Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

GMC Forum _ Electronic Entertainment _ Why Not To Use Pirated Software

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 12 2007, 11:25 PM

Why not to use pirated or cracked software

Five reasons not to use cracked software:


1) It is theft and therefore illegal.
2) It results ultimately in fewer and more expensive software products.
3) It is a ‘poor’ way to repay the music community.
4) It is often ‘malware’ and can potentially damage your pc.
5) It is GMC policy not to condone the use or discussion of where and how to get/use ‘crackware’ and illegal filesharing.


It seems opportune to write this now and pin it as a closed thread. I have and use a fair few pieces of music software - commercial, shareware and freeware – sitting on my music PC are sequencers like Reaper, Live!, Reason; the wave editors Audacity and Cool Edit; various soft synths including Reaktor, Sylenth, Pentagon and Atmosphere; two samplers Kontakt and Halion; and various effects and mastering tools including ones from PSP, Sonalkis, Har-Bal and Ozone. If I was to add up the cost of all of this and tell my wife it would probably lead to a divorce. If she knew how much I spend just updating these she would have a fit!

All my software – not just music – however is legal. I don’t use pirated or ‘crackware’ – never have and never will. If I can’t afford some software then I will in the first instance attempt to get a shareware or freeware version. If none are available that I like then I wait until I have saved the money and then buy the software. I don’t have a high income so saving up potentially hundreds of Euros can take me a while and I often find it frustrating to have to wait. But wait I do and what follows are my reasons why I do this rather then use ‘crackware’.

Moral and ethical considerations.
I lecture in Ethics and Morals and one early lecture is a discussion that is extremely relevant to his subject. In it I argue (backed up by some philosophical heavyweights) that the rule that we should live by is basically one of ‘do unto others as you would like done to you’. Or to put this another way: if I steal then I must accept it without complaint if someone broke in to my house and stole all my guitars. ‘Crackware’ is theft and I don’t want someone stealing my possessions.

In most countries software piracy is a felony – not just pirating software but having and using it. It is breaking the law. Like it or not we live in a society and as such should abide by its laws. The laws are there to help maintain and protect society so if you break the law by using ‘crackware’ then expect to pay the price.

It seems that some view piracy as something ‘cool’ that they do as a mark of their ‘living on the edge’ of society or outside it. If you wish to live outside society then you should repay what you have had from it first. Curiously I have yet to meet anyone who has repaid society adequately for their housing, healthcare, education and so on.

Music software is expensive to develop, test, debug and market. Many of the companies involved are small operations. Many make little profit and are often run by a few people who are just passionate about music. ‘Crackware’ eats in to profit both because it reduces revenue and because it means that the companies spend time and money implementing protection routines. Sooner or later someone pays for the lost revenue and increased costs – either the price of the product goes up and/or the company uses time implementing protection rather then coding new or improved products and/or the organization goes bust and/or the staff in the company are paid less or lose their jobs. So ‘crackware’ costs us all –for customers via fewer, more expensive products; and for staff in lost income and jobs.

I’ve spent many years in and around the recording industry and am lucky enough to know a number of people and to have learnt from them. They have a passion for music, recording and technology. In my experience people are nearly always generous with their time and help and often view this as a way of repaying the help and advice they received along the way. If you look at the boards of the music software forums you can see many of these people providing help and advice. Music production and recording is a small community. Using ‘crackware’ isn’t stealing from someone unknown – you may well be stealing from someone who has given you help and guidance or from whom you might need to help in the future.

Music production and recording is a community – a small scale society if you will. If you use ‘crackware’ then you can’t expect to be well received in the community. Take a look at the number of flames in the forums when someone using ‘crackware’ asks for help. Personally I never refuse to help but if I suspect the person is using ‘crackware’ then my help is restricted to advising them to read the manual or contact the software company.


Technical reasons not to use ‘crackware’
Most ‘crackware’ is downloaded from P2P sites. These sites often include items which contain viruses, Trojans and other malicious code. If you use ‘crackware’ you are actively choosing to download and run potentially malicious code.

Virus guards are not ideal for a DAW as most run in the background and monitor activity. Recording and mixing on a DAW takes time and an active, resident virus guard can have a detrimental affect on your pcs performance, slowing it down, reducing hard disc speed or activating when you least want it.

Because of theft most music software companies now protect their software either physically – ie via a dongle – or through software through some form of password code. I stopped using and buying software that is hardware protected partly because I got fed up with losing the dongles and having to spend time searching for them. In some instances hardware protection can cause incompatibility problems with pc hardware or other software that may result in a pc crash, poor performance or software that runs irratically or not at all. So my choice in software is restricted to those that do not use hardware protection.

Software protection is often some form of call and response system. For these systems I find that I have to keep a file of passwords, serial numbers and so on. Everytime I upgrade I have to dig the file out to find this information. Some of my software is locked to a pc component – the hard disc, network card and so on. If I change a component I then have to go through the task of re-authorising my software. Some software is coded to the original installation disc – lose the disc, or just don’t have it to hand, and the software won’t run. All of these methods require time that I would rather spend doing something else with.

So protecting software doesn’t just end up in additional development time and costs and therefore a more expensive product. It also results in inconvenience and may reduce choice and cause technical problems for the legitimate end-user.

Music software is in a state of continual development. The programs are often large and complicated and despite debugging a new version will often be followed up by a number of bug fixes and improvements or feature additions downloadable from the developer’s site. Access to these downloads nearly always requires product registration and so is not available to ‘crackware’ users. In a similar vein product registration is also nearly always required to access technical support. ‘Crackware’ has no technical support. Ironically ‘crackware’ that is ‘malware’ may actually cause technical problems.

Very recently there have some threads about whether we can download the backing tracks and/or lesson videos from GMC. These are both the exclusive intellectual property of, and copyrighted to, GMC and if someone pirated them it would result in lost income for GMC. Without this income GMC might cease to exist and we would all suffer as a result: we would lose the lessons, the instructors would lose an outlet for their lessons and skills and all the work that Kris, Henrik and Maria have put in would come to nothing. I’m sure that’s not an outcome any of us would want.

Software piracy is the theft of intellectual property and as such GMC cannot and will not condone it, or discussions of where to get or how to do file-sharing, cracked software and so on.[i]

Cheers,
Tony

ps - stickied but open for debate.

Posted by: Owen Nov 13 2007, 01:21 AM

Well said.




EDIT - duplicate post deleted Owen as per your request. Not sure why it's doing it to you either. Maybe Kris can help? Tony

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 13 2007, 02:36 AM

QUOTE (tonymiro @ Nov 12 2007, 11:25 PM) *
Why not to use pirated or cracked software
Or to put this another way: if I steal then I must accept it without complaint if someone broke in to my house and stole all my guitars. ‘Crackware’ is theft and I don’t want someone stealing my possessions.

...

Technical reasons not to use ‘crackware’
Most ‘crackware’ is downloaded from P2P sites. These sites often include items which contain viruses, Trojans and other malicious code. If you use ‘crackware’ you are actively choosing to download and run potentially malicious code.


First of all, good post with lots of valid arguments, however, there are some things I've got to say.

Filesharing is not like somebody going in and stealing all your guitars, it's more like someone coing in and copying your guitars and not paying you for it. (I personally wouldn't mind that)

And, you don't get viruses, trojans, etc from serious P2P sites, I'm not telling everybody do go and download everything, but I still want the truth to be told.

And, a personal note to everything about this. I don't think you should download stuff illegaly if you don't have to, try to find shareware and so on, and for the love of god, buy it if you can! But if you're young and/or poor and it's the only way to get something done and you really wouldn't have been able to do it otherwise, I won't mind. Just once you have the money for it, buy it. That's my standpoint, and I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, but this is how I look at piracy. (But when it comes to downloading music, movies and especially tv-series I have a completely different view that won't be discussed here laugh.gif )

Posted by: DeepRoots Nov 13 2007, 02:54 AM

Crackware shouldnt:

be used
be discussed
exist.

My brother designs software for a living, if due to piracy he was unable to find work..it would ruin his many years of education and would be unable to start a family with his girlfriend.

I'd feel crushed if that were me...

Big fat no as far as i'm concerned!

Posted by: Cherio Nov 13 2007, 03:05 AM

Very well said
And I agree with all of you.

Cherio

Posted by: muris Nov 13 2007, 03:37 AM

Try before buy.
Sadly,many stay off buying mad.gif

Posted by: The Uncreator Nov 13 2007, 03:44 AM

Excellent Tony, very well put smile.gif

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Nov 13 2007, 03:47 AM

QUOTE (muris @ Nov 12 2007, 09:37 PM) *
Try before buy.
Sadly,many stay off buying mad.gif


I agree - try before buy is a way of fooling yourself you are doing the right thing. Most will never buy something they already have for free.

Posted by: The Uncreator Nov 13 2007, 03:51 AM

Plus its way cooler to have a CD Collection than an MP3 Collection. I get that warm fuzzy feeling when i see my CD Rack filled up smile.gif

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 13 2007, 04:01 AM

QUOTE (Andrew Cockburn @ Nov 13 2007, 03:47 AM) *
I agree - try before buy is a way of fooling yourself you are doing the right thing. Most will never buy something they already have for free.

While that might be true for some people, others (such as myself) downloads a lot of albums, and then just make a list and buy as much as you can. And, I like spending money on concerts and stuff that the bands get more money from than just buying cd's (a downside with buying cd's can be that you're supposting record companies, if you don't like record companies). So, some people actually buy after they try, I bought about 35 cd's only in july and august this year, so there's still hope, or something.

Oh, and on the topic of downloading music or not, http://www.punknews.org/article/25898 is a good read.

And, I'm not encouraging anyone to download music, I'm just showing all the different coins so you can decide what you want to do. Showing just one side of the coin makes people (or me at least) think it's all bull**** and then just ignore all those arguments (wich might be perfectly valid).

Posted by: Vinicitur Nov 13 2007, 04:02 AM

I won't insult everyone by saying that I've never downloaded stuff (programs, music etc.) because I have. But it was always to "try before deciding to buy". I have always uninstalled/removed the programs or music after making my decision if it was for me or not. Not saying it's the perfect way but it's how I did/do things.

I do have a problem with a lot of people that call me an idiot because I'm prepared to pay for quality and support the artist/developer. I don't understand not supporting the people who make your life easier by making better programs or the music that you enjoy.

Where I might differ in opinion is about distribution. When a program is no longer available or when a music label no longer distributes certain albums. In gaming it would be called abandonware: Games no longer distributed/supported by developers or publishers. And for music if I can't get it any other way because the label doesn't distribute it, then yes I consider downloading because I don't want the music to disappear entirely.

Again this is only 1 person's opinion.

Posted by: fkalich Nov 13 2007, 04:10 AM

QUOTE (Fsgdjv @ Nov 12 2007, 07:36 PM) *
First of all, good post with lots of valid arguments, however, there are some things I've got to say.

Filesharing is not like somebody going in and stealing all your guitars, it's more like someone coing in and copying your guitars and not paying you for it. (I personally wouldn't mind that)


At least some level of eduction in economics should be mandatory, what you just wrote is ridiculous.

Let me explain in simple terms.

1) Revenue = price * quantity sold
2) Profit = the above - business costs.

So what happens to profit, when they sale fewer, because the market gets clipped by the illegal copies?

This is theft, if you do this, you are no different that some guy looting stores during some disaster, no different than somebody breaking into somebody's house and stealing their guitars. You are the same.

If you want to live in delusion, I can't stop you.

edit: there once was a time when I did use some illegal software, music. but I never kid myself into thinking I was not a thief when doing that. I quit doing it some time ago. I am not trying to insult anyone, just stating the facts, if you make illegal copies of intellectual property, you are a thief in doing so, that is just the way it is.

edit2: also our youtube downloads, same thing for most of it. I do that. it is wrong, but I do it. i probably should stop. just don't want to paint myself as an angel. but at least one should remember the phrase "to thy own self be true".

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 13 2007, 04:19 AM

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 13 2007, 04:10 AM) *
At least some level of eduction in economics should be mandatory, what you just wrote is ridiculous.

Let me explain in simple terms.

1) Revenue = price * quantity sold
2) Profit = the above - business costs.

So what happens to profit, when they sale fewer, because the market gets clipped by the illegal copies.

This is theft, if you do this, you are no different that some guy looting stores during some disaster, no different than somebody breaking into somebody's house and stealing their guitars. You are the same.

If you want to live in delusion, I can't stop you.

edit: there once was a time when I did use some illegal software, music. but I never kid myself into thinking I was not a thief when doing that. I quit doing it some time ago. I am not trying to insult anyone, just stating the facts, if you make illegal copies of intellectual property, you are a thief in doing so, that is just the way it is.

