CorePlayer regularly phones home or will deactive itself - Page 2

betaboy · 10-17-2006, 10:10 AM

On a trial version... we are planning to release it the first week in December with the launch of the new BetaPlayer as well.

Alexander Turcic · 10-17-2006, 10:39 AM

Betaboy, it's greatly appreciated by everyone that you're coming forward to answer open questions. While I am not happy about some of the decisions you made, I am sure you have it carefully planned out, and I honestly wish you the best to succeed.

paulkbiba · 10-17-2006, 10:46 AM

Well, for me to see the added value I would have to purchase no less than 5 seperate licenses. Let's see, I regularly switch between my Cingular 3125, Cingular 8124, Toshiba PPC and 2 Ipaq PPCs, depending on what I'm doing.

Even if I didn't use any of the PPCs, I still have the two phones that I switch back and forth. I would need a license for each, even though I only used one at a time. Not acceptable - at least to me.

Bob Russell · 10-17-2006, 11:03 AM

Yes, it doesn't sound very promising on the surface, but I don't think I understand the issues or the implementation yet either. At the moment I'll just acknowledge that I'm still not sure what it all involves, but I am willing to keep an open mind while we sort it all out. The capabilities of the free version may also give us some hints as to the motivations behind it... if it's powerful but is limited only by simple third party licensing limitations, then obviously that would be a big positive sign they are trying to serve the community just as we had previously thought.

If (big big "if") it works well, and we can become comfortable with the licensing terms, upgrades and the way internet communication is integrated, then we've still got something great here as we have been hoping.

TadW · 10-17-2006, 11:38 AM

Since I don't like device locking and online activations, I will wait for CorePlayer FREE, and until then keep using TCPMP which works fine for me.

Harpgliss · 10-17-2006, 01:15 PM

Hi,

If CorePlayer FREE supports everything that the free one previously did and adds skinning, I am all over that as I am not interested in the Communal aspects that will be implemented later.

David

Alexander Turcic · 10-17-2006, 02:27 PM

There is a video of Coreplayer on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqHmbJEzShU

frquixote · 10-17-2006, 02:33 PM

Well, I WAS going to buy CorePlayer as soon as it came out ... in part as a "Thank you" to the folks who have provided us with TCPMP for free, but now I think I'll pass. I might try out CorePlayer Free later, but I have consistently avoided software that requires online registration and/or regularly phones home. I resent both the intrusiveness/aggravation/inconvenience associated with having to let the machine phone home and the potential for exposure of personal information.

I also don't like the fact that this new version is locked to a particular device. Upgrading devices is hard enough without adding device locking to the mix.

NatCh · 10-17-2006, 03:13 PM

Okay, after reading this thread so far, with particular interest to betaboy's posts, and thinking about it a few minutes, I'm left with this question: what is their aim in cutting the functionality back after a period of disconnect?

I understand the fix/upgrade deployment, I understand the meta-data update thing, I totally grok the non-continuation of updates (duh!) ... but in my limited knowledge/experience I just can't come up with a business reason to reduce functionality like this.

I'm thinking about my DirectTV boxes, if they don't phone home for a while (mine never have, in fact) I lose access to buying PPV stuff (big whup), but it doesn't stop decoding the broadcasts just 'cause I don't keep it plugged into the wall, I just lose any updates that might occur. So, what's driving this being set up differently?

It seems to me (as others have said) that if I buy something like this, it ought to work the way I buy it for as long as I like, regardless of what sort of communication it has with the company that made it, the mother-ship, Elvis, or anyone else in this, or any other world. This sounds like the original Librie' time-limited content service, except it's for the application instead of the content!

Does someone else see a reason for it? Or can betaboy comment on that, please?

rlauzon · 10-17-2006, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NatCh

It seems to me (as others have said) that if I buy something like this, it ought to work the way I buy it for as long as I like, regardless of what sort of communication it has with the company that made it, the mother-ship, Elvis, or anyone else in this, or any other world. This sounds like the original Librie' time-limited content service, except it's for the application instead of the content!

