Native Instruments is threatening to switch to subscriptions

[bayswater]

But how much of this is financial? How much of it is emotional?

Treading lightly here as not to inadvertently stumble into politics

one of the generations that wants to OWN things... not rent them.

I’m of that generation too but yes, we should avoid that path.

It’s interesting to read the EULAs. They usually say what you have is permission to use the software in perpetuity, not that you own it. Many of them quite clearly state that they retain ownership. It’s like a “right of way”. They own it but you can use it as long as you behave yourself. You can’t do any things an owner would normally do.

Permission to use is normally subject to a list of “defaults”, and some can be quite vague. In the case of Waves, it’s reasonably tight, but they can terminate the licence if they judge (on their own) that you present a legal risk to them. Not likely they would exercise this in any but the most extreme cases, but that’s a marketing and legal decision they can make because they own it.

[mikehalloran]

But how much of this is financial? How much of it is emotional?

Treading lightly here as not to inadvertently stumble into politics

one of the generations that wants to OWN things... not rent them.

I’m of that generation too but yes, we should avoid that path.

It’s interesting to read the EULAs. They usually say what you have is permission to use the software in perpetuity, not that you own it. Many of them quite clearly state that they retain ownership. It’s like a “right of way”. They own it but you can use it as long as you behave yourself. You can’t do any things an owner would normally do.

Permission to use is normally subject to a list of “defaults”, and some can be quite vague. In the case of Waves, it’s reasonably tight, but they can terminate the licence if they judge (on their own) that you present a legal risk to them. Not likely they would exercise this in any but the most extreme cases, but that’s a marketing and legal decision they can make because they own it.

As an owner, one has certain rights. As a User/Licensee, these rights do not exist.

Without violating any NDAs, one company I worked for settled a suit for 6 figures because another had acquired a subsidiary that hadn't paid me a 4 figure maintenance fee and didn't let the new owner know before the app was distributed to a few million people without a license from us.

I was also on one of the juries in the Intel vs AMD suit over the 8086, 80286 & 80386 microcode. AMD was the 2nd source (required in most military and government contracts) and had the right to make those chips under license—that was never in dispute. However, the 12 page license was worded in plain English that they didn't owe Intel a dime for the chips they made—even worse, AMD would never owe royalties on those, no matter when they were made.

The 80486 Pentium was delayed till the day after that license expired—otherwise, the i486 would have been royalty-free, also—it was that poorly written. How many lawyers did it take to screw that up? I never knew but the 1996 license closed that barn door. AMD is still Intel's most important 2nd Source but they pay royalties now.

[James Steele]

Good point about "ownership" versus a "perpetual license." I was speaking in lazy shorthand. But the gist was that the urge to have a sense of "ownership" is more prevalent in older generations. Younger generations have been somewhat conditioned to subscription services and subscription software. Maybe this is the proverbial "boiling the frog" by increasing the temperature gradually. In a generation or two (maybe less) perpetual software licenses may be an oddity. I imagine if the software companies could have their way, we'd be there today but there's still too much resistance as well as competition.

Back to the subject at hand: if NI were to switch to a completely subscription model, I'd use the last version of Kontakt till I couldn't anymore. It wouldn't be a big deal to me, but imagine all the users with massive sample libraries that require Kontakt and one day Kontakt is only available by subscription? Eventually old Kontakt breaks with an OS update and NI has you.

[bayswater]

Back to the subject at hand: if NI were to switch to a completely subscription model, I'd use the last version of Kontakt till I couldn't anymore.

It’s not an automatic decision for me. I’d look a the cost and decide on that basis. But I’m sure I’d be dealing with far few companies. In my case NI is not likely to be one of them.

Another consideration for these companies has to be support costs. Those with a one time fee and the “no-brainer” sales must have a lot of customers who create a lot of support costs. A A subscription model is likely to drive away the customer segment of occasional and casual and less knowledgable users. Having a much small number of customers who each pay more and cost less is good for them.

[stubbsonic]

With Kontakt, I've paid for updates every few years (waiting for sales), so it's "quasi-perpetual". I also end up buying other little NI things, libraries, etc. So they get pretty regular cash from me.

If they are able to come up with plans that feel fair, I might consider it, but my definition of fair probably won't impress them.

[mhschmieder]

Does this subscription threat fall under the category: "The Native Instruments are Getting Restless"?

[monkey man]

Mark, I think in reality it falls under the famous prophetic utterance of an organisation that shall remain "unnamed" here.

From 2016:
"You'll own nothing and be happy."

Sure looks like things are heading that way and big companies are pushing hard.

[stubbsonic]

Maybe there'll end up being a "spotify" type model for software. You pay a monthly fee and developers get X cents every time you launch their software, and Y cents for every minute you use it.

Then there'll be a bunch of horrible viruses on there that extract cents like in Office Space.

[mikehalloran]

Does this subscription threat fall under the category: "The Native Instruments are Getting Restless"?