Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: keith_cooper on May 23, 2011, 07:36:32 pm
-
The new EULA (http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx?ID=1470&Action=Support) has been released
This from the notification of the change:
“X-Rite did release a new EULA on April 6, 2011 containing some language that several of you voiced concerns over and have since provided us with valuable input. Based on these interactions we are pleased to provide you with a revised EULA, which is retroactively effective as of April 6, 2011.
It is not our intention to question or monitor your business practice. However, there are two types of profile distribution practices that will require a separate distribution agreement with X-Rite. The first point has been in place for many years, while the second point is a new addition. Taken from the EULA they are as follows:
(i) in conjunction with the sale or promotion of an input, display or output device and/or ink or paper if such sale or promotion extends beyond a single customer-specific application,
(ii) in conjunction with profiling services that are offered electronically or online, including through electronic media, email or other network-based communication channels, without significant billable services that involve personalized customer interaction.”
From http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/stuff/?p=1071 (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/stuff/?p=1071)
-
The language is almost as goofy as the original:
You may provide Licensed Profiles to one or more third parties in connection with Your
profiling services provided Your profiling services involve personalized profile-related customer
consultations and are predominantly conducted on-site at a customer location
Predominantly conducted on-site? Predominantly?
-
The language is almost as goofy as the original:
Predominantly conducted on-site? Predominantly?
My reading of the language is that you cannot run an Internet-based profiling service under this basic license since there is no "predominantly on site" interaction. The exceptions are not for profit uses.
-
(ii) in conjunction with profiling services that are offered electronically or online, including through electronic media, email or other network-based communication channels, without significant billable services that involve personalized customer interaction."
So they don't want you running an online profiling business selling them at $50-100 a pop, but if you charge a few hundred an hour for "consulting", it's OK to include profiling as part of your business. Makes perfect sense to me ::) Do they really think that people are out there getting rich by selling profiles over the internet? I mean yeah, some people offer this service among others, but I would be surprised if there's anybody out there who makes even a modest living solely from selling profiles. This doesn't affect me personally, but just the principal of it makes me detest X-Rite as a company.
And it looks like they still kept the retroactive license change to previous versions, which is just ridiculous (and probably unenforceable, especially if you don't buy an upgrade of i1P but a full, standalone version).
-
Hmmm. I have a copy of what X-Rite calls "Final EULA 051011" which was emailed to me by the X-Rite rep for Southern Ca. It would appear to be later than April 6, 2011, but might in fact be the same. I sent the rep my thoughts on the new license, which weren't very positive and haven't heard back from him. I can post the entire text here if you all want to read it. Most notably missing seems to be the part that supercedes previous licenses. At least I didn't see it there and I read it several times. The use of words like "predominately" amounts to very sloppy legal writing and feels to me like they heard the complaints but just couldn't quite bring themselves to just let people use the software the way they always have. There was also a link to an alternate licensing agreements - I guess for those who are not predominate - that led nowhere.
-
Most notably missing seems to be the part that supercedes previous licenses.
I was going by the comment on the Northlight Images page (link above), but after looking at the actual license agreement posted on the X-Rite site, I agree. The new EULA doesn't contain any statement about retroactive effect on previous versions of the software that I could discern.
The page containing the link the new EULA in PDF form does contain this text:
The link below is a revised EULA which was published and distributed on April 6, 2011. The revised EULA is retroactively effective as of April 6, 2011.
But I think they're just saying that this newly revised EULA is retroactively effective from the release date for the i1Profiler product (but still just for that product). If they intended this new EULA to be apply to previous product versions, the EULA itself would have to say that, and it doesn't.
-
So they don't want you running an online profiling business selling them at $50-100 a pop, but if you charge a few hundred an hour for "consulting", it's OK to include profiling as part of your business. Makes perfect sense to me ::) Do they really think that people are out there getting rich by selling profiles over the internet? I mean yeah, some people offer this service among others, but I would be surprised if there's anybody out there who makes even a modest living solely from selling profiles. This doesn't affect me personally, but just the principal of it makes me detest X-Rite as a company.
