L2 every day.  These days I feel a bit of allegiance to Universal Audio since it kind of started in my office, but mainly because I love their products.  

[Fibes]

Sonalksis and UA are first rate all around.

[J.J. Blair]

I also have to say that the people at UA are unbelievable.  Some of the warmest and most helpful in the business.  

[Jan Folkson]

I gave up on waves a long time ago.  Life is too short to deal with crap like that.

[PookyNMR]

Fibes wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 20:00

Sonalksis and UA are first rate all around.

Sonalksis are great.  Maybe not as well known, but as far as plug-ins go, I think they're some of the better sounding ones out there.  Certainly worth a demo.

Never had a problem with Waves.  I quite like their emulation plugs as well as some of their newer products like the C6.

[Tomas Danko]

I decided to never purchase Waves software with my personal money. However, at work I've got another colleague who takes care of WUP and all our iLoks (we've probably got Waves licenses worth $40 000 or more, including one license of something that's above Mercury).

But the friggin' software still won't run well under 64-bit Windows which forces me to work on two PC machines at the same time and that kills the workflow.

One reason for us to stick to Waves, is that we need to be highly compatible between studio projects, outsourcing and such. I'd rather go with UAD, Sonnox and such. However, with the next generation audio engines on the newest gaming consoles I've started to process it all in real-time during runtime instead. It doesn't sound as good, but the benefits are wicked.

Due to this, we're seeng a trend where Waves are trying to port their plug-ins to Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 in order to try and sell us (very expensive) runtime library licenses.

[Jon Hodgson]

Sean Eldon Qualls wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 17:39

I've spent some time at Skyline, and it's hard to believe Ron or Jonathan would be directly involved in pirating plugins...if I had to guess, I'd say it was a visiting engineer or an assistant/intern who put the cracks on their machine. But I don't know anything about this situation outside of what the article states. Plenty of hardware in that room, too...

Well their defence was that they didn't know about it.

But the judge instructed the jury that it wasn't a defence in law

“[a] person is liable for copyright infringement by another if the person has a financial interest and the right and ability to supervise the infringing activity, whether or not the person knew of the infringement.”

Basically, it happened on their watch, they benefited financially, they're responsible.

I didn't know that was the letter of the law (at least US law), so I find that interesting.

[0dbfs]

Sounds like it turned out to be the case in this instance.

I can totally see how this happened and it's probably not an isolated thing.

I'll bet that their "employee-agreement" now moves the responsibility to the employees so that it's very clear what is and is-not acceptable regarding unlawful use of licensed property.

Now, if freelancers are doing this in a rented space on rented equipment then the rental-agreement needs to address this as well.

A business should have these protection-mechanisms in place.

Best,
jonathan

[New Orleans Steve]

 As a 'Label' Owner, I am a student of I.P. law, so I follow this with interest. When I was in the production department at a large non- profit, they had a very strong policy against cracked software. They stated they would buy any software we wanted, but installing cracked software was grounds to get fired.  

 I usually don't work in the box, but have been on sessions where they used Waves..... All I can say is IF I was bootleging software, I wouldn't be cracking WAVES.
 Don't know about others, But to me Waves was not really that Good. Is it really on the 'A' list?

[blairl]

New Orleans Steve wrote on Sun, 23 January 2011 09:19

Don't know about others, But to me Waves was not really that Good. Is it really on the 'A' list?

Absolutely on the 'A' list!  Great audio processing tools.  I say that without reservation after nearly 20 years of using their products.

[bigbone]

After only a few month of working with WAVES, ( studio classics collection ). They are on my A list.

JN

[svs95]

I have Waves on several different systems here, and move one ilok between them, depending on what room or DAW I'm using. Never had a problem with tech support when I told them this, so it must be A-OK with them. In fact, it's the main advantage of iloks over system-resident licenses.

Waves are not the only game in town, but they are on the A-List for sure. Linear Phase EQs, C6 with sideband, X-Hum, L3 LL Ultra, the Renaissance stuff, and the S1 stereo tool are on so many projects, it's hard to imagine not having them.

I also like to meter the final buss through their Durrough meter. It makes it easy at a glance to get the levels high enough, but not too high, and to keep peak/average in a good range.

It wouldn't surprise me if their litigators might have been over-zealous in a case or two, but I also wouldn't be too surprised if some of those stories were not quite true as told.

[Fenris Wulf]

There's exactly ONE Waves plug-in that does something nothing else does, the Linear Multiband. Definitely the most capable multi-band tool/linear phase crossover on the market. And possibly the S1 stereo imager and that new phantom center plug. Everything else I can do without. The Linear EQ doesn't even have temporal overlap processing to remove the pre-ring and is incredibly bad sounding.

The UA stuff is great for plug-ins, but since I moved to analog mixing I don't use them at all. If I run out of outboard compressors I'll do without rather than use a plug-in. Yes folks, DSP actually sounds worse that no processing at all.

Copy protection schemes still have a tendency to royally screw up your computer, and people resort to "buy the plug-in and use the crack." Yes folks, the cracked version is actually more stable.

That reminds me, a fellow on another forum was asking advice on the possible legal ramifications of using a "Hackintosh," which he's contemplating just so he can have something without ridiculous hardware limitations.

So now you can get sued for doing what you have to to make your system work. I don't need that kind of crap in my life. So long digital, I can't say it's been nice knowing you.

[Barish]

Jan Folkson wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 04:37

I gave up on waves a long time ago.  Life is too short to deal with crap like that.

Same here.

By the way, I couldn't help noticing a funny coincidence in the company names there:

Quote:

...New York City-based Reckless Music, LLC, d.b.a. Skyline Recording Studios NYC...

That kinda explains in an ironic way how they made such a mistake.

B.