Thank you for this insightful post!

I'm aware of the fact that they sell less because of this, but I'm talking about the 12 year old boy who gets like 12 Euros each months from their parents who won't afford that software for 2000 euros. He wouldn't have bought that, and his mom and dad wouldn't either.

So yeah, I'll keep living in delusion, hopefully one day I'll be a fully fledged Don Quixote.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and about that guitar thing, I wouldn't have made any profit of them copying my guitars either, instead of selling them to them, but I still wouldn't mind!

Posted by: fkalich Nov 13 2007, 04:39 AM

It is not like the kid is stealing bread because he is hungry.

In the long run, I think you are better off respecting the property rights of others. It motivates you to figure out how you are going to succeed, to take care of things by your own talents and ability. If you just try to get things the sneaky and easy way, you fall into a pattern of behavior that is not a very productive pattern to fall into in the long term.

Posted by: FretDancer69 Nov 13 2007, 04:43 AM

There's an interesting point of view about piracy, and that is, its the only way for "poor" people to get "access" to something, can be books. Anything. Im aware that its ilegal, but you know what im trying to prove here. It can be applied to many things and not only software.

Just sharing my thoughts.

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 13 2007, 04:44 AM

to fkalich: Even though he isn't hungry, he's not damaging the industry (except that he might keep doing so when he's old and have money, but that's a different story..). And if you read my original post more than just the first three lines, you know that I agree with you. (or, mostly at least).

Posted by: fkalich Nov 13 2007, 05:00 AM

QUOTE (Fsgdjv @ Nov 12 2007, 09:44 PM) *
to fkalich: Even though he isn't hungry, he's not damaging the industry (except that he might keep doing so when he's old and have money, but that's a different story..). And if you read my original post more than just the first three lines, you know that I agree with you. (or, mostly at least).


you pointed out an example of those that do not damage the industry. in this case, probably so, so long as he is not redistributing it elsewhere.

However, we live in a society governed by laws, laws to protect property rights. The individual is not allowed to decide "ah, I'm not hurting anything". More often than not, they are and not realizing how. The owners of the software often have special and controlled programs to make software available, but that is up to them, not somebody who by their own personal perspective thinks what they are doing is justified.

If some guy comes into your house and steals your stuff to pay the rent, he feels justified. He feels he needs it more than you. You going be to sympathetic to his POV. You can't just decide what law you are not going to obey because to you that seems reasonable in your circumstances. If I own something, I sure as heck don't want anyone deciding for themselves that they have a right to it, for whatever reason. It is not theirs. They don't have any right to it. The kid just gets some shareware until he can afford something better.

That is what I do. I sure as heck would like some fancy commercial software for free. But I don't do it, I use shareware. I would not buy the fancy stuff either, does not mean I am going to justify my stealing it by that logic.

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 13 2007, 05:04 AM

fkalich: Good for you, but I don't follow laws for the hell of it, I do it when I find them reasonable, and if I don't, I do as I please. The only thing I try to do it not to hurt the "little person". But, I think it's great that people think differently, so I encourage you to keep thinking that way, since it works for you. Just don't try to change my views.

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 13 2007, 05:59 AM

QUOTE (FretDancer69 @ Nov 12 2007, 09:43 PM) *
There's an interesting point of view about piracy, and that is, its the only way for "poor" people to get "access" to something, can be books.


Curiously enough as part of my academic work I also work as an editor within academic publishing - journals, textbooks and monographs. Those publishers that I edit for have all signed up to some form of open commons/copyleft agreement and so make their publications available either at cost or for free. The reason why they do this is that they wish to provide academic texts to as wide a community as possible. In order to do so they feel their role is to try to change the system from within rather then from outside.

In a similar vein I also write and publish academic works and where I have been published by commercial publishers I have asked for open commons on my IP. That is of course my right as the holder of the IP and imo choosing to do this is very different to someone else appropriating IP through piracy.

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: Animosity Nov 13 2007, 06:33 AM

QUOTE (Fsgdjv @ Nov 12 2007, 10:04 PM) *
fkalich: Good for you, but I don't follow laws for the hell of it, I do it when I find them reasonable, and if I don't, I do as I please.



What!!!?!

Edited for large text and implied language - Andrew

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 13 2007, 06:52 AM

QUOTE (Animosity @ Nov 13 2007, 06:33 AM) *
What!!!?!

Edited for large text and implied language - Andrew


I feel the urge to ask you the same thing, what do you mean?

Posted by: Animosity Nov 13 2007, 09:04 AM

QUOTE (Fsgdjv @ Nov 12 2007, 11:52 PM) *
I feel the urge to ask you the same thing, what do you mean?



I mean - That's not for you to decide. You cannot choose to obey certain laws and ignore others.

Posted by: ActiveX Nov 13 2007, 12:40 PM

I don't know if this is coincidence or not, but I bitched about this yesterday in the complaint thread, so here it is again: tongue.gif
I am a programmer, and I develop shareware; this is how I make my living and feed my family - so this type of attitude (stealing software saves me money and doesn't hurt anyone) really upsets me. Stealing is stealing. Would you snatch a purse from an old lady? Would you car jack someone? Do you steal from Grocery and Department Stores? It's all the same. It may come as a shock to you, but not all software is produced by huge multi-million dollar companies like Microsoft; most of it comes from average guys like me who put in very long hours, and work extremely hard only for people to f*****g steal it. mad.gif

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 13 2007, 02:51 PM

QUOTE (Animosity @ Nov 13 2007, 09:04 AM) *
I mean - That's not for you to decide. You cannot choose to obey certain laws and ignore others.

Everybody does it, that's a fact (ok, it's not a fact, but I don't know anyone who's never broken the law) . And I follow almost all laws, but for better reasons than just "oh, they tell me to do it".

And I'm really sorry for moving a bit far from the topic, this will be my last post that isn't super on topic. (or at least that is my plan!)

Posted by: swingline Nov 13 2007, 03:08 PM

QUOTE (Fsgdjv @ Nov 12 2007, 05:36 PM) *
Filesharing is not like somebody going in and stealing all your guitars, it's more like someone coing in and copying your guitars and not paying you for it. (I personally wouldn't mind that)

Your full of crap! You would care, its like in school you do your homework and everyone else copies it you feel screwed because your the only one who did it and everyone else got a free ride. If you bought a 1500 dollar guitar and every one else got it for free how would you feel. Its all the same say I buy Adobe Photoshop CS3 for upwards of 600 dollars, but you got it for free I'd be pissed and you would to if it was the other way around. So don't lie to me, yourself, or anyone else.

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 13 2007, 06:59 PM

***Impartial moderator voice on** * Guys keep it civil - especially towards each other. It's a debate.

Cheers,
Tony

***Impartial Moderator voice off***

Posted by: MickeM Nov 13 2007, 07:52 PM

QUOTE (Animosity @ Nov 13 2007, 09:04 AM) *
I mean - That's not for you to decide. You cannot choose to obey certain laws and ignore others.

Why not? I can speed and run a red light on occacions stay off robbing people. So it works.

EDIT: And to develop it a bit more breaking the laws you're unhappy with is a revolutionary way of challanging the state. An excellent way of making society change and it has been used for all times. When people never protested and just adjusted themselves to all the current laws there would be a great risk for the individual.

Me driving 115 instead of 110 km/h on the highway is not a big revolution but in the end it may lead to politicians saying "Everyone drives too fast, cars are more sequre, there's an economical winning in people getting to their destination quicker" would in the end lead to speed limits being raised to 120 km/h

Me and others running a red light in the same crossing all the time could in the end lead to a round about being built.

We'll see where file sharing will lead to in the end but I'm quite convinced they will adjust the laws instead of busting millions of teenagers all around the world. There's simply too high a cost and too complicated a task to do. It will likely become allowed within reasonable time, say in 10-15 years.

Posted by: The Uncreator Nov 13 2007, 08:11 PM

Valid argument, BUT, Still, this is something considered theft, (and yes, it believe it to be 100% theft...), not something as little as speeding, but you also make another good point about the whole protest/revolution thing, (excellent idea i must say)...And true, yes it is a good point, but continuing to steal music isnt gonna bring about revolutionary change to the world, hopefully what it will do is convince the record companys to do something about it, so where people still pay for it, and the artists get money for there work.

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 13 2007, 08:40 PM

QUOTE (swingline @ Nov 13 2007, 03:08 PM) *
Your full of crap!

Please tone down this a bit. No need to insult anyone who has a different opinion.

QUOTE (DeepRoots @ Nov 13 2007, 02:54 AM) *
Crackware shouldnt:

...
be discussed
...

My brother designs software for a living, if due to piracy he was unable to find work..it would ruin his many years of education and would be unable to start a family with his girlfriend.

I'd feel crushed if that were me...

Big fat no as far as i'm concerned!


I disagree strongly with this. Of course it should be discussed. Everyone is entitled their opinion. If it wasn't for past piracy, would he even have the opportunity to develop software now?

QUOTE (tonymiro @ Nov 12 2007, 11:25 PM) *
Why not to use pirated or cracked software

Five reasons not to use cracked software:
1) It is theft and therefore illegal.
2) It results ultimately in fewer and more expensive software products.
3) It is a ‘poor’ way to repay the music community.
4) It is often ‘malware’ and can potentially damage your pc.
5) It is GMC policy not to condone the use or discussion of where and how to get/use ‘crackware’ and illegal filesharing.

...

Cheers,
Tony

ps - stickied but open for debate.


I'm uncertain about posting this because bottom line is you are right and I don't promote piracy in no way, which I suspect this post could look like. I do disagree on some points though and would like to vent my opinions because as I see it this is not a simple matter. It's not as easy as a legal/illegal situation. Many tend to apply their own moral and claim that this is the right way. I want people to look at all sides and you left the thread open for debating.

1) No. It's illegal but it's NOT theft. I don't know the english legal terms when it comes to intellectual property, it's copyright infringement or something like that . Might be that different countries have different definitons of it, but I don't know of any that defines it as theft.

2) This can be, and is argued about. I'm sure you know that. Without piracy computers wouldn't be in the homes of as many families as it is today. Computers and software wouldn't be available at the prices they are today. Without pirated software I'm sure computers would be a very exclusive, extremely high priced technology available only to a few. Piracy laid the ground for the computer and software business as it is today. And it is a HUGE market, increasing for every day.

3) Yes. It is. I agree on that.

4) Yes. This is true too.

5) And it's a good policy. Since it is illegal GMC should in no way condone it.

Piracy is a crime. It is illegal. There is nothing to argue about that.

What should be discussed is if the laws are up to date and valid today.
Discuss the morals of software companies and media companies and politicians. The EULAs that you "sign" by opening a box and puts responsibilitys on you without an opportunity to disagree. Often they are in direct conflict with (at least in Sweden) local laws. The disclaimers that frees the company from all responsabilty of their product.

The copyright laws weren't written to protect an outdated business model. They was to encourage creativity. The purpose was NOT to ensure payment to the creator. Having artistic work protected for, I think it's 70 years after the makers death in Sweden, is NOT encouraging creativity. The pace today is to high for a timespan like that.

Of course the producer should get paid if you use their product (and they want payment) but as it is today it is getting more and more ridiculous. Dongles and software protection, EULA's. You are only "leasing" the product. It's not your own to do as you please with. Stealthy installed root-kits. Stealthy installed copy protection mechanisms that not only affects the application but your whole computer with slowdowns, phoning home, makes your CD/DVD useless, occupies memory and CPU resources. And so on.

All they are accomplishing is problems for the paying customer. The ones who download pirated software aren't affected since this stuff gets removed. There are plenty of examples of software that, to the customer, works better if it's cracked.

I'll just give one live example of this.
My wife loves games like Settlers, the MS one (can't remember the name now) and Sims.
She's bought every single game and addon in those series.

After awhile she started to complain that her computer was slow and sluggish. I knew about EA's (Electronic Arts) copy protection and told her so. Mail them and tell them and don't buy their stuff. But she really wants to play them. She mailed them and got a standard disclaimer auto response.

