Software Piracy seen as Normal

[crachoar]

Fair Use does not apply to the copying of media for personal (or other) use.

I don't know what US legislation covers that.

Great then. Thanks for the insight - oh-defender-of-justice.

Your legal example of fair use (the legal term, protecting copyright holders) refers to using copyrighted materials for presentations and the like. And yes, that is a valid term. And yes, you can't do what you want.

For example, little Timmy does a report on 'U2' (for some reason). He won't be sued by U2 for making a reproduction of an album cover to pass around so the class can see - as long as little Timmy isn't trying to reproduce their albums for profit.

Fair Use for the consumer, is not that at all. In fact, they're hardly related. Fair Use for consumers, deals directly with the DMCA and the handicaps it has instilled upon the rights of the consumer.

Fair Use for the consumer is a way to protect your investment. Not sell it.

...But it is not legal to make a duplicate and then give that duplicate to someone else.

Neat. That's exactly what I said. Fair Use, here, in the states (remember, 'digital age Fair Use' now - not the legal term you're thinking of), when being brought up in a debate about media, is referring to your (the consumer's) rights to back up the content that you own - for your own personal uses. That's what everybody is fighting for.

Since you didn't seem to get it the first two times, I'll make it crystal for you this time around...

I wasn't saying that it's 'fair use' to download songs for free. I never said that - ever.

I stated that I don't support the iTunes Music Store because it does not allow me to use the music I payed for with other players - without the aid of a plug-in or second application.

Also, I dislike the fact that the RIAA and Apple are fighting to keep it that way (under the DMCA) - by sending 'cease and desist' letters to software makers that make (free) apps to remove the DRM encryption from my files so that I may use them on all of my computers and players.

Not to mention the fact that I can only burn my music 'so-many-times'.

Here, fair use also fights for the right for you to play your iTunes music on your Sony player (which - without some 'morally unsound' applications - you can't do).

I don't like DRM (especially when it's encoded with my personal information). I don't enjoy having proprietary media - so I don't support the iTMS. That's all I said.

As for the other side of things - The MPAA and the RIAA want us to simply exhaust our media, and repurchase it. Afterall, why wouldn't they? More money.

The idea is - you buy it. It should be up to you to decide how or where you use it (i.e. 'enjoy / listen / view' it). You should be able to create back-ups of your library, incase anything should happen to the originals. And I believe any sane person would tend to agree.

Like the common example of children not knowing how to handle delicate media, such as DVDs (which I have already stated - but which I will have no problem repeating for your benefit).

So, you back up the DVD to take on vacation - leave the original $20 master at home, where it's safe. You're not selling it - you paid the corporation for it, etc.

Advocates of Fair Use say that we should be allowed to do that. The MPAA and conservatives alike say we shouldn't (because they enjoy money).

That's how we (geeks) define fair use these days, here in 'Merica. If you need some help with the subject, visit: http://www.protectfairuse.org

Proprietary DRM makes about as much sense as buying lunchmeat that can only be used with certain breads. Move along.

 

[Xtremehkr]

There are more than a few things that should be seen as being norml.

 

[savar]

You do not need Painter. You want it. And you're stealing it.

One thing people rarely consider is that downloading an MP3 is not theft in the typical sense. You are using your own computer and your own leased bandwidth to make a binary copy of a file. There's no loss involved in that scenario.

Opportunity cost is a plausible argument for loss, but if you weren't going to buy the software anyway...then there is no opportunity cost. I'm not saying piracy is okay, but strictly speaking, in the hypothetical I've posed here, nobody gets injured.

 

[iMeowbot]

One thing people rarely consider is that downloading an MP3 is not theft in the typical sense. You are using your own computer and your own leased bandwidth to make a binary copy of a file. There's no loss involved in that scenario.

If you make some really good fake banknotes with your own equipment, and they're good enough fakes that they aren't detected, is there any loss involved when you deposit them in the bank or spend them? If you weren't going to obtain real money anyway, is there any real loss?

