Woz defends Tiger-releasing student. [Archive]

applekid

Feb 22, 2005, 05:58 PM

Make sure to check out the actual interview: http://www.drunkenblog.com/drunkenblog-archives/000369.html

So, Woz is saying the leak was unintentional and donating. Fair enough. If you read the interview, you can get a better sense of who these people being sued are. As I suspected, some are actually sounding like they didn't know, or at least that's Sunny's case.

Sunny sounds like he didn't know what he was doing. Hey, it's not like anybody wasn't ever offered a copy of software from a friend or acquaintance before and accept without knowing it's piracy. We've all been down that road. The right thing to do is reject the offer, but of course there's still some unknowingly or knowingly accept the offer. Since that kind of piracy isn't trouble on a large scale, I think we can settle on it being a lighter shade of gray, and that's the same situation Sunny was in.

Sunny, if you're story is true, just hang in there and let this thing blow over. You just make sure not to make the same mistake twice. Don't hang out with the wrong crowd. Coming from a staunch proponent of taking out every single pirate in existence, that should mean something. I do believe in forgiving, as long as you straighten yourself out from now on. However, you should've read your NDA. I'm quite sure it's the first thing to pop even before downloading the image. Saying you didn't read an agreement usually doesn't hold up well in court though. For that, Apple is going to have to do something whether it's harsh or not.

But, assuming his story is true, I want to see the jerks that helped him get a torrent uploaded and working and the acquaintance that gave him a seed key sued. I'd like to see MTKA torn apart and brought down like Suprnova. I can only hope some of those 25 John Does happen to be the guys that really made this worse. Apple should make an example of the bigger fish, like Nesscence.

Nesscence and the rest of what I consider hardcore pirate guys really deserve the punishment. Read the interview. Apparently we've caught a few MTKA bastards. Good. Lock 'em up and sue them every penny they have. It serves them right. I like how he's even trying to get some pity by saying "What did not occur to me was that it would be so aggressive and occur during the holidays - a time when most are spending time with their families." What a 'tard. Glad you're getting the book slapped in your face, jerk. You're running the tracker, so you're responsible for taking files on and off. Don't act like you did nothing wrong. I do like how he planned out every single bit of his defense. He hides his real intentions with some BS ones. For example, making it invitation-only to give it "social appeal." Look, you made a haven for pirates and want to protect it. Once we get some stats on the legal to illegal file ratio things will be quite clear. I bet there's tons of things said in their forum that will point Apple in the right direction in nabbing the rest.

I hope other companies will join Apple in suing the rest of the scumbags.

Let's have a discussion. We're sorta beating a dead horse, but we've got more light on the story now.

Timelessblur

Feb 22, 2005, 06:13 PM

blackfox

Feb 22, 2005, 06:28 PM

After reading the interview with sunny, and several of the contributing opinions, I look at it like this:

legally, ignorance is not a valid defense for commiting a crime. Sunny did commit a crime by breaking the NDA. The fact that he was ignorant and confused about the whole thing and didn't read the NDA agreement, does not excuse him from accountability.

That said, I sympathize with his plight, and I feel, so should Apple. As was pointed out in various opinions, the damage done to Apple was minor - the software was already released to the public (at least to developers), so Apple did not lose any IP rights or incur any other serious breaches of their technology which could point to demonstrable revenue-loss.

As was said, his crime is more akin to shoplifting. It is a crime, but not necessarily a serious one. I feel Apple is taking the wrong tact pursuing this guy so vigorously - the point has been made, to him and to all, now let everyone get on with their lives. Propose a reasonable settlement or even drop the case altogether.

The cost to Apple to pursue this, considering (a) the unliklihood of recovering sufficient compensation from a kid with little-to-no assets, and (b) the poor publicity and subsequent PR outlay, seems high to the point of impractical and foolish.

Just an opinion. Oh, btw I gathered that sunny was a member here @MR. If you are reading, good luck mate.

Daveway

Feb 22, 2005, 06:32 PM

Kinda reminds me of one of the last scenes in Lord of the Flies. Don't you think?

MacConvert2008

Feb 22, 2005, 07:05 PM

I think it's obvious that Apple is trying to make a point; and end which they arrived upon with much expediency. Apple has every right to enforce their rules and related laws. However, to chastise this individual with this severity and publicity is; as was stated previously; a public relations nightmare. Apple is punishing one for the sins of the many. To an extent, Apple invites piracy. Let me qualify that. In the software realm, they are quite comparable to their PC competition; the Tiger upgrade preorder costs $130 (U.S.) from Amazon.com. We all know what torrent sites are for, and they are certainly even more prevalent within the realm of PC software. In general, however, (as I step onto my soapbox), Apple and its contemporaries should consider their marketing strategy. As they fight the constant battle against music sharing, with application sharing on the rise, charging $1.00 for a song is ludacris. Excuse the digression, but the idea that one should spend $5,000 to fill up a $300 iPod with music is not only unfair, it's asinine. When I purchased my Powerbook a few weeks ago (which I am absolutely enamored with :)) I needed to obtain OfficeMac for school work. Even with a significant student discount, it was $149. The only programs I plan on using are Word and Powerpoint. I know that these are Microshit applications, but nonetheless Apple had a hand in it, and uniquely Macintosh software costs about the same. I'm drowning in student debt (and this is only my first year!) and I'm supposed to spend $149 on software that all of my friends are getting for free? Much to Apple's dismay, their behavior toward this individual has not scared anyone away from software piracy; rather it has alerted the public at large that they should get on Bittorrent and obtain the newest OS X. :P

applekid

Feb 22, 2005, 09:05 PM

In general, however, (as I step onto my soapbox), Apple and its contemporaries should consider their marketing strategy. As they fight the constant battle against music sharing, with application sharing on the rise, charging $1.00 for a song is ludacris. Excuse the digression, but the idea that one should spend $5,000 to fill up a $300 iPod with music is not only unfair, it's asinine. When I purchased my Powerbook a few weeks ago (which I am absolutely enamored with :)) I needed to obtain OfficeMac for school work. Even with a significant student discount, it was $149. The only programs I plan on using are Word and Powerpoint. I know that these are Microshit applications, but nonetheless Apple had a hand in it, and uniquely Macintosh software costs about the same. I'm drowning in student debt (and this is only my first year!) and I'm supposed to spend $149 on software that all of my friends are getting for free? Much to Apple's dismay, their behavior toward this individual has not scared anyone away from software piracy; rather it has alerted the public at large that they should get on Bittorrent and obtain the newest OS X. :P

So, what you're basically saying is spending money is ridiculous, however, if you don't have money, obtaining things by illegal means is justified because of peer pressure? There's no free lunch in nature. But, wait, you're also blaming the marketing for making take these actions? No brain in that noggin'?

There's plenty, and I mean plenty of other options than Apple for your music and MS Office. I especially find it hard to believe when someone complains software is expensive when it is drastically discounted for students. And I find it even harder to believe when a student is complaining about software that pretty much every college and university I know about gives/lends this software to their students! And you even have this software in the frickin' computer labs. And top of it all, who made the financial decision of buying a PowerBook and having no cash left over? Oh no, pirating is the only option left... Boohoo. There's people in worse conditions with a computer and still choose not to pirate the software they seek.

Apple, or its marketing, aren't the ones making people make ridiculous actions. You yourself are to blame.

If there is one thing in this world that i hate it is hypocrits and most people who are complain about sonny and sya way to go apple are Hypocrits. You all better no have a single stolen thing on your computer always gotten all of your stuff legitly.

I don't know about you, but I believe in people going straight and can forgive them. Hell, I once was a pirate. I was still pirating even when MTKA was around. I stopped before this whole invitation system with MTKA, so that's about two or three years ago. I think I started pirating when I was 10, so that's probably about a good 3 or 4 years of pirating.

You probably want to know why I pirated in the first place, right? Well, my parents aren't ones to give me much of an allowance, and I usually had to beg for my games or use gift money. So, pirating gave me my goods for free.

I kept telling myself it was wrong, but I went ahead and pirated anyway. I knew it was wrong even with that first game I pirated. It gets to a point where it's an addiction. You start having withdrawals and... ;) Just kidding. But, it gets to a point where you just won't stop. I can only compare it to a drug addiction because you know it's not good for you, but you do it anyway. I came to a point where I was bored with what I downloaded (almost completely games), and there wasn't that thrill anymore. My biggest reason for quitting was I started feeling bad as a programmer in-training that pirating is taking away money from my fellow software developer. The other reason I quit was there was something about buying something with your money and having the satisfaction of ownership you can't get through pirating. It never felt so good. You feel guilt and shame once these things hit you.