Then she bought Black and White 2 and now the fun starts. The game never starts. Ever.
Some research show that it installs a protection against virtual drives which was incompatible with her DVD drive. And The Sims stopped working too. Software from the same company, and their protection excluded each other. More mailing and non sense responses. EA ,officially, knew nothing about any copy protection that could cause that. Probably that's true. First Lionhead make the game, then an outside company is contracted for the protection then EA distributes it. So I guess technically EA wasn't responsible. EAs answer was "upgrade the graphics driver(duh!)". OK I've done that. "upgrade the sound driver". OK I've done that. "Replace the DVD drive". No way! I've traced it down to your copy protection, you turned down the proof I sent you without any explanation. I was active mailing them for 2 - 3 weeks and in their forums, together with others with the same problem and pinpointed down the problem but as soon as copy protection was mentioned it was met with dead silence from EA.
To put it mildly, that kind of ticked me off. Yes, that's the way to treat your customers.
Luckily we still had two choises. Return it or crack it, a game we paid for, to get what we paid for.
Actually we did neither. The game just lays in a shelf. No one has ever played it, I never got to going through the trouble of returning it.

Don't make this a black or white discussion (no pun intened) or a legal/illegal discussion. It's not that easy.
Don't follow laws blindly. Change them. Make the laws reasonable for the intended purpose. Not to protect a business model that's outdated.

In these kind of discussions sooner or later the argument comes along that the creator should be able to make a living of his/her work.
NO! That's not valid! Nothing is worth more then someone else is willing to pay for it. That's a basic commercial rule. If I can't make a living of what I'm doing I'd better start looking for another job.
If you write songs or play guitar but you can't make a living of it... tough luck. Get a job. I had too. Most people have to. If I write software (well, in most cases I'm probably employed and get paid for that) why should that be a guarantee to a secured future fro me, my family and future kids of kids?
Note: I was a software developer and I do play guitar.

Art and creativity in all forms should be encouraged and there have to be laws regulating it, but that's not equal to "I have the right to be rich on this". Or "The company representing me have the right to be rich on this". The laws are outdated and not valid anymore. What needs to be done is a complete remake. We need to decide what we want to achive and how the laws could support that. Do we want to encourage creativity? Do we want to protect the right to be paid when someone else uses it? Do we want to ensure the profit for a huge industry? Then set the laws accordingly.

And artists, don't be fooled. You sell your soul to the media company when you sign up. I don't think that's the best thing for an artist nor that it is good for art.

These are my opinions.

/edited for some spelling and also I misread an earlier post.

Posted by: DeepRoots Nov 13 2007, 08:55 PM

i think its ridiculous to try to justify pirated software.

It shouldnt be used.

Even if you do decide it is how you want to acquire software- it shouldnt be publicly discussed as this breeds more pirates.

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 13 2007, 09:02 PM

QUOTE (DeepRoots @ Nov 13 2007, 08:55 PM) *
i think its ridiculous to try to justify pirated software.

It shouldnt be used.

Even if you do decide it is how you want to acquire software- it shouldnt be publicly discussed as this breeds more pirates.

As I see it everything should be open for discussion. You solve nothing by not talking about it.

/edit again: omg I really can't spell.

Posted by: MickeM Nov 13 2007, 10:47 PM

QUOTE (DeepRoots @ Nov 13 2007, 08:55 PM) *
i think its ridiculous to try to justify pirated software.

It shouldnt be used.

Even if you do decide it is how you want to acquire software- it shouldnt be publicly discussed as this breeds more pirates.

I don't even see why home users need software like Word/Excel etc. There are perfectly suitable share and freeware that come at a cost we can afford.

And software piracy often strikes directly at the company since it's distributed in a different way than music and film. So yes, software piracy is really really really bad.

Then I think that the music and film industry needs to be shook to its foundation until some unneccessary and expensive middlemen with huge cigars fall off and money can be redirected to the music writers and bands and it will cost the end customer a lot less.

Record companies have their task, but does it have to come with such a heavy price tag?


QUOTE (blindwillie @ Nov 13 2007, 08:40 PM) *
Don't follow laws blindly. Change them. Make the laws reasonable for the intended purpose. Not to protect a business model that's outdated.

+1

QUOTE (The Uncreator @ Nov 13 2007, 08:11 PM) *
And true, yes it is a good point, but continuing to steal music isnt gonna bring about revolutionary change to the world, hopefully what it will do is convince the record companys to do something about it, so where people still pay for it, and the artists get money for there work.

Not change the world, but it's spread world wide and if that happens, the artists get payed more and the record companies less while the end customer gets the art at reasonable cost something is gained.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Nov 13 2007, 11:17 PM

QUOTE (MickeM @ Nov 13 2007, 04:47 PM) *
I don't even see why home users need software like Word/Excel etc. There are perfectly suitable share and freeware that come at a cost we can afford.


I agree - I have access to all the expensive stuff through work, but I decided to rebuild my home PC using as much free stuff as I could, I got 97% of the way there. I found free or cheap substitutes for:

- Word
- Excel
- PowerPoint
- Email
- Zipfiles

and many many more. It can be done.

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 13 2007, 11:49 PM

QUOTE (Andrew Cockburn @ Nov 13 2007, 11:17 PM) *
I agree - I have access to all the expensive stuff through work, but I decided to rebuild my home PC using as much free stuff as I could, I got 97% of the way there. I found free or cheap substitutes for:

- Word
- Excel
- PowerPoint
- Email
- Zipfiles

and many many more. It can be done.

And a +1 to that. If there is a freeware alternative I prefer using that as long as it's not too awkward. Most of the time I find them easier to use and not as bloted as the commercial ones.

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 14 2007, 12:11 AM

QUOTE (blindwillie @ Nov 13 2007, 01:40 PM) *
...
Don't make this a black or white discussion (no pun intened) or a legal/illegal discussion. It's not that easy.
Don't follow laws blindly. Change them. Make the laws reasonable for the intended purpose. Not to protect a business model that's outdated.
...

Art and creativity in all forms should be encouraged and there have to be laws regulating it, but that's not equal to "I have the right to be rich on this". Or "The company representing me have the right to be rich on this". The laws are outdated and not valid anymore. What needs to be done is a complete remake. We need to decide what we want to achive and how the laws could support that. Do we want to encourage creativity? Do we want to protect the right to be paid when someone else uses it? Do we want to ensure the profit for a .


I largely agree and as I've said before and elsewhere I support and lobby, and work unpaid, for open commons and copyleft organisations. For me the issue is to try to get the law changed. Until that happens though I work within it. What I don't see from the software pirates (rather then the end users or some of the distribution channels) is a desire to campaign to change the law. Now I wonder why they don't wink.gif .

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 14 2007, 01:45 AM

I said I wouldn't post any more that wasn't super on topic, but I have to post this (and just hope for it to be regarded as super on topic biggrin.gif )

First of all I don't like that I can't state my opinion (and my opinion was that software piracy was bad, but that everything isn't black and white) without getting offended. Sure, what I read doesn't really offend me, but since I read "edited for language by andrew", I get the feeling that you have something more to say, and theres no way you will convice me of anything by just saying that I'm "full of crap" or whatever.

And what MickeM wrote about breaking laws is exactly how I see it, if I don't like a law, I brake it and hope that others also will so that the law could get changed. I consider it my right as a human being. (And no, I've never stolen anything in my life, not even a chokolate bar, I've never murded, raped or anything like that, amazing, isn't it? blink.gif )

And to both MickeM and blindwillie: + 100000000000000000000, I totally agree with you to 100%

Posted by: ibanezkiller Nov 14 2007, 01:56 AM

QUOTE (swingline @ Nov 13 2007, 09:08 AM) *
. Its all the same say I buy Adobe Photoshop CS3 for upwards of 600 dollars, but you got it for free I'd be pissed and you would to if it was the other way around.


Their is another way... why not to use pirated software... should be "use pirated software!" (as long as the man does not get you)

Their are some stellar arguments for both side here.

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 14 2007, 02:06 AM

QUOTE (Fsgdjv @ Nov 13 2007, 06:45 PM) *
First of all I don't like that I can't state my opinion (and my opinion was that software piracy was bad, but that everything isn't black and white) without getting offended. Sure, what I read doesn't really offend me, but since I read "edited for language by andrew", I get the feeling that you have something more to say, and theres no way you will convice me of anything by just saying that I'm "full of crap" or whatever.


Which is of course why Andrew did the edit that he did and why I put my moderator's hat on briefly - so that you could make your point without being shouted at. We're more then happy for the debate to happen as it is an important issue worthy of discussion. It's also one reason why I'm not interjecting my opinion too much to let others put their points of view smile.gif .

What we moderators do want is that both sides show respect to each other and not descend to the levels of an all out flame war. If it does descend I hasten to add that the thread will get locked.

BTW - if anyone hasn't realised both me and Andrew post in bold italics when we're making a moderator's comment rather then a personal opinion/observation smile.gif .

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 14 2007, 02:13 AM

Yeah Tony, I'm aware of that, and that's of course a good thing. I was just pointing out that it would be even better if people could post politely without getting moderated. And yeah, at least I've noticed the bold italics laugh.gif

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 14 2007, 02:16 AM

np mate - it was sort of less to you and more a general comment smile.gif .

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: Owen Nov 14 2007, 02:32 AM

First of all, Kudos to blindwillie, his post made a lot of sense. smile.gif

QUOTE (swingline @ Nov 13 2007, 02:08 PM) *
Your full of crap! You would care, its like in school you do your homework and everyone else copies it you feel screwed because your the only one who did it and everyone else got a free ride. If you bought a 1500 dollar guitar and every one else got it for free how would you feel. Its all the same say I buy Adobe Photoshop CS3 for upwards of 600 dollars, but you got it for free I'd be pissed and you would to if it was the other way around. So don't lie to me, yourself, or anyone else.


Coincidentally Apple did that with the iPhone, people bought it when it came out and then two weeks later dropped the price $200, big business is not against using questionable tactics as well.

In recent surveys piracy also appears not to have effected album sales either:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/11/05/study_filesharing_increases_cd_sales.html

Also in 2005 the UK albums chart recorded its highest ever sales in history, despite the rapid influx in people downloading music from the internet.

Of course this only applies to CD's - which are generally available at a cheap price anyway, I have no idea how piracy effects small software companies producing high cost and high budget products - however I'm willing to stick a limb out and say not positively.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not trying to put forward the case for piracy here, but in general it doesnt seem to be effecting most industries at all, most people will buy the majority of products they use and I've not seen many of the more successful software companies harvesting a loss financially of recent.

In short I think the whole thing is a tad blown out of proportion but never the less it is illegal and if people want to find illegal things they dont have to look hard - a quick search on google will do it, as such I do not think it is appropriate to post such things up for discussion on GMC - people know how to find this stuff and GMC need not be associated with it.

I am not going to stop people pirating, people have their reasons and we're never going to change that by simply saying "Piracy is bad, stop now!" or being rude and hollering at them, legally Fsgdjv is in the wrong but who am I to tell him what and what not to do? He doesnt seem to be having a negative impact statistically so at the end of the day, why should we enforce something when he is most likely causing no harm.

We have all done immoral and wrong things, now I'm no Christian - I'm actually an agnostic, but there is a quote by the big J that makes perfect sense in this context;

Let ye who is without sin, cast the first stone.

Hope someone understands where I'm coming from here laugh.gif wink.gif


- Owen

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Nov 14 2007, 02:34 AM

And for the record, my edit was more about the big letters than the content - it would have got through unscathed otherwise but I took the opportunity to soften it slightly.

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 14 2007, 04:33 AM

Apologies Andrew - my mistake.

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: Animosity Nov 14 2007, 04:51 AM

QUOTE (MickeM @ Nov 13 2007, 12:52 PM) *
Why not? I can speed and run a red light on occacions stay off robbing people. So it works.

EDIT: And to develop it a bit more breaking the laws you're unhappy with is a revolutionary way of challanging the state. An excellent way of making society change and it has been used for all times. When people never protested and just adjusted themselves to all the current laws there would be a great risk for the individual.

Me driving 115 instead of 110 km/h on the highway is not a big revolution but in the end it may lead to politicians saying "Everyone drives too fast, cars are more sequre, there's an economical winning in people getting to their destination quicker" would in the end lead to speed limits being raised to 120 km/h

Me and others running a red light in the same crossing all the time could in the end lead to a round about being built.

We'll see where file sharing will lead to in the end but I'm quite convinced they will adjust the laws instead of busting millions of teenagers all around the world. There's simply too high a cost and too complicated a task to do. It will likely become allowed within reasonable time, say in 10-15 years.



Anarchy.

Posted by: radarlove1984 Nov 14 2007, 05:04 AM

QUOTE (swingline @ Nov 13 2007, 06:08 AM) *
Your full of crap! You would care, its like in school you do your homework and everyone else copies it you feel screwed because your the only one who did it and everyone else got a free ride.
Funny you should say that. I'm a sophomore college student working on my BS degree in Physics. I've been a straight A student for almost 2 years now, and I have NO problems at all with letting people copy my work. For free. Sometimes I'll even show up 20 minutes early.

