The risk of using Spitfire plugin on a commercial project

[MarkusS]

Interesting discussion! I agree with anyone avoiding 3rd party players other than Kontakt. Used a lot of VSL and East West until they got their own player. Moved on to some OT until they got their own player. It’s actually great because successful developers creating their own players opens the door to new developers and products like the Cinematic Series or Performance Samples that I use a lot now. But if they move on to their own player I’ll stop using them, too. It’s just too much hassle and too risky (I agree) to use all these different players at once. I totally understand why developers want to have their own player but I’ll still avoid them.

Also I love Kontakt because I can easily create and program my own libraries and also reprogram libraries I bought (if allowed).

Never had a single problem with NI access but I know developers complain about their products being cracked. I for one would never use a cracked product and will buy any NI library (even if cracked somewhere on the net) if I like it enough or think it’s useful for a commercial project and I suspect many others here will, too.

 

[JohnG]

I can easily imagine a pro composer having lets say only BBCSO as main orchestral library

Well, we disagree, Lionel.

Part of the issue is that the sample companies understandably fear piracy if there is no limit to the number of downloads or resets. Part of it is that I've had at least as many problems with Kontakt / NI over the years as the proprietary players. Part of it is that your reply implies that there is some precious perfection in one library for which there is no reasonable substitute in another library, which I think is rare.

It's Piracy's Fault

Practically since sample libraries were invented, the developers have had to watch as illegal torrent sites steal their work, often within a few days, that might have taken many months and plenty of money to produce. They can't just go 'naked.'

If one is working professionally, by definition you didn't take up composing last week, and most composers have at least one alternative for almost any instrument, maybe excepting some esoteric or ethnic ones. Certainly "regular" orchestral instrument substitutes abound on most professional composer rigs. Hardly anyone is going to get, say, a Netflix gig with their starter setup.

Naturally, it's awful getting interrupted. However, if you've had to, as the OP wrote, perform a system recovery while mid-project, I think it's rough to call out a company over it. That said, maybe there's a more optimal number of resets, or a better policy? I'm not nuts about most of the alternatives, including hardware, but I sympathise with developers needing some protection from torrent downloads.

[note: I have received free products from Spitfire]

 

[Lionel Schmitt]

Well, we disagree, Lionel.

Part of the issue is that the sample companies understandably fear piracy if there is no limit to the number of downloads or resets. Part of it is that I've had at least as many problems with Kontakt / NI over the years as the proprietary players. Part of it is that your reply implies that there is some precious perfection in one library for which there is no reasonable substitute in another library, which I think is rare.

It's Piracy's Fault

Practically since sample libraries were invented, the developers have had to watch as illegal torrent sites steal their work, often within a few days, that might have taken many months and plenty of money to produce. They can't just go 'naked.'

If one is working professionally, by definition you didn't take up composing last week, and most composers have at least one alternative for almost any instrument, maybe excepting some esoteric or ethnic ones. Certainly "regular" orchestral instrument substitutes abound on most professional composer rigs. Hardly anyone is going to get, say, a Netflix gig with their starter setup.

Naturally, it's awful getting interrupted. However, if you've had to, as the OP wrote, perform a system recovery while mid-project, I think it's rough to call out a company over it. That said, maybe there's a more optimal number of resets, or a better policy? I'm not nuts about most of the alternatives, including hardware, but I sympathise with developers needing some protection from torrent downloads.

[note: I have received free products from Spitfire]

Well, I think there is uniqueness to every patch of every library and it's not unusual for me to go through 10 viola spiccato patches to find the... hopefully... right one. Maybe I just have finer ears for samples!
Some libraries even have very non subtle differences in dynamics (like not going to FF or very soft etc), overall volume etc and everything has to be reprogrammed and remixed.
And, I can't imagine every composer has equivalents for every patch, especially if it's a different style than what they do regularly. Even if it's just 1%, that's still thousands of composers who will be in trouble.
I have more sympathy with that than a company like Spitfire dealing with piracy. Kontakt libraries are easy to pirate and yet they managed to get to the point where they are now just fine.
Sorry not sorry, I have more empathy for every single composer who's work is interrupted by this nonsense.
And as others have mentioned - there MUST be a way to view how many resets are left so you can even sort stuff out when you see you only have none before hitting that limit.
There have also been cases mentioned here where libraries got deactivated randomly.
And a system reset is nothing super crazy, definitely must be taken into account how to reactivate stuff in such a case by developers, especially mammoths like SF.
It should be as simple as reinstalling the software and relocating the samples. I'm not a software designer but I would be surprised if you couldn't protect against piracy in a way that doesn't require a reset of the installation.
With the Sine Player as far as I experienced it you simply download the player on the website, log in and relocate your libs. Done. No resets, no redownloads (except the player ofc).
And I'm sure they have piracy protection!!!
One issue here might be that the Spitfire Player is essentially a different plugin for every library which makes it fairly unique in that regard and thus also brings some fairly unique risks.

