I have said more than my fair share on the official site's thread... but consider this...

DAZ has had a very questionable history of non-communication, double talk, and out right going back on their own promises. It should surprise no one, them least of all, that customers are assuming the worst from this development.

Their roll out / announcement of it was bungled, again, and started the paranoia fire. They compounded the issue by being heavy handed with the message deletion and mod modification.

I have no proof of it, but I am willing to bet that last year's price increases are the cause of this year's DRM plans. Prices goes up, sales go down, piracy increases because the perceived value has increased, discounts become more extreme, the sale price brings the new increased price down to the old prices. The vicious circle just feeds on itself.

The executive that came up with the plan to raise the prices can't blame the downturn in revenue on their increase the price policy, so pirates are blamed.

All of this is theoretical conjecture on my part.

Am I saying piracy is not a problem? No. Am I saying that DAZ shouldn't find a way to protect the PAs and their assets? No. Am I saying that DAZ has completed effed up the roll out? Yes. They poisoned the well before the water was even drawn. They snuck out this new direction and acted like they had something to hide. So no one should be surprised that customers are questioning the motivation as well as the future direction of their plans.

You know what is not theoretical? All the previous broken promises. Selling DS4 for an extreme amount of money, then turning around and giving it away for free a month later. Promising there would be no more "barn burner" sales, then having one six months later.

I've been a DAZ customer for, I believe, 20 years, since the Zygote days. I've been through Metacreations meltdown. The Corel days. I was there when Canoma was unveiled. etc. etc. I've been up and down this roller coaster so often that I am use to almost all of the bumps and curves.

I believe the price increases were due to nothing more sinister than inflation. There had not been a generalised price increase for well over a decade before that. Does any other form of goods you know have that stability of pricing for such long terms?

It really wouldn't of mattered how a lot of the things you have described were handled, some people would still have adverse reactions regardless to the implementations such as DS becoming free, Piracy protection, etc. When DS became free if they said anyone who purchased in the last 6 months will receive a full refund, people who were 6 months and 1 day would be pissed, no? In my experience even a company which is totally transparent, A Nobel prize winning communicator, entirely direct and forthright in every aspect will still have critics and detractors. If you have stuck with DAZ3D for 20 years they must be doing something right, no?

I have had posts deleted from the Daz Forum threads on 4.9 and for the sake of clarity of the thread I welcome the sweep throughs by the mods on those threads, as they were becoming bloated and unwieldly to the point of being useless as information resources.

Actually most of your points are incorrect. Or at least stretching the truth to suit your position.

Prices... The prices use to be a lot higher. Then dropped for a while. They stabilized for a few years. Then started an increase trend last year. For example, in 2004 when I purchased the Millennium Dragon it was $99 for just the model, texture and poses. V3 with just the head and body morphs was $79.

The prices went down. Then the ship started to loose direction. Lots of different things were thrown at the wall to see what would work. For a while, these were good. Innovations. Investments that yielded new products. That's how we got DAZ Studio. Back then there was no such beast. It came about because of a spat with whoever happened to be the owner of Poser at that time.

Then things started to get bad. Barn burner sales. Overnight changes in direction. Lack of communication. At three points it got so bad that I stepped away for years at a time.

Then it stabilized for a while. Things seemed to be improving. Then the ship lost direction again last year. Things thrown at the wall. 3D printing. Gaming licenses. etc. etc. None of them really seeming to work out.

Here's a secret for you... When DS went free; they were giving out refunds. You had to call them directly and plead your case. This happened repeatedly. DS4. The Auto Fit tool. Carrara Pro. The Supersuit bundle. etc. etc.

Yes, some people would have had a bad reaction no matter what. But if the things in the past hadn't happened, then the number of people having a bad reaction right now would probably be a lot less.

"Then it stabilized for a while. Things seemed to be improving. Then the ship lost direction again last year. Things thrown at the wall. 3D printing. Gaming licenses. etc. etc. None of them really seeming to work out."

Forgive me but is not the basis of innovation, being brave enough to attempt new idea and markets whether successful or not. I would hardly consider any of these things as "lost direction' in fact the gaming licences lead directly to Morph3D. The issue with 3D printing isnt Daz3D its that 3D printing is in its infancy as an industry, with no steady suppliers of machines, consumables or maintenance available globally.

So just to recap you stated you think maybe DRM influenced last years price increase. I can tell you from the information I have that is not the case it was mainly motivated by inflation factors.

Razor42 posted at 11:55PM Fri, 30 October 2015 - #4236093

So just to recap you stated you think maybe DRM influenced last years price increase. I can tell you from the information I have that is not the case it was mainly motivated by inflation factors.

Razor is correct. Nothing sinister happened, the issue is products were undervalued (especially with inflation), with some instances of some vendors undercutting or devaluing their own products. Seems like all the forums across the DAZ-verse are rife with speculation these last few days.

You say inflation, I say self inflicted wound.

Repeatedly having these insane, nonsensical sales that they didn't even understand the ramifications of. I have ranted about the "cutesy" gimmicky sales for what seems like decade now. Discounts go up, base price goes up. The actual purchase price remained the same.

They created a customer base that knows not to buy at full price. The average customer knows to buy early on sale or to wait for a sale to come along. I am willing to bet the items selling at the full base price are an extreme minority of all sales.

And yes, trying new things is the definition of innovation. However trying a half a dozen different things at the same time and not really putting much effort into all of them... That is what the average customer sees. Then not communicating only leads to more speculation.

At the very least you can admit that their handling of this fiasco has been piss poor. The communication is coming through the forum in a mostly non-official way. Messages containing promises being made by DAZ employees seem to be getting altered or just disappearing. There is no official statement on any part of the site other than the forum. There doesn't appear to be a road map for where this ride is heading.

Because of this, the speculation begins. Speculation then leads to rumors. Rumors then lead to accusations of wrong doing.

Certain DAZ employees are doing an admirable job of trying to reassure customers. However no one knows if they are speaking in any sort of official capacity. No one knows if they can be trusted. Or if they even have the real story from their higher ups. Why all of the distrust? Because of all the broken promises and non-communication of the past.

I don't begrudge you, or anyone else, for wanting to protect your assets. I would be livid if all my hard work was pirated on a regular basis.

However DRM is notoriously bad. It doesn't stop the pirates. It barely even slows them down. Most of the time it just annoys the legitimate users. It serves no positive purpose to anyone. The scheme they have come up with will not protect your assets. It will not stop the pirates. It will not increase sales. It will just be a waste of resources.

