Hcs voice packs altering other apps code?

[Dahill]

I floated that idea myself as a possible theory - so it could have been me, or maybe I heard the same as you somewhere, it would certainly make a bit more sense than "I'm going to screw GMP and break laws just out of spite".

I could swear I did hear it or read it as an upcoming project or feature.
Here is what makes it worse...one of my favorite elite musicians is currently launching his next album within GMP (at least a month to two before he sells it outright) and " Watson" just jacked up my jams" and my "computer".
I somehow feel his attempt to corner the market may have moved him off the market for most.

 

[Rafe Zetter]

Thank you Cmdr Rafe Zetter for your explanation.

Changing someone else's code and/or content without permission is indeed very wrong. The Reddit post I read this morning suggested global variable values were changed, which seems ok to me. A content provider does not need to play nice, but cannot alter other parties content.

If the latest version of the HCS voicepacks still alter GMP code - this would indeed put HCS on dodgy ground, if it does not then I am struggling to see how it will be the doom and gloom predicted, I suspect it depends in wich territory any legal case was prosecuted.

From a justice point of view, I hope you are correct about the chargebacks, I would be suprised though.

As for FDev, I hope they continue supplying COVUS voicepacks. thus implying a continued partnership with HCS - I like more content not less content, but HCS should behave legally, if not ethically for that to continue.

Simon

The global variables that were changed in the previous version are not used by HCS - however they ARE used by GMP, and HCS knew this.

Basically HCS threw down a bucket of ice under GMP and ensured GMP would fall flat on its face.

The updated version of this afternoon doesn't change those variables anymore, (those entire sections have been deleted) it now does a simple check - if GMP is active within VA, HCS fails to run AT ALL.

So the same end result applies - HCS have changed their code TWICE so that the end user is unable to run HCS and GMP plugins within Voice Attack AT THE SAME TIME - despite thet fact they do two very different things with ZERO overlap. Remember HCS DOES NOT OWN VOICE ATTACK - VA is an entirely seperate company.

If the HCS singularity version was a genuine mistake, they could have reverted the code back to how it was before singularity when GMP and HCS worked side by side no problems - they didn't they kept the end result but changed how it got there, and have since openly admitted it was deliberate.

So the changes bring HCS inside the law regarding interfering with another companies code, but still throw the toys out of the pram as far as monopolising how VA works for the end users, and thus still outside the anti-competition law regulations.

It's truly quite pathetic - he deserves to get crucified, as an example to other indie devs that this sort of kaka just isn't cool, and especially for having the arrogance to think that he could still dicate to end users of VA how they are allowed to use HCS or GMP.

 

[mikelimtw]

The global variables that were changed in the previous version are not used by HCS - however they ARE used by GMP, and HCS knew this.

Basically HCS threw down a bucket of ice under GMP and ensured GMP would fall flat on its face.

The updated version of this afternoon doesn't change those variables anymore, (those entire sections have been deleted) it now does a simple check - if GMP is active within VA, HCS fails to run AT ALL.

So the same end result applies - HCS have changed their code TWICE so that the end user is unable to run HCS and GMP plugins within Voice Attack AT THE SAME TIME - despite thet fact they do two very different things with ZERO overlap. Remember HCS DOES NOT OWN VOICE ATTACK - VA is an entirely seperate company.

If the HCS singularity version was a genuine mistake, they could have reverted the code back to how it was before singularity when GMP and HCS worked side by side no problems - they didn't they kept the end result but changed how it got there, and have since openly admitted it was deliberate.

So the changes bring HCS inside the law regarding interfering with another companies code, but still throw the toys out of the pram as far as monopolising how VA works for the end users, and thus still outside the anti-competition law regulations.

It's truly quite pathetic - he deserves to get crucified, as an example to other indie devs that this sort of kaka just isn't cool, and especially for having the arrogance to think that he could still dicate to end users of VA how they are allowed to use HCS or GMP.

Rafe, I 100% agree with you.... but calm down, you are going to burst an artery or something LOL

 

[Lanceor]

@ Rafe Zetter

Thanks for summarising and clarifying the issues at hand. I don't use either HCS or GMP, and given the recent turn of events, I doubt I will ever use HCS.

Frontier are probably looking at this very closely now, and are likely to be conducting their own investigation. For both legal and PR reasons, they would need to be 100% certain before making a public statement and/or altering their business arrangements with HCS.

 

[oscarolim]

I'm not sure where your information for that is coming from - citation required, because GMP uses ZERO HCS assets, GMP doesn't need HCS to function within VA.

HCS and GMP were performing different functions within VA.

The "infringement" lawsuit HCS brought against GMP was proven to be unfounded.

HCS has no rights to monopolise what plugins work within VA as they don't own VA, and as I stated before HCS still works when other NON GMP plugins are used.

Is what it was implied on the reddit post HCS made. That attempts to license went into deaf ears. If is true or not, well, who am I to say.

 

[Toumal]

As I wrote on Reddit, what HCS can do is to not officially support running both profiles at the same time. People experiencing issues would be asked to only run one pack at a time, problem solved. But actively sabotaging the other pack is unacceptable. Now that HCS just refuses to start is less egregious, but still an anti-consumer move.

Imagine buying an aftermarket headlight lamp for your car, and then the car refuses to start because "non-genuine part detected".

 

[VerticalBlank]

Imagine buying an aftermarket headlight lamp for your car, and then the car refuses to start because "non-genuine part detected".

It’s more like your car refusing to start because you have a motorbike in the same garage.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

So what should I do with ASTRA on my PC? It's the only Voice Attack plug in that I use.