 

[After G]

If you make some really good fake banknotes with your own equipment, and they're good enough fakes that they aren't detected, is there any loss involved when you deposit them in the bank or spend them? If you weren't going to obtain real money anyway, is there any real loss?

Considering that pretty much all money these days is fiat money and isn't backed up by gold anymore, but by your trust in the government, the government won't lose gold it doesn't have. That being said, if you made enough of them, all banknotes, real or fake, would lose their value. Kind of like German money post-WWI/pre-WWII. Or Italian money. Or Vietnamese money.

In the case of software, it's not like Adobe Photoshop suddenly gets cheaper/less valuable because some software pirates made some copies. Even with the "unlimited" number of copies one could potentially make, software isn't suddenly worth almost nothing. In fact, software gets more expensive to "factor in" piracy. And look at Microsoft. Their OSes have to be some of the most pirated software around, and they're not hurting because of it.

 

[iMeowbot]

In the case of software, it's not like Adobe Photoshop suddenly gets cheaper/less valuable because some software pirates made some copies.

Actually it is just like that, because license revenue is the value of that software to its owner (the author/publisher). The value is reduced by the license price times the number of unlicensed copies used.

Even with the "unlimited" number of copies one could potentially make, software isn't suddenly worth almost nothing. In fact, software gets more expensive to "factor in" piracy.

Actually that is false. In markets where software theft and counterfeiting is rampant, publishers have been forced to reduce their prices.

In Thailand, Microsoft sell XP and Office for the equivalent to USD36. in Malaysia, they offer XP Home bundled with Works for about USD40. Other publishers are using the Digital Passport service to tailor prices to the local piracy rates.

And look at Microsoft. Their OSes have to be some of the most pirated software around, and they're not hurting because of it.

Ah, they're rich so it's okay to steal from them.

 

[EGT]

I've never really liked the idea of using illegal software. I was talking to a friend on MSN the other day and we were chatting about Tiger for some reason...
Within seconds of me saying "I haven't bought it yet", he gave me a bit torrent link to download the latest version
I sort of just dismissed it. It's really not fair at all.

 

[latergator116]

If you make some really good fake banknotes with your own equipment, and they're good enough fakes that they aren't detected, is there any loss involved when you deposit them in the bank or spend them? If you weren't going to obtain real money anyway, is there any real loss?

Yes, by counterfiting money you are lessening the value of others' money and, therefore, stealing.

 

[tsk]

Oh, good try... <applause>

Nope, it's a scan from a book by W E Eascher, which I bought about 20 years ago, I have several volumes of his work and 1 original woodblock print. Fair use? Intent?

I wish I could draw like that.

Actually, (I think) scanning a book like that is often copyright infringement.

Typically books have a disclaimer that says something like:

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquires concerning reproductions outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department...

I copied the text out of a textbook on my desk here. I guess there are a few loopholes if it's permitted by law, but I don't think scanning a book for an avatar is "technically" legal.

 

[LethalWolfe]

The age of P2P and off-the-rack desktop computers (as opposed to purpose built workstations) being able to handle hi-end apps is relatively new. Yet before this time poor, starving students learned what was required to get into the workforce even though they didn't personally own the standard industry tools. Imagine that...

And currently there are many disciplines that require things that can't be downloaded from the internet. Yet poor, starving students of those disciplines seem to have no problem learning what is required to get into the workforce even though they don't personally own the standard industry tools. Imagine that...

As programs like Photoshop, FCP, or Avid filter more and more into the mainstream saying, "I know Photoshop" means less and less. A friend of mine graduated from college in '98 in basically got his first gig 'cause he had Avid experience (our college had 6 Avids at the time). I graduated a few years later and, by that time, it was basically common to come out of college w/Avid experience. (sidenote: Another friend got a job at Dateline from a project he shot on S-VHS and edited on a linear (deck-to-deck), cuts only editor)

There is a big difference between TOOLS and TALENT. Tools can be taught. Talent cannot. If person A made an interesting DVD menu w/Photoshop Elements and iDVD and person B made a so-so menu w/Photoshop CS and DVD Studio Pro, I'm gonna hire person A. I can teach person A how to use new tools. I can't teach person B talent.

Owning an official NBA basketball doesn't make you an NBA player.


Lethal

 

[WinterMute]

Actually, (I think) scanning a book like that is often copyright infringement.

Typically books have a disclaimer that says something like:

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquires concerning reproductions outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department...

I copied the text out of a textbook on my desk here. I guess there are a few loopholes if it's permitted by law, but I don't think scanning a book for an avatar is "technically" legal.

Under current English copyright law I can photocopy an entire chapter of a book and distribute it to my classes as long as I am not in any way altering the text. This also applies to images, recordings and other stored media but not software.

The Universities and colleges pay for this right.

Technically you're probably right, technically I can't transfer ANY of my CD's to my iPod because we don't have a "fair use" law in this country (yet), technically the videos I record off my cable service are illegal for the same reasons. I'm not re-distributing the image for profit, it's in the public domain as a 1200x1400 pixel image (I Gooooogled it yesterday, there's hundreds of Escher illustrations on websites) I don't benefit from Escher's work at all.

Again I think it's the intent, if I was using the Escher illustration to make money I would be in serious breach of the intellectual copyright of Escher's estate, which is why images and music have to be cleared for use in films and commercials.

Plus there is a time limit on copyright, although it's currently under review.

Some people in this thread seem to misunderstand the difference between physical and intellectual copyright..... (well, one person at least).

I'm glad to see such an informed and calm debate by most participants, the urge to grandstand on subjects like this is strong.

 

[Henri Gaudier]

Hoist the Jolly Rodger

Capitalism is rotten to it’s sick exploititive core and if it can make something for €10 and sell it for €1000 it will. No fair play on its part, just relentless profiteering. And if one market will bear a higher price - will they be happy and keep it the same price as elsewhere? No they’ll jack it up to whatever the market will take.

Whilst we’re all meant to be good little consumers and buy it if we can and do without if we can’t afford it. It’s strange how some people only get outraged or offended by assaults on capital and yet in their private lives they don’t care about anyone or anything else. Their outrage is empty, knee jerk idiocy. If they priced it right the problem would all but disappear. Why have a hack when you can be legit with updates, support?

As an artist, my work is of immense importance to me and if that means a bit of cracked software so be it. It’s easy to adhere to capitalisms code of ethics if you have the cash.

The Sex Pistols used stolen equipment and the great German film director-Werner Herzog shot his first feature on a stolen 16 mill camera. Thank **** they did. The world is a better place for them.

And finally, piracy aiding Osama Bin Laden? Pentagon drivel.

 

[WinterMute]

Capitalism is rotten to it’s sick exploititive core and if it can make something for €10 and sell it for €1000 it will. No fair play on its part, just relentless profiteering. And if one market will bear a higher price - will they be happy and keep it the same price as elsewhere? No they’ll jack it up to whatever the market will take.

This is true, "all the market will bear" has been a capitalist maxim for hundreds of years, it's not a modern thought. Software companies may be able to mass produce the actual product for a few ££$$, but it's the development, marketing and security that costs the money, Apple's margins on hardware are very slim, as are car manufacturers, should we be stealing Macs and Fords because we think the prices are too high?

Software piracy has become the issue it is because it's so easy, and there's little that can be done to stop it. Car theft is pretty easy to, with a little research or a brick, but so far only a very small portion of our society thinks it's OK to steal cars. Applespider's initial comments are based on the premise that almost everyone now sees piracy as OK.

It’s strange how some people only get outraged or offended by assaults on capital and yet in their private lives they don’t care about anyone or anything else. Their outrage is empty, knee jerk idiocy. If they priced it right the problem would all but disappear. Why have a hack when you can be legit with updates, support?

I don't think that last statement would happen even if the companies were to drop their prices, Applespider's post was about the ethical shift that has happened to allow people to see theft of certain items as not only acceptable, but almost a right. Why would anyone pay any money at all if getting it for free is OK? We see from the problems with shareware and donateware that most people simply won't pay.

As an artist, my work is of immense importance to me and if that means a bit of cracked software so be it. It’s easy to adhere to capitalisms code of ethics if you have the cash.

So you'd be happy to have your immensely important work stolen and used for others profits would you? You do all the work and they get all the money? You wouldn't even get the recognition.

Piracy is the negation of creativity and talent.

 

[Mechcozmo]

Capitalism is rotten to it’s sick exploititive core and if it can make something for €10 and sell it for €1000 it will. No fair play on its part, just relentless profiteering. And if one market will bear a higher price - will they be happy and keep it the same price as elsewhere? No they’ll jack it up to whatever the market will take.

Whilst we’re all meant to be good little consumers and buy it if we can and do without if we can’t afford it. It’s strange how some people only get outraged or offended by assaults on capital and yet in their private lives they don’t care about anyone or anything else. Their outrage is empty, knee jerk idiocy. If they priced it right the problem would all but disappear. Why have a hack when you can be legit with updates, support?

As an artist, my work is of immense importance to me and if that means a bit of cracked software so be it. It’s easy to adhere to capitalisms code of ethics if you have the cash.

The Sex Pistols used stolen equipment and the great German film director-Werner Herzog shot his first feature on a stolen 16 mill camera. Thank **** they did. The world is a better place for them.

And finally, piracy aiding Osama Bin Laden? Pentagon drivel.

Better to be a pirate than join the Navy... but when the Navy shoots you, you don't have any excuses.

 

[RacerX]

I've been stealing Painter since version 7...

I would pay SOMETHING for this software, but now the hundreds and hundreds of dollars everything costs these days. They overshoot my price range by $500, so I have to steal it.

So let me get this straight... you use this software for making money, but you aren't willing to pay for the software?

Early on (late 80's, early 90's) I used software that wasn't mine (belonged to friends of mine) to learn how to use that software. But as I started making money based on the use of that software, I replaced it all with licensed versions... because the software had paid for itself.

Now I can usually download a 30 day trial of some piece of software. And if I can earn enough money from the use of that software in that time, then I buy it. And again, the software paid for itself.

If you are using this software in any of the work you sell, then you don't have a moral leg to stand on... you are stealing. And the fact that it is software doesn't change that it is stealing. What you are doing would be the equivalent of stealing canvases, brushes and paint from an art supply store.

You are basically shoplifting with less risk of being caught.

Painter 9.0 for me is so buggy and they still haven't released updates for it. It's been out for months! If I had bought it when it came out, I'd be sooo pissed right now!

Has anybody here paid full price for software and ended up regretting it when it crashed their computer, messing up their files? And the only thing you can do is sit on your butt waiting for them to release updates? Sometimes the updates themselves cause problems!

Major software updates promise new improved features but what they don't say is "now with more bugs!" I know this is just how things work but I prefer to try before i buy, and that's basically how I justify ripping these companies off.

And there is no one forcing you to upgrade (specially if you are using the software illegally to begin with). I've stayed with versions of software that are getting quite old because they still do everything that I need of them. Why upgrade when what I have works fine.

Any change from a stable system is going to introduce issues... that is just the nature of computing. The question should always be "do the benefits out weigh the costs?" If the answer is "yes" then you upgrade.

But, of course, this isn't even your software to complain about.

If we compare this (again) to something like shoplifting, you are basically complaining about the quality of the products you stoled to justify stealing them.

You've got some major ethical issues here.

 

[cait-sith]

I develop software professionally.

If someone downloads something I have made commercially for their own use, e.g., not to make a profit with, that's fine. If they do or do not download the software, I do not lose any money.

However, if they get good at using my software and go into the job market, they may choose to purchase my software for commercial use. Had they never used my software, they may go with something else.

The same argument can be used for music. I've bought so many CD's because I've heard a track or two from a friend and downloaded some more to sample the artist.

A scheme where companies charge for commercial use and not personal use is great. Sun did it with Solaris, and that allowed me to learn their OS and get a job as a Solaris admin once upon a time. And I made the recommendation to my management staff to keep using Solaris instead of migrating to a different platform. So letting me download a copy of their OS made them several thousand dollars.

