CoreCodec/H.264 Codec "CoreAVC"

[Sirber]

LOL. You are forgiven since your prices are so low :)Even for free people don't want it :(

Cmon pirates! Pirate it! ;)

sorry for the OT

[clsid]

Guess how many employees they have.....I'll be you, your wrong with the guess.

My argument cannot be tested without taking approximate statistics. It's based on piracy which is an unknown variable. No one knows how many copies of it are out there. That doesn't make my arguments false it just makes it unprovable in a logistics sense.

I'm sure if we had the appropriate stats coreavc 1.1 would have made alot more money without piracy or at least some sort of protection.
Why should I care about how many employees they have? Probably just a handful. If they are not up to the task, then they so hire more staff or concentrate on just one product at a time.

Without stats I can indeed not falsify your arguments, but neither can you falsify mine when I claim that the opposite holds.

This discussion is going nowhere. Time for the thread to go back on topic.

[Revgen]

I'm glad I bought this software early when it came out. I'm not having any of the problems that newer purchasers are having.

[foxyshadis]

Please ask Microsoft the same question and see if you get the same response as CoreCodec (if they reply), as that's basically what they did with SP2, introducing Genuine Advantage. I don't remember this fuss with Adobe introducing activation (which I totally agree with Chronocross ISN'T DRM!!!! Properly research DRM and you'll be proved right!) in their products, so why the fuss for a codec that costs at most $20 and plays back H.264 faster than any publically available solution? Activation is designed to tie a product to a system. You don't complain when Microsoft or Adobe or another company does it, but CoreCodec and all the barrels start pointing!!!!!


Did you read the EULA all the way through it, or just click "I accept" and rush through like most people? IT PAYS TO READ THESE THINGS ALL THE WAY THROUGH AS THEY CONTAIN ALL THE LICENSE INFORMATION YOU NEED!!!!!

@3ngel: :goodpost: re prank / backlash.

If you think Microsoft, Adobe, Intuit, AutoCad, and any other company that has used activation hasn't had both a huge amount of backlash, and a huge amount of reported problems with their activation systems, you're sorely mistaken. Gripe sites are basically awash with reports. Intuit is the sneakiest, willfully deactivating perfectly good older products, Microsoft just plain doesn't care and demands a new license, Adobe is reasonably fair but prone to long stretches of activation problems.

Most companies that have used activaion have found that they simply don't have the server or support resources to handle it all, and mostly engender a lot of bad will from customers. (The big ones don't have to care, given the amount of bad will against them already.)

A quick check shows Coreavc 1.2 hasn't shown up on the major pirate sites yet, so in that sense they're not doing too badly. On the other hand, the entire exercise is dependant on more pirates buying legal than losses from folks who want nothing to do with activation, "horror stories", and terrible support, even if it would have worked fine for them. With all the griping spreading around, I know more than a few people were put off buying 1.1 after the 1.0 mess, and it'll be worse now. But more power to them, it's their company.

CC, why exactly are you berating someone for not opening a trouble ticket for the company, when that's exactly what they did, even if it was lost? (Before getting upset enough to cancel their order entirely.)

[akupenguin]

The Open Source Generation is really sad. Most of you think that everything should be free. I'm sure most of you dont realize that the reason xvid cannot sell their codec or even create official builds is because of patents. It's the same reason there are no official x264 builds.
No, the reason there are no official x264 builds is that I don't run windows and I don't want to bother figuring out how to cross-compile.

I don't believe in software patents, so I don't really care whether or not it's legal to distribute binaries. But even if I did take patents into account (and put aside the fact that mpeg-la allows a royalty-free licence for some number of codec instances and I have no idea whether x264 has passed that limit), I haven't seen any evidence that distributing sourcecode is any more legal than distributing binaries. The only thing source code gets you is perhaps a little weight to an argument that it was for "academic purposes"... which doesn't by itself let you violate patents, it only reduces the chance that you'll get sued.

