Piracy

[Ellie]

Yes or no?

Here's my stance on the matter. I have only pirated a few programs. One was because the license wouldn't let me use it on more than one (er... five) computers. I only ever used one computer at a time, so I figured I stayed in with the license, but no, had to crack it to use it.

Second, was a game, which my friends were modding. I downloaded it, cracked, to play their mods. I would never have bought the game in real life - partly because I don't like the genre of game it was, and secondly because after playing the cracked game I realised how awful it was.

Now, that is one reason I support piracy: it lets you try out programs FULLY before you buy them.

My second argument for piracy is this: cracking programs that you would never, ever buy, and probably won't use very often. Take photoshop for example. £1,000 (probably more than that now). I will never, ever spend £1,000 on software. Not unless it was for a commercial product and I had the budget. I would instead use free programs, such as The GIMP. Now here's the thing. Whether I pirated photoshop, or downloaded GIMP, Adobe gets no money either way. Adobe would never get money from me, not in any scenario, because I would not pay £1,000 for software. Therefore, cracking it is not immoral, it is not stealing anything from the company and is not losing them any money - because they would never have had the money from me in the first place. So why can't I crack it? (For the record I haven't cracked Photoshop as I wouldn't know where to begin, haha).

Now, for some arguments AGAINST piracy...

I understand that companies need to make money. Pirating something like a £5 DVD, or a film that is currently in the cinema, I would not do, purely because I could afford that and would (depending on the film in question) be willing to pay anyway. Secondly, an independant product, such as... Aveyond, I would not pirate (bad example on Aveyond as I was turned away by the poor gameplay in the demo, but nonetheless). Perhaps it is for a nonsensical reason; I like supporting small developers. Yes, I know, there is no difference between a small developer and a large one.

 

[mawk]

another argument for piracy: a lot of cracks and keygens play some cool chiptunes in the background.

 

[psiclone]

another argument for piracy: a lot of cracks and keygens play some cool chiptunes in the background.

1000x's this. There have been certain ones I've kept up for hours on end, and it never felt like the music was the same the whole time. It was epic.

However, I support piracy based on your first argument. Also, if there's a crap movie in theaters, why are you going to spend 5 bucks (or whatever) on it to go see it? If you have no intention on purchasing <product> at all, then the <company> has never gained or lost anything from you from pirating. Granted, most games can be played online without a legitimate key or whatever, but those are the ones who do not go full out crazy to combat piracy.

Look at Spore (that game was a huge letdown, btw, but that's another topic). There was this whole big uproar about that game because people who purchased the game, could only install it on up to 5 computers, and the game itself installed spyware onto your system without any of your knowledge/consent. Those who pirated it.. could install it infinitely and did not get the spyware. They eventually came out with a patch to "fix" the problem, but the whole idea here is that they did not hinder piracy at all. All they did was give those who pirated a thumbs up, while those who purchased the product got a fat dick in their asses.

I wholeheartedly support piracy, as I said. 99% of the time I do it is for single player games. Obviously multiplayer you can't* play online with, so I usually either rent (PS3/360) or buy (PC) those.



* this statement is a lie.

 

[tgman]

I only pirate software thats unreasonably priced eg photoshop flash and after effects cs4

 

[Jason]

My view on this is simple;

If it's too expensive, Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum !

 

[tgman]

My view on this is simple;

If it's too expensive, Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum !

my thoughts exactly

 

[Schism]

I'll play the devil's advocate for a moment, here.

The problem with piracy is that it's something of a slippery slope. Say you start with something like photoshop; the price is astronomical, something our hypothetical pirate to be could never afford, and would never purchase. So he downloads the software, and hey! This is pretty cool. Now he has a professional product with a fat price tag and he took zero damage to the ol' wallet in the process. Not too shabby.

Then he sees another piece of software, one closer to affordable. He could go out and buy it, sure. Or...he could get it for free. So he downloads it.

Next thing you know, the kid isn't paying for anything anymore, because well...why spend money when you can get it for free on teh intarwebz? Movies, music, software, you name it. Maybe Adobe didn't lose any money, but now other companies, artists and developers are.

See what I'm getting at?