That's just my way of paying it forward. Some people copy the answers and turn everything in and others actually go home and figure everything out for themselves (after they copy the answers and turn everything in, of coarse!). Either way, it doesn't affect me because my work is finished.

Music file sharing is a big debate here in the US, especially on college campuses. The most prevalent idea is that we share music because of the bandwidth (campuses have T3 lines). That's completely untrue. We share and download music because - brace yourselves for the truth no one's brave enough to say - it's free.

It's as simple as that. Most of us are metaphorically living out of our suitcases, and when we graduate we'll be at least $40,000 dollars in debt. Claiming that we hurt the record industry because of file sharing is completely false because we could never BUY records to begin with. We're the customers the record company never had and never will have.

Shutting down file sharing websites wouldn't make us go back to buying CDs. It would make us listen to FM again.

And I've got bad news for musicians. Once you make a song, it's not yours anymore. It doesn't belong to you. Half of my life's story is set to the music of the 60's and 70's. My first date was set to the music of Journey. The first time I made love, Santana was playing in the background. After my first serious relationship ended, Air Supply was playing for a month!

The record companies don't own those moments. I do. You do. We all do.

Is sharing music morally wrong? Sorry, but I don't think any one of us is credible enough to answer that. Is it legal? That depends on your country. Does it mean we don't support the band? Of coarse not.

I want to address all the software programmers on the message board now. I don't mean for this to sound overly harsh, but it needs to be said.

Just because you got a college degree in computer science doesn't mean you're entitled to a high paying job. It doesn't mean you're entitled to any job. Computer programming is a very high risk business. You can make your first $10 million the first month out of school or you can barely make minimum wage and spend your days re-enacting the greatest hits of Office Space.

Your sense of entitlement is no more justified than any of us expecting to get record contracts because we practice the guitar 8 hours a day for 10 years. If you're a software programmer - or musician - then you should know the risks involved in the business.

Musicians have to worry about getting stiffed out of gig payments, roadies breaking or stealing your equipment, finding transportation, food, shelter... not getting your ass kicked by the audience... not getting screwed out of record deals... etc...

Programmers have to worry about optimizing source code, preventing software piracy, finding a decent job, starting up their own company, etc...

Both jobs are high risk and both should be done for the love of doing it. If you got in to either business to get rich fast, you should seriously reconsider the coarse your life is taking.

Now, to connect this all to my Physics homework tangent, I see file sharing the same way. People copying my lab reports aren't stealing them, they're just copying them. No one is physically taking the report away from me, and I'm not hurt in any way because of it.

The same holds true for people who could never buy CD's each month. The record company isn't loosing money off of them. They claim they are. They wrongly assume that if P2P file sharing stops, every broke college student in the country is going to magically come up with an extra $30 bucks a month to spend. I'd love to know how that could ever happen.

One more thing... I firmly believe in the principle of do unto others as you would like done to you. And I seriously hope that if one day I need to copy someone's lab report, install PowerPoint, or borrow a DVD someone rented from Netflix, that people will be decent enough to let me. Because all laws of intellectual property aside, doing basic things like that to help our fellow human beings is necessary to our sanity and our survival.

The philosophy of "I've Got Mine, Jack" is never helpful and always has a way of coming back to bite you in the ass at the worst possible time.


Now, does believing all this make me a bad person? And who are you to judge anyway?

- I welcome any thought out responses to this post. If anyone has conflicting ideas, let me know. I'm especially interested in hearing what the Ethics professor thinks of this. We seem to have taken the same general idea of Karma and run with it in completely different directions.


------------------------
Disclaimer:

I'm in no way anti-corporation or anti-establishment. Large corporations have probably done more good for the world than anyone or anything else in the history of all mankind.

As with all debates that have no right answer, there's a thousand shades of gray. My response was directed at a certain part of the gray area. I trust that you'll all be smart enough to understand the part I was addressing and not misquote me out of context.

Your actually millage may vary. For topical use only. Contact poison control immediately if swallowed. Price excludes all tax and financing charges, etc... etc... etc...

Posted by: steve25 Nov 14 2007, 05:14 AM

Interesting discussion. I'm not going to take any sides here i'm just going to give you my input on what i think about both.

Yes piracy is illegal. Piracy of films, music, software etc. Now, here's what i know or at least this is how it was last time i checked. Buying films for example and then copying them for yourself is perfectly fine. You are allowed to do this just in case i dunno, it gets scratched or something you do have a backup. It becomes illegal when you start selling it. That is a ticket to prison my friends. If you are copying your software/music/film whatever and selling it even to a friend. If you get caught you can be locked away for it.

If you download it off the internet, that all depends if you paid any money at all for it. If you download music say off limewire or similar programs to that it is illegal however, programs like limewire aren't illegal. The actual program itself is not illegal because its purpose was file sharing, not illegal downloading. It's what you do with limewire that makes it illegal. I'm using this as an example here. Now you won't get as harsh a penalty as if you were selling it, but it's still illegal. But are they really going to go round every house and punish 90% of the people who own computers with an internet connection?No, they are targeting the ones who are doing much worse. Downloading illegal files for example. Making viruses, selling illegal picture and video content etc.

As for software, i think that will depend on how much you've got and how much the program is worth. Lets say you've not got a genuine copy of Windows i think that's a very common thing. If you're using illegal software in a business and particuarly when you're making money then that is very much illegal. For example, if you have illegal music production software and you're making albums and selling them while using it then that is much worse then just using it to practice with.

I have been given a copy of Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003 by my college to use on my course. I haven't paid a penny on it and it is a copy (but it's a copy of an original not a downloaded version). Actually you can download some of microsfts programs off their website as long as it's for education use only i beleive. Anyway back to what i was saying. I haven't paid a penny for it and for you programmers you'll probably be aware of Microsofts development environment. However i did have to sign a form saying that i would never use it for anything other then education purposes, especially not making money out of it. This makes it perfectly legal.

People wouldn't pirate so much though, if these software packages weren't so expensive. Software developers won't ever lose their jobs there are too many out there. There are still a big enough number of people out there who will quite happily buy legal software. But there are others that refuse to pay such a high price for software. Microsofts software is an example loads of people will copy it instead of buy it because while it may be high quality software, its still very expensive. But being one of the richest companies in the world, they're doing fine aren't they and they aren't about to go bust or anything. So yes they could get more money if people didn't do that. They live in proof that companies can still survive

Posted by: FretDancer69 Nov 14 2007, 05:19 AM

Really good post radarlove. I agree with you on many points you mentioned.

Posted by: bad_tel Nov 14 2007, 05:30 AM

im all for it sving money why pay £££££ when its there for free
if its called stealing then some one better tell my tax man he has been stealing from me for years

Posted by: fkalich Nov 14 2007, 05:31 AM

QUOTE (MickeM @ Nov 13 2007, 12:52 PM) *
Why not? I can speed and run a red light on occacions stay off robbing people. So it works.

EDIT: And to develop it a bit more breaking the laws you're unhappy with is a revolutionary way of challanging the state. An excellent way of making society change and it has been used for all times. When people never protested and just adjusted themselves to all the current laws there would be a great risk for the individual.

Me driving 115 instead of 110 km/h on the highway is not a big revolution but in the end it may lead to politicians saying "Everyone drives too fast, cars are more sequre, there's an economical winning in people getting to their destination quicker" would in the end lead to speed limits being raised to 120 km/h

Me and others running a red light in the same crossing all the time could in the end lead to a round about being built.

We'll see where file sharing will lead to in the end but I'm quite convinced they will adjust the laws instead of busting millions of teenagers all around the world. There's simply too high a cost and too complicated a task to do. It will likely become allowed within reasonable time, say in 10-15 years.



Good example of the flaws in the logic of people deciding whatever they want to decide. Here one guy decides what traffic laws matter. I don't think a lot of cops would agree with you, maybe they have a good reason?

Nobody is perfect, but come on, stealing is stealing. All this hand waving so people can feel justified and taking something that does not belong to them, because they can get away with it.

Just like those people looting television sets, robbing houses in New Orleans after the flood. Stealing software is what middle class do, the poor break into the stores. Same thing in my book. Same dishonesty. Just different opportunities presented to both economic classes, but still the same basic character. Take whatever you can take, whether it belongs to you or not, if you think you can get away with it.

edit: btw, pretty much the same philosophy of life of your average rodent. Hope that does not offend anyone, I actually respect rodents. But we are not rodents. And should not have rodent ethics I believe.

Posted by: shredmandan Nov 14 2007, 05:32 AM

QUOTE (MickeM @ Nov 13 2007, 01:52 PM) *
Why not? I can speed and run a red light on occacions stay off robbing people. So it works.

EDIT: And to develop it a bit more breaking the laws you're unhappy with is a revolutionary way of challanging the state. An excellent way of making society change and it has been used for all times. When people never protested and just adjusted themselves to all the current laws there would be a great risk for the individual.

Me driving 115 instead of 110 km/h on the highway is not a big revolution but in the end it may lead to politicians saying "Everyone drives too fast, cars are more sequre, there's an economical winning in people getting to their destination quicker" would in the end lead to speed limits being raised to 120 km/h

Me and others running a red light in the same crossing all the time could in the end lead to a round about being built.

We'll see where file sharing will lead to in the end but I'm quite convinced they will adjust the laws instead of busting millions of teenagers all around the world. There's simply too high a cost and too complicated a task to do. It will likely become allowed within reasonable time, say in 10-15 years.



+1 smile.gif
This is also how i see things

Posted by: bad_tel Nov 14 2007, 05:49 AM

1 question have none of you ever downloaded a song
well ok but i bet there is not 1 person who has not recorded a track of the radio on to a casset well thats illegal

Posted by: radarlove1984 Nov 14 2007, 05:52 AM

While I agree with that basic principle of breaking laws to protest, I don't agree with the example posted.

Intentionally breaking the law to provoke change is a great way to start a revolution, but that only works for things that (for lack of a better phrase) actually matter.

Non-violent protest only works when the world is watching and can apply pressure. Overthrowing an oppressive government or protesting genocide gets attention quickly.

Nobody (again, in the whole grand scheme of things) really cares about college kids downloading Metallica on Limewire.

While I agree that the laws will eventually change to reflect the times, I have no delusions about a "power to the people" revolution coming from it.

Posted by: Owen Nov 14 2007, 05:56 AM

QUOTE (bad_tel @ Nov 14 2007, 04:49 AM) *
1 question have none of you ever downloaded a song
well ok but i bet there is not 1 person who has not recorded a track of the radio on to a casset well thats illegal


The argument here isnt really about if anyone has done it or not - we've all probably participated in piracy at some point, intentionally or not.

It's more along the lines of whether its justified/immoral/wrong. cool.gif

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 14 2007, 06:22 AM

QUOTE (Animosity @ Nov 14 2007, 04:51 AM) *
Anarchy.

Demorcacy

Posted by: Animosity Nov 14 2007, 06:27 AM

QUOTE (Fsgdjv @ Nov 13 2007, 11:22 PM) *
Demorcacy


Wrong.

Posted by: Hemlok Nov 14 2007, 06:44 AM

QUOTE (Animosity @ Nov 14 2007, 05:27 AM) *
Wrong.

+1

Posted by: steve25 Nov 14 2007, 06:54 AM

QUOTE (Owen @ Nov 14 2007, 06:56 AM) *
The argument here isnt really about if anyone has done it or not - we've all probably participated in piracy at some point, intentionally or not.

It's more along the lines of whether its justified/immoral/wrong. cool.gif


I agree this isn't about what you've done. Heck i stole a pound out of my mums purse once when i was 7 years old so that i could go up the shop to buy sweeties! I never got caught, but i knew it was wrong and i didn't do it again!

Posted by: ActiveX Nov 14 2007, 07:01 AM

QUOTE (radarlove1984 @ Nov 13 2007, 08:04 PM) *
I want to address all the software programmers on the message board now. I don't mean for this to sound overly harsh, but it needs to be said.

Just because you got a college degree in computer science doesn't mean you're entitled to a high paying job. It doesn't mean you're entitled to any job. Computer programming is a very high risk business. You can make your first $10 million the first month out of school or you can barely make minimum wage and spend


I don't believe that I'm automatically entitled to a high-paying job, or anything else for that matter; but if I create a piece of software, and someone finds it useful and decides to USE it, then I expect to be paid what I'm asking, just like any other business. Pretty simple.
Some people build guitars, some people build furniture, I build software programs...why is it ok to steal my products, and not these others? No one here would argue over the rights or wrongs of someone walking into the guitar makers shop, trying out one of his guitars, deciding that he likes it, and then going back to steal it because he doesn't want to fork out the cash.

