iLok "laws" are too tight

This is NOT a subject regarding the presence of or the need for copy protection systems.


It is about unnecessary money driven restrictions when the need for moving licenses and/or iLoks arises. I would like to sell my Pro Tools M-Powered 8 and I'm facing the following situation. I have other licenses stored on the iLok (that came with the product). I will then move these licenses to another iLok, leaving only the M-Powered 8 license on the original iLok. iLok rules says that I'm not able to release an iLok from my account unless the iLok is empty. This means that the buyer will not be able to register the iLok to his account, because it has not been released from my account. I know it can be done if you get your wallet out and pay for it, but that is not gonna happen.


I bought the Music Production Toolkit second hand a couple of years ago and the situation was the same. Neither the seller nor me wanted to pay $25 for transferring the license, so I just got the iLok holding them. Otherwise, the deal would not have happened. Apart from holding the MPTK licenses, the iLok is useless, since it is still tied to the sellers iLok account. After some time, you end up having several iLoks on the computer, and the only ones happy are those selling the iLoks.


The eLicenser used for e.g. Cubase, does not have these restrictions. Hence, it is technically possible to run a copy protection system, without having to pay all the time.


For the legit user, copy protection systems is a wicked necessity already from the beginning, but these iLok related restrictions upgrades the problem into show stoppers. In other words, I'm so tired of the iLok scheme, that it has limited my motivation for buying new stuff. I know other people who feels the same way.


Thanks for listening.


Idea No. 2326