Possible to sell my HQ Player License

Is it possible to sell my HQ Player Mac License?

If it is - how would one do so?

Love the software but finding that my new Hugo 2 plays better on it’s own!

1 Like

HHe, he, The official answer is no.

Because it’s linked to your email adress. And probably some legal shit as well, but that may depend on what country you live in.

There is nothing technical stopping you and a buyer to do so as far as I know.

But remember all that have a another license from before only pay 50% for a new license on another platform. (Do not apply to HQPLAYER embedded).

So you’re maybe looking at a quote low price for your license.
I’m sure you will get $50 for it.

Anyway why not list it and see what’s happening :grinning:

There is a buy and sell thread here.

Also you should expect Miska in near future will do an upgrade, that cost money. Even more hassle to upgrade for that buyer, since he depending on you to do.

Maybe just give it away :joy::joy::joy:

Maybe I should change to a subscription model like Roon… :thinking: The web shop infra has full support for it already.

Now Desktop 3.x has gone through 5 years of upgrades with single payment. Maybe 100€/year like Roon would be better… No lemme think about it, maybe 10€/month instead… :thinking:

I doubt you can sell your Roon license either.

1 Like

In the EU software licenses can be resold regardless of the developers country of origin.

The July 2012 judgment in the ‘UsedSoft’ case stated, in summary, that the distribution right held by the software vendor was ‘exhausted’ within the EU provided certain conditions were met: that the software license was perpetual, that it had originally been sold at an economic price, and the seller’s copy was made unusable at the time of transfer.

The European Court restated this position a couple of year’s ago. The original judgement involved some well-know software vendors.

However, Roon is not software in this sense, it is a subscription service (a membership.) Or at least that’s my interpretation. Maybe @danny has some worthwhile advice afterall … he certainly understands customer service.

Sorry to dig up that thread, but you don’t seem to have learned anything from it. Perhaps you shouldn’t have pressed that Reply button!

1 Like

So I should definitely convert to a subscription service? I wouldn’t mind, better for me.

Regarding the topic, I have not yet seen a way to sell apps purchased from Google Play store or from Apple’s App Store. My case isn’t any different, model is the same.

Same actually goes for music downloads purchased from various online stores, including iTunes.

There’s no way to make sellers copy unusable, so this doesn’t apply…

Same as for music download content reselling. The service that was providing market place for reselling music downloads was shot down very quickly.

Only you can answer that. Only you know your sales figures, customer base, retention etc.

The “UsedSoft” case was against the software giants where perpetual licenses cost seven figures or more with annual maintenance. In practice, who would pursue a claim for a $100 licence? Music downloads should be no different, but I haven’t looked into that.

FWIW I have no issue with your licensing, but I think your customer service skills could do with honing! :slightly_smiling_face: Neither you nor your customers seem to benefit. Sometimes “rules” can get in the way; usually there are other factors to consider. It’s easy to sabotage success by focusing on principles and forgetting the customer.

I certainly see you have a loyal following who have benefitted from free upgrades for 5 years. That’s nigh on a lifetime membership fee. Maybe it is time to reconsider your licence model?


Oh, that’s easy … you destroy the media.

I think you’re referring to an illegal practice. That’s completely different. I could legitimately sell you my CD collection. But, I should not retain any copies. Likewise, if I sold digital copies of my collection that would be illegal too.

But it needs to be provable, for digital copy. “Media” is something physical, we are not talking about anything physical here.

Content type being music or software doesn’t define which is “illegal practice”. It applies to all intellectual property.

CD is a physical media. Music download or HQPlayer download is not a physical media.

It is also illegal for you to sell your CD’s but to retain rips.

You know, I rather focus on improving software features, sound quality and such things. Instead of spending lot of time and effort because of one or two problems. No matter what approach I take, there will certainly be someone unhappy and upset. No matter what I do.

I don’t want to create extra pain for 99.9% of the installations because of 0.1%. That would sound like something governments do… So yeah, my approach may be simplistic.