They simply want to get rid of online profiling services, so they could sell more profiling kits. Online profiling service is a PITA for xrite, as it stops people from buying the profiling toys.
Just take a look at i1profiler - it's definitely not aimed at professional color consultants nor other color geeks alike, it's an evolution of a ColorMunki...
-
"(ii) in conjunction with profiling services that are offered electronically or online, including through electronic media, email or other network-based communication channels, without significant billable services that involve personalized customer interaction"
This bit from the special eula page that is now active on the x-rite website might actually provide a means for those who offer online profiling services but always have some conversation either by phone or email about the process and expectations.
The eula that was linked at the top of this thread does appear to be the same one I've had for a couple of weeks.
-
Since I have now mastered ArgyllCMS maybe I'll open a profiling service. There is no restrictive EULA with Argyll! :D
-
Since I purchased Monaco with my Isis and was promised a free upgrade as part of that transaction and not provided the EULA at that time to decide if I wanted to proceed or not and if I do not accept the current EULA, maybe I should try to get my money back. Sounds like a possible class action law suit to me.
-
I'm no lawyer, but it appears to me that (ii) allows online profiling for pay. It's hard to read, sort of a double negative, but if I interpret it correctly it states that a separate agreement is needed if the online activity is "without significant billable services that involve personalized customer interaction.”
So as long as one receives compensation, and works directly/personally (?) with the customer, this exception doesn't apply and no additional agreement is required.
Added by edit - my interpretation of this phrase is XRite is trying to prevent somebody creating a profile, and then sending it for free to several buddies.
Lawyers?
Richard Southworth
-
Just take a look at i1profiler - it's definitely not aimed at professional color consultants nor other color geeks alike, it's an evolution of a ColorMunki...
I'll agree to disagree with you here. It's not the munki package and the quality of the results are outstanding.
-
I'll agree to disagree with you here. It's not the munki package and the quality of the results are outstanding.
I have to agree. Arguments with regards to the GUI aside, the end results are better than anything else I've tried and a definite improvement on Monaco Profiler. I've been revisiting Argyll lately but so far I've not been able to come close to the quality of the profiles that I get out of i1Profiler.
Cheers, Joe
-
I'm no lawyer, but it appears to me that (ii) allows online profiling for pay.
It doesn't support internet based remote profiling services. You can't just have people send in targets and bill them for the profiles going out to them without other services (like training).
It does support remote profiling when it's *combined* with billable training. That training can be provided onsite, over the phone, etc.
I'm actually in favor of this approach. Having been in the calibration business since 1994, remote profiling is a pain in the ass, and does a great disservice to everyone involved, except when trained end-users are the ones getting the profiles. People need that training in addition to the profiles. If you don't give them that training bad things happen.
Most people think all they need is a printer profile when they actually need much more (better display calibration, better lighting, better understanding of color management policies, etc). Cheap online remote profiling services without any training usually leads to disappointing results because of weaknesses elsewhere in the workflow and creates a support burden on the provider. It also cheapens the value of high quality training - training that looks at the bigger picture of someone's workflow and carefully integrates not just good output profiles, but excellent display calibration, lighting suggestions, color management policy understanding, etc. That's what people really need - a bigger picture understanding about how all of the components work together.
I've operated a remote profiling service for over a decade now. It's a private service that's only available to my clients that have received onsite training. It allows for these knowledgeable professionals to maintain excellent profiles for their devices over time. It's affordable and I'm very clear about telling them that it doesn't include any support. Remote profiling works really well with these clients that I've visited and spent time with. I've anticipated the questions they're going to ask and taught them advanced critical thinking color skills so that they understand all the complex aspects of their workflow and can address problems on their own.