Now, on a personal note, I'm not really against piracy. Almost everyone with a computer and an internet connection is guilty of it on some level. I doubt big, powerhouse companies like Adobe are feeling the pinch, because the average Joe couldn't really afford it to begin with. So they aren't losing out. It's when you get down to the little things, like movies and music and inexpensive programs where I think you hit a moral gray area. Are you justified in piracy when you could afford to buy it legitimately? Probably not. And while Adobe might not feel the pinch of piracy, it wouldn't surprise me at all if the little guys are, and I definitely wouldn't want to contribute to putting the little guy out of business.

On the legal front however, it's another story. I think the war on piracy; particularly in the music industry is ridiculous. I've discovered a lot of new music and artists via downloaded music, and when I find something I like, I'll buy the album or download more via iTunes. Some of my favorite artists I would never have discovered if not for 'piracy' and I think slapping people with astronomical fines and jail time for something that is largely innocent in intention is sad. Nobody's out to kill the music industry, for crying out loud.

 

[mawk]

Next thing you know, the kid isn't paying for anything anymore, because well...why spend money when you can get it for free on teh intarwebz? Movies, music, software, you name it. Maybe Adobe didn't lose any money, but now other companies, artists and developers are.

also playing n64 is a slippery slope because next thing you know you're addicted to world of warcraft

 

[Guest]

;D

 

[Vadon]

I'll play devil's advocate a bit more and give some slightly better arguments. (I'm sorry, but the slippery slope thing... I don't see pirating photoshop as a gateway to more piracy.)

Astronomical Prices
There's a reason these programs are expensive. It's because they're not aimed at you. They're aimed at developers, people with actual budgets making commercial products. Software such as Photoshop, 3dsmax/maya, flash, etc. are intended for use by businesses, not amateurs. Because they have a smaller market by cutting out amateurs, they need to increase the price.

This might not seem to make sense, afterall if you decrease the price you increase the number of buyers and people using your product. But it does make sense when you crunch the numbers. Let's look at 3Ds Max. Its price tag is at ~ $3,500. For easy math, let's say that there are ten people who want 3d modeling software that represent a general cross-section of the possible market. One is a developer with a budget that let's them get whatever software they want. Six are hobbyists who want it for whatever reason, school, entrepreneurship, whatever. And three are some self-deluded dumbfuck kids who think they're going to make a great game with their buddies they met on the internet and they need 'teh epic graphics.' Almost no matter what, the first person is going to buy the program, but let's pretend that Autodesk (the makers of 3ds Max) want to increase the number of consumers. If they drop the price to $350, the developer gets it, the six hobbyists might get it, and the three kids pirate it because they're moneyless bastards with a false feeling of entitlement. Assuming that all the hobbyists do buy the program, that's still only $2,450 where at the $3,500 mark they could have had that one developer, even if it leaves the amateurs out in the cold.

These software prices are created by trying to get the maximum from developers without alienating them from being too high. Y'all aren't the market for Photoshop, its intended for folks who want to use the product to make real money. Not furry fanfic pictures. (Not sayin' that you folks in particular want to make those pictures, but some of the forums I used to hang out at were fraught with... those people.)

In otherwords, the price may be astronomical to y'all. But they're that expensive so that the companies actually make money.

Piracy is stealing
I don't care how you try to justify it, in the end you're stealing. You can jump through as many hoops as you want to try to prove in some way that it's not stealing from them(Read: They're not actually losing money), but it is still stealing. Why? You're taking a product from the market without paying for it. It's that simple.

Really. It's that simple.

Sure, you can try to justify it by saying, "Well... I wouldn't have gotten it anyway! And it doesn't cost them any money because I'm grabbing it digitally." Which are both technically true, but doesn't change the fact that you've taken property you haven't paid for.

Piracy is one thing, but if you're going to engage in it, recognize it for what it is. You're stealing, and if you get caught and are told to pay up, fess up to it.

The number of licenses.

Now, I agree that the things many software companies have done to protect their product are ridiculous. But it's not without merit to try to protect their software from being spread illegally. Can you really blame a company for not wanting its product to be stolen? No. Can you be pissed off with how they try to do it? Absolutely.

The idea behind limiting the number of times you can install a piece of software comes from one of most common ways piracy happens. Where friends just pass the CD(s) around and everyone installs it. It sucks for you when you have to say... reformat your hard-drive three times because you keep getting debilitating viruses from porno/lyric websites and you want the software on your PC, laptop, and some other computer.

