Softphonics are done???!!

[selig]

The gray area comes with Props keeping the profits from the dodgy product even after a case like this. That's why I would have hoped for a store credit (and ideally Props would have a legal recourse / commercial pressure to get some money back from the developer for example by holding the income or freezing all their other REs, but in this case it seems way too late for that

Well, Propellerhead made profits off of the products. But they can say that they are simply a distribution system for REs, refills, etc. It's probably in their agreement somewhere.

There is still money floating around somewhere - don't the developers get paid after a 30/45 day window? Or has that changed? That will have to be figured out. It's still technically Softphonics' money, or is it?

Here’s how I see it, fwiw.

The Props are like publishers (or like the Apple Store, if you prefer), and publishers don’t pay for copyright infringement on the part of songwriters.

As for profits, I see the Props “take” as payment from the dev for support, marketing, copy protection, the store page, and dev tools (rather than profit for the intellectual property). I say this because my research shows that going the independent route costs similarly to what we give up for the same services from the Props (at least at the time I checked into this when REs were first introduced).


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[madmacman]

I just clicked delete on my Encore refill. That's all the catharsis I need.

Me too. With a tear in my eyes. But before I'm tempted to use it again (because it's "there") I'll do the move to the trashcan better now.

Pity. But maybe it encourages me to restart my work on some combinators based on Orkester. Since im a complete layman on writing orchestral scores, some free stuff (such as the Virtual Playing Orchestra http://virtualplaying.com/virtual-playing-orchestra/) will be good enough for me.

[chaosroyale]

I should clarify: I certainly don't think Props are "guilty" of anything except having perhaps slightly too lax quality control of their store. I don't think this case is a big deal, it's just a minor developer who tried scamming his customers.

My feeling is that because REs and refills are only available in the Props store, and they have to be submitted for pre-approval, it's not quite the same as buying any old VST. It's more like buying a library from the "Best Service" brand via their own homepage, and those seem to be vetted carefully. If one of those turned out to be a copy of another library, there would probably be slightly more response, even just a reply saying "we are sorry this happened, it is completely against our rules". I completely understand other poster's comparisons to the Apple store. (The Apple store is garbage, though!)

Let's hope the developer learned his lesson and let us all be careful about the providence of sample libraries in future.

[madmacman]

My feeling is that because REs and refills are only available in the Props store, and they have to be submitted for pre-approval, it's not quite the same as buying any old VST.

Refills can be purchased from anywhere. In fact, I bought a Refill from Props store only once. Everything else from different sites. I got my Encore Refill directly from the Softphonics online shop.

[stratatonic]

I just clicked delete on my Encore refill. That's all the catharsis I need. I feel sorry for those that invested more cash than me for a bunch of stuff they can no longer use. They stole my money but I don't intend to pass on any further emotional investment for free.

I think that Hydlide summarized it best when he signed of his vlog that appeared before this similarly titled thread appeared.

'Piss off Softphonics!'

Of course you bounced all your projects you had laboured on before you booted the product into the ether. So what about all those who have no clue this is happening and need the product re-downloaded from the Prop Shop because of a computer crash or a new computer in the future?

[CephaloPod]

Unless you know the specific sample library used it's not easy to pick out something like this. I could almost guarantee the creator of the video stumbled on this by chance. As mentioned above, is QA supposed to compare products to every similar product on the market? If not then how would they know which ones to check? It's an impossible task.

Yes, it's impossible to do with absolute certainty. But some due diligence would go a long way. They could just communicate with the developer. "Hey, we noticed you have a lot of string samples in this RE. What is the source of the samples?" "Oh, they are royalty-free samples? Where did you get them?" "Oh, you sampled an orchestra yourself? That's a lot of work! Can we have more info about that process?"

And I tend to avoid stores/markets/shops that have a bunch of junk products along with some good products. If the Props want to cheapen the RE brand by allowing all kinds of questionable stuff in without vetting it first, well, that's an interesting business model.

[selig]

Unless you know the specific sample library used it's not easy to pick out something like this. I could almost guarantee the creator of the video stumbled on this by chance. As mentioned above, is QA supposed to compare products to every similar product on the market? If not then how would they know which ones to check? It's an impossible task.

Yes, it's impossible to do with absolute certainty. But some due diligence would go a long way. They could just communicate with the developer. "Hey, we noticed you have a lot of string samples in this RE. What is the source of the samples?" "Oh, they are royalty-free samples? Where did you get them?" "Oh, you sampled an orchestra yourself? That's a lot of work! Can we have more info about that process?"

And I tend to avoid stores/markets/shops that have a bunch of junk products along with some good products. If the Props want to cheapen the RE brand by allowing all kinds of questionable stuff in without vetting it first, well, that's an interesting business model.

Again, we all pay more for any additional work along these lines. Bottom line, all of this stuff can be so easily made up and there’s absolutely no way to get any 100% useful feedback from such a cursory conversation. And anything further just costs more time/money, which is of course passed on to the user.

All this because of ONE developer - would it be worth the extra cost to everyone?