I bought the few games that I did like. I broke all of my burnt CDs, erased No-CD cracks and remaining disk images, etc. Some of you probably wondered just how knowledgeable I was on this piracy stuff. Well now you know :) I had a similar admittance on iDevGames.com years ago. It's a good thing to get off your chest. And something worth bringing up once in a while. It's a little hard to talk about though. Because I know there's probably people that will look at me suspiciously now. But, that's alright. It's expected.

I suppose you can call me a hypocrite for supporting Apple whenever they bring out their big guns when it comes to legal actions, considering when I myself was a pirate. So, sure, I'm guilty as charged, I suppose. However, instead of staying silent or acting like I never did anything wrong, I prefer to hope to change some other pirates views and actions. Will it work? Probably not. But, if I can get one pirate straight, then at least that's one last bootlegger to worry about. Hey, if you still want to give me the evil eye for pirating in the first place and keep accusing most of the people here have pirated as being hypocrites, go ahead. But, I prefer to forgive the ones that because they can help out instead of hurt the community.

Sure, what Sunny did was wrong. However, I don't what to see him torn into pieces for his wrong doing. He isn't the pirates I'm after. Hell, I rather like to think he's not even a pirate. It's almost inevitable what he did is going to get him some sort of punishment. I do think if he gets any punishment at all, it should be light. Heck, I'm hoping he'll get lucky and owe only an apology to Apple as his punishment.

However, the remaining two accused that have been identified don't deserve an ounce of leniency. From reading the interview, the MTKA admins are still up to their old tricks. Dodging, dancing, and prancing around hard questions. It's hard to prove because they're only implying things, but I remember them slipping up with some forum posts. I can only hope Apple digs the stuff up. I remember an admin ranting on and on about how he spent money on tons of things, but still needs to bootleg some things for reasons I didn't care to remember.

But, something much clearer I remember is this: We had an incident with a particular game an iDevGames developer made, and someone noted of how the serial key was released. (The guy this pointed it out was an ex-pirate we tried to straighten out previously. We thought we were successful. But I find it suspicious he was hanging out on the particular pirate forum...) Anyhow, the developer quickly patched it up. Some people went to that forum and yelled at the pirates. Then the pirates defended themselves by saying something along the lines, "Oh, hey, you are a talented programmer. You keep making good games and we will buy them." The thing settled for a week. We checked again to find out a new key was posted after the patch. These are the pirates that really annoy me. They like to kiss ass and act like they never did wrong and claim they have good intentions. I have little hope for those pirates that just make excuses in their imagination like that one. Somehow they find it in themselves to admit they still are pirating though. They lack that shame I found.

So, yeah, the proof is out there, and these pirates are being clever and tricky. Some punishment might put some sense back into them because that's the only choice left since they're not turning away voluntarily and not to mention won't even admit to their wrongdoings when they've been caught red-handed.

Sunny, if you are reading, you've got more balls than all the pirates in the world. I'd donate to your fund if I wasn't a poor student myself :)

Looks like I'm asking for a flame-war with yet another thread, so flame on :) I hope that all made sense. I'm getting tired typing all of that stuff! :eek:

angelneo

Feb 22, 2005, 09:36 PM

I am quite cynical about this as all we can actually depends on is an account from "Sunny". I feel his relation of the events that transpired should be taken with a grain of salt since he is the actual defendant himself. I am still quite neutral about this.

LimitedEdition

Feb 22, 2005, 09:44 PM

This guy "Sunny" is a software pirate, and it appears he is also a liar.

C'mon man, the interview is totally unbelivable. He got the seed key from a stranger on the Internet and though it would be ok to Torrent Mac OS X, a commercial program? No way.

Don't be sucked in Woz. You may think you are standing up for the little guy in the face of the big corporation, but size is not the fundamental issue. Fundamentally, you are standing with the thief against the creator he has stolen from. Are you sure you're on the right side here?

MacConvert2008

Feb 22, 2005, 09:58 PM

Applekid:

You make a good point, but I don't think you really understood what I was saying. Yes, I have the money. And yes, I bought the software. For the record, my University doesn't loan anyone software, and the computers in the lab have a 20-minute limit, which is down to 15 because it's exam week. Anyway, I definitely understand your position, and I tend to talk in absolutes, but you can certainly see why people pirate software. If OfficeMac were the only program I needed, I shouldn't complain. But I found out that I need Studio MX and Photoshop and we know what those cost. I'm sure this has been suggested lots, but why don't they just make software harder to hack? Some of these programs require basically no computer knowledge whatsoever to distribute. You can take an MS Office disk to 20 computers and it will install 20 times if you don't register it with Microsoft. The reason people get mad at pirates is that it sucks when you're paying for something someone else is getting for free. It isn't fair, but it's the way of things. That's how I feel, anyway, and I'm sure some of you share my sentiment. Look to the source. It's not me, as you asserted, or perhaps even Apple, as I implied (although in the case of OS X Tiger it is), but the software makers themselves. I know that hackers are always a step ahead, but most "pirates" just burn one disc to another, make/distribute ISO's or DMG's, or install on multiple systems. Even if the handful of hardcore hackers kept up with increased security measures, the majority of lay consumers would get sick of ever-more-complicated processes and might bite the bullet and buy it. In truth I'm not mad about the software prices, but rather that it's so easy for everyone around me to steal it. 10 years ago, if someone wanted to steal software they needed balls enough to walk into a store and walk out with it. At this point, there is little or no risk involved. It's a personal choice, and when I look at MS Office, I guess I take it for granted. It's always been there, and it never really changes. For that $149 I could go buy an Xbox. Instead, I bought a mostly-empty box with a crappy cd-sleeve and a big sticker saying "Do Not Distribute." Doing the right thing sucks, but I'm far more inclined to go by the book with software than music. ITunes should take a lesson from napster with the unlimited downloads thang. Anyway, I hope that helped clear things up. Peace.

MacConvert2008

Feb 22, 2005, 10:00 PM

angelneo

Feb 22, 2005, 10:02 PM

Actually the interview does ring a few alarms for me, as "sunny" serves up quite a few "choice" words that tries to get the readers' sympathy votes. I am not sure if it has been re-work by the editor for sensational reasons but the interview sounds surreal. I would like to give "sunny" the benefit of doubt as there's a tendacy for people to vote for the underdog, the little people who fought so hard against the mightly big corporations. If "Sunny" is a member of this forum, perhaps he can clarify a few things here?

adamjay

Feb 22, 2005, 10:57 PM

i think the main thing woz is trying to say is there are far bigger fish to fry that are negatively effecting Apple than Sunny is.

its the old "why are you pulling me over officer, aren't there some murderers you could be chasing after instead" routine. but you still shouldn't do 65mph in the 40mph zone :rolleyes:
the law is the law.

Koodauw

Feb 22, 2005, 11:15 PM

It makes complete sense. Steve was always in it for the money, Woz did it because it was what he loved to do. I think Apple lost alot of its heart when Woz left.

Timelessblur

Feb 22, 2005, 11:24 PM

Can some one explain how what apple doing is any diffent that the scumming thing the RIAA and the MIAA is forcing on people.

Far as I can tell apple playing the I am huge and you are small. I will crush you because I can.

If you thow any stones on this you computer better be 100% free of all pirated and stolen stuff other wise well everything you say about how way to go apple is meanning less because the 2nd that a compiany turns on you for you stealing their stuff you going to start complaining and yet you support it being done to others.

Basicly Way to go as long as I am not the target.

applekid

Feb 22, 2005, 11:30 PM

First off, to the skeptics about Sunny:

It crossed my mind. Maybe Sunny is trying to get sympathy. I thought to myself getting a seed-key through a stranger was iffy, too. It would help him and probably the rest of us if he showed us where and how he got the help for placing the torrent on MTKA. There's definitely a smattering of bogus to it. The story doesn't hold together completely.

I think I'm giving the mate the benefit of the doubt here though. I'll stick by that for now, but cautiously. Saying he's got balls may be overstating a bit, but I'll stick by it for now. Maybe things will unfold with this article.