 

[Henri Gaudier]

In the history of the world ,,,,

Dear Wintermute your response is reasoned (within a consensual boundary) and yet you carry this statement -

"Everything in excess, moderation is for monks..." Lazerus Long

This in a way exemplifies my point. I am not advocating total disregard for conventional morality but on certain issues, I’ll step out of the confines of judeo christian capitalist doctrine, take the hack and do my work, get drunk on the sound, become momentarily alive in the certain knowledge that everything is built on a foundation of murder and oppression. As I eat whilst others starve, as the Pentagon plans another black op, as the World Trade Organisation rapes another third world country, as one more Tiger gets blown away - my ills are small.

Capitalism steals everything, sanctified by Papal bulls it then demands YOU pay through your teeth.

As for my work being stolen - it is! When we work ensemble, all to one end, each to their best abilities and some are paid a 100 times more – that is theft – and that IS capitalism.

Move towards the Palace of Wisdom, extend your leash to its greatest extent. If someone weeps at the song made on a cracked Cubase because it’s so true, true, true – you’ll be forgiven. At your last breath ....it is nought.

 

[WinterMute]

Dear Wintermute your response is reasoned (within a consensual boundary) and yet you carry this statement -

"Everything in excess, moderation is for monks..." Lazerus Long

This in a way exemplifies my point. I am not advocating total disregard for conventional morality but on certain issues, I’ll step out of the confines of judeo christian capitalist doctrine, take the hack and do my work, get drunk on the sound, become momentarily alive in the certain knowledge that everything is built on a foundation of murder and oppression. As I eat whilst others starve, as the Pentagon plans another black op, as the World Trade Organisation rapes another third world country, as one more Tiger gets blown away - my ills are small.

Capitalism steals everything, sanctified by Papal bulls it then demands YOU pay through your teeth.

As for my work being stolen - it is! When we work ensemble, all to one end, each to their best abilities and some are paid a 100 times more – that is theft – and that IS capitalism.

Move towards the Palace of Wisdom, extend your leash to its greatest extent. If someone weeps at the song made on a cracked Cubase because it’s so true, true, true – you’ll be forgiven. At your last breath ....it is nought.

You never know, I might be being ironic...

I'm an atheist, no-one's going to reward me for anything in the end and just because it's all gone to cr*p doesn't mean I shouldn't hold opinions about things that matter to me.

If you can live with what you do OK, nothing I say or do will change that, just as it won't make the hoodied teenager over the road think twice about downloading the latest releases, he sees it as a normal act.

Look, I'm boring myself with this now, I've said everything I need to say at the moment, theft is theft, if that's alright in your book, go steal something.

Just don't discuss it on MacRumors...

 

[mvc]

I develop software professionally.

If someone downloads something I have made commercially for their own use, e.g., not to make a profit with, that's fine. If they do or do not download the software, I do not lose any money.

However, if they get good at using my software and go into the job market, they may choose to purchase my software for commercial use. Had they never used my software, they may go with something else.

The same argument can be used for music. I've bought so many CD's because I've heard a track or two from a friend and downloaded some more to sample the artist.

A scheme where companies charge for commercial use and not personal use is great. Sun did it with Solaris, and that allowed me to learn their OS and get a job as a Solaris admin once upon a time. And I made the recommendation to my management staff to keep using Solaris instead of migrating to a different platform. So letting me download a copy of their OS made them several thousand dollars.

Interesting post...

In my opinion the major software developers COULD shut down piracy almost immediately using compulsory online registration or other known methods.

The reasons they don't are simple and purely economic:

1. There is more income to be gained from having pirated copies floating around introducing new users to the software who often will later buy a copy, than there is from trying to ensure ALL users pay, as many would simply not pay and not use the software either, or worse....

... They would use a competing product that they can pirate instead.

2. So this leads us to the simple fact that no one software developer in a non-monopolistic situation can suddenly tighten up their registration process without actually losing money long term if their competitors don't follow suit.

This is why usually only software with major dominance in its field can ever get away with requiring dongles and complex online registration processes.

Does any of this justify software piracy - no, but it helps explain its prevalence.

Software companies themselves are allowing it.