Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Can A Pirated Copy of GB Effect its Performance?
- Thread starter dubdub
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It is probably impossible for me to say anything but "don't pirate software!" without getting flamed now, but I'll give it a shot anyway...
It would be interesting to take the Arts industry, all the currently law abiding citizens that pay for the software that they use for their work. Take all them and put them in a pot, NOW, take out ALL the ones that sometime previously in their life pirated the software that they now use. I wonder how much that would effect the industry...
Not saying Piracy is right, not trying to justify it and make it morally right. Just posing a question to keep the thoughts going on the "system" and what can be done.
Also, in reply to software having overhead and production cost and employees needing med insurance. Exactly how much more medical insurence is their for them as opposed to MacSoft? or Symanc? Or any other software company (aside from giants that can draw money from other sectors like M$ and Apple) that sell software for $50-$90? I think the EDU "discounts" should at LEAST match what the rest of the software world sells software for. Saying $250 is a great deal for a $1000 program, but with that in mind, so is a EDU discount of $10,000 on a $100,000 program, $90,000 savings, wow! You get my point
Probably my last post for a while, I'm leaving the country for 5 weeks...
Tyler
Earendil
It would be interesting to take the Arts industry, all the currently law abiding citizens that pay for the software that they use for their work. Take all them and put them in a pot, NOW, take out ALL the ones that sometime previously in their life pirated the software that they now use. I wonder how much that would effect the industry...
Not saying Piracy is right, not trying to justify it and make it morally right. Just posing a question to keep the thoughts going on the "system" and what can be done.
Also, in reply to software having overhead and production cost and employees needing med insurance. Exactly how much more medical insurence is their for them as opposed to MacSoft? or Symanc? Or any other software company (aside from giants that can draw money from other sectors like M$ and Apple) that sell software for $50-$90? I think the EDU "discounts" should at LEAST match what the rest of the software world sells software for. Saying $250 is a great deal for a $1000 program, but with that in mind, so is a EDU discount of $10,000 on a $100,000 program, $90,000 savings, wow! You get my point
Probably my last post for a while, I'm leaving the country for 5 weeks...
Tyler
Earendil
jxyama said:
i strongly resent your implications here. i believe it's not relevant to discussions at hand.
I think what some of us are trying to say is that people, such as students (the future Photoshop pros, etc) cannot afford the software, even at education prices, so are 'forced' to pirate a copy. Personally I've never pirated anything - I just accept that I'll have to go without. But that hurts potential sales of the software in question.
If they offered a very cheap "Express" version (like FCE for example) of most software, that would help. For example, I use Photoshop Elements which is reasonably priced. It's not like Adobe or Microsoft are struggling for business (not that that makes piracy of their products any more "right"). They make plenty of money on their software. However, reducing the price even a little would help combat piracy.
When someone cannot afford something but there is a relatively easy way to get it, they tend to go that route, whatever the legality of the situation. Even regular people who have never got as much as a parking ticket. Like the music (and soon film industry also), software companies need to offer CHOICE rather than just expect everyone to cough up many hundreds or thousands of dollars just because their software is 'the industry standard'.
If they offered a very cheap "Express" version (like FCE for example) of most software, that would help. For example, I use Photoshop Elements which is reasonably priced. It's not like Adobe or Microsoft are struggling for business (not that that makes piracy of their products any more "right"). They make plenty of money on their software. However, reducing the price even a little would help combat piracy.
When someone cannot afford something but there is a relatively easy way to get it, they tend to go that route, whatever the legality of the situation. Even regular people who have never got as much as a parking ticket. Like the music (and soon film industry also), software companies need to offer CHOICE rather than just expect everyone to cough up many hundreds or thousands of dollars just because their software is 'the industry standard'.
Personal pirating
The people who want to chastise those involved in the copying of commercial software for personal use are missing some important points:
Software isn't like a physical product. No one is being harmed as a result of me making copies of software and giving them away for free to people who weren't going to buy the software anyway.
Commercial software isn't like a physical asset that depreciates normally based on open market conditions. The release of a new version of software can make the old version almost worthless due to a lack of technical support, restriction of features only to new versions, and a lack of bug fixes.
A person who copies software like iLife or OS X, uses it for personal use, and doesn't use Apple's servers for updates isn't costing Apple any money.
I can make lots of copies of my Linux CDs and DVDs legally, but doing this with OS X is somehow seen as bad. I don't like being forced by Apple to upgrade because software is deliberately being made so that it won't run without the latest version of OS X. It might be different if upgrading was an option, but it isn't and the upgrades are becoming annual. I can choose to ignore the Apple license or stop using Apple software, which will eventually mean moving to other computers instead of to the latest Apple products for a system upgrade.
The spread of free software has a significant effect on how many people use it. If I had to pay $129 for a new copy of OS X for each system every time Apple decided to make a new version, I wouldn't be using it and I also wouldn't recommend Apple computers to other people, which would be a real cost to Apple.
Of the software I have purchased, most of it has been freeware or shareware from small companies or individuals who care about each customer and don't treat customers as numbered units of revenue sources.
