I'm of the "Verified" tag on the avatar. Then it's up to the forum members to decide if to help or not. If someone is seeking information before purchasing (as anyone should), answering generalized "does it do this?" should be not problem.
+1
+1 - Just one question: How would a User obtain this Verification Tag?
I very much like the idea of the verification tag approach.
How would a User obtain this Verification Tag?
One approach could be for the user to fill in a field or two on the forum with the serial number of their Vegas Pro and basic Account details (e.g. email address). The system auto interrogates the account as well as the name (not user name) of the forum account and if all the details align, the system adds a verification tag to the avatar. For privacy and confidentiality purposes, the forum does not retain the SN and account details entered by the user.
But I further suggest that the verification tag should include the Vegas Pro version number for the verified SN. Why? The user might have a legit version of Vegas Pro 11 for sake of argument but has a cracked version of Vegas Pro 18 (I think somebody raised this as a possibility when the subject was discussed on the forum in April last year). So without the version number listed, that user could ask for help re VP18 and the forum would be oblivious to the fact that the verification tag relates to a circa 10 years old version. The complication is that then there would often need to be more than one verification tag, each one containing just the numeral of the verified VP version.
One instance where this wouldn't work is for those who have legit Vegas Pro bought through Steam because Steam apparently don't have serial numbers for Vegas Pro and thus probably don't have MAGIX accounts. Also, those with a trial version could possibly face a bit of difficulty, but that may not be so much of a problem because trial versions are time limited. Somebody who claims for months to have a trial version would thus attract suspicion.
+1 - I like this. One more thing, actually, two more things.
1 - At the moment we have to assume that this thread is being read by those who maybe now thinking twice about posting here.
2 - Unless this thread gets Traction with VegasCreativeSoftware viz @VEGASDerek et al, and the Moderators hereabouts, we might as well be blowing smoke.
To all, thanks for participating. Now, over to our “Decision Makers” and Moderators.
As here said, "We use the given tools to prevent this once we are aware." The "Decision Makers" make the rules.
I'll leave that to the owners to decide as it's above my pay grade.
@vkmast - I’m glad you said that. This is going to be real easy now.
Personally @Grazie I think you are "blowing smoke" as you suggested. Verification would be cumbersome and problematic for reasons Dexcon outlined a few posts back. Plus how would you suggest handling non users who have come here asking questions with a view to purchasing. Magix only make Manuals/User Guides available to those who have purchased, so prospective purchasers have nowhere else to find out the answers to their queries.
As an overview, this is all about putting 'the cart before the horse', the 'cart' being the forum and the 'horse' being the Vegas Pro programme itself. If Vegas Pro was uncrackable or substantially less able to be cracked, the flow through to the forum of 'unwanted' posts would be stopped or considerably stemmed. Realistically, uncrackable is unachievable, but improved security to limit cracking should be achievable - and I would be surprised if Vegas Creative Software aren't fully aware of this and are currently working on it.
Some governments and corporations employ reformed expert hackers (at large salaries apparently) to help those governments and corporations close access as much as possible to their systems from industrial or politically motivated hackers. I wonder if there are skilled people expert at 'cracking' computer programmes, who are now reformed, who might be in a good position to identify the weaknesses in Vegas Pro's coding that enable the cracking that is so rife at the moment, and suggest coding to close those avenues.
This is in no way meant to decry Grazie's post and concerns - I am in full agreement with him - but perhaps the 'horse' needs to be focused on as a priority which would inevitably lead on to a large reduction in pirate problems on the forum.
Out of interest have you ever downloaded a cracked version? Over the years I have tested a few downloads VP15->17 on a virtual machine (W7 or XP). Scanning after un-zip/un-rar revealed a number of possible virus. Most versions fired up correctly and do not need to 'phone home' to run. None can be updated & none extensivley trialled.
Reading an old book (VP9) by Douglas SpottedEagle it was recomened to exclude vegas directory from AV. Maybe some problems encountered by genuine users can be attributed to AV.
Once tested virtual machine deleted and replaced with new copy of virtual machine.
To date not experienced problems with virus crossing from VM to base pc. Maybe lucky so far.
******************************************************************************************************************
Own licenced versions of all VP used and support your desires not to assist users of cracked product.
