Have the feds ever pursued anti-trust litigation against Autodesk? Autodesk seems about a million times as monopolistic and predatory as Microsoft, and yet they seem to be given a free pass. Maybe it's because, unlike Microsoft, most people in the general public have never even heard of Autodesk.
I was very surprised when I realised how much of microsoft are in fact Autodesk. First I thought Microsoft was about to buy Autodesk, but it was the other way around.
I wish someone would hold them accountable for bringing new Autodesk Version on line which seem to have had minimal Beta Testing, and seem to be loaded with bugs. Then they don't want to help you sort them out with out having to pay some kind of fee for technical support, because you never found them within the first 30 days.
When I finally make the jump to Mac world, I think I'm also going to make a point to learn ArchiCAD and/or VectorWorks. I've been using AutoCAD for over 10 years and I know it inside and out, but I'm tired of hitching my wagon to the Autodesk horse without knowing any other options.
I love Autodesk. Their tightwads with their software though. On that response on the linked page it says that unopened/licensed copies can be resold but not used/ licensed versions, and the question is wether the licensure agreement is leaglel or not. They still make the best product in my opinion. I do wish they sold used software, maybe they'll start. If not, I'll have to just keep getting it free.
You want to repeal the 14th amendment? The one that guarantees due process and equal protection under the law? Heh? What's that got to do with Autodesk?
it says in your link shes exec chairman and Carl Bass is CEO. is that incorrect or are you incorrect cause i gotta say jonas77 i'd hate to think that you ever make untrue/non-verified statements... that'd just break my fucking heart in pieces.
You'd better believe that Jonas77 always checks his facts, re-checks his facts, and them checks them again before posting here. You can take his word to the bank.
We should all sue Autodesk.. for cruelty to animals (us).. I did note with some pleasure that the Autodesk recruitment booth at our career fair today seemed to be, largely, ignored
"Autodesk will pay you $500 cash or $2500 in software if you turn in a pirate"
How about self-pirating (trying to crack their stupid PLU 'cause it doesn't work and causes my laptop to crash)? If I figure out how to do it, can I turn myself in, get $2500 in free software, and continue to enjoy my fully-paid-for licensed-to-me software?
All I know is that, EVERY SINGLE PERSON I KNOW THAT DOES DRAFTING, uses friggin' freebee copies of CAD. So I just don;t get it..,..
So the software that most firms use, the one that most schools accept and most teach, the one, so pervasive is friggin FREE to EVERYONE...
yet they do nothing about it. All they would have to do is some kind of IP verification process for license manager software,.... start with the first univeristy you can think and bust the entire lot....
No you see, my theory, is that AutoDESK knows all too well about it. They puposefully let piracy get out of control because they know it promotes their own pervasiveness. I just don't beleive they are that interested in busting pirates, or else we would hear something other than rumors about how you get 500$ or whatever.
Anyway, I actually just feel like AutoCAD sucks now..and am glad I am not stuck doing it all day.
Discreet's CEO was quoted as saying he'd rather have everyone using cracked versions of Max than a competitor's program.
Of course they don't want to bust people. If Maya was rampant and free, there is no way it would have ever been used in architecture.
Autodesk is smart enough to know that you'll use what you know, request your employer to buy what you know, etc.
They know people like me will buy and continue to upgrade Max just to keep it current.
And this is why I smile thinking of them being sued. Their licensure program is a scam, imho. Not being able to transfer or sell a license that you paid $3800 for??!
Something will unseat them eventually, but it'll take a while.
I have a very mixed opinion about Autodesk. I hate the fact that they are basically buying out all competing software companies. At the same time, it makes it much better for compatibility because a lot of people are on the same platform. Anyone going to Autodesk University?
Hey as long as I am using Rhinoceros, IntelliCAD, Blender, Sketchup I feel safe
MS said the same thing about as long as people are using their software rather than the competitions, even if not 'legally'
interoperability is really the key and that is y i think you see all these vendors running to very incompatible BIM solutions to trap us like rodents into their cages.
I'm not a fan of non-transferable liscences. It may be the law but I don't think it should be. Further the liscencing structre basically forces people to continually update and pay rediculous fees for updates that are buggy and provide no real value or additional features. Most of the time they're more power hungry making the same old tasks slower, requireing you to upgrade your hardware simultaneously...
for exactly those reasons, psycho-mullet, we only load every third or fourth update of our subscription softwares. besides the bugginess and power use, there's also sometimes a learning curve figuring out what's different and how it's going to affect the daily work.
I canceled my subscription this year. Just not worth it. Max 6 was fine with me, combined with VRay and Final Render, you can't beat it.
But since you can't downsave, I have to keep upgrading every year. Then, I've got some things that I have to have max 9 on one computer to open files, but work in max 8 to keep compatible with sub contractors. Joys.