If he gets ass-rammed, I won't have too much sympathy because the back of my mind is saying he's gotta be bluffing. Maybe I'm in too much of a forgiving mood. :p

But, I'm more psyched about the iPod Mini update ;)

Now to my mate MacConvert2008. Hey, first off, no hard feelings. I may have come off a bit harsh. But, we're having an intelligent discussion so I just must reply :D But I will reply tomorrow... I have to sleep. :o

Maybe someone like Duff_Man will speak on my behalf on this one. That guy helped me out when that twit asked what would happen if he installed Tiger. Stirred up a bit here at MR. Good thing, too. Anyways, g'nite.

Keynoteuser

Feb 23, 2005, 12:00 AM

I think Sunny is lying about some things. He probably didn't think it would get out of hand, but I think the whole seed thing is bad bad bad. Who gives out their ADC keys to just anyone off the net? Either he's lying, or the guy who GAVE it to him is a complete moron.

And as far as MTKA is concerned. That guy is not even a GOOD liar. I've been told every single one of my products is on MTKA. The friends I know who have access to that site rave about all the free stuff they get off it.

I think Apple should smack Sunny around a bit, but I think someone finally needs to take MTKA down for good.

jsw

Feb 23, 2005, 12:19 AM

I completely agree that MTKA should die. It serves no valid purpose, period.

However, as far as Sunny is concerned, I think the possible punishment far exceeds the harm inflicted. Anyone - anyone - can get legal access to Tiger betas for $500. I have it. I paid, and I got five keys. I could see someone who only needed one key deciding that it wasn't so bad to hand out one of the spare ones - not technically legal, but I know it happens, and it's hard to pursue legally. I wouldn't hand one out to a stranger, but I might have if I were younger.

In any event, thousands and thousands of people have legal access to the Tiger betas, and anyone who could even remotely be considered a threat to Apple (i.e., MS) has, I'm sure, legal Tiger beta copies.

So, regardless of Apple's legal notices, it seems extraordinarily heavy-handed to argue that the release of a Tiger beta in any way - any way - harms the company. I have no idea why Apple's being such a pain about this stuff. I understand how a leak about, say, the Mac mini could cause problems. But Tiger is out there, everywhere, and Apple has sent it to any registered, paying developer. I got two copies in the mail today - two builds that were apparently and for some odd reason sent at the same time.

So how can Apple claim any damages? Sorry, but I cannot side with them on this one. It's bullying, clear and simple. If this were a release version of Tiger - or even close to a release version - I'd understand. But the versions which were described in the suit are not even vaguely good enough to be used as a default OS. They're cool to play with, but very buggy.

broken_keyboard

Feb 23, 2005, 01:57 AM

If this were a release version of Tiger - or even close to a release version - I'd understand.

The release version costs $129 and legal beta access costs $500 and you are saying you understand how a final release would be damaging but not a beta?

Santaduck

Feb 23, 2005, 02:35 AM

Timelessblur

Feb 23, 2005, 02:40 AM

Well it does seem Apple has turned a corner and is pursuing wrongdoers, even its own ardent fans, with increased litigational vigor.

I've read the above, but what I'd really like to hear more of is Woz & his justifications. I wonder if he's worried about the kid's overall 'harmlessness' or if Woz is really worried about Apple hurting its corporate image (in the eyes of most consumers) as the nice guy.

I think he tryign to do both. Get away from the people who think apple can do no wrong and the people who would buy dog poo if apple put it in a white box and then put their symble on it followed by them claiming it is the best product ever. Look at how the public reacted to the RIAA and the MIAA tackets and that is how non apple fanics are seeing this. People who see stuff for what it for and the people who dont think apple is there savior that is the best way to put it.

Mav451

Feb 23, 2005, 02:50 AM

Well it does seem Apple has turned a corner and is pursuing wrongdoers, even its own ardent fans, with increased litigational vigor.

I've read the above, but what I'd really like to hear more of is Woz & his justifications. I wonder if he's worried about the kid's overall 'harmlessness' or if Woz is really worried about Apple hurting its corporate image (in the eyes of most consumers) as the nice guy.

The drunkenblog URL was great...
I especially liked Jason Harris & Wilfried de Kerchove's comments.

The moment Apple introduced DRM it became the bad guy. I don't care how "simple" it is, the fact is that DRM is a monkey on your back the entire time you try to use iTunes. Its corporate image was already tainted right there.

DRM in whatever way you put it is Big Brother. Nothing can change the fact that THEY have control, not YOU. The irony is delicious isn't it Apple?

Furthermore, the escalation into hurting its fans (Thinksecret) and now Sunny should not be a surprise. Apple is shooting themselves in the foot here, and I'm not sure they even realize it right now.

broken_keyboard

Feb 23, 2005, 09:33 AM

I don't care how "simple" it is, the fact is that DRM is a monkey on your back the entire time you try to use iTunes.

I agree. I never copy anything and I take copy protection as a personal insult most of the time.

If it said on game boxes which ones required the CD in the drive I simply wouldn't buy them. Not because I have any intention of copying, but because I just don't want to do business with someone who insults me.

Any company who thinks selling products without DRM is a ticket to bankruptcy, well here is at least one example of an extra customer you will get by doing that.

jsw

Feb 23, 2005, 09:45 AM

The release version costs $129 and legal beta access costs $500 and you are saying you understand how a final release would be damaging but not a beta?
Yes, because people distributing a release version of Tiger would be keeping money away from Apple, because many of those who download the pirated version would otherwise have bought the retail version.

I'd be willing to wager that no one one Earth sent in $500 just so they could get a Tiger beta, and no one who got a pirated beta would otherwise have joined the ADC program. People who have pirated betas aren't costing Apple a dime.

I'm not saying it's right to pirate Tiger. It isn't. I'm just saying there's no harm to Apple in this case, and they're being really heavy-handed.

AlmostThere

Feb 23, 2005, 09:56 AM

I take copy protection as a personal insult most of the time

Rather like the cinema or DVD trailers that warn you against copying the movie and the effects of piracy.

I mean, hello ... I am sitting in a paid for seat, in a cinema, paying to watch your movie (and helped out by purchasing a massively overpriced bag of popcorn). Why are you inflicting your political battles on me? Why not bug the people who haven't paid, you annoying git.

If I don't want to listen to their preaching, ironically my best bet is to bittorrent myself a copy of the film!

AlmostThere

Feb 23, 2005, 09:59 AM

People who have pirated betas aren't costing Apple a dime.

And are almost certainly going to be first in the line when it is finally released.

mkaake

Feb 23, 2005, 10:25 AM

I always find it intersting how people will jump on some one who give out software that not fullly legal. It a safe assumtptoin that on almost everyone of there computers they have pirated software. I still get kicks out of some people who jump on this guy for give out tiger and yet they where among the people who downloaded it.

If there is one thing in this world that i hate it is hypocrits and most people who are complain about sonny and sya way to go apple are Hypocrits. You all better no have a single stolen thing on your computer always gotten all of your stuff legitly.

why do people think it's so stinkin hard to obey the law?

i've never understood that, but everytime i denounce piracy on macrumors, i get flamed. always via PM, and about half the time in the thread.

but i honestly don't get it. is it that hard to drive the speed limit? is it that hard to tell your friend that if he wants iPhoto, you're not going to give it to him? can't afford office? get openoffice. can't afford iPhoto? use image capture. can't afford iTunes? wait a minute...

jsw

Feb 23, 2005, 10:42 AM

why do people think it's so stinkin hard to obey the law?

i've never understood that, but everytime i denounce piracy on macrumors, i get flamed. always via PM, and about half the time in the thread.

but i honestly don't get it. is it that hard to drive the speed limit? is it that hard to tell your friend that if he wants iPhoto, you're not going to give it to him? can't afford office? get openoffice. can't afford iPhoto? use image capture. can't afford iTunes? wait a minute...
The point is that the punishment should be proportional to the damage done. Stealing MS Office "costs" MS money, and so should produce a decent fine. Providing a pirated version downloaded by many costs MS a lot of money, and so should be similarly punished. Downloading a Tiger beta costs Apple $0 and causes no loss of intellectual property.

The law should be obeyed - our part of the social contract - as long as it is reasonable - their part. Apple is being a bully to make a point.

I don't think a lot of people are pro-piracy. I'm not. But I'm also very much anti-bullying. I believe someone should be punished if and only if they cause some describable harm.

As far as driving the speed limit: if it were a safety issue, it should be enforced 24/7, and every violator should be ticketed. It isn't, and they aren't. At least around here, rush hour (really, rush hours) effective speed limits are 10 mph higher than during the day and at night. Cops do not enforce the limits at those times because, if they did, massive jams would occur. The speed limit is a revenue generation tool with a safety-oriented cover. True "safe" speed is derived from driving conditions, time of day, traffic load, vehicle parameters, and driver capability. I might be able to safely drive somewhere, sometime, at 90 mph, but, for you, at another time, in other traffic and weather, 10 mph might be the safe speed. Speed limits make no sense whatsoever since, like a broken clock, they seem appropriate only about twice a day.

mkaake

Feb 23, 2005, 12:04 PM

The point is that the punishment should be proportional to the damage done. Stealing MS Office "costs" MS money, and so should produce a decent fine. Providing a pirated version downloaded by many costs MS a lot of money, and so should be similarly punished. Downloading a Tiger beta costs Apple $0 and causes no loss of intellectual property.

The law should be obeyed - our part of the social contract - as long as it is reasonable - their part. Apple is being a bully to make a point.

I don't think a lot of people are pro-piracy. I'm not. But I'm also very much anti-bullying. I believe someone should be punished if and only if they cause some describable harm.

As far as driving the speed limit: if it were a safety issue, it should be enforced 24/7, and every violator should be ticketed. It isn't, and they aren't. At least around here, rush hour (really, rush hours) effective speed limits are 10 mph higher than during the day and at night. Cops do not enforce the limits at those times because, if they did, massive jams would occur. The speed limit is a revenue generation tool with a safety-oriented cover. True "safe" speed is derived from driving conditions, time of day, traffic load, vehicle parameters, and driver capability. I might be able to safely drive somewhere, sometime, at 90 mph, but, for you, at another time, in other traffic and weather, 10 mph might be the safe speed. Speed limits make no sense whatsoever since, like a broken clock, they seem appropriate only about twice a day.

kind of nice to get a thoughful response without flameage. not used to that :)

anyway, i guess the argument would need to be made then, as to if apple is losing money by this being available to the public (although with an NDA saying you can't distribute, i refuse to side with the person pirating software). i say yes, some say no. guess when it gets closer to gold master, it's worth more money to more people. an early beta, prolly not going to cost apple too much money. last version, or gold version? yeah, i think it would.

anyway, i just generally find it silly when people agree to a certain set of limits (agreement you click 'yes' to when you install software), and then say that it's a ridiculous agreement, and they don't want to abide by it. sure, not clicking 'yes' means you can't install, but isn't that kind of the point? if you don't want to play by their rules, don't use their software?

and while i agree that bullying is no good, i'm not entirely sure that's what this is (grabs flame suit). apple, at some point, if they intend to stop the piracy, need to go after the people pirating it. i'm sure they didn't know before they started this exactly who they were going after... so they didn't say - let's pick on some college kid who can't defend himself... it just happens to be a college kid because there are too many college kids involved in pirating software, which they sadly don't even see as being wrong, and quite frankly, feel justified in doing it. I remember living in the dorms, and watching huge counter-strike parties, where only two people owned the software... but those who didn't felt completely justified by their piracy.

scary.

anyway, back to work!

Timelessblur

Feb 23, 2005, 12:07 PM

why do people think it's so stinkin hard to obey the law?

i've never understood that, but everytime i denounce piracy on macrumors, i get flamed. always via PM, and about half the time in the thread.

but i honestly don't get it. is it that hard to drive the speed limit? is it that hard to tell your friend that if he wants iPhoto, you're not going to give it to him? can't afford office? get openoffice. can't afford iPhoto? use image capture. can't afford iTunes? wait a minute...

Their are a few who dont have anything illegel on their computer but they are few and far bettween. Most of the people claim that are prouble lying it is as simple as that. If you have kids who use the computer then ignorics will kick in.

It just the fact that it really a safe bet that the computer has illigle stuff on thier. Most of the people who say stick it to them and bash the heaviest also are very hypicrical.

Is my computer 100% clean heck no but a vast majority of is 80-90% what I have is legit and all of the higher end stuff is. Mind you a lot of it is edu which is fine because I still in school and I got it though the school. I still paid 140 for an Edu verson of Mathcad. I have MS office though the school and I plan on getting autocad. I have a handful of games that crack but I dont even play them much the ones I play the most I have paid for. My music is where the heavist illegal stuff is and over 1/2 of that I have either own, It was a free legal download off the net, or it unliscened in the United States so their really is no other way to get it and it legel to have.

I am one of those people who strongly believe in if you like it you should support it by buying it but I dont ram it down people thoughts I just state that is what I believe and for the most part I follow that belief but at the same token I can not bash some one for pirating simple because I still do it it every now and then but very limited. People who only pirate their stuff I pretty edgy about. I do beleive if you not willing to get the stuff you like though legal means you are not a fan and should not be counted.

Laslo Panaflex

Feb 23, 2005, 12:14 PM

Woz did a phone interview on the Screen Savers yesterday. He basically said the same thing that Drunkenblog says, but in the interview he said that he doesn't know any of the legal details becuase he hasn't read the court papers. Anyway, he just said that the punishment doesn't fit the crime, and that everyone makes mistakes.

Anyway, it's not up to Woz, and even if Woz still worked for Apple he still wouldn't have any say in it. :rolleyes:

CanadaRAM

Feb 23, 2005, 12:17 PM

Applekid:

You make a good point, but I don't think you really understood what I was saying. Yes, I have the money....But I found out that I need Studio MX and Photoshop and we know what those cost. I'm sure this has been suggested lots, but why don't they just make software harder to hack? Some of these programs require basically no computer knowledge whatsoever to distribute.
I'm getting another deadbolt added to my door in case this tosser is in my neighborhood and decides he needs a new TV. Othewise he'll say "how come you didn't make your house easer to break into?"

MacConvert2008

Feb 23, 2005, 12:21 PM

I'm getting another deadbolt added to my door in case this tosser is in my neighborhood and decides he needs a new TV. Othewise he'll say "how come you didn't make your house *harder* to break into?"

Do you honestly believe that there is no difference between breaking into someone's house, invading their privacy, and possibly endangering their lives and pirating software? Save the absolutism for Christian dogma.

Timelessblur

Feb 23, 2005, 12:38 PM

Do you honestly believe that there is no difference between breaking into someone's house, invading their privacy, and possibly endangering their lives and pirating software? Save the absolutism for Christian dogma.

aparently some can not see the sarcaim in what he said.

He was also making a point. Just because it easy to get crack software does not mean it is right.

mkaake

Feb 23, 2005, 04:04 PM

Do you honestly believe that there is no difference between breaking into someone's house, invading their privacy, and possibly endangering their lives and pirating software? Save the absolutism for Christian dogma.

difference:

when you pirate software, the person you're hurting, you can't see. more people do it, because it requires far less in the balls area than going in to someone's house.

the point, good sir, is that it's breaking the law. and if people have such a care free attitude about breaking the law, there's no way I would want them living around me.

jsw

Feb 23, 2005, 04:18 PM

kind of nice to get a thoughful response without flameage. not used to that :)
I think we agree about 90% of the way. The difference is that I feel that "illegal" does not necessarily imply "wrong" (nor does "legal" imply "right" in all cases). I won't steal software. However, I would "steal" stuff I already bought. Example: last year, my daughter left a case of 20 DVDs on a plane, and they were "lost". We purchased all the replacements we could, but some were Disney movies that aren't sold now. I would have no problem if my brother sent me a copy of them. Why? Because I bought the DVD, I lost it, and I would have bought it again, but Disney won't sell it to me. I made a good faith effort. It would be illegal to use the copy, but I find it in no way whatsoever to be unethical.

Likewise, if I bought a CD and it got snapped in half on accident, I would have no moral problem downloading a copy of it. I wouldn't do so out of fear of being caught, but I'd have no ethical qualms about it.

I think that companies have far more say over our rights to use their products than they should have, that's all. Just because they can type it into a license agreement doesn't make it right. When I buy a toy for my daughter, there's no license agreement. When I buy a tool for my garage, no license agreement. When I buy an orange at the store - which, I suppose, I could use to grow other oranges - no license agreement. Software, music, and movies are inherently easy to copy and steal, granted. But, instead of providing incentive to buy the product, most companies just resort to making people afraid to steal it.

applekid

Feb 23, 2005, 06:59 PM

And are almost certainly going to be first in the line when it is finally released.

I guarantee you that more than half of the people pirating Tiger in its beta is going to pirate the final release. You show me that any torrent of the commercial release of Tiger isn't downloaded by the current "fanatics", and I'll eat my words.

I saw the same thing happen with Jaguar. People claimed only fanatics were touching betas of Jaguar then. But in reality, a large chunk of those "fanatics" turned out to be pirates that openly admitted they downloaded Jaguar final and Jaguar beta. "Almost certainly" is no where near accurate on how many fanatics will download the final version of Tiger.

Back to MacConvert2008...

That was the most illogical thing I have ever read. So, you're blaming the people that make software for all of the pirates? Alright, I blame 7-11 for selling candy bars, and its their own fault those particular candy bars continuously get stolen. It's just completely their fault. They had security cameras, sold the candy behind the counter, locked up shop, bought new locks, and everything else they could do in their power, so it's completely their fault. So the thief should have no responsibility because he/she isn't to blame for not knowing the difference between right and wrong? So the thief is the good guy? You're saying everybody is entitled to steal when security is broken on any as petty as a candy bar or as expensive as Photoshop? What you're saying is you get jealous of people doing the wrong thing, unless of course you don't think what they're doing is wrong which makes me seriously question if you have any common sense or if your parents even taught you the difference between right and wrong or just a sucker for peer pressure.

Look, if everybody knew what was right and what was wrong, we'd be in a utopia. But, let's face it, we've got plenty of crooked people on Earth, and they should be put back in line and pay properly for their faults whether it be by fine or jail time.

anyway, i just generally find it silly when people agree to a certain set of limits (agreement you click 'yes' to when you install software), and then say that it's a ridiculous agreement, and they don't want to abide by it. sure, not clicking 'yes' means you can't install, but isn't that kind of the point? if you don't want to play by their rules, don't use their software?

This might be the core of piracy problem. Look at some of the attitudes here. Some people are saying we shouldn't follow agreements. And if you disagree with some agreement, you somehow automatically have the pirate to obtain whatever it may be illegally. Like that makes sense.

But, instead of pirates blaming the corporation and lawmakers, they should blame themselves. Instead of trying to make a publicity stunt or making up excuses in your mind, why don't you go to your lawmaker and tell them you want to see things change? Frankly, I think some agreements and laws should be fixed up a little for this day and age (movies for example), but I'm not going to pirate something like a movie just because I think the law is wrong. As long as the law stands, I deserve punishment if I pirate.

I accept the fact not everyone in the world is a good person. People kill people. People steal from other people. Hey, it just happens. So, if companies want to protect themselves from getting screwed by one more loser, I'm all for it, even if I have to agree to another agreement or see another FBI notice in my movies. If I don't agree with what's going on, I'll still take actions that inbound in the laws or just not buy the product.

Sometimes I question how easily tempted people are. Maybe pirates are the younger end of the age spectrum, but some are adults or almost adults and have the maturity of a child.

and while i agree that bullying is no good, i'm not entirely sure that's what this is (grabs flame suit). apple, at some point, if they intend to stop the piracy, need to go after the people pirating it. i'm sure they didn't know before they started this exactly who they were going after... so they didn't say - let's pick on some college kid who can't defend himself... it just happens to be a college kid because there are too many college kids involved in pirating software, which they sadly don't even see as being wrong, and quite frankly, feel justified in doing it. I remember living in the dorms, and watching huge counter-strike parties, where only two people owned the software... but those who didn't felt completely justified by their piracy.

This is what I don't get either. Do you just tell Apple to turn a blind eye to piracy? Do you think Apple legal had any idea who they were going after when they sued Sunny?

Anyways, let's get back on topic. My feeling is the people that pirate Tiger are either your loser pirate or your loser fanatic that lacks patient and needs to grow up. So, I think Sunny should've known better because he is the latter. Considering I believe his story mostly, I don't think he deserves a big punishment. The people that seem to not support Apple's actions are sorta assuming there's going to be large fines and punishments for each of these people already, even though there's been nothing said about that as of yet.

MacConvert2008

Feb 23, 2005, 10:46 PM

Back to MacConvert2008...

That was the most illogical thing I have ever read. So, you're blaming the people that make software for all of the pirates? Alright, I blame 7-11 for selling candy bars, and its their own fault those particular candy bars continuously get stolen. It's just completely their fault. They had security cameras, sold the candy behind the counter, locked up shop, bought new locks, and everything else they could do in their power, so it's completely their fault. So the thief should have no responsibility because he/she isn't to blame for not knowing the difference between right and wrong? So the thief is the good guy? You're saying everybody is entitled to steal when security is broken on any as petty as a candy bar or as expensive as Photoshop? What you're saying is you get jealous of people doing the wrong thing, unless of course you don't think what they're doing is wrong which makes me seriously question if you have any common sense or if your parents even taught you the difference between right and wrong or just a sucker for peer pressure.

Alright, first of all, personal insults aren't called for or necessary. Secondly, you never quoted anywhere that I said the thief has no responsibilty... my point was that the same security devices have been place for much of this software for years. You denied the existence of a utopia, but you act as though a thief carries all the blame. So many people like to see the poor innocent software manufacturer as getting screwed by evil pirates, but when these companies release software in the same series for 10+ years, it's obvious they're not suffering too terribly. There's a reason why my Volkswagen has unique laser-etched keys and my dorm has two card swipes to even get to the hallways. If someone leaves their car unlocked with the keys sitting on the porch, I feel little sympathy for them when it gets stolen. If that candy store owner doesn't have any security, even though he can certainly afford it, and gets burglarized, it is in part his fault. Everyone has a bleeding heart for the 'victim,' but in this imperfect world (which you just discussed) it's one's responsibility to do all one can to protect one's assets. Some of these manufactuers aren't even trying. Ethically, pirating software is wrong. No one is contesting that, at least not anymore. But Adobe, Macromedia and the like can probably afford to put slightly more security in their $400+ software packages. You know what? I probably am a little jealous. Not because they're doing something wrong and I'm a teenybopper succumbing to "peer pressure" to be cool. Maybe I'm just bitter that I spend a week's paycheck on a CD that everyone around me gets for nothing. Maybe I'm bitter that everyone on this forum has pirated something (a well-established fact on this thread) and somehow one wakes up one morning and suddenly comes into a state of techno-ethical enlightenment and begins evangelizing the hell-bound 'pirates.' Talk about "illogical." And one last thing: Please don't call me a "sucker" or blindly assert that I have no morals. Seeing as you don't even know my first name, I don't think you're qualified to analyze my conscient convictions or my parents' abilities. You don't have that right.

angelneo

Feb 24, 2005, 12:33 AM

Alright, first of all, personal insults aren't called for or necessary. Secondly, you never quoted anywhere that I said the thief has no responsibilty... my point was that the same security devices have been place for much of this software for years. You denied the existence of a utopia, but you act as though a thief carries all the blame. So many people like to see the poor innocent software manufacturer as getting screwed by evil pirates, but when these companies release software in the same series for 10+ years, it's obvious they're not suffering too terribly. There's a reason why my Volkswagen has unique laser-etched keys and my dorm has two card swipes to even get to the hallways. If someone leaves their car unlocked with the keys sitting on the porch, I feel little sympathy for them when it gets stolen. If that candy store owner doesn't have any security, even though he can certainly afford it, and gets burglarized, it is in part his fault. Everyone has a bleeding heart for the 'victim,' but in this imperfect world (which you just discussed) it's one's responsibility to do all one can to protect one's assets. Some of these manufactuers aren't even trying. Ethically, pirating software is wrong. No one is contesting that, at least not anymore. But Adobe, Macromedia and the like can probably afford to put slightly more security in their $400+ software packages.
I can see your point in saying that software makers should make it harder to crack but it's a little different than leaving the keys in your cars or forgetting to lock the doors. Its not a matter of personal properties but intellectual properties where it is another ball game. Trying to based our arguments on physical items is somewhat flawed. A closer approximation is perhaps like for example, someone copied your homework.