Ahhh... but read the fine print. You didn't "buy" it. You licensed its use.

Again, we have something that is bordering on fraud. If I purchase something, I have a certain set of rights. If I license something, I have less rights (mostly limited by the license agreement).

But if a license is represented as a purchase, isn't that fraud?

NatCh · 10-17-2006, 06:29 PM

I had a feeling you might see it that way, rlauzon, in fact, I almost put a comment to that effect in my post.

And, yes, I agree -- such a misrepresentation is effectively fraudulent in my book, regardless of the technical legality of it.

Dick Tracy · 10-17-2006, 11:06 PM

This product appears to be a warning shot that the Big Boys are solidifying the legal concept that media will not be owned, only leased. Draconian and backwards.

betaboy · 10-24-2006, 01:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Tracy

This product appears to be a warning shot that the Big Boys are solidifying the legal concept that media will not be owned, only leased. Draconian and backwards.

No way... you are not following our CorePlayer concept. Our mantra is that you clearly own what you own. In the end, all we are doing is providing the services and features for you to manage that content in a secure manner.

NatCh · 10-24-2006, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NatCh

Or can betaboy comment on that, please?

Hmm, maybe not.

betaboy · 10-31-2006, 07:42 AM

NatCH... as much as i'd like to go into a legal tit-for-tat... the fact is if it were up to us here at CoreCodec (and me more specifically) i'd distro our products with NO EULA at all. As a matter of fact up till this past version with CoreAVC our H.264 video decoder we did just that... we distributed it without any EULA what so ever...

Our history of Open Source has taught us many things we try to balance on... but in the end we are the copyright holders... and a license grants usage permissions.

10-17-2006, 10:46 AM	#18
paulkbiba Connoisseur Posts: 84 Karma: 45 Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: United States Device: Nokia e61i, iPhone	Well, for me to see the added value I would have to purchase no less than 5 seperate licenses. Let's see, I regularly switch between my Cingular 3125, Cingular 8124, Toshiba PPC and 2 Ipaq PPCs, depending on what I'm doing. Even if I didn't use any of the PPCs, I still have the two phones that I switch back and forth. I would need a license for each, even though I only used one at a time. Not acceptable - at least to me. Last edited by paulkbiba; 10-17-2006 at 10:57 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PRS-900 Check Store Newspapers regularly.....	DougFNJ	Sony Reader	6	01-29-2010 11:06 AM
Bebook crashes regularly	Rinde	BeBook	13	08-17-2009 10:53 AM
VoIP for N770, N800, Palm phones and Nokia phones	mogui	News	5	07-08-2007 04:42 AM
Project Gutenberg's regularly updated Top 100	Alexander Turcic	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	0	10-17-2006 08:59 AM

10-17-2006, 10:10 AM	#16
betaboy Junior Member Posts: 9 Karma: 10 Join Date: Dec 2005 Device: x50v	On a trial version... we are planning to release it the first week in December with the launch of the new BetaPlayer as well.

10-17-2006, 10:39 AM	#17
Alexander Turcic Fully Converged Posts: 18,175 Karma: 14021202 Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Switzerland Device: Too many to count here.	Betaboy, it's greatly appreciated by everyone that you're coming forward to answer open questions. While I am not happy about some of the decisions you made, I am sure you have it carefully planned out, and I honestly wish you the best to succeed.

10-17-2006, 11:03 AM	#19
Bob Russell Recovering Gadget Addict Posts: 5,381 Karma: 676161 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Device: iPad	Yes, it doesn't sound very promising on the surface, but I don't think I understand the issues or the implementation yet either. At the moment I'll just acknowledge that I'm still not sure what it all involves, but I am willing to keep an open mind while we sort it all out. The capabilities of the free version may also give us some hints as to the motivations behind it... if it's powerful but is limited only by simple third party licensing limitations, then obviously that would be a big positive sign they are trying to serve the community just as we had previously thought. If (big big "if") it works well, and we can become comfortable with the licensing terms, upgrades and the way internet communication is integrated, then we've still got something great here as we have been hoping.