It also doesn't help when, to the average customer, it appears to already be bungled in the roll out. I know beta testing is meant to address this and refine the effort. However so far this just smells of a half baked effort. It doesn't appear to have been completely thought through. Particularly when developers are saying things like "we didn't think of that. And this is important enough that I am going in on my day off to work on it."

Yes, on one hand it is reassuring that it is being taken that seriously. On the other hand it makes people nervous that something so important was completely overlooked.

I am being objective. I am not being irrational. I am not threatening to never buy another DAZ product. I am not screaming for anyone's blood. I don't feel betrayed. I am taking a wait and see position.

However I am not optimistic that it will end well. DAZ has a track record of trying these new things. Setting off down the path. Then just giving up without getting to the destination. Leaving behind a half completed project that we have to suffer with.

All I ask of you is this... How will you feel if your first release with DRM is pirated just as quickly as the previous releases. And, ontop of that, the sales are less because of said DRM? I would think that if my worst fears are realized, you would not continue creating or selling things through DAZ. You would be foolish to do so if you were continually loosing money.

So you stop. And who looses? DAZ does, they've lost assets they could sell. The customer looses because they can no longer purchase your items. You loose because of the lost revenue. No one wins.

Do I think this worst case scenario is going to happen? No. Is the potential there? Yes.

Again, I am taking a wait and see position to see how things shake out once it goes live. I don't have any plans of using DAZ Connect because it really offers me no benefits. I don't use Smart Content. I am happy using DIM to update, in fact I run DIM every morning to check for updates.

Male_M3dia posted at 12:30AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236094

Razor42 posted at 11:55PM Fri, 30 October 2015 - #4236093

So just to recap you stated you think maybe DRM influenced last years price increase. I can tell you from the information I have that is not the case it was mainly motivated by inflation factors.

Razor is correct. Nothing sinister happened, the issue is products were undervalued (especially with inflation), with some instances of some vendors undercutting or devaluing their own products. Seems like all the forums across the DAZ-verse are rife with speculation these last few days.

I never said there was something sinister going on. I merely said I understood why some people would think there is.

And speculation occurs when there is no official information. Which is the case now. Comments buried in a forum is not a very good way to official announce such a monumental change.

When I originally bought my items, I bought them without DRM. I am not too keen on having DRM inserted into them after the fact. That right there is a questionable tactic to take. Am I going to cry foul over it? Nope. It's not important enough to me at the moment. However I might change my opinion when it actually happens and I see the results.

I believe Razor used the car sale analogy over on the other thread. So I am going to use that here...

Adding DRM after the fact is like my taking my car in for service and finding that they added new locks to the car without asking me. Maybe a fingerprint sensor that would keep anyone else from starting my car even if they had the keys. But then what happens if I am 500 miles from home and the fingerprint scanner breaks? I don't think I would be too happy if I was stranded and not able to start my car...

Last comment before I log off...

I did some quick research earlier this evening. I found that I spent just over $10k USD at DAZ since June of 2013. I have no idea if that is a lot or nothing compared to the average DAZ customer, but to me that is a lot of money. Particularly for a hobby. It's almost half the price of a decent car.

I don't even want to think about what my total spent is. I have 967 orders on record with DAZ. I only went back 400 of them as part of this exercise.

Considering that I think I am being really calm concerning this out of the blue change.

I think perspective and as you have described rationality are pretty key assets for this situation. Unfortunately in a lot of cases both are in short supply.

The level of DRM we're talking about here is no more intrusive than itunes or many, many other online content providers. To the average user it will be pretty much be unnoticeable, to the average pirate the first hurdle ever put in place to attempt to protect this kind of product. No one thinks this is a silver bullet for piracy, but to do nothing is to just let even the most novice of individual free to exploit this content, however they please with NO barriers in doing so. To hackers and crackers potentially a challenge for their ego.

Unfortunately perception to the customer is any protection on top of No protection is a big jump even if it has minimal impact and appears rather threatening. To basically say pirates are too good we can never win. So let's not bother may work for multi billion dollar industries but for niche markets it could be the difference between survival and going under if not mitigated adequately in the long term.

DAZ3D has more to lose from piracy then say a store like Renderosity as DAZ3D it has a lot more financially invested in the development and the future of the industry. Renderosity can mitigate the loss as they really have no actual investment in content, programs or future developments of the industry.

Wait and see is the nature of most business these day when trying something new, but those that fail to move forward are inevitably falling behind. Risk and innovation go hand in hand. And other cliches... Personally whatever the long term outcome is, I'm glad that DAZ3D are attempting to make a difference into what content creators & creatives globally see as one of the primary threats to their livelihoods. To do otherwise would display more a lack of care and consideration of their contributors to just accept this as collateral loss.

As far as piss poor handling, I guess that's a matter of personal opinion, but remember this is a beta phase for DS not an official version release.

JasonGalterio posted at 1:08AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236099

Last comment before I log off...

I did some quick research earlier this evening. I found that I spent just over $10k USD at DAZ since June of 2013. I have no idea if that is a lot or nothing compared to the average DAZ customer, but to me that is a lot of money. Particularly for a hobby. It's almost half the price of a decent car.

I don't even want to think about what my total spent is. I have 967 orders on record with DAZ. I only went back 400 of them as part of this exercise.

Considering that I think I am being really calm concerning this out of the blue change.

That's all you spent? I have over almost 1300 orders and I sell. And as far as speculating, I would suggest waiting and getting all the information before getting too upset.

JasonGalterio posted at 4:11PM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236099

Last comment before I log off...

I did some quick research earlier this evening. I found that I spent just over $10k USD at DAZ since June of 2013. I have no idea if that is a lot or nothing compared to the average DAZ customer, but to me that is a lot of money. Particularly for a hobby. It's almost half the price of a decent car.

I don't even want to think about what my total spent is. I have 967 orders on record with DAZ. I only went back 400 of them as part of this exercise.

Considering that I think I am being really calm concerning this out of the blue change.

All I can say is that people are listening to your concerns and that there is a middle ground between asset protection and freedom of accessibility and usage for customers. Lets hope DAZ3D can nail it and your concerns are deemed unwarranted in the future. But as you said only the future will reveal all.

Keep a level head Guys and Girls too much speculation and that is all it is. Please make sure respect is shown here to each other but you are all going very well considering a few raw nerves and concerns at the moment. I know us humans don't like to let the facts get in the way of a good story.

