At 12:32 PM 8/10/03 +0000, Robert Patterson Finale wrote: >The statement is correct so long as you keep your >current computer (actually optionally 2 of em) running >as long as you live. But most people upgrade computers >periodically, or have hard drive crashes, etc. When that >happens, you'll have to get a new reg code, and that >means MM has to be there and able to provide it.
Not entirely. I just posted the following on the Finale forum. I've reposted the suggestion here because I refined it since my original comments to this list. It does address the issue of Makemusic being defunct and/or products being obsoleted. The response to this note was also how I learned that PACE is not employed in the challenge/response system. With regard to a previous post here: Although Tyler may be a Coda Tech Support employee, Tyler is not reponsible for Finale's license/clickwrap agreement, and his assurances certainly don't assure me. If the Makemusic CEO posts a response, that is one that might be considered authoritative in touchy matters like this one. As posted: ----- The following is a letter to a Makemusic executive who has responsibilities in this area. The response was positive, but not definitive; if there is a definitive response, I think we'll all know: Hello [====], [====] thought I should send this idea directly to you. My suggestion for a key escrow was already made when I canceled my Finale 2004 order. Sales said they would forward it to Makemusic administration, but perhaps in the business of a new release, it wasn't seen. I've been a Finale user since FinWin2.2, was a beta tester for 3.0, and have purchased every upgrade except the protected Finale 98. I want this product to succeed, especially as I have 10 years investment and hundreds of musical scores tied up in its formats. I restated my suggestions in my order cancelation to the Finale list regarding your copy protection methods. If any of your folks follow the list, you'll know that some of us are angry about Makemusic issuing 'victimware'. I'm at the moment the most vocal, not only about protection, but about Makemusic's dissembling on the website that challenge/response isn't copy protection. By any common understanding among users, it is. Any manufacturer's inclusion of software-disabling features after purchase establishes a mode of copy protection, and challenge/response is one of those limitations. In any case, here is what I posted about your copy protection, and I hope Makemusic can act quickly to implement these straightforward ideas. 1. Publish the protection information truthfully on the website and ordering materials, removing comments that it is not copy protection. 2. Create a universal unlock (skeleton) key. Makemusic probably already has one. 3. Escrow that key to a third party contracted to Makemusic only for that purpose. 4. Create and publish a support schedule for version obsolescence (product end-of-life). 5. Publish the key and distribute it to purchasers when that version is no longer supported. 6. Authorize the third party to publish the key when Makemusic violates the support schedule or shows other indications, with the third party as sole arbiter, that the product is endangered through Makemusic tech, support, or economic failures or for the failure of Makemusic to provide authorizations in a timely manner or otherwise disrupt its use by legitimate purchasers. 7. Require the serial number to purchase upgrades, as is done now. 8. Include the universal unlock key escrow and release process as part of the user agreement and warranty. You could lead the way for other software companies who engage in copy protection by protecting *both* sides of the contract. There is already precedent for making a skeleton key available after the demise of a product. For example, Gadget Labs released the keys on the company's closure, in fact, allowing users to permanently unlock the software. [====] Thanks, Dennis _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
