Software Piracy

[Vertigo50]

Here's somthing to mull over. Just think about how many people are burning in hell over pirated software and software licences. Well?

 

Ummm, zero? Not because piracy is morally okay, but mostly just because hell doesn't exist.

 

Now THAT is something to mull over.

[Alessandro17]

As someone once said, "What a pity you can't download hardware..."

 

Except that a pretty decent computer in Europe can be bought/built for 500 or 600 Euro, same price as Vista Ultimate and a lot less than some specialized software.

[cbushjr56]

I do not approve of software piracy nor do I approve of companies (Microsoft) that release {censored} software and charge a premium price for it. I have bought CorelDraw 13, Adobe PhotoShop CS2 (Mac & PC) plus many other programs only after I have tried them. I have also bought Windows XP Pro, Windows XP Pro 64-bit and Office XP but no more. I will give Microsoft products away as I feel that they are not even worth that. Windows Vista is a joke!

 

When companies decide to charge a reasonable price there will be piracy. I do not condone it but being disable and on a fixed income I will buy what I can afford as long as the software is relatively bug free which leaves out Microsoft.

[EFI]

In my opinion, if its a large corporation...then feel free to pirate their software before buying...the thing here is its the major software corporation that are the biggest scam artists of all time. Half of their products are either usless, or do not function the way in which they were advertised. The only big company that I actually know who's softwares are worth is Adobe...and that too not all of them, just Photoshop, Illustrator, and Indesign. The rest of them are not worth it. The only products that come out of Microsoft that are worth it is Office, all their other softwares...which includes their operating system...is not worth the money.

 

That being said, on the other hand...if its a small group of individuals who make a good software for a living and are either asking small amount of money to keep them going, or just for a donation....I would open hartedly pay them. It is here that the guilt feeling comes in if you dont pay for your application/software.

 

The big multi-billion dollar heads have enough money to float around in, so I could care less...but if their software is truly worth it...then I shall purchase it...but not before pirating it first. There is no way in hell I'm going to spend $100+ on a software that looks good, but does nothing...or does somthing in a time consuming or a crappy way.

[elvira]

I'm also in the "Try before you buy" category. Sometimes it absolutely makes no sense to invest in a program when there is no demo version available and you have no idea whether it'll run well on your computer. Or, even if there is a demo version, you don't know for sure (in the 30 days you're allowed to use it) that it's worth it. Sometimes it takes me longer than that to know that I must own it. I feel no guilt at using bootlegged software as an extended demo, because the software company gets their money in the end.

 

I also agree that the software should be per user, not per computer. That makes no sense. I only have one pair of hands and one pair of eyes—I can't use more than one computer at a time! I've even occasionally stretched this philosophy to be one copy per family or household. I got an illicit copy of Photoshop for a family member, just for her to tinker with. But when she started making money using Photoshop, it was time for her to get her own copy. We found a used copy of a previous version off of eBay (legal and registered with Adobe) for a low price. It would have felt wrong not to do it.

 

Whenever I fall in love with some software that I'm *cough* trying out, I have a burning urge to own it outright. Usually I'll find a way to do it, even if the price is steep. I somehow managed afford Final Cut Studio, even though I'm far from being a professional (and will never be a professional) and am too poor to ever justify paying the full retail price. Good old eBay came through again with a fantastic deal! (Legal and registered with Apple.)

 

I've passed along software to others who have no ability to get the software legally. (One time it was a friend in Europe who had no credit card.) I believe that now that she's hooked on the software, that she'll eventually find a way to buy it (well, probably when an upgrade she wants comes out).

 

I do not understand cheapskates who refuse to pay for any software, even though they can well afford it. I am far from rich, but I manage it. If I want to be compensated for any intellectual property I may eventually create, I'd better be willing to compensate others for their work. As others have said, it's especially important to do this with smaller developers who aren't raking in the big bucks.

[Ferret-Simpson]

hahahaha, this is funny companies (i.e. Microsoft, Adobe, Corel) actually wants you to pirate your software. Microsoft specifically said they would prefer you to pirate their software over using a competitor's product.

 

Of course they do!