Time and time again people have contacted me saying "I'm a pro and know what I'm doing - I just need a profile from you." When I have made exceptions to my rule about only working with existing clients, I've been flooded with support emails from these people. "Prints from your profile don't look like my monitor" because they aren't calibrating their displays correctly or using good lighting, "Prints from your profile look too good, can you desaturate your profiles?" because they're used to over-saturating their files to compensate for their previously poorly color managed printing process, etc. Or worse yet, they continue to get poor results and don't bother to tell the remote profiling service provider at all. You get the idea. People need training in addition to the profiles. If you don't give them that training bad things happen. That's my opinion - my $0.02!
-
Scott,
Let's get off of the soap box, and stick to the point at hand. If one charges $50-100 for a profile, involving initial contact with the client, sending the target via email, receiving printed target, scanning by whatever method, sending back the profile via email, and providing instructions as where to load in a pc or mac, rendering intent preference, etc., then the least of the process is actually cranking out the profile via i1P or whatever.
"Significant billable services" has to be measured against the charged fee. Again, I see nothing in the wording that precludes doing as I stated. From where do you receive information to generate your absolute statements to the contrary?
Richard Southworth
-
If one charges $50-100 for a profile, involving initial contact with the client, sending the target via email, receiving printed target, scanning by whatever method, sending back the profile via email, and providing instructions as where to load in a pc or mac, rendering intent preference, etc., then the least of the process is actually cranking out the profile via i1P or whatever.
I'm trying to help set the record straight that what you've described above requires a separate agreement with XRite.
"Significant billable services" has to be measured against the charged fee.
If you had an invoice that includes other services, like training, that is admissible.
From where do you receive information to generate your absolute statements to the contrary?
From direct discussion with those that have written the EULA.
Just trying to help! This legal stuff really is hard to read so it's nice to know exactly what a companies intentions are.
-
Good evening
Excuse my English, I'm French. OnSight, I do not agree
with your conclusion, I myself am a trainer in management
colors and repro long in France. In addition, I am one of the beta testers
who worked on the software and the latest solutions for XRITE.
I produces ICC profiles for remote clients. Do not assume that all users profiles icc know nothing about color management. Often a PDF file to accompany any good amply sufficient, all clients of this service are not ignorant.
-
I'm certainly not saying anyone is ignorant and I also include incredibly detailed PDFs with the training and profiles that I generate. I work with some amazingly proficient professionals around the world and find that even the best can benefit from some dialog and training about the finer aspects of this complex topic (color management).
What I am saying/recognizing (with lots of experience here) is that there are inherent challenges with public remote profiling services.
-
It doesn't support internet based remote profiling services. You can't just have people send in targets and bill them for the profiles going out to them without other services (like training).
While I don't have a dog in this hunt and I agree pretty much with what Scott said, I still don't like the fact that the EULA was after the fact. While I am not going to open a profiling service, the simple fact is that I expected the EULA to be the same as the one for Monaco. This is a simple bait and switch IMHO.
-
I'm certainly not saying anyone is ignorant and I also include incredibly detailed PDFs with the training and profiles that I generate. I work with some amazingly proficient professionals around the world and find that even the best can benefit from some dialog and training about the finer aspects of this complex topic (color management).
What I am saying/recognizing (with lots of experience here) is that there are inherent challenges with public remote profiling services.
The language problem is not uncommon facilitate our exchange
(Laughs). Like you I am a specialist in color management and
As a former colorist, I meet every day players in the business
image. I can assure you that France has not everyone
necessarily need training on the subject but like to benefit from
tailored services to about icc profiles
-
I'm actually in favor of this approach. Having been in the calibration business since 1994, remote profiling is a pain in the ass, and does a great disservice to everyone involved, except when trained end-users are the ones getting the profiles. People need that training in addition to the profiles. If you don't give them that training bad things happen.
