I agree, allowing it to be sold as Costco seems to indicate that they don’t care overmuch about who gets the software at a below-usual-market price. Not all software companies handle things the same way, nor do I think these activities mean they’d turn a blind eye to the use and sharing or cracked or pirated software.
Software sales on my campus are fairly restrictive (although the prices are drool-worthy). They do enforce policies at purchase. They don’t raid your house to make sure you haven’t given away or resold the cheap software goods, but, FWIW, they do make you sign something saying you won’t do that. Microsoft has also limited the number of times certain programs can be installed, and the U won’t sell additional copies to you. Have too many hard drive crashes and you are screwed on being able to use el-cheapo software. Furthermore, some of the editions that are student-only are limited in features or superimpose a “STUDENT COPY” graphic on all printed drawings (Autocad, I’m looking at you).
Outside of the whole “student version” issue, some software requires locks or dangles (or at least, they used to) making it hard for it to be shared. Like Skald said, there is ample evidence that many companies would prefer to control who gets it and for what price.
When I bought Windows XP, I bought it based on certain promises. Things that MS had been trumpeting in its literature for several years before release, like the fact that you wouldn’t need to reboot your computer except for changes to the core kernel, and how it would be a super-secure OS, etc.
Guess what, there were viruses and security patches almost immediately, and that whole no reboot thing? Well, they must have put out a press release in 2 point font that said they couldn’t get it to work, because I went through a lot of rebooting whenever I installed new software or hardware. And of course, since I had opened and installed it, no store in their right mind was going to take it back.
Oh yeah, and it was like 1GB to install…all that extra code, and they couldn’t take the time to seal up the security holes, most of which pertain to memory buffer issues.
So, when someone offered me a pirated version of Office 2003, yes, I took it. If MS is gonna screw me on its promises, I’ll take a little something for my trouble.
There is absolutely no excuse for anybody to pirate software, especially when there are free/open source alternatives available for just about everything.
And if you absolutely must have the capabilities of, say, Photoshop over the GIMP, you’re probably in a position where you can pay for it, anyway.
As a Linux/BSD zealot, I think the BSA is awesome. I kinda wish they were even more draconion.
The only “justification” I can think of for stealing software would be from somebody who says, “I stole it because I’m a thief. I make my living stealing stuff. Why should software be any different? Hell, I’ll steal the computer, too.”
Indeed. You know what, I know it was wrong. If the FCC or whoever came to my door and told me I had to pay for it plus fines, I guess I would. But you know what else? Companies that lie and twist the truth in their marketing materials can kiss my hairy ass during a bowel movement. Let me address one of the other questions:
If I bought a Ford and:
a) it was a lemon
b) there was no way for me to resolve this issue (ie lemon laws, warranty, etc)
c) taking a car from the dealer lot was as easy as pirating software
d) there was little risk of getting caught
you bet your ass in a moment I’d go and take what I rightfully paid for…a quality automobile.
You know, it’s funny how you can’t read the effing EULA without breaking the seal and opening the box, thus making the software unreturnable. Were that not the case, I might have just returned it and got my money back. But I can’t. And I’m sure not going to spend hours upon hours of my time going to court to get back 99 dollars. Microsoft lied to me. It would cost me more than what I paid for the software to get resolution on those lies, so I put them in the same position. It will now cost them more than the software is worth in order to recoup the cost of their Office software. I’d say it about evens out.
I don’t pirate software willy-nilly. I have paid for every other piece of software and music in my home. But I did choose to take the law into my own hands in this instance. I suppose that means I am less than an upstanding citizen in your eyes. I think I’ll be able to live with it, though.
I work in the computer game industry. One of the major tools we use is 3DStudio Max, a piece of modelling software which runs about $3500.00. There’s a new version roughly every 18 months or so.
I’ve known precisely two artists who paid for their personal copies of their software, and both of those gave up trying to buy the newest version every time. To stay competitive, they’ve had to do what all the other artists do- use a pirated version. Since the game companies use this software, the artists they employ have to know how to use that particular software It’s simply unworkable to use one of the cheaper or free alternative program packages if the companies you’re trying to work for use 3DStudio Max.