10-17-2006, 11:38 AM	#20
TadW Uebermensch Posts: 2,583 Karma: 1094606 Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Italy Device: Kindle	Since I don't like device locking and online activations, I will wait for CorePlayer FREE, and until then keep using TCPMP which works fine for me.

10-17-2006, 01:15 PM	#21
Harpgliss Member Retired Posts: 149 Karma: 6287 Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New Hudson,Mi. Device: TH55	Hi, If CorePlayer FREE supports everything that the free one previously did and adds skinning, I am all over that as I am not interested in the Communal aspects that will be implemented later. David

10-17-2006, 02:27 PM	#22
Alexander Turcic Fully Converged Posts: 18,175 Karma: 14021202 Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Switzerland Device: Too many to count here.	There is a video of Coreplayer on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqHmbJEzShU

10-17-2006, 02:33 PM	#23
frquixote Addict Posts: 230 Karma: 2448688 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Kapolei, Oahu, HI Device: KOBO Libra 2, Kindle PW3, Samsung 8A Tablet, Samsung S10e Phone	Well, I WAS going to buy CorePlayer as soon as it came out ... in part as a "Thank you" to the folks who have provided us with TCPMP for free, but now I think I'll pass. I might try out CorePlayer Free later, but I have consistently avoided software that requires online registration and/or regularly phones home. I resent both the intrusiveness/aggravation/inconvenience associated with having to let the machine phone home and the potential for exposure of personal information. I also don't like the fact that this new version is locked to a particular device. Upgrading devices is hard enough without adding device locking to the mix.

10-17-2006, 03:13 PM	#24
NatCh Gizmologist Posts: 11,615 Karma: 929550 Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3	Okay, after reading this thread so far, with particular interest to betaboy's posts, and thinking about it a few minutes, I'm left with this question: what is their aim in cutting the functionality back after a period of disconnect? I understand the fix/upgrade deployment, I understand the meta-data update thing, I totally grok the non-continuation of updates (duh!) ... but in my limited knowledge/experience I just can't come up with a business reason to reduce functionality like this. I'm thinking about my DirectTV boxes, if they don't phone home for a while (mine never have, in fact) I lose access to buying PPV stuff (big whup), but it doesn't stop decoding the broadcasts just 'cause I don't keep it plugged into the wall, I just lose any updates that might occur. So, what's driving this being set up differently? It seems to me (as others have said) that if I buy something like this, it ought to work the way I buy it for as long as I like, regardless of what sort of communication it has with the company that made it, the mother-ship, Elvis, or anyone else in this, or any other world. This sounds like the original Librie' time-limited content service, except it's for the application instead of the content! Does someone else see a reason for it? Or can betaboy comment on that, please?

10-17-2006, 06:29 PM	#26
NatCh Gizmologist Posts: 11,615 Karma: 929550 Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3	I had a feeling you might see it that way, rlauzon, in fact, I almost put a comment to that effect in my post. And, yes, I agree -- such a misrepresentation is effectively fraudulent in my book, regardless of the technical legality of it.

10-17-2006, 11:06 PM	#27
Dick Tracy Detective Posts: 109 Karma: 4455 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: California Device: Palm TX	This product appears to be a warning shot that the Big Boys are solidifying the legal concept that media will not be owned, only leased. Draconian and backwards.

Advert

Advert

10-31-2006, 07:42 AM	#30
betaboy Junior Member Posts: 9 Karma: 10 Join Date: Dec 2005 Device: x50v	NatCH... as much as i'd like to go into a legal tit-for-tat... the fact is if it were up to us here at CoreCodec (and me more specifically) i'd distro our products with NO EULA at all. As a matter of fact up till this past version with CoreAVC our H.264 video decoder we did just that... we distributed it without any EULA what so ever... Our history of Open Source has taught us many things we try to balance on... but in the end we are the copyright holders... and a license grants usage permissions.