[ChronoCross]

No, the reason there are no official x264 builds is that I don't run windows and I don't want to bother figuring out how to cross-compile.

I don't believe in software patents, so I don't really care whether or not it's legal to distribute binaries. But even if I did take patents into account (and put aside the fact that mpeg-la allows a royalty-free licence for some number of codec instances and I have no idea whether x264 has passed that limit), I haven't seen any evidence that distributing sourcecode is any more legal than distributing binaries. The only thing source code gets you is perhaps a little weight to an argument that it was for "academic purposes"... which doesn't by itself let you violate patents, it only reduces the chance that you'll get sued.

That's the discussion I was referring to. It's on too shady ground . The discussion happened back in like early 2005 last time I remember.

[Sirber]

Alright guys, let's stop this.

Keep 1.1 if you don't like activation or use 1.2.
or use something else

[Sharktooth]

Just my 2 cents...
Every piece of code that enforces the limitations specified into the software (or other stuff) license IS DRM.
However, before buying CoreAVC, i'll wait for a DRM-free (or if you preferer, an activation free) version capable of decoding lossless h.264.

[Chainmax]

If CoreAVC was available for portable devices and game consoles I would buy it in a heartbeat.

[DeepBeepMeep]

Beside the DRM we should not forget the real issues here:

- vapoware for bug fixes : although betaboy explicitely stated in this forum in many occasions that some issues would be fixed, it isn't the case. There are two ways to see it, either it is pure lies parts of a sales pitch or it is incompetence in not trying to understand the bug. I think it is both, regarding the "incompetence" theory I am a bit surprised that beta boy instead of asking more information about how to reproduce the bug, has just answered bug reports with his trademark "yes everything will be beautiful and fixed in the next release"

- vaporware for features: of course we have got here the all famous GPU Support. If you guys at Core have knew that you can't include it, then stop creating expections with make repeating announcements it is going to be there. Otherwise don't be surprised you have to handle disapointments. In additon if I remember correctly CoreAAC 2.0 and some other products were supposed to be part of the package as well

- long delays: ok it takes time for a small company to deliver products, but you won't convince me that that the release that was due already a couple months ago (betaboy made a couple a annoucements) has been delayed because of the time spent fixing bugs. It is quite obvious they have spent a big part of their time working on some other projects and on adding their beloved activation. Anyway, if you can't make it for a specific date stop announcing every week that the release is imminent. If you know you guys you are not capable to meet deadlines (it shoud be obvious after a certain time) don't make it worse and stop giving targeted dates !

- Disappearing features: it is quite likely that very few people in the near future will have a quad core CPU or even will ever need a quad cores to play video since most video are playable now with a monocore CPU. However, people don't like the feeling that they are beeing screwed up. Take away something even if they don't need it and don't be surprised this creates rage.

- Flawed DRM: I am not going to enter in the DRM discussion. However, let's assume I am not against it. At least I would like to know it is there, I would like to know what it does, which information are sent, how many activations I have. I can't understand how you could have believed that people would let get you away with you first version of the DRM that didn't mention anything about its existence. It should have crossed your mind with the success of all these tools to detect spyware that people are getting more concerned about what is installed on their computers.

- Rushed website: At firt you new web site didn't seem to have been tested much. Ok, it is impossible to check every details of it, but at least make sure that what people will see first will work properly. For instance it is quite strange you didn't realise that home page offered the possibility to any user to edit tags. More annoying the registration process which looked as if it hadn't been tested at all: once you are registed nothing tells you have been registered and that you need to login. If you don't want to spend days answering support mails at least make sure you products don't need support by fixing obvious bugs.

- Absence of communication: people in this forum have asked you questions about various things. Not answering questions about for instance how the DRM works is not going to reassure anybody it is not evil because it will open the doors to all sorts of theories.