Timelessblur

Feb 24, 2005, 01:25 AM

I can see your point in saying that software makers should make it harder to crack but it's a little different than leaving the keys in your cars or forgetting to lock the doors. Its not a matter of personal properties but intellectual properties where it is another ball game. Trying to based our arguments on physical items is somewhat flawed. A closer approximation is perhaps like for example, someone copied your homework.

no this is more close to the stealling of physical proparty than the one you are using. Just the only diffence is nature resorse where not used in the manfuatoring and making of it but the same money loss it there.

a close example is it more like walking into a collage book store and then taking one of those 100+ buck text book taking it to a copy machienc and coping everyting out of it which is hugely illage and agaist the law.

angelneo

Feb 24, 2005, 01:55 AM

no this is more close to the stealling of physical proparty than the one you are using. Just the only diffence is nature resorse where not used in the manfuatoring and making of it but the same money loss it there.

a close example is it more like walking into a collage book store and then taking one of those 100+ buck text book taking it to a copy machienc and coping everyting out of it which is hugely illage and agaist the law.
Well, the main difference as you pointed out is that you are not depriving the other party of that item as well, which is different from stealing a car in which the owner will lose the car. The example you quoted is exactly like mine before, copying someone homework. I think we are getting off-topic again

Timelessblur

Feb 24, 2005, 02:52 AM

Well, the main difference as you pointed out is that you are not depriving the other party of that item as well, which is different from stealing a car in which the owner will lose the car. The example you quoted is exactly like mine before, copying someone homework. I think we are getting off-topic again

BS yet again. you ARE depriving the other party of the item.

To be more exact you are depriving them of there money plan and simple. Coping some else homework is ethiily wrong but no one is really loosing much.

Now piratiing software, music, movies ect some is loosing out of there money so it is the same as stealing physcial properity because that physical proputry is equal to some $ amont that has to be spent to replace it.
So yet again you been proven wrong.

Peterkro

Feb 24, 2005, 03:14 AM

If you copy software the owner loses nothing they still have what they started with. Its copyright violation not stealing.

blackfox

Feb 24, 2005, 03:25 AM

I must ask why there is continued debate about the activity of this guy. By agreement, what he did is against the law. That is indisputable, and for his particular case, unchangeable. Any argument over right, wrong, morality, fairness is purely academic.

Where this is room for (constructive) debate (if that is what is desired), is in the action Apple chooses to take - in the manner and type of consequence this guy is subjected to. Because this, as far as I can tell, is entirely up to Apple's discretion, and as such has a wide latitude of possible expressions. What's more, it is actually possible to effect change by this form of debate (although extremely unlikely.)

Questions about fairness, right, wrong and morality are useful here. While many people have touched on the consequence aspect, too many seem to have gotten sidetracked by the cause.

Sorry to interject.

angelneo

Feb 24, 2005, 04:19 AM

BS yet again. you ARE depriving the other party of the item.

To be more exact you are depriving them of there money plan and simple. Coping some else homework is ethiily wrong but no one is really loosing much.

Now piratiing software, music, movies ect some is loosing out of there money so it is the same as stealing physcial properity because that physical proputry is equal to some $ amont that has to be spent to replace it.
So yet again you been proven wrong. I'm sorry but I do not want to argue with you what is intellectual property when there are too many articles around the internet on this issue which you can read up on. I sincerely hope that the retort is not targeting me. As I have said, we have gotten too far off about the topics of Sunny.

Timelessblur

Feb 24, 2005, 08:55 AM

If you copy software the owner loses nothing they still have what they started with. Its copyright violation not stealing.

Fine I just going to take a 100 dollar from you pay check and it going to go my pocket. It not stealling you never would of seen it but it 100 bucks that you should of had but you never miss it since you never got it.

that is EXACTLY what it like when you crack software or copy music. it money that the company should of had but never got because some one took it from there pay check and put it in there pocket.

applekid

Feb 24, 2005, 10:27 AM

So many people like to see the poor innocent software manufacturer as getting screwed by evil pirates, but when these companies release software in the same series for 10+ years, it's obvious they're not suffering too terribly.

I haven't seem software that hasn't changed their security system with certain milestone updates. Piracy has definitely changed from what is used to be. It used to be underground servers were the only ways to download files, and those servers were very, very selective. BitTorrent and BitTorrent trackers have changed everything. I don't have a problem with BitTorrent existing since piracy always takes advantage of a program that originally had no malicious intentions. However, BitTorrent trackers have gotten so popular that I found people at school that aren't computer savvy at all pirating everything and anything.

So, no companies haven't suffered or aren't suffering. They've always suffered. But, back in the day, it was just copying floppies or CDs among people you actually knew; easy for law enforcement to find and bust if one started selling pirated copies, and the damage was miniscule either way. Now, that's all very different with the internet. Got a connection, go download and release the pirated copy to the masses. The companies definitely have the right to call foul. Should they adapt to these changes? Sure. They've always have, but they can only do so much because...

Some of these manufactuers aren't even trying. Ethically, pirating software is wrong. No one is contesting that, at least not anymore. But Adobe, Macromedia and the like can probably afford to put slightly more security in their $400+ software packages.

It comes back to juggling the consumer's rights and stomping on piracy. Like many of us have said, we are inconvenienced when the developer goes to what we see as ridiculous measures to protect their software. Microsoft for example gets scrutinized with Windows XP's authentication system. Should companies go as far as Microsoft, or should they have some leniency so that it's still a reasonable amount of security for the consumer to actually want to buy the product? Most people may shrug off that EULA paper or quickly hit agree to agreements in installers without reading it all. Some people don't think much a serial key. Some people might not think much of a CD check or a new CD key with every update because the developer changed an algorithm. Some people may not think much of online registrations.

But, it shows how transparent the security really is. Even you say they aren't doing anything, but in reality, there's a lot of security they you don't know about. Which is good. Everybody is always saying don't harm the consumer to protect against piracy, and you are proving that point.

Let's not forget software developers are often monitoring what happens to their software, or at least it's rumored to be true. Back in my pirate days, I remember reading some articles people posted about how Apple, Adobe, and other big names have been tracking pirated copies of software. But, they haven't acted. Why? That's beyond me, but they seem to waiting for the perfect moment to go after the pirates. I know for a fact software developers monitor famous piracy websites like MTKA. Feral Interactive brought it up once in the IMG Forums recently. They didn't take action, but nothing says they won't.

So, again, everything is happening transparently. You cringe at pirates, but just wait for them to be caught. I think I have always had to migrate to a new source of pirated files quite often even back in the day. Why? People were getting busted! FTP servers kept going down. Carracho and Hotline servers fell. The distributors are definitely getting busted. Paraphrasing what Jason Jones said about the Halo story: These pirates should be or are waiting for the hammer to fall. Look at recent happenings such as Suprnova. And MTKA is definitely being threatened now. I bet MTKA forums are buzzing with discussion about what they have to do. I remember there was some freaking out when someone asked the hypothetical what would happen if someone got caught.

You know what? I probably am a little jealous. Not because they're doing something wrong and I'm a teenybopper succumbing to "peer pressure" to be cool. Maybe I'm just bitter that I spend a week's paycheck on a CD that everyone around me gets for nothing. Maybe I'm bitter that everyone on this forum has pirated something (a well-established fact on this thread) and somehow one wakes up one morning and suddenly comes into a state of techno-ethical enlightenment and begins evangelizing the hell-bound 'pirates.' Talk about "illogical." And one last thing: Please don't call me a "sucker" or blindly assert that I have no morals. Seeing as you don't even know my first name, I don't think you're qualified to analyze my conscient convictions or my parents' abilities. You don't have that right.

Maybe I am wrong for attacking you, and for that, I apologize and regret saying some things. However the impression I get from what you're saying is since other people steal software, nobody would mind you doing the same. Now, since you said you haven't done any piracy, good for you and maybe I was a bit harsh saying you have questionable morals, a sucker for peer pressure, or illogical. However, if you were to pirate, then there's no question in my mind what you did was wrong and what I said was malicious. But, I still say you shouldn't be jealous. The way I see it is you're acting like you're jealous of that candy store thief because they got a freebie by breaking the law and you payed for your candy without any guilt hanging over you. That's why I say you should have at least a small amount of moral values to at least say the thief isn't doing the right thing to obtain his goodies.

Instead of being jealous of the thief, just wait for that hammer to fall on the pirate and live your life the right way. It pays. Is it really worth paying the $250,000 fine and jail time for pirating MS Office or pay that $149 for MS Office or just don't buy it at all and have no worries?

Pirates, look out. That hammer will fall on you. Pull out while you have a chance. Because I for one will have no sympathy if you get caught red-handed.

mkaake

Feb 24, 2005, 10:32 AM

I think we agree about 90% of the way. The difference is that I feel that "illegal" does not necessarily imply "wrong" (nor does "legal" imply "right" in all cases). I won't steal software. However, I would "steal" stuff I already bought. Example: last year, my daughter left a case of 20 DVDs on a plane, and they were "lost". We purchased all the replacements we could, but some were Disney movies that aren't sold now. I would have no problem if my brother sent me a copy of them. Why? Because I bought the DVD, I lost it, and I would have bought it again, but Disney won't sell it to me. I made a good faith effort. It would be illegal to use the copy, but I find it in no way whatsoever to be unethical.

