![]() I can't see that it would be too helpful for the Max community and the Max product to make that reality be cut-and-pasted away. I know it's not the mission statement for C74 to make a programming environment for commercial applications, but it is a reality that it's used this way. It would be great if there was an option for a bit of obfuscation of the collective. It is definitely a drag that someone who owns Max 5 or runs the demo could conceivably cut-and-paste the collective, make a few edits, and make a standalone to distribute the app free of protection. I haven't yet ported these to Max 5, so the exposure that JSON brings is not yet a factor. It works pretty well, and our products are under the radar enough such that no one has earnestly tried to hack the cp scheme. ![]() At Livid, we have a registration scheme for Union, Cell, and DNA that authorizes a machine to use the software. ![]() I missed this thread! I have been selling standalones for a while now, for better or worse. That being said, I'm all about open-source and absolutely love it when a major app gets a worthy competitor which was made by a community effort of volunteers, and has its secrets available for all to see. At the same time, if someone or a group or a company builds an amazing app which can make lots of money (meaning that people are willing to pay for it) this should be readily protectable, as it spurs on further development of these complex apps. The result is that more people know and can share more, and build upon everyone's past work. And that's the great part of a community like this, or like forums where you go to learn Java or whatever else-re-using and tweaking existing code is a great way to learn and to make big steps quickly, that you may not understand at first, but through deconstruction you learn a lot more than you would trying to build from scratch. The vast majority of stuff we create, it seems, people are willing to share-since as clever and difficult the functions may be, we realize that they're probably not worth much (if anything) monetarily, at least as-is. the ultimate in frustration for you, the creator! It would be nice for certain things you've worked on for a long time to not be so easily grabbed and re-used, or worse, for someone to use them in their own app which is then sold and protected. There's also nothing that says you couldn't sell patches which could be modifiable (giving the buyer the details as a kind of reward), or give away free ones in which you *don't* want the functions copyable (you want people to use it freely but don't want them to steal from it). commercialism, you can make patches and distribute them however you want, free or not nobody ever *has* to buy them unless they want to-it's like having copyright on any other artwork, though in this case, would be much stronger protection. I don't think it has anything to do with art vs. IMO having some sort of copy-protection available as an option at the top level (when building an app) is definitely the best solution, and I would welcome it if it's possible for C74 to implement.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |