Testing the waters on piracy protection....

    Maybe this is not a feature request, but several recent events (not just the infamous "Grand Theft Kempo" of 240 profiles, but also candid facebook discussions on sharing profiles) have got me thinking...


    Would it be possible to in some way link purchased profiles to a specific KPA, for instance it's mac address?


    Piracy is detrimental to the product in the long haul, I think. If it becomes a big enough problem (and I don't know if it ever will), the incentive to put a lot of care and love into making great profiles will diminish.


    Piracy protection measures can be cumbersome (many people plain HATE iLOKs for instance), and some people even feel mistrusted. So there may not be an obvious solution. I don't know how a pairing to a specific mac address would impact repairs and/or replacements under warranty either. And resale would result in losing the profiles as well.


    These technical considerations aside, what is everybody's opinion on this?


    Most of the people here I think are honest and upstanding users. Sadly, not all. And then there are probably many who are NOT as "involved" with the community as my fellow posters.


    Just want to test the waters, really. It might become relevant some time in the future, and it might be a good idea to discuss some possible solutions and if there are some that are "not as bad as others".

    Whatever solution they choose someone will hack it. I know ilok2 is secure at the mo, but I bet there is some really intelligent person who is trying to hack it as we speak. (I remember when ilok1 was secure and that has been hacked) just to get that buzz that he was the one who cracked it, I think that's how these hackers work.


    This is why I don't think CK will ever do a plugin of the KPA, which I'm glad about as this protects all of our investment in the KPA. I like Ingolf are hoping that the majority of KPA user have morals and won't participate in pirating profiles, but like stated above you will always get a few who will :(

    I've been thinking -- to approach this from a different perspective -- that it would be cool if the Rig Manager could have a "Rig Store" section as well, where all of the studios offering paid rigs could be represented if they wanted.


    Of course it would have to incorporate some kind of payment system, and probably anti piracy measures as well to get the sellers on board.


    It's just so cool that the Rig Manager has access to the whole Rig Exchange, but then for paid profiles you still have to mess with different websites, downloads, zipped .kipr files etc. Ok, not that bad of a hassle, but it could be smoother! :D

    With all due respect to ANYONE who takes the time to make a profile and share it (whether for free or for profit), the entire model of the KPA was designed specifically to encourage a community. It was born with a completely different intent than for-profit software development and sales. Trying to backtrack the KPA model into that of a capitalist, developer-to-consumer model just isn't realistic. Anyone who makes a set of profiles and attempts to sell them for a profit MUST know that there will be a certain amount of sharing/theft involved. And, without getting to deep on the subject, I think this is not entirely wrong to some degree. Again, when I bought a KPA (and I bought one on day 1) I knew CK was forming the rig sharing community and that the idea behind the unit was to SHARE. Not sell for profit. Now, if some people want to (and it's their right to) use the KPA platform as a way to make some extra cash, then so be it. But they have no RIGHT to absolute security - it was never, at least to my knowledge, advertised that the KPA would be a legitimate, secure way to make profits for any individual other than CK and team.

    Quote from Feck

    With all due respect to ANYONE who takes the time to make a profile and share it (whether for free for for profit), the entire model of the KPA was designed specifically to encourage a community. It was born out of a completely different intent than for-profit software development and sales. Trying to backtrack the KPA model into that of a capitalist, developer-to-consumer model just isn't realistic. Anyone who makes a set of profiles and attempts to sell them for a profit MUST know that there will be a certain amount of sharing/theft involved. And, without getting to deep on the subject, I think this is not entirely wrong to some degree. Again, when I bought a KPA (and I bought one on day 1) I knew CK was forming the rig sharing community and that the idea behind the unit was to SHARE. Not sell for profit. Now, if some people want to (and it's their right to) use the KPA platform as a way to make some extra cash, then so be it. But they have no RIGHT to absolute security - it was never, at least to my knowledge, advertised that the KPA would be a legitimate, secure way to make profits for any individual other than CK and team.


    :thumbup: This.

    The "KPA model" does not dictate policies for commercial profiles. Each commercial profile provider has a policy that you agree to by purchasing their profiles. I know of no commercial profile providers that allow sharing or distribution of their profiles. If you don't want to abide by their policy, don't buy their profile. The "KPA model" is not justification for theft. Theft is theft.

    Quote from alwainwright

    The "KPA model" does not dictate policies for commercial profiles. Each commercial profile provider has a policy that you agree to by purchasing their profiles. I know of no commercial profile providers that allow sharing or distribution of their profiles. If you don't want to abide by their policy, don't buy their profile. The "KPA model" is not justification for theft. Theft is theft.


    THIS

    If I was an amp manufacturer , I would laugh at this thread, really.
    It's just as if I was selling mp3s from artists' CD's I ripped, and complained my mp3's were shared for free.

    Edited once, last by lef38 ().

    Like 2
    Quote from lef38

    If I was an amp manufacturer , I would laugh at this thread, really.
    It's just as if I was selling mp3s from artists' CD's I ripped, and complained my mp3's were shared for free.


    :thumbup:

    Quote from Feck

    With all due respect to ANYONE who takes the time to make a profile and share it (whether for free or for profit), the entire model of the KPA was designed specifically to encourage a community. It was born with a completely different intent than for-profit software development and sales. Trying to backtrack the KPA model into that of a capitalist, developer-to-consumer model just isn't realistic. Anyone who makes a set of profiles and attempts to sell them for a profit MUST know that there will be a certain amount of sharing/theft involved. And, without getting to deep on the subject, I think this is not entirely wrong to some degree. Again, when I bought a KPA (and I bought one on day 1) I knew CK was forming the rig sharing community and that the idea behind the unit was to SHARE. Not sell for profit. Now, if some people want to (and it's their right to) use the KPA platform as a way to make some extra cash, then so be it. But they have no RIGHT to absolute security - it was never, at least to my knowledge, advertised that the KPA would be a legitimate, secure way to make profits for any individual other than CK and team.


    Though i also sell profiles, i totally agree. Trying to push the Kemper guys into making some sort copy protection will probabaly only lead to the end of commercial profiles, at least on the official platform. I would suggest to not make this whole problem bigger than it really is.

    Quote from Feck


    :thumbup:


    If a commercial profile is a copy of the tone of an amp, what happens if I profile a commercial profile? Can I share it or sell it? Imagine "Profile 1" Seeking to re-create the sound of The Amp Factory's Numberd Amps – TwoPelt... :P


    This already happened. Last month, someone implemented a profiling process that doesn't need a KPA to profile the tone of other profiles.

    I have thought about this topic many times. Kinda off topic but in the same vain...What is keeping major amp companies from suing the shit out of Kemper for what this device is made for?


    Isnt the act of profiling infringing on some sort of copyright?


    Seems like a grey and very blurry line for people to bitch about copies of copies.
    Kind of like a bootlegger telling the cops that their stock was stolen from...


    How much do the people who sell "pro" profiles give to Kemper or the original amp manufacture from their sales?
    I see it like a club playing music and not paying for the license to cover the royalties.

    the Kemper doesn't copy the amp, it just mimics the tone. Not to mention that all amp manufacturers apart from Fender and Vox would be on very dodgy ground if they were to start complaining about copying...