The availability of software for free with an option to donate money to support the company or group producing the software can be more effective in gaining users and raising money than hiding the software behind a huge price tag with expected and frequent upgrade costs. Adobe, Corel, and Macromedia have lost thousands of dollars in sales because I don't agree with their license agreements or their attitudes concerning software copying and sharing. The loss of my business is costing these companies a quantifiable amount of money, and because they want me to pay to use their software for non-profit use and would restrict my ability to use the software as I wanted even if I did buy it, I now have no plans to ever buy their products whether for commercial use or not.
The people who want to chastise those involved in the copying of commercial software for personal use are missing some important points:
Software isn't like a physical product. No one is being harmed as a result of me making copies of software and giving them away for free to people who weren't going to buy the software anyway.
Commercial software isn't like a physical asset that depreciates normally based on open market conditions. The release of a new version of software can make the old version almost worthless due to a lack of technical support, restriction of features only to new versions, and a lack of bug fixes.
A person who copies software like iLife or OS X, uses it for personal use, and doesn't use Apple's servers for updates isn't costing Apple any money.
I can make lots of copies of my Linux CDs and DVDs legally, but doing this with OS X is somehow seen as bad. I don't like being forced by Apple to upgrade because software is deliberately being made so that it won't run without the latest version of OS X. It might be different if upgrading was an option, but it isn't and the upgrades are becoming annual. I can choose to ignore the Apple license or stop using Apple software, which will eventually mean moving to other computers instead of to the latest Apple products for a system upgrade.
The spread of free software has a significant effect on how many people use it. If I had to pay $129 for a new copy of OS X for each system every time Apple decided to make a new version, I wouldn't be using it and I also wouldn't recommend Apple computers to other people, which would be a real cost to Apple.
Of the software I have purchased, most of it has been freeware or shareware from small companies or individuals who care about each customer and don't treat customers as numbered units of revenue sources.
The availability of software for free with an option to donate money to support the company or group producing the software can be more effective in gaining users and raising money than hiding the software behind a huge price tag with expected and frequent upgrade costs. Adobe, Corel, and Macromedia have lost thousands of dollars in sales because I don't agree with their license agreements or their attitudes concerning software copying and sharing. The loss of my business is costing these companies a quantifiable amount of money, and because they want me to pay to use their software for non-profit use and would restrict my ability to use the software as I wanted even if I did buy it, I now have no plans to ever buy their products whether for commercial use or not.
There is some truth to what you are saying arogge, but I disagree with some of it. Firstly, pirating of software even for personal use is hurting the producer. For example, if I buy Office and then let my friend install it too, Microsoft has lost a sale of that because my friend no longer has to pay the £450 to buy it. This is also true of music and films. It's very tempting to borrow a friend's CD and import it into iTunes, then give it back, but that is also stealing.
Now lets think of a physical example. Take book burning. This is a potentially ludicrous thing, but something that is vital to economy (although I don't like it due to environmental damage). Millions of books get burnt every day. Brand new books. The reason? Too many produced for demand. I know someone who drives lorries that carry the books from warehouses to the place where they get burnt. Needless to say, several have 'fallen off the back' and ended up in his collection. Now you could say that that isn't harming anyone because they were going to be destroyed anyway. However, in doing so, he will never buy that book, hence there is potentail loss of sale. This is regardless of the fact that he may never have bought it anyway. In that sense, the law of averages then comes into play.
Although software is not so physical, and so does not get burnt as such, the act of copying for personal use is exactly the same. The damage comes in potential loss of sale. Sure, you could argue that you may never have bought it anyway, but that's where demos and free trials come in. Of course, I wish there would be more demos and stuff. And I'd wish that Apple would agree for magazines to include demo software of Apple products (including updates) on magazine cover discs.
Having said that, high prices put people off buying too, as I have been arguing.
Now lets think of a physical example. Take book burning. This is a potentially ludicrous thing, but something that is vital to economy (although I don't like it due to environmental damage). Millions of books get burnt every day. Brand new books. The reason? Too many produced for demand. I know someone who drives lorries that carry the books from warehouses to the place where they get burnt. Needless to say, several have 'fallen off the back' and ended up in his collection. Now you could say that that isn't harming anyone because they were going to be destroyed anyway. However, in doing so, he will never buy that book, hence there is potentail loss of sale. This is regardless of the fact that he may never have bought it anyway. In that sense, the law of averages then comes into play.
Although software is not so physical, and so does not get burnt as such, the act of copying for personal use is exactly the same. The damage comes in potential loss of sale. Sure, you could argue that you may never have bought it anyway, but that's where demos and free trials come in. Of course, I wish there would be more demos and stuff. And I'd wish that Apple would agree for magazines to include demo software of Apple products (including updates) on magazine cover discs.
Having said that, high prices put people off buying too, as I have been arguing.
arogge said:
what if you gave a copy of PS to someone who had no intention of buying full PS? maybe that person would have bought PSE after seeing how expensive PS is? but if that person already has a pirate copy of PS, adobe would miss out on a sale of PSE.
this is an overly simplistic view. why do you get to determine whether the person you are giving the software to wouldn't have bought it?
software isn't like a physical product, you are right. that's why you get away with pirating it to begin with. you cannot conclude that piracy is harming no one.