@JasonGalterio it is not to happen like this. Daz is the last company on my system to go DRM, Please do not spend your weekend believing your 10K of products are under any threat. A company can't sell you products for close to 3 years under set terms then come knocking on your door to take it back because of a policy change. If you are worried do a backup of your entire library on an external drive. This is not needed but you might feel more confident your stuff is going nowhere then. Razor42 has made a very valid point. When you log into 4.9 there is the clearly visible "Work Offline" option. Now that would not be there if half your fears were going to come into play.

_Until the deal is further altered.

If DAZ manages to impose this step, they can (and will) go further down the software-as-service road. The "logical" next step is everything-is-"free" but then you have to pay a small amount whenever you try to render or export a scene. It is not far fetched, it is like what happens in pay-per-view video services where you have to pay whenever you watch a movie, regardless of whether you have already watched in the past (contrast with buying a DVD and then being able to watch the movie without further costs, as many times as you like)._

That is totally baseless and pretty clearly conjectured with out any knowledge of how a brokerage functions.

_Prices... The prices use to be a lot higher. Then dropped for a while. They stabilized for a few years. Then started an increase trend last year. For example, in 2004 when I purchased the Millennium Dragon it was $99 for just the model, texture and poses. V3 with just the head and body morphs was $79.

The prices went down. Then the ship started to loose direction. Lots of different things were thrown at the wall to see what would work. For a while, these were good. Innovations. Investments that yielded new products. That's how we got DAZ Studio. Back then there was no such beast. It came about because of a spat with whoever happened to be the owner of Poser at that time.

Then things started to get bad. Barn burner sales. Overnight changes in direction. Lack of communication. At three points it got so bad that I stepped away for years at a time.

Then it stabilized for a while. Things seemed to be improving. Then the ship lost direction again last year. Things thrown at the wall. 3D printing. Gaming licenses. etc. etc. None of them really seeming to work out.

Here's a secret for you... When DS went free; they were giving out refunds. You had to call them directly and plead your case. This happened repeatedly. DS4. The Auto Fit tool. Carrara Pro. The Supersuit bundle. etc. etc.

Yes, some people would have had a bad reaction no matter what. But if the things in the past hadn't happened, then the number of people having a bad reaction right now would probably be a lot less._

Not a spat.. a very real fear that the program would be turned into abandon ware as it was passed from hand to hand.

Actually... when Daz started to have an active and involved marketing team things started to improve. Daz is much stronger and the PA's much more financially secure now than in the past. 3D printing was always expected to be a down the road thing but it would have served no purpose to not get in some testing and so forth on it. Gaming licenses may not have had the impact you were looking for but it helped them work out the direction to go with Morph3d.

Charging for Studio was one of the few miss steps they have made and that was before most of the current Admin staff was in the positions they are. Thankfully they course corrected and once again is a very successful marketing tool. It can't have been too big a hit since they have been able to afford to do some pretty major expansions since then. I can think of a few people who have carried on like they were dumped by a lover after the return to free but most people are not quite so prone to a highly personal grudge long term like that.

Razor42 posted at 1:15AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236101

I think perspective and as you have described rationality are pretty key assets for this situation. Unfortunately in a lot of cases both are in short supply.

The level of DRM we're talking about here is no more intrusive than itunes or many, many other online content providers. To the average user it will be pretty much be unnoticeable, to the average pirate the first hurdle ever put in place to attempt to protect this kind of product. No one thinks this is a silver bullet for piracy, but to do nothing is to just let even the most novice of individual free to exploit this content, however they please with NO barriers in doing so. To hackers and crackers potentially a challenge for their ego.

Unfortunately perception to the customer is any protection on top of No protection is a big jump even if it has minimal impact and appears rather threatening. To basically say pirates are too good we can never win. So let's not bother may work for multi billion dollar industries but for niche markets it could be the difference between survival and going under if not mitigated adequately in the long term.

DAZ3D has more to lose from piracy then say a store like Renderosity as DAZ3D it has a lot more financially invested in the development and the future of the industry. Renderosity can mitigate the loss as they really have no actual investment in content, programs or future developments of the industry.

Wait and see is the nature of most business these day when trying something new, but those that fail to move forward are inevitably falling behind. Risk and innovation go hand in hand. And other cliches... Personally whatever the long term outcome is, I'm glad that DAZ3D are attempting to make a difference into what content creators & creatives globally see as one of the primary threats to their livelihoods. To do otherwise would display more a lack of care and consideration of their contributors to just accept this as collateral loss.

As far as piss poor handling, I guess that's a matter of personal opinion, but remember this is a beta phase for DS not an official version release.

I'm not wild about the whole DRM thing however, I'm less wild about seeing mine and other vendor's products being dropped on warez sites by users wanting to increase their download ratios, and when I send the DMCA notices to those sites they're now ignored. Unfortunately it's at a point where there needs to be some type of middle ground because not doing anything is simply not an option.

It would be like you making an image that you're proud of, someone steals it and drops it on a paid gallery that you receive no compensation or credit for. Do you try to keep that from happening or you just shrug and say "Those are the breaks." ?

Is it a perfect solution? Not in the least, but ignoring the issue and doing nothing to slow it down isn't an option either.

You have all pretty much said the same thing regarding the DRM... It's something, but it's not really going to work.

It's a mathematical equation. On one side is the customer. On the other side is the pirate. The more effective the DRM is at stopping the pirate, the more inconvenient it is for the customer. This equation will remain the same until there is some sort of shift in the fundamental nature of DRM.

It wasn't that long ago that the most effective DRM / website security was a Secure Key issued to every customer. Those keychain devices with the rotating numbers... But then some hacker was able to work out the algorithm the key chains were using. And everything went into disarray.

My point is two fold. No protection is bullet proof. And there are better steps to use resources on.

And some of my pictures have been used just like described. And I did just shrug and go oh well. I do this as a hobby. I don't expect to make money from it. I never have. I put them out there and I move on. There is absolutely nothing I can do to stop people who have no regard for others efforts. Just like my DRM equation above anything I do to stop unauthorized use (watermarks, reduced resolutions, etc.) has a negative impact on the legitimate viewers.

I have also had people to ask me to remove watermarks from pictures they want to use but don't want to pay for. I have refused and attempted to educate those people about what they were doing. Did they get it? No, because it is impossible for them to grasp a concept so simple unless it impacts them directly.

Again, as I have stated repeatedly, I am relatively calm right now. I am not worrying about it. I am waiting to see what happens before I crystalize my position.

Do I think my worst case scenarios will happen? No. I say them in the hopes that they don't happen. I hope that someone will see those thoughts and realize the idiocy of going down that path.

