Elias, if the server can access external servers it is a no go with the
Rules.  If the server can get out. People can get in.

Randy S. Little
http://www.rslittle.com/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/



On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Elias Ericsson Rydberg <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Cloud licensing shouldn't really be an issue legally speaking. None of the
> footage or assets would leave the LAN? If footage can be streamed for
> review sessions I don't see the licenses cloud not. I wasn't aware of the
> current cloud capabilities of flexlm or RLM. No point in reinventing the
> wheel, but if any freelancer could set it up within minutes we would not
> see the issues posted earlier in this thread.
>
> As far as streamed applications goes, these still some performance issues
> that would have to be looked over. Let's begin with Microsofts office 365
> streamed off their azure platform, which I'm told they've invested
> massively in. Let's see how simple text editing works first, and let it
> mature into Photoshop stills and eventually into editing and composting.
>
> I've seen that Citrix have a demo with Maya on their site and that vmware
> is also in the same market. Not exclusively for these kinds of applications
> of course. But from what I can  gather, the issue seems to be with
> licensing Citrix hosts. Cost wise we'll eventually get there if that's
> where people see great performance.
>
> The studios will eventually have to get on board, but I get their fear of
> involving more servers and systems. With the recent Sony hack in mind.
>
> Cheers,
> Elias
> Den 18 dec 2014 19:45 skrev "itai bachar" <[email protected]>:
>
> Freelancers need a 'lite' version, say limited to 2k, and in line with Ae
>> prices.
>> If TF care for the freelance market, which is, as said, mainly the
>> commercials market.
>> Perhaps they're happy enough with just big studio's.
>> Flame is also not freelance friendly.
>> But from 0 $ pro software (Resolve+Fusion) to 10K $ (NukeStudio) there's
>> a big gap, that can be filled
>> by TF, and make a lot of compositors happy, and keep using Nuke.
>> If BM will integrate Resolve with Fusion for round tripping, there will
>> be a small migration in that way.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Nathan Rusch <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   Cloud-based licensing and/or software distribution is a complete
>>> no-go for any studio working on a lot of major features. The new security
>>> requirements that have been imposed on vendors by some of the major studios
>>> are extremely unforgiving. I really hope we don't see VFX software heading
>>> exclusively in that direction or they will be "innovating" themselves away
>>> from most of their customers. At the very least, both licensing models must
>>> be allowed to coexist.
>>>
>>> The only way Adobe software can be used is if you buy enough licenses
>>> for them to grant you use of a local license server (I think the minimum
>>> requirement is 15 CC licenses).
>>>
>>> -Nathan
>>>
>>>
>>>  *From:* Jose Fernandez de Castro <[email protected]>
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 18, 2014 10:11 AM
>>> *To:* Nuke user discussion <[email protected]>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Nuke-users] unimpressed and moving on
>>>
>>>  I think that the future of software piracy protection is going to be
>>> precisely the Netflix model, which is to stream the software and run the
>>> services off the cloud, with local storage and some processing, of course.
>>> This is going to happen, whether we like it or not, and even Adobe has
>>> started testing this with Photoshop for chromebooks. Some services, like
>>> Nvidia's Grid are already doing it for games. Of course software such as
>>> Nuke, which is disk space heavy and computationally intensive will be a
>>> challenge to implement under this model, but they might figure it out. Not
>>> saying that I love the idea, but it might be an alternative to all this
>>> licensing issues and might also make software such as Nuke more affordable.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Elias Ericsson Rydberg <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As much as all these annoyances are valid, I do feel the need to play
>>>> the devils advocate here. Nuke wasn't designed for freelancers and
>>>> shouldn't be treated as such. It was made for use in a studio. So when you
>>>> bring the software on set or out of the house, you'll have to work around
>>>> that limitation. This shouldn't be a surprise, the requirements says it
>>>> needs a server for licensing to work.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, TF could be more accommodating in this regard. It's
>>>> 2014 now. Maybe offer a license server in the cloud so it's reachable
>>>> through the internet. Let's say you register the MAC-adresses of your
>>>> computers and the server could only serve licenses to those machines. And
>>>> if you are a studio and need to have a license server on site for speed and
>>>> redundancy. TF could potentially offer you to set up your own cloud host
>>>> that could serve licenses on site and to on set operations. Or a hybrid. So
>>>> if your Internet connection goes down, the studio can still be served
>>>> licenses from the local server. The few studios that have multiple
>>>> locations could potentially have one license cloud spread over multiple
>>>> servers for redundancy and speed.
>>>>
>>>> I can also envision that these license servers could be able to lease
>>>> licenses to the seats and have TF bill you per hour/days/months instead of
>>>> having a fixed number of floating licenses in your pool. This would offer
>>>> studios to quickly scale up from 20 to 100 seats when they land big jobs.
>>>> And then scale back down again when they wrap. If would also be very
>>>> interesting  if the licenses could be leased from your server to external
>>>> cloud rendering services as well. Or lease licenses to freelancers or
>>>> sub-contractors?
>>>>
>>>> Ultimately it comes down to money of course. But TFs poor treatment of
>>>> its existing customers, in this aspect, isn't defendable. I'd say these
>>>> licensing problems could be solved by technology instead of harrasing phone
>>>> calls. Adobe have rather successfully deployed their cloud licensing model
>>>> and I'd be flattered if The Foundry did the same and built upon some of my
>>>> ideas above.
>>>>
>>>> TL;DR: Make licensing easy, customizable and reasonably priced and
>>>> studios and freelancers will stay with until death. Piracy is best fougth
>>>> by providing better solutions. eg. Netflix.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers and excuse my ramblings,
>>>> Elias Ericsson Rydberg
>>>> Answering social issues with technical solutions since 1990
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Nuke-users mailing list
>>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nuke-users mailing list
>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nuke-users mailing list
> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users

Reply via email to