Post by: bigbone on January 17, 2011, 03:47:17 PM
http://www.audioprointernational.com/news/1976/Waves-Audio-w ins-lawsuit-against-two-NYC-studios
What do you think !!!!
JN
Post by: Bill Mueller on January 17, 2011, 03:52:40 PM
| 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
Post by: bigbone on January 17, 2011, 04:12:26 PM
| Bill Mueller wrote on Mon, 17 January 2011 15:52 | ||
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
Post by: Podgorny on January 17, 2011, 05:57:20 PM
Post by: Fletcher on January 17, 2011, 07:01:56 PM
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.
Post by: DarinK on January 17, 2011, 07:10:15 PM
| 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.
Post by: Wireline on January 17, 2011, 07:14:14 PM
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....
Post by: bigbone on January 17, 2011, 07:24:45 PM
| 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
Post by: jrmintz on January 18, 2011, 06:25:32 PM
Post by: Fletcher on January 19, 2011, 08:03:49 AM
| 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!!
Post by: 0dbfs on January 19, 2011, 09:21:12 AM
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
Post by: ktownson on January 19, 2011, 10:01:23 AM
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?
Post by: Podgorny on January 19, 2011, 10:07:16 AM
| 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.
Post by: kats on January 19, 2011, 11:40:36 AM
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.
Post by: jetbase on January 19, 2011, 04:32:36 PM
Post by: bigbone on January 19, 2011, 07:35:14 PM
| Podgorny wrote on Wed, 19 January 2011 10:07 | ||
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
Post by: Fibes on January 19, 2011, 07:54:03 PM
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.
Post by: rphilbeck on January 20, 2011, 08:59:54 AM
Post by: joeyhavoc on January 20, 2011, 10:00:14 AM
| 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
Post by: MagnetoSound on January 20, 2011, 10:17:18 AM
| 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!
Post by: Edward Vinatea on January 20, 2011, 10:22:01 AM
. 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
Post by: Podgorny on January 20, 2011, 10:23:04 AM
| 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.
Post by: mrufino1 on January 20, 2011, 12:35:31 PM
| 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.
Post by: Sean Eldon Qualls on January 20, 2011, 12:39:33 PM
Plenty of hardware in that room, too...
Post by: faganking on January 20, 2011, 01:03:51 PM
Post by: J.J. Blair on January 20, 2011, 01:09:45 PM
Post by: zmix on January 20, 2011, 06:21:59 PM
| J.J. Blair wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 13:09 |
Nevermind. |
Killer album.
...till you hear this...
Post by: joeyhavoc on January 20, 2011, 06:52:40 PM
| zmix wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 17:21 | ||
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.
Post by: J.J. Blair on January 20, 2011, 08:56:56 PM
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.
Post by: Jay Kadis on January 20, 2011, 09:05:48 PM
Post by: J.J. Blair on January 20, 2011, 09:10:08 PM
Post by: Jay Kadis on January 20, 2011, 09:21:01 PM
Post by: Fibes on January 20, 2011, 10:00:05 PM
Post by: J.J. Blair on January 20, 2011, 10:10:49 PM
Post by: Jan Folkson on January 20, 2011, 11:37:18 PM
Post by: PookyNMR on January 21, 2011, 05:38:01 PM
| 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.
Post by: Tomas Danko on January 23, 2011, 08:35:29 AM
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.
Post by: Jon Hodgson on January 23, 2011, 08:50:26 AM
| 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.
Post by: 0dbfs on January 23, 2011, 10:30:06 AM
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
Post by: New Orleans Steve on January 23, 2011, 11:19:46 AM
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?
Post by: blairl on January 23, 2011, 05:12:41 PM
| 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.
Post by: bigbone on January 23, 2011, 07:18:39 PM
After only a few month of working with WAVES, ( studio classics collection ). They are on my A list.
JN
Post by: svs95 on January 25, 2011, 12:10:31 AM
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.
Post by: Fenris Wulf on January 26, 2011, 08:18:07 AM
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.
Post by: Barish on February 01, 2011, 02:01:03 AM
| 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.