"For example, if I buy Office and then let my friend install it too, Microsoft has lost a sale of that because my friend no longer has to pay the £450 to buy it."
Microsoft Office copying is something that I don't like because people believe that they must have it and would do almost anything to get it. By giving them the software without showing them the free and better alternatives, the demand for Microsoft software is actually increased because that extra person is now using its proprietary file formats that other people will believe need another copy of Microsoft Office to be read.
"This is also true of music and films. It's very tempting to borrow a friend's CD and import it into iTunes, then give it back, but that is also stealing."
Should I take the artists' CDs that I bought, as a result of listening to copies of the artists' music before buying their albums, back to the store for a refund?
"Now lets think of a physical example. Take book burning. This is a potentially ludicrous thing, but something that is vital to economy (although I don't like it due to environmental damage). Millions of books get burnt every day. Brand new books. The reason? Too many produced for demand."
That's a physical item that cost money to produce each unit. There are probably some markets to which those books could be sent, but the producer just wants to fix the oversupply cheaply by destroying it.
"I know someone who drives lorries that carry the books from warehouses to the place where they get burnt. Needless to say, several have 'fallen off the back' and ended up in his collection. Now you could say that that isn't harming anyone because they were going to be destroyed anyway. However, in doing so, he will never buy that book, hence there is potentail loss of sale."
You can't count those book findings as potential sales unless he was intending to buy the books. He could just send money to the authors if he likes them.
"Although software is not so physical, and so does not get burnt as such, the act of copying for personal use is exactly the same. The damage comes in potential loss of sale. Sure, you could argue that you may never have bought it anyway, but that's where demos and free trials come in."
The good demos include a large sample of the software and I've purchased software based on using those kinds of demos. The bad demo software is time-limited, missing features, and riddled with nag screens. While a business operator might want to get a 15- or 30-day trial and evaluate it, I might take a few months to use the software and decide if I'm going to buy it or not. If I can't do that, the company doesn't get any money.
jxyama said:
I, for one, don't have Photoshop because I can't justify the Adobe price tag. I will not buy Photoshop, PSE (Photoshop express?), or any other Adobe product. I now use GIMP and other Open Source alternatives. If Adobe had let me use the software for free, I might have bought a lot of the company's products and been able to promote that software to other people. Adobe, as can be shown quantitatively, has lost money because of its refusal to make software free for non-profit use. And I can determine if a person requesting a copy of commercial software is going to buy it or not. If someone has just bought a new Mac, needs an image editor for a few pictures, finds that iPhoto can't do the task, and I had the software he or she needed, that person is not suddenly going to go out and pay lots of money for Photoshop or another commercial package if I don't give that person the software. However, an individual who wants to have Photoshop because he wants expense-free profits while running a photo-processing company, would not get a copy of the software.
You can never base a law on whether someone was intending to buy something or not and you could never prove it either way. Even if the lorry driver wasn't intending to ever buy the books and never would have done, that does not make keeping those books right.
I'm not sure if you pirate any software that doesn't perform to your expectations, demo-wise, but that's not a good thing to do. On the other hand, if you simply never use that product again, then that is your choice. I think lower software pricing would help appease this issue but I fail to understand why people think that the non-physical presence of software and ease of copying it makes it any less wrong than stealing from a brick and mortar store. By that logic, if someone invented invisibility suits so that we could easily go and nick stuff from shops, that would make it right because we wouldn't get caught?
As I've said before, the software/music/film industries have themselves partly to blame for high amounts of copying and piracy (e.g. due to high prices and lack of distribution methods). I think music and DVDs are way too expensive and this promotes piracy. However, the bottom line is that piracy and illegal copying is and always will be wrong.
I'm not sure if you pirate any software that doesn't perform to your expectations, demo-wise, but that's not a good thing to do. On the other hand, if you simply never use that product again, then that is your choice. I think lower software pricing would help appease this issue but I fail to understand why people think that the non-physical presence of software and ease of copying it makes it any less wrong than stealing from a brick and mortar store. By that logic, if someone invented invisibility suits so that we could easily go and nick stuff from shops, that would make it right because we wouldn't get caught?
As I've said before, the software/music/film industries have themselves partly to blame for high amounts of copying and piracy (e.g. due to high prices and lack of distribution methods). I think music and DVDs are way too expensive and this promotes piracy. However, the bottom line is that piracy and illegal copying is and always will be wrong.
"You can never base a law on whether someone was intending to buy something or not and you could never prove it either way. Even if the lorry driver wasn't intending to ever buy the books and never would have done, that does not make keeping those books right."
That should be the decision of the author. If the author says that he wants the books destroyed, then keeping them would be wrong. But what if the author likes the fact that one more person has his book because that person might buy more of the author's books and promote them too?
"I'm not sure if you pirate any software that doesn't perform to your expectations, demo-wise, but that's not a good thing to do."
