Software are people using Legal Copies

[Sketchrender]

This is going to get me flack.

 

As a lot of Fx and Viz companies are setting up offices in Eastern countries, are they using Legal software or not ?

 

Do big fx houses and Viz companies really give a damn if they are legal or not?

 

I often wonder, why we keep ourselves legal, apart from the fact that it is illegal obviously here. You could very easily spend €1500+ a year just keep subscriptions and plugins going.

 

What do people think.

 

Phil

[notamondayfan]

I run all my software legally. Software may seem a lot, but after the initial cost, the yearly cost really isn't that much, and any decent freelancer, studio or business should easily afford this. I think digital businesses, such as ours, have very little running costs compared to traditional businesses, so I think we're very lucky.

 

There's no reason to use cracked software in any business but it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of studios used illegal software, greed is everywhere.

 

Also there are plenty of alternatives if you can't afford the full set-up. For example I use DraftSight instead of AutoCAD as a free alternative. It does what I need (mainly deleting parts of CAD I don't need).

 

A couple of larger projects and contacts have come from my software reseller, so I guess that's karma for you. I also love the fact my software works from release day, and if I need support it's there, rather than hunting dodgy warez sites looking for a copy, which might work, or might corrupt my PC.

 

Sadly there isn't really any punishment or prevention for using illegal software. Vray tried with the dongle, but even then there are still illegal versions floating around. I don't know if Adobe have made any steps forward with their CC, perhaps licences are activated over the net?

 

Anyway, don't let it get you down. At the end of the day, you know in yourself that you're doing the decent thing, and not profiting from underhand tactics.

 

Dean

[Sketchrender]

Dean

Thank you for the reply.

I always run legal software and can hardly afford it at the moment, but do.

It's not getting me down, at all.

 

I just think , that the bigger companies get a lot of their work done in eastern countries for next to nothing, and they are as far as I am concerned running illegal software. When I get mails of companies in China for example telling me they have a hundred people willing to model and render, I have to ask why Autodesk are not going after these companies.

 

So somebody correct me if I am wrong.

[Nic H]

you could spend all day worrying about who is using legal copies but ultimately its not going to do your business any good. no one can say for sure who is 'legit' and 'illegal'

 

if i lived in china or somewhere with low wages i certainly wouldn't use legit software. people do what they have to do to get money and get by, cant really slight them for that - even if it is 'unfair'

 

people will end up coming back to you because they know you and like your work. luckily price isn't the only factor in getting work.

[beestee]

Often times discussions such as this discuss the morality of the subject, but the reality is that if nobody paid for the software used in our industry then the developers would not be able to continue supporting it and pushing it forward.

 

It is a tough pill to swallow to think that maybe we (or our employers) are footing the bill for studios that use the software illegally through higher pricing due to piracy, but it would hurt the industry as a whole if everybody stopped paying the developers.

 

Next step in the progression is ad-supported professional software.

[RyderSK]

I like what NIC said.

 

Now you asked about big (or bigger) studios and I can only talk about medium sized (40+ people) local branches, of pretty large international advertising houses from my own country but I've heard first hand from even close abroad. Those whose mother branches generate unthinkable amount of money so not your local poor freelancers :- ) These guys don't even have licenced Photoshop on their nicely shiny large Macs :- D

 

I have mixed feelings on the subject. I was somehow fortunate to win quite few licences or get them under very good conditions, so I am not very good case, and I am on edge quite often due to semi-moral attitude. But yeah, it's bit pointless to discuss.

 

I somehow think the only eventual solution is truly unbreakable protection, and it does seem to work for few software companies, although those who probably spend the most (poor Ubisoft ) ..well, we know how end up. But wanting this to be a "moral" debate, that's tough choice that will never work (at least not on internet, but, still very unfortunate debate in real too )

 

Now, for something "I will get flack" but I would mention is, I think the countries where MOST piracy happen ( pointless to name, we all know which, and it's somehow sensitive topic for most..) don't truly even understand the western concept of "pirating". I honestly don't think they even think about it at all and would doubtfully buy it even if they absolutely could.

 

 

Thinking bit more...I think I could discuss this quite deep in real-life as there is lot of interesting psychological and sociological factors involved, so if you plan to go to Venice AD5 next year, we can grab a beer there, or in Prague, or Bratislava, or NYC. But it's bit stupid topic to discuss on internet so I think I won't continue :- )

[notamondayfan]

I wouldn't say it's a stupid discussion, just a sensitive one that many people will have varying opinions.

 

Also there's the other side of the coin, looking at it from a developers point of view. Now this is a bit controversial, but if the developers made the software so secure that you couldn't get it anywhere other than through re-sellers, you would probably see a decline in that product being used in the industry in 5-10 years time. People will move to what they can use easily, rather than do nothing. I know Autodesk and others now have PLE versions of most software, which I congratulate them for, but 10 years ago when I started, if Max wasn't available, I would have moved to something else.

