Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Can A Pirated Copy of GB Effect its Performance?
- Thread starter dubdub
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
tomf87 said:
You guys are starting to make me sick. Some of you want to argue to the point where you are MISQUOTING me or quoting me out of context or out of point.
Let me quote the ENTIRE phrase...
"The only time I ever "pirated" software that cost less than $100 were a few shareware/trial versions of programs back in the OS8.6 days when I was 13 and thought I was cool because I could find the invisible prefs"
Tyler
Earendil
Earendil said:I have. And for being the only thing that you ask, you sure have spent a lot of time replying to posts when NO one has said that Piracy is Legal.
...
I am not making "excuses" (3."To serve as justification for"), I am explaining while I commit this illegal act, and how I plan to partially correct it. I'm displaying the flip side to the example of kids who can get these programs legally with money from their parents.
...
Well you're wrong. I'm not. I would never tell or ask anyone to pirate software. In fact in this thread I'm suggesting ways to STOP piracy, and help the software companies, while making it harder to pirate without being caught. The only time I ever "pirated" software that cost less than $100 were a few shareware/trial versions of programs back in the OS8.6 days when I was 13 and thought I was cool because I could find the invisible prefs
well, obviously, we have substantial difference of an opinion. to me, "partially correcting" (whatever that means) part of your post tells me that while you at least think piracy is illegal, you don't think it's "wrong." the only reason you'd think to "partially correct" something that is 100% illegal is because the chances of getting caught and paying for the consquences is virtually nil when it comes to piracy. no, no one here have said piracy is legal. but i think many here i've been posting against think pirating is like jaywalking - an illegal act that has no negative consequences most of the time. and i beg to differ.
laws in this case do not change based on differing personal circumstances. if piracy is illegal, it is illegal regardless of whether you are poor or rich.
you specifically mention not pirating software under $100. how about those over $100?
Snarf! said:
Exactly!! In this way the savings would go towards those that were actually making an attempt at learning the software for career purposes.
Finally, someone is following train of thought
Tyler
Earendil
jxyama said:
A single piece of software that would cost me $500 to use and learn at the scale at which it would be useful to me. "partial correction" is that when I make money, I will pay for the program, so what I used is paid for. Still not "legal", but full compensation for the companies work will be there.
Now if you'd like to keep nitpicking my words, go ahead, but I won't be responding, at least not on this thread, feel free to PM me. I will stick around and discuss ways of preventing and perusing piraters from continuing. As you appear to have plenty of money for all your career programs, I suspect that you probably haven't given this path all that much thought, that's ok.
Does anyone know of a company that has started to use some sort of tracking for "work" produced by software? I don't think it's quite feasible with todays tech, but things are only going to become more automated and electronic. I see it happening eventually.
Tyler
Earendil
Earendil said:
here are some i can think of, not involving piracy.
1) educational discount. this is already in place. since software companies are doing this as a favor to edu. institutions, i think it's unfair to ask for 100% complete versions at next to nothing prices. people will always want more stuff for less and something's gotta give. i think educational prices, for most widely used software, are quite fair at this moment.
2) guarantee from schools that they will supply enough computers in labs with ample operating hours with specialized, expensive programs needed for all the classes being offered. if one have a computer and simply wants the software for one's convenience, then that is one's problem and still not an excuse for piracy.
3) temporary license. classes requiring specialized programs will offer temporary licenses at modest prices with a few caveats. 1) it will phone home to school's database and will let one use the program only when enrolled in the class. 2) it will have adjusted functionality set that will meet the requirement for the specific class.
4) setting aside a part of the tuition for academic purchasing. schools will offer to set aside a part of the tuition with modest interest for academic purchasing. this will be reserved from the tuition specifically to purchase expensive textbooks or software. it will be refunded once graduated or dropped out.
etc.
Earendil said:
i strongly resent your implications here. i believe it's not relevant to discussions at hand.
what if you never make it in the career you "trained for" using the pirate software?
will you be purchasing the updated, full version of the software once you make it? or will you be making additional "donations" to the company, including any interests, to make up for the pirated software in the past?
what if the company goes bankrupt?
etc. etc.
i think the best solution is for you to take out additional loans. that sounds a lot fairer than software companies having to foot the bill for unwanted, unguaranteed "loans" to whoever getting pirate software?
If I were a professional making money I know I'd feel differently, but as I student I have to wonder...
What are the production costs for the major art programs compared to every other piece of software? Anyone know? Does the regular software production/cost ratio even come close to the handicapped "educational" priced software/production cost ratio? Or is the high price of education software just so professionals aren't as inclined to use it?
What are the production costs for the major art programs compared to every other piece of software? Anyone know? Does the regular software production/cost ratio even come close to the handicapped "educational" priced software/production cost ratio? Or is the high price of education software just so professionals aren't as inclined to use it?
Earendil said:
can't help to mention it, but you certainly got a "pro" machine.
let's just lighten up. i'll lay off - i feel strongly about piracy (which should be pretty obvious), but i don't really want to sound as if i want to crucify you as if you represent the entire problem...
jxyama said:can't help to mention it, but you certainly got a "pro" machine.
I knew it was only a mater of time before someone said that. Well, I've shared a Bondi iMac with three siblings that all are only 2.5 years younger than me, and I've shared for 4 years now. I worked damn hard at min wage to get a computer that would last me, and that I could hopefully use in the development of my career. That was all before college took all my money though
Speaking of over priced items, wtf is with the price of college these days? It has gone WELL beyond inflation. In fact I read someplace that it makes the top 20 list of services that have risen in cost over inflation...humm...
nm, don't answer that, stay on topic
Tyler
Earendil
Luckily for me, the place I'm looking to transfer to actually costs less than the private high school I went to.Earendil said:I knew it was only a mater of time before someone said that. Well, I've shared a Bondi iMac with three siblings that all are only 2.5 years younger than me, and I've shared for 4 years now. I worked damn hard at min wage to get a computer that would last me, and that I could hopefully use in the development of my career. That was all before college took all my money though
Speaking of over priced items, wtf is with the price of college these days? It has gone WELL beyond inflation. In fact I read someplace that it makes the top 20 list of services that have risen in cost over inflation...humm...
nm, don't answer that, stay on topic
Tyler
Earendil
Earendil said:hulugu said:Just to poke a few holes in your argument. First, many of these companies offer educational discounts or student versions of their software.[/i]
So obviously I'm not talking about them
I think though that my original idea went a bit above this...
*snip*
Furthermore, you argument has a problem, eg:
I want to learn digital photography, but I can't afford a new camera. So I go to the nearest Best Buy and steal the camera. Obviously when I become proficient I will be a digital camera buyer and future customer and therefore I'm just using "alternate" means. In fact, if I get caught I will tell the Best Buy security goon that it is more of a "loan."
I am not so naive as to think anything I say would defend me in court. Their may be better examples, but that isn't a great one. You can pick up "used" film cameras for next to nothing these days. And unlike software, Film hasn't changed in the least bit in the last 50 years. Skip two versions of a piece of software and you're talking a big difference in functionality, not to mention it may be outdated on a system or not even supported.
But people have sidetracked and picked apart my original post so that I am defending something that wasn't even my point. How about we go back to coming up with ideas as to how things could be made better? I think I may be one of the very few on this thread that has done that so far, while other people insist on preaching the gospel to the wrong doers.
Tyler
Earendil
But, my point still holds, your logic states that stealing is okay if you were willing to buy it later when you could afford it; that's credit. But, you can't do this with any physical object, so why is software so different?
A film camera hasn't changed much since Ansel Adams, but that's not the point it's still wrong, and it's illegal. Please note just for the record: morality and legality are not the same thing, but parallel systems.
I'm not defending the system, but this logic makes it very easy for people to steal software and music. The RIAA and the software companies under the flag of the BSA don't do themselves or us any favors in the way they act either, but that doesn't make your actions any more moral.
I should think about a better example, I know, but nonetheless stealing IP (by not paying for it) is wrong, but because it's an abstraction that makes it okay.
I would say the system works, to a point, but could be extended further and could have been if software wasn't so easy to copy and pirate.
In the case of Maya PLE, no it is not the full version, but it allows you to understand the basic tenents of the software so it's useful. But, I would be happy with higher discounts for students (say 75% off) and then a watermark system. If a student buys the software that version will always be marked as a student version, if it appears on a p2p site, then the student who bought that copy is liable. (Charged for full-version and limited to the equivalent of 10 copies, yeah this could be a 10,000 bill, so don't share software, jack***.)
Simple, easy, and it catches only those who are pirating software en mass. This of course still allows sneaker-net, but that is a very small problem.
If a corporation starts running a Student-Learning-Edition then let BSA hang them up by their balls. Corporations/Studios/etc. know to buy their software and there's a system already in place, it just needs to be used effectively.
Furthermore, some art schools, design schools, have computer labs that allow you to use their software to get your projects done. You also might want to try getting a loan, or a credit card, even an extra job, to pay for your software, etc. My wife and I are graduate students and I work 40+ to pay for school, my expenses, and my software so don't tell me it can't be done.
johnnyjibbs said:
the watermark covers your entire image, it's not just in the corner or something. VERY annoying.
to post about a cheap learning edition of FCP etc. that would be exactly what i need. spending $500-1000 is doable on software for me, but $5000+ is WAY too much. If you think i'm exaggerating (any professional will know i'm low balling this number) look at copies of Director, FCP, Maya, Logic, etc. stealing is definitely wrong, i agree, but i really have no other option. unfortunately i need a place to sleep, and food to eat, and my parents would never fork out that kind of cash for computer program's (i think $4,000 on a computer alone is a bit much to ask).
so would it be better to just not learn the software at all, eventually make a living off of it, and when i'm capable of affording it paying for a license? i'd say 80%+ of people who work in the industry have gotten their on a very similar route.
my school allows me to stay in a lab and work all day from 6 am to midnight, but if i worked only at school i'd be their all day, and i'd have no reason to have even purchased a Mac in the first place.
Before a pricing war a few years ago Maya unlimited was 16999 US,and complete was 7000 US I think it was,so their current pricing will not be changing anytime soon.
Imagine paying 17000 for a seat of unlimited and having it drop 10 grand over night.
Imagine paying 17000 for a seat of unlimited and having it drop 10 grand over night.
<sigh>I drop the bait, I catch a fish, I drop the bait, I catch a another fish. It just shouldn't be that easy.sonicbaz said:
briankonar said:
i know this issue has been beaten to death, but you purchasing a computer and not wanting to work at school "all day" is your problem.
you just happen to be wealthy enough to afford a computer (a Mac!) but not the software. someone who's an even poorer "struggling student" and can't afford a computer would have no choice but to work in the computer lab, all day at school, if needed.
johnnyjibbsPirating said:"Manufacturing" things costs money. Research and development costs money. Creating things costs money. Promoting things cost money. Making sure software is compatible with thousands of software programs out there costs money. People who make this software have to have medical insurance. They need to make a living wage. I could go on, but I won't. The point being is that despite software not seeming like a real product you can hold, IT IS! There are products and there are services. Software and music seem to fit inbetween those two product categories. Well, they shouldn't be inbetween, they are products...even if virtual in nature sometimes (iTMS or downloads)! You can't really steal services (you can't go to a mechanic and steal an oil change) and you shouldn't steal products...no matter what form they come in. If you don't like the price, don't buy it! That is the basis for our economic structure. If the price is too high for what you get in return (and nothing illegal has been done such as price fixing) then chances are someone else will come out with a similar product for cheaper. If someone else doesn't come out with a cheaper one that is similar then it probably costs that much to make that good of a product so buy the damn thing or do without.
How can one say student discounts cost way too much. Take iLife for example. $29 for five software programs! Give me a break! I don't see any other industry that gives student discounts for products. Don't get greedy, buy the software or do without!
Earendil said:
M$ I'm sure is already tracking as they do everything and probably working on a plan to make everyone pay per document created or some crazy thing like that. A use fee of sorts?!?!
We're not disputing the good value of iLife. But iLife is $49 and Maya is several thousand $ - huge difference. Sure, programs like Maya are very complex and have required a lot of hard work to produce, but then they can sell as many as they like at no extra cost. Upgrades keep the cashflow going.flyfish29 said:"Manufacturing" things costs money. Research and development costs money. Creating things costs money. Promoting things cost money. Making sure software is compatible with thousands of software programs out there costs money. People who make this software have to have medical insurance. They need to make a living wage. I could go on, but I won't. The point being is that despite software not seeming like a real product you can hold, IT IS! There are products and there are services. Software and music seem to fit inbetween those two product categories. Well, they shouldn't be inbetween, they are products...even if virtual in nature sometimes (iTMS or downloads)! You can't really steal services (you can't go to a mechanic and steal an oil change) and you shouldn't steal products...no matter what form they come in. If you don't like the price, don't buy it! That is the basis for our economic structure. If the price is too high for what you get in return (and nothing illegal has been done such as price fixing) then chances are someone else will come out with a similar product for cheaper. If someone else doesn't come out with a cheaper one that is similar then it probably costs that much to make that good of a product so buy the damn thing or do without.
How can one say student discounts cost way too much. Take iLife for example. $29 for five software programs! Give me a break! I don't see any other industry that gives student discounts for products. Don't get greedy, buy the software or do without!
However, I'm not saying, release Maya at $49 (in fact, that is a bad example because the Personal Learning Edition does exist, which is free, but this is true for any of the expensive programs) but that if it was a little less expensive, they would have more sales and so recoup bigger profits via 1) increased volume of sale and 2) decreased piracy (as many could now afford it). We have seen this bare fruit to some extent with programs such as Final Cut Express and Logic Express, but they are still quite expensive (although FCE 2 is cheaper).
The same arguement goes for video games (many argue that if all were £20 ($40) as opposed to £40-45, ($80-90) they would have far more sales per game. Reproduction and packaging and distribution costs are negligable.
By the way, medical insurance is not an issue here in UK because the NHS is free
I believe that software is worth a lot because it can take a lot of hard work to produce. It doesn't matter that its less physical and so "copyable" - it is no less of a product. I'm not disputing that software companies/artists should be paid, it's just that several £/$100-1000 is a lot of money that people can't have and lowering the price would help fight against piracy, while earning higher sales also.
you can't just say lower the price then you'll sell more and make up for the lost revenue per sale in the overall revenue. you must account for the fact demand may change differently than the way lost revenue per sale changes.
if a $1500 software was reduced to $500, will the sales increase by a factor of three? not always. and this doesn't even include the cost. if that said software costs $100 to make and in overhead, then you will need to sell the $500 version 3.5 times more than the $1500 version to reach the same profit. (and the situation gets worse in real life because you'd have much thinner profit margin to survive.)
i did simplify the fact overhead would be spread over more units and would be lower per unit shipped if the demand increased, that is true. but i hope you still see my point.
things are generally priced where they need to be - it's not as arbitrary as you make it sound. even if you can make more copies at "no cost," you could incur more costs that's not associated with production. if you produce more but they don't sell as well, then there's additional cost incurred to keep those extras in storage.
the demand, however, gets a little warped when things are free. that's a different issue all together and a part of things to consider when discussing piracy.
if a $1500 software was reduced to $500, will the sales increase by a factor of three? not always. and this doesn't even include the cost. if that said software costs $100 to make and in overhead, then you will need to sell the $500 version 3.5 times more than the $1500 version to reach the same profit. (and the situation gets worse in real life because you'd have much thinner profit margin to survive.)
i did simplify the fact overhead would be spread over more units and would be lower per unit shipped if the demand increased, that is true. but i hope you still see my point.
things are generally priced where they need to be - it's not as arbitrary as you make it sound. even if you can make more copies at "no cost," you could incur more costs that's not associated with production. if you produce more but they don't sell as well, then there's additional cost incurred to keep those extras in storage.
the demand, however, gets a little warped when things are free. that's a different issue all together and a part of things to consider when discussing piracy.