Posted by: MickeM Nov 14 2007, 07:37 AM

QUOTE (Animosity @ Nov 14 2007, 04:51 AM) *
Anarchy.

Well, we could all just stop questioning things and walk a straight line. See how that works out.

Posted by: MickeM Nov 14 2007, 07:58 AM

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 14 2007, 05:31 AM) *
Good example of the flaws in the logic of people deciding whatever they want to decide. Here one guy decides what traffic laws matter. I don't think a lot of cops would agree with you, maybe they have a good reason?

Nobody is perfect, but come on, stealing is stealing. All this hand waving so people can feel justified and taking something that does not belong to them, because they can get away with it.

Just like those people looting television sets, robbing houses in New Orleans after the flood. Stealing software is what middle class do, the poor break into the stores. Same thing in my book. Same dishonesty. Just different opportunities presented to both economic classes, but still the same basic character. Take whatever you can take, whether it belongs to you or not, if you think you can get away with it.

edit: btw, pretty much the same philosophy of life of your average rodent. Hope that does not offend anyone, I actually respect rodents. But we are not rodents. And should not have rodent ethics I believe.

I wasn't refering to any "reclaim" streets/the city or whatever action which main purpose seem to be to destroy things. And it's so neat how you managed to deminish both the middle class and the poor in one single sentence. Why not mention the rich? Avoiding taxes, elbowing their way up while others have to take the fall, record company bosses who cash in the big money. Do you think they are all honest? It's typical you forget to mention the rich who probably move the most dishonest money around and it's a typical mistake to think honesty is in their nature.

A little civil disobeyance is just healthy, both for society and the indivudal, healthy as in evolving. And if you're refering to animal society and having so many animals you should really know of survival of the fittest. If we would break the discussion down to what's in mans nature it's for certain not to follow the laws but to survive. Much like a rodent or a cockroach. And with a flooding situation like you refeer to there are other philosopical rules that apply - Pavlov - as the basic foundation to material and economical security gets swept away. People from outside will also see their chanse to fetch stuff as their needs tell them they need to improve their situation, wether it's to buy drugs or they need a TV.
None that apply to software stealing or how companies steer the music or movie insustry. Nor has it anything to do with running a red light or speeding. Especially speeding as in my example is something that most part of the population does at some time and the affect it has will in some cases be that the speed limit is increased. It happens here. Civil disobeyance since the runles dont apply to the reality leads to a change of rules.
Stealing a TV like you said will clearly not change the rules so that act will become legal. Seriously, to that extent I don't see your point... at all.

QUOTE (radarlove1984 @ Nov 14 2007, 05:52 AM) *
Nobody (again, in the whole grand scheme of things) really cares about college kids downloading Metallica on Limewire.

Lars does laugh.gif

Posted by: The Uncreator Nov 14 2007, 07:59 AM

QUOTE (bad_tel @ Nov 13 2007, 08:49 PM) *
1 question have none of you ever downloaded a song
well ok but i bet there is not 1 person who has not recorded a track of the radio on to a casset well thats illegal


Never downloaded a single song, and i dont even listen to the radio (i dont like anything on the radio), ive bought every piece of music i own.

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 14 2007, 08:00 AM

QUOTE (Animosity @ Nov 14 2007, 06:27 AM) *
Wrong.

I'm not sure about all these kinds of fancy words, so I may be wrong, sure. But questioning the authorities is something that makes democracys thrive, heck, it's what made democacy a possibillity. And, when a lot of people brake a certain law in a democracy, the ones in charge has to listen, and they do listen in democracys, unlike what they may do in some totalitarian state. That's what I meant by typing democracy, it fits perfectly in a democracy and (in my opinion) it's just healty for the countrys evolution. And, aren't there a lot of weird laws almost everywhere that noone follows? Like I've read a lot of lists of funny laws in some american states that I'm sure nobody follows, but I suppose that's not the case for you?

After some googling I found I site that lists stupid laws, I don't know how credible it is, but it seems good enough since it lists where in the law books the laws are and so on, but I can't really check it up. But for example, look at this law:
http://www.dumblaws.com/law/1279

And browe around the page if you just want a laugh, and I can't say that this page isn't a joke, but you get my point.

Posted by: The Uncreator Nov 14 2007, 08:07 AM

I saw a few other posts saying the real problem is not whether who has done it, but whether it is immoral/ wrong/ or justified ( we all seem to agree, that in fact, it is illegal )

Immoral: Well thats a personal oppinion, which maybe i havent been thinking of, and as with any set of oppinions, none are all the same, to me it is immoral, my morals tell me that the software, music, or film thats being pirated had someone hard working behind it, and they put alot of time and effort to create it (or even a team of people)

I would like to ask one question, i dont know the history of computers that well, but how did pirated software help computers? im not saying this as some smart ass remark, i would really like to know, i see an opportunity to gain some extra knowledge.

Posted by: jeff Nov 14 2007, 08:11 AM

I just spent 1/2 hour reading this thread. Damn, I just missed 1/2 hour of practice! biggrin.gif

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 14 2007, 08:13 AM

fast answer to the uncreator: I think the one who said that basically meant that a lot of people bought computers because it makes it possible to download movies, music and so on. At least that's the only thing I can think of.

edit: typo

Posted by: The Uncreator Nov 14 2007, 08:14 AM

I can see that being a point, but hell, computers were easily available before that stuff was widespread.

Posted by: Fsgdjv Nov 14 2007, 08:17 AM

Agreed, but it was what I could think of.

Posted by: The Uncreator Nov 14 2007, 08:22 AM

Anyone else got any theories?

Posted by: steve25 Nov 14 2007, 08:27 AM

Here's a thought. Is it ok to download music that's not for sale? What i mean it lets say you like a certain song in a movie or something but you can't find it anywhere to buy. Is it ok to download it or rip the audio off of the dvd do you think?

Posted by: FretDancer69 Nov 14 2007, 08:32 AM

QUOTE (The Uncreator @ Nov 14 2007, 01:22 AM) *
Anyone else got any theories?


yeah i do. For example. Lets say this person wants to become a programmer, to create Real programs and software like GP in the future. But has no access to tools and stuff that might help him, why? probably because he doesent have enough money, or it might be because those tools are beyond his ability to obtain.

What could you do? Lets say, he manages to get something like Visual Basic, For free, and PIRATED/ILLEGALLY, Visual Basic is a basic program that allows you to create programs and to learn how more or less the procedure is done. After he obtains this, he begins his quest (just like we all did with our guitars). As time passes, he becomes a really good programmer, and what happens? lets say, he and a team manages to create something really useful, powerful and awesome like Guitar Pro.

Now, thats a story. But analize how he was able to start his "quest in order to create such powerful and helpful programs we keep mentioning here.

Posted by: Zephyr Nov 14 2007, 08:32 AM

Hmm... my opinion on downloading free music is that it's alright if you're just checking the artist out, but if you decide that you're a fan and want to actually listen to their music, you should go out and buy it. It's just not fair to the artist. The same applies to programs, someone spent their time and resources making it, and they deserve compensation.

I mean, it's not like it matters that much to huge artists, who are making millions as it is, but it's still fair...

Posted by: swingline Nov 14 2007, 08:44 AM

Sorry about being so aggressive before I'm just a little upset because my best friend is living from paycheck to paycheck because of pirated software.
By the way he is a software designer.

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 14 2007, 08:53 AM

Thanks Swingline,
the topic seems to be 'close to home' for quite a few and so potentially emotive. As moderator I just want to try to keep the discussion civil and friendly so appreciate your apology.

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: ActiveX Nov 14 2007, 08:59 AM

QUOTE (FretDancer69 @ Nov 13 2007, 11:32 PM) *
yeah i do. For example. Lets say this person wants to become a programmer, to create Real programs and software like GP in the future. But has no access to tools and stuff that might help him, why? probably because he doesent have enough money, or it might be because those tools are beyond his ability to obtain.

What could you do? Lets say, he manages to get something like Visual Basic, For free, and PIRATED/ILLEGALLY, Visual Basic is a basic program that allows you to create programs and to learn how more or less the procedure is done. After he obtains this, he begins his quest (just like we all did with our guitars). As time passes, he becomes a really good programmer, and what happens? lets say, he and a team manages to create something really useful, powerful and awesome like Guitar Pro.

Now, thats a story. But analize how he was able to start his "quest in order to create such powerful and helpful programs we keep mentioning here.


If this person was like myself, I started out learing with open-source tools and free software like Microsoft's http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/express/default.aspx
Like previously stated earlier in this thread, there are always alternatives to stealing software.
...I'm still on my quest though; I work in a cubicle as a code monkey for a big company from 9 -5, then work from home evenings and weekends on my own stuff...then dishonest people steal it; and alas, I'm still in my cubicle wink.gif

Posted by: jeff Nov 14 2007, 09:07 AM

I think the guys at Reaper have a good thing going on. Make a product that you believe in, one that works well, light weight and runs on just about anything. Put it out there as uncrippled software and then challenge the big guys at a more than reasonable and affordable price. Get the users involved through the forums and guitar sites like GMC and then see what happens. That's what they are doing and it works like a charm. The Reaper community is actively involved in providing feedback to the developers and the developers can basically use them as testers and the users enjoy the involvement. It seems to me that the idea of "let your conscience be your guide" model is working for them because they have something good.

It's true that they could not sustain business however, if nobody purchases their software but that is the risk of doing business. There are enough people out there who will buy something when it's a good value and affordable as opposed to getting pirated copies. But on the other hand, what will happen to them as they grow? Maybe the same thing that has happened to every other small software company that has grown to become a big corporate machine that everyone despises...

I think that some (not all) - some software companies have totally priced themselves out of what the average person needs. New bloated OS requiring more RAM to run mostly unused application options, pretty graphics and upgrades and a host of other things that, in all reality, most people don't even use. This drives up the price of software and hardware and then the piracy starts.

I don't agree with piracy at all, but I can understand why it exists. I don't think it will ever go away. It's just a part of life that we have to deal with I suppose. mellow.gif

Posted by: fkalich Nov 14 2007, 09:15 AM

QUOTE (MickeM @ Nov 14 2007, 12:58 AM) *
Stealing a TV like you said will clearly not change the rules so that act will become legal. Seriously, to that extent I don't see your point... at all.
Lars does laugh.gif


The changing society thing was nonsense. This is not Nazi Germany. No death camps. Last I saw, we still elected our public officials. I write my congressmen and senators, they always write back and explain themselves. That is how we get along, in a lawful orderly fashion.

I will take the evil capitalists with all their faults, over the alternative. I am partial to sustained healthy economic growth. Besides, if you ever saw a budget of a large corporation, the compensation to top execs is pretty minor in comparison to the whole budget, actually not even consequential with respect to overall profitability. The top execs are not the corporation, the corporation is an entity unto itself, whose property rights need to be respected. When companies are profitable, they are productive. Drug companies will not spend zillion of development dollars coming up with drugs to cure diseases if they have to just give it away at the end.

In the software/media industries. Well I think we can assume that if this "sharing" of somebody else's stolen property did not adversely effect profitability, they would not object. I know, you can decide if you deserve it, besides, this is just part of the overall revolution. Just don't complain when you come home and your prized guitar is missing. That was part of his social revolution.

Posted by: fkalich Nov 14 2007, 09:27 AM

QUOTE (jeff @ Nov 14 2007, 02:07 AM) *
I don't agree with piracy at all, but I can understand why it exists. I don't think it will ever go away. It's just a part of life that we have to deal with I suppose. mellow.gif


At some point you will have to check in every time you use it. Your rights to it will be verified. You won't get away with it anymore. That is the solution, and I am sure the industries will move in that direction at some point.

In other words, you won't get away with it. No, there will be no revolution, just better enforcement, fines, jail terms. Which is what needs to be done.

My brother once told me something. You can try to get to people by trying to convince them on the morality of some behavior. You might get to them. However, nobody likes a baseball bat smashing into their knee cap. You can be sure that will be an effective determent. When people are afraid to steal this stuff, when they think they will get into trouble, they will mostly stop doing it. Up to then, only those who hold higher ethics on such things will refrain. Others will do it, and besides, this is just party of the glorious revolution against the evil capitalists.

Posted by: shredmandan Nov 14 2007, 09:37 AM

QUOTE (MickeM @ Nov 14 2007, 01:58 AM) *
change of rules.
Stealing a TV like you said will clearly not change the rules so that act will become legal. Seriously, to that extent I don't see your point... at all.
Lars does laugh.gif



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCAguVejr5E laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: The Uncreator Nov 14 2007, 09:57 AM

QUOTE (FretDancer69 @ Nov 13 2007, 11:32 PM) *
yeah i do. For example. Lets say this person wants to become a programmer, to create Real programs and software like GP in the future. But has no access to tools and stuff that might help him, why? probably because he doesent have enough money, or it might be because those tools are beyond his ability to obtain.

