Sound Blaster

[sprgnzwp]

I think it's important for Creative's customers to be able to read the original response from Phil O'Shaughnessy, here's the removed message to Daniel_K:

Daniel_K:

We are aware that you have been assisting owners of our Creative sound cards for some time now, by providing unofficial driver packages for Vista that deliver more of the original functionality that was found in the equivalent XP packages for those sound cards.  In principle we don't have a problem with you helping users in this way, so long as they understand that any driver packages you supply are not supported by Creative.  Where we do have a problem is when technology and IP owned by Creative or other companies that Creative has licensed from, are made to run on other products for which they are not intended.  We took action to remove your thread because, like you, Creative and its technology partners think it is only fair to be compensated for goods and services.  The difference in this case is that we own the rights to the materials that you are distributing.  By enabling our technology and IP to run on sound cards for which it was not originally offered or intended, you are in effect, stealing our goods.  When you solicit donations for providing packages like this, you are profiting from something that you do not own.  If we choose to develop and provide host-based processing features with certain sound cards and not others, that is a business decision that only we have the right to make.

Although you say you have discontinued your practice of distributing unauthorized software packages for Creative sound cards we have seen evidence of them elsewhere along with donation requests from you.  We also note in a recent post of yours on these forums, that you appear to be contemplating the release of further packages.  To be clear, we are asking you to respect our legal rights in this matter and cease all further unauthorized distribution of our technology and IP.  In addition we request that you observe our forum rules and respect our right to enforce those rules.  If you are in any doubt as to what we would consider unacceptable then please request clarification through one of our forum moderators before posting.

Phil O'Shaughnessy
VP Corporate Communications
Creative Labs Inc.

 

Forum Moderator
Creative Labs

[Legolash2o]

and there response:

-----------------------------------------------

We have read the strong feedback about Creative's forum post regarding driver development by Daniel_k and other outside parties. Creative's message posted on our behalf by our Company spokesperson tried to address our concern about the improper distribution of certain software which is the property of other companies. However, we did not make it as clear as we would have liked that we do support driver development by independent third parties. The huge task of developing driver updates to accommodate the many changes in the Vista operating system and the extensive testing required, including the lengthy Vista certification requirements for audio, makes it very difficult for Creative to develop updates for all past products. Outside developers have been very helpful to Creative and our customers by developing updates for many of our Sound Blaster products, and we do support and appreciate these efforts. This however does not extend to the unauthorized distribution of other companies' property. We hope to work out a mutually agreeable method for working with Daniel_k in supporting his efforts in driver development. Going forward, we are committed to doing a better job of working more closely with third parties to support their development for our products and our customers.

----------------------------------------------------------

Message Edited by Legolash2o on 04-02-2008 01:17 AM

[silverblade_uk]

Isn't it a little late for them to suddenly realise they've done a bit of a "whoopsie"? I mean it took surplus of 200 posts before the thread was locked and the original post altered.

Why alter the first post after all that time? It's like what was originally said is now being "covered up" with the excuse of "you didn't read it as we meant it to come across"... How else is it meant to be interpreted?

[dis_stinkz]

Creative's response is too little, too late, and looks like a feeble attempt at PR firefighting after the boat is already sunk. You've lost more customers in the past few days than you imagine, creative. Last weekend over a dozen gamers from where I live went down to the hardware store to return their Creative Xtreme gamer and Fatality pro cards for refunds. I'm seeing this happen in many places now. You can only attempt to salvage what's left of the support and trust you lost over the past few days.

[BigKriss]

Can someone please post the revised Creative message here as well? I believe the original was revised before being deleted

along with the thread.

Cheers.

[FalconFour]

Here's to hoping this one can stay up for all to see this time, as opposed to being deleted because the company's now "too embarrassed" to want to keep that up here...

Pretty certain, by the very fact that the original message was edited, that Phil is now flipping burgers at McDonald's.

 (Hey, that's not far from where I'm at... but I'm 21 and never had a full time job. We've all gotta start somewhere. But Phil started... and ENDED!)

[Kral2]

Creative can't help but screw up.  By attempting to change history WAY after it was too late to even make a valid attempt at it, it just points out they're trying to change history which will cause more people to hate them.

[FalconFour]

---

BigKriss wrote:

Can someone please post the revised Creative message here as well? I believe the original was revised before being deleted

along with the thread.

Cheers.

---

You mean this thread?