you could've gotten the same one for free from kazaa. or somewhere else.
best,
mishka


On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 15:32:36 -0700, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How can this be?
> 
> While browsing yesterday I came across a link for Adobe software at closeout
> prices, including Photoshop CS.  I followed the link to
> www.markedownsoftware.com.
> 
> It offers a full version Photoshop CS for $95.99 as a download only, and
> slightly more if a CD is desired.  I purchased the download version.  A
> serial # was not provided in the download.  I e-mailed today asking for the
> serial # and via return e-mail was given a link to a web page containing the
> serial # along with special instructions, including a 'fix' program.  The
> web page also had serial #'s for a bunch of other products I did not
> purchase.
> 
> It essentially said 'Install the software as normal with the serial # from
> the web page and when the activation portion of the install comes up, cancel
> out of it.  Then run the provided little 'fix' program that was provided
> with the serial #'.
> 
> Well everything worked as described.  When I received the serial # (prior to
> reading all the instructions) I did an install and tried to activate, which
> sends serial #, etc., to Adobe.  Activation was denied.  I susbsequently
> uninstalled and reinstalled following all the instructions regarding the
> 'fix'.  The software works like it should.
> 
> I halfway suspect I've bought a bootleg version, except that I can't imagine
> someone blatantly advertising this on the web and not being afraid of the
> 'Software Police'.
> 
> Any idea how this can be legitimate?  How can numerous purchasers all be
> given the same serial #?  Can someone possibly purchase a group license and
> then legally resell it indvidually?   How can an indidvidual or small
> company sell it at this price when Adobe itself sells it for $649?
> 
> If it's not legit, I'm not going to have gigantic qualms of conscience as
> I'm the legitimate owner of versions 3, 4, and 6, but I'm sort of
> suspicious...
> 
> Tom C.
> 
>

Reply via email to