11 ms·
How I converted a software thief into a customer
- waqf 14y agoBut what was the origin of the invalid numbers? That's the teaser I kept reading for ...
- tghw 14y agoThink like someone trying to get software for free, and you should get it.
- Torrents 14y agoOK, I'm thinking like someone who's trying to get software for free. I still don't get it. If they were modifying an existing valid key, it doesn't seem like people would keep using the same one. Unless people are downloading a keygen or something. Any more hints?
- joshmlewis 14y agoTo me it seems like these keys were shared on a site somewhere and when people Googled for free blurity key or whatever these came up.
- eridius 14y agoIf that were true the author would have been able to find the keys, but he said Google failed him.
- burntwater 14y agoIt's possible the serial was posted on a dark net, such as Tor.
- joshmlewis 14y agoMaybe they didn't search on Google then, but another forum or site that isn't indexed by Google.
- majorlazer 14y agoMaybe the invalid key was posted on a warez site and everybody was trying to use it.
- elliottcarlson 14y agoBesides a keygen, software might be bundled with a list of keys to use when downloading from certain sites.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- dmn001 14y agoThere more info here: http://www.keacher.com/1060/how-i-got-to-my-first-sale/ http://www.keacher.com/1060/how-i-got-to-my-first-sale/ The first result for "blurity serial number" points to https://www.trademarkia.com/blurity-77870929.html https://www.trademarkia.com/blurity-77870929.html Edit: Entering the serial number does indeed produce the easter egg dialog, with a coupon code that still works. BTW, there is a typo on the buy page 'regsitration'.
- teuobk 14y agoWe have a winner! After I discovered people were doing that, I was rather surprised that they thought that the trademark serial number would be a valid registration key. I guess people don't read. Edit: Thanks for the heads-up about the typo. Oops!
- guscost 14y agoMind the sampling method, it only suggests that software pirates don't read ;)
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- droithomme 14y agoVery nice anecdote. There's a lot of controversy on how to handle piracy and piracy attempts. Many developers and companies get angry and create police-state quality authoritarian solutions that punish their legitimate users. Obviously from the way I express it I feel this is not the best response. We draw the line at providing hand holding customer support to pirates, but we do gratefully accept well formed bug reports from them, without judgement. Being polite but firm and reasonable sometimes results in a conversion.
- sharkweek 14y agoNotch, of Minecraft fame, is well known for these types of shenanigans, even shaming a Minecraft pirate in a Quake 3 match (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120412/07474418467/friendly-pirate-challenges-minecraft-creator-to-quake-3-battle.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120412/07474418467/friend...) Not sure it's scalable, but sure makes for a fun alternative to perpetual legal battles
- exDM69 14y agoSome indie game producers release on piratebay right from day zero. Usually with some kind of easter egg version, e.g. all in-game characters have a pirate hat, no other hats are available like in a legitimate version. This makes sure that no-one pirates a badly cracked buggy version and gets a bad experience and decides not to buy the game. Thankfully free demos are coming back so it is easier to test a game legally before making the decision on the purchase.
- Fargren 14y agoSadly, it's still common for a demo to not be really representative of the actual game.
- shasta 14y agoBut then are pirates still in violation of copyright law?
- gosu 14y agoAlso: should the developers be in violation? I imagine it's a little like (sorry) kiddie porn, where, even if you're the kiddie, society doesn't want you supporting a community that it considers to be negative.
- rodly 14y agoI believe he means the developers are releasing their software for torrent in a trial or easter egg form.
- activepeanut 14y agoIsn't this incentivising people to pirate before buying a legitimate license?
- Produce 14y agoThe world isn't so simple that we can slap 'good' and 'bad' labels on everything and expect things to be perfect. It's also not so trivial to condition people that we can simply create a punishment/reward system and expect it to fulfill it's role accurately. Look at the failure that is the legal system and how badly it addresses the problem of crime. Even under the threat of the harshest penalties, crime still happens. Even after locking someone up in a cage, they are still likely to re-offend. Think about it - people cooperate with people they like. Trying to take someone's money, physical freedom or whatever else makes you their enemy. People are very unlikely to cooperate with their enemies. The trick is to not trigger that "you're an enemy" response. The result is an open line of communication and a real chance that the behavior will change. In other words, we're not Pavlov's Dogs and a little common sense goes a long way. Given how many people are enamored by computing devices which only have one button, it's clear that the vast majority will pay full price instead of going to the trouble of downloading the pirated software, installing it, doing whatever needs to be done for the coupon code to come up and then paying. It's much simpler to buy the damn thing and be done with it. If someone is going through all that trouble, they probably can't afford the retail price.
- mmariani 14y agoYeah, I had the same thought. But what if you turn it into a game? Imagine this... 1. User tries to enter a bad SN or whatever; 2. You challenge him to let's say file X valid bug reports; 3. User gets 50% off or something like that. It could work!
