Upcoming EULA changes, round 4

Quote
CFandM wrote:http://graphicssoft.about.com/library...ream3d.htm

Interesting bit of history. Can’t help but wonder how things would have worked out if corel hadn’t dropped it. Maybe I still would have spent the next five years in the world of telnet, then again, maybe I would have entered the world of visual arts ten years earlier than I did.

Quote
ronviers wrote: Look at this Carl.

Oo! that looks fun!! bet its pricey though.

Quote
Sign Guy wrote: Shutterstock

Um I don't drive so don't have a driver's licence or have a passport so until then no shutterstock for me. Ah well maybe when I save up some money psst cool vector images Sign Guy.

Hey GMs Apprentice, the issue has never been the creative application of textures such as on 3D objects, but rather the selling of straight textures without any creative modification or application. Without a straight texture selling restriction, many talented authors are no longer submitting quality texture filters to FF's filter library....because they don't want texture sellers to capitalize upon their hard work in that way. As a result, both FF and and users like yourself aren't getting alot of new, top-quality, cutting edge filters anymore.....which is a crying shame because FF could have easily done something about it when they had the chance....

IMO, the problem with pay/pro filters is that customers will feel "gouged" by buying the program and then having to pay more for access to all the best/most usable filters. If FF did do pay/pro filters, something would have to give.....like drastically lowering the programs base price to compensate for it.....and I can't see that working at all with FF currently having to maintain a continuous program discount in order to keep sales up.....

The FF sales pitch is "free filters," and while adding a filter store is possible and sounds like a cool idea, it is definitely a risky move. I do hope though that the company is or has considered this idea, as I see now how it could benefit me and potentially new users.


How about adding a clause to the EULA (better written than mine obviously):

"All filters currently in the online library are free of extra charge. However, we (FF Inc.) do not ensure that all future filters submitted will be available at no extra charge."

This way, the decision does not have to be made now but is a possibility that all users can be aware of now.

Hi Gm Apprentice [ thought you were taking the piss on Gmm till I saw your website LOL ] thanks for your support. There has been several people indicate that they would be happy to pay for particular filters. As I've said before Steve I cannot see your logic,[ I'd feel "gouged" if I paid full price for FF knowing how regularly they discount the program to half price, I'd feel "gouged" if I had v1 and FF converted all there own filters that were available to me when I purchase v1 to v2, I'd feel "gouged" if the highest quality filter were not available to me ]. The fact is there is a free library and always will be and with new authors submitting filters to try and earn the program or a few established authors that are happy to give hour and hours of there time/skill free to a commercial business that profits from those filter will still have that option. As Fred correctly points out people have no problem with the concept of paying for add ons, a market place would only benefit the user by having more quality filter available to them that simply are inaccessible to them now [ the author who no longer submit would return, the authors who have never submitted because of no return would submit and the author who claim they never submit there best filters would have a reason to ] also authors would need to make there filters stand out with quality/originality or buyer wouldn't purchase them. It's a win win situation, FF makes more money, authors get a return and users have greater quality choice. The negative for FF I guess is that at the moment they have authors working for them free and it would take an effort on there part to set up a market place, but I really think this is short sighted and if they think about it they can only profit from a Market place and they would no longer need to offer constant 50% discounts on the program as they would be propping up there cash flow with a market place. As FF has chosen not to responded to the market place idea [ or anything else in this thread ], not really a sign of respect for the people who have contributed greatly to many aspects of FF business, a simple statement of there position was the least they could do. Maybe when they are discounting the program 90% they'll think there is an alternative and come up with the idea for a market place.

StevieJ wrote: "I'm sure a poll of FF customers would show you how many would like having to pay for all the best filters on top of paying for the program..."

That's a great idea! Yes, FF should do a poll, a survey even, something where all the users give their feedback, not just us few here.

Steve, you have a perfectly valid argument on human nature, as does everyone else, but we should really get some solid numbers as facts to back them up. Keep in mind that money is numbers, so we should be comparing numbers to numbers.