Likewise, if I bought a CD and it got snapped in half on accident, I would have no moral problem downloading a copy of it. I wouldn't do so out of fear of being caught, but I'd have no ethical qualms about it.

I think that companies have far more say over our rights to use their products than they should have, that's all. Just because they can type it into a license agreement doesn't make it right. When I buy a toy for my daughter, there's no license agreement. When I buy a tool for my garage, no license agreement. When I buy an orange at the store - which, I suppose, I could use to grow other oranges - no license agreement. Software, music, and movies are inherently easy to copy and steal, granted. But, instead of providing incentive to buy the product, most companies just resort to making people afraid to steal it.

having stated it that way, i think you can move that closer to 99 or 100%.

and i completely forgot what else i was going to say :)

oh well. oh, and as a quick aside, i don't have any pirated software on my computer, lest i be thought a hypocrite... :)

and i think it would be proper to issue a fine. maybe 500 dollars :), the cost of ADC membership. or 129 for everyone who downloaded it :)

applekid

Feb 24, 2005, 10:38 AM

Well, the main difference as you pointed out is that you are not depriving the other party of that item as well, which is different from stealing a car in which the owner will lose the car. The example you quoted is exactly like mine before, copying someone homework. I think we are getting off-topic again.

So you're saying when someone does something as petty as copy another kid's homework or something as major as pirating software, nothing is lost?

Not only money, but the author's effort and time are stolen. The value of intellectual comes from the process and efforts put into it. So, yeah, you are depriving the author of things when they did not agree to give away this stuff for free.

Hey, maybe with homework the kid meant to give away his work, so there is no loss for the author. But, something like software, there definitely is nothing that says it was meant to be given away for free.

applekid

Feb 24, 2005, 10:41 AM

and i think it would be proper to issue a fine. maybe 500 dollars :), the cost of ADC membership. or 129 for everyone who downloaded it :)

I can settle for that, too. But, let's remember there was malicious intent with someone that is pirating and/or distributing. So, maybe whatever current fines and even jail time is overkill, but making them pay up more than face value is quite appropriate, IMHO.

angelneo

Feb 24, 2005, 11:00 AM

So you're saying when someone does something as petty as copy another kid's homework or something as major as pirating software, nothing is lost?

Not only money, but the author's effort and time are stolen. The value of intellectual comes from the process and efforts put into it. So, yeah, you are depriving the author of things when they did not agree to give away this stuff for free.

Hey, maybe with homework the kid meant to give away his work, so there is no loss for the author. But, something like software, there definitely is nothing that says it was meant to be given away for free.I was just trying to illustrate the idea with a trivial example. Sorry if I did not make myself clear. The idea is that no physical loss is experienced by the users of the software. For all they care, owner who purchase the software are not affected by piracy on the surface unlike owners of car who suffer from car theft. Items are duplicated but not deprived from other people as they still possessed the item. We can argue that the makers of the software suffer from potential sales (for their effort) as RIAA or those anti-piracy group mentioned but it is very hard to account for. That is why infringing of intellectual property is so different from stealing of physical items and many are able to find excuses in committing piracy.

EDIT: I am not justifying piracy, just trying to explain to timelessblur what's the difference between stealing physical items and IP infringement for my previous post

MacConvert2008

Feb 24, 2005, 12:11 PM

word :) it's goin' down. Yeah I didn't realize that suprnova got dominated, that's cool. Yeah and you're right; it is an inconvenience when companies like microsoft have big-brother security measures. When I thought about it, I realized that there really is no way to stop it, and that's probably the attitudes a lot of law enforcement organizations have. It wouldn't surprise me if microsoft had a massive server with databases following the cd-keys available from Crackspider.net and the like, just waiting for someone to try to get an update to log their IP and MAC addy. But, as an example, there's one company that all of my pirating fans buy from... Blizzard. Their beta-key system is ingenius, and even if some serious hardcore hackers can get past it, white-hats don't even bother. I've actually gone through two legit copies of warcraft III (hehe) and never thought twice. My brother who lived in the room next to me when I was at home had to buy his own copy to get on battle.net, in addition to WOW and Diablo I/II. I guess that's a different scenario because they only wanted it for the online interaction, but it's an example of good security. Even though WCIII has been out for four years, I haven't heard of any average joe pirate being able to manufacure battle.net-ready ISO's. Anyone heard different? Some productivity apps like Dreamweaver are used online, but if they were to overtly contact their manufacturers' servers, that would be a massive ACLU law suit waiting to happen. I guess they could always catch a handful of upper-level hackers (like the ones running torrent sites) and reduce their punishment in exchange for the names of their affiliates, and let it trickle down like that until it gets enough press to scare everyone off. Highly improbable, not to mention costly, but if big daddy companies stand to increase their profit margins they might be willing to pitch in.

milzay

Feb 24, 2005, 03:52 PM

Timelessblur

Feb 24, 2005, 04:36 PM

Seeing as this post has gone to piracy stuff here are my thoughts. My first problem is with games. The games industry is now bigger than the films industry, and that means theres a huge market for computer games. Yet companies (and consumers) can still justify paying £40 per game when you can buy films for £15 (most of the time cheaper). Its a joke. Now i will say that games like Metal Gear Solids, GTAs, Gran Turismos deserve their price tag, but you expect consumers to pay £40 for all games. Time prices caught up with the industry.
I think the solution for software would be something similar to what the Maya team, whereby they offer a student edition for free, with almost all features, albeit with wtaermarks all over renders (needs to be more subtle than this), this is a great idea. Seriously, its unfair to expect a home user to pay these high prices (my sister needs Photoshop, InStyle (for uni)- I like to play around with Flash / Dreamweaver, Cinema4d, Bryce) but im not making any friggin money and buying all these apps would cost more than my and leg.. and heart... and brain... and eyes. if they just want to try a program and get into a new area, companies should be promoting this, hell they should users like me as an investment because if i did start making money then i would pay for the apps. Lets face it big companies should pay these prices as they are making millions from these apps, but the average home user doesnt deserve to pay these prices, unless they are making £££ from the app.
Really, we shouldnt be trying to stop application sharing we should be looking at why people do it.

well some pretty clearly does not know why some apps cost an arm and a leg. It clearly a thing of supply and demand.
2nd games have not really changed price much for the past 10+ years. while everything else has inflated in cost games has stayed at the exact same prices so in relaitly they have been becoming cheaper while all other cost have gone up

For those apps you listed their is a reason they cost so much. They have a huge deloment cost and main taining of them. 2nd they want to make some money off of them. 3rd they dont sell very many of them. They are lucky if they sell several thousand in a year. Now lets compare that to games that are selling 10 of millions copys. There are programs like autocad out their that cost $3000 a copy and it is 300+ for an edu verson of it. They dont sell very many of them and never will because no one use those apps and they are pro leval.

If you can not pay for it dont use it. 2nd you can download the program and use it but you opinan of it means noughting since you not a true use nor a true fan. If you pirate a game you not a fan of them game. If you like the program PAY FOR IT. Dreamwave is a pro level app. by you logic I going to pirate final cut pro (a 1k app) and motion from apple becuase i just want to play with it..... Wait it a pro lv app and it not ment for home users.

dont try to justify pirating stuff because you cannt. Just admint you steal software. I'll admit that I have pirated stuff on my computer I dont try to justify it nor am I going to but by my own rules none of the stuff I have pirated I am a true fan of them and I should not be counted in what features should be add to software because I did not pay for it nor do I plan 2 but the stuff I have priated I dont really use it. Everything that I like or use on a semi realare bases I paid the money for it. I just a student and I fork out 140 for an EDU copy of mathcad. few 200-300 of games that I like. I paid for my OS out of my own pocket. Paid for reteal upgrade for my laptop to go to XP pro. I paid for most my software and any that I use I own completely legelly (wither it full reteal or I got it though edu. either way it is legal on my computer. Can you say the same for yours where over 90% of the stuff on it is legit.

milzay

Feb 24, 2005, 04:52 PM

well some pretty clearly does not know why some apps cost an arm and a leg. It clearly a thing of supply and demand.
2nd games have not really changed price much for the past 10+ years. while everything else has inflated in cost games has stayed at the exact same prices so in relaitly they have been becoming cheaper while all other cost have gone up

For those apps you listed their is a reason they cost so much. They have a huge deloment cost and main taining of them. 2nd they want to make some money off of them. 3rd they dont sell very many of them. They are lucky if they sell several thousand in a year. Now lets compare that to games that are selling 10 of millions copys. There are programs like autocad out their that cost $3000 a copy and it is 300+ for an edu verson of it. They dont sell very many of them and never will because no one use those apps and they are pro leval.