 

Also you could argue the cost of software is disproportionate depending on your uses and the size of your company. Ie I have no problem buying 3Ds max as I use it everyday, but I haven't purchase other software such as Marvelous Designer or Unity Pro as at the moment I can't justify the cost as I have no real need for it, but would love to add them to my arsenal. Also if you're a freelancer earning £15000, then Max at £3000-4000 is a huge investment, but for an agency with a turnover 100x more then a Max licence isn't such a large investment.

[John Dollus]

I have to ask why Autodesk are not going after these companies.

 

Attempting to enforce anti-piracy policies is often a sisyphusian exercise when it involves crossing international borders. The time and money involved just makes it a losing proposition in all but the most extreme cases.

[CliveG]

a sisyphusian exercise .

 

Now then - no need for language like that here!

[RyderSK]

Also if you're a freelancer earning £15000, then Max at £3000-4000 is a huge investment, but for an agency with a turnover 100x more then a Max licence isn't such a large investment.

 

Yes, but that agency needs to buy such licence for many seats and it just adds up to cost of their employees. These agencies have big turnovers, true, but they also count quite well how far they can afford paying up on their employees, and most of them would rather hire more. I think this is very true for lot of smaller game companies (that's still 100+ people usually) when software usage is high and budgets are shrinking every year. There is really good info about it on Swen's blog about Belgian Larian studio, how all these costs add up.

 

(On note about Marvelous, we had since won twice their advanced licence in their monthly competition. I am not sure if they're still around, but they were rather easy. Though I didn't upgrade to version 3.0, because those terms are just stupid... like EON almost)

[notamondayfan]

Yes, but that agency needs to buy such licence for many seats and it just adds up to cost of their employees. These agencies have big turnovers, true, but they also count quite well how far they can afford paying up on their employees, and most of them would rather hire more. I think this is very true for lot of smaller game companies (that's still 100+ people usually) when software usage is high and budgets are shrinking every year. There is really good info about it on Swen's blog about Belgian Larian studio, how all these costs add up.

 

(On note about Marvelous, we had since won twice their advanced licence in their monthly competition. I am not sure if they're still around, but they were rather easy. Though I didn't upgrade to version 3.0, because those terms are just stupid... like EON almost)

 

Yea I know what you mean about each employee needs a tool set, but there are plenty of floating licence software (vray, forest pro, rail clone, etc) that a studio might only need a handful of licences to work properly. The same goes for this like model packs, a freelancer pays £200 for a model pack, so that's £200 for 1 user, where as a studio buys a £200 pack for 100 employees, then that's £2 each. Anyway I'm getting side-tracked here!

 

Also, sorry to deviate again, but those MD competitions look good, I'll keep an eye out, but what terms are you referring too?

 

Dean

[RyderSK]

The new pricing compared to almost zero new useful features and most importantly confusion around selling those models with newly differentiated licences. At the moment, I found little reason to upgrade here. Maybe they changed this since, but it backfired quite a lot and almost everybody complained on forum.

[Sketchrender]

My original rant, and that's what it is, is that the big companies who ship the donkey work out to poor countries knowing that the copy-write laws are being flaunted, and they take no responsibility at all for it. that's who should be chased down in my opinion.

[notamondayfan]

I think the issue you are ranting at is much wider than just limited to software. You also have to look at working conditions, benefits, etc, which is really not that different from clothing stores out-sourcing manufacturing to India, China, etc where labor is cheap, but conditions are shocking.

 

The issue is more ethical rather than what's right and wrong.

 

Perhaps we should be looking at ways to make it more obvious that we are using legit software? I know with my business insurance, I can have a link / button put on my site if I wished, that links to my insurer to prove that I have insurance.

 

Maybe even accreditation through business sites such as LinkedIn would useful to raise awareness?

 

Using the above examples would then give clients the choice to choose if they want to hire a tight-arse freelancer, or someone who has made a considerable investment in their business? If you have a client who is "more ethical", perhaps it might sway them your way. On the other hand some clients wouldn't think twice, and would always go for price / quality.

 

Dean

[Sketchrender]

Ya, I would have to agree.

Reminds me of this.

[Tommy L]

Its a little bit off topic, but I have a comment to add...

 

I have a couple of freelancers with whom Ive tried a new billing strategy and I think its worked out really fair for all involved so I thought I'd share it:

I send about 50% of my modeling work to my guys overseas, less if its quiet, more if Im swamped.

Ill send a brief and a desirable completion date. They do the work - send an invoice - I pay it. There's no discussion about the fee until after the job. This may seem arse about face, but if you think a little deeper it makes sense...

-Im a sole proprietor (and a dad) and as such have limited time. Im relatively successful so I have a high output of work. I want my time to be spent working not haggling and I want my freelancers doing the same.

-My guys know the going rate in their own country, they also know what they have to earn to make their business work.

