Question about *locking* filters.

due to the nature of the data files, the ffxml's, this would be particularly difficult to do. you'd almost have to encrypt them and i'd hate to see that.

i do understand what you're asking for and why. like jean said a while back, this would promote others releasing filters that they might otherwise not want to. but the cost for doing so would probably be prohibitive. the ffxml files are basically text. you can open them up and look at them or even edit them in notepad. heck, i even fixed one of mine by doing so.

so, even if you made these read only, they could still be easily copied, made read/write and then edited in FF. so, about the only other option would be to encrypt them and i think that's a bad idea.

so, it still boils down, to me anyway, that FF is a sharing program. the whole philosophy is based on this. it's a user sharing library and encrypting or locking filters in some manner just goes against the grain here.

your complaint about the youtube stuff is quite legitimate and i do understand. but i'm curious about what it is you want to protect here in FF....

ok, i just re-read your first post. so, what you want to protect is your ideas that are part of a submitted filter but that are potentially also many other filters down the road. so, basically, you want a sort of copyright protection on those ideas so that you can get the rest of that potential used. hmm, interesting. i have run across that very notion myself when making filters. my solution to that has always been either dont submit the filter, as is the case with some of my multi-filters, or dont worry about it and just submit it. and, as far as i can tell, no one has ever developed any of my ideas in submitted filters.

but, if they did, i still wouldnt worry about it because i'll gain something from what they do. frankly, i've seen things in other's filters that have inspired me to create something else. that's just a natural process. the free exchange of ideas and knowledge always benefits me more than if i simply hoard too much. and yes, i do hold back a little bit, especially if i think there's really something there for an immediate development, but for the most part i think the sharing of filter data is beneficial to more than just FF's pockets. what i give out i tend to get back ten-fold in new ideas. so, to me, the numbers justify losing one or two ideas to someone else.

see, to me, if the filters were locked, i'd never get to see how uber made all the things he made or how steve did all his glass stuff, or how ben made his feather or northern shadow made some of the incredible things she made and that would hurt me, FF and all the rest more than not guarding a few state secrets. so, we'd all end up having to learn everything from scratch, never being able to build on all that's really here.

Quote
Kraellin wrote: so, what you want to protect is your ideas that are part of a submitted filter but that are potentially also many other filters down the road. so, basically, you want a sort of copyright protection on those ideas so that you can get the rest of that potential used.

----Well, not just me, I'm not holding that much ha-ha, but assuming FF keeps growing, there will be many people who might not mind sharing cut-down or range limited filters that did some great stuff. But if someone can just open their filter, remove the range limits, and add more to it, then their filter (and any results from it), has no protection against being copied in that way. Doubley so for unique concepts that have not been exploited/realized by others yet. There are not many of even the hardKore filter makers here I don't think, that can just look at a filter someone else made, and go and copy it without looking inside of it. So in that way, it is a large step against copies, and in that way might even slow down the pointless repetitive growth of the filter library, by removing that easily abused possibility.
----Since there is a much cheaper (1/3 the cost) version of FF available that does that for us, (makes filters uneditable/viewable internally), why can't it be an option for the full version ? Again, not to belabor the point, but there's really nothing to lose from allowing filters to be locked. Those who don't care or want, specifically to share the internals of their filters, can choose to. And those who don't want their filters opened, can still share something with the rest of us all. It simply is a win-win in the end. And yeah, people can just choose to not sumbit their filter to the library now as things are, but how does anyone win there ? They don't.

jffe

Quote
xirja wrote: Well, until there is adequate DRM on FF filters, why would anyone do this? Hello? I understand the idea of growing a product through the widest possible adoption (piracy), but now that we are in version 5, can we not expect a way to actually enable authors to sell filters without the threat of piracy?

I often had thought about this but the only thing that I came up with so far is using a script with copyright info and then hide that in a filter where its just too annoying to find.........So the average/new person trying to submit for credits or trying to make a quick buck may not know where to find it....ie editing on the fringes or xmls....
Then turn it into something that cannot be submitted......Can't fix what can't be found so easily....But I will say no more in public about it..

For the novice, yes, but...I'm trying to slay the wizard, man! I want a time limited secure cloud rental service for my filters, now!.

Damn, how far is Position left="-231968" from the maximum. A nested mess of dummy grouped components plus this enormous canvas space, yep that'll help.

You can even go one step further with the above and prevent any editing in the editor...But this one is a little extreme and still has some work-arounds...
This produces a nice bug and shuts down FF if the filter is choosen to be edited...
Nothing is destroyed or hurt in the shutdown....Its not a real bug but one that is forced....
I will not explain this method in public since this does not belong in the FF library and I will give it away if used...They have enough real bugs to work out..

Try to edit me.ffxml

Dear FF Team,

Please DON'T fix these bugs.

Honestly, the .xml files can still be edited and "fixed" manually (I think?), but that's still a big deterrent.

IDK, I think Waldo is doing something funny to my computer... are you sure that script is safe?

Quote
xirja wrote: As long as they don't share the image/number; so maybe...a lua script can query the hardware ID? Hmmm smile8)

hmmm...

I think that's great for Genetica, but sorta not why I bought Filter Forge. I feel more inclined to learn how to make filters if I can mess around with them... I think that's what makes Filter Forge much better than other similar software...
Lock a filter? Sure, if you never learned anything you applied to that that filter from anyone else... If it was solely your creation, blind without building on anyone else's idea. And hopefully it is the pinnacle of what that kind of filter could ever be... Because lock it and nobody can improve on it and eventually most people will start do the same (even with the stupidest ideas) and before long filter variety and experimentation will be cut in half. I didn't create filter forge and therefore anything I ever make with it will be because I learned how to manipulate someone else's brilliant work and the controls they dreamed up to provide me the opportunity expand on their concepts. I've remade dozens of filters that I've reconfigured for personal use to produced an effect that I'm baffled the original creator never realized was possible or really bothered to to try... I never submitted them because I really didn't do much, just added controls, omitted an node or did something minor, but with the changes, it's a whole different filter almost... And totally does what I needed as opposed to the original version... Thank god that filter wasn't locked, or I'd have been stuck short of what I needed. Not to mention, being able to alter filters is one of the main reasons why I bought the Pro version. Locking filters limits a filters usefulness too... There are a couple of really great, brilliant filters that I've altered this way that were absolutely useless to me unaltered. A locked filter is a limited filter and a dead end.
If a filter is so important to a person and they feel they truly own every aspect of the concept and don't want anyone learning fr om or building off their idea, then I'm quite happy they keep it to themselves... I'd rather never know about it then worry about if something I made was too close to what they made and therefore infringes on their idea. I feel locking a filter submitted to the library is a bad idea.... If it means that much to someone, they should sell it elsewh ere or keep it for themselves.
I truly thank all the filter creators who are happy to share their ideas, methods and work. I think in life too often people forget how much we learn from others, and no matter how great an idea we have, how brilliant our work, without someone at some previous point in the past having shared what they knew, that great idea would never have flourished. There is much truth to the saying "I see so far because I stand on the shoulders of giants".