While on-site consultation by somebody such as yourself is ideal, it's just not realistic for most hobbyist photographers. And I would also argue that using a remote profiling service could be more beneficial for many than buying a budget package such as ColorMunki and trying to DIY. At least the guy offering the profiling service probably has enough experience to make recommendations about media type or other settings for specific printers, as well as instructions for using the profile and evaluating results. Plus as you yourself have stated the higher-end i1P produces better profiles than ColorMunki.
This legal stuff really is hard to read so it's nice to know exactly what a companies intentions are.
Well, intentions are not really relevant unless they're backed up by the actual language in the EULA. If their intention really is to get rid of internet profiling services, they should have stuck with the original EULA.
"significant billable services that involve personalized customer interaction." is vague enough that there's plenty of wiggle room for somebody who provides email consultation and/or instructional documentation to claim they're meeting the requirements of the new EULA. At the very least, it would take a court to decide.
-
Scott,
Regardless of XRite's "intentions", all that really counts is the wording. And I don't see anything that defines "significant billable services" as having to include training, as opposed to the services I listed. In other words, I see the normal process of providing profiles for pay, i.e. interaction with a single client to receive a target, process the data, and provide the final product with instructions, as necessary and sufficient to satisfy the license agreement.
If XRite is really serious about prohibiting internet profiling for pay, then they are going to have to be much more specific in their license agreement. I challenge you to provide us with a written signed statement from somebody in XRite refuting my conclusions. Otherwise, please stop issuing absolute statements as to what is and isn't allowed based on conversations with the EULA authors.
Richard Southworth
-
As I'm sure you realize, I'm bound by agreements not to share my communications with them. What I can do is try to help clarify some of the intentions here. What you decide to do with this info is up to you. Want to challenge them in court? Cool. Want to use another product for a public remote profiling service? Cool.
-
As I'm sure you realize, I'm bound by agreements not to share my communications with them. What I can do is try to help clarify some of the intentions here. What you decide to do with this info is up to you. Want to challenge them in court? Cool. Want to use another product for a public remote profiling service? Cool.
n this case Scott why you lose your time here if this is not to exchange information? No client to train? Not cool ;D
I am part of Coloratti (well until I am accepted as such) but that does not stop me to say when a license seems unreasonable
-
Scott,
You don't have to share communications, just urge one of them to join the forum and provide the requested statement.
You're recognized as one of the more knowledgeable members of this forum, and in my opinion should be more careful about qualifying your statements with a few IMO's as opposed to issuing "truths".
Richard Southworth
-
Couple points. One, I agree that i1P isn’t ColorMunki, its my go to package for profile creation now. I still have PROFILER and ProfileMaker Pro, i1P is better in terms of the end product. The UI needs work, there are bugs that need to be fixed. Nothing new here.
The EUAL is still pretty silly IMHO. I don’t know if there’s any way it can be enforced since there’s no way X-Rite can track how many remote profiles I’ve built. Or if I changed for consultation and gave away a profile (or vise versa). They have no idea if I was on site or someone just mailed me a target to build a profile. And in the end, what’s the difference anyway? So if someone flies me out and I build a dozen profiles on site, or I build 6, come back and build 15 more for them, how is this a problem for X-Rite? Plus I can ask X-rite for my very own exclusion to the existing EULA. So the entire exercise in trying to control the profiles seems a huge waste of time to me. All its done is produce bad feelings towards the company.
As for remote profiling being less work or more work or in anyway a necessarily different working process, I can tell you from experience that there are times I’ve spent far more time on the phone before and after creating a remote profile than had I driven on site and built one. There can be a lot of hand holding or there can be zero. And why should someone who wants a custom profile but doesn’t have the desire to purchase even an entry level package have to pay for someone to come to them for the profile instead of getting done remotely?
Whether the profile is built remotely or on site, its the same damn profile.
-
n this case Scott why you lose your time here if this is not to exchange information? No client to train? Not cool ;D
LOL! I'm in the studio today preparing for 1) a lecture I'm giving next week at a conference and 2) a workshop I'm leading the following week. I really should get back to that!