However I do have a personal motto that helps me deal with similar situations: "Never discount the impact of stupidity."

Even the smartest person can make stupid decisions. Even the stupidest person can somehow end up in a position where they are making important decisions. The stupidest idea can be made to look ground breaking. And the most ground breaking idea can be made to look stupid.

My fear is that somewhere up the DAZ leadership change there is that executive that exists in every company. The one that thinks he knows everything and is going to fix every ill of the company. The one that has no idea what the company sells or who the customers are. The executive that worked at the widget factory down the block and is going to deal with this company just the same way.He is going to make profit for DAZ come hell or high water. People who disagree with his (or her) plans get steamrolled. Logic is thrown out the window. The self-destruction begins as the quality and the customer base erodes. Etc etc.

I've been down that path with DAZ before. Some of you even allude to points in the past where that was going on. All I am saying is that I hope this isn't another one of those stages.

JasonGalterio posted at 7:39AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236128

You have all pretty much said the same thing regarding the DRM... It's something, but it's not really going to work.

It's a mathematical equation. On one side is the customer. On the other side is the pirate. The more effective the DRM is at stopping the pirate, the more inconvenient it is for the customer. This equation will remain the same until there is some sort of shift in the fundamental nature of DRM.

It wasn't that long ago that the most effective DRM / website security was a Secure Key issued to every customer. Those keychain devices with the rotating numbers... But then some hacker was able to work out the algorithm the key chains were using. And everything went into disarray.

My point is two fold. No protection is bullet proof. And there are better steps to use resources on.

And some of my pictures have been used just like described. And I did just shrug and go oh well. I do this as a hobby. I don't expect to make money from it. I never have. I put them out there and I move on. There is absolutely nothing I can do to stop people who have no regard for others efforts. Just like my DRM equation above anything I do to stop unauthorized use (watermarks, reduced resolutions, etc.) has a negative impact on the legitimate viewers.

I have also had people to ask me to remove watermarks from pictures they want to use but don't want to pay for. I have refused and attempted to educate those people about what they were doing. Did they get it? No, because it is impossible for them to grasp a concept so simple unless it impacts them directly.

Again, as I have stated repeatedly, I am relatively calm right now. I am not worrying about it. I am waiting to see what happens before I crystalize my position.

Do I think my worst case scenarios will happen? No. I say them in the hopes that they don't happen. I hope that someone will see those thoughts and realize the idiocy of going down that path.

However I do have a personal motto that helps me deal with similar situations: "Never discount the impact of stupidity."

Even the smartest person can make stupid decisions. Even the stupidest person can somehow end up in a position where they are making important decisions. The stupidest idea can be made to look ground breaking. And the most ground breaking idea can be made to look stupid.

My fear is that somewhere up the DAZ leadership change there is that executive that exists in every company. The one that thinks he knows everything and is going to fix every ill of the company. The one that has no idea what the company sells or who the customers are. The executive that worked at the widget factory down the block and is going to deal with this company just the same way.He is going to make profit for DAZ come hell or high water. People who disagree with his (or her) plans get steamrolled. Logic is thrown out the window. The self-destruction begins as the quality and the customer base erodes. Etc etc.

I've been down that path with DAZ before. Some of you even allude to points in the past where that was going on. All I am saying is that I hope this isn't another one of those stages.

We haven't said it wasn't going to work. What we have said is what is happening now doesn't work, and doing nothing doesn't work. So there needs to be some middle ground so it's not so easy for someone to just drop it on a site without any repercussion.

You want to protect your work? Then don't sell it. That is the only DRM that works.

You want to make money from your work? Then someone else is going to want to take that money from you.

You want to sell your work? Then someone else is going to want it for free.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management

Saying doing nothing is not an answer is rubbish and has been proven wrong: In January 2007, EMI stopped publishing audio CDs with DRM, stating that "the costs of DRM do not measure up to the results." Following EMI, Sony BMG was the last publisher to abolish DRM completely, and audio CDs containing DRM are no longer released by the four largest commercial record label companies.

Saying DRM will protect anything is also rubbish: As widely repeated, Blu Ray DRM was supposed to provide ten years of protection. It was broken in less than a few months.

Saying that users won't be prevented from using their legitimate purchases is rubbish: Many DRM systems require authentication with an online server. Whenever the server goes down, or a region or country experiences an Internet outage, it effectively locks out people from registering or using the material. This is especially true for a product that requires a persistent online authentication, where, for example, a successful DDoS attack on the server would essentially make all copies of the material unusable.

I am not going to bother copying any other text, but there is all section of that article dedicated to why DRM actually results in the inverse of what is being attempted.

I will believe that this will work when you tell me that DAZ has invested more money into this scheme than those who have tried and failed already. The truth of the matter is most companies are moving away from DRM. The ones that are still using it (Steam for example) have their hiccups but are significantly bigger than DAZ with more resources to reassure customers.

"So there needs to be some middle ground so it's not so easy for someone to just drop it on a site without any repercussion."

Bingo. And so far, that isn't what this is. "Minimal protection" means its still going to be pretty easy to break. There is still no repercussions as you, yourself, stated that your efforts to remove items with DCMA complaints have failed.

So now try to look at it from the point of a customer:

DAZ invests resources in instituting DRM. DAZ says DRM will protect their assets (proven not to be true). Customer then mentally does the math. Investment occurred, it's not buying what the seller says, so what is the seller not saying? What is the investment actually meant to purchase? Then the speculation feeds on itself.

Here's a thought to consider....

Want to protect your assets?

For the first six months that new products are released, lock them down hard. Issue a dongle that proves identity. Or a secure keychain that requires a log on. Or an secure key app that provides a cycling code. Or make users renew their decrypt key every two or three days. Or keep some of the model code on a server and make the user refresh that code every two or three days.

No minimal security. Lock it down just as tight as possible.

Then, after six months, unlock it and leave it decrypted.

Forget the old products that have already been released. They are already out there. Those cows are out of the barn. Trying to corral them back in is a waste of resources.

People don't want to buy DRM content? Wait six months. People are worried that Godzilla will nuke Salt Lake City? You only loose access to items bought in the last six months instead of forever.

Just don't try to sell me a 1976 Nova and claim that it is as safe and reliable as a 2015 Toyota.

JasonGalterio posted at 8:31AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236140

You want to protect your work? Then don't sell it. That is the only DRM that works.

You want to make money from your work? Then someone else is going to want to take that money from you.