If Discreet, the company that makes the software, made it much cheaper for professional individuals to purchase legal copies (say, $100-$500, with the stipulation that it can only be used for non-profit educational purposes), I’d be willing to bet that every artist I know would have a legal copy. By insisting that professional individuals pay the same amount per copy as the companies that hire them, Discreet is practically ensuring that individual artists continue to pirate the software.
Note: there is a competitive software package which has a pricing scheme exactly like the one I propose- Maya. Maya is also cheaper (and some say better, although I disagree). However, Discreet has just purchased the company that makes Maya… we’ll just have to see what comes from that. Personally, I hope they combine the two packages into one package which has the best of both Max and Maya, with Maya’s pricing scheme. But then, I’ve always been a bit of an optimist.
Maya has two versions, a $2000 one and a $7000 one.
Softimage XSI has a good $500 version in addition to the $2k and $7k ones.
These companies aggresively hunt businesses that use unlicenced copies. From what I hear, they merely frown upon individuals using it to learn or get a job. Everyone I know that has a ‘demo’ version desperately wants to get a job using a legit copy.
This assumes that your pirate is able and willing to pay for the product. I seriously doubt your average Russian software pirate has 200 bucks to drop on Vista.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. I’m psyched to hear you are using it–but dismayed to hear about the piracy. I’m married to one of the former Yost Group members. Yost is not longer getting royalties from it so I guess I won’t gnash my teeth too hard.
I don’t understand why all your peers have cracked/pirated copies. Yes, it is expensive. Isn’t the pricing based on the assumption that it would be bought by companies for the artists they employ? As for artists working as independent contractor, wouldn’t they consider it a cost of doing their craft (much as they buy computers with great rendering capacity and good video cards)? I didn’t think the upgrade was a full $3500 each time. It didn’t used to be.
Not really. Doesn’t matter whether the pirate could pay for a legit copy. He stole the product he’s using. It’s still a stolen product no matter how much money the thief has. The seller is deprived of money to which he is entitled for the use of his product. If he doesn’t get paid, the product should not be used.
No, the seller is deprived of no money. If the Russian Pirate uses the software the seller gets 0 dollars, and if he doesn’t use the money the seller gets 0 dollars. The money he is legally entitled to is a theoretical amount, and does not exist in this case.
Theft is wrong. Pirating software does not meet most definitions of theft. That is because it is debatable whether or not the owner of the copyright was deprived of anything. Every pirated version of software is not a potential sale lost, in many cases it is a future client.
Frankly I am a bit of a relativist. I have been lied to and damaged monetarily by too many software vendors to be on their side on this issue. I have had many versions of software that were said to be stable, but turned out to be buggy to the point of distraction. These bugs were never fixed (like they were in the old days :). The vendor just assumed they would fix them in the next version which I would have to buy.
Well, I’m no intellectual property theorist, so bear with me… but in another sense, the developer’s income is supposed to be correlated with the number of users (I’m not talking legally, I’m talking about the logical reward for investing time and expertise into software development). Build a desirable product, get more users and more income. Build a bad product, have no users and no income. Pirated software introduces a disconnect, because the developer is producing a desirable product yet is getting no income from some of the usership.
In other words, by stealing the software, the thief is violating the laws of the market. What’s next, the laws of gravity? Good god man, you can see how serious this could get.
Wow, guys you’ve really opened my eyes : pirating is stealing
geez and who could’ve thought
The thing is, my question was a rhetorical one .
The situation as it is now:
I invested and has been working hard on making my software/book/CD/DVD , here is my price ,
what ?? You are too poor ? F…k the poor ! Take it or leave it.
What I really expected/hoped to hear is: Yes the things as they stay now is somewhat unfair,
We live in the US , we can afford it and so be it ,who cares that it’s much more expensive overseas (compare to their earnings)
The fact that exist a cheaper/free substitution is absolutely irrelevant,
let’s compare apples with apples. I need Vista …for better or for worse… because I don’t want to have compatibility problems with other soft/users so, please, don’t tell me to use Linux ,ubunty, whatever…