I actually don't use much for software. The really expensive software for very important work doesn't run on the desktop Mac, anyway.
"I think lower software pricing would help appease this issue but I fail to understand why people think that the non-physical presence of software and ease of copying it makes it any less wrong than stealing from a brick and mortar store."
It's only "wrong" legally. The big difference between the two wrongs is if I steal a product from a store, the following happens:
The store does not get paid;
The stock manager has to look for the missing product and can't find it;
The store writes off the loss;
If there is too much theft, the store might spend money on more security and employees could get laid off;
The store raises prices or reduces shelf stock and product variety;
Stolen products are not available for customers to buy;
The store might lose more sales and future customers who are frustrated to be told (this happened to me) that there are at least 25 bricks on the shelf where there are clearly none remaining. This happened because the bricks were not marked as sold on the store computer.
If I copy OS X to use on two computers, the following happens:
I get to use the software that wouldn't work without the 10.3 release;
I'm a happier Apple user and continue to promote Apple computers and make real hardware sales;
The included bug fixes improve system performance, and that means I don't have to call AppleCare as much as I did when I had the older release;
Apple does not support the server and bandwidth for two systems to be patched and updated;
Both parties benefit.
However, if I copy Microsoft Office 2003, this happens:
The user gets hooked on using the proprietary software;
The Microsoft-formatted files that the user shares with other people may be unreadable until they also get Microsoft Office;
The user now demands that everyone else start using what he has, which means using Microsoft Windows;
Other people who can afford the software buy Microsoft Windows and Office, giving Microsoft thousands of dollars in sales and more monopoly power;
This leads to more copying and more demand;
I get a Word, Excel, or PowerPoint document that I need to read but I can't read it on my Unix system;
General frustration occurs in trying to figure out what was in the unreadable file;
Productivity is lost as a result.
Copying a normal, non-monopolistic company's software, and giving it to someone for free can have this actual result:
The recipient has a computer with more functionality and begins to play with the new software;
If it isn't useful, it will not be used anymore;
If it is useful, the user has a good opinion about the software and remembers the name of the company;
The user talks to other people and tells them that this software is really useful;
He gives them copies of the software;
Some people realize that they want the manuals and reference books that come with the boxed product;
They go to the store or directly to the company and buy the product after finding that they get technical support along with the books, and a commercial CD-ROM containing the software;
The company now has multiple sales from customers with a positive opinion of the company who will remember the service they received and will likely buy more of the company's products;
The product is more widely-used than it would have been without the users' copying and distribution;
Market share and general interest in the company increases;
Both the company and the users benefit.
Of course, if they pirated the software (yes it is pirating), what would be keeping them from getting a .pdf of the manuals? Or why bother with the developer's/distributor's manual when (in the case of Photoshop) many books exist that go far more in depth than the manuals Adobe provides, and even those can be gotten illegally.arogge said:
As much as some people are anti-Microsoft, Apple has just about as many proprietary formats as Microsoft. For example, iDVD save-as-archive requires iDVD, not a standard disc-burning format. This is purely so Apple can get more sales of Superdrives (as opposed to letting users use external burners). Does that mean it's ok to somehow steal superdrives? Sure, Office has proprietary formats and people should be more professional and use something universal like PDF to share documents but you don't really need Office to open a word file. There are plenty of converters out there: TextEdit does a good job on the Mac, then there's Appleworks and OpenOffice.org. There are plenty of others.
If too many people abuse the OS X one-user licence system, expect Apple to start using security keys and registration like Windows. It is currently done on trust. Sure, I do believe that Apple, in some ways, causes its own problems by charging so highly between releases with no upgrade price because it narrows the percentage of people using the latest operating system. However, most programs run well on Jaguar anyway. Also, they don't develop Jaguar anymore so they do not have to share resources in that way.
I can see you're trying to argue that more exposure to a product may increase someone's likelyhood of doing business with that company, arogge, but people are creatures of habbit. Once someone has pirated one thing I bet it's temptingly easy to keep on doing it again and again.
If too many people abuse the OS X one-user licence system, expect Apple to start using security keys and registration like Windows. It is currently done on trust. Sure, I do believe that Apple, in some ways, causes its own problems by charging so highly between releases with no upgrade price because it narrows the percentage of people using the latest operating system. However, most programs run well on Jaguar anyway. Also, they don't develop Jaguar anymore so they do not have to share resources in that way.
I can see you're trying to argue that more exposure to a product may increase someone's likelyhood of doing business with that company, arogge, but people are creatures of habbit. Once someone has pirated one thing I bet it's temptingly easy to keep on doing it again and again.
arogge:
this is pretty absurd. yes, it costs apple next to nothing if you (and only you) pirated OS X. but if everyone who works for non-profit or for personal use decided for themselves to follow your logic and pirated OS X, it will hurt apple's bottom line. no ifs or questions about that.
it's somewhat similar to spamming on a personal level, such as advertising a sublet to a small university emailing list: yeah, if only one person sent a generally unwanted email to an email list of 50 university students, it only costs those 50 students miniscule amount of time to press delete. however, if many, many students did the same, it becomes a real problem.
you have no right to determine whether what you are doing does no harm or not. only because you are not paying for the consequences you can claim to have done no harm.
if you don't like the pseudo-annual $130 upgrade on OS X, then switch the platform. use linux. as long as you continue to benefit (being a non-profit doesn't matter, it still pays your bills and rent, doesn't it?) from the use of OS X, i believe you owe apple both legally and morally to pay for those upgrades.