You want to sell your work? Then someone else is going to want it for free.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management

Saying doing nothing is not an answer is rubbish and has been proven wrong: In January 2007, EMI stopped publishing audio CDs with DRM, stating that "the costs of DRM do not measure up to the results." Following EMI, Sony BMG was the last publisher to abolish DRM completely, and audio CDs containing DRM are no longer released by the four largest commercial record label companies.

Saying DRM will protect anything is also rubbish: As widely repeated, Blu Ray DRM was supposed to provide ten years of protection. It was broken in less than a few months.

Saying that users won't be prevented from using their legitimate purchases is rubbish: Many DRM systems require authentication with an online server. Whenever the server goes down, or a region or country experiences an Internet outage, it effectively locks out people from registering or using the material. This is especially true for a product that requires a persistent online authentication, where, for example, a successful DDoS attack on the server would essentially make all copies of the material unusable.

I am not going to bother copying any other text, but there is all section of that article dedicated to why DRM actually results in the inverse of what is being attempted.

I will believe that this will work when you tell me that DAZ has invested more money into this scheme than those who have tried and failed already. The truth of the matter is most companies are moving away from DRM. The ones that are still using it (Steam for example) have their hiccups but are significantly bigger than DAZ with more resources to reassure customers.

"So there needs to be some middle ground so it's not so easy for someone to just drop it on a site without any repercussion."

Bingo. And so far, that isn't what this is. "Minimal protection" means its still going to be pretty easy to break. There is still no repercussions as you, yourself, stated that your efforts to remove items with DCMA complaints have failed.

So now try to look at it from the point of a customer:

DAZ invests resources in instituting DRM. DAZ says DRM will protect their assets (proven not to be true). Customer then mentally does the math. Investment occurred, it's not buying what the seller says, so what is the seller not saying? What is the investment actually meant to purchase? Then the speculation feeds on itself.

Unfortunately the world doesn't work like that. Things will continue to be sold, and there will need to be ways to protect assets regardless of what some people feel. So if you don't want to buy protected assets and programs you are free to make your own. But considering every software company has some type of protection in place, your argument really doesn't make sense.

And as I said before, I am also a customer that has more assets than most people people complaining. So I do understand from both sides, since I do both: assets need to be easy to use, but also some type of protection needs to be in place to reduce theft, hence the middle ground. I keep my software licenses current for the work I do, and I also buy assets for my work, and I also see the impact of them having absolutely no protection so people can just upload them and share them with no regard for license. Also it's also increasingly hard to remove copyrighted works when you submit a claim, they get ignored by many sites now. Unfortunately this isn't something that no one else in digital world does, and this is where it's heading. The goal is to make it where transparent to the user where you are doing the same things legally that you've been doing with your content. Since no one has any encrypted content yet, it's pointless to speculate that it's some evil draconian scheme like some of the other products some have bought that really gave DRM a bad name.

Male_M3dia will you please stop implying that I am claiming that there is some sort of secret DAZ illuminati plan going on here? You are flame baiting and I am not going to bite. In fact, I am going to stop addressing you.

To elaborate on my previous thought, in the hope that someone from DAZ might read it...

I am not anti-DRM. I am anti-pointless DRM. Which is what I am reading into statements like "minimal security."

My suggestion is this....

Every customer gets two keys. The first key is a generic this is customer "A" sort of key. Has to be renewed every thirty days, which is pretty typical for most DRM items. The second key is a more specific key, possibly one for each product. This key has to be renewed every two or three days.

I buy a new product on it's release day. The product is encoded to my customer key and I receive a specific product key for it. When I add the product to a scene, the keys are checked. If my keys are invalid, the product doesn't de-crypt. If my keys are out of date, either one of them, then the product adds into the scene (so that I can still compose a project) but I am not able to export or render that scene.

After six months the product is updated to remove the security and the keys are no longer needed.

1. This provides DRM with some actual teeth. Something that might actually deter a pirate for a little longer. Maybe out beyond the six month window.
2. DRM intolerant customers have the option of waiting to purchase until the unlocked item is available. And potentially paying a premium, non-sale price.
3. DRM cautious customers will have a reassurance that in six months the product will be open. And there is no fear of a kaiju attack on Salt Lake City.
4. Customers with out of date keys are not locked out. They can still compose a scene, they just can't finalize it until their license is validated.

I'm confused. You're against minimal DRM implementation aimed at adding a first level of security to protect assets from opportunistic and casual pirates.

But are suggesting the implementation of one of the harshest DRM systems I have ever heard proposed.

I truly don't believe it's black and white with DRM as in it works or it doesn't. There are many levels of effectiveness and varying amounts of impact on customers.

I firmly believe providing a plug and play zip file as a product package is akin to laying down a pirate party welcome mat with free jugs of rum for all.

I am against first level DRM security because it is pointless. It's going to stop your average pirate for... what, five minutes? And inconvenience customers for forever.

Instead of complaining that the sky is falling. Or just complaining. I am trying to be constructive and offer additional ideas.

Like I have said repeatedly, I don't begrudge any PA for wanting to protect their work. But the official path being chosen now (as I understand it) benefits no one.

I think you're overestimating the skills of the average pirate. Most pirates who share DS products in all likelihood have never even used DS and have no actual experience at breaking 64 bit encrypted files. The process in the future will also add a level of difficulty to those wanting to use pirated content in DS where at present there is none.

Some of the pirates I have dealt with I have been able to trace their digital footprints to actually find their name and address in the states.

Hardly super hacker criminal masterminds,..

Razor42 posted at 9:41AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236152

I think you're overestimating the skills of the average pirate. Most pirates who share DS products in all likelihood have never even used DS and have no actual experience at breaking 64 bit encrypted files. The process will also add a level of difficulty to those wanting to use pirated content in DS where at present there is none.

True. But that is going to change just as soon as DAZ throws down the gauntlet. Now its going to be a challenge which will be accepted. The first broken encryption will take the longest, but I don't imagine it will be very long.

After all just like most DRM the pirate will have access to both the key and the lock.

Each subsequent decryption will be much faster, since the process will be known.

Razor42 posted at 9:46AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236153

Some of the pirates I have dealt with I have been able to trace their digital footprints to actually find their name and address in the states.

Hardly super hacker criminal masterminds,..

I have done the same as well, in a slightly different context. But now you've made my point... What did you do about them? Did you stop them? Were their any repercussions? Usually there are none.

Why? (Forgive the reference.) It is like Sheldon on the Big Bang Theory trying to explain to the police how his Battle Ostrich in Word of Warcraft was stolen. Nothing happened because no one really knows what to do... Unfortunately to most laws these digital possessions have no intrinsic value. The laws have not caught up to reality.

