Dunwich Type Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 ...does product activation depend on an installation’s files remaining stationery on the drive where things were originally installed? AFAIK, Adobe's activation scheme is tied to the hardware, and as long as you don't swap out the relevant hardware components you can move the software all over the place on a Mac. I've never tried moving software around under Windows (or any non-Mac *NIX OS) because complex Windows apps prefer staying put after being installed. Adobe's protection does, however, refuse to work if you screw around with the license management daemons, which are kept separate from the rest of the Adobe software. I once moved the management daemon library out of a directory when diagnosing a problem, and after moving it back I was unable to run any Adobe apps, even after reinstalling the entire suite. It's been a while, but IIRC I had to reinstall the OS to fix the problem.
aluminum Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 "I disagree. If you don’t like the protection scheme just don’t license the product. Someone might get their jollies cracking the product for ‘fun’ in the privacy of their own home, and although this is quite sad, providing they don’t publicize the hack then no harm is done." Nothing sad about a consumer actually wanting to posses what they purchase. I dislike the whole 'it's just a license...not a purchase' guise the media industries hide behind. TRUST your customers. Be NICE to them. Give them a REASON to keep giving you money in the future. Look at this thread here. They've already tainted their image through just one PAYING customer being annoyed. "What’s better a software solution that stops you from doing things against the EULA, or the EULA you don’t read and end up breaking?" It's better to not bother. Consumers don't read EULAs.
Miss Tiffany Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Darrel, consumers that care do read EULAs.
canderson Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 The font components are downloaded by the LHF Service and placed in: /Applications/Letterhead Fonts/Contents/Resources/LHFService/Contents/Resources/fonts/ These files are still not generally functional. They might be modifying the data slightly just before making the ATS call to activate the font. It's not entirely clear what problems this might pose for FontExplorer or Suitcase users. Running two font managers at once has been problematic in the past. When a font is activated by ATS it is not entirely possible to hide it's location. The complete font may only exist temporarily, but it is possible to find it's location. I think the other stated reasons are more important for avoiding these fonts. Really this is not flexible enough for professional design work. In most cases, a very similar font will be available from a major vendor without the potential headaches.
Si_Daniels Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 >Look at this thread here. They’ve already tainted their image through just one PAYING customer being annoyed. If the paying customer had said "I spoke to the vendor and they said - tough luck, and sent me packing" then there may be some validitiy to this. So far no one has indicated that they've even spoken to the vendor. >It’s better to not bother. Consumers don’t read EULAs. That'll change, esp. once they get sent the invoice a few months after they've posted a PDF containing the fonts on their blog.
paul d hunt Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 --Consumers don’t read EULAs. --consumers that care do read EULAs. Do you adhere to EULAs for typefaces that you purchase?
pattyfab Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 I will say this about Quark and EULAs - if you Collect for Output in Quark it point blank asks you if you have read the license and are complying with its restrictions. Of course then it lets you go ahead and collect anyway, but I think it's cool they ask. That said, I rarely read EULAs. Sorry. Doesn't mean I'm not aware of font piracy issues. I would NEVER buy a font I couldn't turn on and off at will.
Si_Daniels Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 >Sii, I posted this here instead of talking to the vendor first because I did not want my complaint possibly being kept private. It's unlikely they would have said "we'll provide unlocked fonts providing you don't publicize the fact" but you never know. Anyway thanks for providing us with the detailed explanation. Cheers, Si
canderson Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 It's interesting that they're willing to bet their brand on this. If I were going to try to implement font DRM I would create a new brand. The reason is that the print/design community is very "sticky" with regard to their opinion of specific companies. If people who support Macs in education and publishing put up "No Letterhead Fonts!" policies, this sentiment could get stuck in consumers' minds. They may become affaid to use any LH fonts. Also, I'm not sure it's been mentioned, but if LH decides to not to update their application to support new versions of Mac and Windows, font users could potentially lose their ability to use their fonts!
typequake Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 I am a consumer that reads the EULA, but cares less about it than consumer protection legislation. It's a contract? So what? A contract could be invalid, unconscionable, or unenforceable. And intellectual property rights are not natural law, but exist only to the extent that they are recognized by the state. So I respect a EULA only to the extent that it deserves respect.