... that does not stop me to say when a license seems unreasonable
Me neither. I've been one of the most vocal people railing against this EULA and have worked at getting it changed.
-
Then he'll have to work again because current conditions are not suitable for many prersonnes and I understand. For my part I only work on testing the solution but if you ask me my opinion on the conditions that would otherwise not exist and discussion ;)
-
The EUAL is still pretty silly IMHO. I don’t know if there’s any way it can be enforced since there’s no way X-Rite can track how many remote profiles I’ve built. Or if I changed for consultation and gave away a profile (or vise versa). They have no idea if I was on site or someone just mailed me a target to build a profile.
A couple years back I had the bright idea to have a go at making a remote profiling service website. I spent some fair amount of time writing it all up and generating the screenshots and instructions and all and setting the whole thing up, got it all up and running and did a little Adwords campaign, 'went live' and just waited for the money to start rolling in.
What's hilarious is that X-Rite really thinks the 7 (yeah, seven) profiles I've written from actual generated business from that site are worth jacking with all this nonsense over.
I took the Adwords campaign down but the site is still there, and all I use it for now is to distribute targets and have a payment button for current customers--such as Scott Martin described.
So it's far from a huge deal, however, by this EULA, if I upgrade my copy of Monaco Profiler, I'm going to have to take it down. If X-Rite ever did decide to 'go after' remote profiling services, I'm sure looking for online sites is how they'd start.
Thing is the Audit language still remains in the new EULA. I've been down the road of tilting at giant windmills in court, and I'm not going there again. X-Rite legally can make an attempt to enforce this provision, and that attempt would be enough to kill a guy like me. It's not a chance I'm willing to take.
To Scott I'd add that while this is a definite improvement and your efforts in getting this far are much appreciated, it's a good idea never, ever to get involved in attempting to interpret intent of legal language.
Legal language means exactly what it says. Supposed intent is entirely beside the point.
Finally, whoever it was that pointed out that they'd bought Monaco with promise of a free upgrade has, I think, a very, very valid point. The kind of point that would stand up in court.
From what I've seen, and for what my opinion is worth, yes, the King is indeed dead and the profiles that come from i1P are superior to Monaco. Argyll? Please. I didn't like the EULA that came with Monaco and I've tried for years to get MP quality profiles out of Argyll. Just not happening.
Qualux too for that matter. Qualux actually makes very credible profiles for large-gamut devices but it falls down on smaller ones.
So I'll probably grit my teeth and pay full pop for i1P just so that I have it but also to keep my Monaco license intact. But X-Rite is still not on my Christmas card list.
Mike Adams
Correct Color (http://correctcolor.org)
-
Ok, time for a test case of this silliness. I filled out and submitted the XRite special agreement form with the following description:
"Primary business involves direct local customer contact, providing profiles and consultation on customer premises. However, occasionally the need arises to receive a printer target via mail, generate the profile using i1Profiler, and then send the profile to customer via email. Further interaction by phone and email is required for remote customer to successfully utilize profile."
So hopefully I can report back as to how this works. Has anbody else tried?
Richard Southworth
-
I've already presented this question to them and had considerable dialog about it. If you work with a customer onsite and then later want to make profiles remotely for them that's fine, totally fine! There's "significant billable services" to that client in addition to the remote profile.
What's not so good is when you offer remote profiling services to people you've never worked with. Put up a remote profiling website and watch the money come in with minimal contact kind of thing. Your email could use a little clarification as to wither you're providing remote profiles to existing clients or to new ones as that is the key, IMO.
-
Has anbody else tried?
Filled out the form this morning, no reply as yet.
Put up a remote profiling website and watch the money come in with minimal contact kind of thing.
What defines minimal contact kind of thing? So if people call me and we talk for 5 minutes about color management, no wait, 7 and a half minutes, then its OK? I mean seriously, this is so silly. 50 profiles are OK without a newer EUAL but 51 sounds an alarm? Or from Jan 2011 to June 2011 I build 50 remote profiles, then someone sends me a target by mail for a profile, I can call them up and somehow convince X-Rite (mentally) that its OK to build this new remote profile because of what? I send this customer a copy of my book or a PDF on color management?
