Finally!! Now there's just one more thing...

This was a loooooooooooooong time coming, but it's finally here.

These family packs are a great idea. I will eventually purchase one, perhaps at level 5. However, as wonderful as these are, there is still something that needs to be addressed. In the past, I've advocated for high ticket items such as muti-volume commentaries to be made available for collective purchase. In other words, a virtual collective of x number of individuals (5, 10, 15?) would "chip in" on the purchase price of NICOT/NT, for instance, and get full use and access. The long-standing view of encyclopedias and similar resources is that they are made to be collectively read. Prior to the digital age, the primary market of products such as AYB & AYBD was public, university, and seminary libraries, with the expectation being that dozens and hundreds of people would avail themselves of access. When the digital age hit, the single-user concept raised its ugly head. I get it. I understand why...digital is subject to massive reproduction abuse. So, to avoid that boogey man, publishers and their ilk (hey there, FL! Wilted Flower ) decided to buck the abuse onto the consumer. Make no mistake...the single user EULAs of years past were abusive. Understandable, but abusive.

Anyway, times change, markets mature, and FL has managed to wrangle a way of offering these family packs. Cheers to FL!!!! Beer Drinks But, happy as I am, my joy is limited. I am firmly of the opinion that my family should be able to access my AYB and AYBD, and the myriad of other very expensive high ticket items I have in my extraordinarily pricey Logos Bible library. My idea of a "collective purchase" of high ticket resources dovetails pretty well with these new family packs. Tbh, I feel like if I were to purchase a level 5 pack (or possibly a level 6?), then my full library should be available to those who are enrolled in my family pack unit. And let's be clear: not only have I read less than 5% of what I have in my library, but I am pretty certain that no one in my family unit will read even 5% of what I have read. My suggestion is NOT about "taking the publishers to the cleaners". Rather, it is about making my massive Logos resource purchases bear some fruit rather than being the equivalent of virtual tchotchkes on a virtual shelf. In the end, this is about allowing customers the dignity to rise above the epithet of "criminal" just because they want to see their ginormous investment have some actual benefits for their loved ones.

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

https://community.logos.com/forums/t/200046.aspx

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1162172#Comment_1162172

Yeah...if that discussion is the sum of FL's effort, they won't see a dime from me for these packages. I'm really astonished that people really seem to think that they OUGHT to pay full price as a single user for a product CONCEPTUALIZED and DESIGNED to be purchased by institutions and used by hundreds of people. 😞

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1162210#Comment_1162210

Yeah...if that discussion is the sum of FL's effort, they won't see a dime from me for these packages. I'm really astonished that people really seem to think that they OUGHT to pay full price as a single user for a product CONCEPTUALIZED and DESIGNED to be purchased by institutions and used by hundreds of people. 😞

I don't have a dog in this one. But the decision to limit access 'way back' has had some merits (continued publishing of yet one more commentary or lexicon). Although, if OL prepubs are any clue, that argument is on its deathbed. Journals are the last-gasp. With the competitive world now centralizing on automated text (and regergetating authors), maybe shared-resources is the ONLY likely way forward for high-end scholarship.

I'm curious (and none of my business) what in those family packs might 'work' for your family. All the families I ever knew, were quite specific on teaching-text ... none of this 'ecumentical stuff'.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1162210#Comment_1162210

I'm really astonished that people really seem to think that they OUGHT to pay full price as a single user for a product CONCEPTUALIZED and DESIGNED to be purchased by institutions and used by hundreds of people.

The Terms of Service state clearly that the software and content cannot be used that way, so it is clear that you are paying for exclusive use. But I doubt that you (and any other savvy user) have paid full price for all of your content! Logos 3/Libronix may have been implemented in a way that gave rise to that impression, but that changed with Logos 4 and its installation for a single OS user. If multiple Logos users can log on to that installation, their content is separate from other users and cannot be shared.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1162257#Comment_1162257

The Terms of Service state clearly that the software and content cannot be used that way, so it is clear that you are paying for exclusive use.

Which is the problem I'm addressing. I know what the EULA says, and I acknowledge that it served its purpose during the birth pangs of digital media, but it was & is a one-size-fits-all solution for a world in which one size simply does not fit all. When "ridiculous" is the only option, sometimes you just have to roll with ridiculous. That's what we did when Logos came out, before FL was a thing. That was over a quarter century ago!! Again, I get why, in the days of Napster, the EULA was written and the business model was designed the way it was. Bob had to convince the brick-and-mortar publishers that his project wasn't going to leave the door to their henhouses wide open. So, single user it was. Fine...I get it. But that doesn't negate the fact that in many ways the EULA was abusive, sort of like martial law. Necessary given the times, but definitely not an appropriate way of conducting normal affairs. These new family packs simply trumpet that fact. Perhaps it's true, in fact, they are simply a package of one-user licenses, but the idea is much bigger and broader than that. There is acknowledgment in the packaging that there is a need for "shared" resources.

What I'm saying is pretty stinking simple: if I buy a certain level of basic user packages for my family (and I'm fully willing to concede it would have to be the max-level package, or perhaps even a level above 5), then my family should be able to access my NICOT/NT, my AYB, my HALOT, and even my Bloomsbury bundle. Logos users have gotten so used to martial law, they have come to believe that it is the normal state of affairs. It isn't.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1162687#Comment_1162687

What I'm saying is pretty stinking simple: if I buy a certain level of basic user packages for my family (and I'm fully willing to concede it would have to be the max-level package, or perhaps even a level above 5), then my family should be able to access my NICOT/NT, my AYB, my HALOT,

The Family packs recognize a need without violating the single user requirement, but the lack of premium content makes that pricing possible. Could FL include premium content for a family of three (say) and keep the price attractive? It might help if FL can discount your premium content and that of any family member, but that gets really complicated. However, do all your family need that premium content. Why not buy it as required at Sale prices? Why not buy a lesser product (I don't see AYB Dictionary, or HALOT as 'family' level)?