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.
Piracy and Mac OS X
- Thread starter arn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Re: Software Developers
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"?
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.
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.
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"?
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
macrumors P6
Re: Software Developers
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.
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.
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?
AlphaTech
macrumors 601
making OS 10.2 cd only work on one system
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.
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.
The State gives you the "rights to ownership"; the State can take them away; therefore we inherently dont really "own" anything.
AlphaTech
macrumors 601
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... 🙄 twit😀
faustofernos
macrumors member
Apple's Greed Will be It's Downfall
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 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.
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 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.
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
macrumors 601
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. 🙄
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.
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.
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
Moderator emeritus
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.
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
macrumors 68020
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
peterjhill
macrumors 65816
Re: Apple's Greed Will be It's Downfall
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
macrumors 65816
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
macrumors 601
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. 😛
Re: Pirates...
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.
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.
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).
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).