As a developer perhaps I can give some of my views on the subject:
Some pieces of software are clearly 'hard to break into' -- a great example is Maya. It's CLEARLY meant for studio work, so a student getting his hands on it is really not reasonable. If your school doesn't have labs with Maya (mine doesn't) then you're left with a demo version (for AW's Maya, that's Maya PLE) or pirateing.
Now; I completely see the point of PLE and agree with it; but I also have had lots of trouble using it due to the watermark.
I've seen pieces of software that use 30 day demos, this always has annoyed me. Why? Because I tend to grab these demos; install them; use it for a bit and forget about them until the 29th day. Now; you can often remove the demo and put it back on but thats just dishonest.
So here's my proposal:
1) For some pieces of software; an education price is silly. iLife is a great example. There is veritably no one that can really justify pirating this (with the POSSIBLE exception of testing it to see if it will run; but I hear that excuse too much from people that have no intention of removing it if it does)
For OTHER pieces of software I think there should be 2 methods
#1) Edu prices and other such discounts; a la Photoshop. I think the Edu price on PS should be a touch lower but it is there and I feel that I can scrounge up the funding to buy it.
#2) For pieces of software like Maya, I like the PLE existing but I do find the watermark to be 'too much' more often than not. Instead I'd like to propose such pieces of software be 'phone home'-ish -- If you use Maya PLE and want to turn the watermark off you can, temporarily (and never for 'final render quality'), under the condition you let the software 'phone home' to AliasWaveFront and monitor your actions to the keystroke. If it can't get the reply from AWF it won't let you turn it off (for security, of course, you'll need this to be encrypted). The problem? Cost for all that bandwidth and a decent 'detector' to make sure you're not trying to cheap your way out. Maybe a charge-per-incident (something low, like $1 to $5) to turn it off for 10 minutes.
#3) Software demos that use time as their limiter should limit based on USAGE time. "You can use this product for 24 hours" is far better than 30 days IMHO.
There is NO EXCUSE for piracy if some form of demo exist; I get the bejeebus annoyed out of me by Maya's watermark (my big example for that reason) but I will not pirate it because PLE exist.
Most of these pro products have some form of 'finalization', and I think that a 'free version' with no watermarks that just doesn't allow this finalization is normally acceptable (a great example, TrueSpace has, or had, a demo that has almost all the functionality of the full version with no use limitation on time or anything. The removed functions? You can't save projects or render to a file. Annoying? Yes. But as a student it let me figure out the software and now I have a legal version of TrueSpace).
I believe there is very (VERY) rarely a legitimate reason to pirate software; but as a developer I understand the need to let students access a product that they may wish to use in a professional studio. Any software that cost over $100 should have some form of demo, IMHO. Personal users and students can't afford to 'test' software at that kind of cost.
I don't steal books from the bookstore, but most bookstores let me open it up and read the first chapter. Pro software seems to sometimes, very begrudgingly, give you the back cover until you buy the book. A problem with IP is that it is very difficult to evaluate the quality of it without actually using it. I think that software makers with the ego to ignore these demands deserve to have their products overlooked and unused; not pirated. Any great innovations they have will be absorbed by the rest of the market.
One last thing: Anyone who develops software to cross a platform needs to give multiplatform users a reason to pay. I have a legal version of X for Windows; I do not have X for Mac. I would be willing to pay, say, $10 or so for the priviledge of putting it on both, but I'm not about to rebuy it. The only piece of software I know that accomodates this is the Opera webbrowser (which I love to death for this and other reasons)
Whew, I'm long winded. :blush: sorry.
Some pieces of software are clearly 'hard to break into' -- a great example is Maya. It's CLEARLY meant for studio work, so a student getting his hands on it is really not reasonable. If your school doesn't have labs with Maya (mine doesn't) then you're left with a demo version (for AW's Maya, that's Maya PLE) or pirateing.
Now; I completely see the point of PLE and agree with it; but I also have had lots of trouble using it due to the watermark.
I've seen pieces of software that use 30 day demos, this always has annoyed me. Why? Because I tend to grab these demos; install them; use it for a bit and forget about them until the 29th day. Now; you can often remove the demo and put it back on but thats just dishonest.
So here's my proposal:
1) For some pieces of software; an education price is silly. iLife is a great example. There is veritably no one that can really justify pirating this (with the POSSIBLE exception of testing it to see if it will run; but I hear that excuse too much from people that have no intention of removing it if it does)
For OTHER pieces of software I think there should be 2 methods
#1) Edu prices and other such discounts; a la Photoshop. I think the Edu price on PS should be a touch lower but it is there and I feel that I can scrounge up the funding to buy it.
#2) For pieces of software like Maya, I like the PLE existing but I do find the watermark to be 'too much' more often than not. Instead I'd like to propose such pieces of software be 'phone home'-ish -- If you use Maya PLE and want to turn the watermark off you can, temporarily (and never for 'final render quality'), under the condition you let the software 'phone home' to AliasWaveFront and monitor your actions to the keystroke. If it can't get the reply from AWF it won't let you turn it off (for security, of course, you'll need this to be encrypted). The problem? Cost for all that bandwidth and a decent 'detector' to make sure you're not trying to cheap your way out. Maybe a charge-per-incident (something low, like $1 to $5) to turn it off for 10 minutes.
#3) Software demos that use time as their limiter should limit based on USAGE time. "You can use this product for 24 hours" is far better than 30 days IMHO.
There is NO EXCUSE for piracy if some form of demo exist; I get the bejeebus annoyed out of me by Maya's watermark (my big example for that reason) but I will not pirate it because PLE exist.
Most of these pro products have some form of 'finalization', and I think that a 'free version' with no watermarks that just doesn't allow this finalization is normally acceptable (a great example, TrueSpace has, or had, a demo that has almost all the functionality of the full version with no use limitation on time or anything. The removed functions? You can't save projects or render to a file. Annoying? Yes. But as a student it let me figure out the software and now I have a legal version of TrueSpace).
I believe there is very (VERY) rarely a legitimate reason to pirate software; but as a developer I understand the need to let students access a product that they may wish to use in a professional studio. Any software that cost over $100 should have some form of demo, IMHO. Personal users and students can't afford to 'test' software at that kind of cost.
I don't steal books from the bookstore, but most bookstores let me open it up and read the first chapter. Pro software seems to sometimes, very begrudgingly, give you the back cover until you buy the book. A problem with IP is that it is very difficult to evaluate the quality of it without actually using it. I think that software makers with the ego to ignore these demands deserve to have their products overlooked and unused; not pirated. Any great innovations they have will be absorbed by the rest of the market.
One last thing: Anyone who develops software to cross a platform needs to give multiplatform users a reason to pay. I have a legal version of X for Windows; I do not have X for Mac. I would be willing to pay, say, $10 or so for the priviledge of putting it on both, but I'm not about to rebuy it. The only piece of software I know that accomodates this is the Opera webbrowser (which I love to death for this and other reasons)
Whew, I'm long winded. :blush: sorry.
"If too many people abuse the OS X one-user licence system, expect Apple to start using security keys and registration like Windows."
If Apple tries that, I plan to default to Yellow Dog Linux within a few days, look to AMD for system upgrades to replace the PowerMac, and will stop promoting Apple products. That will cost Apple more than $10,000 this year alone. And Apple knows it, too, which is probably why there is no copy protection scheme in Apple software.
"It is currently done on trust. Sure, I do believe that Apple, in some ways, causes its own problems by charging so highly between releases with no upgrade price because it narrows the percentage of people using the latest operating system. However, most programs run well on Jaguar anyway."
I mostly have the problem with X11 and Java3D. I had to install OS 10.3 to get them to work, even though I had no need for anything else in the new release.
"I can see you're trying to argue that more exposure to a product may increase someone's likelyhood of doing business with that company, but people are creatures of habbit. Once someone has pirated one thing I bet it's temptingly easy to keep on doing it again and again."
If that's the case, stopping personal pirating isn't going to stop these kinds of people from going to the real pirates that sell illegal copies of software for a profit. I would rather give people software for free and hope that they eventually buy it than to force them to buy from the spammers.
arogge:
you still didn't answer my point. what if everyone else under similar circumstances as you decided to do the same and pirate? you still think there are no negative consequences?
switch to linux and let apple lose your business. just because apple end up "positive" from you doesn't mean you can pirate their software. or is there a reason you haven't switched to linux yet? when you bought your PM, you paid for what you got. beyond that, you didn't pay. if they decide not to give you upgrades for free, that's apple's decision and their right. if you can't deal with what you paid for, pay someone else, but don't pirate. you aren't "entitled" to upgrades - you didn't pay for them.
and guess what? i paid for my panther - and i didn't need X11 or Java3D support. do you hear me complaining that i was forced to pay for features i didn't need or use?
finally, just because there are "worse" kind of pirates out there doesn't make your type of "pirate" any less "wrong."
(obviously, i'm not going to make a "believer" out of you anyway, so i'm now wondering why i'm wasting my time... anyway, i think i'm just about done here. it's far off topic already... )
you still didn't answer my point. what if everyone else under similar circumstances as you decided to do the same and pirate? you still think there are no negative consequences?
switch to linux and let apple lose your business. just because apple end up "positive" from you doesn't mean you can pirate their software. or is there a reason you haven't switched to linux yet? when you bought your PM, you paid for what you got. beyond that, you didn't pay. if they decide not to give you upgrades for free, that's apple's decision and their right. if you can't deal with what you paid for, pay someone else, but don't pirate. you aren't "entitled" to upgrades - you didn't pay for them.
and guess what? i paid for my panther - and i didn't need X11 or Java3D support. do you hear me complaining that i was forced to pay for features i didn't need or use?
finally, just because there are "worse" kind of pirates out there doesn't make your type of "pirate" any less "wrong."
(obviously, i'm not going to make a "believer" out of you anyway, so i'm now wondering why i'm wasting my time... anyway, i think i'm just about done here. it's far off topic already...
)"yes, it costs apple next to nothing if you (and only you) pirated OS X. but if everyone who works for non-profit or for personal use decided for themselves to follow your logic and pirated OS X, it will hurt apple's bottom line. no ifs or questions about that."
There is a question and it involves what happens if people get tired of paying for OS X. Apple is going to lose sales on new hardware, which is where the profit is. If Apple had told me a few weeks ago that installing OS X twice was not possible and that I must buy a second $129 box and CD-ROM, I probably wouldn't be using OS X right now. I also wouldn't have sold somebody on getting a new PowerBook because my opinion of Apple would have changed. There is a lot more "pirating" going on, as in one person buying the software and installing it on multiple systems, than you're willing to realize.
"it's somewhat similar to spamming on a personal level, such as advertising a sublet to a small university emailing list: yeah, if only one person sent a generally unwanted email to an email list of 50 university students, it only costs those 50 students miniscule amount of time to press delete. however, if many, many students did the same, it becomes a real problem."
Spamming costs money because of the server and bandwidth resources. If there is too much spam going through the network, the network can crash and legitimate mail can be lost. This is not the same as making a copy of software.
"you have no right to determine whether what you are doing does no harm or not. only because you are not paying for the consequences you can claim to have done no harm."
Can you quantify how much damage I've done to Apple? I can easily quantify how much money Apple has made as a result of my ability to use Apple software without restrictions.
"if you don't like the pseudo-annual $130 upgrade on OS X, then switch the platform. use linux."
That's not going to help Apple at all. If I am forced to switch to Linux, that move will soon be supplemented by a 64-bit AMD system running Linux, which means that I don't buy a new Apple desktop, ever, and Apple would not be included in my purchase recommendations.
"as long as you continue to benefit (being a non-profit doesn't matter, it still pays your bills and rent, doesn't it?) from the use of OS X, i believe you owe apple both legally and morally to pay for those upgrades."
OS X doesn't really pay me anything, and Linux could easily replace OS X for what I want. OS X for me is more of a personal desktop environment than anything else. Really critical work is not done with OS X, but rather on high-end workstations and servers running Linux or a another Unix variant. I could move over to a Linux or Unix workstation for my personal work within a few hours, a move which is practiced occasionally in case something does happen to the Mac. I like the company's hardware products, but I don't need Apple.
There is a question and it involves what happens if people get tired of paying for OS X. Apple is going to lose sales on new hardware, which is where the profit is. If Apple had told me a few weeks ago that installing OS X twice was not possible and that I must buy a second $129 box and CD-ROM, I probably wouldn't be using OS X right now. I also wouldn't have sold somebody on getting a new PowerBook because my opinion of Apple would have changed. There is a lot more "pirating" going on, as in one person buying the software and installing it on multiple systems, than you're willing to realize.
"it's somewhat similar to spamming on a personal level, such as advertising a sublet to a small university emailing list: yeah, if only one person sent a generally unwanted email to an email list of 50 university students, it only costs those 50 students miniscule amount of time to press delete. however, if many, many students did the same, it becomes a real problem."
Spamming costs money because of the server and bandwidth resources. If there is too much spam going through the network, the network can crash and legitimate mail can be lost. This is not the same as making a copy of software.
"you have no right to determine whether what you are doing does no harm or not. only because you are not paying for the consequences you can claim to have done no harm."
Can you quantify how much damage I've done to Apple? I can easily quantify how much money Apple has made as a result of my ability to use Apple software without restrictions.
"if you don't like the pseudo-annual $130 upgrade on OS X, then switch the platform. use linux."
That's not going to help Apple at all. If I am forced to switch to Linux, that move will soon be supplemented by a 64-bit AMD system running Linux, which means that I don't buy a new Apple desktop, ever, and Apple would not be included in my purchase recommendations.
"as long as you continue to benefit (being a non-profit doesn't matter, it still pays your bills and rent, doesn't it?) from the use of OS X, i believe you owe apple both legally and morally to pay for those upgrades."
OS X doesn't really pay me anything, and Linux could easily replace OS X for what I want. OS X for me is more of a personal desktop environment than anything else. Really critical work is not done with OS X, but rather on high-end workstations and servers running Linux or a another Unix variant. I could move over to a Linux or Unix workstation for my personal work within a few hours, a move which is practiced occasionally in case something does happen to the Mac. I like the company's hardware products, but I don't need Apple.
"switch to linux and let apple lose your business. just because apple end up "positive" from you doesn't mean you can pirate their software. or is there a reason you haven't switched to linux yet?"
