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 Cripples iOS Game in Less than a Week
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
At your university, pirating software, and justifying it on an Apple fan board...
Bravo... Glad to see the University has a strong Ethics department.
Why not try out one of the cars in the faculty parking lot? If you like it you can pay the owner for it, if not, just give it back, I'm sure they won't mind (or press charges!).
You can call it whatever you want. It's still taking something that doesn't belong to you without permission. That makes it wrong, and I don't believe for a second that if someone "borrowed" something of yours without permission that you wouldn't be FURIOUS.
Especially if once they got caught they tried to justify taking it by saying "I was going to pay the guy if I decided to keep it! I swear!"
BTW, interesting youtube videos. Do people actually watch those? I think you said the F word in the first video more than what was in Pulp Fiction.
That's fine, if you did could you admit you're a thief or would you make excuses like others here have?
That implies we believe you buy anything in the first place. I don't. I think you lie about what you do to try and justify what you're doing even though you know it's theft/stealing/wrong/whatever...
It's ok. The world is full of petty criminals and you can count yourself among them. Some of them feel pretty good about themselves, and that's fine too.
Doesn't change the fact that you're a petty thief, but hey, I bet if someone stole from you you'd be cool with it, and what goes around comes around right?
If your iPad/iPhone turns up missing just let it go. I'm sure the thief would just "stop buying stuff" if you stopped/caught him anyway...
yeah one of them has almost 200,000 views. so i guess people do watch them
Holy crap you're almost as cool as Rebecca Black.
It doesn't matter what you believe. If I have no way to determine if I want to own something, & no recourse, I don't buy it. Never have. The result is, I either buy nothing at all, or I buy things that I'm fairly sure I want to own. Just like anyone. I've simply found a way to reduce the risk of buying a lot of garbage in between, by not gambling on total unknowns.
You can personally attack me any way you want but it changes nothing. You won't find anything in my possession I haven't paid for. ...and you have no idea what has been stolen from me over my life, so I'll just let your hotheaded blabbering slide.
Last edited:
I don't think they can necessarily differentiate between the pirated copies accesing their server vs. paid copies. I'm thinking it might be they know they sold X number of copies, and they see 10X copies making requests to their server.
This is what happens, however its typical an order of magnitude higher than your example.
They sold X and there are 100x simultaneous server accesses.
With multiple devices under one Apple ID, its not uncommon to see multiple devices accessing a server for every copy sold, but an average increase of more than 100% is unlikely. For everyone who has three or more devices under the same Apple ID, there are many more who have only one.
There is currently no way to tell if the app accessing your service was purchased or is an illegal copy.
Possibly the best post I've read on macrumors in months. (and I say this as someone who buys all the software/games I use, but its just a breath of fresh air to see a parallel side of the argument put forth so well).
I'm surprised people don't understand the difference between theft and copyright infringement.
If I were to walk into HMV and steal a CD that's theft, I'm depriving HMV of their item and their ability to sell it. If I were to download a movie I'm effectively taking a copy, the original (if that term is even applicable for downloads) is still there. That's a big difference.
If I were to walk into HMV and steal a CD that's theft, I'm depriving HMV of their item and their ability to sell it. If I were to download a movie I'm effectively taking a copy, the original (if that term is even applicable for downloads) is still there. That's a big difference.
I'm unfortunately not surprised to what lengths people go to justify their unjustifiable behaviour.
If you walk into HMV and steal a CD, that's theft. HMV may or may not have insurance, but the record company is going to be paid for the CD, and the artist will get his money as well. You hurt HMV or the insurance, but not the artist. If you download a movie, you hurt the artist.
Of course copyright infringement is not theft. But it is illegal, just like theft is, and for the same reason. If you sneak into the movie theatre to watch a movie without paying, if you take a taxi and then run away before paying the driver, and in many other situations, what you do isn't literally theft, but it is just as bad, and therefore there are laws against it.
But you are right, of course, so we should not use the word "thief" anymore, but maybe "scumbag" is more appropriate.
I'm not trying to justify anything, everything on my jailbroken iPhone is 100% legal. I don't have Installous installed. I just bothers me that people are using the wrong terms for things, it undermines their whole argument because it makes them look silly and hysterical.
I've yet to meet someone with a jailbroken iPhone for whom this is true, but that's a discussion for another thread.
I've yet to meet someone with a jailbroken iPhone for whom this is true, but that's a discussion for another thread.
Doesn't matter to me if you believe me, I know that my statement is true.
Keep in mind that any tweak, theme, or app that modifies Apple's UI or modifies iOS to provide additional functionality not available to App Store apps likely results in copyright infringement.
I've yet to meet someone with a jailbroken iPhone for whom this is true, but that's a discussion for another thread.
Well I can tell you that I have a jailbroken iPad - and everything on there is legal.
My main reasons for doing so were to install TeX Live, OpenVPN, and a Java virtual machine. Also, due to the way the vast majority of jailbreak tweaks are made (code injection as opposed to distributing modified files), there isn't any copyright infringement involved.
And the USCO has quite clearly said that jailbreaking isn't copyright infringement, and have made it an exception to the DMCA - http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/07/dmcaexemps.pdf
Good for you if that's true! There's always a first! Most everyone I've come across has installed SBSettings and/or themes.
But copyright infringement doesn't require distribution. If you "inject" code that modifies iOS, you are still creating a derivative work. Not saying any of your software does that, just simply that a lack of distribution of the modified code is irrelevant.
Absolutely true. Except to clarify that the exemption makes jailbreaking legal for specific, limited purposes. Jailbreaking to install a pirated app is still a DMCA violation.
I don't have any themes installed, that's not why I JB. I've bought BiteSMS and LockInfo because they add useful functionality to my phone.
----------
Some of us couldn't care less about the DCMA because we're outside its jurisdiction. Frankly even if I weren't I'd still jailbreak. It's my device and if I'm not pirating anything my conscience is clear.
SB Settings and themes are both legal too
.By the nature of code injection, no derivative work is ever created - since extra code is injected directly into RAM. If you own a device, you're perfectly entitled to put whatever 0s and 1s you wish into its RAM (which is all code injection does). That's not creating a derivative work, that's using the hardware you've bought.
If jailbreaking in any way was illegal, do you not think Apple would have moved to shut cydia, or its repositories, down (which, let's face it, wouldn't be hard)? Yes, people do illegal things with it, but providing an avenue to do illegal things isn't illegal (i.e. I can illegally import things by driving them through the channel tunnel, but that doesn't make driving through the channel tunnel illegal).
Also, there is no real "for limited use" clause I found - they made 3 main points:
I think that covers pretty much everything i've discussed.
Last edited:
And both of those apps modify iOS to add that useful functionality. Which is copyright infringement.
Good for you!
Hopefully, you see the difference between that and 100% legal!