Software Piracy

[mac.nub]

Firstly, let me say that I am a Christian, and have very strong beliefs in the faith - for example I would not ever have sex outside of marriage - but could never be classed as an "extremist" Christian. A believer, and an extremist are very different things. My father is a police officer, and I have been a Christian for as long as I can remember. But anyway I'll get to the point before I get off topic.

 

Anyway, I share the views of a few other people here, basically - if you can afford it (at least to a certain extent) - buy it! I would especially be inclined to support small-scale developers and Open-Source projects.

 

I have a very strong morale sense or right and wrong. I would never go into a shop and steal something, I would never steal anything physically.

 

However, I have absolutely no problem in downloading programs from large corporations, that I can not afford.

 

Quite simply, I do not class it as "stealing", sure it may be violating copyright laws, but the copyright laws in the UK are quite simply ridiculous, I mean it's against the law to copy a CD to your computer, or an MP3 player period. In other words, replicating or downloading - for personal use - a load of expensive 1's and 0's that you can't afford is not stealing in my opinion.

 

Anyway, that's just how I see it. I fully accept that others have an opinion that it is wrong, but I am a student, will be £21,000 (Aproximately $39,660) in debt by the time I leave university or something around that amount, so a bit of software I can't afford but need doesn't come out top on the list of my purchases.

[icey-ice-ice]

it's like borrowin' a book from the library or showing movies in public.

[GBK.Xscape]

omg guys are we reallying trying to justify stealing? im not saying that i dont do it but gosh, just stop debating over a topic that really cant be argued, you can try to justify murder but it is still bad, and doing the same with stealing software isnt gonna make any difference.

[MacMoof]

I think people should be paid for their work.

 

If you like or use an application or OS, then you should pay for it.

 

I don't agree with some of the BS you sometimes find in the EULA.. for instance, if I have a laptop and a desktop, and only use one or the other (not both at the same time) I think it's {censored} they expect you to buy a copy for each machine.

 

I think if I buy a copy of OSX, I should be able to put it on whatever computer I want. Granted, I don't expect it to actually WORK on my TRS-80 or Kaypro, but hey.. I paid for the software. If I can manage to get it to work on a PC, and paid for a copy of the OS, how is that 'stealing'?

 

That's like buying a music CD from Sony/BMG that you're only 'allowed' to play in Sony branded CD players.

 

Then there is the 'professional' software, like Adobe CS that has a $1,000 price tag.

 

Those products are targeted twards people who make money using that software. If some kid downloads a bootleg version of CS2 and uses it to crop his face on some body builders body, or edit his message board Avitar, I say go for it.. but if he's doing work with the software that he/she is getting paid for, then it's only right to actually buy the software.

 

The truth is, most folks with bootleg software are using it only because they were able to get it for free. They either wouldn't (or couldn't afford to) buy it.. so their use of that software doesn't mean any financial loss to the publisher.

 

Just like the osX86 scene. The people messing with OSX on PC's are, for the most part, PC people. Most aren't about to go out and pay $600 for an iMac sight unseen, so when they get OSX running on their Dell, Apple really isn't short anything.. because it's not like they're loosing a sale.

 

In fact, many people find they like OSX so much, their next computer purchase IS a Mac.

[Zealot]

if have to pay for every software that i have used .i should have like 12.000 dollars .yes three zeros on that.

On the other hand i live in southamerica so its almost like i have to get it via torrent or wathever because software, movies,music they always release them delayed (like 4 months). So do i have choices to get what i cannot get legally?i really think not.

 

greetings.

[GBK.Xscape]

Software piracy is bad.

Edited December 30, 2006 by GBK.Xscape

[39thRonin]

I've always regarded piracy as an unofficial "try before you buy" none of the big packages would have their marketshare & reputation today without it. Just think: how many home users would have & know photoshop without an illicit copy?..

 

The line for me has always been commercial use. Once the program is being used to make money, some of that needs to go back into buying the software.

 

In the meantime, hobbyists have the choice of using a free package which may or may not be inferior to the commercial one, or using a "bogus" copy of a commercial package, which potentially gains the software company a skilled user in the employment market, the further spread of their reputation and, once the chips are down, their market share.

 

I totally agree with you Hagar. If I charge one penny for work based on software - it must be bought. However, if I'm just checking out some software and find it online, well, then it's fair game. Having said that, I know that most folks out there have read the marketing drivel about a piece of software - only to find that it does not work as advertised. The only way you can really find out stuff like that is to try the full software BEFORE pluning down your hard earned cash.