What could you do? Lets say, he manages to get something like Visual Basic, For free, and PIRATED/ILLEGALLY, Visual Basic is a basic program that allows you to create programs and to learn how more or less the procedure is done. After he obtains this, he begins his quest (just like we all did with our guitars). As time passes, he becomes a really good programmer, and what happens? lets say, he and a team manages to create something really useful, powerful and awesome like Guitar Pro.


I would still prefer some kinda facts to support that claim of pirated software makes computers commercially available.

Posted by: fkalich Nov 14 2007, 10:04 AM

QUOTE (shredmandan @ Nov 14 2007, 02:37 AM) *
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCAguVejr5E laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif


That was good, entertaining way to make the point.

Another example, and here I get on the good side of Kris, and probably the teachers.

For $50 every six months I get this site. That is an absolute steal. It is worth more than that. Clearly. This is the best instruction money can buy in my view.

Kris comes up with a great idea, runs a super business, real smart. But he can only charge a fraction of what it is worth. Why? Because if he charges more, people will start stealing. For $50 every 6 months, not worth their bother. But if he charges more, there goes the revenue stream.

So he can only pay the instructors what the business can afford to pay them. If he could raise prices, and stuff would not get "SHARED", he could pay them more. See how this works, this glorious revolution. Just hurts the entrepreneur, and everybody that works for him. They don't get what they really all deserve because they have to concern themselves with not making theft attractive to users.

This is how it goes in the whole industry, because of the theft. Lower profitability, less employment. But I know, just part of the glorious holy revolution.

Posted by: radarlove1984 Nov 14 2007, 10:14 AM

QUOTE (ActiveX @ Nov 13 2007, 10:01 PM) *
I don't believe that I'm automatically entitled to a high-paying job, or anything else for that matter; but if I create a piece of software, and someone finds it useful and decides to USE it, then I expect to be paid what I'm asking, just like any other business. Pretty simple.
Some people build guitars, some people build furniture, I build software programs...why is it ok to steal my products, and not these others? No one here would argue over the rights or wrongs of someone walking into the guitar makers shop, trying out one of his guitars, deciding that he likes it, and then going back to steal it because he doesn't want to fork out the cash.


All I'm saying is that piracy comes with the territory. Ethics aside, your work is soooooo much more likely to be stolen if you develop software. It's just the business you've chosen. You're in a high risk field where a lot can go wrong. I tend to think of it as owning a gas station in a bad part of town. You should expect theft, because it's naive not to. Programming is just as risky as playing the stock market or becoming a venture capitalist. It's definitely not a stable 9-5 job.
---------------------------------
Before I continue, my second job is doing (X)HTML and CSS coding for startup websites. I've been burned by theft too, especially since ANYONE can view HTML code.
EDIT: description removed. Whilst it might be easy and legal rather not have GMC used to demonstrate how to do it. Cheers, Tony

And the worst part is that viewing the source code is perfectly legal.
---------------------------------
I knew all of this going into programming though. I expect to take a loss, but I still program because it beats working at McDonald's and the pay's about the same.

I can definitely understand why programmers are angry over software piracy, but I personally don't mind. I know it's a high risk job, I knew that going into it, I expect piracy, and I plan for it. Piracy is what it is. I've made peace with it.

-----

And sorry if I came across like a real ass by saying this. My brother's in the same situation you are in, and I've probably lost a good $2000 dollars in the last 6 months. Believe me, I can definitely sympathize with you and I know it's so much harder when you have a family to support. My heart goes out to you because I know you and many other people have gotten screwed over by piracy.

(and props to you if you can program in ActiveX. I know PHP, CSS, HTML, and some basic JavaScript nothing complicated like ActiveX)

Posted by: Vinicitur Nov 14 2007, 02:51 PM

QUOTE (bad_tel @ Nov 14 2007, 12:49 AM) *
1 question have none of you ever downloaded a song
well ok but i bet there is not 1 person who has not recorded a track of the radio on to a casset well thats illegal



Yes I have. But I always bought the CD if I liked it. I own 300+ CDs and they're all legal!
As for recording, that's debatable for one simple reason. When you buy your cassette or your CD you pay a hidden tax which goes to the record industry. At least that's what happens in Canada.

And for the record it's not illegal to download music in Canada. It's illegal to distribute it. That's how the law is written for the moment.

Posted by: MickeM Nov 14 2007, 03:41 PM

QUOTE (The Uncreator @ Nov 14 2007, 08:22 AM) *
Anyone else got any theories?

Without reading further to find whether the answer is there cracked software has made it possile for the large mass of people to afford (since it comes at no cost obviously) tools that were only available to companies.
Someone with an interest in program development with C could get the tools needed for own program development and have contributed to high level of IT knowledge, sales of the book "C for Dummies" (or dl of the copy) and maybe him or herlelf have written some useful shareware, freeware or some mean viruses.
I've been so lucky I was making a school project in C for a company and when the project was over they let me have the copy they bought. Right or wrong, at least it was payed for but here purchased by a company and it was quite expensive.

Pirated music software allows anyone to have and use a home studio whick leads to a large musical development. Though I can say Reaper beats my Sony ACID Pro when it comes to earing up system resources, if there hadn't been a large number of home users noone had firstly developed Reaper and secondly noone were there to use it.

So pirated software made the tools available to the masses and have created a need for a computer. I think we can say that today there freeware or shareware that will fill everyones needs. But reading back in my reply the average Joe couldn't have started developing these programs if it wasn't for cracked software since average Joe wasn't likely to afford a compiler.

If if that didn't happen there would be no need for a home computer and GMC would never have been built.

Surely it's stealing and moraly wrong but as I see it it has made us all evelop a lot faster than it had elsewise. As it is today we all have a chanse to use freeware and shareware and I belive that is the right way to go, so that we support the massive deveopment of new software. These programs are made for us and suits out computers and basic needs for functionality better in most cases.

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 14 2007, 03:57 PM

QUOTE (ActiveX @ Nov 14 2007, 07:01 AM) *
I don't believe that I'm automatically entitled to a high-paying job, or anything else for that matter; but if I create a piece of software, and someone finds it useful and decides to USE it, then I expect to be paid what I'm asking, just like any other business. Pretty simple.
Some people build guitars, some people build furniture, I build software programs...why is it ok to steal my products, and not these others? No one here would argue over the rights or wrongs of someone walking into the guitar makers shop, trying out one of his guitars, deciding that he likes it, and then going back to steal it because he doesn't want to fork out the cash.

Of course you should get paid. But when people don't want to buy your software you need to rethink something.
The right way is not to enforce your way onto people through EULAs, enforcing restrictions to get continued support, lobbying politicians, governments and countries to be able to keep your position. The sane thing to do would be to look at yourself and find out why people don't buy your software. What you are doing wrong and what you could change to meet your customers need.

You don't accuse whole countries of crime because their laws doesn't suite your business. If you don't like it, fine. Go do business somewhere else. If I don't want to buy your software on your conditions, let's discuss terms that I found reasonable or I won't buy it. I'm the one who makes the choise and set the terms. Not you, the seller. If you don't want me to use it any way I want, don't sell it to me.

Posted by: Layzer Nov 14 2007, 04:20 PM

I'm not too knowledgeable in this area, that said, I stopped downloading music from P2P networks for 3 reasons.

1. I did not want legal troubles
2. I don't want viruses.
3. I would hate being an artist and being deprived of my rightful earnings

P.S. FKALICH....are you going to MU\KU game on the 24th??? GO MIZZOU!

Posted by: MickeM Nov 14 2007, 04:21 PM

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 14 2007, 09:15 AM) *
The changing society thing was nonsense.

Nope. It's been done through out all times. This is very peaceful, used to be done with guns, swords and bow and arrow.

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 14 2007, 09:15 AM) *
I will take the evil capitalists with all their faults, over the alternative.

See there, putting millions in ones own pocket on the side seems alright to fkalich while driving 115 kn/h on a 110 road isn't. I can understand now how you can take party with record company bosses.

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 14 2007, 09:15 AM) *
Drug companies will not spend zillion of development dollars coming up with drugs to cure diseases if they have to just give it away at the end.

That's exactly what happens. Forumlas gets public after a few years and others can just copy the pharmacy and sell it cheaper.

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 14 2007, 09:15 AM) *
In the software/media industries. Well I think we can assume that if this "sharing" of somebody else's stolen property did not adversely effect profitability, they would not object. I know, you can decide if you deserve it, besides, this is just part of the overall revolution. Just don't complain when you come home and your prized guitar is missing. That was part of his social revolution.

Apples and pears, that's what you're comparing. Maybe your comparance is more valid with someone selling pirated software, or the one cracking it. You suggest here more like it's an offence to listen to the music being played on the stilen guitar while knowing it was stolen.

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 14 2007, 04:40 PM

QUOTE (The Uncreator @ Nov 14 2007, 08:07 AM) *
I saw a few other posts saying the real problem is not whether who has done it, but whether it is immoral/ wrong/ or justified ( we all seem to agree, that in fact, it is illegal )

Immoral: Well thats a personal oppinion, which maybe i havent been thinking of, and as with any set of oppinions, none are all the same, to me it is immoral, my morals tell me that the software, music, or film thats being pirated had someone hard working behind it, and they put alot of time and effort to create it (or even a team of people)

I would like to ask one question, i dont know the history of computers that well, but how did pirated software help computers? im not saying this as some smart ass remark, i would really like to know, i see an opportunity to gain some extra knowledge.

I could dive deep into this but I'll try to give my version in short.
I've been in the business since ~1985.
Computers where not for everyone then. Very expensive. Software had insane prices. The tools for developing software too. We wheren't any better. The software I developed was priced to get the very most out of each customer and yet kill the competion. We did have the top of the line software for what it was doing and it killed all the competition. Even though I thought our price was horrid, it was just a tenth of the main competitor.

Hmmmm, this is stearing into the long explanation, I'll change direction.

Before the office and home computer market rocketed, the above was the case.
If it hadn't been possible to pirate software the rocket would never had launched.
In my opinion it was the wide availability of software that made it interesting for common people to buy a computer. And with more computers on the market it's more attractive for software developers to write good software. More people understands what could be done with a computer and starts to develop their ideas. This leads to more great software available, which leads to more competers sold, which leads to... We have lift-off! And the rocket has kept accelerating ever since.

If what I describe above is true, was piracy good or bad? Wrong or right?
That's in the eye of the beholder. The answer is obvious to each, but different to everyone. Depending on the moral of the reader and how he/she looks at the world the answer will be different.

There is no right or wrong. Neither of the answers is correct for anybody else but you.
It all depends on what you think is important.

Did that explain what I'm trying to say?

Posted by: Vinicitur Nov 14 2007, 04:55 PM

QUOTE (blindwillie @ Nov 14 2007, 11:40 AM) *
Did that explain what I'm trying to say?



Yes, perfectly

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 14 2007, 06:12 PM

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 14 2007, 10:04 AM) *
That was good, entertaining way to make the point.

Another example, and here I get on the good side of Kris, and probably the teachers.

For $50 every six months I get this site. That is an absolute steal. It is worth more than that. Clearly. This is the best instruction money can buy in my view.

Kris comes up with a great idea, runs a super business, real smart. But he can only charge a fraction of what it is worth. Why? Because if he charges more, people will start stealing. For $50 every 6 months, not worth their bother. But if he charges more, there goes the revenue stream.

So he can only pay the instructors what the business can afford to pay them. If he could raise prices, and stuff would not get "SHARED", he could pay them more. See how this works, this glorious revolution. Just hurts the entrepreneur, and everybody that works for him. They don't get what they really all deserve because they have to concern themselves with not making theft attractive to users.

This is how it goes in the whole industry, because of the theft. Lower profitability, less employment. But I know, just part of the glorious holy revolution.

Your example isn't specific to Kris or software. That goes for everyone that tries to sell something. If the price is higher than someones want to pay for it, no deal. As I said before, the worth is not what the seller estimates it to. The worth is what somebody wants to pay for it.
Do you mean that it's a good thing itself if Kris could charge more and pay instructors more?

They don't get what they deserve? According to who? You?
Definitly (hmmm) not according to me. To me they get exactly what they deserve. If pavel or muris or whoever (no disrespect, I really respect you and all the teachers work) feels they don't get enough pay, talk to Kris. If Kris can't pay more they have to choose whether they shall continue with the lessons or not.