As a Finn, I have sort of thick skin. We don’t have positive feedback, we only have negative feedback. No feedback is positive feedback… :kissing_heart: In some ways it is universal, those who think they’ve got good customer service don’t go around touting about. Those who think they didn’t, may do…

Yeah, I’m a stubborn software guy, I don’t have shiny marketing departments, or typical customer service department who keeps you running in a meaningless loop until you give up. (just try contacting customer support of any major corporation)


Not anymore … digital media doesn’t need to be tangible.

You’re mixing things up! I was referring to the your comment about “businesses” selling music they had no rights to sell. This discussion isn’t about IPR it’s about selling a licence.

That’s what I said. :slightly_smiling_face:

BTW, I’m really conscious that I’ve inadvertently hijacked @jrd1975’s thread.

You know, I sort of knew that. :smile: But, you do have options and listening to critical feedback is actually very useful even when it’s painful at the time.

If you sell your music to a business, who goes on and re-sells it again makes no difference. There are shop chains here like GameStop who sell used console games (on a physical media).

But in those cases you can be technically pretty certain that there’s nothing usable left behind. If you sell a music download, it’s a different thing.

And good luck trying to resell DRM protected iTunes movie downloads. You have the .mp4 file, but how do you go about selling it to someone? Or reselling the apps from Play store or App store?

Anyway, license keys have buyers name and email address cryptographically embedded inside the license key and HQPlayer will display this information in multiple places.

In order to use your HQPlayer embedded I wouldn’t mind :grinning:
I mean it.

I would really like if you could find a way for users to test out that version for a time for a reasonable amount.
Then I may not complain so much about paying double price compared to the other versions.

There is one thing Miska, you seems sometimes to compare your sw with the price structure of Roon and similar. And even with HW development.

Yes, I understand you have 10 years of hard work behind you, but the value of your SW is the filters. Not the player options In my opinion. You could gain even more with a full integration with Roon, but we have discussed this before. And you didn’t want a closer integration with Roon at that time.

And I must say I’m at least pleased with that we got the embedded version as it is now. A full integration with Roon, filters only, would be what I like to see. And it could be a optional paid add on.
Anyway HQPLAYER embedded with SonicTransporter is almost equal.

So you can’t really compare your SW with Roon I think.
That’s said. I of cause like you to get paid for this part time job. And you for sure spend a lot of hours in support as well here and over in CA.

Keep up the good work :grinning:

(And hurry up with a creative solution for sort time payment for HQPlayer Embedded)

It is only a beginning. Like if you’d look at how HQPlayer Desktop 3.0.0 was in May 2013 and compare it to most recent version.

HQPlayer Embedded is just so much more than just filter set for Roon. At the moment while writing this I’m listening this through HQPlayer Embedded:

Roon is just one of the many possible controls/sources.

There’s also excellent control application:

Plus you can use this too:

And I can play analog sources through a DSD256 or 768/32 PCM ADC, with all the DSP.

I wouldn’t mind have the Tidal version of that playlist :grinning:
(Or just an export I can use)

Also no Android here :grinning:

BTW, I’m really conscious that I’ve inadvertently hijacked @jrd1975’s thread.

No problem at all. You raise valid points.

I had not really expected this to have been such a hot potato!

In view of any potential buyer not getting the upgrade model or any proper transfer of ownership, I would not consider reselling.

Thanks for the heads up chaps.

1 Like

Me neither! And there are others too! Unfortunately Tidal is not very good for this kind of content.

This one in fact was playing using my iPhone 7…

As long the email address and the password can be changed, one can still pass it to another one. In the case of Roon, this can be done without issue. There’s no need to get involve in ’ membership transferrable’ or ‘selling of license’, just a agreement between you and the other party.

Something being technically achievable doesn’t mean it is compliant to TOS (Terms Of Service)…

Here in Roon’s conditions it is said quite clear:

1. Grant and scope of license
1.1 Subject to the terms and conditions of this License you are hereby granted a limited non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use the Roon Software and the Documentation on the terms of this License.

@danny can probably comment further on such practices regarding Roon account.

I hope people realize that trying to work around / fight against the sales model, where pricing is based on certain assumptions, will just impose price increase pressure on all users or at worst risk continuation of service they like to use.

1 Like