 

I also have an affinity for the training/education aspect of piracy. Corporations expect employees to be completely up on a piece of software before hiring them - who should pay for that? I say get the experience with the software any way you can. get the job, then buy the software....

[JustInSane]

Anyone looking to ease their guilt only needs to hear Richard Stallman speak on the true purpose of copyrights, and how it is being abused today. Stallman does an excellent job of attacking major points made by copyright proponents - so good that after you hear him, you may call into the question the ethics of sponsoring the currenly misused copyright system.

 

BTW, it disturbes me that folks pirate Photoshop. Not because I give a {censored} about Adobe's enterprise, but because Gimp (being a product with more potential than Photoshop) is not getting the support it is due. If more people would simply use Gimp, the Gimp support system would grow, and enable it to well exceed the capability of Photoshop.

Edited December 29, 2006 by JustInSane

[JustInSane]

I also have an affinity for the training/education aspect of piracy. Corporations expect employees to be completely up on a piece of software before hiring them - who should pay for that? I say get the experience with the software any way you can. get the job, then buy the software....

Even better, don't sponsor CSS outside of work. Get experience in the OSS variant. If the talent pool were OSS trained, employers would actually have some incentive to use OSS themselves. And if they choose otherwise, make the employer eat the extra training expenses on the commercial tool; and make the design of the commercial tool follow open standards, rather than putting OSS developers in a position where they have to be the follower who is one step behind, trying to figure out how to openly support closed standards (OO Writer, for example).

Edited December 29, 2006 by JustInSane

[John the Geek]

BTW, it disturbes me that folks pirate Photoshop. Not because I give a {censored} about Adobe's enterprise, but because Gimp (being a product with more potential than Photoshop) is not getting the support it is due.

 

Gimp's UI blows for cheap though. I've run MacGimp, Gimp.app, and a few other OS X ports and they all just suck. Even running it on Linux the controls are counter-intuitive to every other software package a design user would be accustomed to. Photoshop isn't perfect either, but it's a lot closer than Gimp. I pay for photoshop because the free alternatives can't match up.

 

If more people would simply use Gimp, the Gimp support system would grow, and enable it to well exceed the capability of Photoshop.

 

Putting myself through more suffering isn't going to make the software any better.

[JustInSane]

I pay for photoshop because the free alternatives can't match up.

It depends on what you're doing. Gimp has served me well with everything interactive I've needed to do with images, and ImageMagick has served me well for anything non-interactive. Ease of use is the only real shortcoming of Gimp, but if you join the mailing list, you'll get support that Adobe just cannot compete with.

Putting myself through more suffering isn't going to make the software any better.

Sure it will. You're not seeing the whole picture. Vendors produce plugins and improvements for the tools that their target users are running. If everyone is running Photoshop, then that creates more of a support market for Photoshop. A company is not going to pursue the business of supporting and improving a tool that's unused.

 

You can easily see this effect just by walking into a retail computer vendor. How many products do you find supported on Windows vs. non-Windows, and how many people are using Windows vs. the rest? Bingo.

 

You also have to consider that non-developers who use Gimp also contribute to the project every time they file a bug report, or complain about an issue publicly. This feedback system is superior to that of Adobe, who really doesn't care if a user does't like some design choice that Adobe has made for them. Fixing the defects is only one element of the improvement cycle.

[GBK.Xscape]

Hey guys, its illegal, dont argue it, we do it and you cant argue that its "ok" becuase you are "trying it out" thats why they have trials then. its plain and simple, ITS BAD.

[Alessandro17]

Anyone looking to ease their guilt only needs to hear Richard Stallman speak on the true purpose of copyrights, and how it is being abused today. Stallman does an excellent job of attacking major points made by copyright proponents - so good that after you hear him, you may call into the question the ethics of sponsoring the currenly misused copyright system.

 

Very good, I listened to it with much pleasure. I don't always agree with RS, but he is an extremely smart person nonetheless.

[JustInSane]

Hey guys, its illegal, dont argue it,

No one here has called into question the legality of copyright infringment, and there has been no argument either way, as the thread has been discussing ethics. You are the first to bring it up. Although it is debatable, because criminal actions against violators remains to be seen. It's largely a civil matter, which may not even contain a criminal component. It's not the state that seeks legal actions in these cases, but the copyright holder.

we do it and you cant argue that its "ok" becuase you are "trying it out" thats why they have trials then. its plain and simple, ITS BAD.

Did someone here argue that trying out software justifies copyright infringement? I must have missed that.