@Grazie ... a really good question. From what I've seen with the most obvious cases where the OP has self-identified as having a cracked version, the post is blocked by a Mod and thus is no longer an issue - which is good. Where often it is not so clear but suspected, I'd go on gut-feeling and make a personal decision based on one's own moral convictions. I've chosen not to respond to some posts from those who very likely have a cracked VP; my surprise is about those who do fulsomely respond. But maybe the pirate clues are a bit more hidden for some. But then I have on occasion replied with suggestions but often qualified with something like, 'for more help contact MAGIX Support'.
Going back to an earlier comment on this thread by 3POINT, he suggested that we just ignore those pirate posts. I think that I will apply that approach from now on.
Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be an obvious pirate problem on the forums for BorisFX, NewBlueFX, Steinberg SpectraLayers or FXHome, but then the pirate clues could well be hidden to me for those products. Do others on the forum see a similar problem on other NLE website forums - or is it mainly Vegas Pro?
I don't recall seeing any pirated Magix software being mentioned on the Magix.info forum, with the exception of Vegas. There seem to be 3 or 4 'Sony Vegas" users per week posting there, many of whom are suspicious and don't show up here after having been told that they were on the wrong forum. There have been a couple of threats of switching to a pirated version from disgruntled users who did not like the activation method and the once/month phone home system, but nothing much about this in the last couple of years. I have not looked to see if there are pirated versions of Movie Edit Pro or Video Pro X floating around.
I have seen evidence of piracy or threats of piracy on the Magix Samplitude forum, but even that is rare.
The word "piracy" is usually used as a warning to users who post their confidential information, particularly their activation code along with their email address and purchase receipt number. This information is quickly removed by a Moderator or the user.
Likewise, I have not seen pirated versions of Xara mentioned on the TalkGraphics (Magix/Xara) forum. Piracy is usually mentioned about theft of content, not the program.
Thank you @john-brown ... very interesting are your comments about other MAGIX products in comparison to Vegas Pro.
Here's an idea that I'm well aware is "out there," but perhaps, if nothing else, could lead to an actual practical solution...
Is there some way for Magix to begin making the VP GUI with some sort of watermark that determines if it's a legit version or cracked -- sort of like the hologram on credit cards? The cracked versions floating around these days are quite similar in their approach, so maybe new code for VP GUIs moving forward can detect if that approach has been used.
In that scenario, a poster who's suspected of using a cracked version is asked to show a screenshot of the problem -- then, BAM! That user is caught! The lack of a proper watermark reveals it's a cracked version!
Does putting my idea on this forum render it unusable? I don't think so. I notice that most cracked users are new posters and wouldn't know to perform a search on hiding their crime before they ask for help.
Frankly I don't understand this whole thread. If it's a free forum and not a "guild" than why should you care if a question is from a pirate or not. One answers a question because he want to help.
Should I call 911 if I see a car accident ahead but the driver had no driving license?
Your issue is else where, you give sometimes too long replies and you feel your time was robbed. Keep snappy concise answers, just to give the direction, not the full map and GPS and than you will not care for the pirates. After all, video editing is about exploration, trials and (lots) of errors so that is what a "new" user should be directed. (I take the basic assumption that most members here are not on the Magix payroll)
My 2c.
Should I call 911 if I see a car accident ahead but the driver had no driving license?
Of course you should call 911 (or 000 in other countries) if you witness a (serious) car accident because there may be injured people involved who may urgently need paramedics - the police will work out the legalities later on. And anyway, how would would a witness in another car possibly know whether or not that a driver in that crash had a valid driving license?
Should I call 911 if I see a car accident ahead but the driver had no driving license?
Strange comparison. Staying with cars, would you also help a car-thief to drive away with it?
@FayFen the VEGAS Community forum policy is that "there is no support here for cracked or pirated copies. "
"Please keep in mind when you write a post or a comment, that with your registration you have agreed to the Terms and Conditions and the Community rules." Quote from the Terms and Conditions: "The customer is also obligated not to procure, install, use, execute, or make available software, files, information, or other content relating to MAGIX services for which he/she does not have the necessary rights"
And no need to assume who's what: