PDA

View Full Version : Piracy and Mac OS X


Pages : [1] 2

arn
Jul 26, 2002, 02:54 PM
Spymac (http://www.spymac.com/comments.php?id=112_0_1_0_C) reports that due to rampant piracy of pre-Jaguar builds, Apple is considering moving towards anti-piracy measures including serial numbers.

More at Spymac (http://www.spymac.com/comments.php?id=112_0_1_0_C)

bellboy
Jul 26, 2002, 03:09 PM
"There definitely are increased anti-theft precautions in Jaguar, but they lay the ground work for future version more than anything else."

does anyone know what the "anti-theft precautions" are in Jaguar?

jt23
Jul 26, 2002, 03:10 PM
can't blame them for that, i don't suppose. i know that a lot of mac folks assume the high road and make comments about how PCers so often "borrow" copies of various software titles. the inplication has always been that Mac users would never do such a dastardly thing.

well my experience (and apparently apple's as well) has been considerably different.

Moonlight
Jul 26, 2002, 03:14 PM
Serial numbers won't help...can't they just pirate the sn's too ?

Sublime
Jul 26, 2002, 03:16 PM
I dont like it. Serial numbers suck.

ShaolinMiddleFinger
Jul 26, 2002, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by Moonlight
Serial numbers won't help...can't they just pirate the sn's too ?

Hahaha....yeah...that's true....I hope they don't implement that same thing Microsoft did with XP where you need to buy one copy per computer. What do you do if you got two machines?

eric_n_dfw
Jul 26, 2002, 03:28 PM
I'll bet they do whatever it is they have done to Final Cut Pro. As of FCP 3.0, CD-R copies and disk images of the original CD's do not work. I'll bet they implement the same thing on 10.2 and beyond. Also, a "key" that you have to type in is not, nessesarily a bad thing, but I hope they don't move to the "you have to register with us" horror that Win XP was supposed to have (or does have).

As an answer to the above question - Yes, you are supposed to buy a copy of OS X for each Mac you run it on, don't you? This is true for most (if not all) commercial software. (Gotta read those EULA's) And it makes total sense too, using the logic that one copy can go on multiple machines, why would a company or school buy licenses for 100 Mac's when they could just install the same one over and over. Installing a single lincense of OS X on more than one machine is no better than burning a copy at your friend's house or pulling it off HL or the like. If only one machine is every booted up, then you have an arguement for it to be okay, but not if you're running it concurently on your PowerMac and on your Powerbook and on the downstairs iMac and on the... well, you get the idea.

BTW, At the FCP 3 roadshow, when this came up, a bunch of people said they thought it was akay to install one copy on multiple machines, as long as they were only using it on one machine at a time. (ie. A PowerBook & a PowerMac) The presenter had to say that Apple's stand on it was for one copy per install. (Although he sounded like a recording when he said it and I'd bet he'd agree with anyone who used it as such.)

eric_n_dfw
Jul 26, 2002, 03:31 PM
As an adendum to my prior post - one easy way they could implement a check for this would be like what Adobe does. It polls the local network looking for other copies of itself with the same serial number. (Not sure how site license serial numbers are handled) and will refuse to work if multiple copies are running.

Arcady
Jul 26, 2002, 03:38 PM
Why does anyone still read that site? The only site with more made-up crap is MOSR. At this point, if Spymac says something, it is proof to me that it will never happen. :D

edit: spelling

Sun Baked
Jul 26, 2002, 03:43 PM
Remember the old days where an angry employee would call the IRS so they can provide an interesting experience for the employer.

Now it's a call to the Software Piracy Group that provides the more stringent proctology visits, and the fines are just insane for not complying with licenses in the workplace.

BillGates
Jul 26, 2002, 03:45 PM
Apple should utilize the embedded computer serial number tied to a supplied OS serial number to generate and activation key that only works on the one system. This adds over head but at least requires the pirate to hack the OS to get it to run rather than simply grabbing a serial number of some list on the internet. I've seen other unix systems like Sun use this method.

Its funny how the honest people are always paying extra to cover the cost of piracy. Ohhh well, thats life.

meddle
Jul 26, 2002, 03:52 PM
Seems like spy mac might be making this one up also. I'm going to buy 10.2 but have been tring to find it online. Granted I haven't looked very hard but the only release I can find is a bad. A broken .dmg. As a developer I would love to install this and play around with it before it comes out. Just don't want to $700 for a month of use. $120 well that's ok. Sort of.

bbarnhart
Jul 26, 2002, 03:54 PM
Considering home computers only, has anyone ever purchased multiple copies of the same program for two or more computers? (Unless the software physically does not allow this, ie Spectre (old network game))

I think the results will be interesting.

awrootbeer
Jul 26, 2002, 03:59 PM
Originally posted by meddle
Seems like spy mac might be making this one up also. I'm going to buy 10.2 but have been tring to find it online. Granted I haven't looked very hard but the only release I can find is a bad. A broken .dmg. As a developer I would love to install this and play around with it before it comes out. Just don't want to $700 for a month of use. $120 well that's ok. Sort of.

Sorry, you either aren't looking hard enough or have no idea where to look. Jag builds are Extremely easy to come by, and I know many many non developers who have them.

dynamicd
Jul 26, 2002, 04:04 PM
Originally posted by BillGates
Apple should utilize the embedded computer serial number tied to a supplied OS serial number to generate and activation key that only works on the one system. This adds over head but at least requires the pirate to hack the OS to get it to run rather than simply grabbing a serial number of some list on the internet. I've seen other unix systems like Sun use this method.

Its funny how the honest people are always paying extra to cover the cost of piracy. Ohhh well, thats life.

If i'm not mistaken, microsoft did something like this with xp and a friend of mine got around it by pirating the corporate edition, i think, which only requires the serial when installing. I'm not sure if this is how it works or if apple even has something like a corporate edition of OS X. Somebody correct me if i'm wrong.

AlphaTech
Jul 26, 2002, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Sublime
I dont like it. Serial numbers suck.

Especially if you loose the number.

IF Apple does go to serial numbers, I really hope that they make the installer cd's independant of the numbers.

topicolo
Jul 26, 2002, 04:47 PM
It's a sad day when Apple has to do that. I remember the days when even software pirates ridiculed people who copied Mac OS 8 because it would hurt Apple's financial situation.

Not surprisingly, Apple later released a PR stating that sales for Mac OS 8 were their best ever and stuff.

Sublime
Jul 26, 2002, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


Especially if you loose the number.

IF Apple does go to serial numbers, I really hope that they make the installer cd's independant of the numbers.

Heh, I have an unusable copy of Starcraft cuz I tossed the jewel case(or whatever the key was on.) Man, I can only keep track of so much.

dricci
Jul 26, 2002, 04:55 PM
Yeah, we can see how well Microsoft's anti-piracy measures work.

AlphaTech
Jul 26, 2002, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by dricci
Yeah, we can see how well Microsoft's anti-piracy measures work.

LMAO!!!! Yeah, it really works... :eek: :D

Windblows has to be one of the most often pirated operating systems out there. :D

rice_web
Jul 26, 2002, 05:12 PM
I think I understand why Apple would take a route such as this.

I don't know if anyone noticed, but Apple is no longer a hardware company. Their margins are less and less (look at the 17" iMac), and are more dependent on the software that they sell.

At the very least, increased security measures would mean some extra money that Apple can use to keep their stock price up.

mymemory
Jul 26, 2002, 05:23 PM
The last time I bought a software was in 1992.

The problem with the softwares are the price. I could buy Photoshop for $90, not for $700 (I guess that is the price). Softwares are way too expensive. If I count the ammount of softwares that I use I would have to pay more than $30.000!!! forget about it, may be in the US you can make that ammount of money but not in the rest of the world, that is about 3 years of salary for me.

j763
Jul 26, 2002, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by ShaolinMiddleFinger

What do you do if you got two machines?

um... buy two copies...

AlphaTech
Jul 26, 2002, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by j763


um... buy two copies...

Even people that purchase windblows don't do that. :p :D Of course, unless they are a corporation.

Pin-Fisher
Jul 26, 2002, 06:10 PM
Originally posted by mymemory
The last time I bought a software was in 1992.

The problem with the softwares are the price. I could buy Photoshop for $90, not for $700 (I guess that is the price). Softwares are way too expensive. If I count the ammount of softwares that I use I would have to pay more than $30.000!!! forget about it, may be in the US you can make that ammount of money but not in the rest of the world, that is about 3 years of salary for me.


You sir are truly a moron. .....

I hope you write some software one day and they priate the hell
out of it and the three years of your life you spent developing it
become a total waste...


(BTW Software is both singular and plural in english you pirate
scum)

big
Jul 26, 2002, 06:11 PM
>that is about 3 years of salary for me

as if! I did however buy 2 macs within the last year... and if apple thinks I am not going to put my Bought copy of Jaguar on them both...they are crazy!

I might have paid another $20 for another in home license, but it's just my wife's laptop...she barely uses it (I guess she likes my dual monitors)

hardly justifies 2 copies of jaguar

rice_web
Jul 26, 2002, 06:26 PM
I just wish society could move closer to a currency-free society...

Ah, communism. :D

peterjhill
Jul 26, 2002, 06:30 PM
It would be so simple for Apple to protect their copyrights, that it isn't even funny. Apple has the advantage over Microsoft in that it makes the Hardware as well as the software.

anyone who has run the Apple System Profiler knows that one of the tidbits that it gives you is the System Serial Number. When you install the system, it could have you go to a web page at apple, enter in your license key, the system would send your hardware serial number BUT NOT STORE THE HARDWARE SERIAL! (to solve privacy issues that people will invariably have), hash the two together using a secure algorithm, then either give you a new code to enter, or better yet, just set the final key into the OS. So unless someone has a way to fake the hardware serial number, they could take your software key, and it would be useless to them.

I would not be unhappy if they stored your hardware serial also, that way if you reinstalled your system, they would have an easier time reverifiying your right to install the OS. Otherwise they could have blank boxes under the software license code that you could write in your final install code into.

So, yeah, it would be trivial for apple to do this. Complain if you must how unfair it is, but it would be fully within their right to do so. They are out to make a profit after all.

awrc
Jul 26, 2002, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by bbarnhart
Considering home computers only, has anyone ever purchased multiple copies of the same program for two or more computers? (Unless the software physically does not allow this, ie Spectre (old network game))

I think the results will be interesting.

Innumerable Windows licenses for various versions (since the number of computers coming into the house generally exceeds the number leaving over any period of time, with the difference ending up in bits).

Two Eudora licenses, two WinZip licenses, two licenses for a defunct Windows newsreader called Gravity

As for Mac stuff, the only thing on my PowerMac that's also on my wife's PowerBook is the operating system and other stuff that came pre-installed.

Mr. Anderson
Jul 26, 2002, 06:40 PM
Given what's possible to do these days - the only way to even try to get away with pirating the software would be to take the machines off the net - sort of defeats the purpose of having a computer today though.

So it shouldn't be too hard for them to inforce it to a certain extent. I'll just wait around and see if they do it. I'll still buy my copy - work pays for it anyway, and in reality, 120 isn't all that much.

D

imacguy
Jul 26, 2002, 06:42 PM
This is just an attempt by Apple to justify their prices for Jaguar. Based on the comments it sounds like it's working.

I wonder what they will try to come up with for the whole .Mac debacle.

I love apple, but announcing both those items on the same day was D-U-M-B marketing!

Cappy
Jul 26, 2002, 06:55 PM
I find it amazing how people justify their reasons for pirating software. I don't want to sound hypocritical since there are a few arguments or situations that I would consider ok when legally it would be considered piracy but in all but a few areas there is no justification. The only reason it happens is because it's easy and convenient. If that wasn't the case, there would be alot more cars on the road with tires stolen(or rather not on the road ;)).

I do have to admit that software is just too expensive in general and really has not decreased over the years. I'm not even sure that's going to change unless open source software can make an impact. I would have loved seeing Opendoc make it into an open source scenario. It never had a chance being commercial but open source could have made things *very* interesting.

IJ Reilly
Jul 26, 2002, 07:05 PM
Originally posted by Pin-Fisher



You sir are truly a moron. .....

I hope you write some software one day and they priate the hell
out of it and the three years of your life you spent developing it
become a total waste...


(BTW Software is both singular and plural in english you pirate
scum)

I'll bet our friend from Venezuela is more fluent in English then you are in Spanish.

To the subject at hand: I run three Macs here. My pragmatic choice is to spend $129 upgrading all three to 10.2, if Apple doesn't prevent my doing so, or zero dollars upgrading none of them, because forking over $390 to upgrade all of them just isn't in the cards. So, which course of action do you think Apple would prefer?

nOrm29
Jul 26, 2002, 07:11 PM
While I hate the fact that I would have to buy 7 different copies of OS X (10.2) because of piracy, I could only agree that Apple should do it.

I bought three different copies of OS X, 2 educational, 1 retail. And yes two were for educational machines that I bought.

But I think Apple has a better way of implementing some type of serialization because like someone mention previously, they make the machines and the software!

Maybe Apple will be better for it. Whether people hate the fact that Apple is behaving like MS, well there is only two alternatives, MS (and you guys KNOW you won't want to go that route) and Linux, which there isn't any cool stuff like the kind you get with OS X (iApps, etc.).

big
Jul 26, 2002, 07:12 PM
>IJ Reilly

see, I think you got it right...If I can spend the money to upgrade my machines here at the house then its worthwhile...

and If I can not, I surely will not upgrade at all, and certainly will not buy 3 licenses.

I'd be happy to spend another $20 on each extra machine, but that's it!

now for an office, corporate, school I can justify having to buy licenses for each machine.

Rocketman
Jul 26, 2002, 07:23 PM
Originally posted by bbarnhart
Considering home computers only, has anyone ever purchased multiple copies of the same program for two or more computers? (Unless the software physically does not allow this, ie Spectre (old network game))

I think the results will be interesting.

I have, out of a sense of fairness. On OS'es I have a different attitude, right or wrong (probably wrong). It's a mac computer. I bought it with a Mac OS paying a substantial premium over a peecee. And this explains alot of the Mac owner issues frankly. I will be buying OSX for a brand new G4 DDR tower about 10 minutes after they are announced. Hopefully it is bundled with it but if not then I will pay the small postege fee for the upgrade as soon as it is available.

I will then try to install the 10.2 disc on my TiG4 that "barely" didn't even come with OSX, by a couple of months. Early adopter there too, it increases system life to be an early adopter. Try it sometime.

I hope it will let me install it and will let me run software update.

Technically I will have two lisences, the one that came with the CPU and one for Jaguar.

Apple, let me get away with it please. I keep buying macs and getting others to do the same. I am your target customer.

Rocketman

buffsldr
Jul 26, 2002, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by Pin-Fisher



You sir are truly a moron. .....

I hope you write some software one day and they priate the hell
out of it and the three years of your life you spent developing it
become a total waste...


(BTW Software is both singular and plural in english you pirate
scum)

Pin-Fisher, Macrumors would be better off without posts like this. You don't know mymemory, you don't know what his environment is like. Mymemory is a stud for learning computers and technology in an evironment that is so difficult.

peterjhill
Jul 26, 2002, 08:02 PM
Originally posted by IJ Reilly

To the subject at hand: I run three Macs here. My pragmatic choice is to spend $129 upgrading all three to 10.2, if Apple doesn't prevent my doing so, or zero dollars upgrading none of them, because forking over $390 to upgrade all of them just isn't in the cards.

Question: Do you really need to run 10.2 on all the machines? If you do, then I can't see a good justification for paying for all three. If you don't then buy it for one machine, and install it on your primary machine.

I work at a university, we pay a ton for software licensing fees.

bousozoku
Jul 26, 2002, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by meddle
Seems like spy mac might be making this one up also. I'm going to buy 10.2 but have been tring to find it online. Granted I haven't looked very hard but the only release I can find is a bad. A broken .dmg. As a developer I would love to install this and play around with it before it comes out. Just don't want to $700 for a month of use. $120 well that's ok. Sort of.

For $500 a year, you can purchase a Apple Developer Connection Select membership which gives you monthly updates on CD-ROM, including the Jaguar developer previews.

Choppaface
Jul 26, 2002, 08:24 PM
hmmm 3 macs and one of me. even if I put 10.2 on all three, there's no way I can do the work of two, so why do I need to pay for 3 copies? I'll probably only put it on my G4 though...

question for the stern software devs: if somebody has a few different computers and they use them either exclusively or another person uses them exclusively for some amount of time, why does the owner of the multiple boxes have to buy multiple copies of your software? they're not going to get more out of it than one person can at a time, and it improves their relationship with your software if they don't have to uninstall it from one box when they want to use it on another.

as to mymemory and people in his sort of situation, it would be convenient if the idealogy of the software license worked everwhere, but some places don't have governments strong enough to promote it. before one attacks the disadvantaged user, one must consider those that are responsible for the conditions that led him to make that decision. if mymemory lived in the US and had the same job here as he does there, he would probably have the potential to pay for the software he uses. where he is now, he most likely does not, unless he were to commit more crimes in order obtain the money needed to pay. these observations boil down to the case of the lesser evil: not getting paid for software that one would not get paid for anyways, or getting paid with dirty money. I do not mean to defend piracy, I mean to question the amount of censure towards pirates. clearly there must be a difference from pirate to pirate; treating all pirates equally overlooks these important differences..

sicle
Jul 26, 2002, 08:31 PM
"There's no such thing as a free lunch." "Pirate scum!" "Low life like you are denying programmers a living." "Apple needs the money." "blah, blah, blah."

After paying for yet another key for Quicktime pro (wasn't too mad about this it was because of licensing) Getting charged for iTools (I'll probably pay for the first year) and then the upgrade price for Jaguar (I'll probably end up paying), I'm in no mood for posts like these.

I have Office 2001, I've no intention of upgrading to Office X. I have a very old copy of Photoshop, but I'm using the Gimp. Is it better? no way, but it's free and I can no longer afford Photoshop. Are Apple within their rights in preventing me from copying Jaguar on to two machines? Sure.

However, Apple still make their money mainly from hardware. I'm willing, for now, to pay a premium on the hardware because I like Apple's products so much and because of all the cool freebies that come with a Mac and because they don't treat their customers in the same way as Microsoft does. However, I am rapidly approaching my limits. Becoming familiar with Unix I'm a lot less intimidated by Linux than I once was. If Apple go down this road I won't be spending any money on Apple hardware or software.

And to all the software developers that post defending the astronomical prices of their employers products. I don't care how much work has gone into the product if it doesn't provide me with value for money I won't buy. The bubble is over for everyone, so don't think you can pass your problems onto the consumer.:mad:

zed
Jul 26, 2002, 08:41 PM
I think in some instance, such as graphics programs, piracy can actually help the software company. I mean who wants to pay all the money to see if they can figure out how to work a particular program. If they pirate it and learn how to use it then they may be more likely to purchase after they find that they can make money off of it. or... I think this applies to college students at least (for a student even the educational prices are unthinkable)

Of course, if you are using the pirated programs and making money from them then you are just plain stealing.

I think Maya has the right idea with the Personal Learning Edition. This gives people like me the opportunity to learn the program without forking over the money.... now if I just had my broadband connection back.... I could download it and take advantage of my opportunity :D

zed
Jul 26, 2002, 08:46 PM
Originally posted by bbarnhart
Considering home computers only, has anyone ever purchased multiple copies of the same program for two or more computers? (Unless the software physically does not allow this, ie Spectre (old network game))

I think the results will be interesting.

The only software that I have purchased 2 copies of for 2 machines is Diablo II, gotta have those access keys to play on battle.net..... and if you arent gonna play on bnet then why play at all??

then again, ive only had 2 macs for a few months now.....

3777
Jul 26, 2002, 09:06 PM
I can't believe the crap i'm reading. If I buy software, and then I make copies and give it to a bunch of people, yes that is wrong. But to hear all of these people whine about how I should "buy one OS or program for each computer" PLEASE, if I spend $140 dollars on XP Pro or OSX, I should be able to install it on any damn computer I own. And if there is something in the law that says that is wrong..... then there is something very wrong with the law. And all the Apple and Microsoft employees who disagree with me can go to #ell!!!

peterjhill
Jul 26, 2002, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by sicle

After paying for yet another key for Quicktime pro

Last year I bought a new QT key for my windows box at work. I had one before on a mac, but had lost it. Then I got a Ti800, found out that the key did not work, it was windows only, so i bought a new Mac key. In May. Now I need to buy a new Mac key. I will though, because I like to download trailers and watch them at full size. Also making AAC's will be nice.

However, Apple still make their money mainly from hardware. I'm willing, for now, to pay a premium on the hardware because I like Apple's products so much

Compare a dell laptop to a similarly configured Ti800, the prices are very close.

peterjhill
Jul 26, 2002, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by 3777
I can't believe the crap i'm reading. If I buy software, and then I make copies and give it to a bunch of people, yes that is wrong. But to hear all of these people whine about how I should "buy one OS or program for each computer" PLEASE, if I spend $140 dollars on XP Pro or OSX, I should be able to install it on any damn computer I own. And if there is something in the law that says that is wrong..... then there is something very wrong with the law. And all the Apple and Microsoft employees who disagree with me can go to #ell!!!

You are wrong. Sorry. There is nothing wrong with the law. Most games will let you install it on multiple computers, as long as you only play it on one at a time. Diablo for instance.

When it comes to an OS, even if you are only using it on one computer at a time, you are reaping the benefits of it on multiple machines. It is because of people with this attitude that I hope Apple puts a install code tied to the hardware serial number into the OS. That way, they will sell more copies of the software and recoup more of the cost of developing the software.

As mentioned before, if Bill Gates goes to comp usa and buys one copy of OSX retail, and installs it on all the Macs that they have (yes they have macs, what do you think they develop Office X on, virtual mac for pc?), yes he "owns" all those computers as the majority shareholder, but, umm, it would be totally illegal.

If it weren't for all the software pirates, maybe games wouldn't cost $65 a pop.

menoinjun
Jul 26, 2002, 09:35 PM
I don't completely agree. If software was cheaper, I would have no problem buying multiple copies of it. If warcraft III cost only $30, I'd buy one for every computer I own so that I could network it. Not at $60 though.

So not only does piracy drive costs up, but costs drive piracy.

-Pete

elgruga
Jul 26, 2002, 09:43 PM
Pirates are important to remind us that most 'ordinary' people are little fascists waiting for a chance to get the neighbours kids arrested for just being there.

The guy who called the Venezuela Pirate scum is a jerk of the first order.

Apple make computers, You buy one , you get the software with it.
All of a sudden people are buying Apple software who dont have an Apple? NO.
So a few people (mostly poor people) pirate a lousy disk. They still have to run it on an old Apple machine. Which they paid for at some point.
All the new Apples have the new software. No pirating there, right?
Oh I forgot, I bought my Tibook 667 in early July - no 10.2 for me.
My ********** OS only lasted 2 weeks. (true)

Old machines running pirate software? Apple should be glad that people are interested enough in their OS to pirate it.
Its a sure sign of success.

As for Application piracy, well, lets face it, $700 for Photoshop is insane.
$150 - maybe.

Look at M$ Office - Bill gates has 400 billion bucks, but he needs more and somehow this is a good thing?

Its time to wake up guys. The world is now dominated by rich and selfish oafs, like gates and Jobs and Martha Stewart etc.
They arent nice people - they are *******s.

Steal their damn stuff if you can - they will Never pay you enough per hour to buy it.

Photoshop = 140 hours of labor at minimum wage - thats 3 and a half weeks - whoops! no rent or food in Photoshop month!
OS 10.2 = 24 hours of labor - no shoes for the kids this week.
Office X = 60 hours of labor (10 days) - Bill needs his cash.

You want to work for almost 4 weeks to get a copy of Photoshop?

Tell me that it isnt ALL overpriced.

Unwilling owner of about $20,000 bucks worth of legal software that just aint worth the price I paid.

elgruga
Jul 26, 2002, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by peterjhill




If it weren't for all the software pirates, maybe games wouldn't cost $65 a pop.
WRONG.
If it wasnt for software costing an arm and a leg, there would be no need to pirate.

Apple make money on the software when they sell a machine for 25% more than everybody else.

Thats why its more expensive, because you get a Mac not a crappy Dell, and you get OS 10.
Thats the profit. Now they want more profit? Try asking Steve to take a cut in salary instead.

Sell his bloody private jet that I paid for.

G4scott
Jul 26, 2002, 10:17 PM
Ok. Software Piracy hasn't been too big of a problem as far as I have seen it, but the way that some of you are talking is starting to scare me.

Everybody at one point in their lives has pirated software, and that's understandable. I'm not going to buy 4 copies of Jaguar for all of my computers, I'm going to buy one. I may sound like a hypocrite by saying this, but Apple does need to make some money. They put 9 million dollars into R&D for OS X, and they want something out of it. Apple is a business, not a charity foundation, and besides, $129 isn't too bad after you see what Jaguar will do to your Mac (and for those of you who say that OS X should've been as fast as Jaguar from version 10.0, piss off a$$holes, and go make your own OS...)

There is a lot of uncertainty in the software business, almost like there is in the music industry. Software isn't a physical thing (If CD's were so expensive to manufacture, then I wouldn't have tons of AOL discs laying around my house). It's a series of 1's and 0's that perform certain functions. True, not everybody has the money to buy photoshop. I do like their LE edition, though, because it's free and comes bundled with things like scanners, etc. (It'll be the day they have a LE version for OS X, though...) Unfortunately, not every software company can do this. Software is programmed by people, who have to live too. How would you like it if you made shoes, and people just came by and started taking them without paying you. You'd be pissed off.

It's the greedy money hogs that piss me off. $400 for office, and you can only run it on one computer at a time on a network? I don't have $1600 to blow on a word processor. I'm going to use AppleWorks that came with my computer for free! Software piracy does have the same affect as shoplifting, though. It drives up the prices, not only for security, but to turn a profit for the few copies that they sell. You shouldn't have to buy a car, and then pay for extra people to ride in it, but you should still have to pay for the car...

Part of my biggest complaint about software companies is how much money the executives make... Look at worldcom and enron... The execs had enough money after the companies died to still make a living, while the employees, the ones who run the company, got the royal shaft... This ties in with software giants, like microsoft... bill gates has billions of dollars, enough to give everyone at microsoft a raise of a couple thousand dollars... These executives don't need to be sitting on a pile of cash their whole lifetime... You can't use that money in heaven (or hell). They should give the workers more and the executives less (lets hear it for communism!) They don't need to charge $400 for office to turn a profit. They just need to cut down on how much they give their executives. As long as the company can make money, they've got it made...

Granted some software isn't worth the price you'd pay, if nobody actually bought software, there wouldn't be any software out there, because nobody would want to make it. As for those of you who haven't bought software in 10 years, you are complete morons, and have no right to complain about software prices and anti-pirating practices. It's because of you that the people who actually pay something for software to use on their computers are being hurt...

Now, of course, shareware and freeware is always nice... :cool:

alex_ant
Jul 26, 2002, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by Choppaface
as to mymemory and people in his sort of situation, it would be convenient if the idealogy of the software license worked everwhere, but some places don't have governments strong enough to promote it. before one attacks the disadvantaged user, one must consider those that are responsible for the conditions that led him to make that decision. if mymemory lived in the US and had the same job here as he does there, he would probably have the potential to pay for the software he uses. where he is now, he most likely does not, unless he were to commit more crimes in order obtain the money needed to pay. these observations boil down to the case of the lesser evil: not getting paid for software that one would not get paid for anyways, or getting paid with dirty money. I do not mean to defend piracy, I mean to question the amount of censure towards pirates. clearly there must be a difference from pirate to pirate; treating all pirates equally overlooks these important differences..
There is no difference from pirate to pirate. Piracy is illegal, that's all there is to it. It doesn't matter what your economic background is, it doesn't matter how corrupt your government is, it doesn't matter how much money you have or how clean or dirty the money you do have is. It doesn't matter what software you're pirating, it doesn't matter how much software you pirate or in what way you pirate it or for how long you pirate it. Piracy = illegal.

You say that mymemory is faced with choosing between two evils: That of not paying for software he wouldn't have paid for anyway or that of paying for the software with "dirty money." In fact, he has a third option, which is to not pay for or use the software at all. Nobody is forcing him into using any software. If his job depends on the pirated software, his job depends on illegal piracy.

I don't have a lot of money, but I want free access to every pay per view and premium channel on television. Does that give me the right to splice the cable line, run it into my house, and attach it to a descrambler? After all, I'm not technically taking anything from anyone - the cable company can't even tell I've done it. Does this make it okay, or right, or in any way not illegal? This is the equivalent of what mymemory is doing.

Alex

balliet
Jul 26, 2002, 10:24 PM
I think everyone shoud take a look at the justifications for stealing software and try to apply them to hardware, see if they still make sense.

I don't make a lot of money, so I should be able to steal a computer.

I'll never use my desktop and my laptop at the same time, so I should get a laptop for free.

All i want is for me and my wife to be able to use the computer at the same time. Why doesn't apple give me a computer for everyone in my family for the price of one?

Why should I have to buy a whole new computer just for a faster CPU and DDR? Apple should just give me a new computer.

Apple hardware is overpriced. So if I steal a computer from them, they are still making money.

And then there is the argument that software companies are evil, and they make enough money already. That goes for just about any big company. By your logic, I could go around stealing cars and it would be ok.

Cappy
Jul 26, 2002, 10:26 PM
Originally posted by ptrauber
I don't completely agree. If software was cheaper, I would have no problem buying multiple copies of it. If warcraft III cost only $30, I'd buy one for every computer I own so that I could network it. Not at $60 though.

So not only does piracy drive costs up, but costs drive piracy.

-Pete

That might be for you but typically what people say and what they do with issues like this are two different things. It's all a matter of ease and convenience.

My beef is in not seeing a savings passed down when a developer implements copy protection schemes. Did we see Windows XP or Office XP get any cheaper with product activation now a standard "feature"? Nope. And corporate licenses went up at the same time.

Other developers are just as guilty. Most like to play this silly game but no matter the scenario they price things by what the market calls for. It has little to do with the amount of piracy.

Note I'm not endorsing piracy but many of the developers need to wake up to this rather than even rely on something like Palladium if it makes it to market.

alex_ant
Jul 26, 2002, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by 3777
I can't believe the crap i'm reading. If I buy software, and then I make copies and give it to a bunch of people, yes that is wrong. But to hear all of these people whine about how I should "buy one OS or program for each computer" PLEASE, if I spend $140 dollars on XP Pro or OSX, I should be able to install it on any damn computer I own. And if there is something in the law that says that is wrong..... then there is something very wrong with the law. And all the Apple and Microsoft employees who disagree with me can go to #ell!!!
If you don't agree with the law then feel free to help change it. If you can't get enough support together, then tough cookies. Violating the law is not an effective measure of protest - it is a self-serving, greedy form of pseudo-protest that is oblivious to the respect of the law. If everyone violated every law they deemed bad, then we would all be living locked in concrete cells to hide from the hordes of maurauding anarchist bandits out to kill us for the gold in our fillings.

Alex

G4scott
Jul 26, 2002, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by imacguy
This is just an attempt by Apple to justify their prices for Jaguar. Based on the comments it sounds like it's working.

I wonder what they will try to come up with for the whole .Mac debacle.

I love apple, but announcing both those items on the same day was D-U-M-B marketing!

It might've been dumb from a consumer perspective, but from a business perspective, it was a good move. Apple's going to get $100 bucks from you one way or another in the next couple of months :p And if you choose not to upgrade, or use .Mac, or to pirate 10.2, that's your choice, but believe it or not, there are still people in this world who pay for things they use (Of course, I'm not saying this about me, entirely ;) )

pianojoe
Jul 26, 2002, 10:38 PM
This discussion is getting way out of hand.

Over here in Germany, it's like this: Usage of software is treated like the usage of a book. Same as one physical copy of a book that can't be read by different people in different places at the same time, you're not allowed to use software that way. You may, however, install a copy on your desktop, and one on your laptop, as long as you're not using them at the same time. (OK, there's no easy way for the sw company to control this. Sorry.) This is the law, and any eula going elsewhere doesn't apply to me. :)

Of course, this doesn't apply to OSes. If I sync my iBook to my G4, I'll have two copies running at the same time! I feel that an additional license should be very low-priced, let's say $20.

Another thing: The moment Jaguar comes out, my original X.1 CD becomes virtually worthless. The first MacOS I ever used was System 7. I wonder how often I paid for the Finder in the last ten years? This all comes down to

Apple, find an upgrade price! Don't kick those millions of people in the ass who have been public-beta-testing OS X since 10.0.0 for you!

A word to Pin-Fisher and the "moron" thing posted earlier:

If you can't deal with my limited knowledge of English, feel free to converse in German or French with me.

maluscanis
Jul 26, 2002, 10:42 PM
Originally posted by 3777
I can't believe the crap i'm reading. If I buy software, and then I make copies and give it to a bunch of people, yes that is wrong. But to hear all of these people whine about how I should "buy one OS or program for each computer" PLEASE, if I spend $140 dollars on XP Pro or OSX, I should be able to install it on any damn computer I own. And if there is something in the law that says that is wrong..... then there is something very wrong with the law. And all the Apple and Microsoft employees who disagree with me can go to #ell!!!

There is a very simple answer to these kind of questions and comments - it is morally wrong to steal software or to not abide by the restrictions placed on the end user by the software company. Unfortunately, this doesn't make the decision to pirate any less tempting.

A. Rastetter
Jul 26, 2002, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by Pin-Fisher


No trees were killed in the sending of this message.




What about all the trees that were killed strip-mining the coal that powers the generators at the power plant which gives power to your computer and all the server computers your message is going through? :D

sorry, just had to ask

maluscanis
Jul 26, 2002, 10:49 PM
Originally posted by 3777
I can't believe the crap i'm reading. If I buy software, and then I make copies and give it to a bunch of people, yes that is wrong. But to hear all of these people whine about how I should "buy one OS or program for each computer" PLEASE, if I spend $140 dollars on XP Pro or OSX, I should be able to install it on any damn computer I own. And if there is something in the law that says that is wrong..... then there is something very wrong with the law. And all the Apple and Microsoft employees who disagree with me can go to #ell!!!

There is a very simple answer to these kind of questions and comments - it is morally wrong to steal software or to not abide by the restrictions placed on the end user by the software company. Unfortunately, this doesn't make the decision to pirate any less tempting.

alex_ant
Jul 26, 2002, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by elgruga

So a few people (mostly poor people) pirate a lousy disk.
Are you saying that there is any difference between rich and poor under the law? There isn't. If you're poor and you steal something, you're in trouble. If you're rich and you steal something, you're in trouble.
They still have to run it on an old Apple machine. Which they paid for at some point.
All the new Apples have the new software. No pirating there, right?
Oh I forgot, I bought my Tibook 667 in early July - no 10.2 for me.
My ********** OS only lasted 2 weeks. (true)
Honestly, cry me a ****ing river. If you don't like Apple's software pricing policies, call them and complain. Sign the petition at petitiononline and storm the web boards and newsgroups. You do have plenty of ways to give feedback to Apple to tell them you're not satisfied. And you DO have the option not to use 10.2. Nobody is forcing you to buy it. There was no contract included with your TiBook that said "We owe you a reduced-price copy of Jaguar." If you assumed there would be, then you made a false assumption, and that's your problem, not Apple's. I don't like the Jaguar pricing scheme either but I do understand the difference between LEGAL methods of protest and ILLEGAL methods of protest (piracy).
Old machines running pirate software? Apple should be glad that people are interested enough in their OS to pirate it.
Its a sure sign of success.

As for Application piracy, well, lets face it, $700 for Photoshop is insane.
$150 - maybe.

Look at M$ Office - Bill gates has 400 billion bucks, but he needs more and somehow this is a good thing?
Is what Bill Gates needs any of your business? Does the morality of your purchasing decision hinge in any way on what Bill Gates needs? If you think it's too expensive, don't buy it. Complain to Microsoft if you wish. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and saying, "Buy this overpriced software."
Its time to wake up guys. The world is now dominated by rich and selfish oafs, like gates and Jobs and Martha Stewart etc.
They arent nice people - they are *******s.

Steal their damn stuff if you can - they will Never pay you enough per hour to buy it.
Well, hey, guess what, I don't like you either. So I'm going to raid your bank account and take what I wish, just because I think you're a dick. No other reason. Do I really need another reason? You're ugly and you smell bad, there, those are my reasons for ya. Hope your account is insured.
Photoshop = 140 hours of labor at minimum wage - thats 3 and a half weeks - whoops! no rent or food in Photoshop month!
OS 10.2 = 24 hours of labor - no shoes for the kids this week.
Office X = 60 hours of labor (10 days) - Bill needs his cash.

You want to work for almost 4 weeks to get a copy of Photoshop?

Tell me that it isnt ALL overpriced.
If you think it's overpriced, fine. Nobody is forcing you to use it. So don't use it. "I think this Lexus is overpriced. $40,000? Should be $20k, tops. I'm taking it."
Unwilling owner of about $20,000 bucks worth of legal software that just aint worth the price I paid.
Boo-hoo. You bought it by your own free will, didn't you? Nobody forced you to. You have no one to blame but yourself for your bad purchasing decision.

big
Jul 26, 2002, 10:53 PM
>I feel that an additional license should be very low-priced, let's say $20

that's what I'm trying to say, in a home environment, this makes sense.

>it is morally wrong to steal software or to not abide by the restrictions placed on the end user by the software company.

ummm,excuse me, I'm so glad you have such a handle on everyone else's life. I for one would rather leave this ruling to higher powers. I know stealing is wrong, though adobe & M$ does it so well, legally.

I'm buying Jaguar, and will install it on two machines. end of story. I will not feel bad for it. When photoshop drops to a reasonable price, I will buy it too!

G4scott
Jul 26, 2002, 10:56 PM
I remember when Mac users used to be friendly :rolleyes:

We would get along, and make fun of and complain about m$ and dell, but now it seems that everybody is just complaining about Apple... It's sad when you see love for something good ruined by penny-pinchers and tight wads

AlphaTech
Jul 26, 2002, 10:59 PM
I just thought I would mention something about the piracy issue... Of the software I have installed on my TiBook and home/game pc, I would have to say that almost all of the software on my TiBook are applications that I have purchased. That jumps to all on the game system. I do have one application on my TiBook that I didn't purchase, but that is software that I use mostly for work. It helps that I got approval from work to install it, and can remove it if I need to.

I did purchase a copy of 10.1 when it came out, and got 10.1.4 with my TiBook. I'm not certain, yet, about how, when or if I will purchase 10.2.

Because of the cost of m$ orfice, I refuse to purchase (or use) it for home. I do have Appleworks, which I do use often.

When I was setting up the game pc, I purchased an OEM copy of win2k. It was about 1/2 the cost of the retail version, and is a complete copy (not an update). It's also not tied to a specific installation number, which comes in handy at work. Especially since all the pc's that come in, have OEM installation codes on the case (either on the side for desktops or underneath the laptop). We also have corporate installation codes, for use when we need them (not often at all).

FattyMembrane
Jul 26, 2002, 11:13 PM
piracy is wrong, plain and simple. but i REALLY hope that apple does not resort to serial numbers and other such devices. the simplistic beauty of setting up a mac was that you didnt have screens popping up every 5 minutes asking you to enter serials, ssns, birthdays, music preference, blood type, etc. when my room mate's pc had one to many blue screens of death, he had to re-install the whole system, and having a paper due the next day, tried to re-install msword, but did not have the serial from his "computer passport" or whatever kind of pamphlet comes with those things. he ended up using my mac. apple has to do what it has to do, but it is tragic that the long running streak of simple installs and simpler backup measures must be ended by a bunch of teenagers with carracho.:(

big
Jul 26, 2002, 11:18 PM
>piracy is wrong, plain and simple.

so are the current prices...

damn, I feel like throwing some tea in the bay now

remember, thats what ended the State's relationship with britain

alex_ant
Jul 26, 2002, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by big
>piracy is wrong, plain and simple.

so are the current prices...

damn, I feel like throwing some tea in the bay now

remember, thats what ended the State's relationship with britain
The difference is that piracy is both morally and legally wrong whereas the current prices are only arguably wrong to some people who can't afford them.

big
Jul 26, 2002, 11:27 PM
>The difference is that piracy is both morally and legally wrong whereas the current prices are only arguably wrong to some people who can't afford them.

could you be any more hypocritical? who can/will say they can afford them?
will you be the presiding judge to say "OH- you make $12 an hour, your broke, sure, you can steal software"

how are you to judge my actions of buying one copy & installing on two machines? M$ office doesn't care, and puts in the LAN control

will apple? don't know, maybe they started this thread to judge our reactions

alex_ant
Jul 26, 2002, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by big
>The difference is that piracy is both morally and legally wrong whereas the current prices are only arguably wrong to some people who can't afford them.

could you be any more hypocritical? who can/will say they can afford them?
Sorry, I should have phrased that differently: "The difference is that piracy is both morally and legally wrong whereas the current prices are only morally wrong to some people." People who can & can't afford them, my bad.

I can't afford Photoshop or Office, or even Norton Utilities. But I don't think the prices of any of those products are morally wrong. I can't think of ANY software prices that are morally wrong to me. If a piece of software costs too much, it will be overtaken by less expensive competition.

Too expensive != morally wrong

If you can't afford it, don't buy it. If it's worth it to another company, they'll come in and offer a competing app that you can afford. If not, that's the free market for ya, love it or sail to Cuba.

Alex

big
Jul 26, 2002, 11:38 PM
sorry, I really dislike it when people tell me what I am doing morally wrong...so it appears though, we both agree big business is just out of their skull, and we definatly need a competitor

3777
Jul 27, 2002, 12:03 AM
Originally posted by maluscanis


There is a very simple answer to these kind of questions and comments - it is morally wrong to steal software or to not abide by the restrictions placed on the end user by the software company. Unfortunately, this doesn't make the decision to pirate any less tempting.

If I pay for the software, I own it. I can install it on my property. The people behind these posts must work for Microsoft or Apple, I bet 99% of the people who buy programs have no idea "they are supposed to" buy a new copy of the same program for every system they own" ...yhea ok, in Apple and Microsoft's dreams maybe! lol:rolleyes:

big
Jul 27, 2002, 12:06 AM
>yhea ok, in Apple and Microsoft's dreams maybe!

in their wet dreams

elgruga
Jul 27, 2002, 12:22 AM
Originally posted by alex_ant

The difference is that piracy is both morally and legally wrong whereas the current prices are only arguably wrong to some people who can't afford them.

LOL! - Alex-Ant - ENOUGH of your specious arguments!

Laws are made by rich people to protect their property. There is ZERO connection between law and morality, OK?
Morals are a kind of subjective notion based around whatever belief system you happen to 'think' is ok. OK?

Sometimes, Laws are based on morality.

I think that $700 for Photoshop is morally wrong, and in my book legally wrong.
I dont need you to tell me - "well just dont buy it then"
Thats an obvious solution, and one that is morally weak - but I happen to think that its morally WRONG to do what many large corporations are doing - see Enron, etc.

I have Apple software upgrade coupons sitting on my desk that are 2 ********** weeks old! And guess what? They aint worth squat.
So why did Apple put them in the TiBook box? Because they used to do upgrades, and now its all just grab.

Some idiot on this forum said something like " It was a lousy consumer decision, but a great business decision" referring to the Apple Macworld debacle.

That is Bollocks. Shafting the customers (consumers) is good business? I find that MORALLY reprehensible, and also stoopid. Dont you, Alex?

Guess what? I dont want free software, I just want FAIRLY priced software.

I dont want a FREE lunch, I want a reasonably priced lunch.

I aint looking for a HANDOUT, I just want a fair shake.



Read a simple American history lesson - Grapes Of Wrath, Steinbeck.

We are in the beginning of a recession - and Apple is behaving like a bunch of scared businessmen worried that they might have to sell their Porsches.

Cry ME a ********** river, baby!

Oh, and ****** bill gates and all his cash, and yes his needs ARE my business because he is a BAD dude and we have to try to stop people like that.

You dont get any rights of privacy when you are shafting people - see Adolf Hitler.

Gee, I guess we are back at morals and law again...!

elgruga
Jul 27, 2002, 12:36 AM
aaah, come'on , man!

Sail to Cuba?

Life doesnt have to be a choice between rampant insane capitalism and rampant insane communism.
We could just have a kind of decent society where there is a guarantee of health and education for all, and enough well-paid jobs to go around, and software at reasonable prices.

We are trapped in Apple's monopoly, as much as we are in M$'s monopoly.

What Apple seems to be doing is copying the M$ model, and that aint cool.

The market will one day be seen for what it is - a tragic gambling game that cares for no-one.

Dammit, those decisions at MWNY by Apple have got everyone at each others throats.

I apologise if my remarks have offended anyone (sorry Alex) - I really am pissed about this 10.2 no upgrade thing.

Dont get me started on .mac.........

Choppaface
Jul 27, 2002, 12:37 AM
Originally posted by alex_ant
Piracy = illegal.


blue is the best color in the world!!! ha ha you're wrong! :D :D :D

but seriously, some things have more depth that that. speeding is illegal but do you speed? if something is illegal, then a society has decided that they don't want somebody to do that. that doesn't mean that doing something illegal is wrong or right, nor does it prove that it is in the best interest of the society or individual not to do things that are illegal. the arguement is not whether what he does is illegal, it is who is hurting who, and who deserves what. labeling something as illegal doesn't mean that all offenders always deserve the same punishment. somewhere there must be more depth, or the community is ignoring diversity.


In fact, he has a third option, which is to not pay for or use the software at all. Nobody is forcing him into using any software. If his job depends on the pirated software, his job depends on illegal piracy.


and nobody forces the software writer to write the software. "Nobody is forcing him [or her] into" writing "any software." everybody has to make a living. if you don't approve of how he makes a living, then try to improve his options, because he will not be able to live up to your expectations by himself. censure does nothing but hurt both parties.


I don't have a lot of money, but I want free access to every pay per view and premium channel on television. Does that give me the right to splice the cable line, run it into my house, and attach it to a descrambler? After all, I'm not technically taking anything from anyone - the cable company can't even tell I've done it. Does this make it okay, or right, or in any way not illegal? This is the equivalent of what mymemory is doing.
[/B]

the difference is that the cable company is thousands of miles away, on a different continent, far away from the juristiction of american morality. sort of like the issue with sat dishes in Canada, but that's a whole nother issue.... but if you don't want to do things that are illegal, that's fine, just grab a plow :D

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 12:45 AM
Hey elgruga, way to go, contradicting yourself like that... :rolleyes:

Originally posted by elgruga
There is ZERO connection between law and morality, OK?
Morals are a kind of subjective notion based around whatever belief system you happen to 'think' is ok. OK?

Sometimes, Laws are based on morality.

If there is zero connection between two items, then how could one be based on the other??? Seriously flawed logic in those statements.

As for the price of products like Photoshop, at least they have very reasonably priced version upgrades. Purchase version X (say 4) and get version Y (7) for $149. This has been the way that Adobe has worked for several years now. They offer reduced price/cost upgrades for all of their software (at least all that I have looked at). There was a time when PhotoShop cost only a few hundred dollars. If you purchased it back then, you had the chance to upgrade for reduced prices all along.

BTW, PS7 is selling for $609 right on the Adobe online store. I am not 100% certain, but I believe that if you have PS version 4 or newer, you qualify for the $149 upgrade (might be version 5 forward).

More then a few software companies have practices like that, reduced price updates (full version changes). I just wish that Apple would do the same for registered owners of their software. Hell, even knocking off 25% for people that went out and purchased 10.1 would be GREAT PR.

Rower_CPU
Jul 27, 2002, 12:46 AM
It looks to me like a classic "Chicken or the Egg" argument. Which came first?

I agree that prices are not inline with the value of products. That still does not make piracy anymore legal or morally justifiable.

Send a message to developers and don't buy their overpriced product...but don't send them the wrong message by pirating it.

big
Jul 27, 2002, 12:48 AM
>and in my book legally wrong

fell like dumping some tea with me? I hear the Boston area is mighty fine this time of year!!

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 12:51 AM
Originally posted by big
>and in my book legally wrong

fell like dumping some tea with me? I hear the Boston area is mighty fine this time of year!!

You can do it during Geektoberfest... :p :D

askien
Jul 27, 2002, 01:55 AM
First my background. I have used PC's all my life, but very little Windows. I ran DOS, OS/2 and Linux. I enjoy Free Software, but I'm not religious about it. One thing is certain, you would not catch me dead using a Mac before MacOS X was released. I am also a programmer.

<p>

When I got my iBook 6 months ago, I did it very aware of reality. Apple computers have an underpowered CPU, slow system bus, slow memory system and they are overpriced. They are also SEXY! Yes. They are sexy. The hardware is beautiful. The operating system is beautiful, and Cocoa is probably the best application framework ever conceived. I remember lusting for a NeXT back in the day, but never had the money.

<p>

In other words, I got an iBook because the total user experience (including visual) was, in my opinion, superior to my speedy PC running Slackware Linux.

<p>

Having said that, I think that this whole Jaguar pricing thing, the .Mac thing and now these potential anti-piracy measures decrease Apple's sexyness. These moves make the Mac similar to the "Wintel" experience. Apple should try and make that not happen. They should try and be as different as possible. I feel cheap when software assumes I'm a potential pirate and asks me for a serial number.

<p>

If Apple positions its products as classy and pricey, they shouldn't be pulling cheap stunts like that.

<p>

On the other hand, none of this is too significant. It worries me because it could be the beginning of something a lot worse.

<p>

Apple people should be spending their time trying to figure out a way to buy Altivec from Motorola and licensing it to IBM, so that they can have decent CPUs.

This was a long first post.

Scottgfx
Jul 27, 2002, 02:00 AM
Originally posted by AlphaTech
Even people that purchase windblows don't do that. :p :D Of course, unless they are a corporation.

Actually, I did. I have two Athlon based systems running XP Professional. I purchased the OEM version that was cheaper than the retail, boxed XP home.

Scottgfx
Jul 27, 2002, 02:16 AM
Originally posted by big
>I'm buying Jaguar, and will install it on two machines. end of story. I will not feel bad for it. When photoshop drops to a reasonable price, I will buy it too!

Not to be a complete *******, but as an arguement I would say... If you can't afford Photoshop, perhaps you should look at one of the bitmap editors that are in your price range. I was lucky though, I bought a full version of Photoshop that came with a scanner. The "Computer City" store had mismarked the price. So either I got a free scanner with Photoshop, or the other way around. This is back when scanners cost over $500!

chuckzee
Jul 27, 2002, 02:28 AM
Everyone who makes a judgment on my morality can go to hell

I'll use whatever software I want at whatever prices I want to pay or not. I donít give a shiat about supporting Steve Jobs or Bill Gates.--super rich f***s, to them and their kind $120 is the equivalence of 1Ę to a normal working stiff. ---When are people going to wake up and realize that they are supporting and enabling an economic system, which is rotten to the core (Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, Micro$oft.etc) which, in its very essence is immoral.--don't give me any lectures about "stealing" cable TV, music, etc..


I can get whatever game or program I want over hotline or any other p2p network. If apple thinks that their codes wont be hacked, posted, or broken, they are idiots and deserve whatís coming to them..Winxp and officexp have been hacked to hell. The way I see it, the better the programs and games I get off the net, the better chance Iíll upgrade my computers..

(If the manufactures were really smart, they would give all their software for free, and just require top-notch hardware to run it.)

Scottgfx
Jul 27, 2002, 02:55 AM
Originally posted by chuckzee
Everyone who makes a judgment on my morality can go to hell

Already been there, Join us!

BTW, I need to borrow your car next Tuesday. No, don't worry, I'll just make my own key.

chuckzee
Jul 27, 2002, 03:13 AM
Originally posted by Scottgfx




BTW, I need to borrow your car next Tuesday. No, don't worry, I'll just make my own key.


Our cars are really not our cars. First of all, I have to register it, then insure it, then keep it gassed up, and then pay various taxes and fees on them etc... We never own them; we support them, so you will be doing me a favor. As for software, yeah, Iíll make or "stealĒ whatever key I need or I find. What about it makes you lose sleep?


As for hell? It's most defiantly windows me :D

Rower_CPU
Jul 27, 2002, 03:32 AM
Originally posted by chuckzee
Our cars are really not our cars. First of all, I have to register it, then insure it, then keep it gassed up, and then pay various taxes and fees on them etc... We never own them; we support them, so you will be doing me a favor. As for software, yeah, Iíll make or "stealĒ whatever key I need or I find. What about it makes you lose sleep?


As for hell? It's most defiantly windows me :D

I'm not losing sleep, but I'm pretty sure that the software developers at Apple are...or did you think that Steve himself writes all the code?

You're not stealing from Jobs or Gates when you pirate, you are stealing from the coders/designers/project managers, etc. People who, just like the rest of us, will most likely never be filthy rich or CEO of billion dollar corporations.

Your acts of "defiance" hurt more people than you think.

chuckzee
Jul 27, 2002, 03:44 AM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU


I'm not losing sleep, but I'm pretty sure that the software developers at Apple are...or did you think that Steve himself writes all the code?

You're not stealing from Jobs or Gates when you pirate, you are stealing from the coders/designers/project managers, etc. People who, just like the rest of us, will most likely never be filthy rich or CEO of billion dollar corporations.

Your acts of "defiance" hurt more people than you think.

You missunderstood me. Just because I have the freedom to do it, does not mean i will. (just cause you can have an abortion, doesn't mean you should) I'll make that call and deal with the consequences...(like I might pay $120 for jaguar, but not $600 for ps7)

buffsldr
Jul 27, 2002, 03:46 AM
And lets not forget about people who have 401(k) plans. If MS is part of their mutual fund, it affects them

Pepzhez
Jul 27, 2002, 04:04 AM
Violating the law is not an effective measure of protest - it is a self-serving, greedy form of pseudo-protest that is oblivious to the respect of the law. If everyone violated every law they deemed bad, then we would all be living locked in concrete cells to hide from the hordes of maurauding anarchist bandits out to kill us for the gold in our fillings.

Now certainly this is a thread ostensibly (or at least originally) about software piracy, but I cannot in good conscience allow such a grotesque generalization pass unnoticed - the most pathetic, most moronic statement I've ever heard! Why don't you go tell that to Jesus Christ, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Henry David Thoreau, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Andrei Sakharov, anyone who harbored runaway slaves in 19th century America, anyone who harbored Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe (shall I continue?) - ALL of whom were knowingly, willingly and (yes) bravely violating existing LAWS. I'll leave it to you to consider just how effective their respective protests were, OK?

The fact of the matter is that some (actually many) laws are simply unjust and outright immoral and it's incumbent upon any decent person to disobey them. If you are in need of a refresher of such ideas, then I refer you to The Declaration of Independence, for starters.

Sorry, but your argument is based on a false generalization, before winding its way into a slippery slope argument. Bad logic, in other words.

But there does indeed seem to be a lot of bad logic and baffling inconsistency bouncing around the Macrumors forums lately.

Funny to read here actual clamoring (!) for Apple to install security measures, product activation, etc. when I can recall the drubbing Microsoft got - and rightly so! - in these very forums for doing the very same thing in the not too distant past. Ergo, if Microsoft and that mean old Bill Gates does it, it's bad, if Apple does it, it's good? Uh-huh. "Well, Apple is a business." So sayeth the slavish zealots. So what does that Microsoft then? Uh, I guess Microsoft has enough money; they have no real need of any more, but if Apple wants to gouge me, well, that's OK!

Here's some common sense for you: neither the RIAA, the MPAA, Microsoft, Apple Inc., Adobe or anyone else has ever been able to produce a shred of actual proof that piracy = lost sales. Because it does not. Those who pirate fall into one of two general categories:

1) Would not purchase the product anyway
2) Could not afford to purchase the product

All those kids happily downloading on Carracho and Hotline are not feeling grateful that they've just managed to save themselves $600 for Photoshop 7.0 and have instead decided to spend the money saved on jeans and bubblegum. If they even had the $600, believe me, sending it all to Adobe is most definitely not something that has ever cropped up on even the lowest reaches on their list of spending priorities. In other words, no lost sale here.

As for 2), piracy runs rampant in countries which are POOR. It doesn't take an economist to figure out the logistics of this. Microsoft Windows is the single most common pirated program in China (if not the world) SIMPLY BECAUSE THE AVERAGE CHINESE PERSON CANNOT AFFORD MICROSOFT'S ASKING PRICE. If MS offered Windows at a price that the populace could afford, do you really believe that there would be any problem with Windows piracy in China? Of course not!

Now you may call these "pirates" immoral, against cosmic law and the right hand of the lord's justice, whathaveyou (as someone here did), but I ask you to consider just where your Apple computers came from in the first place, and just who actually put them together.

And to whoever it was who had the audacity to judge the gentleman from Venezuela, calling him an immoral pirate and whatnot, well, consider this, Mac users: your precious Macs and the components which constitute them are being manufactured and assembled by low-wage, exploited third world laborers, who, believe you me, are most definitely NOT being paid enough to ever dream of being able to afford one of the damn things. This is a FACT. (Average maquiladora factory wage in Mexico: $6 per day - yep, even the imac assembly factory; average tech factory wage in China: less than $2 per day.) Why don't you ask a teenage girl working at an Apple assembly plant in one of these places if she thinks Steve Jobs is a visionary, all-conquering hero? I am certain that you will get a much different perspective than you would at Macrumors, I guarantee you that.

Now you may call these "pirates" immoral, against cosmic law and the right hand of the lord's justice, whathaveyou (as someone here did). So if such people pirate/pilfer copies of Windows or Final Cut Pro or whatever, well, who are you to judge? That's pretty moderate and generous compared to what some there would perhaps prefer to do. That is, line up corporate America in front of the firing squad for human rights violations, environmental damages, and gross exploitation of labor (in most cases, child labor).

What you really saying is that it's A-OK for these people to make your products for slave wages, but - hot damn - be sure to condemn them to mighty hell for having the uppity audacity to wish to have a small portion of the fruits of their labor.

I'm serious. When you fork out that money for your next Power Mac or TiBook or Jaguar OS, why don't you take one look at the sticker on the box/computer which tells you where it was manufactured, where it was assembled. One thing it will NOT say is "Made and assembled by union workers in USA/Canada/European Union"). Think about that for a long minute. And if any of the people involved in making the thing have managed to pilfer some software discs or have somehow managed to walk out of the factory with a Power Mac or Cinema Display screen, well, I say more power to them. Small compensation, actually.

Meanwhile, I invite the anti-piracy zealots here to volunteer to work for $3 a day at a Mac assembly factory. Let's say Macs expressly for the Chinese market. No, you'll never be able to afford one yourself on what you're being paid - food and rent will be your primary struggle in life. But at least you'll be making somebody, somewhere happy. Any volunteers?

SilvorX
Jul 27, 2002, 04:31 AM
i wouldnt want to see apple put on an anti-piracy scheme like M$ did, like stupid activation or what so, that'dd just piss off more even more ppl (due to .mac and $130 for jag)

chuckzee
Jul 27, 2002, 04:40 AM
Originally posted by Pepzhez







Here's some common sense for you: neither the RIAA, the MPAA, Microsoft, Apple Inc., Adobe or anyone else has ever been able to produce a shred of actual proof that piracy = lost sales. Because it does not. Those who pirate fall into one of two general categories:

1) Would not purchase the product anyway
2) Could not afford to purchase the product



Well said pepzhez!

Question to all the moralizers out there; if you go along like happy idiots with a corrupt system that exploits people around the world, does that make you an accessory to a crime?

If your mutual funds are based on deceptions and exploitations, if your present "commander in chief" STOLE his way into office, and ushered in a new era of creeping fascism. If the rich get richer, yet you buy into it all, What justifications can get you into heaven?


Corporations donít give a ***** about you or any of their workers, they exist for one purpose only; to maximize profits.


Take their products, anyway you can. Their arguments have been false, always.

sicle
Jul 27, 2002, 05:11 AM
Those people who are bringing morality into this are getting me really pissed.
I do not believe it is necessarily immoral to break the law, there I times when it can be immoral to obey it. In Iran software piracy is legal. Does that have any bearing on whether it is moral? My morality is different to yours end of argument. Lecture me about your views on morality all you want but you'll get about as far as the Jehova's witness who gets the door slammed in his face when they wake me up on a Sunday morning.
Is installing one copy of OS X in my two computers illegal? Well it is definitely a breach of the license. However, I can see how you could make an argument for fair use. It's not illegal to copy a CD and have the same music playing on two different stereos at the same time. I don't think this has been tested in most countries. What is the difference between this and me stealing a computer? That's obvious to a five year old, I deprive someone else of it's use. Breaking your license on software you have purchased may or may not be illegal but it is not even the legal equivalent of theft.
Am I hurting Apple? Well let me put it this way. There are alternatives, not as good but alternatives nevertheless. Would they rather sell me two computers and one copy of OS X or nothing at all?
I am not someone who as a rule goes around pirating software. There are alternatives there that make it unnecessary. If the big companies that dominate software, Microsoft, Adobe, Macromedia and yes unfortunately Apple too, think that customers will indefinitely accept unreasonable licenses and extortionate prices to finance their Executives jet set lifestyle then they are wrong. It is this whole situation that is immoral.

sudon't
Jul 27, 2002, 05:31 AM
Obviously, they're talking about pre-release copies being pirated. I think they're more concerned with secrecy than loss of revenue.
On the other hand, I will be pirating the 10.2 upgrade; for the first time, I'll be pirating an OS. The reason is, that the OS I got with the machine I bought 3 months ago is still pretty primative. It isn't even able to handle scrolling very well! So, if I don't get 10.2, I'll have a half-baked OS to live with. Forever. No more bug-fixes. And a lot of beach balls!
I'm sorry, but I won't pay $129 for a 0.0.5 point upgrade. Even $20 would've pissed me off a little, but I would've paid it.
And, for what it's worth, I've been a Mac addict, evangelist, and apologist since 1985.

skunk
Jul 27, 2002, 06:04 AM
There's an awful lot of pompous crap being spouted here by those from The Land That Morality Forgot. Pepzhez, your arguments are very refreshing. Stick it to the corporate bandits wherever you can. The playing field is obscenely tilted in favour of white, rich corporations: "playing fair" is not relevant in these circumstances. Everyone should at least use the education discount. Nobody checks, and anyway, life is an education, isn't it? The companies still make an unconscionable profit on the sale, and they can claim a bigger share of the education market too.

For a different perspective, visit www.poclad.org

astrocity20
Jul 27, 2002, 06:05 AM
oh no SERIAL NUMBERS!? Those always work theres no way around them (sarcasm) and for all you people worried about Mac going the XP way just do what the warez scene does and get another serial number for the other computer easy enough.

peterjhill
Jul 27, 2002, 06:08 AM
Originally posted by elgruga

As for Application piracy, well, lets face it, $700 for Photoshop is insane.
$150 - maybe.


Cry me a freakin' river...

Photoshop = Professional softare for digital imaged editing.

Adobe Elements = Consumer version, that does most of what photoshop does

Complaining that Photoshop costs so much, is like complaining that:

A condo overlooking Central Park costs more than one in Brooklyn
A Ferrari Costs more than a Yugo
A Pure Breed Golden Retriever costs more than a mutt
An iPod costs more than an iRock (look it up)

There is a premium that must be paid for that last 5 or 10% of functionality that Photoshop provides. If you make your living using Photoshop, then you, or better yet, your company should pay for it. $700 is alot, but not too much for most companies to pay for a critical tool.

Hell yeah, I'd rather have Photoshop instead of Elements. I'd rather drive an Audi TT. Hell, if there is something that Elements can't do, I'll fire up XDarwin and GIMP, and it will probably do it.

What I will not do, is steal a copy of software, that very hardworking people spent alot of time creating. How many person-hours were spent adding that extra bit of functionality. The reason why a Ferrari cost so much more than a Geo Prism, has to do with the quality of the parts, and the fact that it was made by hand.

You get what you pay for, and if you steal it, don't go crying me a river if the company that makes the software makes it harder for you to steal.

peterjhill
Jul 27, 2002, 06:23 AM
Originally posted by astrocity20
oh no SERIAL NUMBERS!? Those always work theres no way around them (sarcasm) and for all you people worried about Mac going the XP way just do what the warez scene does and get another serial number for the other computer easy enough.

In case you didn't see my earlier post. It would be trivial for apple to use a software SN from the OS Box, and hash it with the hardware SN from your computer (see apple system profiler) and create a unique key for your OS, that will only work on your computer. Apple could have a private key, say 4096 bits, then do a pgp like thing to encrypt your hardware and software keys together. The resulting key could be sent electronically to your computer. You would only have to enter in your software SN. It would keep track of the hardware SN that it got from your computer when you installed it, together with your software SN, so that it would not allow the software SN to be installed on any other machine. Software update could be used to reverify keys. And even better, if the same software SN was seen from, say, over 100 different hardware SN's, then the next software update could disable your OS.

I would find that all very amusing, as a person who will be paying for their upgrade to 10.2, and have no sympathy for people who steal software.

It is not a moral issue. It is a legal issue. It may be wrong in the former, but in the US, it is definitely wrong in the latter to steal software, even from yourself

s10
Jul 27, 2002, 06:47 AM
All the software, including the OS, I use for my work are strictly original. I find it more then logical you pay for the instruments that make you earn money.

At home I have several copies of other software. I use them to do some simple home stuff, play with them, learn them. I feel there is nothing wrong if I use a pirate copy.

But if we're talking pleasure software like games, it's an other story. I would buy them as I would only use them at home. (but I don't like computer games, so that's easy)

Often after playing for a while with a software, I realise I can make use of it at my work, so I buy the copy.

skunk
Jul 27, 2002, 06:49 AM
You're falling into the Language Trap, peterjhill. The laws are made by the corporations for the corporations, using new-speak. We are all being ripped off. Just because some of us can afford to pay someone else's annual wage for quasi-monopolistic products, probably because we are being paid ludicrous amounts of money by those same corporations which depend on trade imperialism and ultimately military power to enforce unfair terms, that does not mean that these practices are right.

j763
Jul 27, 2002, 06:56 AM
Apple has been extremely lenient with Software Pirates in the past. They could very easily ensure that you can only use one copy of MacOS on one box. they make the hw and the sw, that would be *easy*. They haven't resorted to using the BSA to threaten customers into buying the legal product nor required product activation ever.

There is a lot of distance between apple and microsoft on the issue of software piracy

peterjhill
Jul 27, 2002, 07:03 AM
Originally posted by skunk
You're falling into the Language Trap, peterjhill. The laws are made by the corporations for the corporations, using new-speak. We are all being ripped off. Just because some of us can afford to pay someone else's annual wage for quasi-monopolistic products, probably because we are being paid ludicrous amounts of money by those same corporations which depend on trade imperialism and ultimately military power to enforce unfair terms, that does not mean that these practices are right.

I was going to respond to this, but instead I will unsubscribe to thread, as "Resistance is Futile" Trying to change people's opinions on piracy seems to be as easy as getting Jesse Helms to switch parties.

sicle
Jul 27, 2002, 08:04 AM
Full marks to Pepzhez for explaining what's wrong with the world far more articulately than I could.

Is Photoshop impressive software? Yes. Is it worth it's price? Not for me. Comparing it to a Ferrari, a play thing of the idle rich that doesn't save it's owner a minute of time unless they commit unspeakably immoral acts and break the speed regulations, doesn't do Photoshop justice. I think it would be better to compare it to a bulldozer, way out of my price range and I don't move vast quantities of ****** often enough to justify buying one.

Most people can get by with Graphic Converter for light graphics work. Now there's a piece of software that is more than worth it's money. I would willingly pay Mr. Lemke for his usually free upgrades because I can afford it and I think they are worth it. On the rare occasions when I actually need to move an enormous volume of soil, well the Gimp is free on runs nicely rootless in OroborOSX. Not as good as Photoshop, but for me a solution at a price I can afford.

Why moan? Why whine? Why complain? Why not just not buy? Firstly, I think there was a time when consumers bought Office, Photoshop and other "professional" software. I think people like Kevin Brown and the rest should realise that their sales are not going to be what they were in the past. They need to get real.

But for me, I genuinely don't want to see Apple go down this road. I can never join the Cupertino cargo cult, but nevertheless a world without Apple would be a poorer and less interesting one. I just hope they see sense before it's too late. I whine because I care!

And are the pirates robbing Apple employees? Steve Jobs may not write a line of code, his programmers do, but they are paid wages for their work. Not a line of it belongs to them when they have finished. You cannot steal something from someone it doesn't belong to. Will a company make its employees suffer for the money it loses due to piracy?. Probably. They will pass the effect of falling sales too. What people working for these companies should realize is that they have no real interest in toeing the company line.

The poor shareholders? Cry me a freakin' river! They've just got to realize there's no such thing as a free lunch. Just because you have invested money in a company doesn't mean they are guaranteed an income for life without working. Maybe they should get off their a****h***s, on their bikes and start looking for work. There's not such thing as a free lunch in this world!

8thDegreeSavage
Jul 27, 2002, 08:51 AM
Wow...lots of upstanding non piracey dudes here.

I guess I will be considered a total criminal


I smoke lots of pot...and im gonna either borrow XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx


Please, some of you people need to get off your high horses.....Get over it, if buying the overpriced upgrade to Jaguar is your cup of tea..go for it, but dont come on here and act like you have never taken something without paying for it.

I dont imagine your mom would stop making cookies if you raided the cookie jar once in a while.



I am a proud member of The Thieves Army...i steal all my wares...except those that are priced and intended for consumers(IE shareware)

Anything thats overpriced(IE XXXXXXXXx) i steal..and no..nothing any of you windbags of the moral high ground can say will ever stop that.

Pants
Jul 27, 2002, 08:57 AM
Originally posted by peterjhill


You are wrong. Sorry. There is nothing wrong with the law. Most games will let you install it on multiple computers, as long as you only play it on one at a time. Diablo for instance.

When it comes to an OS, even if you are only using it on one computer at a time, you are reaping the benefits of it on multiple machines. It is because of people with this attitude that I hope Apple puts a install code tied to the hardware serial number into the OS. That way, they will sell more copies of the software and recoup more of the cost of developing the software.

As mentioned before, if Bill Gates goes to comp usa and buys one copy of OSX retail, and installs it on all the Macs that they have (yes they have macs, what do you think they develop Office X on, virtual mac for pc?), yes he "owns" all those computers as the majority shareholder, but, umm, it would be totally illegal.

If it weren't for all the software pirates, maybe games wouldn't cost $65 a pop.


so what would apple do with this harvested information? I'm sorry, but I dont trust m$ with this kind of 'contact base' profiling , and I'm starting to see apples mercenary acctions in a similar light. Its a very slippery slope once a policy change like this is made. Similarly, I am NOT happy about buying machines at over the odds prices (and try and argue that desktop macs arent...) loaded with a barely working OS and continually having to buy patches that make it work at accetable levels of performance. Why is an os not the same as a game? I can only use one machine at a time and if I have 3 machines, you honestly think I'll happily shell out 350 quid for them??

I can honestly say that after purchasing over 20 machines from apple over the last gawd knows how long, I'm starting to view them in the same light as any corporate money hungry firm. My cosy feelings for apple products and allegiance are rapidly vanishing.

G4scott
Jul 27, 2002, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by elgruga

Some idiot on this forum said something like " It was a lousy consumer decision, but a great business decision" referring to the Apple Macworld debacle.

That is Bollocks. Shafting the customers (consumers) is good business? I find that MORALLY reprehensible, and also stoopid. Dont you, Alex?


So, it's good for BMW to start giving away all of their cars? The company would be dead within a week.

Apple can't just give this stuff away. They spend money developing it, and do a good job at making their software and hardware, but as far as wall street is concerned, if Apple doesn't turn a profit, it's bad.

It wont be any good to be a Mac zealot when the company is bankrupt...

mmmdreg
Jul 27, 2002, 09:15 AM
Apple gives its XServes an unlimited client license so I think that the OS should be free to use within households for unlimited computers...of course unlimited clients and use of OS's are a bit different but still...and also, businesses are a different story so my idea doesn't apply to them...

G4scott
Jul 27, 2002, 09:19 AM
I have a question.

In your opinion, what is considered over-priced as far as software is concerned?

3777
Jul 27, 2002, 11:27 AM
For those of you who say that people who BUY a program and then install it on more then one of their OWN computers....... raises the price of software....... well..... if you think having everyone but multiple copies of the same program will lower prices then you really are on crack. All that will do is increase profits and raise the stock prices of the companies, as well as raise the 401k statements of their employees. That is why there are so many "moral" posters on this board I think. If not then this site has some of the most anal retentive people the world has ever seen as members. But regardless it would have no affect on price one way or another.

Now as for people who burn copies of Jaguar or XP, and then sell them for 1/2 price or give them away, well yes that is crossing the line, but don't talk bs about buying multiple copies of the same program for every system you own, I simply don't believe any of you who say you would do this. Anf if your not lying then your simply retarded.

peterjhill
Jul 27, 2002, 11:31 AM
Some, please close this thread!!! It is hard to ignore the idiotic justifications for piracy!

IJ Reilly
Jul 27, 2002, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by G4scott
I remember when Mac users used to be friendly


This issue has lit a fire under this 17-year Mac user, and many other Mac veterans, I believe, because we see Apple in the process of a making a serious mistake with this upgrade policy. They are punishing two classes of customers they should be rewarding: (1) long-time, early-adopter Mac users who migrated to OSX 10.0 a year ago March or 10.1 last September, and (2) people who've responded to the "switch" campaign.

I'm in the former category, and a friend is in the latter. He's a long-time PC user who finally caved in to my relentless brow-beating and bought himself an iMac a few months ago. Now he's faced with the prospect of forking over another $129 to stay updated to the newest version of the OS, and wondering if he hasn't made an error switching to the Mac. He said to me last night something along the lines of "I thought I was getting away from Microsoft-like practices by going with the Mac."

I have only one question for those who'd defend Apple's policies, and would preach to us about the evils of bootlegging: what do I tell my friend?

While I'm at it, I should remind Apple's more recent customers that until MacOS 7.0, Apple never charged even a dollar for an OS upgrade. This new regime stinks to high-heaven. Worse yet, it may seriously wound Apple -- and that, in the final analysis, what is getting people like me so excited.

eddively
Jul 27, 2002, 11:39 AM
This has to be the stupidest thing I have read in any forum in a long time. Hearing people like you all, suppoed mac-heads, who are just along for the free ride. All you people who pirate software, you remind me of this fat kid who was on my bus in high school, who had funny red hair, and buck teeth, who tried to convince me that Quake 3 is better than UT because you can have it type in mutliple/random colors.

There is no justification for piracy, I'm guessing nearly all of you will keep doing it. But just know, you are just fooling yourself into thinking its okay.

Not to over-exxagerate the issue, but I liked the one where you substitute hardware for software, it starts to make a lot less sense to pirate. This goes from stealing anything thats "tangible" (assuming code is all just "data"), like a car, or food or a house.

I know more high schoolers who make better logic and choices then you guys do.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by elgruga
Laws are made by rich people to protect their property. There is ZERO connection between law and morality, OK?
Morals are a kind of subjective notion based around whatever belief system you happen to 'think' is ok. OK?

Sometimes, Laws are based on morality.

I think that $700 for Photoshop is morally wrong, and in my book legally wrong.
I dont need you to tell me - "well just dont buy it then"
Thats an obvious solution, and one that is morally weak - but I happen to think that its morally WRONG to do what many large corporations are doing - see Enron, etc.
What are you saying then? Because you think the prices of software are both morally and legally wrong, that you have a right to pirate it? Or that you think pirating it is justified?


I have Apple software upgrade coupons sitting on my desk that are 2 ********** weeks old! And guess what? They aint worth squat.
So why did Apple put them in the TiBook box? Because they used to do upgrades, and now its all just grab.
Yeah, that sucks. But again, Apple never said those coupons would be good for a discount on Jaguar. I think the Jaguar pricing scheme is dumb too, but Apple doesn't owe us anything it didn't tell us it owed us. And unless your software upgrade coupons said "Good for 1 copy of 10.2," Apple does not owe you 10.2.
Guess what? I dont want free software, I just want FAIRLY priced software.

I dont want a FREE lunch, I want a reasonably priced lunch.

I aint looking for a HANDOUT, I just want a fair shake.
Again, you have every right to complain about software prices wherever and to whomever. But as long as software piracy is illegal, you do not have a right to pirate software.

Aex

Baseline
Jul 27, 2002, 11:53 AM
Am I the only person here with a job as a software developer? The only person who is actually hurt by piracy?

And seriously, as Mac users, you people MOST OF ALL should be against piracy.

What is probably the main reason for people avoiding a switch to Mac? Lack of software. Why is there a lack of software? Easy answer: The companies don't think they can make enough money porting and selling their apps to Mac machines.

Now, let's say some company X is considering a port of their producy Y to Mac. What considerations are they going to make? Well, they'll probably first look at the size of the userbase. Apple has about 5% (and that's being extremely generous).

Alright, so company X sees that the Apple userbase is small, but if you can get a lot of people from that small userbase to buy product Y, then they'd be doing great! Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of Mac users are pirates! Out of all the Mac users, only 300 000 of them have bought Office X
http://www.wininformant.com/articles/index.cfm?articleid=25871
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/1710
, probably one of the most "necessary" applications for most computer users.

"Well", says company X, "if Microsoft is only selling 300 000 copies of one of the most popular and necessary software packages in the world, how can we expect to make a profit on this port?"

And if you don't like the Microsoft example, use any other one. Every piece of software ANY of you pirate is one less sold copy to show up on some company's financial statement. Other companies look at the sales of other companies, get scared off by low sales numbers, and boom, you've lost yourself more potential ports.

Really people. You want to help out the Apple culture? Get more people buying their machines? Maybe convince Motorola that their will be enough potential sales to put some real research money into new chips? Then don't pirate software. PROVE to all the companies out there currently avoiding OS X that they can make money porting their product. Then maybe this will convince some more PC users to switch over (because a commerical with a pot-headed high school student just isn't convincing me).

Apple has already lost me as a potential customer because the software applications that I want are either in a very primitive state or not even available for OS X. I was all set to buy a Powerbook a few months ago, but when I stopped and really looked at it, I realized it was ridiculous for me to spend that much when most of the software I want isn't even there yet.

IJ Reilly
Jul 27, 2002, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by eddively
This has to be the stupidest thing I have read in any forum in a long time.

It's impossible to determine what "stupidest thing" you are responding to, but I'm going to respond directly to your "stupidest thing."

I haven't read every last post in this thread, but I haven't seen many if any begging for your mythical "free ride." What I see, mainly, are people who are concerned about Apple adopting a dumb, and worst of all, self-defeating, upgrade policy. I see people worried that Apple is snuffing out the momentum behind OSX for the potential short-term gain of sucking another $129 out of their most loyal (and newest) customers. I see the very people who should be the most enthusiastic about the Jaguar upgrade saying, "no thanks, I'll pass." I see OSX becoming dead-in-the-water. I see Apple shooting themselves in the foot, then reloading.

I see some people with their heads stuck in the sand, unwilling to discuss the consequences.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by Choppaface


blue is the best color in the world!!! ha ha you're wrong! :D :D :D

but seriously, some things have more depth that that. speeding is illegal but do you speed? if something is illegal, then a society has decided that they don't want somebody to do that. that doesn't mean that doing something illegal is wrong or right, nor does it prove that it is in the best interest of the society or individual not to do things that are illegal. the arguement is not whether what he does is illegal, it is who is hurting who, and who deserves what. labeling something as illegal doesn't mean that all offenders always deserve the same punishment. somewhere there must be more depth, or the community is ignoring diversity.
You are making a distinction between what should be legal/moral and what is legal/moral.
and nobody forces the software writer to write the software. "Nobody is forcing him [or her] into" writing "any software." everybody has to make a living. if you don't approve of how he makes a living, then try to improve his options, because he will not be able to live up to your expectations by himself. censure does nothing but hurt both parties.
Well, to use the cable TV analogy again, nobody is forcing the cable TV providers to run all the HBO and PPV channels. They all have to make a living. If you don't approve of how I make a living, then try to improve my options, because I won't be able to live up to your expectations by myself.

Why should improving his options be any of my business? He's got $20k of pirated software by his own admission, somebody should call the SPA and send the ****er to jail. He is perpetuating a felony. My arse it's not wrong, or wrong to a lesser degree. Being poor does not give you a right to what the more advantaged have. If you want to change the debate to what should be based on class and what should be illegal and what should be moral, then that's fine, but the fact is that piracy is currently NOT based on class, it is currently NOT moral (if your sense of morality is formulated with even loose respect of the law in mind), and it is currently NOT legal.
the difference is that the cable company is thousands of miles away, on a different continent, far away from the juristiction of american morality. sort of like the issue with sat dishes in Canada, but that's a whole nother issue.... but if you don't want to do things that are illegal, that's fine, just grab a plow :D
No they aren't. Time Warner is based in the USA, just like Microsoft. That's an untrue argument anyway - I can't steal from, say, a French company just because it's thousands of miles away on a different continent. That would be a violation of international law, which does apply here.

Alex

eddively
Jul 27, 2002, 12:06 PM
I hesitate to think that the reason people are pirating is...because they aren't sure of Apple's business plan. I think its just because they don't want to pay for everything. And yes, by "stupidest" I am talking about everyone who justifies pirating. I'm 17--and I don't pirate. I don't make 6 figures, infact, I barely, if even make 5, but if I want the software, then, well, I'll buy it.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
Everyone who makes a judgment on my morality can go to hell

I'll use whatever software I want at whatever prices I want to pay or not. I donít give a shiat about supporting Steve Jobs or Bill Gates.--super rich f***s, to them and their kind $120 is the equivalence of 1Ę to a normal working stiff. ---When are people going to wake up and realize that they are supporting and enabling an economic system, which is rotten to the core (Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, Micro$oft.etc) which, in its very essence is immoral.--don't give me any lectures about "stealing" cable TV, music, etc..

Yup. You are supporting and enabling an economic system which is arguably rotten to the core. So don't buy software. Don't use software. Nobody is forcing you to use it. You use the software you've stolen because you're greedy and disrespectful of the law. If I think you're a dick, can I steal from you? Can I? I like your pants. Can I have them? No, actually, I'm taking them, because I don't like you, and because you're rotten to the core. See how ************ that argument is? Watch your khakis, sucka.

Alex

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
Our cars are really not our cars. First of all, I have to register it, then insure it, then keep it gassed up, and then pay various taxes and fees on them etc... We never own them; we support them, so you will be doing me a favor.
"We don't own our cars?" Yes we do. It may be necessary to keep the car insured and gassed up and registered, but that doesn't mean we don't own our cars. (Unless we're leasing them.) We can buy a $20k car, put our name on the title, and then turn around and sell it for whatever it's worth. What about that situation is not ownership?

BobVB
Jul 27, 2002, 12:12 PM
[i]Originally posted by alex_ant

Again, you have every right to complain about software prices wherever and to whomever. But as long as software piracy is illegal, you do not have a right to pirate software.
[/B]

Only if you hold the law in some special sanctified regard.

There are two ways to look at the law:
a normative ('do it be cause I ask you') political power system, what can also be called a moral or ethical basic of law. If so, then those people will follow the law whether they will be caught or not.

But there is another way, the 'coercive' or "do it or I'll hurt you'" paradigm. In this scenerio, it is only illegal if you get caught.

We as loyal Apple customers used to deal with them in the normative since out of moral obliation and feeling as if we were in a mutually respectful relationship with Apple. But lately Apple seems to have been leaving its moral and ethical roots behind, the .mac hostage situation of iTools email addresses being a prime recent example.

Many feel that Apple has broken the ethical relationship it had with its customers - that you now see more people taking the 'its only illegal if I get caught' mindset is a natural reaction to this.

Gelfin
Jul 27, 2002, 12:21 PM
From what I've seen the people who have posted a response to this thread so far have mostly fallen into two camps:

1) Piracy is the scourge of humanity and any evil scumbag who in the least way violates his EULA should be crushed like a bug.

2) Software pricing just shows how the capitalist machine is oiled with the blood of the workers and Apple's desire not to have people steal their software will be the trigger for violent Communist revolution. The streets will run red with the blood of the CEOs.

Am I the only one here who thinks BOTH these camps are kinda stupid?

Just as a pragmatic matter, small-scale piracy happens and has always happened. It's pretty easy to fall under the radar where software companies don't really care. Buying one copy of OS X and installing it on two machines at home, while technically a violation, falls into this category. When corporate users, who are the software developers' major source of revenue, start doing it, that causes problems. Also, when it starts popping up online and thousands of people download it and install it on multiple machines without even paying for one copy, that also causes problems.

The very minor case (one copy, two machines) would cost them more to combat than they'd see in revenue. However, this minor case may also be affected by measures taken to fight the more major forms of piracy. Enough people driving at 90MPH and the police will set up a speed trap that may catch you driving only 5MPH over the limit as well. Don't blame the police. Blame the people who went overboard and caused a problem that needed attention.

Likewise when Apple says that they have to take steps to fight widespread piracy, don't be mad at Apple. Be mad at the people who abuse Apple's heretofore laid-back attitude about it. If people weren't openly stealing Jaguar builds online this wouldn't be an issue.

IJ Reilly
Jul 27, 2002, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by Baseline
Really people. You want to help out the Apple culture? Get more people buying their machines?
I've been down that road, and it does not lead to a very happy place. It certainly is not my "job" to convince anyone to buy an Apple product, but this is precisely what many Mac owners do -- preach the Mac until their friends are sick of hearing about it. Then as in my case, a friend responds by purchasing a Mac, and Apple decides he needs to pay for the OS all over again, just a couple months later. Thanks for switching, compadre. So am I going to stick my neck out again for Apple? What do you think?

The problem is, too many people are treating this like it's some sort of deep philosophical issue which raises profound ethical questions. Fundamentally, it is not. In essence, this is a totally pragmatic issue. It's a question of whether Apple will succeed or fail with OSX, and consequently, as a company. How anyone, most especially Apple, thinks they can make OSX a success without their most customers behind them is a mystery to me.

skunk
Jul 27, 2002, 12:26 PM
Really you should have advised your friend to wait till August and buy Jaguar pre-installed. Timing is everything...

Baseline
Jul 27, 2002, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by IJ Reilly

I've been down that road, and it does not lead to a very happy place. It certainly is not my "job" to convince anyone to buy an Apple product

Maybe I phrased it incorrectly. I'm not talking about converting people to Macs for THEIR sake, I'm talking about how other people switching would help current users. I also think it's still how people try to preach Macs so much.

My point, is that the more people out there who are switching over, the more companies will be convinced to port their software products, a bonus to everyone owning a Mac. But if most of the switchers/current owners, are pirating their software, then no one will want to port

chuckzee
Jul 27, 2002, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by Baseline


Am I the only person here with a job as a software developer? The only person who is actually hurt by piracy?

Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of Mac users are pirates! Out of all the Mac users, only 300 000 of them have bought Office X
http://www.wininformant.com/articles/index.cfm?articleid=25871
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/1710
, probably one of the most "necessary" applications for most computer users.


R


300000@$400 a pop bought in $120,000,000 to Microsoft.

I donít understand your logic here. I can get WHATEVER software I want for window---that doesn't stop companies from developing for them. Win98 and Office are the most pirated pieces of software available, and I believe Microsoft STILL made Billions on them.

As pepzhez said:

"neither the RIAA, the MPAA, Microsoft, Apple Inc., Adobe or anyone else has ever been able to produce a shred of actual proof that piracy = lost sales. Because it does not. Those who pirate fall into one of two general categories:"

1) Would not purchase the product anyway
2) Could not afford to purchase the product

I donít give a ratís ass if you are a software developer with your slavish devotion to the corporation; unless you develop shareware or freeware; you are participating in the perpetuation of greed.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
Now certainly this is a thread ostensibly (or at least originally) about software piracy, but I cannot in good conscience allow such a grotesque generalization pass unnoticed - the most pathetic, most moronic statement I've ever heard! Why don't you go tell that to Jesus Christ, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Henry David Thoreau, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Andrei Sakharov, anyone who harbored runaway slaves in 19th century America, anyone who harbored Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe (shall I continue?) - ALL of whom were knowingly, willingly and (yes) bravely violating existing LAWS. I'll leave it to you to consider just how effective their respective protests were, OK?
If you think software pricing schemes are of the same magnitude as the US Declaration of Independence, civil rights, the end of slavery, and the protection of Jews during the Holocaust, there are MANY MANY people who don't agree with you. Frankly I think that by lumping software pirates in with MLK and Thomas Jefferson that you're insulting what these great people stood for. Equating acts of thievery by selfish greedy tightwads with the civil rights movement is shameful.
The fact of the matter is that some (actually many) laws are simply unjust and outright immoral and it's incumbent upon any decent person to disobey them. If you are in need of a refresher of such ideas, then I refer you to The Declaration of Independence, for starters.
Unless the very mechanism by which laws are changed is corrupt (WHICH IT ISN'T), then there is no reason you can't change the laws legally. Your logic is self-serving:

"1) I can change the law legally, or
2) I can change the law illegally but get tons of free software along the way and not get caught!

I choose #2."

Funny to read here actual clamoring (!) for Apple to install security measures, product activation, etc. when I can recall the drubbing Microsoft got - and rightly so! - in these very forums for doing the very same thing in the not too distant past. Ergo, if Microsoft and that mean old Bill Gates does it, it's bad, if Apple does it, it's good? Uh-huh. "Well, Apple is a business." So sayeth the slavish zealots. So what does that Microsoft then? Uh, I guess Microsoft has enough money; they have no real need of any more, but if Apple wants to gouge me, well, that's OK!
I realize that anti-piracy schemes don't work. I have no problem with Microsoft's product activation other than it being inconvenient. As long as the people who paid for the software can use it, fine by me. I don't really care whether or not Apple goes with serial numbers.
Here's some common sense for you: neither the RIAA, the MPAA, Microsoft, Apple Inc., Adobe or anyone else has ever been able to produce a shred of actual proof that piracy = lost sales. Because it does not. Those who pirate fall into one of two general categories:

1) Would not purchase the product anyway
2) Could not afford to purchase the product

All those kids happily downloading on Carracho and Hotline are not feeling grateful that they've just managed to save themselves $600 for Photoshop 7.0 and have instead decided to spend the money saved on jeans and bubblegum. If they even had the $600, believe me, sending it all to Adobe is most definitely not something that has ever cropped up on even the lowest reaches on their list of spending priorities. In other words, no lost sale here.
I agree with this, but there is a difference between the business model that software companies DO have and the business model that software companies SHOULD have. Besides, the fact that I wouldn't have bought a Ferrari anyway doesn't give me the right to steal one.
As for 2), piracy runs rampant in countries which are POOR. It doesn't take an economist to figure out the logistics of this. Microsoft Windows is the single most common pirated program in China (if not the world) SIMPLY BECAUSE THE AVERAGE CHINESE PERSON CANNOT AFFORD MICROSOFT'S ASKING PRICE.
Then they shouldn't use it.



And to whoever it was who had the audacity to judge the gentleman from Venezuela, calling him an immoral pirate and whatnot, well, consider this, Mac users: your precious Macs and the components which constitute them are being manufactured and assembled by low-wage, exploited third world laborers, who, believe you me, are most definitely NOT being paid enough to ever dream of being able to afford one of the damn things. This is a FACT.
These low-wage workers are not committing an immoral felony. The gentleman from Venezuela is. That is the difference. If their wages suck, I have sympathy for that, but at least they're HONEST wages.
Now you may call these "pirates" immoral, against cosmic law and the right hand of the lord's justice, whathaveyou (as someone here did). So if such people pirate/pilfer copies of Windows or Final Cut Pro or whatever, well, who are you to judge?
If somebody steals somebody else's car, who am I to judge the actions of that somebody? I don't know, you tell me.

That's pretty moderate and generous compared to what some there would perhaps prefer to do. That is, line up corporate America in front of the firing squad for human rights violations, environmental damages, and gross exploitation of labor (in most cases, child labor).
So the generalized wrongdoings of the companies from which software is being stolen give software pirates a justification to steal software? In other words, do two wrongs make a right?
What you really saying is that it's A-OK for these people to make your products for slave wages,
No, I'm saying slave wages is a different argument from software piracy. You should start a new thread.

Alex

IJ Reilly
Jul 27, 2002, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by skunk
Really you should have advised your friend to wait till August and buy Jaguar pre-installed. Timing is everything...

Well, I'm a friend, not an advisor, but I couldn't very well have advised him to wait for a product that didn't even have a ship-date back in April or May when he bought the iMac. I suppose I also need to remind you that 10.1 was a free upgrade. Nobody but nobody expected Apple to adopted this scorched-earth upgrade policy with 10.2 -- which is why we're debating it here.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by 8thDegreeSavage Anything thats overpriced(IE Photoshop) i steal..and no..nothing any of you windbags of the moral high ground can say will ever stop that.
I'm not going to say you'll ever stop it. Keep it up, in fact. I'd love to help put your ass in jail, though. Sure, I've stolen from others before too. I've stolen from the cookie jar. And in every case, I got exactly what was coming to me.

Alex

Baseline
Jul 27, 2002, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee


I donít understand your logic here. I can get WHATEVER software I want for window---that doesn't stop companies from developing for them. Win98 and Office are the most pirated pieces of software available, and I believe Microsoft STILL made Billions on them.

Yeah, but look at the installed user base of Windows machine vs. Mac machines. Sure, tons of people pirate Windows software, but there are more people out there buying Windows software than there are total Mac users, pirates and legitamites, combined.

Originally posted by chuckzee
"neither the RIAA, the MPAA, Microsoft, Apple Inc., Adobe or anyone else has ever been able to produce a shred of actual proof that piracy = lost sales. Because it does not. Those who pirate fall into one of two general categories:"

1) Would not purchase the product anyway
2) Could not afford to purchase the product

I have proof: EVERYONE on this board saying flat out that they're going to pirate OS X.2 You know all these people WOULD by the product anyway, and frankly, if you can afford to purchase Mac hardware, then you can afford to purchase software.


I donít give a ratís ass if you are a software developer with your slavish devotion to the corporation; unless you develop shareware or freeware; you are participating in the perpetuation of greed.

Wow, "slavish devotion". What a keen insight to my mind and soul you have there! I've worked for the company for less than three months, and I have a slavish devotion? I'm more concerned that if we don't sell our products, because people pirate them, then jobs are lost.

And since when were any slaves "devoted" to their "masters"?

chuckzee
Jul 27, 2002, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant

"We don't own our cars?" Yes we do. It may be necessary to keep the car insured and gassed up and registered, but that doesn't mean we don't own our cars. (Unless we're leasing them.) We can buy a $20k car, put our name on the title, and then turn around and sell it for whatever it's worth. What about that situation is not ownership? [/B]


If the State wanted your real estate, automobiles, computers, whatever...they can just take it, and deem whatever they feel necessary as compensation...you try to stop them by waving a silly piece of paper.

IJ Reilly
Jul 27, 2002, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by Baseline


Maybe I phrased it incorrectly. I'm not talking about converting people to Macs for THEIR sake, I'm talking about how other people switching would help current users. I also think it's still how people try to preach Macs so much.

My point, is that the more people out there who are switching over, the more companies will be convinced to port their software products, a bonus to everyone owning a Mac. But if most of the switchers/current owners, are pirating their software, then no one will want to port

Fine, but my point is that Apple has severerly undercut the "switch" campaign with this policy. Apple is trying to paint themselves as the "unMicrosoft" -- which is a great way to go. But it won't ring true if they start treating their customers like bottomless pits of money they can strip-mine whenever the bottom line demands it. This is a losing strategy.

chuckzee
Jul 27, 2002, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant

Yup. You are supporting and enabling an economic system which is arguably rotten to the core. So don't buy software. Don't use software. Nobody is forcing you to use it. You use the software you've stolen because you're greedy and disrespectful of the law. If I think you're a dick, can I steal from you? Can I? I like your pants. Can I have them? No, actually, I'm taking them, because I don't like you, and because you're rotten to the core. See how ************ that argument is? Watch your khakis, sucka.

Alex

Now your argument doesn't hold water; If you were to steal my car, pants basketball, etc... you will be prevent me from using it. I I were to install a copy of 10.2 on my macintosh, who would i prevent from using it?

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
If the State wanted your real estate, automobiles, computers, whatever...they can just take it, and deem whatever they feel necessary as compensation...you try to stop them by waving a silly piece of paper.
Yes, that is true. It can. Eminent domain is in effect in most countries. What are you getting at? It doesn't change the fact that you do still own the car, until the government takes it. (Which it essentially never does, so what's your point?)

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 01:02 PM
IF Apple makes the install cd work only one one system (the first one you update/install it on) more then a few people will be royally pissed off. For one thing, schools and corporations that purchase the large license count would have to carry around several cd's and keep track of which serial number is installed on which machine, as well as the installation code that is created. That will drive down the adoption rate.

Last year, one of the departments at work purchased many copies of KPT and Vector Effects. We got each version in it's own retail box, complete with serial numbers and install cd's. The cd's were NOT tied to the serial number that came inside each box. I was able to install all the copies onto the target systems with just one cd for each one. Instead of needing to carry around ~40 cd's with serial numbers, I was able to carry two and a sheet with the numbers and who it was going to.

As far as doing the same with the Mac OS, it wouldn't be too difficult as long as the install cd is not tied to the serial number. If I was to wait for the twits in NJ to send up cd's, I would probably be retired before they arrived. I have used the OS install cd's that come with systems to install updates as well as boot the computer in order to run utilities.

chuckzee
Jul 27, 2002, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant

Yes, that is true. It can. Eminent domain is in effect in most countries. What are you getting at? It doesn't change the fact that you do still own the car, until the government takes it. (Which it essentially never does, so what's your point?)


The State gives you the "rights to ownership"; the State can take them away; therefore we inherently donít really "own" anything.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
Now your argument doesn't hold water; If you were to steal my car, pants basketball, etc... you will be prevent me from using it. I I were to install a copy of 10.2 on my macintosh, who would i prevent from using it?
That's a very good point. You should take that point to your legislators and work to get some laws changed. Fight the bad laws inside the system, not illegally outside it. The system is not so corrupt that it can't be changed.

Alex

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
The State gives you the "rights to ownership"; the State can take them away; therefore we inherently donít really "own" anything.
I'm still not sure what your point is. Do you have a problem with this? If so, you are more than able to change it, if there are enough people who agree with you and would be willing to go along with you. That's how democracy works.

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
The State gives you the "rights to ownership"; the State can take them away; therefore we inherently donít really "own" anything.

Bullsheit... I own my furniture, my tv, dvd player, vcr, pots, pans, printer, computer, truck and motorcycle (once the loans are paid off). You don't own the utility companies, since they are providing a service to you (electricity, gas, cable tv...) as well as anything that you are either renting or leasing.

Your statement MIGHT hold water in a communist country, like China. NOT in the US... :rolleyes: twit:D

faustofernos
Jul 27, 2002, 01:54 PM
Historically, 10.2 (Jaguar) is the MOST EXPENSIVE operating system to this date: because its an UPGRADE. Call a spade a spade. People are upset because they paid for OSX, and now the AMOUNT OF MONEY that Apple is charging for a .5 upgrade is ridiculous.

Oh, you say, its MUCH MORE than just an upgrade? LIES! 10.2 runs EQUAL at the speed of 9, which is what it should have been in the first place. People are outraged because they have to pay money for something they feel they ALREADY OWN, which is the rights to future upgrades of their operating system.

If Apple wants to charge FULL price to is users for an operating system, then it should be a FULL NEW VERSION (OS 11). I am sorry, but operating systems are not that valuble!

Apple wants to have its cake and to eat it as well Ė they want people to adopt os X, yet they give their current users every reason to distrust the company and to drag their feet to adopt the new OS, Jaguar.

We ALREADY PAID FOR OS 10.2 when we bought our way overpriced computers that came with OSX. We also should have access to ANY FUTURE UPGRADES of the OSX system. IF apple wants to charge money for an OS, then they need to CALL IT A NEW OS.

Also, iTOOLS is i****! $100 dollars a year should get you MUCH MORE than just server space, and some crappy software that doesnt do anything (Virex is a joke). Ugh. Apple's greed will be it's eventual downfall.

Mark my words:
Apple will not exsist 10 years from now. People will not put up with this practice, it does not differentiate Apple from M$. Apple in the future will be less and less easier to use, because of their greed.

mr_austin
Jul 27, 2002, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


Bullsheit... I own my furniture, my tv, dvd player, vcr, pots, pans, printer, computer, truck and motorcycle (once the loans are paid off). You don't own the utility companies, since they are providing a service to you (electricity, gas, cable tv...) as well as anything that you are either renting or leasing.

Your statement MIGHT hold water in a communist country, like China. NOT in the US... :rolleyes: twit:D

This is incorrect, at least in terms of property. There are many situations where the state can seize your property (usually giving you fair market value or better) if they decide they want to put a highway or a dam or something there besides your house. You have the ability to fight it, most of the time, but there are definitely situations where people lose and have things they 'own' taken away from them at the discretion of the US gov't.

(wow, this thread is REALLY off topic, but still really interesting...)

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by mr_austin
This is incorrect, at least in terms of property. There are many situations where the state can seize your property (usually giving you fair market value or better) if they decide they want to put a highway or a dam or something there besides your house. You have the ability to fight it, most of the time, but there are definitely situations where people lose and have things they 'own' taken away from them at the discretion of the US gov't.

You even put right in your post (twit) that they give you money (more then it's worth) for your property. You DO get to remove all of your belongings from the residence BEFORE they purchase/take possession of your home or land. :rolleyes:

BTW, Purchasing/paying for something is NOT the same as seizing. Seizing is what happens to criminals that use those items in the criminal act, or purchased the items from profits of those criminal acts.

big
Jul 27, 2002, 03:10 PM
>10.2 runs EQUAL at the speed of 9, which is what it should have been in the first place.

yep...that's why I'm finally bought OSX, 10.1 was the beta...10.1.5 is finally almost useable

ergo
Jul 27, 2002, 03:16 PM
To those of you who are engaged in the daily fight for survival, who have had to resort to using pirated versions of software simply so you could remain in business, so you could just remain in the race, so you could SURVIVE... I wish you Godspeed.

I once was able to purchase the software I needed to keep a modest graphic design business afloat; every pro-line application had a corresponding receipt in the filing cabinet...full versions & updates. No longer. In the last year I have gone from being able to put between 5-10% of my income in savings, to my current situation: I have less than $300. in reserve at the moment, and there is NO sign of this situation changing for the better; in fact, I fear that it will get far worse. I have talked with many other freelancers in this business, and all are experiencing a downturn, some far more than others. For some of us, Carracho & Hotline often provide salvation...not a 24/7 warez-grabbing hobby.

I wish that everyone here who has made their stand on morality could spend a sobering afternoon with a colleague of mine who is so preoccupied with her dwindling business and her perception of an economy in "freefall" that she can barely hold a normal conversation now. She has taken a part-time job just to make ends meet, but it takes away from time with her son. A couple weeks ago, we talked about a job that a prospective client wanted her to take over, completing layout of the initial InDesign files prepared by a former designer. She desperately needed the job, but had only QuarkXpress. I was happy to give her InDesign2...she is now completing that job. I have a hard time believing that any of you (Alex, for example) would not have done the same thing!

If you are a person who has always had the means, whether through hard work or trust funds, to purchase the software you needed, then I tell you that you are most fortunate. There are hard-working folks with solid work ethics who are struggling, and you have NOTHING of value to say to them if you have not walked in their shoes; remember..."there, but for the grace of God, go I". It could be YOU! I am not deeply religious, but truth is where you find it.

For those who wake up daily to lives of "quiet desperation", moral condemnations from on high sound as absurd (considering the harsh realities of life) as the assertions of relatively wealthy Soviet-era politburo members that they were there to "serve the people"...often from luxury dachas, of course. If you must wallow in your "righteousness", please do it amongst yourselves, and in private...you make the rest of us jealous.

Rower_CPU
Jul 27, 2002, 03:33 PM
ergo-
You paint an excellent picture of the economic downturn the conservatives try to say doesn't exist in the US.

I can afford to buy my software, and yes, I feel fortunate in being able to do so. I have not always been able to.

My standpoint on this subject is not one of selfrighteousness, but of simple legality. If you use software in a manner contradictory to the license agreement, you are committing a crime. Sorry if that seems harsh to you, but it's the truth.

Just as you feel you must speak up for the struggling workers who cannot afford to buy software legally, we feel we must speak up for the software designers who suffer from its illegal use.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by ergo
To those of you who are engaged in the daily fight for survival, who have had to resort to using pirated versions of software simply so you could remain in business, so you could just remain in the race, so you could SURVIVE... I wish you Godspeed.

I once was able to purchase the software I needed to keep a modest graphic design business afloat; every pro-line application had a corresponding receipt in the filing cabinet...full versions & updates. No longer. In the last year I have gone from being able to put between 5-10% of my income in savings, to my current situation: I have less than $300. in reserve at the moment, and there is NO sign of this situation changing for the better; in fact, I fear that it will get far worse. I have talked with many other freelancers in this business, and all are experiencing a downturn, some far more than others. For some of us, Carracho & Hotline often provide salvation...not a 24/7 warez-grabbing hobby.

I wish that everyone here who has made their stand on morality could spend a sobering afternoon with a colleague of mine who is so preoccupied with her dwindling business and her perception of an economy in "freefall" that she can barely hold a normal conversation now. She has taken a part-time job just to make ends meet, but it takes away from time with her son. A couple weeks ago, we talked about a job that a prospective client wanted her to take over, completing layout of the initial InDesign files prepared by a former designer. She desperately needed the job, but had only QuarkXpress. I was happy to give her InDesign2...she is now completing that job. I have a hard time believing that any of you (Alex, for example) would not have done the same thing!
You're right, I probably would have. But I would have felt bad about having to do it. I would have realized it was not the right thing to do from a legal standpoint. What made me jump in this thread was the "down with corporations" mantra of those who pirate software just to spite the software makers, and others, who attempt to justify piracy when their self-serving justifications are at best laughable.

If you have a choice between pirating software and letting your child starve, I say pirate the software. It's not a good position to be in. But it would be wrong not to make an effort to ensure that your livelihood does not forevermore continue to depend on gross violations of the law.

Also FYI, I'm not a snitch. I've never turned anyone in for piracy. I have friends who pirate software, and they know how I feel about it. They continue to do it, but at least they realize and admit that what they're doing is wrong. More than I can say for the freeloaders who pirate a certain $700 professional graphics package because they don't like Adobe, or because the price is "morally wrong."

Alex

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by mr_austin
This is incorrect, at least in terms of property. There are many situations where the state can seize your property (usually giving you fair market value or better) if they decide they want to put a highway or a dam or something there besides your house. You have the ability to fight it, most of the time, but there are definitely situations where people lose and have things they 'own' taken away from them at the discretion of the US gov't.

(wow, this thread is REALLY off topic, but still really interesting...)
I don't know if you realized that AlphaTech is one of those Second Amendment gun nuts. He's probably got a huge paramilitary training ground in his backyard. I don't know if the government would want to mess with him. :)

peterjhill
Jul 27, 2002, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by faustofernos
Historically, 10.2 (Jaguar) is the MOST EXPENSIVE operating system to this date: because its an UPGRADE.

ipv6,ipsec,pptp,new mail client,quartz extreme. I think that this is a major release, and the only reason they went to 10.2 instead of 10.5, is so they would be able to stay with the ten for a while longer. It is a major upgrade.

Oh, you say, its MUCH MORE than just an upgrade? LIES! 10.2 runs EQUAL at the speed of 9, which is what it should have been in the first place. People are outraged because they have to pay money for something they feel they ALREADY OWN, which is the rights to future upgrades of their operating system.

Simple answer, don't upgrade. You are not being forced to upgrade. No one is. Don't buy it if it is not worth the money for you. If enough people don't buy, guess what, apple will make less money than expected, and the stock market will punish them for performing below expectations. You see, that is the beauty of our system.

If Apple wants to charge FULL price to is users for an operating system, then it should be a FULL NEW VERSION (OS 11). I am sorry, but operating systems are not that valuble!

Surely that is what microsoft would have done. If the name of the software is so important to you, then I am sure someone can hack all the "about this Mac" pages for you so they say 11. No matter what it is called, It is a great piece of software. I am using it right now, and it is like a whole new machine.

We ALREADY PAID FOR OS 10.2 when we bought our way overpriced computers that came with OSX. We also should have access to ANY FUTURE UPGRADES of the OSX system. IF apple wants to charge money for an OS, then they need to CALL IT A NEW OS.

Umm, no you didn't. You do not make the rules, apple does. They write the software, and this is what they have chosen to do. If the machines are overpriced for you, then don't buy them. buy a cheap pc instead. And if you look at the price/feature ratio, apple looks very good. Look at their portable line. Configure a dell that compares to either the ibook or the powerbook. Apple will come out on top, without even taking into account the software benefits.

Also, iTOOLS is i****! $100 dollars a year should get you MUCH MORE than just server space, and some crappy software that doesnt do anything (Virex is a joke). Ugh. Apple's greed will be it's eventual downfall.

pop/imap mail and the backup software, as well as the integration of the web site with iphoto make it worth my while. I already have virus software that is licensed through work, no matter though.

Mark my words:
Apple will not exsist 10 years from now. People will not put up with this practice, it does not differentiate Apple from M$. Apple in the future will be less and less easier to use, because of their greed.
I will refrain from the personal attack that would come so easily here. apple will still be here 50 years from now, because people like cool stuff, and apple makes it.

mr_austin
Jul 27, 2002, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


You even put right in your post (twit) that they give you money (more then it's worth) for your property. You DO get to remove all of your belongings from the residence BEFORE they purchase/take possession of your home or land. :rolleyes:

BTW, Purchasing/paying for something is NOT the same as seizing. Seizing is what happens to criminals that use those items in the criminal act, or purchased the items from profits of those criminal acts.

I suppose it's a matter of a perspective. If someone demands that I give them something for whatever price they dictate without the option of refusing, that is not a typical sale. Ownership implies the right to retain ownership, if so desired.

To steer this back to the current discussion, according to most EULA's, you don't even really own software. (hence, End User LICENSE Agreement). You own a license to operate the software, which they dictate the terms of.

If you brought the argument "I own the computers, I own the software, I can do what I want" to the SPA, you would almost definitely lose.

At the end of the day, it's pretty simple. They make a product, and you can decide whether to buy it or not buy it, whether to steal it or not steal it. There are people who justify stealing, people who know it's wrong and do it anyway, and people who don't do it. According to the law, it's still stealing, and Apple has every right to try to stop you from doing it. Just as you have every right to stop using their products as a result of their actions.

Here's a good article by Ron Lindeboom, who has an interesting perspective on all this... he's pretty mad...

http://www.creativecow.net/articles/lindeboom_ron/osx_jaguar/index.html

-a

peterjhill
Jul 27, 2002, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant


Also FYI, I'm not a snitch. I've never turned anyone in for piracy. I have friends who pirate software, and they know how I feel about it. They continue to do it, but at least they realize and admit that what they're doing is wrong. More than I can say for the freeloaders who pirate a certain $700 professional graphics package because they don't like Adobe, or because the price is "morally wrong."
[/B]

I completely understand. I know people who have lots of stolen software also. I tell them I don't want to know about it. And that they should not even try to ask to copy software that I have purchased. Plenty of games have they asked for, but I won't give in.

I actually respect the pirates who steal software, admit that it is illegal, and don't try to come up with some moral justification. I am not standing on a moral pedestal, but a legal one.

There are laws that I don't agree with. I don't understand (actually I do) why alcohol and tobacco are legal and pot is illegal. The first two have killed a significant number of people one way or another, while the latter has has not. Random morality mixed with law can be dangerous, IMHO. When the morality of the few, but powerful is legislated, that can be very bad. Or worse, when people twist morality around to control others.

eg.
It is believed by some that Willam R. Heast, newspaper magnate of old, who also owned a bunch of paper mills felt threatened by the hemp industry, as excellent quality paper was easily manufactured from it. Whereas a tree cut down for paper takes decades to grow back, the same acre of land could be harvested every year for the fiborus hemp plant. His solution was to use his newspapers to start off the anti-marijuana movement.

Now the industrial hemp industry is gone. The alcohol and tobacco industry has a vested intrest in keeping the status quo. It is a tricky situation. Just like piracy, almost everyone has an opinion. Should the laws be changed? Who is benefiting from them? Who is being hurt by them? What forces are keeping the status quo for piracy?

I appreciate intelligent discourse on controversial topics. I have not heard any good arguements yet that sway me the slightest in thinking that american copyright law should be changed. The law protects Microsoft, It also protects Ambrosia. It protects Blizzard. It even protects Linus Torvaldis. It keeps Microsoft from stealing linux and not giving credit where due. Hell, it protects the guy that took the famous 9/11 picture with the flag from having his photograph stolen and reprinted by others for profit of not.

Hold down Apple-V next time you boot to os X. You can see Apple paying respect to the holders of the BSD copyright. Apple respects copyright law, and so do I.

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by mr_austin
I suppose it's a matter of a perspective. If someone demands that I give them something for whatever price they dictate without the option of refusing, that is not a typical sale. Ownership implies the right to retain ownership, if so desired.

If you brought the argument "I own the computers, I own the software, I can do what I want" to the SPA, you would almost definitely lose.

You DO own the hardware/computer, you can use it to do as you please.

In the recent past, how many people have been forced to sell their home to a company or even a government agency?? The only case that even comes close is when the government offers to relocate people that decided to live in a flood plain (on the edge of the Mississippi river when it flooded). If you get a house where there is a history of major flooding, it floods, and the government offers you assistance to move you to someplace safe, that is a good thing. They could have taken the attitude that you bought the place, you decided to live there, it's your own dumb-ass fault.

BTW, there is more involved with a highway going in, especially if it requires purchasing land from people. There are meetings out the whazoo about it, on both the local and governmental levels. Plans to put a road through have gone south when people have refused to sell their land. So if you think you are powerless to stop things, you are wrong. You CAN do something about it, if you choose to. Again (word of the month) ya twit. :p

Ramble
Jul 27, 2002, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by elgruga
Pirates are important to remind us that most 'ordinary' people are little fascists waiting for a chance to get the neighbours kids arrested for just being there.

The guy who called the Venezuela Pirate scum is a jerk of the first order.

Apple make computers, You buy one , you get the software with it.
All of a sudden people are buying Apple software who dont have an Apple? NO.
So a few people (mostly poor people) pirate a lousy disk. They still have to run it on an old Apple machine. Which they paid for at some point.
All the new Apples have the new software. No pirating there, right?
Oh I forgot, I bought my Tibook 667 in early July - no 10.2 for me.
My ********** OS only lasted 2 weeks. (true)

Old machines running pirate software? Apple should be glad that people are interested enough in their OS to pirate it.
Its a sure sign of success.

As for Application piracy, well, lets face it, $700 for Photoshop is insane.
$150 - maybe.

Look at M$ Office - Bill gates has 400 billion bucks, but he needs more and somehow this is a good thing?

Its time to wake up guys. The world is now dominated by rich and selfish oafs, like gates and Jobs and Martha Stewart etc.
They arent nice people - they are *******s.

Steal their damn stuff if you can - they will Never pay you enough per hour to buy it.

Photoshop = 140 hours of labor at minimum wage - thats 3 and a half weeks - whoops! no rent or food in Photoshop month!
OS 10.2 = 24 hours of labor - no shoes for the kids this week.
Office X = 60 hours of labor (10 days) - Bill needs his cash.

You want to work for almost 4 weeks to get a copy of Photoshop?

Tell me that it isnt ALL overpriced.

Unwilling owner of about $20,000 bucks worth of legal software that just aint worth the price I paid.

Right on!!!

I am a student, and $69 bucks for education is still $69 bucks I don't have. I support apple, I overpay for their machines, the least they can give me is a damn *free* update every now and then. OSX still isn't complete as far as I'm concerned.

Pepzhez
Jul 27, 2002, 06:43 PM
To alex_ant,

Point 1:

If you think software pricing schemes are of the same magnitude as the US Declaration of Independence, civil rights, the end of slavery, and the protection of Jews during the Holocaust, there are MANY MANY people who don't agree with you. Frankly I think that by lumping software pirates in with MLK and Thomas Jefferson that you're insulting what these great people stood for. Equating acts of thievery by selfish greedy tightwads with the civil rights movement is shameful.

You are taking my argument out of context. I think you should reread my post and you will see that I was responding to a questionable generalization someone had posted here, i.e. - that violation of the law was always wrong and ineffective.

Unless the very mechanism by which laws are changed is corrupt (WHICH IT ISN'T), then there is no reason you can't change the laws legally. Your logic is self-serving

Lawmaking and the lobbying process is not corrupt??? What world are you living in? Let me give you a little example that may be dear to your heart and interests:

I invite you to take a look at the Hollings bill which has just been submitted to the US House of Representatives. This will give the RIAA and MPAA (and other copyright holders - Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, all takers) the legal right to search your computer, launch DoS attacks, hack away at will - ALL of which is illegal under current US law. These are things that neither you or me can do, but if this bill passes, corporations will have their own special police powers, in effect an independent corporate secret police independent of the Department of Justice. Why is this? Because Hollings is bought and sold by the entertainment corporations, that's why (they've given him $187,000 - cheap, ain't it?). Now Hollings is a Representative from South Carolina. What does shilling for the entertainment corporations have to do with representing the interests of the people from his district in South Carolina (per his constitutional duties)?

Now let's see you (unless you have hundreds of thousands of dollars to give to elected representatives) attempt to get a bill introduced in Congress. Go ahead and try. Let's see when we hear about your bill being introduced, OK? If this process isn't corrupt, then I don't know what is.

Then [poor people] shouldn't use it ... These low-wage workers are not committing an immoral felony. The gentleman from Venezuela is. That is the difference. If their wages suck, I have sympathy for that, but at least they're HONEST wages.

Ah, yes, the "let them eat cake" justification, coupled with philistine Kantian absolutism, not to mention privileged, smug holier-than-thou self-righteousness.

As I stated in my original post, you seem to think it's fine for these people to slave for your benefit on barely sustenance wages, yet how dare they presume to want a small piece of it themselves. So do you really have any sympathy with that? Sorry, I don't see any evidence. These people are working their asses off just to survive. Now how much does, say, Apple Inc. have in cash reserves? Four billion? And they are paying their workers $2-6 per day? So just how HONEST are the Western corporations exploiting their workers?

(And I didn't see you or any of the other holier-than-thou anti-piracy crusaders taking up my offer of volunteering to work for Apple for $2 a day, did I?)

As for "immorality", gee, thanks for the amendment to the ten commandments! Now tell me, since when did running a cracked copy of Photoshop become an "immoral" act, tantamount to - what? - murder, rape? Get your priorities straight, why don't you?

Let me tell you a story now. Adam. I live in the US-Mexico border region and I also work in film, video and music (in adddition to teaching philosophy at the university). For the past year I have been involved in a project which brings the means of video and music production to the poor in Mexico. We volunteer our time and energy to this project; no one is making any profit on this.

Now, in order to help these people (who really have nothing; they're lucky if they can afford three meals a day) to have the means to express themselves, we of course try to give them the necessary equipment and whatever assistance and knowledge we can impart. As none of us are anything near rich, we beg and borrow what we can - someone may donate a two year old imac DV here, a B & W G3 there, a Canon Optura DV camera here, and so on and so forth. As for software, yes, I confess that I have zero guilt or moral reproach about loading my copies of Final Cut Pro 3, OS X, Logic Audio, Photoshop, Peak, my QT Pro keys, ad infinitum onto these machines.

If it makes you feel any better, Adam, yes, I did pay for all of those. Still, I suppose I am, in your eyes, committing "immoral" acts by breaking the EULA agreement for the benefit of people who "shouldn't be using" this stuff, their "crime" being that they are poor. How DARE you! Who are you to judge?!

Your attitude sucks, Adam, and your intolerance and smug sense of divine privilege is obscene. I'll make you another offer, then: I invite you to come down to Mexico and tell these people - some of whom do work in maquiladoras for $6 a day (include food, rent and clothing in that salary, then do the math and tell me how long until they "should" be able to afford a Mac and the software that runs it, OK?), some of whom are children of said factory workers - that they are "immoral pirates" for breaking the divine law. Take it all away from them, go ahead. And let them know what punishments you would have imposed upon them. Imprisonment? Capital punishment? Eternal fire and brimstone?

Until and unless you can go there and tell these people face to face, go fiddle with your Enron stock and keep your effete, shrill moral indignation to yourself.

BTW, we did indeed write to Apple, Adobe and many others, informing them about this project, asking politely for any benevolent donations if they would be so kind. We received only one response of any sort from the over 40 companies we wrote to: irony of ironies, Microsoft sent 20 copies of Office Mac and proposal forms for possible financial grants. I'm no fan of Microsoft software products but at least this company gave a small pittance (doubly odd when you consider that we pointed out that we were running Mac-based systems).

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by Ramble


Right on!!!

I am a student, and $69 bucks for education is still $69 bucks I don't have. I support apple, I overpay for their machines, the least they can give me is a damn *free* update every now and then. OSX still isn't complete as far as I'm concerned.
10.1 was free, so there you go.

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by Ramble
Right on!!!

I am a student, and $69 bucks for education is still $69 bucks I don't have. I support apple, I overpay for their machines, the least they can give me is a damn *free* update every now and then. OSX still isn't complete as far as I'm concerned.

The reality of the matter is that you HAVE been given free updates to OS X 10.1 (all the way up to 10.1.5).

I would gladly pay $69 to get 10.2, just as I intend to pay the $49 for the iTool/.mac upgrade.

I think there would be much less stink about the entire price issue if Apple offered the full version of OS X (and subsequent pay updates) for $100. Just as they did until OS X came out.

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 06:50 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant

10.1 was free, so there you go.

Not for everyone... I paid the ~$130 (more after tax :eek: ) to get 10.1.

Rower_CPU
Jul 27, 2002, 06:59 PM
I'd say that you need to look at your priorities as well, Pephez.

Since when do digital audio and video production come before providing food, shelter, medical support and basic education? It sounds to me like you are denouncing the supposed elitism here, when your charity work is exactly that: elitist.

I live in San Diego, and I know what the US-Mexico border situation is like. Drug cartels and political corruption on both sides of the border prevent positive action from taking place. Why not address those issues and enrich the lives of the entire community, and not just a select few individuals who obviously have attained a certain level of education, if they are able to use computers as you describe?

I'm sorry, but your protestations fall on deaf ears since their inherent value is skewed to fit into your self-serving justification.

PS. Apple, MS, etc. won't be coming after the people you help...they'll be coming after you, the one who broke the EULA.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
You are taking my argument out of context. I think you should reread my post and you will see that I was responding to a questionable generalization someone had posted here, i.e. - that violation of the law was always wrong and ineffective.
I agree that violating the law can, in some cases, be the right thing to do. But I don't believe that software piracy generally falls anywhere near that category.
Lawmaking and the lobbying process is not corrupt??? What world are you living in? Let me give you a little example that may be dear to your heart and interests:

I invite you to take a look at the Hollings bill which has just been submitted to the US House of Representatives. This will give the RIAA and MPAA (and other copyright holders - Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, all takers) the legal right to search your computer, launch DoS attacks, hack away at will - ALL of which is illegal under current US law. These are things that neither you or me can do, but if this bill passes, corporations will have their own special police powers, in effect an independent corporate secret police independent of the Department of Justice. Why is this? Because Hollings is bought and sold by the entertainment corporations, that's why (they've given him $187,000 - cheap, ain't it?). Now Hollings is a Representative from South Carolina. What does shilling for the entertainment corporations have to do with representing the interests of the people from his district in South Carolina (per his constitutional duties)?

Now let's see you (unless you have hundreds of thousands of dollars to give to elected representatives) attempt to get a bill introduced in Congress. Go ahead and try. Let's see when we hear about your bill being introduced, OK? If this process isn't corrupt, then I don't know what is.
Who voted for Fritz Hollings? The entertainment corporations? I didn't think so. Fritz Hollings is in office because apparently a lot of people like what he's doing. If they didn't like it, they wouldn't have re-elected him. If there were a more desirable candidate for office to the people of SC, then that person would be in office right now. Not every candidate is so corrupt. It is perfectly possible to run and win on anti-corruption platforms, as numerous politicions on all levels of government have done and are doing.
Ah, yes, the "let them eat cake" justification, coupled with philistine Kantian absolutism, not to mention privileged, smug holier-than-thou self-righteousness.

As I stated in my original post, you seem to think it's fine for these people to slave for your benefit on barely sustenance wages, yet how dare they presume to want a small piece of it themselves. So do you really have any sympathy with that? Sorry, I don't see any evidence.
What the hell? I think it's terrible that people "slave for my benefit on barely sustenance wages." What that has to do with pirating software, though, is beyond me. It seems to me to be a different argument entirely.
These people are working their asses off just to survive. Now how much does, say, Apple Inc. have in cash reserves? Four billion? And they are paying their workers $2-6 per day? So just how HONEST are the Western corporations exploiting their workers?
Who is forcing "them" to work for Apple? If they're feeling exploited, they shouldn't work there. And I'm still unsuccessful in my attempts to connect this argument to software piracy. Does working for a crappy wage give "them" permission to commit piracy, an illegal act? Does the fact that Apple has lots of cash in reserve somehow give "them" the right to this cash?
As for "immorality", gee, thanks for the amendment to the ten commandments!
I don't personally subscribe to the Ten Commandments. I remarked that software piracy was immoral to anyone whose sense of morality was based even loosely on respect for the law.
Now tell me, since when did running a cracked copy of Photoshop become an "immoral" act, tantamount to - what? - murder, rape? Get your priorities straight, why don't you?
Who ever said it was tantamount to murder or rape? I didn't. Stop putting words into my mouth.
Let me tell you a story now. Adam. I live in the US-Mexico border region and I also work in film, video and music (in adddition to teaching philosophy at the university). For the past year I have been involved in a project which brings the means of video and music production to the poor in Mexico.
Hold on for a second while I wipe the tear from my eye. (And I'm not sure who Adam is.) You actually TEACH philosophy? Oh my, and all this time I had thought you had merely failed the intro class. The standards must be pretty low down there.

We volunteer our time and energy to this project; no one is making any profit on this.

Now, in order to help these people (who really have nothing; they're lucky if they can afford three meals a day) to have the means to express themselves, we of course try to give them the necessary equipment and whatever assistance and knowledge we can impart. As none of us are anything near rich, we beg and borrow what we can - someone may donate a two year old imac DV here, a B & W G3 there, a Canon Optura DV camera here, and so on and so forth. As for software, yes, I confess that I have zero guilt or moral reproach about loading my copies of Final Cut Pro 3, OS X, Logic Audio, Photoshop, Peak, my QT Pro keys, ad infinitum onto these machines.

If it makes you feel any better, Adam, yes, I did pay for all of those. Still, I suppose I am, in your eyes, committing "immoral" acts by breaking the EULA agreement for the benefit of people who "shouldn't be using" this stuff, their "crime" being that they are poor. How DARE you! Who are you to judge?!
No, their crime is not that they are poor. Their crime is possession of pirated software. You are an accessory to this crime. Like it or not, the law is the law.
Your attitude sucks, Adam, and your intolerance and smug sense of divine privilege is obscene.
Who is this Adam you keep referring to?

And what "smug sense of divine privilege" are you referring to? All I'm saying is that if it's illegal, don't do it. I don't care about your socioeconomic background. Rich or poor, illegal acts = wrong. If that's a smug sense of divine privilege, then call me Allah.
I'll make you another offer, then: I invite you to come down to Mexico and tell these people - some of whom do work in maquiladoras for $6 a day (include food, rent and clothing in that salary, then do the math and tell me how long until they "should" be able to afford a Mac and the software that runs it, OK?), some of whom are children of said factory workers - that they are "immoral pirates" for breaking the divine law. Take it all away from them, go ahead. And let them know what punishments you would have imposed upon them. Imprisonment? Capital punishment? Eternal fire and brimstone?
Considering their economic status, I'd settle for a small fine and removal of said pirated software from their possession. I'm all for helping the underprivileged, but I am not all for doing so by committing illegal acts.
BTW, we did indeed write to Apple, Adobe and many others, informing them about this project, asking politely for any benevolent donations if they would be so kind. We received only one response of any sort from the over 40 companies we wrote to: irony of ironies, Microsoft sent 20 copies of Office Mac and proposal forms for possible financial grants. I'm no fan of Microsoft software products but at least this company gave a small pittance (doubly odd when you consider that we pointed out that we were running Mac-based systems).
What does this have to do with anything at all we're talking about in this thread?

mmmdreg
Jul 27, 2002, 07:24 PM
that was a massive post alex_ant...

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by mmmdreg
that was a massive post alex_ant...
You can thank Pepzhez for all the hot air used to inflate it. :D

Pepzhez
Jul 27, 2002, 08:13 PM
Since when do digital audio and video production come before providing food, shelter, medical support and basic education? It sounds to me like you are denouncing the supposed elitism here, when your charity work is exactly that: elitist.

When did I ever say they did come before that? I didn't and they don't. I have, however, been remiss in describing the context of this project. We do this project as an adjunct of the very things you are describing. The money we collect has not gone to buying Power Macs and Final Cut Pro - it goes to providing necessities. I am a volunteer, as is an American dentist (he provides free dental and oral care every Saturday - actually I happen to know he spends quite a bit of his own money on supplies, and, believe me, he doesn't do it for the tax break - which is negligible), a couple of US medical doctors, a professor of mathematics, a Women's Studies prof, Buddhist temple volunteers, many university student volunteers - everything from botany to engineering to geology, a Catholic priest, the Mexican Communist Party (yep - chew on that), various musicians, painters and artists, legal activists and attorneys from both sides of the border, etc., etc. EVERYONE involved knows damn well what the top priorities are. And, beyond that, whatever skills or educational opportunities any given volunteer can present is a welcome and encouraged bonus.

Thus, I do not see anything elitist about providing the education and means to aesthetic and artistic expression. Our "students", if you will, are working class poor. Last time I looked, I saw no daughters and sons of rich government officials or drug lords at any of our education seminars. So don't talk to me about the "elite" bogeyman.

I spend most of my time teaching English grammar, writing skills, communication skills, social philosophy, a bit of German language, aesthetics. If these people - most with little more than the equivalent of a 6th grade formal education - are able to learn these subjects, it's not a problem for them to learn how to operate a digital video camera, Final Cut Pro, Logic Audio or OS X. Do you really believe it requires a PhD to be able to do this stuff? I can tell you about one gentleman (now 38 years old) who only three years ago could barely read in his native Spanish (he had to work to survive from the age of ten). Today, not only is he an avid reader of advanced philosophical texts and novels, he also knows how to install and configure Linux systems better than the volunteer who originally taught him the rudiments of the OS. (As for myself, I know diddly squat about *nix systems, though I am now learning from this man.) Better still, he is now able to teach others these skills (language, literacy and computers). And that he does - he gives his time to his community every day. And isn't that what it should be all about?

I do of course agree with you - basic necessities must be provided first. I do indeed know what the priorities are. But there is nothing elitist about sharing knowledge and skills (and the equipment needed).

I live in San Diego, and I know what the US-Mexico border situation is like. Drug cartels and political corruption on both sides of the border prevent positive action from taking place. Why not address those issues and enrich the lives of the entire community, and not just a select few individuals who obviously have attained a certain level of education, if they are able to use computers as you describe?

I think I just answered your concerns. I do disagree with your self-defeating pessimism, though. I have seen positive changes occur in the lives of individuals, despite the fact that drug cartels and political corruption are still very much in place.

You live in SD - so what are you doing about any of this? We started all of this with nothing - just a few people with some basic ideas and no funding whatsoever.

Again, reread my post. First of all, MS won't be coming after me - they were the only ones who legally donated software. We have no pirate copies of MS software on any of those machines. No one involved here WANTS to be breaking any laws, no matter how trivial or unfair they seem to us. One of the positive effects of this entire thing is that there are now people who have the skills and knowledge to install and maintain Linux (read: open source) software and OS's. Of course we want to move more in this direction. (As I do at home, for my own reasons, as I'm tired of being gouged, simple as that.) But until there are free and reliable Linux equivalents, we'll continue to use our "immoral" copies of FCP, Logic Audio, et al. (We hardly ever use Photoshop anymore, prefering MacGimp for obvious reasons.)

Well, Rower_CPU. if you care to give us $600 for a legal copy of Photoshop, no - we'd still spend the $600 on food and clothing and run MacGimp. And if you want to give us $1000 for a legit FCP, no, sorry - we'd also spend that on necessities and continue running the "immoral" copy. Such are the priorities.

And if Apple would like to come after me for breaking the EULA for this, by all means, bring it on. Let them deal with the PR fallout. Would be interesting to see a case in which a multi-billion dollar corporation is nit-picking over a broken EULA in order that the working poor can have access to it. The added bonus would be that evil Bill Gates would come out looking benevolent (Microsoft gave freely, after all) and Steve Jobs would be painted as a heartless villain, snatching iMovie away from hungry children. Which is exactly why Apple would never pursue the case.

But if they did ... well, I'm ready with my Socratic defense strategy. Who knows? Maybe they can somehow fit this into the "Switch" campaign. I got it all worked out: show a Mexican or Chinese factory worker - better still, someone who works at an APPLE factory - have him/her say to the camera, "If Apple ever decides to pay me a living wage, I'm definitely gonna buy a Mac!"

Pepzhez
Jul 27, 2002, 09:17 PM
Who voted for Fritz Hollings? The entertainment corporations? I didn't think so. Fritz Hollings is in office because apparently a lot of people like what he's doing. If they didn't like it, they wouldn't have re-elected him. If there were a more desirable candidate for office to the people of SC, then that person would be in office right now. Not every candidate is so corrupt. It is perfectly possible to run and win on anti-corruption platforms, as numerous politicions on all levels of government have done and are doing.

Well, Alex (not Adam, my mistake), there's a difference between empty rhetoric and the reality of one's actions, and the sad truth is that most "anti-corruption" rhetoric is just that - empty campaign rhetoric. George W. Bush railed against "corruption" - now can you say "Enron"? Can you say "Harken Oil"? But now that you bring it up, I seem to remember that the candidate who WON the election actually isn't in office, so tell me more about corruption and the unsullied purity of our election process, all right?

What the hell? I think it's terrible that people "slave for my benefit on barely sustenance wages." What that has to do with pirating software, though, is beyond me. It seems to me to be a different argument entirely.

Go back to my original post. I pointed out that those who pirate fall under one of two general categories: 1) those who would not purchase the product anyway (Carracho users and the like), and 2) those who cannot afford to purchase said product (those who live in third world countries who literally earn $2-6 per day). It is point 2) that has everything to do with the argument. Which brings me to ...

Who is forcing "them" to work for Apple? If they're feeling exploited, they shouldn't work there. And I'm still unsuccessful in my attempts to connect this argument to software piracy. Does working for a crappy wage give "them" permission to commit piracy, an illegal act? Does the fact that Apple has lots of cash in reserve somehow give "them" the right to this cash?

What a marvelous solution, Alex! If the poor aren't happy, then let them go elsewhere, get a better job. I have news for you, boy, they can't simply walk down the street and take that $50K per year consulting job, just as starving Ethiopians can't stroll to the local Safeway for some groceries. Do you think that people are working for $2-6 a day because they want to?! Do you think they really have a choice?! And do you think they are happy with their utter lack of choice? Wake up!



I don't personally subscribe to the Ten Commandments. I remarked that software piracy was immoral to anyone whose sense of morality was based even loosely on respect for the law.

Neither do I, but then you are the one bringing "morality" into the debate, aren't you? Let's see this in perspective. I imagine that we could agree that software piracy is an illegal act. At best it should be considered a misdemeanor offense. Tell me, is driving 1 mile per hour over the legally posted speed limit immoral? Is playing music too loud after 10 p.m. an immoral act? These are two relatively trivial examples of breaking laws. So just what is your standard of judgment? I would say that the above two examples are mere annoyances - those guilty of breaking those laws may be accused of insensitive, boorish behavior, if you will, but IMMORAL? And, again, who are you to decide what is moral and immoral?

You boasted that you are not a snitch, but you sure have no hesitation over judging other people's "moral" behavior. How smugly self-righteous is that?

I should add that there is a perfectly valid reason why I mentioned that we have attempted to get software companies to donate to the project. This is a non-profit organization with virtually zero cash reserves, set up to benefit people who likewise have zero cash. Don't you see that we do NOT want to break any laws, even if we personally feel them to be rather silly? This was a chance to tell these companies, look, this is what we are doing, this is the benefit which results for people, we cannot afford to buy this stuff, but if you wish to donate freely (or offer an affordable alternative), we would be most grateful. Now no one is expecting a handout or think ill of them if they refuse. But if they wish to be benevolent, all well and good for all concerned. It directly helps people, perhaps gives the software execs a good feeling, or, if not that, perhaps they reap benefit from positive PR resulting from their donation. Whatever. Microsoft gave something, no one else did. Subsequently, we did not have to resort to using pirated, illegal copies of Mac Office (and, yes, Office is necessary in these educational programs - anyone who wishes to seek secretarial or paralegal work is expected to know how to use Office) - and we are grateful for that. So read what I wrote very carefully - there is nothing inconsistent in my arguments here.

So let me summarize the world of law 'n' order according to Alex, as far as I understand it - and please DO correct me if I am wrong:

- Anti-corruption rhetoric = anti-corruption fighter; if Fritz is there, then all must be right with the world.

- Poor people shouldn't be exploited (true), but no one is forcing them to be exploited (dictates of hunger and basic necessities aside, I guess).

- If they don't like it, let them eat cake. Or "go get a better job".

- Now since they are poor and immoral lawbreakers (since they are using pirated software they couldn't otherwise afford), you'll be the benevolent dictator and wipe their machines and give them a small fine. How nice of you. The poor do not "deserve" what you have, never mind that MOST of what you have (where was your Mac manufactured and assembled? Cuppertino? I think NOT) is being made by these very same people whom you are so willing to brand "immoral lawbreakers".

Alex, I'm very happy that you are in a privileged position and have choices that most of the people in this world will never have, but you just can't seem to realize the reality of the situation. I just wish that you'd drop the smug condescension over those less fortunate than you. I know, I know, you keep chanting that "the law is the law is the law". Well, some laws are just and some aren't. You seem to believe that the poor should know their place, and if they cannot afford the asking price of something like computer software, they should content themselves with leaving well enough alone, lest they commit "immoral" acts. Or wait until they can save enough money to buy it themselves (again, I invite you to do the math). I guess you're not all bad. At least you'll let them off with a small fine, and not the firing squad.

Rower_CPU
Jul 27, 2002, 09:49 PM
Pephez-

I commend your group and their efforts, but I still don't see how your work addresses the "big" picture. Creativity and self-expression are leisurely pursuits that very few get to enjoy. How are your participants selected? What requirements must they meet in order to gain access to what you teach?

Again, I say contribute to the humanitarian aspects that are needed by so many.

I have donated, and will continue to donate, to causes that I deem worthy...but if you tell me that your organization flaunts the law so brazenly, just as Enron and the others you are so quick to vilify, I say that you deserve whatever fall-out comes your way.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 09:51 PM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
Well, Alex (not Adam, my mistake), there's a difference between empty rhetoric and the reality of one's actions, and the sad truth is that most "anti-corruption" rhetoric is just that - empty campaign rhetoric. George W. Bush railed against "corruption" - now can you say "Enron"? Can you say "Harken Oil"? But now that you bring it up, I seem to remember that the candidate who WON the election actually isn't in office, so tell me more about corruption and the unsullied purity of our election process, all right?
Yes, there is a lot of empty campaign rhetoric on every topic, government corruption included. If voters have a problem with that, they will keep on electing different candidates into office until they see the results they want. Show me a government that ISN'T corrupt, please. (Not to justify corruption, but to point out that a flawless political system has not yet been devised.)
Go back to my original post. I pointed out that those who pirate fall under one of two general categories: 1) those who would not purchase the product anyway (Carracho users and the like)
To rehash my cable TV example: I steal cable TV. I wouldn't purchase my 150 channels of pay-per-view anyway.
2) those who cannot afford to purchase said product (those who live in third world countries who literally earn $2-6 per day). It is point 2) that has everything to do with the argument. Which brings me to ...
I make diddley squat and I can't afford 150 channels of PPV either. Which has everything to do with my argument... that I am entitled to free PPV! Yeah, baby!
What a marvelous solution, Alex! If the poor aren't happy, then let them go elsewhere, get a better job. I have news for you, boy, they can't simply walk down the street and take that $50K per year consulting job, just as starving Ethiopians can't stroll to the local Safeway for some groceries. Do you think that people are working for $2-6 a day because they want to?! Do you think they really have a choice?! And do you think they are happy with their utter lack of choice? Wake up!
I've asked you time and time again, what the hell does this have to do with software piracy. Unless you think that an individual's right to pirate software is dependent upon their income level, this is another argument entirely. So start a new thread already and stop going off topic.

Neither do I, but then you are the one bringing "morality" into the debate, aren't you?
I'm bringing morality into the debate as it deals with legality.
Let's see this in perspective. I imagine that we could agree that software piracy is an illegal act. At best it should be considered a misdemeanor offense. Tell me, is driving 1 mile per hour over the legally posted speed limit immoral? Is playing music too loud after 10 p.m. an immoral act? These are two relatively trivial examples of breaking laws. So just what is your standard of judgment? I would say that the above two examples are mere annoyances - those guilty of breaking those laws may be accused of insensitive, boorish behavior, if you will, but IMMORAL? And, again, who are you to decide what is moral and immoral?
If every law violation were equivalent, every violation of the law would carry the same penalty. This is obviously not the case. Software piracy is different from driving over the speed limit, it is different from playing loud music after 10pm. Morality is obviously not an objective concept, but I think many (in fact the vast majority) would agree that taking the fruit of several, dozens, hundreds, or thousands of other people's hard work, without paying for it, in violation of the law, is immoral.
You boasted that you are not a snitch, but you sure have no hesitation over judging other people's "moral" behavior. How smugly self-righteous is that?

Yes, if I see someone do something that is obviously illegal and immoral by most definitions of the word except yours, I'll probably judge them accordingly. If that's smugly self-righteous, then I guess I'm an evil, smug, self-righteous bastard. So sue me.

In regards to your situation in Mexico, I think what you're doing, and what's happening there - the education and uplifting of the poor - is great. The ONLY thing I have a problem with is your attempts to justify piracy. It is under all but the most exceptional circumstances immoral, and yours do not qualify. If you want to pirate software, then fine, I'm not going to stop you. But do realize that it's wrong. Immoral, illegal, wrong.

Alex

bretm
Jul 27, 2002, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by peterjhill
It would be so simple for Apple to protect their copyrights, that it isn't even funny. Apple has the advantage over Microsoft in that it makes the Hardware as well as the software.

anyone who has run the Apple System Profiler knows that one of the tidbits that it gives you is the System Serial Number. When you install the system, it could have you go to a web page at apple, enter in your license key, the system would send your hardware serial number BUT NOT STORE THE HARDWARE SERIAL! (to solve privacy issues that people will invariably have), hash the two together using a secure algorithm, then either give you a new code to enter, or better yet, just set the final key into the OS. So unless someone has a way to fake the hardware serial number, they could take your software key, and it would be useless to them.

I would not be unhappy if they stored your hardware serial also, that way if you reinstalled your system, they would have an easier time reverifiying your right to install the OS. Otherwise they could have blank boxes under the software license code that you could write in your final install code into.

So, yeah, it would be trivial for apple to do this. Complain if you must how unfair it is, but it would be fully within their right to do so. They are out to make a profit after all.

I tell ya what sux about all this hardware/software integration. If I buy some software, whether it be graphics or OS or whatever, I will someday sell the computer. The first thing I do when I sell the computer is to clear off the drives and install the OS that came with the computer. I sure don't leave the software, OS, etc. that I bought on the computer. That's mine. But if the serials become linked to the hardware in any way - this could become an extreme hassle for both the user and Apple. Apple would have to go through some bizarre procedure to change the serial to the new hardware.

bretm
Jul 27, 2002, 10:07 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant

Yes, there is a lot of empty campaign rhetoric on every topic, government corruption included. If voters have a problem with that, they will keep on electing different candidates into office until they see the results they want. Show me a government that ISN'T corrupt, please. (Not to justify corruption, but to point out that a flawless political system has not yet been devised.)
[/b]
To rehash my cable TV example: I steal cable TV. I wouldn't purchase my 150 channels of pay-per-view anyway.
[/b]
I make diddley squat and I can't afford 150 channels of PPV either. Which has everything to do with my argument... that I am entitled to free PPV! Yeah, baby!
[/b]
I've asked you time and time again, what the hell does this have to do with software piracy. Unless you think that an individual's right to pirate software is dependent upon their income level, this is another argument entirely. So start a new thread already and stop going off topic.
[/b]
I'm bringing morality into the debate as it deals with legality.
[/b]
If every law violation were equivalent, every violation of the law would carry the same penalty. This is obviously not the case. Software piracy is different from driving over the speed limit, it is different from playing loud music after 10pm. Morality is obviously not an objective concept, but I think many (in fact the vast majority) would agree that taking the fruit of several, dozens, hundreds, or thousands of other people's hard work, without paying for it, in violation of the law, is immoral.


Yes, if I see someone do something that is obviously illegal and immoral by most definitions of the word except yours, I'll probably judge them accordingly. If that's smugly self-righteous, then I guess I'm an evil, smug, self-righteous bastard. So sue me.

In regards to your situation in Mexico, I think what you're doing, and what's happening there - the education and uplifting of the poor - is great. The ONLY thing I have a problem with is your attempts to justify piracy. It is under all but the most exceptional circumstances, and yours do not qualify. If you want to pirate software, then fine, I'm not going to stop you. But do realize that it's wrong. Immoral, illegal, wrong.

Alex [/B]

Out of the examples given 1 - speeding, endangers people's lives, but they also chose to be out there on the road too. Not immoral. Negligent maybe. Malicious or immoral, no. 2- playing music after 10pm, insensitive, rude, maybe malicious. Not really immoral. 3 - pirating software, taking something that isn't yours. Thievery. I believe there's a commandment about that one! I think it would qualify as immoral in any definition of moral I could find. You're taking money directly out of the stores hands. You're raising the prices on the software and taking money out of the hands of those who do buy it. You're possibly putting people out of work. If the software were discountined you might put developers out of work and companies out of work that relied on the software. But hey, you'd sure as heck teach the kids not to grow up and be software developers.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 10:19 PM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
I should add that there is a perfectly valid reason why I mentioned that we have attempted to get software companies to donate to the project. This is a non-profit organization with virtually zero cash reserves, set up to benefit people who likewise have zero cash. Don't you see that we do NOT want to break any laws, even if we personally feel them to be rather silly?
What the hell are we arguing about then?
This was a chance to tell these companies, look, this is what we are doing, this is the benefit which results for people, we cannot afford to buy this stuff, but if you wish to donate freely (or offer an affordable alternative), we would be most grateful. Now no one is expecting a handout or think ill of them if they refuse. But if they wish to be benevolent, all well and good for all concerned. It directly helps people, perhaps gives the software execs a good feeling, or, if not that, perhaps they reap benefit from positive PR resulting from their donation. Whatever. Microsoft gave something, no one else did.
Subsequently, we did not have to resort to using pirated, illegal copies of Mac Office (and, yes, Office is necessary in these educational programs - anyone who wishes to seek secretarial or paralegal work is expected to know how to use Office) - and we are grateful for that. So read what I wrote very carefully - there is nothing inconsistent in my arguments here.
You're making it sound as if you would have resorted to piracy if Microsoft hadn't offered to donate software. Is that the case?
So let me summarize the world of law 'n' order according to Alex, as far as I understand it - and please DO correct me if I am wrong:

- Anti-corruption rhetoric = anti-corruption fighter; if Fritz is there, then all must be right with the world.
Of course not. I think Fritz is a terrible senator, I am an independent, and there are many better candidates running for office that truly would clean **** up. Just look at the numerous third parties out there - they're on the ballots, it's just that not many (or, few) seem interested in voting these candidates into office. So we have Fritz. Who won a clean election. It wasn't until after he assumed office that Disney and the entertainment companies bought him.
- Poor people shouldn't be exploited (true), but no one is forcing them to be exploited (dictates of hunger and basic necessities aside, I guess).

- If they don't like it, let them eat cake. Or "go get a better job".
The second point is not accurate. Instead of correcting it, I'd just like to say that for approximately the 118th time that I don't think these points belong in this thread, as they have nothing to do with software piracy.
- Now since they are poor and immoral lawbreakers
No - since they are lawbreakers. I don't care that they are poor or immoral and the law doesn't care either, unless either of those pertain to legality.
(since they are using pirated software they couldn't otherwise afford), you'll be the benevolent dictator and wipe their machines and give them a small fine. How nice of you.
Thank you.
The poor do not "deserve" what you have, never mind that MOST of what you have (where was your Mac manufactured and assembled? Cuppertino? I think NOT) is being made by these very same people whom you are so willing to brand "immoral lawbreakers".
I'm only willing to brand the ones who actually pirate software as immoral lawbreakers. I wouldn't imagine all Apple assembly plant workers are software pirates. But yes, that is correct. Do you mean to imply that the poor deserve unfettered access to high-priced professional software just because they work for the same company that produces machines on which said software is able to run? If that's the case, then I'm voting you in as President in 2004, because my yearly income is below $5k, which means I'm poor and I should get all the software I want for free! Wooooooohoo!
Alex, I'm very happy that you are in a privileged position and have choices that most of the people in this world will never have, but you just can't seem to realize the reality of the situation. I just wish that you'd drop the smug condescension over those less fortunate than you. I know, I know, you keep chanting that "the law is the law is the law". Well, some laws are just and some aren't.
So you think the software piracy laws are unjust then. Well, why didn't you just come out and say so to begin with?

If you think software piracy laws are unjust, work to change them. And if the reason you can't change them is because you encounter too much resistance from anti-piracy advocates, then tough - you'll have to be content with piracy being illegal. In the case that your efforts to legalize piracy are unsuccessful due to government corruption - which I HIGHLY DOUBT would be the case - then that's another story.
You seem to believe that the poor should know their place, and if they cannot afford the asking price of something like computer software, they should content themselves with leaving well enough alone, lest they commit "immoral" acts. Or wait until they can save enough money to buy it themselves (again, I invite you to do the math).
Well, hey, it's a crappy situation. I wish everyone could just have everything they wanted. There is LOTS I would like to be able to afford but can't. But there's this thing called "class." No matter how much we humans try, we just can't manage to get rid of it. This guy called Marx had an idea a while back, and it was implemented in the Soviet Union but failed to remove all class distinctions - the leadership was in a higher class than the proletariat. Pure capitalism doesn't really care about class - it allows wide gaps to open up. Pure socialism theoretically equalizes class, but as I mentioned, there has been no perfect pure socialist society yet.

So what should we do? Software publishers can't just let anyone who wants their software have it. They have to make money in order to continue to produce their software. Should they offer separate high-income and low-income versions of their products? Separate business & personal versions? Whatever you decide, the fact remains that until a more equitable pricing structure happens, software piracy by the poor or by anyone for that matter will be illegal and immoral.

Alex

Pepzhez
Jul 27, 2002, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Pephez-

I commend your group and their efforts, but I still don't see how your work addresses the "big" picture. Creativity and self-expression are leisurely pursuits that very few get to enjoy. How are your participants selected? What requirements must they meet in order to gain access to what you teach?

Again, I say contribute to the humanitarian aspects that are needed by so many.

I have donated, and will continue to donate, to causes that I deem worthy...but if you tell me that your organization flaunts the law so brazenly, just as Enron and the others you are so quick to vilify, I say that you deserve whatever fall-out comes your way.

We attempt to provide basic needs (food, clothing, shelter, education, legal aid) first and foremost, and we also contribute what we can in other areas. I think that the pursuit of creativity is part of human nature, and no one should be deprived of that simply because they are poor. And I've said that we do not WANT to violate the law with any of this, but there is just no possible way we could ever afford to buy (say) copies of FCP for every machine. At the very least, I did pay for my own copies of all of the software - and it is these that were also installed on the machines. A violation of the EULA license? Yes, but one I'm not going to lose any sleep over. And I seriously doubt this such a piddling act puts me on the express train to eternal damnation or the top or even bottom of the FBI's most wanted.

(For what it's worth, the EULA licenses are of dubious binding legality - no one has ever tested any of this in court to my knowledge. And I couldn't possibly imagine that any software corporation would ever want to use a situation like mine to test it!)

Please note that I make a distinction here. I am not handing out my copies of software to middle class college kids or any of my professional colleagues. I'm well aware that I could at any time get all this stuff for FREE off Carracho. That would even be less hassle than ordering it legitimately, I could have easily saved myself a few thousand dollars (which IS a lot of money to me), but I don't do that. I'm hardly rich, but I do make enough to afford to buy FCP and OS X - and I did just that, I bought them.

As for the requirements for anyone to participate, we're not running a state university with prerequisites. It's very simple - anyone who wants to walk in and do this is welcome to. No one has to sign anything, no one even has to give their name if they don't want to. Some people come in and leave after 5 minutes, some people express a brief interest and then move on to something else, some spend all of their free time obsessively making music/video. One young woman who began her video-making experience here has since - on the basis of her work produced and edited on this begged, borrowed and pilferred software - has been awarded a full scholarship to the Mexican Film Institute (a big deal under any circumstance - even more amazing when you consider that her parents have never had anything beyond a 6th grade education). It's up to them. No tricks here - there's nothing elitist about any of it. Just the opposite, in fact.

I could cite all sorts of examples - the kid who turned away from gang-life and smalltime drug dealing after discovering and cultivating his painting talents, and so on, but I don't want to sound sentimental or corny about any of this, but it is true. I don't think there's anything inconsequential or trivial about helping people cultivate their talents and interests.

I'm afraid that this has gotten WAY off the topic thread, so if anyone wishes to continue these matters, please begin a new thread.

Rower_CPU
Jul 27, 2002, 10:38 PM
Once again, my congratulations for what you and those you have helped have accomplished.

I was taking umbrage with your assertion that even if I was to contribute to your cause you would use the money for purposes other than those for which it was given. You would take my money, ostensibly given for software, and use it for supplies instead. Why focus on the software at all, if it detracts from the real need?

Pin-Fisher
Jul 27, 2002, 10:39 PM
Originally posted by IJ Reilly


I'll bet our friend from Venezuela is more fluent in English then you are in Spanish.





Va la cogida usted mismo...

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 10:40 PM
You know something Pepzhez... there are things called grants that the government gives out for people/organizations to do education projects (among other things). Did you consider applying for some of those to set up your 'program' properly, or did you just go to the software companies looking for a handout??? There are also many companies that donate to nonprofit organizations all the time. They do that for the tax write-off as well as the good PR it provides. There are also churches that make donations... There are even activities that YOU could do to raise funds. Simple things like bake sales and car washes are used all the time to raise funds for all kinds of things (typically by nonprofit organizations).

So the next time you claim that trying to help out 'poor' people is justification for pirating software just remember that you are committing felony theft (one copy of PS alone ($600) more then qualifies I believe).

Something else to think about, would you justify shoplifting because the people are too poor to purchase the stuff from the store??? Acts like that are what drives up the prices for the rest of us. twit :p :D

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 10:48 PM
An analogy:

I think that the understanding and appreciation of the art of the pornographic film is essential for the human spirit to grow and thrive. And I should not be deprived of that simply because I cannot afford it. That is why I steal pay-per-view television. I don't WANT to violate the law with this act, but there is just no possible way I could ever afford to subscribe to so many pay-per-view channels. At the very least, I did steal the pay-per-view signal from my neighbor who did pay for his. A violation of the law? Yes, but one I'm not going to lose any sleep over. And I seriously doubt this such a piddling act puts me on the express train to eternal damnation or the top or even bottom of the FBI's most wanted.

(Besides, I couldn't possibly imagine that any cable company would ever want to use a situation like mine to test their no-pay, no-watch policy!)

Please note that I make a distinction here. I am not inviting any kids or any of my professional colleagues in to watch the Sunday Afternoon Anal Marathon. I'm well aware that I could at any time get all these movies for FREE off Carracho. That would even be less hassle than watching them legitimately, I could have easily saved myself a few thousand dollars (which IS a lot of money to me), but I don't do that. I'm hardly rich, but I do make enough to afford to buy certain individual porn movies - and I did just that, I bought them.

Cappy
Jul 27, 2002, 11:11 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech
BTW, there is more involved with a highway going in, especially if it requires purchasing land from people. There are meetings out the whazoo about it, on both the local and governmental levels. Plans to put a road through have gone south when people have refused to sell their land. So if you think you are powerless to stop things, you are wrong. You CAN do something about it, if you choose to. Again (word of the month) ya twit. :p

Well it could be tough to mount a fight if you're the only one in Montana within 75 miles of civilazation. ;)

Pepzhez
Jul 27, 2002, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech
You know something Pepzhez... there are things called grants that the government gives out for people/organizations to do education projects (among other things). Did you consider applying for some of those to set up your 'program' properly, or did you just go to the software companies looking for a handout??? There are also many companies that donate to nonprofit organizations all the time. They do that for the tax write-off as well as the good PR it provides. There are also churches that make donations... There are even activities that YOU could do to raise funds. Simple things like bake sales and car washes are used all the time to raise funds for all kinds of things (typically by nonprofit organizations).

We do receive some grants, yes. And we spend a considerable amount of time and effort on raising money. If you'd read what i actually wrote, you'd see that there is involvement from everyone from the Catholic Church to the Mexican Revolutionary Communist Party. Also many businesses donate food, clothing, etc. We do know what we're doing and are not merely writing letters asking for free copies of Photoshop.

So the next time you claim that trying to help out 'poor' people is justification for pirating software just remember that you are committing felony theft (one copy of PS alone ($600) more then qualifies I believe).

I think we will have to differentiate between outright theft (say, I ran into CompUSA and ran out with a stolen copy of FCP) and an end-run around the EULA, which is applicable to my case (installing my legally purchased copy of FCP on multiple machines, in direct violation of the EULA). Now, software end-users agreements have not been tested in court. Let the moralizers worry about immorality here, but I think legally-speaking, we are talking about two entirely different acts. Add to the legal wrangling that I committed these allegedly illegal act in a foreign country, not in the US, and that the evidence is outside of US jurisdiction. Does any corporate lawyer want to touch this one?

Something else to think about, would you justify shoplifting because the people are too poor to purchase the stuff from the store??? Acts like that are what drives up the prices for the rest of us. twit.

That all depends on the circumstance, wouldn't it? I don't believe there are moral absolutes in this scenario, and I'd find it hard to believe that you would think there would be. If penniless people were starving while a fully stocked Safeway sat right across the street, by all means would I encourage them to break the damn door down and take whatever food they could get out of there. If we're talking about middle class teenagers lusting over some garment at the Gap, well, no, of course I would not encourage shoplifting in this case.

And to address another question raised concerning Microsoft Office, yes, I would violate the EULA in order to teach people to use the app, if there is no other choice. If MS Office skills are a determining factor in finding secretarial/paralegal work (and they are), do you think I am about to deprive people of that learning opportunity by telling them, "Oh, very sorry, I know you would like to acquire the necessary skills on this computer in order to land a better job (with better pay), but I can't break this EULA agreement because that would be illegal and morally incorrect"?

If breaking the EULA will help these people improve their situation - when it LITERALLY comes down (for them) the difference between a job which hardly provides sustenance to one that will accord an entire family 3 meals a day, hell yes - to hell with the EULA! (Fortunately, in the case of MS Office, we don't have to concern ourselves with that, as they legally donated copies to us.)

And I don't believe anyone here at Macrumors would be so heartless to disagree with that, would they? At least I hope not!

As I've said, I admit what I have done and am fully prepared to argue it in court, if need be.

Now, AlphaTech, I don't believe that my actions have driven up the price of software for you or anyone else (or me - remember - I BUY my own software). Or let's look at it another way: now that Windows has product activation, FCP disc images are now apparently impossible to copy, and Photoshop has similar protections - tell me, so now will the price of Windows XP, FCP and Photoshop come DOWN in the near future? Let me know when it happens, OK?

And why the "twit"? No need for name calling, really. I'm respectfully treating you as a reasonable, intelligent adult; is it too much to expect reciprocal behavior on your behalf?

e-coli
Jul 27, 2002, 11:19 PM
The software industry requires a certain amount of pirated versions to be in the marketplace. It stimulates sales. I guess in the same way that the handgun industry profits by flooding the black market with handguns.

Sun Baked
Jul 27, 2002, 11:25 PM
Pepzhez why bother worry about EULAs when there is the Business Software Alliance to provide the proctology visits.

Get familiar with this phone number 1-888-NOPIRACY or the website http://www.bsa.org/usa/

Washington D.C., (July 24, 2002) -- The Business Software Alliance (BSA), a watchdog group representing the nationís leading software manufacturers, today announced that two Miami, FL engineering firms paid a combined total of $125,116 to BSA to settle claims that they had unlicensed copies of software programs installed on office computers. In addition to the payment, the firms agreed to delete any unlicensed copies, purchase replacement software and strengthen their software management practices.

Most BSA investigations begin with a call to BSAís hotline, 1-888-NO PIRACY, or with a report to BSAís Online Reporting Form at www.bsa.org. In these cases, BSA contacted the firms through their attorneys, although in some cases BSA pursues a software raid. In response to BSAís request, the firms voluntarily conducted a self-audit.

The following companies settled claims with BSA:

* Ford, Armenteros & Manucy, Inc., an engineering firm headquartered in Miami, FL, paid $55,116 to BSA to settle claims that it had more copies of Microsoft software programs on its computers than it had licenses to support.

* Metric Engineering, Inc., an engineering firm headquartered in Miami, FL, paid $70,000 to BSA after a self-audit revealed more copies of Autodesk, Bentley, Microsoft and Symantec software programs on its computers than it had licenses to support.

ďThese firms cooperated fully with BSAís investigation, quickly corrected any licensing deficiencies and strengthened their software management program,Ē said Bob Kruger, vice president of enforcement for the BSA. ďAll businesses should ensure that all of the software programs installed on their computers are fully licensed before they become targets of BSA investigations. Otherwise, they may end up paying BSA in addition to acquiring licenses.Ē

Just because your crime helps the needy doesn't mean it'll keep you out of jail if you piss off the wrong person.

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
I think we will have to differentiate between outright theft (say, I ran into CompUSA and ran out with a stolen copy of FCP) and an end-run around the EULA, which is applicable to my case (installing my legally purchased copy of FCP on multiple machines, in direct violation of the EULA). Now, software end-users agreements have not been tested in court. Let the moralizers worry about immorality here, but I think legally we are talking about two different acts. Add to the legal wrangling that I committed alleged illegal act in a foreign country, not in the US, and that the evidence is outside of US jurisdiction. Does any corporate lawyer want to touch this one?

Theft is theft no matter how you look at it.

That all depends on the circumstance, wouldn't it? I don't believe there are moral absolutes in this scenario, and I'd find it hard to believe that you would think there would be. If penniless people were starving while a fully stocked Safeway sat right across the street, by all means would I encourage them to break the damn door down and take whatever food they could get out of there. If we're talking about middle class teenagers lusting over some garment at the Gap, well, no, of course I would not encourage shoplifting in this case.

And to address another question raised concerning Microsoft Office, yes, I would violate the EULA in order to teach people to use the app, if there is no other choice. If MS Office skills are a determining factor in finding secretarial/paralegal work (and they are), do you think I am about to deprive people of that learning opportunity by telling them, "Oh, very sorry, I know you would like to acquire the necessary skills on this computer in order to land a better job (with better pay), but I can't break this EULA agreement because that would be illegal and morally incorrect"?

If breaking the EULA will help these people improve their situation - when it LITERALLY comes down (for them) the difference between a job which hardly provides sustenance to one that will accord an entire family 3 meals a day, hell yes - to hell with the EULA! (Fortunately, in the case of MS Office, we don't have to concern ourselves with that, as they legally donated copies to us.)

And I don't believe anyone here at Macrumors would be so heartless to disagree with that, would they? At least I hope not!

As I've said, I admit what I have done and am fully prepared to argue it in court, if need be.

Again, theft is theft (and morally wrong) no matter how you attempt to justify it (as well as against one of the ten commandments). There are NO circumstances where you can justify breaking into ANY kind of store or stealing items from it (food and/or clothing included). By breaking into the safeway you are doing more then just stealing from the store, you are raising the prices to everyone else. The insurance company will charge higher premiums to that store (eventually if not right away) which will either force them to increase the price of items or force them out of business.

Would you justify stealing a van if you "needed" it to help transport people???

Also doing an "end run" around the EULA IS theft, the same as stealing the application off a store shelf.

BTW, I don't agree with stealing ppv channels either. If you are that 'hard up' for the porn, then get it some other way. :rolleyes: I pay good money for the cable channels I get (no ppv's) and would be royally pissed off if I found someone else piggy-backing my cable.

While it is nice that you are trying to education some people, it still doesn't justify theft of any kind.

Cappy
Jul 27, 2002, 11:41 PM
Originally posted by faustofernos
Historically, 10.2 (Jaguar) is the MOST EXPENSIVE operating system to this date: because its an UPGRADE. Call a spade a spade. People are upset because they paid for OSX, and now the AMOUNT OF MONEY that Apple is charging for a .5 upgrade is ridiculous.

I'm usually a fun, loveable guy on here but you are indeed a misinformed d*mb*ss. How long have you been in the Mac market?!?!?! Remember Mac OS 7.6??? It sure didn't cost as much($99 I believe) but it offerred very, very little that didn't already exist in patches that were freely available for 7.5.5. Amelio himself admitted this while running Apple. They needed it to bring in a little money during those hard times. At least Mac OS X 10.2 offers something you moron!

Originally posted by faustofernos
Oh, you say, its MUCH MORE than just an upgrade? LIES! 10.2 runs EQUAL at the speed of 9, which is what it should have been in the first place. People are outraged because they have to pay money for something they feel they ALREADY OWN, which is the rights to future upgrades of their operating system.

What IT planet do you live on?!?! Most OS's tend to get slower as they get developed. Look at just about any Windows variant and even Linux. It's the hardware that typically bails them out. If they called this same version Mac OS 11 would you and all of the other dopes on here calm down? As far as I'm concerned it's that close to being a full version increase.

Originally posted by faustofernos
If Apple wants to charge FULL price to is users for an operating system, then it should be a FULL NEW VERSION (OS 11). I am sorry, but operating systems are not that valuble!

Yeah you only need it to be able to use your system and all. Developers just love their programmers to bang the hardware and share that information with other developers so that they don't bang away at the same addresses and crap. Oh, you probably don't multitask though, do you?(C= 64 is probably too much for you then) Consider then that software costs would go up due to development time without an OS. Oh, lets pirate every update for that too! :rolleyes:

I'll be the first to say though that I would love to see the Mac OS be free and costs made up elsewhere but whether they grasp a business model like that or not does not take away from how valuable an OS is.

Originally posted by faustofernos
Apple wants to have its cake and to eat it as well Ė they want people to adopt os X, yet they give their current users every reason to distrust the company and to drag their feet to adopt the new OS, Jaguar.

You really are a misinformed PC user, aren't you?

Originally posted by faustofernos
We ALREADY PAID FOR OS 10.2 when we bought our way overpriced computers that came with OSX. We also should have access to ANY FUTURE UPGRADES of the OSX system. IF apple wants to charge money for an OS, then they need to CALL IT A NEW OS.

So you're simpy upset over what they charge based on the version number?!?! Ever hear of paying for something what it's worth?!?! Try getting past being superficial. They've done this many times before but for some reason people are throwing fits about it now. They did with 7.6 as well but thankfully not as many dopes as you were on the internet then. ;)

Originally posted by faustofernos
Also, iTOOLS is i****! $100 dollars a year should get you MUCH MORE than just server space, and some crappy software that doesnt do anything (Virex is a joke). Ugh. Apple's greed will be it's eventual downfall.

You're obviously not a businessman. It's actually not a bad value for the non-geek community. I've even seen it for $80 through MacMall. Even better.

Originally posted by faustofernos
Mark my words:
Apple will not exsist 10 years from now. People will not put up with this practice, it does not differentiate Apple from M$. Apple in the future will be less and less easier to use, because of their greed.

Maybe Apple shouldn't differentiate itself from MS. MS is a successful business that is, oh lets see, the most successful in the world!!!

It must be Apple's Switch marketing that has these newbies out feeling insecure about their status or something. Or maybe it's just PC dweebs switching and wanting to pirate everything. And Apple thought this was a good thing? ;)

Pepzhez
Jul 27, 2002, 11:41 PM
Geez ... Alex, please go enroll in either a freshman composition class or a logic course because it's glaringly obvious that you never learned fallacies of argument. If that's too much trouble for you, I'll be happy to send you one of my many desk copies of Hurley's "Logic" textbook. Without fail, they always send me two every semester, and I've never figured out why that is.

Unfortunately, they never bother to include a EULA in the postal packet along with the book freebies, so I have no idea what your or my specific legal rights would be in this situation and what they are or are not limited to - not to mention the possible legal ramifications of mental distress inflicted upon you by the legally murky (possibly criminal) act of gift-giving, and how this may or may not upset your sense of moral indignation and paranoic fear of violating the almighty Law.

I'm sure glad that Alex isn't on my Xmas gift list, because I never could afford the attorney consulting fees which surely would be a necessary prerequisite before sending him his present.

Cappy
Jul 27, 2002, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by e-coli
The software industry requires a certain amount of pirated versions to be in the marketplace. It stimulates sales. I guess in the same way that the handgun industry profits by flooding the black market with handguns.

I would certainly agree that piracy can sometimes stimulate sales. It worked well for the Amiga back in its heyday in the UK and has worked well for the Wintel platform previous to the internet. How many times have people borrowed a copy from work and then talk about the software being used to neighbors who didn't have that luxury? Happens alot. Napster even played a role in increasing sales to concerts.

The industry knows this goes on and those that know how to use it, do alright for the most part. I'm not condoning piracy but I do know that it's not always the evil that companies would have you believe.

I actually know people who do pirate software initially and use them as a trial. If they use it and like it, they buy it. If they don't, it goes bye-bye. Is it wrong? Yes, it is...legally. Some developers make you jump through hoops for testing software and only sometimes is it full featured. That's the closest argument I think anyone can really have on piracy. It is wrong but it's actually being used to evaluate a purchase...sometime more than one.

alex_ant
Jul 27, 2002, 11:55 PM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
Geez ... Alex, please go enroll in either a freshman composition class or a logic course because it's glaringly obvious that you never learned fallacies of argument. If that's too much trouble for you, I'll be happy to send you one of my many desk copies of Hurley's "Logic" textbook. Without fail, they always send me two every semester, and I've never figured out why that is.
I would say it was more a satirical attempt at mocking your half-baked justification for committing felony acts than a fallacious argument.
Unfortunately, they never bother to include a EULA in the postal packet along with the book freebies, so I have no idea what your or my specific legal rights would be in this situation and what they are or are not limited to - not to mention the possible legal ramifications of mental distress inflicted upon you by the legally murky (possibly criminal) act of gift-giving, and how this may or may not upset your sense of moral indignation and paranoic fear of violating the almighty Law.

I'm sure glad that Alex isn't on my Xmas gift list, because I never could afford the attorney consulting fees which surely would be a necessary prerequisite before sending him his present.
And now you are mocking me, I see.

AlphaTech
Jul 27, 2002, 11:57 PM
I actually agree with Cappy here. :eek: :eek:

Each new generation of OS typically needs a more powerful computer to run. If not, then it needs a more powerful system to run smoothly/better then the previous generation. Remember how many systems could run OS 9.x, and how many of them were no longer (officially) able to run OS X?? Just about every Mac from about 1994 on (PowerPC chipset forward) can run OS 9.x. OS X is calling for at least a G3 chip.

As for the version numbers, it has been pointed out before that Apple is going against what it has done in the past for numbering. With the 10.x being major updates and the 10.x.x being minor/free ones.

You could/can go from OS 9.0 all the way to 9.2.2 via free downloads. I just did a very fast and easy search on Apple's support site (downloads section) and was able to find the 9.1 update (9.0-9.0.4 required) as well as the 9.2.1 update (updates 9.1 or 9.2) you can then download the 9.2.2 update and be at the very latest version. All for free, especially if the computer you have shipped with 9.x.

Hey alex, don't let the ******* get you down. :D

mec
Jul 28, 2002, 12:09 AM
Hi All,

The moral, ethical, and end user arguments are really interesting reading. What are people's thoughts the possible outcomes and goals for Apple financially??

An example:

If Jaguar arrives and it can be installed without a license key for each machine I will be sorely tempted, and pressured, to install it on my laptop, my wife's laptop, my Mom's G3 and my Dad's new iMac after purchasing just one copy.

If that were the case there would be 4 installed copies of 10.2 floating around out there and Apple would only see the $129- of (gross) revenue.

If Jaguar arrives and it requires a paid license keyed to a machine's ethernet ID or serial numbers
that one copy or four copies (depending on how they implement the scheme), if I could convince these 3 people that they should (or must) pony up, will represent $516- of revenue to Apple.

I am sure there are many early adopters of OS X
that will do at least one "favor" for a family member, friend, themselves or their company and slap their 10.2 CD (or copies) into more than 1 Mac. It's too simple and too easy to do someone a 'no cost' favor and "save them a few bucks".

It's very easy to say cheaper is better as a user who clicks the agree button as fast as possible during an install and earns brownie points every time they violate a EULA with no consequences for them.

Possible Upside to Locking:

If Apple nodelocks future versions of OS X they could possibly grab a lot more cash from their die hard users and from switchers who might otherwise freeload off of someone willing to burn, post, or install a copy for them.

That is money to build market share, staff genius bars, man hotlines, buy software and hardware companies, to hire more talented programmers and invest more man hours to make 10.3 that much more competitive and compelling.

Possible Down side:

Apple can put Phil or Steve on stage a WWDC 2003 to explain to their developers why the growth of the installed base has slowed to a trickle.

To explain why there is a fractured chaotic installed base of machines running 8.6, 9.2, 10.1.6, 10.2, 10.3 etc, all with different feature sets and development issues.

To explain why forward progress on Mac OS X has been thrown into question by short term greed.

Free vs. Paid / Locked vs. Unlocked:

With free unlocked updates like 10.1.5 Apple can point to ALL of their Mac OS X users and tell developers that MacOS X is a consistent and up to date installed base of users to develop for.

Apple will likely see no major growth or drop in income from their OS efforts.

With paid updates (or possibly worse locked) updates Apple would no longer be able to compel a developer to build on technologies which were only deployed in a fraction of the installed base - QuickDraw GX anyone?

They would likely see some rise in income from "freeloaders" going legit and some decrease from pissed off users just saying no.

Speculation:

Apple wants to grow their base and their income and in their arrogance and greed don't care too much about their current users.

Apple is using .Mac to test these waters.

If Apple makes enough money off of .Mac I bet that Software Update will only be free for security patches and that any new feature downloads, will require a paid .Mac subscription... in a year or two you will have a choice of buying your annual (locked) updates for $129- or getting them a month earlier for $19.95 - if you are a current .Mac subscriber.

Here's comes "Apple Club" all over again.

-mec

sicle
Jul 28, 2002, 12:13 AM
Enough of stupid analogies. The original topic of this thread was about installing a copy of an OS on multiple computers in your home. Get real! The overwhelming majority of people do not regard installing an operating system they have bought on two computers as immoral. I doubt anyone has been prosecuted for this I doubt they ever will be. Is this even technically theft? I don't know the intricacies of US law but I doubt whether this would be considered as theft in most countries. Please remember most people in the world are not governed by US law.

Morality? Possibly endangering someone's life by driving over the speed limit seems like a much more serious crime to me than software piracy. Oh, but wait I don't write commercial software.

Does piracy cause jobs to be lost in the software industry? Most figures that are bandied around assume that the people who use pirated software would have bought the software if they couldn't pirate. As Pepzhez has pointed out in most cases this isn't true.

What certainly will cost jobs in any software company is if people stop buying its products. I believe we are reaching the point now where people will stop buying. I have. I no longer buy upgrades to Photoshop or Office. There are cheap and even free alternatives that do what I need to do. Judging from sales of Office X a lot of other people have the same attitude.

I think most of the posters screaming about the morality of software piracy are simply ridiculous. However, I don't see piracy as the best way to change things. The way to make your voices heard is simply not to buy until they reduce their inflated prices. Buy shareware produced by conscientious small developers. Use open source software. Make do with existing versions of software your have.

I sincerely hope that Apple see sense and do not go down the Microsoft road on licensing.

e-coli
Jul 28, 2002, 12:13 AM
Originally posted by mec
If Apple makes enough money off of .Mac I bet that Software Update will only be free for security patches and that any new feature downloads, will require a paid .Mac subscription... in a year or two you will have a choice of buying your annual (locked) updates for $129- or getting them a month earlier for $19.95 - if you are a current .Mac subscriber.

Here's comes "Apple Club" all over again.


that's interesting. i hadn't thought of it that way, but i wouldn't be suprised. That would really p*ss some people off though. It's kinda like having to lease your computing services. Heck, M$ is getting away with it.

Pepzhez
Jul 28, 2002, 12:24 AM
Also doing an "end run" around the EULA IS theft, the same as stealing the application off a store shelf.

Says who? Never saw that in the Bible or the Koran or any US court document. AlphaTech, I want you to show me the legal ruling which states this. Show me a test case in which someone was convicted, in which the law equates a EULA violation with physical felony theft. You can't, because it's never been tested in court. Ask any corporate attorney about the binding legality of software EULA's and she or he will tell you ... it has not yet been challenged in a US court.

Now ask yourself why so many multi-billion dollar corporations have not pressed the issue. It would be extremely easy for them to find violators of their EULA (corporate, eduction, individuals) and attempt to sue for damages. Why haven't they? Easy - they are in no hurry to have their EULA's scrutinized and found wanting.

Theft is theft is theft ...

You intimate that you subscribe to the ten commandments, thus implying that "theft" is a matter of divine law. But things are more problematic than that, so I ask you to consider the following and reconcile that with your inflexible absolutism:

Obviously, the concept of theft is a relative matter, varying from place to place, and is contingent upon the question of what does and does not constitute private property and what legal rights are bestowed by a legal institution in any given place.

For example, I happen to know that the software EULA's differ in the US and Germany, as I live and work in both countries at different times of the year. Since the EULA in Germany accords me the legal right to put multiple copies of a single piece of software on as many machines as I own, legally in Germany, I am not a thief if I am installing the same copy of OS X onto both my Power mac and my iBook. However, I am perhaps legally considered a thief if I do the same thing in the US. So which is right? Where to do you draw absolutes?

According to divine absolutism, is it all dependent upon geography then? Am I not a thief when the iBook is in Europe, but become one when I and it enter US airspace? You tell me.

So it just isn't that simple after all, is it then? If you're going to make such sweeping generalizations, then prepare to justify what you are saying.

And, yes, I would steal a van in order to transport people, if there was no other choice and if it was a matter of life and death. And, no, I wouldn't lose any sleep over the alleged "wrongness" of the act of thievery. I think it would be a justifiable act.

Rower_CPU
Jul 28, 2002, 12:39 AM
Wow, Jean Valjean and Robin Hood rolled into one and brought forward to the 21st century...impressive.

Romanticize the act of theft if you wish, but that does not change the legal ramifications of your actions. If something is illegal in one country and not another that does not entitle you to break the law in the latter. Marijuana use is legal in the Netherlands. Do you expect to be able to use it legally here, if you happen to spend half your time there? Please. Now who's making sweeping generalizations?

sicle
Jul 28, 2002, 12:51 AM
Rower_cpu please deal with his arguments. Is a breach of the licensing agreement installing an OS on more than one computer the equivalent of theft even in the USA? Legal precedents please! If you haven't got them don't bandy around phrases like theft.

Pepzhez
Jul 28, 2002, 12:58 AM
Now Alex is setting US legal precedent.

I don't know why I have to keep reminding you and AlphaTech that software EULA infringements have never been challenged, much less upheld, in any US court. So please tell me which felony acts I am guilty of committing? Perhaps in your own private Lilliput, but not in the eyes of US law.

Neither you or AlphaTech have any idea of what you're talking about. I'd say that you are both acting hysterically, tossing around epithets like "immoral" and "felon" with the zeal of Mccarthyites screaming "Communist!" and having no logic or proof to justify any of it. None whatsoever.

Let's put this issue to rest, shall we? Alex, AlphaTech and the rest of the Anti-Piracy Hysteric Squad can send all excess cash they have to Cuppertino, volunteer to pay $800 for Jaguar and $10,000 for OS 10.3 when it's released in six months. They can also form vigilante groups to beat senseless any and all immoral kids who have a Carracho app on their desktops, perform canings on and collect reasonable fines from all immoral third world software pirates, maintain Apple's product activation servers, and spend the remainder of their time gravely informing all exiting customers from the Apple Store, purchases dangling from their wrists, the dire consequences of breaking the almighty EULA. Perhaps Fritz Hollings will even submit a bill (after Apple gives him at least $187,000, that is) to add an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, officially recognizing the power and the privilege of the Apple Cops.

Then maybe NOW the rest of us can sleep soundly at night, knowing such upright citizens are making sure that Steve Jobs won't be up tossing and turning all night long, pining over that pilferred Quick Time Pro key some Carracho kid or starving Third World peasant snatched from the jaws of Wicked Corruption and Vile Temptation (cause we're ALL potential criminals, after all).

To the grave, to the grave! The day of doom is nigh! Unless of course Alex and AlphaTech can save us. Don't worry, they'll make sure that their sweet prince Steve Jobs won't have to worry his pretty little head about a single thing.

Cappy
Jul 28, 2002, 12:59 AM
Originally posted by Pepzhez


Says who? Never saw that in the Bible or the Koran or any US court document. AlphaTech, I want you to show me the legal ruling which states this. Show me a test case in which someone was convicted, in which the law equates a EULA violation with physical felony theft. You can't, because it's never been tested in court. Ask any corporate attorney about the binding legality of software EULA's and she or he will tell you ... it has not yet been challenged in a US court.

Have you asked any corporate attourney this question? Silly question...I'm expecting you to be honest when you're endorsing piracy.

Just because it has not been challenged(if that is the case), does not mean it's ok to ignore it. Where do things stop if it's ok to ignore it? One small town just buys one copy and then circulates it through the neighborhood? The reason it has not been challeneged(again, if that is the case) would be because you're talking about small quantities in the consumer's hands in the grand scheme of things. The law system is taxed the way it is so it's more productive to just stick to going after businesses and institutions.

Originally posted by Pepzhez

For example, I happen to know that the software EULA's differ in the US and Germany, as I live and work in both countries at different times of the year. Since the EULA in Germany accords me the legal right to put multiple copies of a single piece of software on as many machines as I own, legally in Germany, I am not a thief if I am installing the same copy of OS X onto both my Power mac and my iBook. However, I am perhaps legally considered a thief if I do the same thing in the US. So which is right? Where to do you draw absolutes?

And in some countries you get your hand cut off for stealing. Get a grip dude! You're trying to make this argument something that it's not. Piracy is all about ease and convenience. It's going to happen no matter where you are but the harder it's made to happen and the more strict the punishment, the more likely the point is goig to get across what's right or wrong about it according to the culture you're in.

Originally posted by Pepzhez
According to divine absolutism, is it all dependent upon geography then? Am I not a thief when the iBook is in Europe, but become one when I and it enter US airspace? You tell me.

Morals are typically defined by culture and the US is a multicultural country where the government and laws are made up by the people. The vast majority in the US feel that these laws, rules, and regulations are necessary to maintain a strong country in commerce.

Originally posted by Pepzhez
And, yes, I would steal a van in order to transport people, if there was no other choice and if it was a matter of life and death. And, no, I wouldn't lose any sleep over the alleged "wrongness" of the act of thievery. I think it would be a justifiable act.

Yeah and I can picture you sitting in your jail cell telling all of the inmates how wrong it was that you were convicted. :)

Cappy
Jul 28, 2002, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
Now Alex is setting US legal precedent.

I don't know why I have to keep reminding you and AlphaTech that software EULA infringements have never been challenged, much less upheld, in any US court. So please tell me which felony acts I am guilty of committing? Perhaps in your own private Lilliput, but not in the eyes of US law.

You really need to go back to school if you believe this about US law. It is a binding license until challenged and the courts rule otherwise. Not the other way around. You *could* assume that it would fall on its face but that doesn't change the law until challenged and the license is altered.

Also you seem to imply that Mac OS X users have some sort of right to get 10.2 for free. It is a priviledge not a right. A priviledge that is not going to happen and no challenge in court is going to change that.

Originally posted by Pepzhez

Neither you or AlphaTech have any idea of what you're talking about. I'd say that you are both acting hysterically, tossing around epithets like "immoral" and "felon" with the zeal of Mccarthyites screaming "Communist!" and having no logic or proof to justify any of it. None whatsoever.

And your points had proof? C'mon now...play fair. Stop trying to spin doctor this. Maybe you should become a politician so you can address this issue. ;)

Originally posted by Pepzhez
Let's put this issue to rest, shall we? Alex, AlphaTech and the rest of the Anti-Piracy Hysteric Squad can send all excess cash they have to Cuppertino, volunteer to pay $800 for Jaguar and $10,000 for OS 10.3 when it's released in six months. They can also form vigilante groups to beat senseless any and all immoral kids who have a Carracho app on their desktops, perform canings on and collect reasonable fines from all immoral third world software pirates, maintain Apple's product activation servers, and spend the remainder of their time gravely informing all exiting customers from the Apple Store, purchases dangling from their wrists, the dire consequences of breaking the almighty EULA. Perhaps Fritz Hollings will even submit a bill (after Apple gives him at least $187,000, that is) to add an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, officially recognizing the power and the privilege of the Apple Cops.

Then maybe NOW the rest of us can sleep soundly at night, knowing such upright citizens are making sure that Steve Jobs won't be up tossing and turning all night long, pining over that pilferred Quick Time Pro key some Carracho kid or starving Third World peasant snatched from the jaws of Wicked Corruption and Vile Temptation (cause we're ALL potential criminals, after all).

To the grave, to the grave! The day of doom is nigh! Unless of course Alex and AlphaTech can save us. Don't worry, they'll make sure that their sweet prince Steve Jobs won't have to worry his pretty little head about a single thing.

Ok. You've convinced me. You just like to read and hear what you say. You've spouted off some of the biggest bunch of horse ***** I've seen in a long time.

sicle
Jul 28, 2002, 01:16 AM
Copying a CD for personal use, and even giving a track or two to a friend is not theft whatever the manufacturer writes on box. Can't you conceive that the same concept of fair use could possibly apply to software?
I do not believe the majority of people in any country believe that installing an OS you have bought on more than one computer you own is theft. I think most people's sense of morality is quite sound.

Rower_CPU
Jul 28, 2002, 01:35 AM
Originally posted by sicle
Copying a CD for personal use, and even giving a track or two to a friend is not theft whatever the manufacturer writes on box. Can't you conceive that the same concept of fair use could possibly apply to software?
I do not believe the majority of people in any country believe that installing an OS you have bought on more than one computer you own is theft. I think most people's sense of morality is quite sound.

If the manufacturer writes on the box or places a EULA on the software and you click "Agree" you are legally bound to follow the stipulations of that agreement.

Have you ever read one of these, or is it jsut another dialog box you just have to click through when you install your software?

Pepzhez
Jul 28, 2002, 01:42 AM
Cappy,

Why, yes, I have indeed asked three different corporate attorneys about this very topic - all of whom have said that this is a much debated issue in intellectual property circles, and one which no software company is eager to test in court - for the reasons that I stated.

Plus, haven't I been quite forthcoming about my activities? I haven't made it a secret with anyone, not with the people with whom I've dealt, not in the conversations I've had with attorneys (and even the Apple rep I met at the university), and certainly not in Macrumors. So how do you think I am not being honest in my convictions and actions?

I don't believe in divine absolutism or cosmic law, but AlphaTech and Alex apparently do and use that vague, half-thought generalization to justify their hysteria, and that is the issue I was addressing. Of course it's relative! And that's precisely my point. They are equating "thievery" with morality, or rather lack of morality. "Morality" and/or "immorality" has zilch to do with the law in the US. In other words, Alex and AlphaTech are not talking about any legal definition - they are judging others according to whatever divine or cosmic "law' they are projecting onto the world. To that, I simply ask how it is they make the distinction. What is it based on? Is US law the cosmic law? The EULA is different in Germany (which, like the US, does not drag the slippery slope of "morality" into the legal system), so how do these two instances of legal variance figure into their "moral" universe?

I'm frankly amazed that some people here are such inflexible letter of the law zealots, raining down hellfire on someone who pirates a piece of damn software. But I understand how arbitrary it all is. After all, I never saw Alex or AlphaTech defending and salivating over Windows XP product activation, nor have I ever heard them whine over how heavily pirated Microsoft software is, nor did I ever hear them screaming for the heads of the Windows Pirates. But if someone dares to complain (gasp) that Jaguar pricing is unfair, that the EULA is unfair, if someone, somewhere d/l'd FCP on Carracho - hey! these two are ready for the jihad!

If Steve Jobs proclaimed himself Hitler tomorrow, these guys would be the first on their block to buy the requisite jackboots, no doubt about it.

Fortunately, I seriously doubt that Jobs or anyone on his staff is anywhere near the hysteric these guys are.

That's it! I'm tired of repeating myself. I really don't care if anyone here wishes to snatch Jaguar from Carracho or if they want to pay double for the privilege of owning it. It's up to you and I'm in no position to judge. I'm not god (I'm an atheist anyway) and I'm not on the Apple board and I'm not the district attorney, so what's it to me? I don't think Apple is going to collapse because some kid is getting FCP on Carracho. And if Apple somehow managed to stop all piracy, I don't believe FCP will suddenly come down in retail price. Or at least I'll believe it when I see it.

Again, Cappy, when someone is convicted as a felon for violating a EULA, come tell me about it. Anyone with the cash can assemble a legal team to compose a EULA saying any crazy thing you want it to. You can assume it's legally binding if the EULA in Jaguar has a provision that no user of Jaguar can ever say anything bad about Steve Jobs' shirts, but until someone is convicted of a felony in court for badmouthing Steve's attire - in direct violation of the Jaguar EULA - save and stuff your moral and legal bellowing and branding.

And just where in the world did I imply that people deserve 10.2 for free? I never said that. In fact, I never even brought this issue up. Either you are confusing my posts with someone else's or you're hallucinating.

skunk
Jul 28, 2002, 04:59 AM
An EULA is not law. An EULA is an attempt to form a contract, usually after purchase. Until it has been tested in the courts it has no legal status. Many contracts foisted on purchasers are unfair, and have been found to be so when they are challenged. Actually, this applies to quite a few laws as well: how many times have unfair laws been overturned? Many laws are in breach of natural justice (as represented by various Constitutions), because many are drafted by vested interests in an attempt to extend their own agenda. There is, however, a clear distinction between installing one copy of an OS on all your own machines (as a private individual), and distributing or downloading copies without paying. The latter is obviously theft, irrespective of the law in any state, whereas the former is not: whoever said that stealing from yourself is theft is quite plainly mad.
Just for the record, I have paid for one copy of every piece of software I have.

durandal
Jul 28, 2002, 05:18 AM
Piracy is wrong.
Price gouging is wrong too.

Why don't they sell a $20 update version of OSX that is the system only and none of those new apps I will never use, as well as a Sherlock without those net thingies. And charge separately for the apps, or sell the whole deal for $130.

On the weed argument+the "people of this beautiful multicurltural country make the law" argument: if the majority really did make the law, weed would be legal. And Bush wouldnt be in power.
USgov is maybe better than 3rd world countries, that doesnt make it good.

And for the people bitching about their Car prices, sell your car, cancel your car insurance and tear up your registration. Get on the Bus or a bike. Thats one less car's exhaust fumes i'll be inhaling.

Pephez, you're funny. Doesnt add much to the thread tho.

Apple, please be reasonable. Either protect your software and sell it at resonable prices so that we CAN buy multiple copies and not break the law, or charge your ridiculous prices for bloatware bundled apps which I wont use (for all I know they are the best thing since french bread -american sponge sliced bread sucks- but I don't need and e-calender or a syncing app or expensive and prestigious web storage for backups. iomegaware was free with my zipdrive.) and dont protect it so I can actually pay a price its woth by dividing the price of $130/6=approx 20=the price i should pay for a couple of of OSX updates.

Whew. Rant and digressions.
And no comment on my spelling, i'm in a hurry to get to the waterpark.

peterjhill
Jul 28, 2002, 07:38 AM
Originally posted by sicle
Enough of stupid analogies. The original topic of this thread was about installing a copy of an OS on multiple computers in your home. Get real! The overwhelming majority of people do not regard installing an operating system they have bought on two computers as immoral. I doubt anyone has been prosecuted for this I doubt they ever will be. Is this even technically theft?
<snip>
I sincerely hope that Apple see sense and do not go down the Microsoft road on licensing.

It is not a question of morality for me, it is a question of ethics. Legal Ethics. It is illegal in the united states, and any other country that apple can make it illegal in to install the os on more than one machine. As for being prosecuted, well, I speed when I am driving on interstates. I go 73 in a 65 mph zone. I realize that I am breaking the law, and am willing if I get caught to face the music and pay any fine that I would incur. The possible fine for stealing software is much greater.

What road are you talking about? Microsoft has to use license codes. As there are way many more people with PC's, thus the number of people willing to pirate the software being greater, they need to protect themselves from lost sales. Who gives a ****** about having your OS less widely installed compared to actually selling less of the ******.

again, I will laugh at all the pissed off people, I will ROFL, if Apple is able to keep illegal copies of 10.2 from being installed.

peterjhill
Jul 28, 2002, 07:43 AM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
Cappy,

Why, yes, I have indeed asked three different corporate attorneys about this very topic - all of whom have said that this is a much debated issue in intellectual
And just where in the...
<snip, blah, blah, drivel, drivel, communism is dead dude snip>

They really need to implement a SQUELCH feature to this bboard software. The bandwidth that Pepzhez is consuming, all those electrons wasted. (IMNSHO)

peterjhill
Jul 28, 2002, 07:51 AM
Originally posted by e-coli


that's interesting. i hadn't thought of it that way, but i wouldn't be suprised. That would really p*ss some people off though. It's kinda like having to lease your computing services. Heck, M$ is getting away with it.

e-coli was speaking of the need to pay for software updates. I would bet that Apple would not do that. Microsoft is not doing it (therefore not getting away it).

Yes, 95-98 and nt-2000 did contain bug fixes, but there were other significant changes to the OS that warrented a paid upgrade. windowsupdate.microsoft.com is still free, and bill is not stupid enough to make it a paid service, and neither is steve.

peterjhill
Jul 28, 2002, 08:19 AM
Originally posted by Pepzhez


Says who? Never saw that in the Bible or the Koran or any US court document. AlphaTech, I want you to show me the legal ruling which states this.

The web makes it so easy to search the law...


TITLE 17--COPYRIGHTS

CHAPTER 1--SUBJECT MATTER AND SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT

Sec. 117. Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.--
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement
for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the
making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an
essential step in the utilization of the computer program in
conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner,
or
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes
only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that
continued possession of the computer program should cease to be


Why Apple owns the copyright to software written by programmers in its employee:
USC17 Ch2 Sec 109
(b) Works Made for Hire.--In the case of a work made for hire, the
employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered
the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have
expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns
all of the rights comprised in the copyright.

What they will do to you:

TITLE 17--COPYRIGHTS

CHAPTER 5--COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND REMEDIES

Sec. 503. Remedies for infringement: Impounding and disposition
of infringing articles

(b) As part of a final judgment or decree, the court may order the
destruction or other reasonable disposition of all copies or
phonorecords found to have been made or used in violation of the
copyright owner's exclusive rights, and of all plates, molds, matrices,
masters, tapes, film negatives, or other articles by means of which such
copies or phonorecords may be reproduced.




Interesting article from law.com (http://www.law.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/View&c=LawArticle&cid=1024078977228&live=true&cst=1&pc=0&pa=0)


Piracy is indeed a bad thing. It cheats those who've created something valuable out of their rightful compensation. My theory has always been if it's good enough to use, it's good enough to pay for. On the other hand, software used to be the cheapest part of a PC purchase, often accounting for a small fraction of the total system cost. Today the software you run probably costs more than the hardware.
I don't begrudge Microsoft taking steps to protect its intellectual property. I do have a problem with the heavy-handedness they use in enforcement, but more on that later.

GPTurismo
Jul 28, 2002, 09:53 AM
Let me say that the only place to focus on making money is the business sector. Companies charge way to much for their software for the average consumer. Even 130 dollars is a lot for when I PAID for a freaking apple machine and they won't keep it up to date, especially since they are going to FORCE you to use 10.2 to run newer software. I really now see why so many mac users are going linux.

Remember, 130$ for the average consumer is half a months of groceries. And again, the fact I paid 3 grande for their damn machine... like so many other people...

It looks like the only platform I am starting to respect for consumers is Linux >:| Especially since Apple makes their money off of hardware, they are simply going to the old "leech the consumer around every corner" program.

BUT....

I don't trust spymac, so we will see when 10.2 hits.

mmcneil
Jul 28, 2002, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by eric_n_dfw
As an adendum to my prior post - one easy way they could implement a check for this would be like what Adobe does. It polls the local network looking for other copies of itself with the same serial number. (Not sure how site license serial numbers are handled) and will refuse to work if multiple copies are running.

Office vX, VPC, and Action Utilities have exactly this type of licensing system. It is probably the easiest and least intrusive to implement - perhaps less hackable:confused:

mmcneil
Jul 28, 2002, 11:13 AM
Certainly seems like a lot of "legal opinion" - I vote we throw five lawyers in a ring to settle this - the survivor gets to have his opinion overturned by either the 9th Circuit or the court of public opinion:p

Sun Baked
Jul 28, 2002, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by GPTurismo
Let me say that the only place to focus on making money is the business sector. Companies charge way to much for their software for the average consumer. Even 130 dollars is a lot for when I PAID for a freaking apple machine and they won't keep it up to date, especially since they are going to FORCE you to use 10.2 to run newer software. I really now see why so many mac users are going linux.

Stop complaining -- like Linux, the guts of OS X is FREE, you don't have to pay for it - it's under a open source license.

Remember www.opendarwin.org/ and developer.apple.com/darwin/

If you don't want to pay for 10.2 - don't.

In reality you're not paying for Darwin you're paying for Quartz, Quicktime, Carbon, Cocoa, Classic, and the Aqua Interface along with all the little Apple Applets, Applications, and Plugins that make Darwin/Java/OpenGL operate like a complete modern OS.

If you want to see the slick Aqua interface with the neat Jaguar updates on top of Darwin when you boot your machine it'll cost you $130

If you don't mind hunting the net for source code to modify and build or running a non-Aqua GUI, keep the $130 in your pocket and download Darwin.

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
Cappy,

Why, yes, I have indeed asked three different corporate attorneys about this very topic - all of whom have said that this is a much debated issue in intellectual property circles, and one which no software company is eager to test in court - for the reasons that I stated.
Not eager to test in court != not illegal
Plus, haven't I been quite forthcoming about my activities? I haven't made it a secret with anyone, not with the people with whom I've dealt, not in the conversations I've had with attorneys (and even the Apple rep I met at the university), and certainly not in Macrumors. So how do you think I am not being honest in my convictions and actions?
Perhaps someone else said you weren't, but I didn't. I see no flaws with your honesty.
I don't believe in divine absolutism or cosmic law, but AlphaTech and Alex apparently do and use that vague, half-thought generalization to justify their hysteria, and that is the issue I was addressing.
No. Again, I use it as an extension of legality. As I mentioned, I believe software piracy is an act that is immoral partly because it is a serious crime. This depends on the severity of the act, of course, but to equate it with speeding or playing loud music after 10pm would be a fallacy.
Of course it's relative! And that's precisely my point. They are equating "thievery" with morality, or rather lack of morality. "Morality" and/or "immorality" has zilch to do with the law in the US. In other words, Alex and AlphaTech are not talking about any legal definition - they are judging others according to whatever divine or cosmic "law' they are projecting onto the world.
I personally am judging those under the jurisdiction of US law according to the law projected onto the US by the U.S. Government.
To that, I simply ask how it is they make the distinction. What is it based on? Is US law the cosmic law? The EULA is different in Germany (which, like the US, does not drag the slippery slope of "morality" into the legal system), so how do these two instances of legal variance figure into their "moral" universe?
US law is US law. German law is German law. What is immoral in one country may be moral in another country.
I'm frankly amazed that some people here are such inflexible letter of the law zealots, raining down hellfire on someone who pirates a piece of damn software.
Hey, the law is the law. That's why it's there. You can choose to abide by it or choose to violate it - it's your choice. I'm just pointing out that violating the law is, by most accounts including my own in your morally relativistic universe, GENERALLY immoral. And when did I ever rain down hellfire? I only said, "it's immoral and illegal." If that's hellfire then Hell must not be such bad place.
But I understand how arbitrary it all is. After all, I never saw Alex or AlphaTech defending and salivating over Windows XP product activation, nor have I ever heard them whine over how heavily pirated Microsoft software is, nor did I ever hear them screaming for the heads of the Windows Pirates.
I don't advocate piracy of any company's software. I think XP product activation would be a good thing if 1) it weren't so inconvenient and 2) it actually worked.
But if someone dares to complain (gasp) that Jaguar pricing is unfair, that the EULA is unfair, if someone, somewhere d/l'd FCP on Carracho - hey! these two are ready for the jihad!

If Steve Jobs proclaimed himself Hitler tomorrow, these guys would be the first on their block to buy the requisite jackboots, no doubt about it.
Dude, talk about logical fallacies. I have no particular love for Apple. I've only been a Mac user for 8 months. I think pirating Jaguar is equally unjustifiable as pirating Windows XP.
Fortunately, I seriously doubt that Jobs or anyone on his staff is anywhere near the hysteric these guys are.
Hysteric? I'm just saying, "piracy is wrong." If that's hysteria...
That's it! I'm tired of repeating myself. I really don't care if anyone here wishes to snatch Jaguar from Carracho or if they want to pay double for the privilege of owning it. It's up to you and I'm in no position to judge. I'm not god (I'm an atheist anyway) and I'm not on the Apple board and I'm not the district attorney, so what's it to me? I don't think Apple is going to collapse because some kid is getting FCP on Carracho. And if Apple somehow managed to stop all piracy, I don't believe FCP will suddenly come down in retail price. Or at least I'll believe it when I see it.
I actually agree with this entire paragraph.

I think you would be much more successful in your arguments if you would stop being so sensationalistic, Pepzhez. I'm not a Nazi stormtrooper. I'm not smug and self-righteous. I simply think piracy is, by most definitions of the word, immoral. It's also illegal in most countries. And those two in concert, to me, make it wrong. There, that is my entire participation in this thread summed up in a single paragraph. To a worker in a program funded in part by the Mexican Communist Party, it should be no surprise to me why you advocate stealing from the rich and give to the poor, violating any laws that happen to be inconvenient in the process. I really couldn't care less if you were in favor of keeping that up. But I disagree with your attempts to justify it.

Alex

Cappy
Jul 28, 2002, 02:56 PM
I agree with just about everything alex_ant wrote here but I will add again. Piracy in most cirlces is all about being able to do it conveniently and get away with it. Some people hate getting their keys out everytime to their door lock and deadbolt but it helps keep their house safe.

There also is nothing wrong with being honest in your beliefs but remember that this is a multicultural world. Pepzhez only seems to use that in his arguments when it was convenient in his reference to Germany. Most people are talking about the US here in case that needs to be clarified. :rolleyes: More than 50% of business done in hardware and software is done in the US alone so I think that's where things really matter in the argument.

Pepzhez, you unfortunately remind me of someone I know who essentially doesn't see anything being illegal or even immoral unless it impacts them or a friend or relative of theirs in a negative way. Otherwise he uses attourneys to work out deals all of the time to keep his butt out of jail. He lives life in the fastlane and would be right at home in Germany. What it comes down to is respect for others work.

I wonder how many people enjoy reading a good book that may be 500+ pages long that someone else owns. Do you think they make a copy of every page so that they can read it as well? It's not convenient to do so for most so, no, it does not happen. If it was an electronic format(how about the cd that comes with Mastering Windows 2000 Server), would they copy it? You better believe it. Again, it's all about convenience and not having respect. And yes, it is against the law...until challenged and ruled differently...not legal until challenged.

Pin-Fisher
Jul 28, 2002, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by buffsldr


Pin-Fisher, Macrumors would be better off without posts like this. You don't know mymemory, you don't know what his environment is like. Mymemory is a stud for learning computers and technology in an evironment that is so difficult.


Are you a mod?? Ive seen worse then this so dont preach to me. You think he is a stud?? Why don't you walk hand in hand down a beach somewhere...he's a theif. Ill bet you would feel different if you actually wrote the things he was pirating...

Pin-Fisher
Jul 28, 2002, 04:15 PM
theif = thief

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 04:17 PM
If Microsoft, Apple, etc, knew that their software would be crack, hack, and pirate proof, Iím sure that they would charge thousands for their products (office)---. Piracy keeps them in check.


All you smug, self-righteous anti-pirating ethicists out there get all worked up over nothing.

Pirates, hackers, crackers, etc.. will always exist. There is nothing, you, the "law", or anybody can do anything about it.

Apple and Microsoft are billion-dollar business, -who exploit all their workers in one form or another. I donít give a damn about the legalities of "stealing" software from them. The gates of St. Peter will not me closed to me and the millions of others who have not sold their soul to the corporate, government, law God.

Rower_CPU
Jul 28, 2002, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
If Microsoft, Apple, etc, knew that their software would be crack, hack, and pirate proof, Iím sure that they would charge thousands for their products (office)---. Piracy keeps them in check.


All you smug, self-righteous anti-pirating ethicists out there get all worked up over nothing.

Pirates, hackers, crackers, etc.. will always exist. There is nothing, you, the "law", or anybody can do anything about it.

Apple and Microsoft are billion-dollar business, -who exploit all their workers in one form or another. I donít give a damn about the legalities of "stealing" software from them. The gates of St. Peter will not me closed to me and the millions of others who have not sold their soul to the corporate, government, law God.

Dear, sweet Jesus...this is not about religion!

Pirates, hackers, crackers and their ilk would not exist if software were free. There I just got rid of them. No-one pirates iMovie, iPhoto, iDVD or iTunes...do they?

Now, we all know that this is unlikely in the near-term, but possible if people stop stealing and driving prices up for the actual paying customers.

Don't try to justify it. It's wrong and you know it.

Save your pedantic, self-serving, pro-pirating diatribes for the warez sites.

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by Pin-Fisher



Ill bet you would feel different if you actually wrote the things he was pirating...


If I wrote something good enough to be pirated, and spread out enough for the most possible people to enjoy, --I would be honored.

Pin-Fisher
Jul 28, 2002, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee



If I wrote something good enough to be pirated, and spread out enough for the most possible people to enjoy, --I would be honored.

Yea...I'm sure. While all of your advertising agents, web hosts , landlords etc etc wait for the money you DIDN'T get I'm sure they would be comforted in the fact that you feel honored. This is the real world . It revolves around money. Always has..always will.

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by Pin-Fisher


Yea...I'm sure. While all of your advertising agents, web hosts , landlords etc etc wait for the money you DIDN'T get I'm sure they would be comforted in the fact that you feel honored. This is the real world . It revolves around money. Always has..always will.

Boo.hoo.hoo...waaahhh,

I'm so sorry my pirating cost you your job. Too bad, but it is the "real world". Time to change fields. It all revolves around the nature of the capitalism you so vehemently support. If you love money so much, you got to live by it's rules.

Pin-Fisher
Jul 28, 2002, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee


Boo.hoo.hoo...waaahhh,

I'm so sorry my pirating cost you your job. Too bad, but it is the "real world". Time to change fields. It all revolves around the nature of the capitalism you so vehemently support. If you love money so much, you got to live by it's rules.


Blah blah blah....your incoherent remblings amuse me.

Oh..BTW ......Iv'e got plenty of money so don't you worry yourself about it....

8thDegreeSavage
Jul 28, 2002, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by Pepzhez
To alex_ant,

Point 1:



You are taking my argument out of context. I think you should reread my post and you will see that I was responding to a questionable generalization someone had posted here, i.e. - that violation of the law was always wrong and ineffective.



Lawmaking and the lobbying process is not corrupt??? What world are you living in? Let me give you a little example that may be dear to your heart and interests:

I invite you to take a look at the Hollings bill which has just been submitted to the US House of Representatives. This will give the RIAA and MPAA (and other copyright holders - Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, all takers) the legal right to search your computer, launch DoS attacks, hack away at will - ALL of which is illegal under current US law. These are things that neither you or me can do, but if this bill passes, corporations will have their own special police powers, in effect an independent corporate secret police independent of the Department of Justice. Why is this? Because Hollings is bought and sold by the entertainment corporations, that's why (they've given him $187,000 - cheap, ain't it?). Now Hollings is a Representative from South Carolina. What does shilling for the entertainment corporations have to do with representing the interests of the people from his district in South Carolina (per his constitutional duties)?

Now let's see you (unless you have hundreds of thousands of dollars to give to elected representatives) attempt to get a bill introduced in Congress. Go ahead and try. Let's see when we hear about your bill being introduced, OK? If this process isn't corrupt, then I don't know what is.



Ah, yes, the "let them eat cake" justification, coupled with philistine Kantian absolutism, not to mention privileged, smug holier-than-thou self-righteousness.

As I stated in my original post, you seem to think it's fine for these people to slave for your benefit on barely sustenance wages, yet how dare they presume to want a small piece of it themselves. So do you really have any sympathy with that? Sorry, I don't see any evidence. These people are working their asses off just to survive. Now how much does, say, Apple Inc. have in cash reserves? Four billion? And they are paying their workers $2-6 per day? So just how HONEST are the Western corporations exploiting their workers?

(And I didn't see you or any of the other holier-than-thou anti-piracy crusaders taking up my offer of volunteering to work for Apple for $2 a day, did I?)

As for "immorality", gee, thanks for the amendment to the ten commandments! Now tell me, since when did running a cracked copy of Photoshop become an "immoral" act, tantamount to - what? - murder, rape? Get your priorities straight, why don't you?

Let me tell you a story now. Adam. I live in the US-Mexico border region and I also work in film, video and music (in adddition to teaching philosophy at the university). For the past year I have been involved in a project which brings the means of video and music production to the poor in Mexico. We volunteer our time and energy to this project; no one is making any profit on this.

Now, in order to help these people (who really have nothing; they're lucky if they can afford three meals a day) to have the means to express themselves, we of course try to give them the necessary equipment and whatever assistance and knowledge we can impart. As none of us are anything near rich, we beg and borrow what we can - someone may donate a two year old imac DV here, a B & W G3 there, a Canon Optura DV camera here, and so on and so forth. As for software, yes, I confess that I have zero guilt or moral reproach about loading my copies of Final Cut Pro 3, OS X, Logic Audio, Photoshop, Peak, my QT Pro keys, ad infinitum onto these machines.

If it makes you feel any better, Adam, yes, I did pay for all of those. Still, I suppose I am, in your eyes, committing "immoral" acts by breaking the EULA agreement for the benefit of people who "shouldn't be using" this stuff, their "crime" being that they are poor. How DARE you! Who are you to judge?!

Your attitude sucks, Adam, and your intolerance and smug sense of divine privilege is obscene. I'll make you another offer, then: I invite you to come down to Mexico and tell these people - some of whom do work in maquiladoras for $6 a day (include food, rent and clothing in that salary, then do the math and tell me how long until they "should" be able to afford a Mac and the software that runs it, OK?), some of whom are children of said factory workers - that they are "immoral pirates" for breaking the divine law. Take it all away from them, go ahead. And let them know what punishments you would have imposed upon them. Imprisonment? Capital punishment? Eternal fire and brimstone?

Until and unless you can go there and tell these people face to face, go fiddle with your Enron stock and keep your effete, shrill moral indignation to yourself.

BTW, we did indeed write to Apple, Adobe and many others, informing them about this project, asking politely for any benevolent donations if they would be so kind. We received only one response of any sort from the over 40 companies we wrote to: irony of ironies, Microsoft sent 20 copies of Office Mac and proposal forms for possible financial grants. I'm no fan of Microsoft software products but at least this company gave a small pittance (doubly odd when you consider that we pointed out that we were running Mac-based systems).



Oh snap...hey Alex.



http://homepage.mac.com/mossmanone/.Pictures/****ingowned.jpg

8thDegreeSavage
Jul 28, 2002, 05:14 PM
Oh *shoot*...cant have curses in my picts.

Rower_CPU
Jul 28, 2002, 05:17 PM
Originally posted by 8thDegreeSavage
Oh *shoot*...cant have curses in my picts.

That, and the username is wrong...:rolleyes:

agoldweber
Jul 28, 2002, 05:30 PM
I'm sitting at home picking my toes... ho hum.

The phone rings. It's a client of mine. She has a hot project that needs to go to press in 4 hours. She'll pay me triple my rate if I can do it.

The changes are doable, minor stuff: copy edits, color tweak, etc.

"Email it right over," I say, "I'll take care of it right now."

A minute later the file comes through. Oh *****! The blasted thing is in blasted Pagemaker! I don't own Pagemaker!

The clock is ticking.

1st I try to do plug-in conversion into Quark. Ooops! It's a mess.

tick.

Next I call my friend to see if he's home--he's got PM loaded. He's home but his G3 is down for a bit (fried HD).

tick.

Now what? Oh, I know! I'll swing by my friend's house and pick up an install disk, install PM, do the job and then uninstall it.

tick.

I do this and all is good.

am I a BAD GUY THIEF?

skunk
Jul 28, 2002, 05:34 PM
Yes you are. You are using a piece of software you have no right to.

Rower_CPU
Jul 28, 2002, 05:38 PM
Why would you agree to do a job without knowing all the particulars (eg, file format) beforehand? Sounds like bad business sense to me...not a question of software piracy.

skunk
Jul 28, 2002, 05:41 PM
When I ordered 10.1 way back from the online Apple Store, I seem to remember selecting an option to buy additional licences (UK spelling) for additional home computers at a really knockdown price, like 10 or 20 GBP. This seemed eminently reasonable. Only one set of CDs arrived (10 and 9). Of course I may be imagining things. Anyone else have any recollection? My short-term memory is a bit hazy....

Matt_d
Jul 28, 2002, 05:58 PM
I can't say i'd like the idea. Apple already have us over the pan when it comes to only running mac os on the apple hardware.

skunk
Jul 28, 2002, 06:14 PM
But you bought the Apple hardware to run the Mac OS didn't you? Surely you didn't buy it to run Windows? Additional licences for home use at a reasonable price seems fair to me. Asking the full price for each machine's OS is just the kind of practice which will lose the sympathy of users. If users perceive that Apple is behaving fairly, they are far more likely to evangelise the platform. Same applies to .mac: I have bought my initial $49 membership, but I have doubts about the value after that. If they have any sense it'll be a better package by then. They can't be paying much for Virex, nor for Backup, and surely they should only be concerned with covering their costs on this: sure, they can't give it all away, but $100?

Pin-Fisher
Jul 28, 2002, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Why would you agree to do a job without knowing all the particulars (eg, file format) beforehand? Sounds like bad business sense to me...not a question of software piracy.


100% correct.....

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
If Microsoft, Apple, etc, knew that their software would be crack, hack, and pirate proof, Iím sure that they would charge thousands for their products (office)---. Piracy keeps them in check.
Thousands? There are laws against price gouging.
Pirates, hackers, crackers, etc.. will always exist. There is nothing, you, the "law", or anybody can do anything about it.
This is true.
Apple and Microsoft are billion-dollar business,
As opposed to simple million-dollar businesses, which are not as vile?
-who exploit all their workers in one form or another.
Really. Please explain how workers who voluntarily choose to work for Apple and are free to leave at any time are being exploited.
I donít give a damn about the legalities of "stealing" software from them.
Great anarchist attitude there.
The gates of St. Peter will not me closed to me and the millions of others who have not sold their soul to the corporate, government, law God.
Ah, melodrama. I'm not aware of any soul transactions occurring when I buy a piece of software. I always thought I handed over plain old money, and got conditional rights to use a piece of software in return, and that's all there was to it. Please explain how the purchase of software involves selling one's soul.

agoldweber
Jul 28, 2002, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Why would you agree to do a job without knowing all the particulars (eg, file format) beforehand? Sounds like bad business sense to me...not a question of software piracy.

gimme a break! is this serious!? bad business sense!

the scenario I gave didn't even really happen. it's an example I came up with to show that property and ownership can be fleeting with no harm done--to anyone.

I put it out there for a further debate of the issue of piracy. not for Mac users to question my or anybody else's "business sense." please.

further on this issue--does this all go for fonts as well? if so, there are a lot of freelance designers out there in line for some lawsuits!

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 08:09 PM
Originally posted by agoldweber
gimme a break! is this serious!? bad business sense!

the scenario I gave didn't even really happen. it's an example I came up with to show that property and ownership can be fleeting with no harm done--to anyone.

I put it out there for a further debate of the issue of piracy. not for Mac users to questions mine or anybody else's "business sense." please.

further on this issue--does this all go for fonts as well? if so, there are a lot of freelance designers out there in line for some lawsuits!
I have a question.

What ever happened to common decency?

Does every single possible happening of every single possible occurring circumstance need to be spelled out in local, state, and federal statutes in excruciatingly detailed legalese?

What ever happened to "right" and "wrong"?

What ever happened to "I think I probably shouldn't do this," or "I think it would probably be okay if I did this"?

What ever happened to the sinking feeling you get in your stomach when you know you're doing wrong. The sinking feeling that never goes away despite any attempts you make to justify the act that caused it.

The US is a country so dependent on lawyers it makes me sick. It wasn't always this way. What ever happened to personal responsibility? It has vanished. Instead we have IRresponsibility and greed, on the part of both individuals AND corporations. It's all about "ME," "I," and "US." Sharing is dead. Trust is dead. Respect is dead. Children at least trust and respect, which is more than I can say for most American adults.

Every law has to be tested and prodded. People are like animals confined in cages, poking and prodding at every nook in hopes of finding a way out. "Aha, this is illegal, but what about THIS? What if I only do it BRIEFLY? Huh? Huh?!? Got ya THERE, didn't I?!?"

It gives me a heightened respect for the "lower" life forms, who at least don't seem to be as sleazy as the vast majority of Americans. Perhaps the koalas and the dolphins and the beetles and dogs are more evolved than us. They certainly seem to me to be more mature.

agoldweber
Jul 28, 2002, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant

What ever happened to "I think I probably shouldn't do this," or "I think it would probably be okay if I did this"?


I couldn't agree with you more alex_ant!

so many times people, without thinking--or worse yet, without the ability to think for themselves--run to the black-and-white legal text without realizing these simple and important words:
we're on a planning spinning around the sun

if you're a "good" and "hard-working" person and not looking to steal or get anything you don't deserve, regardless of what the law or the contract says, you should be able to make your own decisions.

much of this falls apart of course when we bring Worldcom and Enron into the mix--I wonder if they paid for all their licenses? ;)

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant
I'm not aware of any soul transactions occurring when I buy a piece of software. I always thought I handed over plain old money, and got conditional rights to use a piece of software in return, and that's all there was to it. Please explain how the purchase of software involves selling one's soul. [/B]



hummm.... should i spend hundreds of dollars on software to support billion dollar corporations; that I can get for free. Or should I use that money to give to the charity of my choice?


http://www.networkforgood.org/index.html

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
hummm.... should i spend hundreds of dollars on software to support billion dollar corporations; that I can get for free. Or should I use that money to give to the charity of my choice?
Pirating the software is a separate act. You can donate to charity without spending whatever on software made by whatever corporations and WITHOUT pirating said software. It comes down to either buying said software or donating to charity. If you donate to charity instead of buying the software, pirating the software is a separate decision that is still illegal and by most accounts immoral.

I take it you're not going to continue the other facets of your argument you established? Specifically, worker exploitation, price gouging, soul theft and corporations being (I assume, based upon our wording) progressively more evil the more they are worth? Because I was anxious to hear you expand on those and draw them out into rational territory.

Pin-Fisher
Jul 28, 2002, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee




hummm.... should i spend hundreds of dollars on software to support billion dollar corporations; that I can get for free. Or should I use that money to give to the charity of my choice?






http://www.networkforgood.org/index.html


Oh yea...like you donte to charity...hahahah..Laughable.

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 08:58 PM
[Really. Please explain how workers who voluntarily choose to work for Apple and are free to leave at any time are being exploited.


QUOTE]

since you are oblivious to the facts of corporate exploitation in america, I suggest you talk a look at this pamphlet about conditions for ordinary workers in silicon valley.


http://www.igc.org/dbacon/Unions/04hitec1.htm



and specifcally; Quote from page 5 about your "darling" Apple:

According to Garcia, understanding the position of immigrant workers was an important part of the successful campaign at Shine and Apple. "Apple spends a lot of money on its image," he explained, "and our strategy attacked it. We helped people to understand that the company was exploiting immigrant janitors, and we forced Apple to take responsibility - we told Apple 'it's your system - you control the contractors; you're causing the exploitation."




http://www.igc.org/dbacon/Unions/04hitec5.htm

peterjhill
Jul 28, 2002, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by agoldweber
I'm sitting at home picking my toes... ho hum.

The phone rings. It's a client of mine. She has a hot project that needs to go to press in 4 hours. She'll pay me triple my rate if I can do it.

The changes are doable, minor stuff: copy edits, color tweak, etc.

"Email it right over," I say, "I'll take care of it right now."

A minute later the file comes through. Oh *****! The blasted thing is in blasted Pagemaker! I don't own Pagemaker!
BAD GUY THIEF?

Go to Kinko's, they have legal copies of pagemaker. Since you do not own it, feel free to actually pay to "rent" the usage of it in a perfectly legal manner. Otherwise, by Pagemaker.

Rower_CPU
Jul 28, 2002, 09:04 PM
Originally posted by agoldweber
gimme a break! is this serious!? bad business sense!

the scenario I gave didn't even really happen. it's an example I came up with to show that property and ownership can be fleeting with no harm done--to anyone.

I put it out there for a further debate of the issue of piracy. not for Mac users to question my or anybody else's "business sense." please.

further on this issue--does this all go for fonts as well? if so, there are a lot of freelance designers out there in line for some lawsuits!

I know this situation didn't happen. I was pointing out that your argument was based on poor reasoning to begin with.

Have you ever heard of the "straw man" principle/argument? It is a debate technique in which one of the debaters creates a fictitious example that he knows he can easily defeat (knock down) and thus bolster his argument. Your example was one such "straw man"...I simply put a match to it before you could knock it down.

agoldweber
Jul 28, 2002, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee

since you are oblivious to the facts of corporate exploitation in america, I suggest you talk a look at this pamphlet about conditions for ordinary workers in silicon valley.
http://www.igc.org/dbacon/Unions/04hitec1.htm


wow. I do believe chuckzee has come armed with some info.

I like. I like.

though this is comparing apples and oranges--no?

we can't all sweep in as the crusaders for the exploited and pirate software for our own benefit and convince ourselves we're helping others. this wasn't the exact train of thought, but it is skirting dangerously close to two very different issues.

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 09:11 PM
Originally posted by Pin-Fisher



Oh yea...like you donte to charity...hahahah..Laughable.




You donít know shiat about what I do or donít do with my money...

Unlike people like you, who have "plenty of money ", most people donít, and refuse to give what little they have away unnecessarily.

peterjhill
Jul 28, 2002, 09:11 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
[B][Really. Please explain how workers who voluntarily choose to work for Apple and are free to leave at any time are being exploited.
[QUOTE]
since you are oblivious to the facts of corporate exploitation in america, I suggest you talk a look at this pamphlet about conditions for ordinary workers in silicon valley.

What do you know, first hand about conditions that Apple employees must put up with? Anybody can have their own friggin web page or print up a pamplet. Sorry, I don't blindly believe what some wacko puts up on a web site. Have you even been to America? Have you studied American history? American Law? Give me a break. I'm a liberal, and you make me feel like I actually want Bush to be president (which I sure the hell don't).

As for giving your money to a charity... Bill Gates is the BIGGEST SINGLE PHILANTHROPIST in the world! Apple donates thousands of computers to to needy schools and programs. Do you expect anyone to respect you for stealing software, and justifying it by giving a few dollars to some panhandler?

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 09:17 PM
Originally posted by peterjhill



As for giving your money to a charity... Bill Gates is the BIGGEST SINGLE PHILANTHROPIST in the world! Apple donates thousands of computers to to needy schools and programs

let's all bow to our lord Bill "jesus christ" Gates...

Rower_CPU
Jul 28, 2002, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
[Really. Please explain how workers who voluntarily choose to work for Apple and are free to leave at any time are being exploited.


QUOTE]

since you are oblivious to the facts of corporate exploitation in america, I suggest you talk a look at this pamphlet about conditions for ordinary workers in silicon valley.

http://www.igc.org/dbacon/Unions/04hitec1.htm

and specifcally; Quote from page 5 about your "darling" Apple:

According to Garcia, understanding the position of immigrant workers was an important part of the successful campaign at Shine and Apple. "Apple spends a lot of money on its image," he explained, "and our strategy attacked it. We helped people to understand that the company was exploiting immigrant janitors, and we forced Apple to take responsibility - we told Apple 'it's your system - you control the contractors; you're causing the exploitation."

http://www.igc.org/dbacon/Unions/04hitec5.htm

Wow, you mean the janitors that are being paid minimum wage are the ones writing the code that you're stealing......you heartless SOB.;)

That article squarely points out that the contracting companies were using illegal labor, and then tried to fire them once they organized. You're blaming Apple for using a resource provided by another company.

It looks to me like this article points out that Garcia used bullying tactics, threatening to mar Apple's image in order to get his way. Nice example...way to show how "good" and "right" that campaign is.:rolleyes:

Once again, the "two wrongs make a right" argument is played out. If that's the best you can do, please move on.

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 09:40 PM
As for giving your money to a charity... Bill Gates is the BIGGEST SINGLE PHILANTHROPIST in the world!



Bill "jesus christ" Gates giving $100,000,000 to chairity, (which i'm sure is someway involved in the propagation of windows, or some other selfish rite..) is like me donating 5 bucks. I dont hear nor want to hear anyone sing my praises (i would be embarrassed)

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by peterjhill




Apple donates thousands of computers to to needy schools and programs.



So that they can clear invetory, take it off their taxes, and sell millions of dollars in upgrades to OS 10.2

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 09:57 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
since you are oblivious to the facts of corporate exploitation in america, I suggest you talk a look at this pamphlet about conditions for ordinary workers in silicon valley.


http://www.igc.org/dbacon/Unions/04hitec1.htm



and specifcally; Quote from page 5 about your "darling" Apple:

According to Garcia, understanding the position of immigrant workers was an important part of the successful campaign at Shine and Apple. "Apple spends a lot of money on its image," he explained, "and our strategy attacked it. We helped people to understand that the company was exploiting immigrant janitors, and we forced Apple to take responsibility - we told Apple 'it's your system - you control the contractors; you're causing the exploitation."

Let's assume Apple is as bad as Nike from the standpoint of "worker exploitation." (Which I would find very surprising.) Let's assume Apple is holding its janitors as slaves, feeding them bread and water, and torturing them when they don't work fast enough.

Here are just some of the many things you would have a legal and moral right to do in response to such a situation:

1) Not buy Apple products.
2) Organize a boycott of Apple products.
3) Report Apple to the authorities and get them busted for illegal labor practices.
4) Help form an Apple worker's union.

And here is one thing you would not have a legal or moral right to do in such a situation:

1) Pirate Apple's software.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Crime A does not beget crime B. Didn't your mother ever teach you that?

I'm still waiting for your explanations of why there would be price gouging in absence of piracy, how one's soul is being sold upon a software purchase, and how corporations are more evil the more they are worth. Your arguments have so far been nonsensical, but certainly chock full of entertainment value.

GPTurismo
Jul 28, 2002, 10:10 PM
1) the **** they apple is forcing us to buy (they will force us, because they did it with 10.1 with new software) is what they should be calling the final release. The crap they have forced on us in the past has been barely beta worthy.

2) I have been a big supporter of apple through all of this. I have argued and gone through a lot defending them. But now they have pulled an MS/Big Business ploy and is forcing you to upgrade, **** them.

3) To probably use 90% of the software coming out in september or later you will have to upgrade, so to keep your mac up to date you will have to pay for the os.

4) They make money on the hardware, they should have the decency to keep upping their os to make their hardware sales go up, not ****ING SHAFT their past loyal users.

5) Upgrades in the decimals should be free. 10.0 - 10.9.9.9_ should not cost a dime. I was mad when adobe charged for 5.5, I hated that MS charged for 9x - ME, this is bad business practice and all of you are simply supporting it.

6) Forget me selling my dual 800, it's almost paid for and once it is it's getting smashed, forget selling it so Apple, oh so good compnay who cares for it's customers can reap another soul.

7) I will be looking at replacing the 100+ macs at my work with linux boxes.

8) the sole purpose of copyright was so that a person could not lay CLAIM to your work. Theoretically, if I do not steal any material objects from apple, and do not make money off of their intellectual property, I am theoretically am clear of charges. The problem is that lobbyist have had that changed. Soon, you won't be able to copy your movies, rip your cd's for back ups, or even lend many media types to your friends because these laws will soon be trickled down to apply to all intellectual properties.

Good work Uncle Steve. You killed NEXT, and you're killing Apple.

chuckzee
Jul 28, 2002, 10:12 PM
Originally posted by alex_ant



And here is one thing you would not have a legal or moral right to do in such a situation:

1) Pirate Apple's software.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Crime A does not beget crime B. Didn't your mother ever teach you that?


Is it morally right to give artificially created entities; (corporations) the same rights as human beings? Besides, no one can prove that piracy is morally wrong. The only argument I hear (not convincing, btw) is that if you do that, you will prevent people from making money?!



Since when is preventing people (corporations) from making money morally wrong?!

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
So that they can clear invetory, take it off their taxes, and sell millions of dollars in upgrades to OS 10.2
Who cares WHY they do it? They do it, don't they? Isn't that the whole point of charities? I didn't think charities existed so that we could measure our wholesomeness and integrity by supplying the reasons for our donations. I thought they existed because they were worthy causes that needed money, plain and simple?

I'm not a blind Apple loyalist by the way, but a no-strings-attached donation of $$$$$$ to a charity is a good and decent move by ANY company or ANY individual. It doesn't matter WHY they do it. It's the act that means everything. Some people (not usually corporations) actually donate anonymously in realization of this. Whoa.

Rower_CPU
Jul 28, 2002, 10:20 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
Is it morally right to give artificially created entities; (corporations) the same rights as human beings? Besides, no one can prove that piracy is morally wrong. The only argument I hear (not convincing, btw) is that if you do that, you will prevent people from making money?!

Since when is preventing people (corporations) from making money morally wrong?!

No, you don't prevent the corporation from making money...you take it away from the people who create the software.

Do you think that major corporation's software are the only one's being pirated? Get real! The small developers suffer worst of all when people disregard paying for software.

Get a clue. This isn't about sticking it to "The Man". It's about breaking the law.

GPTurismo
Jul 28, 2002, 10:22 PM
Breaking the laws that protect major corps and shaft the working man.

Sadly little developers (who I buy as much software as I can from) get shafted due to the abusive practives of the large corps.

GPTurismo
Jul 28, 2002, 10:25 PM
Put it this way, if they did this crap in the car market...

They would change standards every 2 years

Make it where you couldn't use your car after 3 years

make incrmental changes on the driving abilities of the car every 6 months and you have to pay for it to keep your car up and running and have it able to run on the street.

Get a clue, this isn't about breaking the law, it's about the laws allowing bad business.

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by chuckzee
Is it morally right to give artificially created entities; (corporations) the same rights as human beings?
Well, that's a whole different debate, isn't it? One that has nothing to do with software piracy.
Besides, no one can prove that piracy is morally wrong. The only argument I hear (not convincing, btw) is that if you do that, you will prevent people from making money?!
Morality is not something you can "prove." It differs from person to person, and is often stood atop different foundations. For some these foundations may be logical - e.g. "Piracy is morally wrong because it is an exchange of goods or services agreed to by only one party." For some they may be religious - e.g. "Piracy is wrong because it violates the Ten Commandments." For some they may be philosophical - e.g. "Piracy is wrong because it is a violation of the law."

What these foundations and the somewhat differing senses of morality they support have in common are the almost universal conclusion that piracy is wrong. For one thing, it's illegal. For another, it involves taking the fruit of someone else's labor without compensation. (This someone could be either a company or an individual.)

Even if you happen to disagree that piracy is morally wrong, you can still agree that it is illegal. You are free to fight whatever nebulous construct you're fighting by continuing to pirate software at your own peril, but the legal and ethical thing to do would be to do STOP pirating software, and go about this process in a more civilized fashion. If you feel that software piracy should be legal, you are free to go about the process of enacting this change via legal and ethical means.

Am I saying, "STOP PIRATING SOFTWARE IMMEDIATELY!"? No. I'm merely pointing out that piracy is wrong. Feel free to go mad on Carracho to your heart's content. But please do realize that what you are doing is wrong, even if you don't like the companies which produce the software you steal.
Since when is preventing people (corporations) from making money morally wrong?!
It's not. You're free to simply not pay corporations any money whatsoever. But you are not free to use their software without paying for it - to do so would be illegal and, by most accounts, morally wrong. Certainly ethically wrong.

Alex

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 10:36 PM
Originally posted by GPTurismo
Breaking the laws that protect major corps and shaft the working man.

Sadly little developers (who I buy as much software as I can from) get shafted due to the abusive practives of the large corps.
I agree. But pirating software is not the right way to go about resolving this problem.

Instead of saying,
"I don't like your business practices, so I'm gonna steal yer stuff,"

It would be smarter, much more effective, and more lawful to say,
"I don't like your business practices, so I'm gonna call my representatives and get some people together who will fight you on this."

alex_ant
Jul 28, 2002, 10:38 PM
I think this is my second favorite thread ever in the history of Macrumors, right behind that one on gun control. :)

AlphaTech
Jul 28, 2002, 10:41 PM
Originally posted by GPTurismo
1) the **** they apple is forcing us to buy (they will force us, because they did it with 10.1 with new software) is what they should be calling the final release. The crap they have forced on us in the past has been barely beta worthy.
They are NOT forcing you to buy anything, you CHOSE to purchase Apple computers to use. You also agreed to the software license agreement when you installed any software, as well as any OS. You get the OS with the computer initially, and then IF you DECIDE to update, you do so.

2) I have been a big supporter of apple through all of this. I have argued and gone through a lot defending them. But now they have pulled an MS/Big Business ploy and is forcing you to upgrade, **** them.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head and telling you to puchase it or else :rolleyes:

3) To probably use 90% of the software coming out in september or later you will have to upgrade, so to keep your mac up to date you will have to pay for the os.
That all depends on the other companies writing the software. I would find it very difficult to believe that m$ will drop IE support for any older Mac OS (version 9 and newer). Just as I don't believe that Adobe will stop supporting OS X 10.1 with their products. Get a clue Bubba. :rolleyes:
4) They make money on the hardware, they should have the decency to keep upping their os to make their hardware sales go up, not ****ING SHAFT their past loyal users.

5) Upgrades in the decimals should be free. 10.0 - 10.9.9.9_ should not cost a dime. I was mad when adobe charged for 5.5, I hated that MS charged for 9x - ME, this is bad business practice and all of you are simply supporting it.
You have to be on some hefty reality bending drugs there. Apple has never had free updates to go from one full decimal version to another. Were you able to go from 8.0 to 9.0 for free?? :p twit BTW, IF you bothered to take the time to look, you would find that you CAN go from 9.0.x to 9.2.2 for free, all via downloads. You still have to have OS 9.0.x installed though.

6) Forget me selling my dual 800, it's almost paid for and once it is it's getting smashed, forget selling it so Apple, oh so good compnay who cares for it's customers can reap another soul.
Bubba, you are one DUMB F‹cker... Donate your dual 800, smashing it is just ****ing stupid (got it Stimpy?). :rolleyes:

7) I will be looking at replacing the 100+ macs at my work with linux boxes.
Unless you are the head of the company you work for, or the head of IT good luck in getting the company to shell out XX thousands of dollars for systems that might work. Linux is NOT known for great hardware integration. You are at the mercy of the component makers to provide good drivers for the software. While it could be stable, once it is all setup, it will cost you even more money. I say more, because you WILL have to purchase all new versions of your software to run on Linux, unless you intend to STEAL that too. :rolleyes: twit

8) the sole purpose of copyright was so that a person could not lay CLAIM to your work. Theoretically, if I do not steal any material objects from apple, and do not make money off of their intellectual property, I am theoretically am clear of charges. The problem is that lobbyist have had that changed. Soon, you won't be able to copy your movies, rip your cd's for back ups, or even lend many media types to your friends because these laws will soon be trickled down to apply to all intellectual properties.

Good work Uncle Steve. You killed NEXT, and you're killing Apple.

I guess you never bothered to read the end user agreement with the software... IF you bothered, you would see that it does follow copyright law. Just as the copyright laws prevent you from taking a movie, pulling sections from it and claiming it as your own.

Jobs pulled Apple back from the brink. While not all of us will agree with what a company does all of the time, I still feel that he will not drive it into the ground, or kill it. :rolleyes:

GPTurismo
Jul 28, 2002, 11:06 PM
Well, a)

you're an idiot.

B) where I work we have deals with Redhat and SuSE and oh no we get it for free. Also we work with DELL and IBM, and we get servers and solid desktops for great prices. We can get solid p4 boxes running redhat for a FRACTION of we pay for our macs.

We have linux guru's on our staff due to our oracle databases we run. Oh my, and expanding them to desktops would be fine. Brilliant people on staff.

And smashing it will be fun. Like I said, i would rather not donate it because I wouldn't want apple to do this crap to everyone else and forcing them to go to use a buggy beta software.

Also, apple is slowly loosing it's majesty it had. Steve saved it with some cool ideas and he is going to ruin with his Ego as usual.

And, yes, I do heavily influence our technology purchases through out the business. I am one out of 4 people who have kept the macs, and we are all weary of apple.

So before you go calling people names you need to ask. you twat :o