My pov is that it's a good thing that the knowledge and technology is in a range that makes it worth while for Kris to do this. If he makes a living on something the we find it worth to pay for, great!

Also there is different ways to cover the costs and get a profit. Sell to a few for a high price or sell a lot to a lower price. Low price does in no way equal low income.

And as someone else said earlier and I agree to, some professions should be done because you love it and the rewards it brings. Not entirely for the money. What I appriciate on this site is that I really do believe that the instructor's here likes to teach us and they get something out of our learning. If pavel and muris (for example. Sorry, you got picked again) wasn't as engaged in the forums this site would be just another paysite and I would surely leave.

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 14 2007, 06:36 PM

And I do agree with MickeM. Revolt! It isn't neccessarily right because someone decided so.

Posted by: jeff Nov 14 2007, 08:07 PM

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 14 2007, 03:27 AM) *
At some point you will have to check in every time you use it. Your rights to it will be verified. You won't get away with it anymore. That is the solution, and I am sure the industries will move in that direction at some point.

In other words, you won't get away with it. No, there will be no revolution, just better enforcement, fines, jail terms. Which is what needs to be done.

My brother once told me something. You can try to get to people by trying to convince them on the morality of some behavior. You might get to them. However, nobody likes a baseball bat smashing into their knee cap. You can be sure that will be an effective determent. When people are afraid to steal this stuff, when they think they will get into trouble, they will mostly stop doing it. Up to then, only those who hold higher ethics on such things will refrain. Others will do it, and besides, this is just party of the glorious revolution against the evil capitalists.
Yes, I agree with you. I especially feel bad for the people who work tirelessly developing programs only to have them stolen. It really is a shame.

I was thinking about something here - do you think it's possible that some of the same people who develop software put out pirated copies on P2P loaded with trojans and viruses for the benefit of those who steal them? I wonder.

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 14 2007, 10:38 PM

Here is a twist on piracy. Not software but it relates.
http://www.rlslog.net/piracy-isnt-that-bad-and-they-know-it/

And some reflections on this http://hughstimson.org/

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 15 2007, 12:35 AM

Just to clarify some points in my OP and some of the subsequent posts:

I'm not a 'professor of ethics' (I'm assuming Radarlove that you were referring to me). I have a PhD in 20th C Philosophy and when I teach u/g students one course I teach is Ethics and Business Ethics.

Amongst other qualifications I also have an MBA so I have a reasonable understanding of business economics and so on. Before any of us start to guess what business model Kris has - and I certainly don't know what the figures are and am not about to speculate - it's worth keeping in mind that piracy and file-sharing of GMC would undermine it. Contingency and 'worst case analysis' would almost certainly indicate that piracy and file-sharing would result in a loss of income to a point where the site would become unviable. What sensitivity analysis indicates as the probability to the worst case is though I can only imagine.

The ethical principle is 'do unto others... ', it doesn't say 'don't steal' but that if you do then expect and accept both the consequences of your actions and the same to happen to you. This is a universal imperative - applies in all situations at all times to be logically consistent. The laws that we live by are morally based. Morals are not universalised but contingent - that is why different countries have different laws at different times. It is also why laws can both be broken and changed. As I've said rather then break them I prefer to work to change them.

I worked my way through University - I come from a very poor family and I had three part time jobs on the go throughout my u/g. I was also an Honours 'A' student - graduated 2nd in my u/g year but I worked and sent money home to my mother DESPITE having to miss a lot of classes because I had to go to work.
I worked full time whilst doing both my Masters and then again my PhD to support myself and my family. If I didn't work it would have meant that both me and my family would have gone hungry. I teach a lot of u/g and post grad students who also work for the same reasons.

I have a lot of sympathy, and an understanding, of what it means to be a student with a low income. I don't however think that being a student entails a right to download and file share illegally. The argument that 'I don't have money and so couldn't buy it so I take it' is based in a modernist ideology of 'instrumental rationalism' and, at least to me, grounds why some sociologists refer to us as a narcissistic and egocentric generation. It happens to be both an argument and an ideology that I personal don't like.

Minor point - allowing others to copy work in my University - and indeed other Universities that I know well - is an act of 'collusion'. In my University collusion would result in a hearing in front of the University Senate with penalties that range up to, and include, instant dismissal from the program affected and any other being undertaken at said time.

I've heard for many years that those whose work is a vocation don't need to be paid as well as others because they 'do what they enjoy' and by doing so surrender their rights to a similar standard of living. Yeah right, in my book that is just another form of exploitation. They deserve the same rights and protection as everyone else and similarly software developers and coders and musicians also deserve the same protections under the law from piracy.

Final bit for a while as I'd rather others debate the topic then me. To my mind a major reason why GMC is such a good site is because of all the time and effort that Kris has invested, much more then we perhaps realise and much more then we perhaps credit him for. I feel he does this not just as an 'income' but because he loves music and is seriously committed to teaching us. It's not just hard business economics at work here - there's much more. He trusts us not to misuse all that he has invested here and piracy would be a fundamental breach of his faith in us. (Apologies to Kris - this is my opinion.)

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: MickeM Nov 15 2007, 12:51 AM

QUOTE (blindwillie @ Nov 14 2007, 06:36 PM) *
It isn't neccessarily right because someone decided so.

I think I used up half an A4 to describe what you said in one short sentence laugh.gif

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 15 2007, 12:54 AM

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif I do that all the time MickeM laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: Pavel Nov 15 2007, 01:36 AM

5 pages of discussion, already?? WOW!!

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 15 2007, 01:45 AM

QUOTE (MickeM @ Nov 15 2007, 12:51 AM) *
I think I used up half an A4 to describe what you said in one short sentence laugh.gif

Well that's a first for me then tongue.gif
I tend to drift of in all directions instead of putting it simple which I suspect makes my posts a bit confusing.
Thanks biggrin.gif

Posted by: MickeM Nov 15 2007, 02:10 AM

QUOTE (tonymiro @ Nov 15 2007, 12:54 AM) *
laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif I do that all the time MickeM laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Oh yes, you if anyone is well known for short writings laugh.gif

Anyway, I'm leaving this discusison for now since noone will convince me of the opposite and I won't convince anyone else.

I usualy don't speed since I rather keep the cruise control at 100 instead of 110 where it's allowed. If I have to rush with my car to the hospital when someone needs emergency aid I will for that moment write my own laws and drive as fast as possible since I at the moment would find it appropriate. I think most people would if they found themselves in the same situation. Right? It's an offense to the law but in my mind I would think it's the right thing to do. I'm very much for peoples freedom and multiple choices where they can act according to what they think is better, which should be done without hurting someone but also without feeding someone else excessively.
In contrary to tonymiro I'd say - fine, let the kids have it their way with music and movies, me as an adult will pay for my stuff because I can afford it but I don't think someone unemployed or a kid with no money and cheap parents should not have less. And think world wide here, there's not only the US and Sweden but plenty of poor countries in the world and in my eyes they could have it at no cost. I stand for it and if I ever would make commercial music I'd like those who can afford it to buy my stuff and those who can't can just take it. It's not like they would buy in anyway.
Moray applies here. If you can buy it, do so, if you can't then just grab it. Most of us here won the lottery of being born in the right country or the right family, some have worked they way up to a descent economic state but facts are that not everyone will ever get that opportunity. If someone were sleeping under a viaduct and eating from garbage cans but got an opportunity to enjoy music for free and see movies for free spite it was against the law I wouldn't mind at all, and I would be happy if it was mine.

If I would get big in Somalia not because of record sales but since my music is widely spread and popular I'd go there for a concert if I was invited. It would never have happened if I had to rely on record sales since it's one of the poorest countries on earth. (there could be other reasons for not going to Somalia but it's just an example)

I'm completely against software piracy, in comparance to music and movies where I think the money end up in the wrong pockets and pricing is ridicilous. I'm lucky to have a job computer with Word and Excel but I lean on free and shareware rather than the more expensive tools and I'm still alive and kicking so it's possible. It had it's purpose to get people creative in their tasks but now there's enough of software for the people to go around.

And I'm completely against stealing, there were some twisted comparances to stolen goods being the same as shared music. I don't think so, it's not even close. I wouldn't be sad if someone copied an mp3 from my harddrive, I would be sad if someone stole my shoes. I would be sad if that mp3 was one of my songs and someone else put his name on it. I wouldn't if it became a commercial fiasko haha or if the song was noticed and appreciated with my name still on it.

Anyway, over and out of this thread for some while cool.gif

Posted by: blindwillie Nov 15 2007, 02:18 AM

QUOTE (tonymiro @ Nov 15 2007, 12:35 AM) *
Just to clarify some points in my OP and some of the subsequent posts:

I've heard for many years that those whose work is a vocation don't need to be paid as well as others because they 'do what they enjoy' and by doing so surrender their rights to a similar standard of living. Yeah right, in my book that is just another form of exploitation. They deserve the same rights and protection as everyone else and similarly software developers and coders and musicians also deserve the same protections under the law from piracy.

Cheers,
Tony

I want to clarify one thing and make sure you didn't get me wrong.
I might have expressed it clumpsy. I did not mean that you should do this because you love it, and accept a lesser income.

What I ment was that the primary reason for being an artist should be because you love the art.
If you love what you do that will show in the result.
As you are my teacher here I'll use that as an example. I will be more willing to pay good money for a teacher who is excited about what he does and cares about my progress than to one who doesn't.
I appreciate a dedicated teacher with a bit lesser skills more than a highly skilled uninterested teacher who doesn't give a rats behind about my progress as long as he has done his part and gets his pay.

Funny situation though.
- So you want to work for us? Do you like to teach stupid people stuff?
- Oooh yes! I love it!
- Great, I'll reduce your paycheck with 10% then. If you accept that you really must love it and the job is yours.
tongue.gif

/edit: haha! I made a mistake in the post. The badges confuses me. I noticed it but was in a hurry so I had to post it as is. My kid was waiting for me to pick him up at his guitar teacher and I had forgot about him tongue.gif

Posted by: fkalich Nov 15 2007, 03:36 AM

QUOTE (MickeM @ Nov 14 2007, 09:21 AM) *
That's exactly what happens. Forumlas gets public after a few years and others can just copy the pharmacy and sell it cheaper.


Which means that the drug producers have to keep this in mind when deciding on whether to spend the zillions of dollars it takes to bring a drug through development, the years that takes. Most of which are failures, even after they have spent the zillions. And after that, somebody will just steal it from them. Perhaps this means they don't develop some drugs that could save people from a lot of suffering, as the profit is not there?

You have any idea what it costs to bring a medical drug to market? You think it is something noble to be undercutting the efforts of those who are working to relieve the suffering if the sick? Right, glorious socialist revolution. Problem is, after you steal everything from the evil capitalists, there is little left. What will you do then?

Posted by: 1mpr1m1s Nov 15 2007, 04:37 AM

smile.gif Piracy is bad

Posted by: Owen Nov 15 2007, 04:53 AM

Oh, how I despair sometimes rolleyes.gif laugh.gif

So 1mpr1m1s, theoretically If I happened to take control of your GMC account it would be mine to keep and you would be happy for me?

Going by that logic... unsure.gif

(not that I would/can or anything)

cool.gif

Posted by: 1mpr1m1s Nov 15 2007, 04:58 AM

QUOTE (Owen @ Nov 14 2007, 07:53 PM) *
Oh, how I despair sometimes rolleyes.gif laugh.gif

So 1mpr1m1s, theoretically If I happened to take control of your GMC account it would be mine to keep and you would be happy for me?

Going by that logic... unsure.gif

(not that I would/can or anything)

cool.gif

smile.gif

Posted by: fkalich Nov 15 2007, 05:07 AM

QUOTE (Owen @ Nov 14 2007, 09:53 PM) *
Oh, how I despair sometimes rolleyes.gif laugh.gif

So 1mpr1m1s, theoretically If I happened to take control of your GMC account it would be mine to keep and you would be happy for me?

Going by that logic... unsure.gif

(not that I would/can or anything)

cool.gif


If everyone took that attitude, we would live in Mad Max world.

edit: I see he edited it away. Maybe he was not really serious, might have just been an emotional thing, and he really did not mean it.

QUOTE (Layzer @ Nov 14 2007, 09:20 AM) *
I'm not too knowledgeable in this area, that said, I stopped downloading music from P2P networks for 3 reasons.

1. I did not want legal troubles
2. I don't want viruses.
3. I would hate being an artist and being deprived of my rightful earnings

P.S. FKALICH....are you going to MU\KU game on the 24th??? GO MIZZOU!