-If the job changes, as in the scope of work gets smaller or larger it doesn't matter, because its not a set fee.

 

Once the precedent has been set and the relationship established, Im quite happy for them to bill me after the job. I pay them right away.

I think one of the reasojns it works is because they know that there's a long line of people behind them that would like me as a client. Choosing your own fee and instant payment from a busy US client are good incentives. Its also empowering and creates mutual respect.

If they crank their prices, I will simply go somewhere else. Interestingly, it doesn't happen. I keep reliable freelancers, they keep a happy client. I even see the quality of their work develop and increase over time.

 

Like I said, this is just for modeling work which is a fairly quantifiable entity. I have a moral conflict about sending full jobs out, I feel like Im cheating my client... If I do that I tend to use local freelancers and I let my client know thats the case.

I thought I'd mention it as I think its relevant to the discussion.

[Nic H]

the onus of *policing legal software* should not be shifted onto the person employing outsourced modelling work....software companies should make better protection or work out a new licensing system to make their products affordable.

 

policing software via professionals sounds all very neoliberal to me lol, why would i care if its legit or not?

i just want my model. this isnt child labour no lives are at risk, in fact you are helping people in less 'financially fortunate' countries make a living in a lopsided global economy

[adrianhedley1]

I was born and bred in England, parents moved to the Caribbean, no fault of mine.

 

In 1995 I looked at the current software and world trends with respect to freelancing over the internet. Just married and with money from my own pocket I scrimped and purchased a P75 installed autoCAD LT (legal software).

 

Since then I have purchased and upgraded legal and licensed software for Vectorworks, Cinema 4d, E-on vue xstream, photoshop, photomodeler various add-ons textures etc.

 

I am, without being vain, hardworking, dedicated and loyal to those I work with.

 

WOULD YOU HIRE ME ?

[Nic H]

yep of course - if your work is good!

[adrianhedley1]

yep of course - if your work is good!

 

Thanks nicnic, you're an okay kind of guy.

 

After 18yrs the wife is pleased as chuff that I got my first freelance job offer.

[RyderSK]

I don't think any client will ever care what software you use and whether it's legal. Putting such info on LinkedIn or website is same as putting there I have really nice computer and monitor. For all they care, I could be pixel-painting their images on Atari as long as I would give them what they want.

 

I am very pretty sure this will never change. That's why I write it's futile to care about it, I agree with Nic's sentiment that the ball is on developers side. Once they create unbreakable protection, all problems will be solved. But until then..

[harryhirsch]

""My original rant, and that's what it is, is that the big companies who ship the donkey work out to poor countries knowing that the copy-write laws are being flaunted, and they take no responsibility at all for it. that's who should be chased down in my opinion.""

Companies do not know that, they care about quality and price..do we get the same stuff for half the price in Xland? Greta, then we ask them.

And lets face it, do we care about the conditions our computer hardware was made? We know about the working conditions in that countries, guess someone should chase us down now huh?

And do something about it? Autodesk should sue companies in that countries when there is no legal system and even companies like Mercedes or Nestle have no chance to win the case?

No local lawyer will support foreign companies, no court will take the case....even companies that belong to the government use unlicensed software...

but the good news is ..prices going up for good renders there as well...and for the companies that do renderwork there: some render companies in that certain country sell all the files as a package to make extra money...psd, dwg floorplans, 3D max or mash and textures.

That is what clients should know to make a decision.

[CliveG]

This thread is way too large and philosophical now: should we all be ashamed for wearing our sweatshop clothes, shoes, talking on our sweatshop phone, working on our sweatshop computers, watching our sweatshop TV's -generally living our globalised sweatshop exploiting lives? Or would we be actually happy paying fair prices for our ..... well everything, could we exist - wouldn't WE have to put our prices up then? Do we want to have our cake and eat it.... buy everything cheap from these countries then still bitch when they take a bit of our work, on whatever basis, whilst they try and cop a break?

 

Indeed it seems to me just about the only ones we don't need to feel all that sorry for are the ones we started the whole discussion being pious about - the big software companies who make lot's of money and probably treat their staff pretty well with medical, pensions, creche, staff break-out area's, team building days so that they can continue to bring us next years upgrades that may or may not work better than last years!

 

Boy I think this topic has outgrown it's relevance, let's just stick to arch-viz eh? We're not going to change the world here..... do what you need to do to sleep at night with a clear conscience, pay for you software if you can or feed your family using pirate software if you can't!

[Nic H]

i like the meandering conversations, its interesting to see the viewpoints from different parts of the world. no need to limit it.

 

like u say ultimately we all just want to make money and get by doing good work so i find it tough seeing people begrudging others choices (wether legal or not) when it makes little *real* difference to your day to day.

[CliveG]

its interesting to see the viewpoints from different parts of the world.

 

Is that the Egyptian or Yemeni flag on your profile Nic? :-)