 

Microsoft know that thanks to the new "Genuine Advantage" garbage, you can only get an up to date system by continually downloading cracked windows versions and clearing your hard disk. They benefit from that! Because it drives people to purchase the sotware. They also love to be able to include the statistics that extend their product usage by adding "Oh we don't know for certain how many people are using pirate versions of our software, but from our research it includes 80% of teenagers and Linux Gurus. Yes. >.> <.<"

 

Elvira, you're making some good statements there.There are a couple of programs I use - Tubesock for one, which are small time shareware programs that I buy licenses for. Still haven't been able to afford a Tiger License, but I need two, and £200 is alot of money to a student. But as I said, there are some companies that force you to hack or crack their software. As I said, anyone who used a notebook o dekstop could get some form of Mac, but Apple hate the TabletPC concept. While some people hate them, others can give or take, I can't live without it. With Ink, Jarnal, the on screen keyboard, inkscape. . .

[Jeezoflip]

If anyone on this forum is complaining about software piracy, look at the community you belong to. This communities sole purpose, and reason for existance is because it tells you how to illegally put os x on your x86 pc, which would mean you have to pirate it since apple does not sell it like that. I'm not saying thats bad, considering im on os x on my dell right now, but im just making a point.

[Guest Ramm]

Not true, jeezoflip. Sure, this was founded on the idea of that, but look at it now. Most forums have nothing to do with OSx86. What is it, four boards out of at least 15, maybe 20+?

[Ictinike]

Everyone is a pirate in some form. I mean, if you've ever listened to music on YouTube thats copyright, and not put up by the ACTUAL artist, it's piracy.

 

But, in terms of software, so many people do it, many I know just do it to try the software, and buy it later if they like it. But, some software is so god damn expensive, I mean, I don't want to have to decide between buying a new COMPUTER or spending almost as much on PHOTOSHOP. Thanks.

[Guest Ramm]

I agree. Software piracy is mostly because of the price of the software. Of course, if photoshop costed 50 bucks, people would still feel the need to pirate it.

[Ictinike]

Ya, of course, but much less people would. In my opinion my Photo Editing software shouldn't cost as much as my Camera did. -.-

[EFI]

Well, Photoshop, especially CS3, has a lot of features that I guarantee not many people are even aware of. I actually think when you take into all its capibilities (I'm a Photoshop poweruser), the price could look subjectable. I'm not saying its still worth that high price, but one could get a much clearer picture of why its priced that high if they understand all the true advanced editing features beyond just the filters that most people use. A lot of other photo editing softwares are priced within a $100 range or less, but I have yet to see any of them be as flexible as Photoshop is. This is also the exact same reason why Adobe made Photoshop Elements, which is basically a watered down version of Photoshop for the normal users, and is also priced like a normal photoshop editing software should be.

[pataloca]

I happened to shell out $100 to the folks at netlock.com for a vpn client, only to find out after i purchased an intel mac, that my "entitlement" ran out. BAH greedy bastards they are all. Support the small developer, forget these greedy overpricing companies.

[Tick-Tock]

Ahhh... I pirated Photoshop CS back in the day. While CS3 may have more features, I feel more comfortable using an older pirated copy than upgrading. Pirating one copy is bad enough, the way I see it, and CS does everything I want it to for now. Not that I have a problem with piracy - if there was en expensive program that I really wanted at the moment, I'd download it, sure. Lately however I've been finding that open source or free software oftentimes performs just as well for what I need it to do (like using Seashore or GIMP for simple picture editing tasks, or using VLC to playback videos fullscreen).

[I don't want a user name!!]

I've seen the first and the seventh page only, but I get the point you've talking all these pages. I haven't seen too much, but I saw enough to say that you clearly know what's the impact of piracy in society.

 

Well, in my case, I don't use too much pirate software, because I don't use too much software. In fact, I just have what I need, and some other software that I might use someday. I exchange some programs because some people asks it to me (like Photoshop), but not far than that. I mean, obviously, that I don't sell pirate software, just exchange it (or lend it). I hate the people who has the face to sell pirate, and even, opensource software. I've seen here some people that actually sells Ubuntu copies for 2 or 5 dollars (between CL$1000 and CL$2500). I think that kind of people should be in jail, because of daring to sell pirate software. The fact of exchange software (in some manner) obviously affects the industry (in my dreams), but it's not that ugly.

