Filmora is no longer supporting user's Lifetime licenses.

[vertigo220]

2 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

well, yeah, hence I think you should get a refund (and compensation because you now have to buy a competing product)

 

I know thats probably not realistic,  but the refund kinda is... class action suit time yet?

Yeah, good luck with either of those, though. That's a situation where the consumer just gets screwed, and nothing they can do about it. And the companies know that.

[Tams]

Unless detailed otherwise in the purchase contract (not just some promotion page), there's no fixed term for 'Lifetime', so Wondershare really aren't in the wrong here as long as they still offer for download and allow use of the latest version of Filmora before they ended the 'Lifetime' option.

 

Not that I'd buy anything from Wondershare considering they have an office in Lhasa, so are clearly in the CCP's pocket.

[Tams]

10 hours ago, manikyath said:

this.

they can do a lot of good things without per definition having to be "good guy". i do also sort of worry about the whole steam on linux / proton thing actually hurting linux gaming 'outside of steam' in the long run.

I wouldn't worry too much about that, as the actual heavy lifting is done by Wine and CodeWeavers, the latter the company that are working with Valve.  Valve mostly just do some scripting that dials in the settings without user input.  In that way, 'Proton' is really just a marketing term.

 

That said, yes, both Proton and Wine have and will stymy development of games that run natively on Linux.  But, gaming on Linux wasn't really going anywhere (there was some movement with Vulcan, etc. but not much and that will still help), and as it's not emulation, Wine/Proton see very little, if no, drop in performance.

[vertigo220]

3 minutes ago, Tams said:

Unless detailed otherwise in the purchase contract (not just some promotion page), there's no fixed term for 'Lifetime', so Wondershare really aren't in the wrong here as long as they still offer for download and allow use of the latest version of Filmora before they ended the 'Lifetime' option.

 

Not that I'd buy anything from Wondershare considering they have an office in Lhasa, so are clearly in the CCP's pocket.

I'm not sure if details buried in a T&C will stand up against a much more prominent, conflicting advertisement that strongly suggests something else. I realize people should read the terms of a purchase, but many/most don't, and my understanding, which may very well be incorrect, is that the law provides for some leeway here in that terms can't always be upheld if they're questionable, regardless of whether or not the person that accepted them actually read them. I mean, if you bought software and it said in the terms of the sale that as part of the deal you were signing over all of your possessions to the company, I'm pretty sure no court would determine that part of the contract binding. In this case, it seems very much to me like a bait and switch: the bait is the prominently displayed use of the unqualified word "lifetime" and the switch is the fine print that says "not actually lifetime, but just until the next version" or something along those lines.

[divito]

15 hours ago, manikyath said:

are those people who used to use 10 and 11 *still* able to use 10 and 11? that's what's mostly unclear to me.

 

because if they still are, this is less of a "raze the city" topic than it would otherwise be.

 

essentially,  what the company could (should?) have done, is instead of  calling it filmora 12, just call it "filmora studio" and boom.. all previous licensing for filmora no longer applies, because different product. still douchy, but no longer questionable for the license terms.

 

This video actually showcases some answers to the questions some people have been having, and showcases Filmora/Wondershare's scummy nature.

[HenrySalayne]

8 hours ago, Tams said:

Unless detailed otherwise in the purchase contract (not just some promotion page), there's no fixed term for 'Lifetime', so Wondershare really aren't in the wrong here as long as they still offer for download and allow use of the latest version of Filmora before they ended the 'Lifetime' option.

You are absolutely right. I found this in section 8 "conditions" of the contract: I already increased the size by 300%, but it's still easy to miss.

Quote

[...] lifetime^* license [...]

 

*) lifetime based of a hamster

 

[byAsh]

UPDATE: Daniel has made another video on this discussing the differences in the license agreement when he bought it vs the license Filmora is referencing.

 

 

[byAsh]

Also users found this on the way back machine from a few weeks before this happened, it has since been removed & Filmore states it was a “misunderstanding”.

[Colt10]

  FIlmora is now bullying youtube steamers.

 

 Really pisses me off.

[Skiiwee29]

@HellsCreation I have merged your thread into the thread surrounding the Filmora issues.