- tghw 14y agoIt only comes up if they've already tried to pirate it. It's acting on the idea of price discrimination; the person trying to pirate the software has shown a decreased willingness to pay for the product, so econ theory says to lower the price for just that person in order to maximize revenue.
- 14y ago
- petitmiam 14y agoI wonder if the customer will now share the coupon code.
- exDM69 14y agoCoupon codes get shared anyway and that should be taken into account when sharing them out and pricing them. I always check retailmenot.com before making purchases at web stores with a coupon code field visible in their order form.
- 0x0 14y agoI'd be wary of including a "coupon code" that identifies myself as a potential "software pirate" when purchasing something using my name and visa card online, even if the seller has the best intentions.
- MysticFear 14y agoUse Paypal
- bostonvaulter2 14y agoYou could always generate it server side and lock it to the ip that the original request came from.
- MysticFear 14y agoJust hope the user's IP does not change from purchase to activation?
- iamdann 14y agoThe popup you wrote had a humanizing effect. It's not just a faceless piece of software anymore. It's a a genuinely nice guy who built a cool product and wants to get paid. As a concept, people know that there's a real person behind every application. But it's not until moments like these when they're actually confronted with that person. Much less offered a deal for trying to rip them off.
- vacri 14y agoIt may also have had an 'oh my god, I've been caught!' effect - no longer is the user anonymous, in their own eyes.
- raverbashing 14y agoYes I expected "something nicer" maybe not using the word "stealing" Still, my paranoid side thought of something: "Oh, they're giving away this code so we give them our contact info, then they know who pirated the software"
- randomdrake 14y agoI think that the early shareware game days did a good job of this and I miss it. Instead of a "Click this link to purchase" you got a message from, usually, the sole developer or small team of developers. It was very humanizing and it was great. The message would thank you for trying out the game. It would usually talk about how the game was awesome and what you were missing out on. It was clearly genuine. You didn't feel like you were purchasing something from some giant company trying to sell something. You felt like you were supporting some people who were passionate about the art they created. I miss this about games and think it may be the reason that I've sort of stopped playing the big titles after 25 years of non-stop gaming. I find myself much more drawn to independent developers on the mobile platform or the wonderfully simple and innovative games from small teams.
- cheeze 14y agoSomewhat related, when I was younger I had no money and didn't have much of a problem pirating software (times have changed and I realize how stupid that is). I tried to pirate a piece of software and upon entering a fake key got a popup similar to yours. Basically, it said "I'm not able to stop you from pirating this software, I'm not even going to disable activation for your clearly invalid key. Just remember that I'm not some huge corporation, I'm a family man trying to support my wife and kids (with a link to picture of his beautiful children). Consider buying this to help keep me afloat and to ensure continued development." It hit me hard, made me realize that it isn't a victimless crime and that I was literally depriving this guy of what he deserves, payment for his hard work. Definitely one of the leading factors that caused me to stop piracy altogether. Even pirates have a heart, and by humanizing the product, it is way harder to steal it and feel okay about it.
- laberge 14y agoHonestly, I can remember something EXTREMELY similar to this. I now buy all the software I can afford.
- belorn 14y agoWhile sounding fine, its a form of error in reasoning - A fallacy of a kind. The logic does not scale. If I go to the supermarket and buy cheap imported goods, I deprive the local market of the possible purchase of their goods. It is very easy, almost impossible, not to deprive someone of payment if payment is based on who has worked hard and what could have happened. The logic also demand that there is a zero sum game going where every copy equals a lost sale. Copying is as about as simple as needing. If needing results in lost sales, then each time I am hungry, I create lost sales for restaurants if I dont buy something immediately. That might also sound fine logically, as if I am hungry I will buy food, and if I didnt need to buy said food, I am depriving someone of payments for their hard work to create food I could have eaten. It is also crazy! the world is not a zero sum world. It is way more complicated and social economics (how should creative people get payed for their work) should be decided by economics and politics, not law.
- quesera 14y ago
- bri3d 14y agoI've seen quite a few instances of string resources like "I need this money to feed my family," or more humorous "so you think you're leet, do you?"-type phrases placed near easily-defeated serial validation code in binaries. A lot of the funnier strings convinced me to give money to the authors of software I'd never have purchased or used to start with (I used to download a lot of shareware just to explore its copy protection). Famously, Mac OS X also contains the "Don't Steal Mac OS X" poem mapped into virtual address space by DSMOS.kext. The people cracking/pirating software are just as human as the authors - any kind of communication at a personal level increases the chance of a sale IMO.