 

Finally, the only thing I have licensed (I bought a license??) is a copy of StarCraft I gave to my brother in his birthday... that game rules, and that's the only reason why I bought it. I accept piracy for exchange, not for own profit (enterprise or natural person).

[apowerr]

Well, Photoshop, especially CS3, has a lot of features that I guarantee not many people are even aware of. I actually think when you take into all its capibilities (I'm a Photoshop poweruser), the price could look subjectable. I'm not saying its still worth that high price, but one could get a much clearer picture of why its priced that high if they understand all the true advanced editing features beyond just the filters that most people use. A lot of other photo editing softwares are priced within a $100 range or less, but I have yet to see any of them be as flexible as Photoshop is. This is also the exact same reason why Adobe made Photoshop Elements, which is basically a watered down version of Photoshop for the normal users, and is also priced like a normal photoshop editing software should be.

Exactly, Photoshop's target demographic is not consumers, its Professionals. I really dont like to pirate software at all, it makes me feel bad because If I had a software company Id want a check in the mail. In fact all I really pirate is Photoshop, 90%+ of my games are legit. I have a jerk of a friend who pirates everything and gets pissed cause I wont.

[A Nonny Moose]

I'll add to the above here in saying that we do have WONDERFUL free alternatives to nearly all of the "big money" applications. GIMP has nearly everything Photoshop does. If I knew OpenOffice existed, I'd have never EVER bought MS Office.

 

Most people don't want the free applications though, because it's some kind of sick status symbol to have those "big money" apps. This attitude needs to change before any kind of software piracy would even begin to slow down.

[nocoast]

I'll add to the above here in saying that we do have WONDERFUL free alternatives to nearly all of the "big money" applications. GIMP has nearly everything Photoshop does. If I knew OpenOffice existed, I'd have never EVER bought MS Office.

 

Most people don't want the free applications though, because it's some kind of sick status symbol to have those "big money" apps. This attitude needs to change before any kind of software piracy would even begin to slow down.

 

I'm sorry, thats just not true...and show me a great free alternative to avid or final cut, Id love to to try it out...there are a lot of great free alternatives, but things become the "industry standard" for a reason...with something like a word processor, which is performing a (relatively) much more trivial task, the grey area becomes thinner, though...

[A Nonny Moose]

The cheap alternative is iMovie for Final Cut, which is an unbelievably powerful editing tool.

[nocoast]

^cheap and free are two different things my friend (especially when people arent willing to pay a dime), Im not quite sure how you could conceivably say that imovie is "unbelievably powerful" it is not, apple intended it not to be...I think "unbelievably user friendly" would be a more accurate claim...

[A Nonny Moose]

That's true. Cheap and free are two different things.

 

All I'm saying is that not everybody needs those super expensive applications. If you can use the free version or the cheap version, then what's keeping you from using it? Other than the thief mentality that is...

[nocoast]

^yeah, in fact a lot of people who download the applications "just for the hell of it", or just to make a little home movie, etc...find that the learning curve is too steep anyways...

[EPDM]

I have yet to meet an individual who has actually purchased Adobe Photoshop. Why is that?

 

Today’s Great Debate focuses on the question of software piracy in all its various forms. Is it wrong? Is it analogous to stealing physical goods?

 

Many people claim that piracy is acceptable and, in some cases, ethical. I know of one Mac developer who has frequently been accused of stealing from open source projects. Is it ethical to steal from an (alleged) thief? What about Microsoft? Why is it that so few people buy copies of Windows? Is it a problem with the user or the product?

 

If you buy a new PC then there's usually a Windows DVD/CD/partition included. Though ppl might have another pressumption about this but this didn't come free. You actually PAID for it. So there are millions of ppl who bought a legitimate Windows OS together with their computer. No stealing at all.

 

In this case its is limiting ppl's choice. Because what if you'd rather have the latest Suse Linux retail version or Fedora Core retail version on your PC instead of Windows? Would the retailer deduct the Microsoft OS and add the Linux retail of your choice?

 

Ofcourse this is out of context in this particular debate. But it does show that there's no black and white in these matters.

