Topic: License is not for re-sale- why?
I acquired my license from another person a few months ago and promptly noticed the tag in the user area, that the license is not for re-sale.
May I ask why? Is there no way to re-sell it now?
- meghdad
- Member
- Offline
- dv
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
meghdad wrote:
I acquired my license from another person a few months ago and promptly noticed the tag in the user area, that the license is not for re-sale.
May I ask why? Is there no way to re-sell it now?
I think Modartt could make an exception, and they say it's not for resale to "prevent abuse" which I believe means something like you buy at a low price from someone desperate to sell it quickly not because you want it but to resell it later to someone else at a profit.
Where do I find a list of all posts I upvoted? :(
- Key Fumbler
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
It appears not being able to transfer an already transferred second hand licenses is nothing new:
https://forum.modartt.com/viewtopic.php?id=533
Edit: Perhaps Modartt don't want the license transfer system to be abused as a dirt cheap (or even free) way for say EDM producers to borrow and share a license of Pianoteq in a quick fix rental system?
Last edited by Key Fumbler (12-12-2021 10:26)
- peterws
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
Why should the license ever be saleable? It doesn't make for good business. The prices are good anyway.
BTW second hand bookshops are probably illegal . . . . books are copyright and generally not for resale.
I'm playing all the right notes but not necessarily in the right order
- Key Fumbler
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
peterws wrote:
Why should the license ever be saleable? It doesn't make for good business. The prices are good anyway.
BTW second hand bookshops are probably illegal . . . . books are copyright and generally not for resale.
People can become incapacitated, or find they simply don't have time due to changes in circumstances.
Further the user might die and loved ones require the money. As the world becomes more virtual more and more of a person's assets can be digital.
- hesitz
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
peterws wrote:
Why should the license ever be saleable? It doesn't make for good business. The prices are good anyway.
BTW second hand bookshops are probably illegal . . . . books are copyright and generally not for resale.
Sorry, your comment about used books is just plain wrong. It has long been firmly established that book purchasers can sell their books, despite the fact that they're not the copyright owners. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine or https://oaxacaborn.com/illegal-resale-a...right-law/
Software is a different can of worms, where the purchasers are deemed to have assented to the terms of the seller's EULA (End User License Agreement), which typically prohibits resale. I'm not familiar with the law in this area, but issues sometimes prohibit enforcement of terms in such shrink wrap license agreements.
Last edited by hesitz (13-12-2021 13:22)
- meghdad
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
I would say most software can and should be rented a.k.a subscription based; because as it is, any software that's sold is not ours ultimately.
That said, I may reach out to Pianoteq and see if they could make an exception in my case, but I doubt they would accept it. And I'm not sure if I can sell it another way.
- Key Fumbler
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
meghdad wrote:
I would say most software can and should be rented a.k.a subscription based; because as it is, any software that's sold is not ours ultimately.
That said, I may reach out to Pianoteq and see if they could make an exception in my case, but I doubt they would accept it. And I'm not sure if I can sell it another way.
Subscription is a great confidence trick if an unscrupulous company can pull it off.
Charging the customers multiple times over for things they aren't going to use. Making you pay again every year upon year, whether you can afford to or not, or lose your license!
Not a decent way to do business.
On the contrary a license should be permanently with you, regardless of the amount of times you wish to swap your hardware or OS platform, provided you can prove you are the same user. That's the only morally decent way to do it to my mind.
OTOH if you sell a license I can understand a company limiting resale beyond that. Less it becomes a cheap rental system for multiple users.
- meghdad
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
Key Fumbler wrote:
meghdad wrote:I would say most software can and should be rented a.k.a subscription based; because as it is, any software that's sold is not ours ultimately.
That said, I may reach out to Pianoteq and see if they could make an exception in my case, but I doubt they would accept it. And I'm not sure if I can sell it another way.
Subscription is a great confidence trick if an unscrupulous company can pull it off.
Charging the customers multiple times over for things they aren't going to use. Making you pay again every year upon year, whether you can afford to or not, or lose your license!