 

[Kyle Preston]

It's Piracy's Fault

Yes, but their response (building their own player) creates a weaker option for their paying customers (working composers, hobbyists, etc.) Essentially, we’re paying the cost for other people’s piracy. They’re passing the buck on to us.

I’m sure SF and others are aware that some of us won’t buy libraries without Kontakt editing abilities — maybe there’s not enough of us for them to care really. And that’s fine, it just means those libraries or companies are prioritizing other things. And maybe they’re not for me anymore. Maybe most users don’t care if it’s Kontakt or not, I dunno.

But another example of this is the annoying orange dot in the top right corner of Apple devices now — which indicates that a program is recoding audio. To those of us working in audio professionally, seeing that stupid dot is like a “yea, no shit Sherlock” reminder. Why didn’t they give us the option to remove it? Why do I have to hunt on GitHub to find a reliable solution? (Thank God for coders that make solutions freely available to the world). I don’t know if he’s responsible per say, but the orange dot started (I think?) around the time that guy working for The New Yorker was gross in front of his camera on Zoom. Now EVERY Apple user has to see that Goddamn orange dot on their screen. Is this to prevent a lawsuit? I honestly don't know, but let's call a spade a spade — companies solve their problems before solving ours.

 

[rgames]

if you've had to, as the OP wrote, perform a system recovery while mid-project, I think it's rough to call out a company over it

I agree. To your point - system screw-ups can cause screw-ups in other software. I've had that problem with other software as well. But again as posted elsewhere, the Spitfire player will also say you are not licensed when you've changed absolutely nothing on your system - no recovery, no new software, no OS updates - nothing. One day it works fine - the next, you can't use it.

So the problem is broader than how you're describing it. You're giving Spitfire a pass using an explanation that is inconsistent with other examples.

The solution is to simply give a 15-day warning or something like that. That at least allows you to keep working while Spitfire has time to respond to the request for another authorization. And I can't see how this approach would have an appreciable effect on piracy.

Everybody wins. It's an extremely simple fix.

But Spitfire hasn't fixed it (apparently), presumably because there are enough other people who do *not* have the problem to make them not care about those who do. (Note: I haven't actually tried to use any Spitfire player products in a while, so my comments are based on my experience from a few years ago.)

Caveat emptor.

rgames

 

[PrimeEagle]

Practically since sample libraries were invented, the developers have had to watch as illegal torrent sites steal their work, often within a few days, that might have taken many months and plenty of money to produce. They can't just go 'naked.'

Piracy has been around way longer than sample libraries, and other industries also have to worry about piracy. Games are a great example, but there are many others. Windows itself, Microsoft Office, and many others. Most, if not all, of those have protection methods that are way less risky and invasive.

 

[MauroPantin]

I have been getting a lot of random de-activations lately, with no change in my system. I have Windows updates completely deactivated. So if something is changing for the player to deactivate I fail to see what it is. It also keeps asking me to re-install stuff that is supposedly already installed.

Additionally, a few of the libraries on the new player (no major ones, the "originals" for the most part and BBC Discovery... AROOF is doing fine, thankfully) are getting these random audio dropouts. If you play a few notes too fast and close together it just stops all audio until you reset the transport. These libraries are not critical to my workflow (a library rarely is at this point) but come on dude! I want to make a quick sketch of an idea and I end up in this technical hallway instead. It's a buzzkill and freaking annoying.

 

[Henrik B. Jensen]

Well, we disagree, Lionel.

Part of the issue is that the sample companies understandably fear piracy if there is no limit to the number of downloads or resets. Part of it is that I've had at least as many problems with Kontakt / NI over the years as the proprietary players. Part of it is that your reply implies that there is some precious perfection in one library for which there is no reasonable substitute in another library, which I think is rare.

It's Piracy's Fault

Practically since sample libraries were invented, the developers have had to watch as illegal torrent sites steal their work, often within a few days, that might have taken many months and plenty of money to produce. They can't just go 'naked.'

