Also thank you all for your posts and comments, much appreciated, I think this is a healthy debate, but at the end of the day we do just want to get the job done and move forward….
OK, your English is obviously not your strongest point, I have not stated anywhere that you are a thief, I said getting clients to buy licenses when there is no just cause is a money grab, totally different things. I have to keep responding because you bring up points that are completely misleading. First of all the price you gave was because both projects were very similar in nature, you got paid fairly, you can get the same job done outsourced to India for half the price, I came to you purely because you were the author. We are a professional company and we don’t get involved with dialogue such as this. If you take it from a clients point of view you are completely and utterly wrong, we say we have paid but we don’t have a useable end product, period, so your rationale should be fair enough lets get the customer to where he wants to be and help him get there. If you look at your own comments they are far from being fair and understanding, actually from the beginning it seems that you are the client and we should be thankful for your business, when it is the other way around. So please, don’t tell us about being derogatory in any way. You’re assuming that we used the videos, going to your comment: From your post: You said to me “I shall let you know tomorrow, hopefully once the file is on-line, thanks for your patience” The next day you said “All worked well with first project, so can you proceed with second project please.” This was said, if you recall as we were not sure how the load speed would be as it was a big file, we had to test that first or otherwise there was no point in even making the second one and the whole thing would have been a waste of time. They were put online on a private server for testing purposes by our web developers. The 2 modifications we want renders the existing ones useless as if you saw the details you would realize that there is no point in having the 4 as they are so similar. Again this is a matter of common sense. I would only be suspicious if a client wants changes that look as if they want to create another end product that serves a different function altogether, that is why we’re amazed at your comments. If you have anything positive and a way to move forward please post again…..
We don’t think it is our responsibility if anyone or everyone says or does this, by way of lying or being deceitful, you have to look into each situation. It appears to me that you just want clients to keep buying licenses from you for no apparent reason, it’s up to you to rectify this as it’s only getting worse for you.
GhosTeam, Thanks for your post, like I said we have not been able to use it as the website is not up and running yet, the launch date is the 15th of April. Of course I am willing to pay for the changes/customization, I am just airing my views on the licensing issue as this is a legitimate case and seems only fair that I want 2 end products and therefore should only pay for 2 licenses. We didn’t use the videos made as one face of the cube has an unsuitable picture on it, our only mistake may have been we created them too early and we should have waited until we were positive about every picture in the cube, anyway your comments are noted and we hope Dsign Productions sees these circumstances the same as you and others do, we shall see ….. Thanks again Regards
Thank you Dorde, someone finally who understands the situation…. It’s common sense really and the integrity, we have not used the end product on our website, the website isn’t even up until the 15th of April, we’re making a couple of minors changes as a few variables have changed at our end. To be dinged with new license fees is absurd as I’m sure support will agree. I appreciate this does not apply to all cases but it is quite clear in our circumstances. Your response makes sense to me and should be quite obvious to everyone else too. Regards
OK I am that client. We bought 2 licences a couple of weeks ago, they were customized, never used as we made them for a website, since then a couple of changes have occurred, so one picture has to be changed. We have not used the end product so it sounds ridiculous to purchase 2 new licences for the same thing. A licence is issued for an end product, we don’t actually have an end product until it is suitable for uploading. We have not uploaded it to the website as it is not suitable now. So in this case we do not have 4 end products, if this was the case and we were going to use 4 end products I can understand in purchasing 2 further licences. As this is not the case it sounds a little naive and a money grab to think otherwise. We have to pay for the change which is reasonable but to think we have to buy the licences again is an issue that is hard to understand, in all aspects of licensing. Please check the facts, I know this is possibly a grey area but common sense needs to prevail in this instance. It cannot be justified by any stretch of the imagination. We have been good customers up until now, so I don’t see why we should be penalized in this manner. Legally we have 2 licenses for 2 end products, an end product is something that you can use for the purpose it was intended. I hope this clarifies our position…..any comments are welcome.