Not a decent way to do business.On the contrary a license should be permanently with you, regardless of the amount of times you wish to swap your hardware or OS platform, provided you can prove you are the same user. That's the only morally decent way to do it to my mind.
OTOH if you sell a license I can understand a company limiting resale beyond that. Less it becomes a cheap rental system for multiple users.
I disagree with your sentiment about subscription.
Either something you pay for is yours or it is not. If it's yours then you should be able to do whatever with it however you'd like. If it's not yours, then it's by definition a rented material , meaning that as long as you keep using it you have to pay for it. This is in my view, the only ethical approach, and it has been established since the dawn of transactions.
It does not matter whatever amount a company charges you, as long as there's competition, you can opt for a cheaper alternative. Meanwhile, there can be conditions and terms of agreement by which the renter would be forbidden to raise the charge for any given period.
Less it becomes a cheap rental system for multiple users
So are you pro user or pro business? If pro user, then this rule clearly can be a disadvantage for any user. If you're pro business, then I think your sentiment about subscription contracts it.
- Key Fumbler
- Member
- Offline
Re: License is not for re-sale- why?
meghdad wrote:
Key Fumbler wrote:meghdad wrote:I would say most software can and should be rented a.k.a subscription based; because as it is, any software that's sold is not ours ultimately.
That said, I may reach out to Pianoteq and see if they could make an exception in my case, but I doubt they would accept it. And I'm not sure if I can sell it another way.
Subscription is a great confidence trick if an unscrupulous company can pull it off.
Charging the customers multiple times over for things they aren't going to use. Making you pay again every year upon year, whether you can afford to or not, or lose your license!
Not a decent way to do business.On the contrary a license should be permanently with you, regardless of the amount of times you wish to swap your hardware or OS platform, provided you can prove you are the same user. That's the only morally decent way to do it to my mind.
OTOH if you sell a license I can understand a company limiting resale beyond that. Less it becomes a cheap rental system for multiple users.
I disagree with your sentiment about subscription.
Either something you pay for is yours or it is not. If it's yours then you should be able to do whatever with it however you'd like. If it's not yours, then it's by definition a rented material , meaning that as long as you keep using it you have to pay for it. This is in my view, the only ethical approach, and it has been established since the dawn of transactions.
It does not matter whatever amount a company charges you, as long as there's competition, you can opt for a cheaper alternative. Meanwhile, there can be conditions and terms of agreement by which the renter would be forbidden to raise the charge for any given period.Less it becomes a cheap rental system for multiple users
So are you pro user or pro business? If pro user, then this rule clearly can be a disadvantage for any user. If you're pro business, then I think your sentiment about subscription contracts it.
Some companies don't let you resell a licence at all. I don't approve of that, though typically that's linked with lower than average purchase price in the first place - something got to break!
Pro business AND pro user.
I don't like the idea of limited resale of a license. I also don't like the idea of a company going to the wall either.
True subscription is the absolute worst model for the user. It consists of regular payments and when you stop paying you have nothing to show for it. Pianoteq is not a subscription system. There is no monthly or quarterly payments. Once you pay for a licence it's yours.
What is more you can sell it on, but only once, at a reduced rate. So that 2nd customer has already got a bargain, and this should be spelled out for them in the first place.
In contrast with Pianoteq once you've paid for a licence it should be yours permanently - the only possible fly in that ointment is hardware failure as they have artificially tied their licences to a particular hardware setup. I certainly don't like the idea that a few unlucky hardware failures, or upgrades and you have to buy a licence again!
Hopefully they are more reasonable than that?
Software is still a relatively new innovation. It has created opportunities for fantastic value compared to hardware, but also a plethora of problems for the creators, as well as relative ease of production (nothing to ship, nothing to service or repair, nothing to stock).
Software doesn't wear out. Software can be pirated. The competition can choose to sell bundled software at ridiculously low prices and make otherwise decent quality purchases look expensive.
It's no wonder that so many controversial sales models out there.
Subscription will be a lose-lose situation for customers in the end that much is certain.