I read through all those posts and I think there is a good case to be made against them for the licensing of software to be illegal (there are a few other issues as well but that one seems the most prosecutable).
Basically the issue is we can't sell software second hand because it explicitly states in the sales agreement that it's a license. However just because they call it a license doesn't make it a license. If it looks like a sale, smells like a sale, talks like a sale, you can call it whatever you want, it's still a sale. If that's found to be so they'd either need to restructure it so it's really a license or acknowledge that it's a sale and allow us to sell ours second hand.
I wonder though if we're shooting ourselves in the foot on pressing this issue. I think the outcome most would like to see is that it's deemed a sale and we're allowed to sell our software used second hand if we so choose.
If the manner in which Autodesk licenses software is found to be a sale, they might just keep the exact same pricing structure but put a limitation on the terms of use so it's really a license; $4000 setup fee which includes 1 year subscription, and then a $2000/year maintenance fee. If you don't pay $2000/year you don't have autocad anymore.... vs. now we just don't have the latest greatest...
Then there's the issues of "forced" upgrade which is a bit more complicated.
they can try that, but I think these companies that charge so much for software are on a thin line. There are alternatives, albeit not nearly as universal.
According to PC Mag 35% of all software in the US is pirated. I'd guess that is at least close to 50%+ for the architecture and 3D world.
They need to do something to encourage younger people to buy copies and not pirate them. Why would anyone pay $1000 (or something like that) for a year of a student licese for Max, with built in limitations, when you can get the real thing for free?
If they raised the price, they'd lose half their users, imho.
Sep 29, 07 8:44 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Autodesk gets sued
Woohoo!! Go get 'em!
http://aecnews.com/news/2007/09/10/2377.aspx
Have the feds ever pursued anti-trust litigation against Autodesk? Autodesk seems about a million times as monopolistic and predatory as Microsoft, and yet they seem to be given a free pass. Maybe it's because, unlike Microsoft, most people in the general public have never even heard of Autodesk.
I was very surprised when I realised how much of microsoft are in fact Autodesk. First I thought Microsoft was about to buy Autodesk, but it was the other way around.
I wish someone would hold them accountable for bringing new Autodesk Version on line which seem to have had minimal Beta Testing, and seem to be loaded with bugs. Then they don't want to help you sort them out with out having to pay some kind of fee for technical support, because you never found them within the first 30 days.
When I finally make the jump to Mac world, I think I'm also going to make a point to learn ArchiCAD and/or VectorWorks. I've been using AutoCAD for over 10 years and I know it inside and out, but I'm tired of hitching my wagon to the Autodesk horse without knowing any other options.
J
does that mean that those free copies of cad will be less free?
Yeah, how come I have never ever heard of Autodesk coming after any pirates.
dude
talk like a pirate day was yesterday
Autodesk will pay you $500 cash or $2500 in software if you turn in a pirate....
so their software is only worth about 1/5 of it's price.
I love Autodesk. Their tightwads with their software though. On that response on the linked page it says that unopened/licensed copies can be resold but not used/ licensed versions, and the question is wether the licensure agreement is leaglel or not. They still make the best product in my opinion. I do wish they sold used software, maybe they'll start. If not, I'll have to just keep getting it free.
It's because carol holtz is CEO for Autodesk & Bush' science advisor?
http://images.odeo.com/5/8/8/CarolBartz-playerimage.jpg
United States President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_President%27s_Council_of_Advisors_on_Science_and_Technology
Time to stop letting corporations dictate anything to people.
repeal the 14th amendment and rewrite the 1st article of the constitution to the times.
You want to repeal the 14th amendment? The one that guarantees due process and equal protection under the law? Heh? What's that got to do with Autodesk?
it has to do with corporate personhood having more power than any person
see: The Corporation
'kay
it says in your link shes exec chairman and Carl Bass is CEO. is that incorrect or are you incorrect cause i gotta say jonas77 i'd hate to think that you ever make untrue/non-verified statements... that'd just break my fucking heart in pieces.
You'd better believe that Jonas77 always checks his facts, re-checks his facts, and them checks them again before posting here. You can take his word to the bank.
Oh wait, it isn't sarcastic Wednesday anymore.
We should all sue Autodesk.. for cruelty to animals (us).. I did note with some pleasure that the Autodesk recruitment booth at our career fair today seemed to be, largely, ignored
"Autodesk will pay you $500 cash or $2500 in software if you turn in a pirate"
How about self-pirating (trying to crack their stupid PLU 'cause it doesn't work and causes my laptop to crash)? If I figure out how to do it, can I turn myself in, get $2500 in free software, and continue to enjoy my fully-paid-for licensed-to-me software?
All I know is that, EVERY SINGLE PERSON I KNOW THAT DOES DRAFTING, uses friggin' freebee copies of CAD. So I just don;t get it..,..