 

Others claim that software piracy is just like any other forms of stealing - it’s theft. Those who shoplift are the same as those who take from the latest Serial Box. Is stealing 1’s and 0’s the same as stealing a physical product? How does piracy affect developers?

 

Some don't even think about it any more. For them, piracy is the only way to get software.

 

What say you?

 

What about this. You are along-time supporter of a certain platform/OS. That platform is developped in a certion region and you know that the healt of this platform is also beneficial to that regionals wellfare (employement etc...). It goes even further as that certion OS/platform is at that time the most advanced and best for the money. So you make the logical decission to invest in this platform. You bought that hardware/OS combination and legitimately ALL the software that you require thereby also supporting regional third-party software developpers. Thousands of dollars/pounds/euros/whatever investment. But that platform is besieged by the big players who stop at nothing to destroy that partical platform (even bribing local authorities to invest in their products instead of these local and better systems) and make it dissapear from "their" market. Then the system breaks down and you require a replacement, only to find that it's no longer available. It seems that the presure of the big players ruined that regional OS/platform.

 

Then what?

 

The only option is to start all over agian. Again invest in another system/OS combination. This time the remainder is an inferior system and inferior OS with excessively overpriced application-software. But you can't afford to loose you job, your income. And you don't have the money to re-invest it again at these worse conditions.

 

Would you starve because the greed of a megacorporation?

[EPDM]

I'll add to the above here in saying that we do have WONDERFUL free alternatives to nearly all of the "big money" applications. GIMP has nearly everything Photoshop does. If I knew OpenOffice existed, I'd have never EVER bought MS Office.

 

Most people don't want the free applications though, because it's some kind of sick status symbol to have those "big money" apps. This attitude needs to change before any kind of software piracy would even begin to slow down.

 

I dissagree with you on the second remark. Many ppl keep at the big-money apps because they're common to it at work and/or school. And while those free apps contain all the functionality of the non-free apps, they don't look or behave the same. E.g. M$ Office starts a lot faster on Windows systems then Open Office. I'm not gonna discuss the technicallities in why this is, but it's clear that to non-technical users this is a dissadvantage. Even more important then the technical differences is that most ppl just can't be bothered to learn yet another office-application's GUI.

 

The reason is (again) quite simple. Majority of ppl using computers today are not the geeks like the ppl on Insanelymac. They're not interested in IT-technology. Their job require them to master some simple computing skills and it takes a lot of effort for them learn these at work. They are not going to learn another software at home when they're supposed to relax and enjoy themselves preferably without computers.

 

I think the encouragment to use these free alternatives should come from employers. Tell the ppl that they don't necessarly need to have M$ office at home and perhaps even provide these alternatives to them if they want to take some work at home. Or even better. Start using the alternatives at work then users will start using it at home as well.

 

A similar situation occurs in our educational systems. They focus too much on pratical computing skills. And since practically every business uses these properietary packages, they teach these at schools. This is unlike other teachings like e.g. maths, which are more theoritical in design and require students to refine them themselves at practical situations. So to follow up on their classwork, students simply require these big-money tools (and schools ought to provide them since they're responsable for this). Ofcourse in this particular case there are "student-"licenses for these big-money apps so that the situation isn't as dramatically here. But educational costs could decrease dramatically if schools learn the basics/theoretics of computing (instead of steamrolling potential M$-Office employees) and allow students to refine their knowledge at their potential jobs. But that requires an attidute change (again) in our business-model which is nowadays run by greed.

 

So the change should happen at the corporations, one way or another.

[BlueAvenue]

Along with the fact that linux is free,is the intoxicating power you have to go anywhere

on the web with total impunity.Back when i was still dual booting Windows XP and PCLinuxOS,

i would go into the warez and keygen sites where i got thousands of dollars worth of

free Windows software. I was even running PCLinuxOs as ROOT and was still impervious to

attack.

Well now i am dual booting PCLinuxOS and Mac OS X 10.4.4 and i do not feel one bit

guilty for downloading Mac OS X 10.4.6 Jas. What Steve Jobs don't know, won't hurt him.

Its a lot of fun running Tiger on my pc for FREE, thanks mister Jas,whoever you are.