Account locked due to suspicious activity
- Thread starter archycho
- Start date
LawsHosting
Verified User
I have 6 licences, 2 owned lifetime then the rest internal lifetime...... I'm using the 2 owned for personal use, the other 4 are dormant as I don't offer VPS/Cloud services anymore, which is what internal licenses are/were intended for - if you offer such services yourself - unless I'm wrong.
I'd just be screwed with MariaDB 11+ - even though I use MySQL on one. ??
I'd just be screwed with MariaDB 11+ - even though I use MySQL on one. ??
Our case is so similar with you , we will only provide DA with servers which located inside our DC , I have not provide the service outside our DC to customers . And maybe there a few ( less than 10% of our licenses ) installed outside our DC but used by owned only , not for rental.
I don't know why our licenses are suspended by DA.
Maybe DA read the history we have changed the IP blocks , but in fact it just for IP relocation only , not the servers.
I do provided the information , but no reply yet.@archycho so just provide them IP-range you are extending previous IP-range and all will be fine
Richard G
Verified User
That's again already violating terms too. Like your customers reselling them again, that is not allowed. Use is not the same as reselling.
So I don't have much hope for you.
For self use will brake the license? Kidding?
IP range limitation was not applied when I paid for those licenses , so I think I hard to agree the violation terms(ie: IP blocks limitation) was added after our payment in addition.
Maybe someone is very new ( compared with us who use over 1x years) and did not know how DA installer run at past , DA registered license per IP , and could be changed with no limitation when we paid . After a while , DA limit to change the IP address 5 times per licenses per year.
And now which use hash key with IP blocks , DA is always changing the policy, IP blocks limitation wan not appear at past!
Please do not use the situation now to compare with when we paid .DA allows to change IP address with no limitations at past , DA system allow to do !
Something DA clients portal allow to config , with no warning’s, that will violate licenses , if there is anyone think it is responsible by customers, please have a bodycheck.
Last edited:
Richard G
Verified User
10% outside of your own datacenter for your own use? Who is kidding here?
Ip limitation is never changed.
Could be changed with no limitation, within your datacenter ip pool. Indeed DA change the limit to 5 times per license per year due to the vast abuse. Due to lots of people exchanging license keys to keep their servers running, instead of ordering a license themselves.
I don't say this was going on with your company, but this was the reason, and normally there is no reason to change more than 5 times a year. And also, it could be changed more than 5 times, only have to give a reason to DA.
Due to this change the abuse got less. The hash key does not come with ip blocks as they are based on server, not on ip. So the only thing this prevents is that a 1 license is used on multiple servers as was done more often in the past (violating terms also) by many people.
And this caused a lot of people abusing licenses getting into trouble. Deservedly!
But in fact, this removed the 5 times a year limit again, as you can change servers as much as you want, but the license now can only be used on one server, not on many.
Still does as it does not work based on ip's anymore.
There are no changes of terms since the beginning. The only change is that they started to check more and be more strict and put in a system to prevent all the abuse which was going on.
For the beginning, DA never asked for IP block registration, this is in addition term after paid of license.
If DA need IP blocks registrations at the beginning, we will have registrations of it.
And if I have no mis-understanding , you have point out someone are re-installing a same license to different customers will violate the license, that is something new to me .( In fact , it has no way to proof a license was used by one customer continuously or not , so it should not be applied for violation I think)
Although I do not agree with *we have action to cause violation *, should DA deactivate all licenses if there is one of the licenses violated? This could cause a big argue.
Richard G
Verified User
The new hash system does exactly that.
That's up to DA to decide. Often company's disable all licenses if only 1 is violated, maybe forever or otherwise at least until proove is given that they are not violoted.
Issue here is that you, not anybody else, is the owner of the licenses so you are responsible for them. If 1 is abused, chances are very high there will be more.
You also stated you abused 10% of your licenses, which prooves imho that it's not only 1 license. So I don't think this will cause a big argue. I think this is already a big problem for you because of violation.
And in that case imho it's still very nice of DA to offer you the 50% offer, instead of just blocking licences.
I
Another , renting IP blocks between DataCenters are very usual situations , if deactivated all licenses because of change IP address , I think DA should send us some warnings (ie : Warning message while installation when key in licenses ) instead of disable all licenses without notice.
I state I have installed some license to other cloud service providers (AliCloud) for our company own use ( CDN ), not for rental , I configured those IP address via DA clients portal with no warnings and no email received from DA , I could not image that cause licenses violation.
Another , renting IP blocks between DataCenters are very usual situations , if deactivated all licenses because of change IP address , I think DA should send us some warnings (ie : Warning message while installation when key in licenses ) instead of disable all licenses without notice.
I think it is not possible to define a license which is bundling with the server to the same client or not , for any server re-installations , IP address change or not , this is impossible to proof *SAME CUSTOMER OR NOT* .
Anyway , I could only wait for DA's reply , as a customer , it is hard to accept policy change without notice ( No question about policy changed or not , at least , the execution of policy changed )
Please note , we have never exchange any keys to others , all DA installed by us and rent to our customers . ( Our point of view , our reseller should classify as our customers ) So please don't apply the situation to us which somebody exchange the keys outside their company.
Richard G
Verified User
You have to read your license agreement better then. They are only to be used in your own datacenter and nowhere else. So knowing your license agreement is your own responsibility, like with most company's.
In those cases one should get either seperate licenses or notify DA of the change.
It doesn't matter who uses the server, the license hash takes care that the license is only used on 1 server, no matter who is using it.
