Sharing payed plugins for free?

[JohnDoeNews]

Statement, true or false:
If person A asks person B to make something for person A and they need a payed plugin for it, then person A should be able to give person B a copy of the plugin they bought.

This does not seem right to me... In my eyes, when 2 or more devs use a copy of the plugins, there should be 2 or more payments for that plugins. Or am I wrong here?

(I am not trying to get a free copy of a plugin... I was offered a copy of a plugin and I refused. Now I want to know if the person who offered me the plugin was indeed in the wrong. I am not here to call them out or to put them in a bad light. I just need to know if I was right telling they are not supposed to offer someone elses plugin.)

 

[RivalRamen_Games]

It doesn't matter if they offered it to you! If they try to give you a plugin that needs to have been paid for, that's not right! I mean, sure, there are gifts, but think about the poor, defenseless, small/medium developers of said plugin.
I wouldn't mind a gift of a big product of, say, a Nintendo Switch. Those guys have enough money as is. But when it's from somebody small or medium, THEN NO!
But this isn't a gift. They are literally COPYING something that needs to be paid for. Imagine a commission, and instead of paying for two copies to gift to Person A, Person B Ctrl-C's it and gives the copy to Person A!
Besides, how do you know whether or not they stole it?? They might be including you in their crime like "OFFICERS! THAT'S MY PARTNER IN CRIME! ARREST HIM, TOO!"
This seems sketchy. If you want it, then you can just buy it from the little/medium guy!
I would really hate it as well if I did a commission for somebody, and they handed a copy of the result to some anon. Watermarks exist for a reason.
(Speaking of which, I really need to put some on my posts, LOL)
Sorry if I'm being too negative. I'm just letting you know refusing was a good idea.

 

[ts50]

So the issue of why this is different than giving, say, a Nintendo Switch (@RivalRamen_Games) has to do with the complexity of electronic files. If I buy a Switch and give it to my buddy, I don't have the Switch anymore. I can't use it for myself.

On the other hand, if I buy an electronic file and give it to my friend, I actually still have the electronic file myself and can use it as I please.

This applies to electronic music too, which is why I recommend never gifting music electronically to anyone (CDs work fine and can be ripped and placed on a phone, etc.). Copyright laws on electronic files are complicated and easy to break. For example, Amazon lets you buy music electronically in MP3s (at least they did a while ago). But if you were to do so, you would have to be sure to select the Gift option so you could ensure that you did not have any access to the music yourself.

It has something to do with licenses. Each user of the plugin needs their own license (if it is a paid plugin, as this is.) What would be fine is if your friend gave you some money or a gift card so you could buy it yourself. And some websites let you buy it for other people. However, in the case you described only one payment is being performed, but two people are getting it, which is the issue.

EDIT: The dev of the plugin does get to decide the terms for themselves. So if the creator says that someone can buy the plugin and then give it to whoever they want, then that's completely fine. However, I don't know of any rule like that (it is self-destructive since it encourages piracy).

 

[slimmmeiske2]

This does not seem right to me... In my eyes, when 2 or more devs use a copy of the plugins, there should be 2 or more payments for that plugins. Or am I wrong here?

No, you're correct. If I hire a mapper to make a map using DS tiles and the mapper doesn't have those, I need to buy a copy for them. It's the same with plugins or other DLC.

 

[ShadowDragon]

Paid plugins cant be shared or used without paying for it.
it should be a legal one in order to use them.

Paid or gift (if he paid) is oke, he paid and give you a free copy (no gift or paid),
is illegal and against their terms as he "re-distribute" the plugin against the terms.

 

[JohnDoeNews]

Okay, thanks. I just wanted to clear this up, so I wouldn't wrongly accuse anyone.

To be fair: They never specified if they would just send me a copy from their own library, or buy me a new copy. I might better have asked about this first.

In either way, I was not interested in this plugin for myself. I didn't receive anything and if I did, I would not have accept it.

 

[Trihan]

If something someone is producing for you requires a licenced product in order to produce it, then either the person offering the commission or the person accepting it needs to buy a licence for that product. This is generally included in the terms of service of such things.

I've had people ask me to make plugins for them that required a paid plugin and they wanted to just send me the plugin file, but I had to refuse.

 

[JohnDoeNews]

If something someone is producing for you requires a licenced product in order to produce it, then either the person offering the commission or the person accepting it needs to buy a licence for that product. This is generally included in the terms of service of such things.

I've had people ask me to make plugins for them that required a paid plugin and they wanted to just send me the plugin file, but I had to refuse.

Basically the same thing as what happened to me.

 

[Iron_Brew]

Alternative thread title:
Stealing - is it wrong?

 

[Shora]

Depend on the commission/plugin license maybe?

 

[JohnDoeNews]

Alternative thread title:
Stealing - is it wrong?

Not sure that is accurate. I guess the better question would then be: "Is this stealing?"

 

[bgillisp]

Usually it is understood to buy a copy of the plugin as well for the coder unless they already own it. Its really no different than the license rules of the past where everyone working on a game had to have a legal license to use the stuff they were using, and you had to buy x licenses if you had a team of x.

 

[CleanWater]

This does not seem right to me...

And it really is not! I'm proud of your attitude.

What have broken me was a "glitch" that allowed persons to "activate" my game "for free" on Steam. I worked several months on that project and I used to pay my bills with money from each sale. After that, I had to definitely close business.

Digital products may be easy to "copy&paste", unlike physical ones, but the amount of work a professional had to develop it needs to be compensated. That's why Intellectual Property Rights laws exist in almost every country of the world. Nobody likes to work for free.

 

[slimmmeiske2]

This thread is being closed, due to being solved. If for some reason you would like this thread re-opened, please report this post and leave a message why. Thank you.