I wish Graphisoft didn't surcharge resale buyers over $2000.

[vfrontiers]

So I have two keys and as it turns out, the economy stinks and I need to sell one of my "assets" to make ends meet. I figure that with the investment made in ArchiCAD over the past 10+ years (and 10 before that with other companies money) that there would be some equity in it.

So following proper procedure, I contact my reseller to find out how to go about selling (I've done it before, so I knew there were some hoops to jump thru). It is here I find out that after I sell my ArchiCAD Key to a 3rd party, THEY will HAVE TO PAY over $2000.00 to register the key in their name!

Ok... so I flipped my lid... and shot back an angry email... but the only response I got... "Well, try reselling AutoCAD" ...

Yes, I am still miffed. I just wonder how many people out there actually know about this policy. The policy has changed over the past 20 years. I am curious about when and how I actually AGREED to this policy. But, like everyone else here, I gloss of the EULA's. Apparently this policy changed around April this year. I am not clear how a company can sell me a product (asset) and then continue, after the fact, to create policy that removes all equity from it.

And the real questions is WHY? "How could it possibly cost $2000.00 to change a name and address in a database? To be fair (someone has to) $600 of it is a FORCED enrollment in the ArchiPLUS program. So at least the buyer will get the next upgrade (if it happens within a year).

Sorry for venting. I love ArchiCAD. I like the people that work there. I like my reseller. I just think this policy is WRONG. So on my tombstone will hang 2 ArchiCAD 12 keys (can't afford to upgrade any longer with this policy in place).

[Laszlo Nagy]

Michael wrote:

laszlonagy wrote:
I have removed the content of the post by Lennox earlier in this thread as I was informed that Lennox was placing a private email conversation with GS UK onto AC-Talk without the permission of the other party.


I have sent a Private Message to Lennox yesterday asking him for removal.
He has not answered me yet so I decided to act in the meantime.

In the USA I think it is called censorship, but I could be *&*&%#!@(%&#$

This is called moderation, not censorship.
We do not want to restrict the information, but a private email conversation not originally meant to be displayed on an Internet Forum.
As I said, Lennox is completely free to write about the email conversation with GS UK and share with you his thoughts.
Also, most people reading such forums like to read the essence of things, not long winded correspondence.

[Anonymous]

My apologies , I did not think prior to posting the email.

Unfortunatly I did not receive the PM as the email address was an old one.
I have tried unsuccessfully to update my email address , quite a palaver!

Again sorry for posting, in my defecnce, I did not think that Alan would mind.

[Laszlo Nagy]

Lennox wrote:
My apologies , I did not think prior to posting the email.

Unfortunatly I did not receive the PM as the email address was an old one.
I have tried unsuccessfully to update my email address , quite a palaver!

Again sorry for posting, in my defecnce, I did not think that Alan would mind.

It is fine.
However, you can still write your own understanding and opinion about it. Nothing wrong with that.

If you send me your new email in Private Mail, I will change it for you in the database.

[Anonymous]

Lazzlo wrote:

"Also, most people reading such forums like to read the essence of things"

I would like to disagree with this.

This forum is full of very detailed oriented folks by it's very nature.

Who on this forum would rather hear just interpretations of events and not the details of fact?

Thank goodness in the US we have a very strong, Freedom of the Press!
Which unless content is slanderous, is quite broad and would include the right to publish a "letter".

But here on this forum, Corp rules, not us.

[Karl Ottenstein]

lec1212 wrote:
Thank goodness in the US we have a very strong, Freedom of the Press!
Which unless content is slanderous, is quite broad and would include the right to publish a "letter".

But here on this forum, Corp rules, not us.

Hi Lec,

I hate to side-track this very serious topic into a freedom-of-the-press issue, but I feel I should respond.

Corp does not rule here. Graphisoft gives us great freedom to speak our minds here; the prime censorship has been the prohibition against posting prices for 'used' licenses for sale and links to cracked copies. Some other forums really do have corporate censorship - a video forum I'm on will delete any post that suggests that one might be happier with another product!

As to freedom-of-the-press: that refers to the ability to publish your own words, not the private and/or copyrighted words of someone else. Graphisoft themselves, by hosting this site, could be legally liable if copyrighted material is posted here without the owner's permission. According to these discussions, e-mail messages sent to someone have an implicit copyright and could be problematic:

http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum44/1500.htm

http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum19/488.htm

Chat in forums like that is not a legal opinion, so who knows. Presumably somebody has researched this. Better safe than sorry.

Like Laszlo, I would like to see a re-post that summarizes the gist of the GS UK position.

Cheers,
Karl

[Anonymous]

I quickly read the removed posted emails and found them to be very interesting and enlightening. I wished I had made a copy for further more leisurely reading at a later date.

With the subtleties and nuances of language it would be very difficult to write an objective and accurate "summary". I would much rather read what the original author wrote rather than someone else's opinions and interpretations.

I have no freedom speech issues, but I, like many, am very disturbed by GS's retroactive change of policy. Hopefully, AC 13 will be a solid and forward looking release, but unfortunately I am more and more discouraged with GS.

I always upgrade (I like the newest!) but because AC 13 will no longer support Mac PPC I won't be upgrading anytime soon. I understand GS's reasons, but upgrading my two licenses and two computers makes no sense at this time. I wonder how many others are in the same predicament?

Don Lee

[Djordje]

Dennis wrote:
Be different from Autodesk in every way they can, and maybe this means rethinking the distribution / support system.
///
Make a good product, have a friendly web presence with open support / communication lines available online. They better get leaner and meaner, (friendlier of course to its followers).

I used to know a company like this, in Budapest. Scattered among a few villas in a very leafy part of the town. Great guys, great product, lovely to know them and be their user, colleague, friend, supporter and evangelist.

Then they built a business park on the banks of the Danube. Went public. Employed ex Autodesk staff and CEOs. Started emulating Autodesk.

[Anonymous]

...which is exactly how many Autodesk users feel about a certain company that started in an office over a pizza shop near Boston in 1999. It was a great product -- with great people you could just call up and they'd help you out. It didn't have all the features you needed, though.

Autodesk came knocking twice -- the first time they were told to bugger off, but the second time the upstart company was out of cash. They had to say yes. The founders were eventually essentially pushed out, but the software continued to develop, though not as quickly.

Those were the days!

In Adesk's view of the world you can transfer licenses if the design company that owns them is sold. Perhaps you could arrange for sale of some part of your company to another person...

[Eduardo Rolon]

metanoia wrote:
...
In Adesk's view of the world you can transfer licenses if the design company that owns them is sold...

Or if the owner dies.

[Anonymous]

Why not just email Alan Baikie and ask his permission to post those emails? I'm sure he would be fine with it as all he was repeating was company policy, but it would be polite to do so beforehand.

Anyway back to the point in hand. I also agree with most of the above, it is a sneaky and unfair change in policy, which I can't find any record of in anything I have signed, received or even seen! I'll contact my reseller tomorrow and find out what the situation is for us.

As an aside, reading the generic terms and conditions found here for the IFC beta download (looking at the first paragraph it seems to actually apply to the full ArchiCAD software rather than the IFC download, but anyway ) It says

GRAPHISOFT wrote:
...You own the media on whlch the Software is recorded, but not the Software itself which remains the property of Graphisoft...

The T&Cs interestingly make no mention of who owns the WIBU-key. As ArchiCAD is downloadable for free and only licenced to us, surely the ownership of the WIBU-Key is actually worth the money! So do we actually own the WIBU-key or licence it? If we own it, what right have they got to effectively charge such a ridiculous figure for selling this bit of equipment to someone else.

What is the point of investing substantial amounts of money in keeping the software up to date over long periods of time, when at the end the software is essentially worth nothing. If they want to do it this way why not make it expensive to resell it if you don't have a subscription, but have a sliding scale of reduction in fees depending on how many years you have subscribed. This way would actually encourage customers to be loyal - the longer you stay with them the more of your money you would get back if you do need to sell one or two copies!