So no, this is not proove if it's the same customer or not, but it isn't intended for that. Which is logical. So that doesn't matter at all. It's only intended to prevent the same license key being used on multiple servers like I said.
No it didn't. Only the enforcement got more strict, because of all the abuse which was possible and which clearly became more and more problematic over the years.
Really? To me that sounds different form an earlier statement.
So your resellers are your customers, so you install them on your servers which you rent to resellers, in your datacenter on your ip pool.
Something must be gone wrong here otherwise DA would not have disabled your licenses.
I didn't. I was talking in general explaining as to why DA was using a more strict enforcement.
And earlier I clearly stated:
I did say that those 10% was violating terms and that this is more than 1 license.
However, it's not me you have to convince, it's DA you have to convince that you might not be violating their terms. However, when reading this thread, my thoughs are chances are not very good.
They ofcourse have way more insight in what's going on and which ip's are used than I do.
Since english is not my mother language , so I say sorry to any mis-communication.
1) All DA licenses are install by us , we never send keys to others. More information , our DataCenter service serve mainly Mainland China , I think anyone should know most of the Mainland China's customers install *Windows Servers* instead of Linux. Our customers almost 90% have no Linux knowledge to install a DA to their server. Until now , *WE HAVE NEVER SEND KEY OUTSIDE OUR COMPANY* , never ask our customer to install OS , our server rental since 2003 , there has no IPMI at all , customers could not install base operating system themselves , DA was installed after OS immediately as bundle to reduce our technical support pressure.
2) We have installed serval license ( less than 5 of 62 ) outside our DC for owned use ( company internal ). In my point of view , DA internal licenses are good fit with *SERVICE PROVIDER* which include datacenter and server hosting companies , so *INSIDE OWNED DC* should not be applied , if does , all server hosting companies violated ( Since they have no owned DC ). If a DC operator could not install DA to other DC as a hosting company does , DA should clarify it clearly .
3) Until now , DA did not reply me the reason of deactivating our licenses , just * IT SEEMS YOU HAVE LIKELY VIOLATE * , at-least DA should told me what action I have taken to cause the problem. This is quite important .
4) Again , I truly agree offering life time licenses is not a good idea and it is not sustainable for company development . If DA ask more service fee for updates , we may accept to , but not just deactivating our services to force payment in-addition.
If a company take action to violate its reputation, I think lost is much more than gain always.
1) All DA licenses are install by us , we never send keys to others. More information , our DataCenter service serve mainly Mainland China , I think anyone should know most of the Mainland China's customers install *Windows Servers* instead of Linux. Our customers almost 90% have no Linux knowledge to install a DA to their server. Until now , *WE HAVE NEVER SEND KEY OUTSIDE OUR COMPANY* , never ask our customer to install OS , our server rental since 2003 , there has no IPMI at all , customers could not install base operating system themselves , DA was installed after OS immediately as bundle to reduce our technical support pressure.
2) We have installed serval license ( less than 5 of 62 ) outside our DC for owned use ( company internal ). In my point of view , DA internal licenses are good fit with *SERVICE PROVIDER* which include datacenter and server hosting companies , so *INSIDE OWNED DC* should not be applied , if does , all server hosting companies violated ( Since they have no owned DC ). If a DC operator could not install DA to other DC as a hosting company does , DA should clarify it clearly .
3) Until now , DA did not reply me the reason of deactivating our licenses , just * IT SEEMS YOU HAVE LIKELY VIOLATE * , at-least DA should told me what action I have taken to cause the problem. This is quite important .
4) Again , I truly agree offering life time licenses is not a good idea and it is not sustainable for company development . If DA ask more service fee for updates , we may accept to , but not just deactivating our services to force payment in-addition.
If a company take action to violate its reputation, I think lost is much more than gain always.
Last edited:
That maybe my fault of explanation , it should be
*we have not build a website* *to sell server with DA* at all ,
*We bundle DA with a server to our resellers* ,
I just point out DA asking us to provide server rental website does not meet our situation ,
*I am not talking about we have send keys outside directly *
we did not send any DA keys outside our company , and never install 1 license more than 1 server at the same time .
( I really do not know 1 DA license could be installed more than a server at the same time , this is very new to me )
Last edited:
I hope this is just a case for *something wrong* instead of DA forcing us to pay more.
Please state what action we have taken to violate the agreement , I have wait for serval days with no reply.Our policies have been the same since 2003 (anyone can use archive.org to verify that our License & Partner agreements have not been modified).
@archycho It looks like you are using our datacenter (internal) products in violation of our terms. However, we don't have a middle-man restriction on retail products, so I don't think there is a need for a big fight here. It simply looks like you are using the wrong products for what you wish to do.
The solution would be to view any of these licenses in your account and look for a green "Upgrade Available" button. This will convert the license to retail (at a great ~1/2 price discount), and then you are free to share your license keys with others, without any restrictions.
We offer this solution in the spirit of cooperation, since you can benefit from the big discount, instead of us simply closing the account. I believe this will allow us to win together, by cooperation.
Is it very hard to answer this question ? @DirectAdmin Sales
Richard G
Verified User
Your point of view in this case, does not stroke with the terms of agreement. Internal licenses are bound to datacenters, not to the kind of use.
So "outside our DC" is a clear violation of terms, no matter what or who's use it's for.
DA needs loads of time answering too long tickets with all kinds of these complaints of people feeling their licenses are disabled for no reason, but they don't answer the questions which are asked.
If you want to have them answer more quickly you have to give an answer to exactly the questions they are asking first.
After that is done, you can start your defend if you have one.