So the software that most firms use, the one that most schools accept and most teach, the one, so pervasive is friggin FREE to EVERYONE...
yet they do nothing about it. All they would have to do is some kind of IP verification process for license manager software,.... start with the first univeristy you can think and bust the entire lot....
No you see, my theory, is that AutoDESK knows all too well about it. They puposefully let piracy get out of control because they know it promotes their own pervasiveness. I just don't beleive they are that interested in busting pirates, or else we would hear something other than rumors about how you get 500$ or whatever.
Anyway, I actually just feel like AutoCAD sucks now..and am glad I am not stuck doing it all day.
Arggh!
Discreet's CEO was quoted as saying he'd rather have everyone using cracked versions of Max than a competitor's program.
Of course they don't want to bust people. If Maya was rampant and free, there is no way it would have ever been used in architecture.
Autodesk is smart enough to know that you'll use what you know, request your employer to buy what you know, etc.
They know people like me will buy and continue to upgrade Max just to keep it current.
And this is why I smile thinking of them being sued. Their licensure program is a scam, imho. Not being able to transfer or sell a license that you paid $3800 for??!
Something will unseat them eventually, but it'll take a while.
autodesk once sued my boss for 10K for using one licensed copy of AutoCad on multiple computers in the office.
Carol Holtz is one of 34 members of Bush's Science and Technology council. Jonas makes it seems like she has the sole access to the president's ear.
Though is he does not exaggerate the corporate priesthood aspect of the council...
Bartz, not Holtz, but the point is just the same.
acad isn't science.. it's a racket. There's a difference. I think.
acad isn't science.. it's a racket. There's a difference. I think.
sorry for the double post. If there's a moderator, please delete one of them and this note too :).. thanks
sorry for the double post. If there's a moderator, please delete one of them and this note too :).. thanks
annalee, who won?
I have a very mixed opinion about Autodesk. I hate the fact that they are basically buying out all competing software companies. At the same time, it makes it much better for compatibility because a lot of people are on the same platform. Anyone going to Autodesk University?
Hey as long as I am using Rhinoceros, IntelliCAD, Blender, Sketchup I feel safe
MS said the same thing about as long as people are using their software rather than the competitions, even if not 'legally'
interoperability is really the key and that is y i think you see all these vendors running to very incompatible BIM solutions to trap us like rodents into their cages.
yup, can you imagine if China and India had to actually pay for Windows? It'd die in a day.
thus y copyrights and IP are human rights violations
I'm not a fan of non-transferable liscences. It may be the law but I don't think it should be. Further the liscencing structre basically forces people to continually update and pay rediculous fees for updates that are buggy and provide no real value or additional features. Most of the time they're more power hungry making the same old tasks slower, requireing you to upgrade your hardware simultaneously...
for exactly those reasons, psycho-mullet, we only load every third or fourth update of our subscription softwares. besides the bugginess and power use, there's also sometimes a learning curve figuring out what's different and how it's going to affect the daily work.
I canceled my subscription this year. Just not worth it. Max 6 was fine with me, combined with VRay and Final Render, you can't beat it.
But since you can't downsave, I have to keep upgrading every year. Then, I've got some things that I have to have max 9 on one computer to open files, but work in max 8 to keep compatible with sub contractors. Joys.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I read through all those posts and I think there is a good case to be made against them for the licensing of software to be illegal (there are a few other issues as well but that one seems the most prosecutable).
Basically the issue is we can't sell software second hand because it explicitly states in the sales agreement that it's a license. However just because they call it a license doesn't make it a license. If it looks like a sale, smells like a sale, talks like a sale, you can call it whatever you want, it's still a sale. If that's found to be so they'd either need to restructure it so it's really a license or acknowledge that it's a sale and allow us to sell ours second hand.
I wonder though if we're shooting ourselves in the foot on pressing this issue. I think the outcome most would like to see is that it's deemed a sale and we're allowed to sell our software used second hand if we so choose.
If the manner in which Autodesk licenses software is found to be a sale, they might just keep the exact same pricing structure but put a limitation on the terms of use so it's really a license; $4000 setup fee which includes 1 year subscription, and then a $2000/year maintenance fee. If you don't pay $2000/year you don't have autocad anymore.... vs. now we just don't have the latest greatest...
Then there's the issues of "forced" upgrade which is a bit more complicated.
they can try that, but I think these companies that charge so much for software are on a thin line. There are alternatives, albeit not nearly as universal.
According to PC Mag 35% of all software in the US is pirated. I'd guess that is at least close to 50%+ for the architecture and 3D world.
They need to do something to encourage younger people to buy copies and not pirate them. Why would anyone pay $1000 (or something like that) for a year of a student licese for Max, with built in limitations, when you can get the real thing for free?
If they raised the price, they'd lose half their users, imho.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.