No, 40% of tickets are alloted to you guys. Should we lose, I would be stuck with about 35,000 missouri fans next to me, could not take that. I do hope we both win this week, so we can settle it in Kansas City. You guys are more talented, but we hold on to the ball a lot better, which could be the difference.
I listen on radio. Executed my tv. I live 2 blocks from the stadium, maybe they will show it on the big scoreboard tv.

I feel that I will root for Missouri if you get past us, as you represent the North, and then the big 12 in the national championship should you beat us and get past Oklahoma.

Which surprises me. I get mobbed off of tigerboard within about 2 minutes of any post. I know a few Missouri people feel that way, but not very many. Most hate us to the bitter end. Same on our side I guess. Although it seems to me that Missouri fans hate us even more than we hate them, which seems nearly impossible on the surface.

Posted by: Owen Nov 15 2007, 05:09 AM

QUOTE (1mpr1m1s @ Nov 14 2007, 07:58 PM) *
I would be so happy I couldnt be more happy for ya ...Have fun biggrin.gif


I take it you will consent to Kris giving me your password then laugh.gif

Posted by: Kristofer Dahl Nov 15 2007, 05:10 AM

Thanks Tony for your excellent post, and the interesting debate that followed! This time, I surpisingly agreed with fkalich, which means we must be right this time! laugh.gif

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind what the consequences of illegal file sharing are - since the exact same thing would happen to gmc if we were exposed to that.

Development of the product is heavily slowed down and in worse case the product dies. Naturally the ones who go first are the small ones.

Please be gentle with us? mellow.gif

Posted by: 1mpr1m1s Nov 15 2007, 05:16 AM

QUOTE (Owen @ Nov 14 2007, 08:09 PM) *
I take it you will consent to Kris giving me your password then laugh.gif

Sure Owen tell him I said it was ok. Maybe since you cant understand the lessons on your own account you want to sign in on mine ---------

edited by Kris - member warned - you are entitled your opinion but not this language

Posted by: fkalich Nov 15 2007, 05:16 AM

QUOTE (Kristofer Dahl @ Nov 14 2007, 10:10 PM) *
Thanks Tony for your excellent post, and the interesting debate that followed! This time, I surpisingly agreed with fkalich, which means we must be right this time! laugh.gif

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind what the consequences of illegal file sharing are - since the exact same thing would happen to gmc if we were exposed to that.

Development of the product is heavily slowed down and in worse case the product dies. Naturally the ones who go first are the small ones.

Please be gentle with us? mellow.gif


we probably agree on more than it would seem on the surface. You have clearly made the good decisions to this point, but I am sure you would like to continue to expand your entrepreneurship, and this is one of the things you have to deal with. But so far so good, or so it seems to me.

I admire this fine product. You find examples of this in other fields, entrepreneurs who have come up with a product that is superior to anything even the big boys are putting out. For example, language lessons. Some have come up with programs that are far superior to what the big companies have provided in the past, and they have to deal with these same issues.

Posted by: Owen Nov 15 2007, 05:20 AM

QUOTE (1mpr1m1s @ Nov 14 2007, 08:16 PM) *
Sure Owen tell him I said it was ok. Maybe since you cant understand the lessons on your own account you want to sign in on mine fool.


Now, cmon, there was absolutely no need for that. blink.gif

I was only joking with you, that was uncalled for.

Posted by: 1mpr1m1s Nov 15 2007, 05:23 AM

Your a funny guy .

Posted by: ActiveX Nov 15 2007, 05:26 AM

QUOTE (jeff @ Nov 14 2007, 11:07 AM) *
I was thinking about something here - do you think it's possible that some of the same people who develop software put out pirated copies on P2P loaded with trojans and viruses for the benefit of those who steal them? I wonder.

Never have done that...but thanks for the idea laugh.gif

...just kidding

Posted by: Owen Nov 15 2007, 05:30 AM

QUOTE (1mpr1m1s @ Nov 14 2007, 08:23 PM) *
Your a funny guy .


Hysterically so. laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: 1mpr1m1s Nov 15 2007, 05:31 AM

edited by Kris

Posted by: jeff Nov 15 2007, 05:31 AM

QUOTE (ActiveX @ Nov 14 2007, 11:26 PM) *
Never have done that...but thanks for the idea laugh.gif

...just kidding


laugh.gif I wouldn't blame you one bit!

Posted by: Owen Nov 15 2007, 05:33 AM

QUOTE (1mpr1m1s @ Nov 14 2007, 08:31 PM) *
Owen likes to talk **** but whines when he gets it back LOL


rolleyes.gif

I <3 You Too. wub.gif

Posted by: mattacuk Nov 15 2007, 05:38 AM

Well Gentleman, i must say.........

Im not touching this one with a 50 foot pole laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif wink.gif

Posted by: Animosity Nov 15 2007, 07:12 AM

Sigh, this is what happens when you mix politics and music. People get upset, and hostility is created.


Why can't we all just play some music?

Posted by: steve25 Nov 15 2007, 07:19 AM

QUOTE (Animosity @ Nov 15 2007, 08:12 AM) *
Sigh, this is what happens when you mix politics and music. People get upset, and hostility is created.
Why can't we all just play some music?


Guitar jam party round your place then

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 15 2007, 08:01 AM

I'm starting to get a little bored with saying this but keep it civil to each other guys. I don't like the naming calling or flaming that a small minority have sunk to - and which Kris has recently dealt with. If we can't discuss this topic reasonably then I'll close the thread.

Tony

Posted by: radarlove1984 Nov 15 2007, 09:32 AM

QUOTE (fkalich @ Nov 14 2007, 12:27 AM) *
My brother once told me something. You can try to get to people by trying to convince them on the morality of some behavior. You might get to them. However, nobody likes a baseball bat smashing into their knee cap. You can be sure that will be an effective determent. When people are afraid to steal this stuff, when they think they will get into trouble, they will mostly stop doing it. Up to then, only those who hold higher ethics on such things will refrain. Others will do it, and besides, this is just party of the glorious revolution against the evil capitalists.

In all of human history, I have never seen a single example of that ever working on a large, nationwide scale. Ever. It's a short term solution that's bound to fail miserably. And who's slamming capitalists? I've already stated that corporations have done more good for the world than anyone and anything in all of human history. I haven't heard a single person claim to be anti-business so far in this discussion.

QUOTE (tonymiro @ Nov 14 2007, 03:35 PM) *
Cheers,
Tony
Thanks for the reply. Sorry that I misunderstood your title in the original post. I re-read my old post and I see how I came across as saying "if we can't afford it, steal it". While my argument leads to that idea, my main claim is that no band, artist, or record label can ever really "own" the music they make. Once they create it, it belongs to the world.

Regardless of copyright laws.

I think a lot of people feel this way, and that's what fuels "pirated" music downloads. None of us feel morally wrong doing this. The people sued by the RIAA are an excellent sample group. When you have a range of people from ages 12 to 70, who have never made contact with each other, live in separate parts of the country, and have no predominant history of crime, and ALL of them are guilty of music downloading, that tells me average people don't think of it as being "wrong".

I'm advocating that if you want a piece of music, get it. It's yours. It's as much a piece of your life as it is of the band that made it. Get the song however you want to. If you've got the cash, buy a CD, if you don't, download it. Personally, I use Rhapsody because of the quick downloads and song quality.

You shouldn't have to pay millions of dollars to look a .jpg of a famous painting, and you shouldn't have to pay to listen to the music that's a part of your life.

The business model will have to change. I believe P2P websites will eventually charge a subscription fee that will help pay for the licensing of software and music. We're at a turning point in technology. Just like with the invention of the assembly line, P2P makes products more readily available and affordable. And just like with the assembly line, businesses are going to have to adapt to the changing times or die off because they can't compete.

It may not be the "Power to the People!" revolution some people are talking about, but a technological revolution can influence the world far greater than a social revolution.

File sharing isn't bad, it's probably the greatest computer technology since the invention of the Internet itself. The problem is that the technology is so new people aren't sure how to properly implement it yet. What do you think the world would look like today if if electricity were banned after the first person died from it? What about cars being banned after the first DUI?


P2P sites are in their early growing stages, but I suspect they will outlive us all.

---------
QUOTE
Minor point - allowing others to copy work in my University - and indeed other Universities that I know well - is an act of 'collusion'. In my University collusion would result in a hearing in front of the University Senate with penalties that range up to, and include, instant dismissal from the program affected and any other being undertaken at said time.

And tonymiro, I'm usually a nice guy so I'm going to assume you wrote that with the friendly intention of keeping me out of trouble. If that was the case, thank you.

Posted by: FretDancer69 Nov 15 2007, 09:33 AM

QUOTE (mattacuk @ Nov 14 2007, 10:38 PM) *
Well Gentleman, i must say.........

Im not touching this one with a 50 foot pole laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif wink.gif


lol, ill do the same.

Posted by: radarlove1984 Nov 15 2007, 09:40 AM

Hahaha, I think I'll do the same. After 7 pages, we're about to start going in circles.

The wise one's know when to call it a day biggrin.gif

Posted by: ActiveX Nov 15 2007, 12:23 PM

QUOTE (radarlove1984 @ Nov 15 2007, 12:40 AM) *
Hahaha, I think I'll do the same. After 7 pages, we're about to start going in circles.

The wise one's know when to call it a day biggrin.gif

Good call, goodnight all smile.gif

"I may not agree with your opinion, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to state it." Groucho Marx 1958

Posted by: Maximus Nov 15 2007, 01:41 PM

I have been following this thread since the beginning and I finally came to the point where I have to speak. Comparing stealing of any kind to a revolutionary uprising or democratic expression is utterly absurd. Also to say that this is a complicated issue is also ridiculous. The only thing stealing is good for is to serve the selfish motives of the person doing the stealing. I am absolutely amazed how people can spin any situation into their own self serving reality. I've seen several people justify this behaviour by saying that since millions of people do it, it must be ok or acceptable. The reason that it is so pervasive is because it is an almost completely anonymous way to do something that they really know deep down inside is not right. It's exactly the same thing as leaving an open candy jar on the floor in a room full of 3 year olds while their parents aren't around. They know they aren't supposed to, but as long as there are no percieved consequeces they will raid the jar. Let's stop pretending that being young or not wealthy entitles us to anything we want. Do what the rest of us do and wait, if you are too young and/or get a job and start saving if you can't afford it. If the item you desire is completely out of your financial reach then come to terms with that reality and move on. In closing I'd also like to say with all due respect to the moderators that this discussion is not centered around who has the best football team. It is a discussion quite simply about stealing, which is and has been a crime in every civilized nation in the world from the caveman on. Stealing has been established as a social no-no because of its vast and overwhelmingly negative impact on not only the individual or group it directly effects but the society as a whole. This is not a debate. It is right versus wrong. Those who condone or defend this behavior are of questionable character. Those who participate in this behavior are criminals. There is no way to say this nicely or put a positive spin on it. Sorry if I have offended anyone but sometimes the truth hurts a bit.

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 15 2007, 07:52 PM

QUOTE (radarlove1984 @ Nov 15 2007, 02:32 AM) *
....
And tonymiro, I'm usually a nice guy so I'm going to assume you wrote that with the friendly intention of keeping me out of trouble. If that was the case, thank you.



Yes it was meant like that (for you and anyone else) and glad you took it as such. Oddly enough in my work I often defend students against the charge of 'collusion' or, more often, 'plagiarism'.

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: tonymiro Nov 16 2007, 12:00 AM

OK guys I'm now going to close the thread. I think we've discussed this one at length and have had the chance to hear different viewpoints and opinions but imo it's getting circular and repetitive. Thank you all for your inputs though - it's been nothing less then interesting smile.gif .

As a quick, albeit not, exhaustive summary:

For many software piracy is a form of theft. It particularly hurts small software designers and manufacturers. For some though this may be an economic necessity for those who can not afford the software. However others feel that in such instances people should instead find and use freeware or shareware alternatives.

Many extend the argument to encompass other forms of file-sharing - particularly audio. Here again some feel that it is an economic necessity and argue that it is one that does not 'hurt' the artist. Others disagree.

There are differing views as to whether or not software piracy as such may be viewed as vehicle for opposing laws that some see as unjust. Some argue that it is and will lead to an improved, more equitable society; some argue that it is an unlawful activity and that social change happens by other legal means.

Apologies if I've glossed a point of view or argument.

Final word on the subject from me. Regardless of our personal viewpoints on this a re-iteration:

With respect to GMC - software piracy is regarded as the theft of intellectual property and as such GMC cannot and will not condone it, or discussions of file-sharing, cracked software and so on.

Cheers everyone for an interesting debate,

Tony

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)