Theres hardly the esteem in cracking a pair of panties for a 3D dolly as there is in say a blockbuster game, movie or program.

I was tempted to send them a rattlesnake in the mail, but I would feel bad for the snake ;)

"So if you don't want to buy protected assets and programs you are free to make your own."

I dont understrand the level of panic I am seeing over some future content that may have some Slight "impediments"to peoples usage.

Seriosly what are you ALL actually doing with all this content that now seems threatend by DRM

My NON Cloud copy of Adobe CS3 is still useful for All of my creative objectives from 2D graphic design for print to editing textures for my 3D work.

My NON Cloud version of Adobe After effects CS3 with video co-pilots optical flare system and many other feature enhancing plugins ,is being used right now to colorgrade & add visual effects to my current animated film project.

My discontinued version of natural motion's "Endorphin 2.7" is being used to create incredible hardbody Dynamics and ragdoll simulations that export to poser/DAZ ready BVH files.

Even the most die hard DS user will not have his Artistic efforts completely neutralized/halted by DRM or.... Gasp!!! having to use the "Old" Daz studio 4.8.09 for his precious web gallery/deviantart uploads.

from the posts I have read over at the Daz site most seem to be complaints from compulsive digtal hoarders who will not be able to implement thier personal content organizational schemes.

Calm yourselves

There are many ways to light Europe.

Also if you're not even smart enough to hide your actual identity while blatantly committing a crime. I'm willing to bet that cracking even basic encryption on a file is probably something that would just make you move onto easier prey. The level of DRM proposed on Daz3D products will be effective, at the least, in combating this level of casual piracy while only adding a barely noticeable level of annoyance to the far majority of legitimate users.

Razor42 posted at 9:53AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236157

Theres hardly the esteem in cracking a pair of panties for a 3D dolly as there is in say a blockbuster game, movie or program.

---

I was tempted to send them a rattlesnake in the mail, but I would feel bad for the snake ;)

I agree. But someone will notice and will take on the challenge. Wait and see.

And part of the reason why the laws haven't caught up is the lawyers themselves. The heavy handed approach they normal take has made it a joke... Let's sue a 67 year old grandma in Des Moines for 17 million dollars because one of her grandchildren downloaded the latest Katy Perry album.

Instead of making an example of someone, they made a mockery of themselves... attacking a suburban retiree that probably only uses her computer to look at family pictures on Facebook.

As someone else said there is no magic bullet. And something does need to be done. But the only way to improve on this is by discourse. Plotting a course while sitting in a bottle hardly ever solves anything.

Unfortunately laws are something that are well beyond mine or DAZ3D's sphere of influence and the way big business has attempted to deal with the issue has, as you have described, done nothing to remedy the situation and in a lot of cases eroded people's confidence in the process. I'm actually not sure how much sway US or international law has on a .ru file sharing site though. Which means really the responsibility ultimately lies with the seller to implement security measures that make an effort to suppress piracy of their products or at the very least put in place barriers to prevent casual piracy. Importantly whatever measures are taken need to cause minimal issue to customers in the usage of the product, at the risk of losing those customers.

"I'm actually not sure how much sway US or international law has on a .ru file sharing site though.

None.. After this new DAZ Encryption is broken and a script developed to automate the process. this "protected content will be shared ,as usual on torrent.

Once seeded it spreads even faster than a virus because the constituent parts are crowd sourced all over the planet via "Seeding", not just in known "enemy" lands such as China & Russia.

As the technology now stands the only way to literally prevent this is to physically enclose your country within some Draconian Faraday Cage that blocks All external communications including satelites.

not really an option here.

Maybe I wouldn't go so far as describing Russia and China as enemy lands, but I get your point, lol.

China is the number 1 spending country globally for gaming too, on an OT note. http://www.newzoo.com/free/rankings/top-100-countries-by-game-revenues/

Zev0 posted at 11:31AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4235788

WandW posted at 5:08PM Thu, 29 October 2015 - #4235778

DAZ is no longer a small shop run by a group of artists, but is now but one small piece of a $80 Billion dollar corporation, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone, and has to contribute to their bottom line...

Say what now?

Sorry for the delay, Zev, as I got no eBots.

Yes, DAZ is owned by NTT DOMOCO Innovations, formerly (until 1 October) NTT DOMOCO Capital, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of NTT DoMoCo, the largest wireless carrier in Japan, which is majority owned and controlled by NTT, the big Japanese telecom company. They had a huge stake in Gizmoz, which merged with DAZ in 2009, and apparently acquired the rest of DAZ in 2011. Here is a list of companies they own...

https://www.docomoinnovations.com/portfolio

Regarding Terry's comment about Poser's ownership, (which I suppose was off topic here ) Yes, Poser has been owned by other software companies for over a decade (and was bought by MetaCreations back in the 1990s before being spun off into Curious Labs as well). However, Poser's management has remained mostly intact through this period, unlike at DAZ, where most (along with many of their in-house artists) were shown the door...

EDIT; Highway 12 Ventures apparently still has a stake; info on privately held companies is hard to find...

WandW posted at 12:51PM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236175

Zev0 posted at 11:31AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4235788

WandW posted at 5:08PM Thu, 29 October 2015 - #4235778

DAZ is no longer a small shop run by a group of artists, but is now but one small piece of a $80 Billion dollar corporation, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone, and has to contribute to their bottom line...

Say what now?

Sorry for the delay, Zev, as I got no eBots.

Yes, DAZ is owned by NTT DOMOCO Innovations, formerly (until 1 October) NTT DOMOCO Capital, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of NTT DoMoCo, the largest wireless carrier in Japan, which is majority owned and controlled by NTT, the big Japanese telecom company. They had a huge stake in Gizmoz, which merged with DAZ in 2009, and apparently acquired the rest of DAZ in 2011. Here is a list of companies they own...

https://www.docomoinnovations.com/portfolio

Regarding Terry's comment about Poser's ownership, (which I suppose was off topic here ) Yes, Poser has been owned by other software companies for over a decade (and was bought by MetaCreations back in the 1990s before being spun off into Curious Labs as well). However, Poser's management has remained mostly intact through this period, unlike at DAZ, where most (along with many of their in-house artists) were shown the door...

EDIT; Highway 12 Ventures apparently still has a stake; info on privately held companies is hard to find...