If one is working professionally, by definition you didn't take up composing last week, and most composers have at least one alternative for almost any instrument, maybe excepting some esoteric or ethnic ones. Certainly "regular" orchestral instrument substitutes abound on most professional composer rigs. Hardly anyone is going to get, say, a Netflix gig with their starter setup.

Naturally, it's awful getting interrupted. However, if you've had to, as the OP wrote, perform a system recovery while mid-project, I think it's rough to call out a company over it. That said, maybe there's a more optimal number of resets, or a better policy? I'm not nuts about most of the alternatives, including hardware, but I sympathise with developers needing some protection from torrent downloads.

[note: I have received free products from Spitfire]

No, John, it’s not “Piracy’s fault” - it’s the developer’s fault, specifically Spitfire’s, that they’ve made a copy protection scheme which is, seemingly at random, causing problems for paying customers.

Other sample library companies have made working anti-piracy measures. So can Spitfire, but of course only if they make it a priority in between their many new library releases.

 

[Michael Antrum]

It would help if the number of resets was displayed, at least then you could request an extra reset if you got low.

I have Ableton Live 11, and it randomly asks me to re-authorise, but because it looks at the machine and compares it to the previous authorisation, my number of authorisations never goes down, because it knows it's the same PC....

Spitfire need to fix this, a nd I'm sure they will....eventually.

 

[GMT]

I still don't understand the limited reset/repair concept. When the library is on the computer it was downloaded on it makes no sense. I've had at least three sessions with support to fix problems (always happened at the weekend) which took seconds. So, show me how to do it and save all the hassle. I have updates ready for BBCSO which will never be downloaded because I can't be bothered with the potential headache.

 

[Virtuoso]

Spitfire need to fix this, and I'm sure they will....eventually.

The last time I had to mail Spitfire support to beg for a reset after an unexpected lockout (and yes - it was a Friday afternoon, so I lost the whole weekend), I pointed out what a hostile and irritating system it is and they replied...

"we are aware of how frustrating this feature of the Application can be and are working on a new system of local authorisation"

That was 8 months ago though, so it doesn't seem to be a priority. I wonder how many loyal customers they are losing with this crap?

 

[JohnG]

Why do we have new sample players?

Piracy is a key impetus that has driven sample library producers to generate their own players. Sure, in addition to that, some developers want additional capabilities that Kontakt doesn't offer, and some have other issues, but without piracy, I believe (with some testimonial evidence from developers who've said so point blank) that we would have fewer custom players.

Why do we have any kind of DRM protection for libraries?

Of course, it's piracy, or we wouldn't need any DRM at all. Have you ever watched how many days it takes for a torrent of new Kontakt libraries to appear? Less than a week, in many cases.

Is Spitfire's DRM protection worse? How About Microsoft?

I think whether one DRM setup is worse or better than another is a matter of opinion, which is often, it appears, driven by individual, idiosyncratic experience.

Anyone who's ever lost a Microsoft license (for Windows or other software) may have had the Kafka-esque experience I had with them. Undoubtedly, it's difficult for MSFT or any other software to balance "easy to fix" with "stop piracy." Sometimes people lean further one way than I'd like. It's very frustrating at times.

Spitfire's solution doesn't bother me too much, though I've also had to contact them for resets at least twice, and the process wasn't instantaneous. I don't see that as a huge burden and I have deadlines just like everyone. Over time, I've had some trouble with all the players. After a while they improve.

Does Anyone Here Have Enough Information to be Sure?

We clearly have a few people who disagree with me, and fair enough to them as individuals. I'm sympathetic; those kinds of problems are very frustrating.

That said, I don't get the vehemence. I doubt anyone writing here has enough data to say with certainty that this or that player is causing problems for all / most users. How could they? It's proprietary information that only the developers themselves have.

 

[xguitaristx]

Nothing will stop piracy, regardless of how “protected” some of these developers may think their players are.

I worked in IT for a few years, and it was pretty astounding to see just how clever and creative hackers could get when they wanted to (seriously, they’re evil geniuses).

When there’s a will, there’s a way.

 

[Kyle Preston]

Imagine if every time you picked up a guitar, before you were allowed to strum chords, you had to authenticate your purchase to some corporate entity first. And if your fingerprint scan fails, and it takes 2+ days for said entity to get back to you, that idea you thought of might get lost forever.