Si_Daniels Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 >It’s interesting that they’re willing to bet their brand on this. If I were going to try to implement font DRM I would create a new brand. The reason is that the print/design community is very “sticky” with regard to their opinion of specific companies. Do you think? People were quick to forgive Adobe when they tried and abandoned protection schemes. I don't think these guys have much if anything to lose by giving this technology a college try.
canderson Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 People were quick to forgive Adobe when they tried and abandoned protection schemes. I think it's easier for companies who make multiple products, like Microsoft, Apple and Adobe. Just because I think the Zune's DRM makes it useless, doesn't mean I dislike SQL Server 2005. Also, if it is something Adobe abandoned, then it is easier to forgive.
Bert Vanderveen Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Who do the makers think they are kidding? If it's possible to outline it before making a PDF, the font can be "re-engineered", right?
Nick Shinn Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Thanks for commenting Chuck. As I said, all power to an indie foundry that wants to do things its way.
typequake Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 its fonts. "Why would you want to rekern any font? If the font you purchased is so lousy that you have to rekern it, I would suggest you ask for your money back." See Bringhurst v3.0 at 203-06.
malbright Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 I wrote Chuck about this and he responded very courteously in a matter of minutes. I feel his pain. I absolutely hate the new protection scheme, but I for one will do everything in my power to try to work within it because I want to support Chuck. It's a good thing he has such wonderful fonts and such an obvious love for the craft or many of us might just decide it's not worth it.
cooper design Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 I have purchased many LHF types over the years and have long been a big fan of their products and their customer support. Whenever I have encountered any sort of difficulty they have been helpful, prompt, and gracious. Unfailingly. And I have always been scrupulously diligent about not allowing my LHF files out into the wild, out of respect for the designers and for LHF. Plus, they're mine! I'm such a big fan that I've even purchased types from them that I don't even need. To satisfy my collector's impulse, or some other irrational motive. Abject affection, maybe. But I will not buy anything from them as long as they employ this contrivance. No way.
zebrasystem Posted January 9, 2007 Author Posted January 9, 2007 Chuck, I too want to thank you for your comments even though I am obviously unhappy with the new system. I do hope the increased sales continue to stay up. I don't know about others, but in my case buying one of the recent LH fonts was due to a feeling of pent-up demand for a choice new release from LHF because of the 2-year drought in font releases till your new system went live just recently. I would have bought more than a single font, but being unsure of what the new font installation system might entail, decided to play it safe. I've wondered for some time what the reason was for the lengthy absence of new releases, and tended to assume LHF must have been busy converting the entire preexisting catalog over to OpenType, which had to have been a huge task. In any event, my feeling at this point is I will probably end up buying a few more LH fonts in the future on occasion but at a significantly reduced level compared to the past because of the impact of the new scheme on our workflow. (I.e., "must haves" but not the "like to haves" like before.) As the previous poster said, however, I continue to have great affection for LHF's fonts, and I hope fortune smiles on you and your business.