Actually no management was ever shown the door.. they sold their stake in company and left. Not sure who started that nonsense, but that should really be cleared up. You can't be shown the door on something you owned, but you can sell it and start a comicon. ;)

And most likely there was a purge at SM at the beginning of this year despite what was said. Word was it was hard to get in touch regarding dson/genesis issues with anyone at SM when all the contacts no longer worked at the company. :) But it does help to give some background on why Poser support was dropped with Genesis 3.

And as far as your references as far as who owns the company, I had to go ask. They don't know what you're talking about. I would stop spreading that if I were you. They thought the phone company part was funny though, I want some free phone service if that was actually true.

@wolf359 Perhaps it is best if we don't go labelling other countries as enemy lands I doubt it would be helpful sending this thread along its merry way. Renderosity is a global website DRM is a global issue. Please keep this in mind

Male_M3dia posted at 1:28PM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236182

Actually no management was ever shown the door.. they sold their stake in company and left. Not sure who started that nonsense, but that should really be cleared up. You can't be shown the door on something you owned, but you can sell it and start a comicon. ;)

Darn it; I tried to edit the link and deleted the post! Thank goodness for a local cache!

Chris Creek said this. He of course sold his stake around the time of the Gizmoz merger and left, but was later brought back. The Board by then was controlled by the investors (they had at least a $12 million stake in Gizmoz, plus whatever they had in DAZ; at least $9 Million when the merger was effected... ( http://techcrunch.com/2009/12/15/gizmoz-daz-3d-merges/ ) , and Dan Farr was later forced out (according to Chris) and Chris of course was later let go.

As far as NTT's ownership goes, check the link I posted... :)

As an somewhat off-topic aside, whatever happened to Gizmoz' technology? I haven't yet seen caricature heads from photos make it into any DAZ products. Did they license that tech to someone else?

Razor42 posted at 4:15AM Sun, 01 November 2015 - #4236157

Theres hardly the esteem in cracking a pair of panties for a 3D dolly as there is in say a blockbuster game, movie or program.

---

I was tempted to send them a rattlesnake in the mail, but I would feel bad for the snake ;)

I don't know about that I have seen some pretty neat pairs of 3D panties in my time. Luck would have it they have always been on special so I haven't had the desire to crack them open. I pay for everything I get and so do the majority. Send the rattlesnake

Razor42 posted at 12:15PM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236157

Theres hardly the esteem in cracking a pair of panties for a 3D dolly as there is in say a blockbuster game, movie or program.

Unless the DRM is constantly modified for each item, they don't have to do it for each item. They just have to get the algorithm once and then automate the process. So it won't matter if it's a pair of panties or the latest figure which the company itself is crowing about being widely used.

Besides, you're not understanding the mindset for a lot of these guys. They don't care what product the DRM they are hacking is protecting. All that matters is that they're showing how easy it is to defeat DRM.

I've mentioned this over at DAZ, I'm going to mention it one time here then get on to other things. The problem is this: DRM does not generate sales for entertainment digital items. Those people who aren't paying for the right to use your stuff are never going to pay for the right to use your stuff - they just will not use it if you make it impossible. Shady businesses that use your product in money making enterprises will pay for it if they have to.

The problem with DRM is that it makes your product more difficult to use for your paying customers, plus it is costly to maintain and develop.

So if you are adding DRM to your product, and it is used chiefly for entertainment, you are going to get lower sales at higher cost. It will not raise your sales. Which is exactly what the music, book, and movie industries found out. Movies still do it to stop people from selling their product illegally, that you have to stop or you go out of business.

If you are incised that people are using your work without paying you, and your bottom line is you want to stop them regardless of lost sales or costs, then go for it, use the hell out of DRM.

If you are trying to increase your sales, you better try something else.

WandW posted at 4:44PM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236192

Male_M3dia posted at 1:28PM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4236182

Actually no management was ever shown the door.. they sold their stake in company and left. Not sure who started that nonsense, but that should really be cleared up. You can't be shown the door on something you owned, but you can sell it and start a comicon. ;)

Darn it; I tried to edit the link and deleted the post! Thank goodness for a local cache!

Chris Creek said this. He of course sold his stake around the time of the Gizmoz merger and left, but was later brought back. The Board by then was controlled by the investors (they had at least a $12 million stake in Gizmoz, plus whatever they had in DAZ; at least $9 Million when the merger was effected... ( http://techcrunch.com/2009/12/15/gizmoz-daz-3d-merges</http:> ) , and Dan Farr was later forced out (according to Chris) and Chris of course was later let go.

As far as NTT's ownership goes, check the link I posted... :)

As I said, no management was forced out. They sold their stakes... period.

Don't believe everything you read. If DAZ actually took the low road like some of these people, your head would spin at the messiness that goes on behind the scenes. They got products to make instead of kicking dirt, thank goodness.

As an somewhat off-topic aside, whatever happened to Gizmoz' technology? I haven't yet seen caricature heads from photos make it into any DAZ products. Did they license that tech to someone else?

_Darn it; I tried to edit the link and deleted the post! Thank goodness for a local cache!

Chris Creek said this. He of course sold his stake around the time of the Gizmoz merger and left, but was later brought back. The Board by then was controlled by the investors (they had at least a $12 million stake in Gizmoz, plus whatever they had in DAZ; at least $9 Million when the merger was effected... ( http://techcrunch.com/2009/12/15/gizmoz-daz-3d-merges/ ) , and Dan Farr was later forced out (according to Chris) and Chris of course was later let go.

As far as NTT's ownership goes, check the link I posted... :)_

I followed your link and it lists Highway 12 as the investors of that single 4 million dollar funding Daz got back in 2007. Looks like Highway 12 has 2 men who are general partners, 3 that are strategic partners and one principle partner who joined in 2010. None of that indications of a later buy out of the company by NTT. If you have some other indication that there was a purchase of Daz by another company I will be happy to look at it.

What I know about Gizmoz is pretty much what is on the internet. I've never actually heard anyone with Daz talk about it even though I added it as a brokerage right around that time. I do know that some of the Daz models and so forth got used in some of the Gizmoz stuff but beyond that I've never seen or heard anything really indicating that the companies were one. My guess is that it was actually a folding in of Gizmoz into Daz and since the President who came with it left after 9 months to do his own thing (though according to linked in he is still on the board). My best guess is that they sold parts of Gizmoz and may have kept some of the people or tech. I seem to recall something about Gizmoz doing phone apps for the Korean market at some point which I would guess would be an easy sell out. In other words I don't think that there was any real impact on Daz then and certainly not now. I think Gizmoz and the merger has only ever been notable to a few people in forums.

I'm really not going to talk about what Cris said other than to say I have never heard anyone at Daz say anything but nice things about Dan. I know they are all very proud of how well he has done with his Con.