The problem here is the that core tries a little too much to behave like Microsoft, develop tons of products at the same time, protect them with very unfriendly protections, ignore the customer. The truth here is that core is very very far from having the importance and hegemony of such a company. Core should use the tricks that helped small companies with little funds to develop : create a HAPPY community around a product, and make sure people say positive things about them and relies on word of mouth marketing... I have made some suggestions about this in my previous post...

In addition, You could consider doing a mea culpa as well it would be a good PR move, people can forgive as well...All of this is getting more and more urgent since what made Coreavc better (the speed) is soon likely to not be such a selling point with the recent big progresses made by open source solutions such as ffdshow.

[clsid]

:goodpost:

GPU support is still listed under the features (with 'to be added' note). BetaBoy still hasn't moved that to a roadmap where it belongs.

[Inventive Software]

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/2049/coreavclj0.png

@CoreCodec: Proper suggestion here. May I suggest different wording on the activation box, maybe assuring the user what you'll collect, or a link to the page that states what you'll collect, so the user isn't worrying what device information they'll collect. Explicitly stating it is just device information and (key point) no personal information is collected may also be on the cards too.

[Sirber]

I made my own installer, no activation.

http://i10.tinypic.com/4c7v520.png

http://i10.tinypic.com/2m34iuf.png

http://i7.tinypic.com/4d5zs0h.png

http://i15.tinypic.com/2pz03n6.png

http://i10.tinypic.com/2mwf6uh.png

http://i15.tinypic.com/48gdt8j.png

http://i7.tinypic.com/47xmejc.png

http://i7.tinypic.com/2w3vuo2.png

:D

[bob0r]

@Sirber

Register under another nick, and tell us how to do it (as i dont know already :p), something like NotSirber and join the FairUse party! :D

[Inventive Software]

He won't. ;) It's already activated, which is why it works without issues. ;)

EDIT: Can somebody either PM me or post here the license for CoreAVC so I can study it more closely please?

[Sirber]

He won't. ;)True :)

It's already activated, which is why it works without issues. ;)You need at least one installed and activated decoder to make everything I made. My installer doesn't call home and everything is clean and will work on a fresh install, where ever it is.

EDIT: Can somebody either PM me or post here the license for CoreAVC so I can study it more closely please?Buy it, then you'll have it :)

[Episode]

@Inventive Software, are you suspecting that their license is not legal? Are you a lawyer?-)

[Sirber]

Here it is:

CORECODEC, INC. END-USER LICENSE AGREEMENT

YOU SHOULD CAREFULLY READ THE FOLLOWING TERMS AND CONDITIONS
BEFORE USING THIS PRODUCT. IT CONTAINS SOFTWARE, THE USE OF
WHICH IS LICENSED BY CORECODEC, INC. TO ITS CUSTOMERS FOR
THEIR USE ONLY AS SET FORTH BELOW. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO
THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT, DO NOT USE THE
SOFTWARE. USING ANY PART OF THE SOFTWARE INDICATES THAT YOU
ACCEPT THESE TERMS.

GRANT OF LICENSE: CORECODEC, Inc. (the "Licensor") grants to you
this personal, limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable,
non-assignable license solely to use in a single copy of the
Licensed Works on a single computer for use by a single
concurrent user only, and solely provided that you adhere to
all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The
foregoing is an express limited use license and not an
assignment, sale, or other transfer of the Licensed Works or
any Intellectual Property Rights of Licensor.

ASSENT: By opening the file package containing this software,
you agree that this Agreement is a legally binding and valid
contract, agree to abide by the intellectual property laws
and all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and
further agree to take all necessary steps to ensure that the
terms and conditions of this Agreement are not violated by
any person or entity under your control or in your service.