Your arrogance would cost Apple real sales. I just haven't gotten around to installing Linux yet. The plans to jump to YDL have already been made. It is unlikely that OS 10.4 will be considered for my next Mac desktop environment because I believe that YDL now better supports my tasks.
"when you bought your PM, you paid for what you got. beyond that, you didn't pay. if they decide not to give you upgrades for free, that's apple's decision and their right. if you can't deal with what you paid for, pay someone else, but don't pirate. you aren't "entitled" to upgrades - you didn't pay for them."
I believe that I paid a premium price, about $700 more than I would have for a faster AMD system with a professional graphics card. I chose Apple because I liked having the free Web services, free software updates, and the good integration between hardware and software. If software I want to use suddenly needs an new operating system, I shouldn't have to pay for the update.
"and guess what? i paid for my panther - and i didn't need X11 or Java3D support. do you hear me complaining that i was forced to pay for features i didn't need or use?"
That was your choice, but I'd rather buy other Apple products than pay for extra software licenses that I don't need. I also don't like being forced to upgrade because it took 10 hours of downtime to do the upgrade. If Apple had simply let me install X11 and Java3D, I could have continued without a significant interruption.
"finally, just because there are "worse" kind of pirates out there doesn't make your type of "pirate" any less "wrong."
"Fortunately, you do not represent Apple, a company which currently enjoys my purchases of additional hardware and software that I do want instead of extra software licenses that I don't want and wouldn't buy if forced to. You're not going to make me feel bad about ignoring the Apple software license because I know that doing so benefits Apple.
arogge said:
so it's ok for you to cheat apple as long as you are overall being positive influence to them? gee, should apple send you a thank you note while they are at it?
taking your argument to an extreme, since i've bought a $1800 PB, does that make it ok for me to pirate $1799.99 in apple software?
i can exactly quantify how much damage you've done to apple or other software companies. just multiply the number of software you've pirated by their price - it's irrelevant if those people would have bought a copy or not - the fact is, they got a free copy and the copyright holder was not compensated. that is a fact. whether they would have bought a copy or not is just circumstantial speculation. how do you plan on proving that they would have never bought those software? you can't - it's all speculation.
if you are advocating free software - switch, not pirate.
arogge said:
again, believe whatever you want about "premium." apple didn't force you to buy their product - you decided to pay whatever the premium you perceived because they provided some benefits to you. if you get something more out for paying more, then that's not a premium.
i believe software that used to work with your older OS would continue to work with your older OS. upgrading is your choice - older OS is not responsible for making sure updated software would work on it. it's the responsibility of the software company. if you need to upgrade both the OS and software, then it must be done together - what's the difference, it's ok to pirate the OS but not the software?
"so it's ok for you to cheat apple as long as you are overall being positive influence to them? gee, should apple send you a thank you note while they are at it?"
I talked to employees and customers at an Apple Store who realized exactly that. Everyone understood that people who were buying were not suddenly going to buy more licenses on top of everything else because they wanted to use software on more than one system. The employees laughed at the possibility that Apple could use a copy protection scheme, calling it very unlikely, and that sales would drop if that did happen.
"taking your argument to an extreme, since i've bought a $1800 PB, does that make it ok for me to pirate $1799.99 in apple software?"
Are you making a profit on it? Are you using Apple's resources or depriving anyone else of its use? Are you reselling the software for a profit? If not, then I don't see the problem.
"i can exactly quantify how much damage you've done to apple or other software companies. just multiply the number of software you've pirated by their price - it's irrelevant if those people would have bought a copy or not - the fact is, they got a free copy and the copyright holder was not compensated. that is a fact. whether they would have bought a copy or not is just circumstantial speculation. how do you plan on proving that they would have never bought those software? you can't - it's all speculation."
I definitely know what I would have bought given different conditions, and so do other people who consider buying Apple products. This all goes into the purchase decision. For other companies' software, it's pretty obvious that someone who can't afford to buy software and just wants to play with it occasionally is not going to buy it because the price cannot be justified based on the lack of any real returns. Eventually, that person may find a way to do some profitable work with the software and will buy it or a later version of it. This is something that I have seen happen as a result of me giving away free software. If the software is never used, that person will not know about it and definately will not want to buy it. In Apple's case, the company is compensated because people are buying the products. If that changes, Apple will have reduced sales or absolutely no sales from me. What your argument fails to consider is the fact that virtually no one really needs Apple computers or its software. I buy and promote Apple products, in large part, because I want to support the company, and that's what I will continue to do unless Apple gets an arrogant attitude.
"i believe software that used to work with your older OS would continue to work with your older OS. upgrading is your choice - older OS is not responsible for making sure updated software would work on it. it's the responsibility of the software company."
I want Apple's Java3D update and X11 (not the beta version) to work on OS 10.2; I have no other need for OS 10.3. Linux had no problem running the Java software, and even an old version of Microsoft Windows could run it. But OS X apparently needed a $129 upgrade. So, how would I install this software without the full upgrade? If I'm missing something in Linux, I just get the source files and patch the system. I never have to upgrade the entire operating system.