The amount of time and energy both we and X-Rite have spent on this silliness is crazy.
-
What defines minimal contact kind of thing?
I think you need to charge for something else besides the profile. Training for example.
-
I think you need to charge for something else besides the profile. Training for example.
So sending them a PDF for $100 with a free custom profile would produce a pass for this 51st profile? Or maybe my own EULA in the email when I send them a profile that states something like “By accepting and using this free ICC profile, I agree that I purchased a PDF about color management from Andrew Rodney”?
-
Might have to charge for them both. The profile and a separate "significant" service. :-] I hear you and get your point!
-
....All its done is produce bad feelings towards the company.
There are many things to say about all of this, and agreements and disagreements with what many have said so far, but the overriding issue is exactly the above. But they have my money at this point, so I guess it's a done deal. The economy and the failure of the entire business community involved in color management implementation has lead to a lack of viability and competition. If there were lots of great options and more on the horizon, this would probably not be an issue.
-
Might have to charge for them both.
The key word here is might. But lets see if this is all a matter of semantics and a request for a separate EULA is provided. If that makes X-rite feel better, I’m fine with it. Its kind of odd that the main/master EUAL is so loosely defined for the few of the customers who will read it or that we can get a custom EULA. Its like X-rite is between a rock and a hard place. I’d prefer they (and we) just get the next dot release out and move on. But its been an interesting exercise in legal ease.
-
For me the die is cast. So I changed my tune because I do
let my clients without proper ICC profile. I also
changed all our offers and to show that is not enriched in
icc profiles performing remote I even dropped considerably
Price
-
I've already presented this question to them and had considerable dialog about it. If you work with a customer onsite and then later want to make profiles remotely for them that's fine, totally fine! There's "significant billable services" to that client in addition to the remote profile.
What's not so good is when you offer remote profiling services to people you've never worked with. Put up a remote profiling website and watch the money come in with minimal contact kind of thing. Your email could use a little clarification as to wither you're providing remote profiles to existing clients or to new ones as that is the key, IMO.
So if somebody takes training from one person he has only the possibility to buy remote profiles from the original trainer or paying for unneeded "services" to a new one. This for years and years...
Not only absurd, but legally very doubtful in the EU.
But as a customer I'm not bound by the EULA, so I can setup a online profiling service and forward the targets to the one I had training from and the profiles to my own customers. Even easier someone can start a second company to do the online service and bill them for e-mailing profiles, consulting and for example website maintenance from the first company.
Oh well just write a bill : opening packaging 10 euro, checking targets 5 euro, making profile 1 euro, checking profile 2 euro, sending e-mail with profile 2 euro.
-
So if somebody takes training from one person he has only the possibility to buy remote profiles from the original trainer or paying for unneeded "services" to a new one. This for years and years...
Not only absurd, but legally very doubtful in the EU.
Good point! So someone takes a class from me. Well for one, I’m doing this next month, students are encouraged to bring targets from home so we can build profiles in class. In this case the EUAL is OK. But then they go back home and in 8 months want one built remotely. Now what? I’ve done my 50 profiles for the year and now I need them to write me some legal doc that says 8 months prior they took a class from me and so its OK for me to build this one profile? How does one prove this? This is banality ridiculous! So I have to submit paper work from customers to X-Rite should they decide I’ve gone over the limit of remote profile work? Or just say screw it and go about my business as I’ve done in the past.
-
After reading all the comments and pondering the EULA, I wonder if x-Rite is sort of stuck in time when nearly ever user needed to profile their printers to get good quality. A lot of opportunity for making money by providing profiling services and thus the software makers trying to get what they feel is their fair share of this. I can remember websites with hundreds of profiles available for download for a fee.