 

If someone infringes copyright with intent to buy it and become compliant with the license, then the ethics of that will depend on where you stand with the current system. If you feel that copyright holders have overstepped the power that was intended for them, then the only unethical action in this scenario is the software purchase that sponsors the copyright. If you are actually with the copyright holders 100%, then it's only reasonable to approve of steps taken to facilitate the sale of the software, which includes giving it the benefit of being tried. It seems your position on this is destructive to both the consumers and the copyright holders.

 

You really should listen to the Stallman speech.

[coelomate1]

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

 

- because adobe photoshop is damn expensive, hard to learn for a novice, and no one in there right mind is going to buy it unless they need it for work. Most people grab it from a torrent because they want to check it out and think that they'll use it, but I bet they never do.

[head]

recently i bought ableton live 6 - and that has some reasons:

 

1. i could not live with the crappy cracks on the mac

2. this program is a great piece of software!

3. the developers have a small company located in berlin, not so faceless like adobe and so on..

 

but, i have to say, this is my first buy since 6 years or so ... i pirate everything i get, and if its good, i think about buying it...

...same with movies, if one is really good (which is not so often, thats why i dont want surprises in cinema) i buy the dvd or give some info to other people and they may watch it in cinema...

 

maybe my behaviour will change if i earn some money (maybe using such software), but as a student i don´t give a {censored} about those large companys...

[John the Geek]

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

 

Hmm? You are sheltered and have no social life I suppose. I know lots of these people.

 

- because adobe photoshop is damn expensive, hard to learn for a novice, and no one in there right mind is going to buy it unless they need it for work.

 

Untrue. Many people I know buy it cheap with an educational discount. It's also not hard to learn, but then - these are college-age students who have no trouble learning software. They (gasp) buy a book and learn the easy way. You can read books, right?

Most people grab it from a torrent because they want to check it out and think that they'll use it, but I bet they never do.

 

I know people who get it on the torent too, and despite your generalization, they all use it. Every artist worth looking at uses it for somehitng or other. Maybe you are just not very smart? I hear MS Paint is good for people who aren't capable of learning the basic functions of Photoshop. You should probably wipe the crayons off of your monitor before someone notices.

 

You need to avoid making such broad and obviously false statements about other people's software usage habits. I just makes you look very bad.

[one_7]

is piracy a steal??

 

is the act of "using something without permission" a steal?? we need a clear definition here on a word steal..can someone explain this??

 

by this post it doesn't mean that i agree with piracy..just want to make sure we have a clear definiton of steal..

 

by the way..let's use open source software..it isn't going to solve the problem of piracy but at least reduce it...

[A Nonny Moose]

steal |stēl|

verb ( past stole |stōl|; past part. stolen |ˈstōlən|)

1. [ trans. ] take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it : thieves stole her bicycle | [ intrans. ] she was found guilty of stealing from her employers | [as adj. ] ( stolen) stolen goods.

• dishonestly pass off (another person's ideas) as one's own : accusations that one group had stolen ideas from the other were soon flying.

 

stealing

noun

he was convicted of stealing theft, thieving, thievery, robbery, larceny, burglary, shoplifting, pilfering, pilferage, looting, misappropriation; embezzlement;

[one_7]

so..what's the summary?is pirating equal to stealing??

 

who has ideas to tackle this problem that plagued many industries??let's share our view

 

as for me.i think we must find reasons on why people pirating and figure out on how to solve the particular reason.mostly it's about pricing..in region like southeast asia, due to currency the original software will cause you a lot .people can say if you have computer than you have enough money and should be able to buy the original software but don't forget that the cost to have computer there is cheaper.most people there have income per se that is lower than west.so they will think that spending money for original software is a waste and the solution is pirating...

[GBK.Xscape]

Yes people have tried to justify copyright infringement with trying out a product. Guess you missed it huh.

Did someone here argue that trying out software justifies copyright infringement? I must have missed that.

This all seems like such a waste of time to try and justify/prove that stealing is ok if you just want to play with a $1,000 dollar piece of software.

[Numberzz]

Out of how many people do you think actually use the unreleased software to do evil things?

[A Nonny Moose]

For those of you that will admit to stealing Photoshop, etc, because of high prices, I want to know:

 

Did you also steal the iLife suite, prices at $80 US? If so, then your argument completely dies.

[GBK.Xscape]

yea thats true, most of the OSX86'ers had to get the iLife suite somehow because it wasn't included in the install disc.

[curlyboy]

comical subject here how many that come to these forums are running a stolen system be it osx windows or whatever ?????????? let alone anything else stolen. When you look at how some big players license there software and the prices they charge its no wonder they get ripped off bigtime christ you just need to look at how MS is licensing vista just now , anyway for some its not stealing its try before you buy sort of deal lmao