OWNERSHIP OF SOFTWARE: The Licensor and/or its affiliates or
subsidiaries own certain rights that may exist from time to
time in this or any other jurisdiction, whether foreign or
domestic, under patent law, copyright law, publicity rights
law, moral rights law, trade secret law, trademark law,
unfair competition law or other similar protections,
regardless of whether or not such rights or protections are
registered or perfected (the "Intellectual Property Rights"),
in the computer software and hardware, together with any
related documentation (including design, systems and user)
and other materials for use in connection with such computer
software in this package (collectively, the "Licensed Works").
ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN AND TO THE LICENSED WORKS
ARE AND SHALL REMAIN IN LICENSOR.

RESTRICTIONS:

(I) You are expressly prohibited from copying, modifying,
merging, selling, leasing, redistributing, assigning, or
transferring in any matter, Licensed Works or any portion
thereof.

(II) You may take a single copy of materials within the
package or otherwise related to Licensed Works only as
required for backup purposes.

(III) You are also expressly prohibited from reverse
engineering, decompiling, translating, disassembling,
deciphering, decrypting, or otherwise attempting to discover
the source code of the Licensed Works as the Licensed Works
contain proprietary material of Licensor. You may not
otherwise modify, alter, adapt, port, or merge the Licensed
Works.

(IV) You may not remove, alter, deface, overprint or
otherwise obscure Licensor patent, trademark, service mark
or copyright notices.

(V) You agree that the Licensed Works will not be shipped,
transferred or exported into any other country, or used in
any manner prohibited by any government agency or any export
laws, restrictions or regulations.

(VI) You may not publish or distribute in any form of
electronic or printed communication the materials within or
otherwise related to Licensed Works, including but not
limited to the object code, documentation, help files,
examples, and benchmarks.

TERM: This Agreement is effective until terminated. You may
terminate this Agreement at any time by uninstalling the
Licensed Works and destroying all copies of the Licensed
Works. Upon any termination, you agree to uninstall the
Licensed Works and return or destroy all copies of the
Licensed Works, any accompanying documentation, and all other
associated materials.

GOVERNING LAW: This License Agreement shall be governed by
the laws of the State of New Jersey and by the laws of the
United States, excluding their conflicts of law principles.

WARRANTIES AND DISCLAIMER:

EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED OTHERWISE IN A WRITTEN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN LICENSOR AND YOU, THE LICENSED WORKS ARE NOW PROVIDED
WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR THE
WARRANTY OF NON-INFRINGEMENT. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING,
LICENSOR MAKES NO WARRANTY THAT:

(I) THE LICENSED WORKS WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS,
(II) THE USE OF THE LICENSED WORKS WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED,
TIMELY, SECURE, OR ERROR FREE.
(III) THE RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THE
LICENSED WORKS WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE.
(IV) THE QUALITY OF THE LICENSED WORKS WILL MEET YOUR
EXPECTATIONS.
(V) ANY ERRORS IN THE LICENSED WORKS WILL BE CORRECTED
(VI) YOU MAY USE, PRACTICE, EXECUTE, OR ACCESS THE LICENSED
WORKS WITHOUT VIOLATING THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
OF OTHERS.

SOME STATES OR JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR LIMITATIONS ON HOW LONG AN IMPLIED
WARRANTY MAY LAST, SO THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS MAY NOT APPLY
TO YOU. IF TEXAS LAW IS NOT HELD TO APPLY TO THIS AGREEMENT
FOR ANY REASON, THEN IN JURISDICTIONS WHERE WARRANTIES,
GUARANTEES, REPRESENTATIONS, AND/OR CONDITIONS OF ANY TYPE MAY
NOT BE DISCLAIMED, ANY SUCH WARRANTY, GUARANTEE, REPRESENATION
AND/OR WARRANTY IS: (1) HEREBY LIMITED TO THE PERIOD OF EITHER
(A) THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF OPENING THE PACKAGE
CONTAINING THE LICENSED WORKS OR (B) THE SHORTEST PERIOD
ALLOWEDBY LAW IN THE APPLICABLE JURISDICTION IF A THIRTY (30)
DAY LIMITATION WOULD BE UNENFORCEABLE; AND (2) SOLE LIABILITY
FOR ANY BREACH OF ANY SUCH WARRANTY, GUARANTEE, REPRESENTATION,
AND/OR CONDITION SHALL BE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A NEW COPY OF THE
LICENSED WORKS.