With the consistency of current printers, manufacturers profiles very often provide more than adequate results for most users. While some still make some income from profile creation, it just isn't the same anymore, and as mentioned by many with this EULA it's really hard to figure out when you might have crossed their line and owe them some more money (and in fact probably impossible for xRite to actually police). They may be better served and make more money focusing on aggressive pricing and marketing and just selling more software packages, and just quit worrying that someone might make a few bucks creating a profile for someone else.
-
remote profiling is a pain in the ass, and does a great disservice to everyone involved, except when trained end-users are the ones getting the profiles. People need that training in addition to the profiles. If you don't give them that training bad things happen. .......
........... When I have made exceptions to my rule about only working with existing clients, I've been flooded with support emails from these people. "Prints from your profile don't look like my monitor" because they aren't calibrating their displays correctly or using good lighting, "Prints from your profile look too good, can you desaturate your profiles?" because they're used to over-saturating their files to compensate for their previously poorly color managed printing process, etc. Or worse yet, they continue to get poor results and don't bother to tell the remote profiling service provider at all. You get the idea.
I don't agree at all that remote profiling does any disservice to end clients at all. I also think it’s pretty insulting to the majority of remote profiling customers to suggest they can’t use custom printer profiles without being trained by the profiler.
Maybe if you’re finding running a remote profiling service a “pain in the ass” you’re getting your approach wrong or have unrealistic expectations of how this service actually works in practice. I don’t think anyone can make a living from solely providing this service, these services end up being a supplementary offering from bigger businesses ensuring that their capital investments in CM get better utilisation.
I've been running a remote profiling service for about ten years now and at least 95% of my clients are delighted with the profiles and service they get from us and present no undue support burden to us. Most of the remaining 5% might need an extra email exchange to sort out any misunderstandings and usage problems, but only a tiny minority need more than a couple of emails to fully resolve their issues.
Despite offering a money back guarantee for anyone unsatisfied with their profile, no one has ever asked for a refund.
Our service is targeted at individual photographers, rather than print shops and higher end clients and most know exactly what they want and how to use the profiles correctly. I'd also guess that most wouldn't spend the extra involved with on-site consultations as a significant number live in remote locations where the costs of on-site visits would be totally uneconomic. It’s these small scale clients that will loose out if X-Rite try to eliminate remote profiling services or charge licence fees that make the profiles prohibitively expensive.
I can't understand why X-Rite would try to shut down small profiling businesses at all. I very much doubt that our profiling business has any negative effect on X-Rite’s sales, probably the reverse. Often our clients go on to invest in more and better CM hardware like monitor calibrators and some I'm sure go on to invest in printer profiling kit of their own having seen the advantages of custom profiles on their own systems.
Paul
-
I do sympathize with Xrite, but IMHO, the Xrite marketing guys have apparently not thought it out to its ultimate conclusion. The resistance which impedes Xrite from selling more color measuring instruments and more profile generation software copies is this overall mess that is loosely call "Color management". Get rid of the complexities and pitfalls and many more customers would likely buy instruments and happily control their processes with much greater effectiveness. But right now, every time CM starts to get a little easier, some big change (or screw up) in printer drivers, new OS versions, media inconsistencies, display technologies, etc, etc., and overall lack of industry standardization sends everyone scurrying back to the starting line or trying to find a new "work around". This situation may represent job security for a few gifted color management consultants, but it's hell on the overall adoption rate of color managed workflows in the photographic and printing industries. Meanwhile, "Cloud computing" is rapidly entering the implementation phase which means some bright marketing guys at every company from Microsoft on down are going to propose a whole new paradigm for charging us for software functionality. If, for example, Xrite really wanted to eliminate remote profiling businesses and capture a fee for every custom profile