Jackie Frant Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Dear Chuck, I have dropped out of buying fonts for a few years. I purchase to rarely, a client has to give me a pretty good reason to spend the extra money. However, as a typesetter in New York City, when the Mac became the way, I plunked down more than $25,000 on a font library. Owning Letraset, Bitstream (Type 3, which they were kind enough to update to a Type 1 a year later), Monotype, Linotype, URW, Adobe (originally library was a mere $15,000 and talk about errors in fonts.), and many fine fonts from FontFont, FontHaus, etc. (BTW, do you have any idea how many Garamonds a typographer during 1989-1991 in New York had to buy to be legit?) In my typeshop, I had a disgruntled worker. He made a copy of my entire library (including some original handtailored fonts) and gave it to his friend, a photographer, down the street. The friend decided to become a design shop, and you could imagine my face when I received a flyer from the "other" shop, letting my customers know that "his" library contained exclusives, and he could set the job better than who you are using today... I contacted Adobe immediately. Yes, I called in the Font Police. I learned pretty quickly that one person stealing a library wasn't worth their time and energy in legal fees. They referred me to a person at QuarkXPress. That was an interesting story. Quark found a consultant in New York who bought 25 copies of Quark. He placed them in one of the companies he was consulting for. Then he placed them repeatedly in other companies -- all using the same serial numbers. He did it so many times, that eventually companies started to contact Quark on their own to get the upgrades -- all using the same serial numbers. I still wonder how that lawsuit worked out -- that is what Adobe wanted me to know, you have to go after the big fish. It isn't like you've lost a customer in me, I do like your fonts, and maybe one day, I'll be able to have a customer who appreciates them and is willing to pay the price. I no longer am. But the fonts I own, all licensed and legit -- I do need to pass on to my printer when I am doing book, advertising and magazine work. I am just sharing this. Maybe some would call it rambling. I do want you to know, I do know what it is like when one is stressed out in a business that is going nowhere, where your assets are being stolen - and worse, advertised against you. Sometimes you have to realize it is okay to move on. Meanwhile, I am curious, if someone did want to give a printer a pdf or have the font to give their absolutely, legitimate printer so their job looks exactly like they expect it to -- is the new licensing of Letterhead Fonts opposed to this? Or must we make a PDF in Photoshop, flatten it like a graphic, and have no fonts -- which means, oh no, more time on making type corrections down the road... And by the way -- I keep repeating myself lately, but I am amazed that a "newbie" can go on line, pick up tons of illegal fonts -- and have a better typography library than Photolettering did in 1989! Probably every typographer I knew, is rolling over in their graves... and most likely, laughing.
Miss Tiffany Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Heron you only have to turn the typefaces to outlines, you don't need to rasterize them. All of Letterhead's fonts are display. I suppose turning the headings to outlines isn't that bad. It is just a nuisance. Being involved with information sharing in between foundries, I've seen a disgusting amount of font piracy. I don't want anyone to think I'm against a foundry doing what they feel they must to protect there work. It is a business decision and like any business decision there is an upside and a downside. It sounds to me like you, Chuck, did what you felt you needed to do.
aluminum Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 "Darrel, consumers that care do read EULAs." Care about what? Consumers want a simple transaction: Here's my money, give me my product. EULAs are only used to restrict the default assumptions of that transaction. They're bad, bad, bad. IMHO, of course. ;o) "I am a consumer that reads the EULA, but cares less about it than consumer protection legislation." Well said. "For those that say that protection is a slap in the face to the consumer or even hint that we are less friendly to our customers now— You obviously have never purchased anything from us or called us." It is a slap in the face. I love Apple. I think they are a great company. But DRM on their songs is a slap in the face. Period. Piracy...the damaging kind...the ones where people are selling your goods...these aren't stupid people. They know how to get around DRM. There's a monetary reward for doing so. The ones that aren't as damaging...the paying customer sending a font to the printer with the file or just wanting to make a PDF to send to a client...this just annoys them. Chuck, good luck with it all. I hope that your protection scheme actually works as you intended. I have a strong hunch it won't, but would love to be proven wrong. Keep us posted. In the end, only you know your user base and perhaps this is the ideal solution for your target audience.
Dunwich Type Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Thanks for the response, Chuck. It's rare for any vendor to speak out candidly about piracy; I'm used to just hearing the same old statistics spewing out of lobbying organizations. Sometimes I think that there would be a lot less IP theft out there if businesses tried a little harder to put a face on things. Good luck to you, and sink or swim, please let us know how it works out.
jlt Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Chuck, I certainly feel your pain, but essentially breaking your customers' final product can't be the best way to do this. I wish I knew a better one, though ... Converting to curves means that the content of your files cannot be searched/indexed/aggregated/copied&pasted, and essentially breaks the whole metadata point of a PDF. It also means that my entire proof process - which is 100% PDF based, now - would have to be abandoned on any jobs I used LHF fonts on. I doubt any art department that uses PDF workflow from proofing onwards can afford to completely re-engineer their procedures just to accomodate your type, no matter how well made and attractive it is. My 2¢. Good luck, JLT --- jlt : http://www.hewnandhammered.com : rnrmf!
Stephen Coles Posted January 9, 2007 Posted January 9, 2007 Thanks for your side of the story, Chuck. I appreciate the effort you made to explain your point of view at Typophile. > From that point forward we began noticing increased cases of piracy. Did you also notice any affect on sales?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now