IN NO EVENT SHALL LICENSOR OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO YOU OR
ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT OR
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND, OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER,
INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THOSE RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE,
DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER OR NOT LICENSOR HAD BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES, AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OF THE LICENSED
WORKS. SOME JURISDICTIONS PROHIBIT THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION
OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, SO THE
ABOVE LIMITATIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. THESE LIMITATIONS SHALL
APPLY NOT WITHSTANDING ANY FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY
LIMITED REMEDY.

SEVERABILITY: In the event any provision of this License
Agreement is found to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the
validity, legality and enforceability of any of the remaining
provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired and a
valid, legal and enforceable provision of similar intent and
economic impact shall be substituted therefor.

ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This License Agreement sets forth the entire
understanding and agreement between you and CoreCodec, Inc. and
supersedes all prior agreements, whether written or oral, with
respect to the Software, and may be amended only in writing
signed by both parties.

CORECODEC, INC.
307 Sinclair Ave.
Lanoka Harbor, New Jersey, 08734
support@corecodec.com

Updated March 22, 2006

I don't think it's illegal to post it.

[Sirber]

(II) You may take a single copy of materials within the
package or otherwise related to Licensed Works only as
required for backup purposes.
nice! I can backup :D
(III) You are also expressly prohibited from reverse
engineering, decompiling, translating, disassembling,
deciphering, decrypting, or otherwise attempting to discover
the source code of the Licensed Works as the Licensed Works
contain proprietary material of Licensor. You may not
otherwise modify, alter, adapt, port, or merge the Licensed
Works.
But I need to do that to backup... :(

[Inventive Software]

(II) You may take a single copy of materials within the
package or otherwise related to Licensed Works only as
required for backup purposes.
nice! I can backup :D
But they've yet to update the license it seems, to accomodate for the "official" installer phoning home:
Updated March 22, 2006
We're in November, almost December. :D
(III) You are also expressly prohibited from reverse
engineering, decompiling, translating, disassembling,
deciphering, decrypting, or otherwise attempting to discover
the source code of the Licensed Works as the Licensed Works
contain proprietary material of Licensor. You may not
otherwise modify, alter, adapt, port, or merge the Licensed
Works.
But I need to do that to backup... :(
It doesn't prevent you. You've already proved that! :D;)

EDIT: After careful digging (2nd paragraph, not exactly far :D), those who have bitched and complained about the activation need only look here:
GRANT OF LICENSE: CORECODEC, Inc. (the "Licensor") grants to you
this personal, limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable,
non-assignable license solely to use in a single copy of the
Licensed Works on a single computer for use by a single
concurrent user only, and solely provided that you adhere to
all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The
foregoing is an express limited use license and not an
assignment, sale, or other transfer of the Licensed Works or
any Intellectual Property Rights of Licensor.

Key words being non-transferable, single copy, single computer, single concurrent user. Don't argue, it was there all along. ;)
EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED OTHERWISE IN A WRITTEN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN LICENSOR AND YOU, THE LICENSED WORKS ARE NOW PROVIDED
WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR THE
WARRANTY OF NON-INFRINGEMENT. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING,
LICENSOR MAKES NO WARRANTY THAT:

(I) THE LICENSED WORKS WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS,
(II) THE USE OF THE LICENSED WORKS WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED,
TIMELY, SECURE, OR ERROR FREE.
(III) THE RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THE
LICENSED WORKS WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE.
(IV) THE QUALITY OF THE LICENSED WORKS WILL MEET YOUR
EXPECTATIONS.
(V) ANY ERRORS IN THE LICENSED WORKS WILL BE CORRECTED
(VI) YOU MAY USE, PRACTICE, EXECUTE, OR ACCESS THE LICENSED
WORKS WITHOUT VIOLATING THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
OF OTHERS.
In effect, according to this license, you agreed that they don't have any obligation to fix issues with the product, activation and bugs included, because they have stated that they make no warranty they will. Basically, CoreCodec are doing their darndest to fix issues they don't have to. Again, don't argue, it was there all along. ;)

[Sirber]

license also say I cannot post benchmarks...

seems they used a microsoft licence :D

[clsid]

Depending on where you live, reverse engineering is legal, no matter what the license says. The average license if full of shit anyways.

[Disabled]

Depending on where you live, reverse engineering is legal, no matter what the license says. The average license if full of shit anyways.

Do I get this licence presented prior to buying the software? I searched their site and didn't find it and did not want to buy a second licence just to see if I can read that licence before I actually buy it. If I'm not able to read the licence before I buy it, I don't have to read that licence, as it has no meaning over here in germany! (The software is still protected by the usual general german laws, but thats it).
Therefore I'm for example allowed to sell my CoreAVC licence to others here in Germany (And delete my own copy of course).

[Sirber]

it's in the installer, after authentification.

[ChronoCross]

I really wish I had access to the license when I was arguing yesterday.

[Inventive Software]

Hold on, the installer phone's home BEFORE it gives you the license???? That's a crazy way of doing it. The license should at least give the end user the chance to decline or accept BEFORE it tries to activate. Why not just activate it after all the options have been given, a la NSIS for example, and when the user clicks "Install", that's the time to activate......

Does that sound a little disjointed? It does when I read it.....

EDIT: It is customary for companies to put the license agreements for their products on their website, I believe Microsoft does for example.

[Sirber]

Why showing the license when it's an illegal copy?
Activate or die trying! mouhahahahaha ;)

@ChronoCross

Are you arguing on something you don't even have? good work

[Sirber]

http://www.usertrust.com/

Seems the decoder (.ax) is signed by that

[Sirber]

installer don't work on another system. Decoder don't register.
The serial # returned by the server is tied too to 1 system.

My first attempt only bypassed the activation, but I didn't get a serial so the decoder should not work.
My second attempt made it work only on my system whitout calling home.
Looking at the .AX, I'm sure the file is digitaly signed so if I try ti dig in and hack, it will not work.

Now I understand why 9 months for that small changelog :D

Well, I'm out of the case and won't use CoreCodec products in the futur.

[ChronoCross]

No I was arguing on what I already read but I didn't have a copy of it where I was yesterday.

The idea of phoning home before showing the license could be construed as verifying that you have a right to even view the license. Although it might work better the other way around for some people. Although it is clear that no one read the license other than me Sirber and Inventive software (btw how come none of you have firewalls that tell you when new programs try to connect to the internet?).

@clsid
You are right about the reverse engineering. They key is that it's illegal to then sell what you have reverse engineered.

[Sirber]

btw how come none of you have firewalls that tell you when new programs try to connect to the internet?NSIS is maybe using IE for that.

[GmorG McRoth]

Maybe core did not wanted to sell codec in first place, just the activation system, and this is just a test drive to see how it works. When they work out bugs they will start selling CoreActivationSystem to the corporations. :)
/joking

[Sirber]

Maybe core did not wanted to sell codec in first place, just the activation system, and this is just a test drive to see how it works. When they work out bugs they will start selling CoreActivationSystem to the corporations. :)
/joking

Core Activation Secure System

Or in short... ;)

[BetaBoy]

All... As we had it with CoreAVC 1.0 the EULA has now been removed from the next installer... as I stated about 40 pages back... Copyright laws are sufficient. See: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=838162&highlight=eula#post838162

In our honest opinion (and our counsels) EULA's are useless.

[Sirber]

Does that mean that the activation will be removed too? Copyright laws are sufficient...