- DanBC 14y agoIt's not as much fun if they do something that can trash data of innocent users. "The tree of evil bears bitter fruit" - (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=eo4Otm_TcW8C&pg=PT509&lpg=PT509&dq=%22tree+of+evil+bears+bitter+fruit%22&source=bl&ots=gzHJyN7x9b&sig=AUBPUFoxB_mBGrKQmw_G-hcl0vQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=jQIGULaKAsqF4gS09IzHCQ&ved=0CJkCEOgBMAQ#v=onepage&q=%22tree%20of%20evil%20bears%20bitter%20fruit%22&f=false http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=eo4Otm_TcW8C&pg=PT509...) If the software thought you were running it under a debugger it would try to trash the disk. Unfortunately several errors made the software think it was running under a debugger even if it wasn't, and a few people lost data.
- Karunamon 14y agoI'd imagine doing something like this nowadays would result in litigation. There are stories of older apps doing all kinds of unsavory shenanigans: (http://www.geocities.ws/johnboy_tutorials/bt.html http://www.geocities.ws/johnboy_tutorials/bt.html) (yes, that IS a geocities link) Some as benign as popping a "gotcha" message like the author here, some as evil as nuking the registry or boot sector. The armchair lawyer in me wonders what would happen if someone who had their drive trashed by gotcha code like this initiated legal action.
- daeken 14y agoI'll never forget that near the store decryption code in iTunes, there was a 16-byte string that stood out like an AES key: DontMessWithThis. It was added a bit after I started releasing code to order from the iTunes Music Store and they started changing the crypto with each release. AFAIK, it's still there to this day, though I haven't checked in a couple years.
- gradstudent 14y agoInteresting tidbit: > I couldn’t figure out where those numbers were coming from. The people trying the invalid numbers seemed to have nothing in common, and my Google-fu failed me. You seem to suggest here you track user information to such a degree that you can Google for the individuals in question. That's creepy as hell! I think you've scared me away from your software forever.
- nyellin 14y agoActually, I assumed he tried Googling the invalid numbers. And logging browser + geographic information in error handlers is standard practice.
- gradstudent 14y ago"Standard practice" for whom? The CIA? Gah! The very idea that some bit of desktop software needs to surreptitiously phone home in the event of an error really rubs me the wrong way. Not only is it wholly unnecessary but it's also a serious intrusion of privacy. OP: does your software tell people up front (i.e. not hidden in some 10 page EULA) it's going to phone home? Do you allow them to opt out? If there is an option, what's the default?
- tghw 14y agoTo make this assertion also makes it clear that you probably haven't worked on much desktop software distributed to a large number of users. There are so many different configurations that the only real way to figure out why it isn't working for a particular user is to have it phone home with a stack trace and basic system info. Otherwise, pretty much every bug would not be reproducible. If you don't like your software doing that (and, believe me, most of it does), then lock down your firewall and only let a whitelist of programs communicate with the outside world. A lot of your software will stop working, but at least you'll know that no information (well, not none, just less) is getting sent out to various servers.
- gradstudent 14y ago
- TomGullen 14y agoI don't like this approach. Earlier this year saw some referrals from a hacking forum from a young gentleman petitioning the cracking community to crack our software for him: http://www.hackforums.net//showthread.php?tid=2148782 http://www.hackforums.net//showthread.php?tid=2148782 (You may have to register to view the thread) I engaged in conversation with that community briefly and told them a little about us, and asked them what was unfair about our pricing and if they had any better ideas for us. The response was extremely positive and supportive, and we received some emails with helpful advice about how to protect our program from crackers like themselves. I've no idea if we got any more sales than we would of otherwise, but we engaged with a community in a respectful manner and it's likely we delayed cracked versions of our software being made freely available. The problem I see with the OP's method is firstly I would be peeved if I was a legitimate customer and interpreted this post as rewarding bad behaviour. Secondly as OP has publicly posted this he might actually lose revenue from future customers purposefully entering wrong keys to gain access to the coupon code. If OP redacts this now, customers might be annoyed by this and ask for discounts, or even find alternatives. So it's quite short sighted to post this in my opinion. Thirdly and possibly most importantly is that it's boiling the company-customer relationship down into a purely financial one. A relationship with a potential customer (no matter what their software ethics are) should be more than that, and it can have unexpected rewards like we experienced. The message in the OP is disrespectful as well, it's highly accusing (is there any risk legitimate customers could see this?). It's my opinion that these sorts of tactics don't do your company and favours in the long term, although in the short term you might collect a handful more dollars.
- tghw 14y agoSee http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4258035 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4258035 for the way this is activated. It only shows it if someone has already made it clear they're trying to not pay for the software.
- TomGullen 14y agoAssuming there's no risk legitimate customers will see this message, it's still a short sighted tactic in my opinion. For an extra $29 in the bank, you've risked alienating your other customers, and could even lose revenue going into the future - mainly because you posted it on your company blog which I'm sure is read by a lot of your legitimate customers. It's a precarious position because the $29 isn't much upside at all and can easily be negated by one single customer who reads this post and finds an alternative. I understand that you feel celebratory about this, but it would be fair to assume that some of your customers will not feel the same way about it.
- jamiecurle 14y agoRegardless of the comments about how negative this is I commend your transparency and creativity.