you cant loose something you never had not to mention they wouldn't have ever of bought it any way
I see what you are saying. I apologize, I was using sodomy as an example of a society reversing directions, because the now legal sodomy was consensual even when it was then illegal. I guess I could have used confiscatory taxation as a better example I suppose.![]()
They've been listening to the MPAA for too long. NO ONE IS BEING DEPRIVED OF ANYTHING. Technically and legally it cannot be stealing.
That's superfluous; you never stated if you were interested in those programs or not. You asked if downloading them would hurt anyone.
Cost? I would love to see an itemized detail of this cost. Show me where it has cost anyone anything.
Not making money, is not the same as being cost it.
Get your language right.
And no, I don't pirate apps.
How about - you have a use for the app but feel it's overpriced?
Take TomTom for example. £10 and I would have bought it. Millions more would have. £70 is a rip off.
So we ripped them off.
They've been listening to the MPAA for too long. NO ONE IS BEING DEPRIVED OF ANYTHING. Technically and legally it cannot be stealing.
But you aren't charged with theft, you're violating the copyright. It's just that simpletons break it down to "stealing" apps.
..........
Also many people unlock their phone because they want to put in a different sim card when they are going abroad on a holiday. Major issue in Europe. You cross a border using your phone, your phone bill will skyrocket.
But you aren't charged with theft, you're violating the copyright. It's just that simpletons break it down to "stealing" apps.
They've been listening to the MPAA for too long. NO ONE IS BEING DEPRIVED OF ANYTHING. Technically and legally it cannot be stealing.
Nope. You have no way - NO way - to prove that any of those freely-downloaded copies would ever have been purchased in the first place. You can't be deprived of theoretical income.If I understand it correctly, it IS stealing. The creators of pirated apps are being deprived of any income they would normally receive from legally purchased copies.
I won't lash out at anyone, I just don't get how stealing became so generally accepted over such a short amount of time.
The problem is that with this mindset, the developers who created the software aren't losing any money either, despite however many copies of the app are stolen. Who cares that they spent time (which costs money), effort (which costs money) and money (which costs money) to create and submit that app to the App Store. Nope, they're just not making any money, right?
By that logic, I should just go take that Ferrari Enzo at the dealership because it's overpriced, in my opinion. I should just take whatever I think is too much because they're ripping me off. Makes sense.....
Put yourselves in the developers shoes, They have just been developing an application using their expertise in their chosen programming language wrote hundreds of lines of code used multiple memory management techniques and insured that their program is efficient and bug free. They then think "Wow I enjoyed that, maybe I can make some money out of what I've made" How would you feel if what had taken you months to make was obtained by someone for free in mere seconds?
Um, no.
The stealing argument has already been made on this page (or page 9, if this ends up on page 10 or later) as well as several times over on the previous ones. Being deprived of potential income is being deprived of something. And the MPAA, though a bunch of self-righteous rich idiots, aren't wrong just because they are a bunch of self-righteous rich idiots.
Traditionally, when you steal something, you deprive another from owning it.
That's not the case with digital content, however, which can be duplicated. There's a completely different psychology associated with it. Digital copies are an infinite resource which naturally results in a zero price point. From a standpoint of pure market economics, there's no stealing involved.
Nope. You have no way - NO way - to prove that any of those freely-downloaded copies would ever have been purchased in the first place. You can't be deprived of theoretical income.
How many teenagers that downloaded the entire Adobe CS4 suite would have ever, EVER paid for it? 0.000001% or so.
Other than stealing intellectual property, but we all know how much *some* people care about their own intellect.THANK YOU
They've been listening to the MPAA for too long. NO ONE IS BEING DEPRIVED OF ANYTHING. Technically and legally it cannot be stealing.
Totally. One of my best friends is in a band and he hears from people ALL THE TIME "I love your band, I got the album on Limewire/bittorrent/etc". Which is great and all, but then they ask why the band doesn't tour more, and his answer is "you got the album on Limewire/bittorrent/etc., so we have no money for gas".
Just because it's expensive does not mean that I will try to take it.
I can afford TomTom but it would be a waste of money without the dock anyway.
These companies take the piss with their prices.
Radiohead launched a free album where people donated money if they wanted - lots of people paid. This site, has people donating to it, big time.
What I am saying is, I wouldn't pirate a $1 app. I wouldn't download it.
I would pirate a $99 app unless it did something life changing.