BTW, the Props already test every device and it has to pass a checklist of various qualities that are objective - overall “quality” is subjective and it would be very difficult to draw a line at what products “cheapen” the brand vs those that do not.

IF it was so easy to do, my guess is they’d be doing it already!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[madmacman]

And I tend to avoid stores/markets/shops that have a bunch of junk products along with some good products. If the Props want to cheapen the RE brand by allowing all kinds of questionable stuff in without vetting it first, well, that's an interesting business model.

In my ears this sounds like the Props store has been a shady place for a long time now. But it happened for the very first time. And it happened with a contributor who had quite a reputation before (for whatever reasons - but that's the way it is). Now let's wait and see which conclusions are drawn from this incident. We can judge if the measures are not satisfying.

[CephaloPod]

BTW, the Props already test every device and it has to pass a checklist of various qualities that are objective - overall “quality” is subjective and it would be very difficult to draw a line at what products “cheapen” the brand vs those that do not.

IF it was so easy to do, my guess is they’d be doing it already!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

It's good to know that they have a checklist of sorts. How about adding one more check: "Developer has provided proof of sample sources." This kind of proof should be very easy for a developer to include. The proof could be faked, nothing is completely air-tight, but it would likely weed-out the vast majority of cheaters looking to make a quick buck. As it stands, it appears anyone can use any samples in their RE's and the Props rubber-stamp it. That practice should change, and I bet it does change, and I don't think it will add any noticeable cost.

[eusti]

The proof could be faked, nothing is completely air-tight, but it would likely weed-out the vast majority of cheaters looking to make a quick buck.

This is what kind of surprises me... I always thought the RE market was too small to make any real money from REs with all the work that goes into it... I mean, yes, it's less money if you just source the samples from somewhere, but it still must take a lot of time to sample a bunch of other software instruments and script whole thing... Strange!

D.

[selig]

BTW, the Props already test every device and it has to pass a checklist of various qualities that are objective - overall “quality” is subjective and it would be very difficult to draw a line at what products “cheapen” the brand vs those that do not.

IF it was so easy to do, my guess is they’d be doing it already!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

It's good to know that they have a checklist of sorts. How about adding one more check: "Developer has provided proof of sample sources." This kind of proof should be very easy for a developer to include. The proof could be faked, nothing is completely air-tight, but it would likely weed-out the vast majority of cheaters looking to make a quick buck. As it stands, it appears anyone can use any samples in their RE's and the Props rubber-stamp it. That practice should change, and I bet it does change, and I don't think it will add any noticeable cost.

What is “proof of sample source” that cannot be faked?

Weed out the vast majority of cheaters - to date there is only one known “cheater”. How many cheaters are you thinking are out there?

What you suggest would have had no effect on this one case, the only one to date - so how would it have any effect on those bent on beating the system?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[stratatonic]

Well, Propellerhead made profits off of the products. But they can say that they are simply a distribution system for REs, refills, etc. It's probably in their agreement somewhere.

There is still money floating around somewhere - don't the developers get paid after a 30/45 day window? Or has that changed? That will have to be figured out. It's still technically Softphonics' money, or is it?

Here’s how I see it, fwiw.

The Props are like publishers (or like the Apple Store, if you prefer), and publishers don’t pay for copyright infringement on the part of songwriters.

As for profits, I see the Props “take” as payment from the dev for support, marketing, copy protection, the store page, and dev tools (rather than profit for the intellectual property). I say this because my research shows that going the independent route costs similarly to what we give up for the same services from the Props (at least at the time I checked into this when REs were first introduced).

Yes, it looks like a win/win for both sides.
You didn't touch on the second part of the post. Is there still a 30/45 day lag time from when there is a sale in the PropShop to when a dev gets paid? Or does Propellerhead just pay a lump sum of your sales every 30/45 days. Because if that is the case, they would currently have control of some money that is not theirs.

[selig]

Here’s how I see it, fwiw.

The Props are like publishers (or like the Apple Store, if you prefer), and publishers don’t pay for copyright infringement on the part of songwriters.

As for profits, I see the Props “take” as payment from the dev for support, marketing, copy protection, the store page, and dev tools (rather than profit for the intellectual property). I say this because my research shows that going the independent route costs similarly to what we give up for the same services from the Props (at least at the time I checked into this when REs were first introduced).

Yes, it looks like a win/win for both sides.
You didn't touch on the second part of the post. Is there still a 30/45 day lag time from when there is a sale in the PropShop to when a dev gets paid? Or does Propellerhead just pay a lump sum of your sales every 30/45 days. Because if that is the case, they would currently have control of some money that is not theirs.

You mean money that is not Softphonics? Sure, maybe. Again, I see their cut as paying for all the things they delivered, not getting payed for the samples or the device - that’s what the devs are getting paid for!

But that’s just my personal view...


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[QVprod]

It's good to know that they have a checklist of sorts. How about adding one more check: "Developer has provided proof of sample sources." This kind of proof should be very easy for a developer to include. The proof could be faked, nothing is completely air-tight, but it would likely weed-out the vast majority of cheaters looking to make a quick buck. As it stands, it appears anyone can use any samples in their RE's and the Props rubber-stamp it. That practice should change, and I bet it does change, and I don't think it will add any noticeable cost.