Of course if you ask me looking at anything to do with the company before 2012 is like looking into the dark ages and not really reliant to them today.

WandW posted at 12:26PM Sun, 01 November 2015 - #4236175

Zev0 posted at 11:31AM Sat, 31 October 2015 - #4235788

WandW posted at 5:08PM Thu, 29 October 2015 - #4235778

DAZ is no longer a small shop run by a group of artists, but is now but one small piece of a $80 Billion dollar corporation, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone, and has to contribute to their bottom line...

Say what now?

Sorry for the delay, Zev, as I got no eBots.

Yes, DAZ is owned by NTT DOMOCO Innovations, formerly (until 1 October) NTT DOMOCO Capital, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of NTT DoMoCo, the largest wireless carrier in Japan, which is majority owned and controlled by NTT, the big Japanese telecom company. They had a huge stake in Gizmoz, which merged with DAZ in 2009, and apparently acquired the rest of DAZ in 2011. Here is a list of companies they own...

https://www.docomoinnovations.com/portfolio

Regarding Terry's comment about Poser's ownership, (which I suppose was off topic here ) Yes, Poser has been owned by other software companies for over a decade (and was bought by MetaCreations back in the 1990s before being spun off into Curious Labs as well). However, Poser's management has remained mostly intact through this period, unlike at DAZ, where most (along with many of their in-house artists) were shown the door...

EDIT; Highway 12 Ventures apparently still has a stake; info on privately held companies is hard to find...

Forgive me but both NTT DOMOCO innovations (Honestly the only place I can find a stated relationship between DOMOCO and DAZ3D is on DOMOCO own portfolio page which you linked it doesn't really say we (DOMOCO) own DAZ3D anywhere there either, as a portfolio page it could be there is another relationship such as investment or it could even mean they sold them some telecommunications gear at one point making them part of the portfolio of DOMOCO {LINK PLS to confirmation?}) and Highway 12 Ventures are both Investment Groups (From what I can see DAZ3D has had 2 rounds of investment in the last few years one in 2011 and later in 2014 and currently DAZ3D has 4 major investors),

Smith Micro on the other hand OWNS Poser outright. There is a vast difference between ownership and investment. So to say "Poser's" team is unchanged is pure fiction "Poser" doesn't have a CFO or CEO or even Staff but Smith Micro does. Poser is an asset of Smith Micro, not a company. Daz3D is entirely operated as an independent company, with from my understanding modern investors that believe that capital is the main asset an investor provides to the operation of a business.

And from my understanding Gizmos was more of an acquisition then a merger. But sometimes small adjustments to words can misrepresent an idea greatly ;) or just make the person saying it feel better about the actual situation. I'm not sure what any of this has to do with DS 4.9 anyway or really why you seem to be trying to tell a story with very few facts, it comes across as slightly malicious like you're planting seeds of disinformation for a particular reason? ...

@ WandW

Also I'm not sure why the dedication to comparing Poser with DAZ3D, it's like comparing Apple with Internet Explorer or Microsoft with Itunes. One is an asset (a thing owned by a company) and one is an organisation/company.

You need to compare DAZ3D with Smith Micro or Poser with Daz Studio then there would be a more like to like kind of equation. Otherwise what your saying comes across as a little nonsensical and a little transparent motive wise.

Oh and one more thing while we're on the topic of Smith Micro here in the DAZ Studio forum.

Congrats to Smith Micro on the 3rd quarter financial report for 2015 (Reported yesterday) losing only 750k in the last three months much better than the 1.2 million they lost in the same quarter last year. And a significant improvement on the last 9 months as well, only losing slightly over 2 Million dollars in that period much better than the 12 Million lost in the previous year (2014)...

The shareholders only lost a few cents of their share price this quarter (5% of the value) rather than the 30 cents per share they lost last year (About 38% of the shares value) Well I guess there used to it by now considering the shares were worth $16+, 5 years ago now they are around .65 cents a share... What's that come to around 96% of the company's value lost in 5 years?

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/smith-micro-reports-2015-third-quarter-financial-results-300167585.html

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Smith+micro+stock&oq=Smith+micro+stock&aqs=chrome..69i57l2j69i59l2j69i60l2.3143j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8

Alright, I am not sure I understand what is going on with DAZ Connect or whatever it is called. Content is delivered only via cloud, not installed locally, and you have to download the stuff you want to use each time you want to use it? Is that right?

Someone give me the tl;dr version of what is happening, please.

Black__Days posted at 3:33PM Sun, 01 November 2015 - #4236265

Alright, I am not sure I understand what is going on with DAZ Connect or whatever it is called. Content is delivered only via cloud, not installed locally, and you have to download the stuff you want to use each time you want to use it? Is that right?

Someone give me the tl;dr version of what is happening, please.

The term cloud is throwing people a little off in this scenario.

Daz Connect is similar to DIM except it is enclosed in Daz Studio. Once you download your Daz Connect item it will be stored locally on your hard drive in an Encrypted format similar to the way DIM does (DIM files are unchanged and unencrypted at this point). So when you install 4.9 it (will) access all of your installed content on your hard drive from DAZ or other providers the same way 4.8 does. If you download via 4.9 Daz Connect from Daz3d it will come down as an encrypted format stored locally on your computer.

Currently all Daz3D content is available through either DIM or Daz Connect both store the content locally on your hard drive once downloaded. Daz Connect in 4.9 will show content you have purchased, but not yet downloaded, as a greyed out icon (which means it's available In the "cloud") where you can click the icon and download and install within DS with Daz Connect.

One hour nap and at first glance I thought I was reading the Financial Times. What on earth has Smith Micro's P&L Statement got to do with the Daz DRM woes Razor? Although reading it L Statement might be a better choice. I do have one question I looked at the info over the greyed out icon and took it how you have explained this here. So is there a few bugs to iron out or will it take time to go through my content and list it all appropriately? because I see a few of those for my content that has been on my drive for years. Could this also be the poser companion files etc because I had Poser and Daz on two separate computers at one stage after upgrade so skipped a heap of the installs. Never bothered to catch up

Razor42 posted at 1:14AM Sun, 01 November 2015 - #4236266

Once you download your Daz Connect item it will be stored locally on your hard drive in an Encrypted format similar to the way DIM does (DIM files are unchanged and unencrypted at this point).

Oh. So it's basically a DRM thing, forcing users to install content from inside the client, so that it will be harder to install things obtained in a shady fashion without DAZ knowing about it. I am okay with this.