THAT, is why this is a problem, at least for me. It’s not just about deadlines (although sometimes it is)— it’s about destroying creativity. I understand why a company would add friction to prevent piracy, but as a user, I’m not willing to pay that cost for them. That's my personal line in the sand. Just give me the guitar, that’s what the money is for. Otherwise, we’re just renting.

I realize these are special case scenarios we're talking here, but, it's happened to me enough times with SF that I just use (and purchase) their libraries less -- why would I risk losing an idea? Ideas are literally how I pay my bills and nourish my soul.

There are just too many amazing options and companies out there to blindly (and riskily) commit to one -- which, I think is a really good thing!

 

[MartinH.]

I'm not up to date what the piracy scene does or does not do, did Spitfire Player and Sine actually prevent their libraries from being pirated? I know the people doing the actual cracking used to treat it like a literal sport... with leaderboards and shit. Don't they do that anymore?

 

[Kyle Preston]

I dunno about samples libraries -- they definitely did that with music files back in the Napster/Kazaa/LimeWire days. The level of competition and group in-fighting was kind of amazing actually.

 

[Crowe]

I sincerely doubt using a proprietary sample player to fight piracy is going to recoup the sales you lost to people who refuse to use your bad sample player. At least I was able to buy the Arks on Kontakt still. I will never buy a Spitfire library that runs in their own player. And yeah, I've bought a bunch of their Kontakt ones.

It's all moot point anyway, especially since we buy  licenses more than we buy samples. I can download cracked libraries all day if I want to, but if I'm going to use them in actual music I'll have to buy the license anyway.

There's something really sad about the thought that (semi)professional composers will generally always just buy libraries outright. That means that Spitfire is forcing their anemic sample player on us for perceived lost sales to hobbyists. Who are Pirates. Class act, all in all.

Of you accept the narrative that this is all about piracy, of course.

 

[jbuhler]

Imagine if every time you picked up a guitar, before you were allowed to strum chords, you had to authenticate your purchase to some corporate entity first. And if your fingerprint scan fails, and it takes 2+ days for said entity to get back to you, that idea you thought of might get lost forever.

Have you looked at how farm tractors work these days? This is more or less the model. And farmers often have to wait days to have an authorized service person come out and fix/unlock the tractor software. Something to look forward to!

 

[El Buhdai]

Does Anyone Here Have Enough Information to be Sure?

We clearly have a few people who disagree with me, and fair enough to them as individuals. I'm sympathetic; those kinds of problems are very frustrating.

That said, I don't get the vehemence. I doubt anyone writing here has enough data to say with certainty that this or that player is causing problems for all / most users. How could they? It's proprietary information that only the developers themselves have.

I think it could be valuable to better understand why people are so vehemently against this, or at least why I would be.

I, and likely many others, see no practical benefit in any composer going to bat for Spitfire on something like this. Defending what is clearly a poorly designed and intrusive DRM system won't make their libraries cheaper, better, easier to use, or more beneficial to you as the customer.

It doesn't benefit Spitfire, either. People who can and want to pay, will pay. People who can't or don't want to pay, simply won't. From all the studies I've been able to find, there is little conclusive evidence surrounding the effectiveness of DRM at mitigating piracy. Some studies say it has no impact, others say it's limited, and some even noticed that the reduced quality and freedom of legally obtained products as a result of DRM actually bolsters piracy rates. Anecdotally, all I've seen it do is delay the inevitable and protect initial sales as hackers find ways to bypass these systems.

All we can know is that DRM makes legally obtained products worse for actual paying customers. Some games run better when pirated. Some sample libraries require less loading time and CPU usage when pirated. Some software won't even run offline unless it's pirated. All we can say definitively about the impact of DRM is that it gives a worse experience to the people who actually pay.

With that in mind...

If we know we're going to put up with a worse experience as paying customers, it is in our best interest as customers to demand that the inevitable downsides of obtaining software legally are mitigated as much as they can possibly be. Locking people out of professional tools with no warning and requiring a slow, inefficient, and external method of re-authorization (which, laughably doesn't even work on weekends) to regain access to the tools that maintain their livelihood doesn't sound like "mitigated downsides" to me. You don't really benefit from defending Spitfire on this if you're a paying customer.

 

[Kyle Preston]

Have you looked at how farm tractors work these days? This is more or less the model. And farmers often have to wait days to have an authorized service person come out and fix/unlock the tractor software. Something to look forward to!

That's pretty nuts! Sounds like monopoly behavior?