This statement undermines any possible checks. A developer can tell Propellerhead anything they want as far as sample source. Unless there's a Propellerhead employee literally sitting n the studio with them during the sampling process there's is no way of stopping this sort of thing. There are plenty of sample based RE's in the shop and no one else is being accused of stealing. Just one developer. Their process doesn't need to change (as it would be futile). We just have to be patient with the process of them dealing with this. But again, until Props release a statement or send an email, this incident is still "alleged".

[Exowildebeest]

I'm surprised some of Softphonics' refills are still in the store, and on sale. You'd think Propellerheads would want to keep maximum distance from Softphonics immediately, regardless of this handfull of refills that might be clean.

[stratatonic]

Yes, it looks like a win/win for both sides.
You didn't touch on the second part of the post. Is there still a 30/45 day lag time from when there is a sale in the PropShop to when a dev gets paid? Or does Propellerhead just pay a lump sum of your sales every 30/45 days. Because if that is the case, they would currently have control of some money that is not theirs.

You mean money that is not Softphonics? Sure, maybe. Again, I see their cut as paying for all the things they delivered, not getting payed for the samples or the device - that’s what the devs are getting paid for!

No. I meant the Money that is earmarked for Softphonics account...

If I buy your ColoringRE today, when will YOU see the money from that transaction?

[CephaloPod]

1. Company XYZ licensed the samples to me. Here is a copy of the contract.
2. These samples are royalty-free. I used these file names. I got them here:________________
3. Here is a picture of me sampling the London Symphony. That's me in the Softphonics shirt!

[selig]

1. Company XYZ licensed the samples to me. Here is a copy of the contract.
2. These samples are royalty-free. I used these file names. I got them here:________________
3. Here is a picture of me sampling the London Symphony. That's me in the Softphonics shirt!

Fake lie & photoshop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[selig]

You mean money that is not Softphonics? Sure, maybe. Again, I see their cut as paying for all the things they delivered, not getting payed for the samples or the device - that’s what the devs are getting paid for!

No. I meant the Money that is earmarked for Softphonics account...

If I buy your ColoringRE today, when will YOU see the money from that transaction?

Answered above. Can’t see money until after accounting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[stratatonic]

If I buy your ColoringRE today, when will YOU see the money from that transaction?

Answered above.

Not seeing it.

Can’t see money until after accounting.

And the accounting takes how long? Is it the 30/45 days I mentioned above?

[Ostermilk]

I just clicked delete on my Encore refill. That's all the catharsis I need. I feel sorry for those that invested more cash than me for a bunch of stuff they can no longer use. They stole my money but I don't intend to pass on any further emotional investment for free.

I think that Hydlide summarized it best when he signed of his vlog that appeared before this similarly titled thread appeared.

'Piss off Softphonics!'

Of course you bounced all your projects you had laboured on before you booted the product into the ether. So what about all those who have no clue this is happening and need the product re-downloaded from the Prop Shop because of a computer crash or a new computer in the future?

I do appear to have mentioned those folk when I said I feel sorry for them. I had to re-read what you quoted to make sure.

[stratatonic]

Of course you bounced all your projects you had laboured on before you booted the product into the ether. So what about all those who have no clue this is happening and need the product re-downloaded from the Prop Shop because of a computer crash or a new computer in the future?

I do appear to have mentioned those folk when I said I feel sorry for them. I had to re-read what you quoted to make sure.

You're a good man, Ostermilk.

[selig]

Answered above.

Not seeing it.

Can’t see money until after accounting.

And the accounting takes how long? Is it the 30/45 days I mentioned above?

Yes there’s a delay (sure!), maybe they can do something. There’s always a delay, no way to do otherwise - not sure the actual question nor the implication. They owe money, best they could do is freeze if under their attorney’s advice. But I have NO IDEA about the law in Sweden, so all of our comments are speculation. Again not sure the point being made?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Iapetus 9]

But this is exactly the issue - the latest IDT's and RE's are just the tip of the iceberg. There are the huge NNXT based orchestra libraries such as EncoRE, EmbouchuRE, timbRE, and so on.

I get what you're saying, but I maintain that there's a difference. There are plenty of peep's sampling from Reason instruments and VST to create their libraries and refills, but the difference is that most of em are being transparent about it all. Softphonics did none of that, and created a rompler to sell us with apparently blatant stolen material. It's a thin line in a day where something like this can cause such upheaval in a community where warez is such a commonplace.

I had a quick discussion the other day in the Krakli FB group. A proper Asshat posted a link to all the warez he had stole, was proud about it, and then provided a link to his music that he was selling. It's the same damn thing. YMMV.

[EdGrip]

I was thinking of some kind of automated sample-check program that works similarly to Shazam or YouTube's automatic copyright-infringement detection system. Obviously too much to ask of Propellerhead (and pointless, given this is just one instance) but a central sample library database with such a checker (let's face it, probably operated by NI) could be useful in general.