[vertigo220]

31 minutes ago, HellsCreation said:

  FIlmora is now bullying youtube steamers.

 

 Really pisses me off.

They're just running their company into the ground at this point, and apparently too stupid to even realize it. Sadly, they'll just rebrand under a different name and people won't know. Also seems to me they're opening themselves up to a libel lawsuit for the DMCA claim. I suspect they're not responding on Twitter or anywhere else because their lawyers have told them not to, especially now that they've upped the legal stakes, because it may be too late to turn back now, as doing so would be admitting they were wrong and, now, that they filed a false and frivolous DMCA claim. Apparently companies never learn from the mistakes of others.

[Maticks]

i watched this saga and thought to myself is lifetime plex pass next

[Mark Kaine]

On 12/29/2022 at 7:00 AM, vertigo220 said:

Yeah, good luck with either of those, though. That's a situation where the consumer just gets screwed, and nothing they can do about it. And the companies know that.

well, as i suggested a class action suit is possible and realistic,  i just don't know how likely it is .

[vertigo220]

4 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

well, as i suggested a class action suit is possible and realistic,  i just don't know how likely it is .

I'd say possible but not very realistic, because it seems highly unlikely. I doubt there are enough people affected to make up much of a class and, of those, far fewer that would want to take it that far over what's a fairly cheap piece of software. And the payout would probably be too low for most lawyers to want to bother with it, and any payout large enough to be worthwhile would probably just bankrupt the company and the monetary judgement would likely never even be seen by the plaintiffs. The whole system is a mess and set up to make it extremely difficult for consumers to pursue and obtain justice. Best bet would be for the FTC to actually do their job, but that's not going to happen. You can bet companies like this have lawyers that have advised them they're at very low risk for doing these things, and they move ahead knowing the odds of actually being held to account are extremely low.

[divito]

5 hours ago, Maticks said:

i watched this saga and thought to myself is lifetime plex pass next

1. I pray they're not that stupid.

2. "Plex’s primary revenue driver has long been its “Plex Pass” membership program, which gives subscribers access to advanced features. Valory said that this part of its business would continue to be very important for the company, but ad-supported video has clearly been the biggest growth engine as of late. “In 2022, ad-supported revenue will easily surpass Plex Pass revenue,” Valory said."
 

With their ad structure (and the funding they raised in 2021), hopefully that means it's less likely to affect lifetime users.

[Donut417]

23 hours ago, Maticks said:

i watched this saga and thought to myself is lifetime plex pass next

Im worried about that as well. We rely on Plex to distribute OTA TV thru out home and use Plex server primarily for whole home DVR. The Plex Live TV functions are the only reason I paid for the Plex Pass life time license. If they were to pull a fast one Id have to look for something else to do the job. 

 

Companies need to start to realize that while subscriptions are great for profit, each person only brings home x amount of money each month. Every company is trying to do a subscription. Eventually its going to cause issues. When people start making tough decisions on what subscriptions are really important. 

[OhioYJ]

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

Companies need to start to realize that while subscriptions are great for profit, each person only brings home x amount of money each month. Every company is trying to do a subscription.

I think part of the problem is there are a bunch of companies trying to do subscriptions that don't need to be subscriptions. Just sell a piece of software and be upfront about it. You get Version 9. You bought version 9, that's what you get. I'd say make the next version good enough that people want to upgrade, but the truth is many people will skip a version or two. Some people will buy every version no matter what... Look at Madden, FIFA, COD, etc.... Trying to sell a "more" based on a promise of "lifetime"  isn't worth the backlash when inevitably you realize you have to break that promise. It's just not sustainable for a company.

[Donut417]

15 minutes ago, OhioYJ said:

Just sell a piece of software and be upfront about it. You get Version 9. You bought version 9, that's what you get.

The problem is you get in to the Windows XP issue. Where no one wants to upgrade and then the company doesn't make money. Subscriptions mean they a steady revenue stream. I mean Microsoft literally had to support XP longer than it intended. Effectively Microsoft had release 3 OS's before XP support was terminated, Windows Vista, 7 and Windows 8. There are still people and business who still use XP to this day. Microsoft is not exactly making money off those people. 