[Inventive Software]

Or maybe they could charge a little more, say $15 for the standard codec, and $30 for the pro perhaps, to compensate for the people that move it regularly.

[3ngel]

At this point one would ask what they do care if someone move it 100 times a day ;)
But in the extreme ridiculous case, if this could stop all the insanity, a higher price could be good.

[pankov]

Betaboy,
please, look at your ICQ and/or e-mail and/or PMs.
I'm (and gabrielaDI too) trying to contact you for more than a week now without success
:(

[oddball]

I have had no reply to my last PM to him either. I have had no reply to my last raised ticked asking for a refund nor my PayPal raised dispute.

Maybe they are swamped or maybe they are playing for time. I have no idea.

But what can you do?

[ChronoCross]

maybe it's a holiday weekend and they decided not to work 24 hours a day.....either way patience is a virtue.

[BetaBoy]

I'm here... yeah vacation for me is packing... i'm moving to where its warmer... pankov... i'll look at the PM's in the AM... oddball.. I did not pursue your issue as you indicated you had requested a refund.

[Ginsonic]

Betaboy, Please don't forget about my update notification, I am patiently waiting for many days now. You have an unread PM from me too !

[Oxygen]

What you dont understand is that the license is for the installed OS. Not the PC as you are indicating. This is not something we are defining but the IP holders who we licensing the technology from. This is nothing we can control.


As stated in the CC forum.
And as stated way earlier in this thread too.

Some of the decisions made by CC are not on their own will. Free upgrade is not free on the IP licence. Why can't people understand that ?

IF you want to blame someone, go blame the MPEG.LA or the other licence holders.

And when will people understand that software warrenty and *right* for the upgrade is a myth ?!
You can hope for it, but you can not oblige the seller to do it.

Quick reminder: you want to make something that acts with MPEG4 AVC, sell your product as you need to eat at the end of the month and stay legal, you _need_ to get a licence for it. Point and simple.
This is the _same_ for MP3, and many others technologies.

And last but not least, if you guys were stopping fracking bash about thoses things, maybe cc would have more time to work on your issues rather than having to deal with you stupid trolls.

[Sirber]

I read before that there are no fees bellow 100 000 copies of the decoder...

[clsid]

And upgrades are free.

And when will people understand that software warrenty and *right* for the upgrade is a myth ?!It becomes a right when a company sells something with a note attached to it saying "feature X will be added at a later date".

[Episode]

This one is from MPEG LA (http://www.mpegla.com/news/n_03-11-17_avc.html)

Royalties to be paid by end product manufacturers for an encoder, a decoder or both (“unit”) begin at US $0.20 per unit after the first 100,000 units each year. There are no royalties on the first 100,000 units each year. Above 5 million units per year, the royalty is US $0.10 per unit.

[bob0r]

Means we got pwned! :thanks:

[Oxygen]

This one is from MPEG LA (http://www.mpegla.com/news/n_03-11-17_avc.html)

Following is a brief summary of the licensing terms, which are yet to be incorporated into definitive license agreements and therefore, provided for information purposes only. These terms cover the entire AVC Standard regardless of which Profile(s) are used:

Hence, as you and i don't know what licence CC have, you can't refer to a brief summary of the licensing terms :cool:

The quote you are refering to only mention the royalties PER codec, not the surrounding costs

Licence *entry ticket* for example ...

[Oxygen]

And upgrades are free.

It becomes a right when a company sells something with a note attached to it saying "feature X will be added at a later date".

Good luck with enforcing that.

Either you read that as :
i've the right to get the upgrade at a later time
OR
it's not on this version, you need to wait for the future version to get it, upgrade will be on your charge

Again, don't take me wrong, i don't necessarly agree with the activation (well, i don't agree with it at all), but people should stop mis-interpreting what they read.

[clsid]

It is normal in the software world that minor and micro updates are free. Major updates (v1 -> v2) are usually not free.

BTW, CoreCodec's official statement is that all 1.x updates are free for existing customers. So STFU.