 

[[VR] Enexemander]

I was under the impression that HCS was just a series of macros for Voice Attack linked to audio files. Can we just delete the section that doesn't allow it to run with other plug ins?

 

[Crank Larson]

So what should I do with ASTRA on my PC? It's the only Voice Attack plug in that I use.

If you like it, use it. I'm certainly not going to be trying for a refund for my two voicepacks. While I won't send future business HCS's way, I still like the two voicepacks I bought, and they were worth the money I paid.

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

+1 I don't think HCS are absolved from issue doesn't matter who has resigned.

The order to make a competing product not work was given. Without the order, this would not be an issue regardless of the method used.

Even thinking you have the right to tamper with a competitors product while yours is running is very out of this world disconnected from plain reality. There should be laws against that.

At the minimum frontier should do the right thing and at least reprimand if not cut off the relationship (steam does this when its needed). Frontier would be complicit in HCS's arrogance if they just brushed it away.

EDIT: This is beyond voicepacks or frontierstore cosmetics, its an issue of business ethics.

 

[sahib]

Even thinking you have the right to tamper with a competitors product while yours is running is very out of this world disconnected from plain reality. There should be laws against that.

Actually there are and they broke them

A couple of days ago I was thinking about buying one of those packs. Then this whole thing happened, I found out about VMX Game Music Packs and bought that instead. Couldn't be happier, dodged a bullet here and ended up with a better product

 

[Good Death]

If you like it, use it. I'm certainly not going to be trying for a refund for my two voicepacks. While I won't send future business HCS's way, I still like the two voicepacks I bought, and they were worth the money I paid.

Yeah both vps I paid for were well worth it. This whole thing is really a shame I've had nothing but a good experience with HCS since my first purchase.

 

[Toumal]

It’s more like your car refusing to start because you have a motorbike in the same garage.

Or that, yes
And the car company claiming that there are "licensing issues" that make them unable to not screw with either your car, or the motorbike.

A couple of days ago I was thinking about buying one of those packs. Then this whole thing happened, I found out about VMX Game Music Packs and bought that instead. Couldn't be happier, dodged a bullet here and ended up with a better product

I'm gonna go ahead and say that I'm not super amazed by the VMX music as a whole. The compositions are very generic and IMHO not at all on the same level as, say, the standard ingame music. Still, people should not have to deal with competing products disabling VMX out of what I can only assume to be malicious intent.

 

[Crank Larson]

Actually there are and they broke them

I wouldn't be too sure on that. There are many technology ecosystems that exclude competitors. You just need to look at the Apple Store for one example (you can only install stuff on your phone from the Apple Store, unless you jump through hoops to jailbreak it). Apple make money from everything that goes through their store, and has complete control over what is allowed there.

Breaking someone else's code (which HCS did before the latest update) does have laws against it (reverse-engineering, etc.), but as HCS no longer do this, and you'd have to prove losses, etc., then there would be little point in pursuing that. The current mechanism (of HCS not working if it detects another product) is not illegal.

Having said this, there is no licence or T&C shown on the HCS website (at least when I checked last night), and nothing is shown when I install the product. There is a text file call HCS Voice Pack Licence.txt that is provided with the voice pack (dated March 2016). There is nothing in that file that suggests that Voicepacks can't be used with other products.

In short, the legal issues aren't likely to amount to much. It's the public relations that are likely to be an issue going forward.

 

[sahib]

I'm gonna go ahead and say that I'm not super amazed by the VMX music as a whole. The compositions are very generic and IMHO not at all on the same level as, say, the standard ingame music.

To each his own I suppose - for me, I really enjoy hearing a different soundtrack after many years of the same thing over and over again

 

[sahib]

I wouldn't be too sure on that. There are many technology ecosystems that exclude competitors. You just need to look at the Apple Store for one example (you can only install stuff on your phone from the Apple Store, unless you jump through hoops to jailbreak it). Apple make money from everything that goes through their store, and has complete control over what is allowed there.

I believe that comparison is not valid, because HCS is not the owner of VoiceAttack; they do not own the ecosystem, merely exist in it. Imagine if you installed the Gmail app on your iPhone and it disabled the Outlook app - that would be a similar situation.

Breaking someone else's code (which HCS did before the latest update) does have laws against it (reverse-engineering, etc.), but as HCS no longer do this, and you'd have to prove losses, etc., then there would be little point in pursuing that. The current mechanism (of HCS not working if it detects another product) is not illegal.

Having said this, there is no licence or T&C shown on the HCS website (at least when I checked last night), and nothing is shown when I install the product. There is a text file call HCS Voice Pack Licence.txt that is provided with the voice pack (dated March 2016). There is nothing in that file that suggests that Voicepacks can't be used with other products.

In short, the legal issues aren't likely to amount to much. It's the public relations that are likely to be an issue going forward.

Yeah, I don't believe anything serious (legal) will come from this, I was just saying they did break the law.

 

[Ozric]

EDIT: This is beyond voicepacks or frontierstore cosmetics, its an issue of business ethics.

business ethics... what a novel idea [wacko]

 

[Lightspeed]

Probably in about a week or two ..... they will have a voicepack sale ..... everyone will jump in who hasn't got one (including me) and say "what a bargain !" ..... previous weeks' problems forgotten ... company slowly recovers .... Reddit reports another scandal elsewhere ..... forum thread opens ....................

 

[Wasp0]

Hell, what a mess, does this mean i might have to start learning to press buttons again in ED??

On a PURELY selfish basis, my main game play revolves around using VA and a Voice pack, i do hope the HCS do NOT go under, VASCO is my sole companion in ED.

**Note**: I am not condoning what HCS have done in anyway, and somebodies bottom needs to smacked, but i hate pressing damn buttons!!