[jagdtigger]

 

[Mark Kaine]

11 hours ago, Donut417 said:

The problem is you get in to the Windows XP issue. Where no one wants to upgrade and then the company doesn't make money.

i mean you're not wrong,  but then maybe these companies shouldn't invest in an unsustainable business model to begin with,  if you think about it,  its actually a scam... so you get something that theoretically would last "forever" yet you cant use it "forever" due to artificial limitations -- which would be fine if disclosed upfront,  but that usually isnt the case, meaning you paid money for something that wasn't what it claimed to be = scam

[Mark Kaine]

On 1/1/2023 at 6:07 AM, vertigo220 said:

I'd say possible but not very realistic, because it seems highly unlikely. I doubt there are enough people affected to make up much of a class and, of those, far fewer that would want to take it that far over what's a fairly cheap piece of software. And the payout would probably be too low for most lawyers to want to bother with it, and any payout large enough to be worthwhile would probably just bankrupt the company and the monetary judgement would likely never even be seen by the plaintiffs. The whole system is a mess and set up to make it extremely difficult for consumers to pursue and obtain justice. Best bet would be for the FTC to actually do their job, but that's not going to happen. You can bet companies like this have lawyers that have advised them they're at very low risk for doing these things, and they move ahead knowing the odds of actually being held to account are extremely low.

maybe you're right and any lawsuit isnt actually worth it, but thats an entirely different issue than being theoretically justified , and that will also depend on location / region, i mean they're selling this worldwide arent they.

 

not saying its gonna happen i just wouldn't write it off that quickly either.  

[AlTech]

"Lifetime" licenses are unsustainable to deliver (if you expect to receive any updates post launch) and will literally run the company into the ground unless they charge per version.

 

The companies that avoid this have other continuous forms of revenue which in most cases mean: a subscription, updating the product to chase after more buyers, or micro transactions/In App Purchases.

[vertigo220]

24 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

"Lifetime" licenses are unsustainable to deliver (if you expect to receive any updates post launch) and will literally run the company into the ground unless they charge per version.

 

The companies that avoid this have other continuous forms of revenue which in most cases mean: a subscription, updating the product to chase after more buyers, or micro transactions/In App Purchases.

Nobody's disputing that, or at least most people aren't. The issue isn't with the company wanting/needing to make money, it's how they went about it. They should have either realized from the start that it's unsustainable and never offered it this way in the first place, or once they came to that realization they should have grandfathered in the previous lifetime license purchasers. They were either inept to not realize they couldn't sustain it or flat-out scammers and knew it but decided to offer it anyway with the intent to not honor it or to make it appear as though that's what people were going to get when the intent was much different. No matter how you look at it, it's on the company, not the consumer, that they got themselves into the mess and it's on them to fix it without simply screwing over their customers. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if a fair amount of people that bought it would willingly donate or switch over to a cheaper subscription model (which at a minimum should have been offered) if the company was just upfront and honest and, instead of just doing this without any warning, notified users that without an increase in revenue the product can't be sustained and would be discontinued.

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, AluminiumTech said:

"Lifetime" licenses are unsustainable to deliver (if you expect to receive any updates post launch) and will literally run the company into the ground unless they charge per version.

The companies that avoid this have other continuous forms of revenue which in most cases mean: a subscription, updating the product to chase after more buyers, or micro transactions/In App Purchases.

That's not true at all. Lifetime licenses can be a good tool for the early stages of business development. Lifetime licenses are a mutual beneficial deal - the company gets an early and fast influx of cash and the costumer profits later down the line (if the venture is successful) with "free" updates when the software transitioned to a subscription or pay-per-update model. Honouring this deal will cost the company a negligible amount.

 

Showing the people who supported your brand from the very beginning the finger (some of them even being brand ambassadors) is certainly not the right thing to do. Wondershare are simply altering the deal in their favour.

[Erwin232]

I know, handbrake is just free why not use handbrae instead. But I do purhase the Wondershare Uniconverter since 2017. And I think Wondershare needs to honor lifetime license not only on FIlmora product but also in their product. Here is a evidence by using a wayback machine that lifetime license have FREE UPGRADES. But when I contact their support they said version 13 and version 14 of the product is paid even I own a lifetime plan. Im just surprised that filmora issue overshadowed the other product licensing isssues. Captured on September 2017