If you can not pay for it dont use it. 2nd you can download the program and use it but you opinan of it means noughting since you not a true use nor a true fan. If you pirate a game you not a fan of them game. If you like the program PAY FOR IT. Dreamwave is a pro level app. by you logic I going to pirate final cut pro (a 1k app) and motion from apple becuase i just want to play with it..... Wait it a pro lv app and it not ment for home users.

Seeing as we are on supply + demand lets talk about computer games. Years a go computers were a lot more expensive and games had much much much less demand. This means thy had to charge higher prices, but this is no longer the case. Demand is so high for games, theres no reason to justify these prices, high demand= more sales, so more sales means more money into company, therefore meaning these companies can afford to drastically reduce their prices, but they're being greedy and we (consumers) are getting royally ripped due to uncompetitve pricing.

Im too lazy to reply to second part, ill do that later, but i think a lot of my answers will be found in my previous post.

Timelessblur

Feb 24, 2005, 04:58 PM

Seeing as we are on supply + demand lets talk about computer games. Years a go computers were a lot more expensive and games had much much much less demand. This means thy had to charge higher prices, but this is no longer the case. Demand is so high for games, theres no reason to justify these prices, high demand= more sales, so more sales means more money into company, therefore meaning these companies can afford to drastically reduce their prices, but they're being greedy and we (consumers) are getting royally ripped due to uncompetitve pricing.

Im too lazy to reply to second part, ill do that later, but i think a lot of my answers will be found in my previous post.

fine agaist for inflation over the past 15-20 years (where prices have been pretty much the same not going up any) if you want to put infaltion (which is pretty constant at 3% a year)in there you looking at games when they coming out being oh some where around 100-120 American for the game. Reality is the games are bettween 50-60 when they are released that is 50% less than what infation is telling us they should be. Put that in their and oh look they have been getting cheap. Also the curve is not a linear curve. Have a nice day and thank you for playing the "you have been proven wrong game"

milzay

Feb 24, 2005, 05:23 PM

fine agaist for inflation over the past 15-20 years (where prices have been pretty much the same not going up any) if you want to put infaltion (which is pretty constant at 3% a year)in there you looking at games when they coming out being oh some where around 100-120 American for the game. Reality is the games are bettween 50-60 when they are released that is 50% less than what infation is telling us they should be. Put that in their and oh look they have been getting cheap. Also the curve is not a linear curve. Have a nice day and thank you for playing the "you have been proven wrong game"

Yea, nice game- good to see its fair considering your contestant 1 and judge 1 2 and 3. Well done, give yourself a prize now.
Dont be ridiculous economics isnt that simple, not all products increase at a steady rate. Look at computers. The PC market tends not to be increasing in price, because its still a devloping market and therfore cheaper ways of doing this are being found and importantly the market is still growing.
Let me make this easy for you, well even make a game out of it:
Little John buys 2 oranges at £2, when the costs are taken into account the orange company is making £1. Little John then goes to school and his friend realise that they can get oranges!!!!! The next day 20 of Little Johns friends go to buy two oranges, the business should:
a) Carry on charging £2, therefore making £30 profit (after all costs are increasing, but because they are importing more they gain some economies of scale)
b) Charge £1, therefore making £10 (still 1000% more than originally- costs do increase, however economices of scale taken into account too)

Amazingly after a few days of observing it was noted that option (a) led to an increase in oranges being stolen, threfore prices being pushed up and a decrease in customers. However wehn option (b) was implemented amazingly the orange shop had a continuing growing number of customers, this suited the consumers due to fair prices and the shop as their profits had grown vastly and were still growing.

So what do you think the right answer is...?

(This is a very similar trend to the videogames market. And yes the line is not linear but its still got an extremely similar relationship. )

applekid

Feb 24, 2005, 07:00 PM

MacConvert2008, I feel ya. Blizzard has a clever way of getting people to buy their games. Many games do follow the Blizzard model of doing a CD-key check for online gaming, which is great. It cripples the quality of the game for pirates since they can't play online where most of the fun usually is. Blizzard's model hasn't been cracked minus some CD-key generators, but Blizzard has successfully banned many accounts. So, it's definitely one that works well. The developers of other types of software should figure out how to cripple their program when its pirated. It frustrates pirates enough to make them buy or give up completely.

Now that we understand each other, we cool? :cool:

Anyways, to milzay, you do realize software is available at educational discounts for your sister? Check http://academicsuperstore.com/ for American prices. I think there are similar stores in the UK. Your sister should probably ask her school for more information or purchase through Apple (they have an education store). Under the More Stores section, click Education.

Let me say some things about this game price discussion. The game industry might be getting as pricey as the movie industry as far as production is concerned, but not profits.

Movies can easily reach to large audiences. All they need to do is break even at theaters and sell the DVDs. You have easily millions of people purchasing movie tickets and DVDs.

Let's do some math:
A blockbuster movie costs about $90 million. Considering a movie ticket goes about $9 (give or take), you need about 10 million people to watch that movie to make even. Just an example, but a movie can easily attract million of people. Sometimes movies bust, but for a movie company to stay profitable, they want to break even.

Now, video game costs are rising, getting close to movie price levels. I've heard it's in the ballpark of $20 million for a high-end game. Now, have you heard how many copies of games get sold on average? Games often do not sell in the millions. You've got those rare triple-A titles that everybody just must have like Halo, GTA:SA, Half Life 2, etc. that millions of people will buy. But, those are very rare; only a few times a year. But, for most games, hundreds of thousands of sold copies can break even and considered a success. So, that $20 million game needs to reach 400,000 copies to get to even.

So, you've got different audience sizes, with similar budgets. Because of that, prices need to stay high or video games would not be profitable.

Timelessblur

Feb 24, 2005, 07:07 PM

Yea, nice game- good to see its fair considering your contestant 1 and judge 1 2 and 3. Well done, give yourself a prize now.
Dont be ridiculous economics isnt that simple, not all products increase at a steady rate. Look at computers. The PC market tends not to be increasing in price, because its still a devloping market and therfore cheaper ways of doing this are being found and importantly the market is still growing.
Let me make this easy for you, well even make a game out of it:
Little John buys 2 oranges at £2, when the costs are taken into account the orange company is making £1. Little John then goes to school and his friend realise that they can get oranges!!!!! The next day 20 of Little Johns friends go to buy two oranges, the business should:
a) Carry on charging £2, therefore making £30 profit (after all costs are increasing, but because they are importing more they gain some economies of scale)
b) Charge £1, therefore making £10 (still 1000% more than originally- costs do increase, however economices of scale taken into account too)

Amazingly after a few days of observing it was noted that option (a) led to an increase in oranges being stolen, threfore prices being pushed up and a decrease in customers. However wehn option (b) was implemented amazingly the orange shop had a continuing growing number of customers, this suited the consumers due to fair prices and the shop as their profits had grown vastly and were still growing.

So what do you think the right answer is...?

(This is a very similar trend to the videogames market. And yes the line is not linear but its still got an extremely similar relationship. )

Yet again you are wrong. Price have not increased just people are not willing to pay. I was point out inflation rate everything else has increased that way. Btw increasing the prices recovers more of the losses than decreasises. The most common agurment that I here about priting is they charge to much yet when you ask them if they changed 50% that amont they still would pritrated it. Increase the prices 10% and you have less than a 1% increase in priting. Prices would drop if everyone was willing to pay.

Also game price do drop in price. after several months the price of the game drops to about 20 bucks for game. If the game is still really a hot game it stays at 50-60 longer. So basicly if you dont think the game is worth 50 bucks you WAIT a few months for it to drop to 20 bucks. So big deal you dont play the game when it hits the shelves you wait for it to drop. If the game is poor is drops faster. Good it stays up there longer. It all a supply and demand. Degree the price yes the demand rises but at the same time they are willing to produce less

Thanks agin for playing You have been proven wrong.

Yet anohter bad attemt at justifing stealing