generated they should have simply put their new profiling engine on an Xrite server and handed out a free Ipad app or the like that lets us upload our data from our Xrite color gismos to their secret sauce application in the cloud. A perfect example today is Dragon's Ipad dictation app. It works like a charm, but your iPad isn't doing the speech to text translation. A company controlled and operated server does it, so you have to have an internet connection, and Dragon now has total access to every word you speak. If I were paranoid, I'd really be paranoid about cloud computing. But my point is simple, cloud computing is the perfect way to transition from the current software purchasing model to a new "click charge" model of pricing. Microsoft could charge a small toll fee for every page we author in Word, Dragon for every word we translate, Adobe for every image we edit. But that said, the proponents of the new cloud computing paradigms should be careful what they would wish for. For every power user who used to pay for one copy of Microsoft Word and then authored thousands of pages per year with his single software copy of Word, others of us paid the same fee, and we only write a few pages per year. Thus, cloud computing will allow every software company to track every last ounce of use and charge for it accordingly, but they may just be surprised at how many copies of software they used to sell for which very little work product actually got made with it. Most software companies actively seek to prevent all aspects of pirated software and other forms of abuse that hurts their bottom line, but do these companies have market data on how many legitimate copies are being underutilized by the customer? On this point, I would further add that generic profiles rather than custom profiles are probably Xrite's biggest leak in their boat. Even when they get the big OEM printer and paper companies to pony up 50K or whatever for the right to mass distribute a few dozen profiles, it probably doesn't make up for the revenue that would have come in if custom profiles were being made instead, new Xrite Eula or not.
cheers,
Mark
-
This is rediculous and doubt it would stand in any EU court. We'll sell you a hammer, but you can only use it on your own house! We'll sell you a car but you cant use it to give people rides for pay! Silly!
-
Has anybody who applied for an extended agreement with X-Rite received anything back? I haven't.
Richard Southworth
-
Has anybody who applied for an extended agreement with X-Rite received anything back? I haven't.
I made a requests and heard nothing other than it was being passed onto another person in the company.
-
Has anybody who applied for an extended agreement with X-Rite received anything back? I haven't.
Richard Southworth
I made a requests and heard nothing other than it was being passed onto another person in the company.
Catch 22 ;)
-
Very disappointing.
But not at all surprising, given X-Rite's history of this kind of thing.
- first release of Color Munki could only be installed 3 times (public outcry overturned this one)
- Profilemaker Pro 5 renamed Profilemaker Platinum and old package discontinued
- (now legacy) Profilemaker Pro 5 not eligible for upgrade to i1Profiler (public outcry overturned this one)
- i1Profiler EULA :
- restricts usage to 50 profiles/year for non-personal use
- grants invasive audit rights to X-Rite
- supersedes EULA for separate products
- restricts usage for clients to on-site only, no electronic communications allowed
- bans remote profiling services
The revised EULA seems to have addressed only one of the above concerns, you can now email/telephone your customers. Big Whoop.
Chance of me upgrading Profilemaker to i1Profiler with this (revised) EULA = zero.
Regrettably it seems my profiling will continue to be done with PM5, until such time as a viable alternative can be found, shame, I'd been looking forward to using the new package. I was very seriously looking at the purchase of an iSis specifically because it would make volume (remote) profiling so much easier, for lower volume non-remote profiling time is not such an issue and the iO is fine, so not only is the i1Profiler purchase shelved, so is the iSis. Whilst X-Rite may not care about just little ole me, I'm sure I'm not alone. Maybe X-Rite don't care about any of us, certainly seems that way judging by the contempt with which these EULA's have been written.
Whichever way you cut it, this is a marketing FAIL, as someone pointed out, you can't sell someone a hammer and then tell them what kind of nail they're allowed to hit with it. ::)
-
I'm sure I'm not alone.
You're not, another isis sale lost here.
-
DJOY,
I've read the new agreement at least half a dozen time, and although I still have major problems with it, it did get rid of the 50 profile limit and the superseding of previous licenses, unless they've revised it a third time. The remote profiling language is still ambiguous at best and the auditing clause is pure b.s. I'm in no hurry to upgrade what ain't broken in the first place.