/Devil's Advocate

Look, I'm not going to play the whole sanctimonious card and pretend I haven't pirated something in the past. Sure, when I was a younger, the way I got expansion packs to the Sims was my friends and I would only buy one expansion pack each. We would then pass the expansion packs around in a circle. It worked fabulously as long as you made sure you installed your own expansion pack last so you could use the CD. At the time I didn't recognize it was piracy, but in retrospect, yeah it was.

I've also downloaded some* music in the past that was unavailable for me to purchase because it wasn't available where I lived at the time. (I later purchased it when I had the opportunity.)

I've done a bit of piracy in the past, practically everyone has. But these days I've decided to stop because I do have a simple philosophy. If I want to enjoy something, I should be able to afford it. It's an incentive to keep working and saving money for getting the things I want.

While I've stopped pirating, I don't campaign against it in trying to stop others. It's your own choice, really. I just want people to recognize it for what it is: Theft. If you're comfortable with that, then that's your prerogative. I really don't mind when people pirate too much because it is true that the RIAA is the spawn of Satan. And it's also true that piracy can bring visibility to artists and programs that might have gone unnoticed if not for the spread. I thought it was awesome when Michael Moore's Sicko was pirated, and his response was, "So?" Granted he had to rescind that statement later because his production company actually... y'know... wanted money.

*Like... two songs, really.

 

[Incognitus]

So basically, to sum this topic up so far, everyone here is in favour of getting something for nothing?

 

[Jason]

... Well duh ?

 

[Ellie]

I sort of get the high-price matter but that only makes sense under those madeup numbers.

In reality, there are probably far more hobbyists than professionals - look at this forum, 36,000 members, for example. But I can see where you're coming from.

But, not everybody who pirates is a... let me see... self-deluded dumb fuck kid who makes furry fan-fic porn and gets viruses from lyric websites and porn. Frankly I found those parts of your post insulting.

I needed to use the program on more than one computer because I bought a new computer. Don't fucking assume everyone on the Internet is a furry from deviant art who can't use the Internet.


Piracy is... a weird one. I agree that it is... well. It is sort of stealing. But it is not. You obtain something that would otherwise have cost you, and given somebody else, money. But you do not physically take anything. The product maker has an infinite amount of things to sell, taking one from infinity leaves infinity. They still have the product to sell, it's not like stealing a car or a candy bar. But I still see what you mean, it is still... getting something for no money.

 

[Vadon]

I sort of get the high-price matter but that only makes sense under those madeup numbers.

In reality, there are probably far more hobbyists than professionals - look at this forum, 36,000 members, for example. But I can see where you're coming from.

But, not everybody who pirates is a... let me see... self-deluded dumb fuck kid who makes furry fan-fic porn and gets viruses from lyric websites and porn. Frankly I found those parts of your post insulting.

I needed to use the program on more than one computer because I bought a new computer. Don't fucking assume everyone on the Internet is a furry from deviant art who can't use the Internet.


Piracy is... a weird one. I agree that it is... well. It is sort of stealing. But it is not. You obtain something that would otherwise have cost you, and given somebody else, money. But you do not physically take anything. The product maker has an infinite amount of things to sell, taking one from infinity leaves infinity. They still have the product to sell, it's not like stealing a car or a candy bar. But I still see what you mean, it is still... getting something for no money.

Ah, I'm sorry if you took offense personally. On the furry-fanfic I was reminiscing about an old forum that I used to frequent years ago and I did mention that, hoping folks would recognize I didn't mean anyone here. As far as the little chilluns who want to make the next great MMO, I was thinking of the GameDev forums where every other thread was a first time poster saying they had plans for a great mmo and need a 'programmer, a 3d artist, and a composer.' My arguments were not intended to be directed toward the RM community in general, but toward folks with ridiculous standards that truly don't come to fruition. (GameDev newbies.) The second half about viruses are actually a true statement as far as reformating goes. The most common virus infections come from porn and lyric websites. If you'd prefer, I would more than happily re-work my post to weed out some of my more incendiary opinions. I didn't mean offense to anyone here. (I'd be lying though, if I didn't recognize that what I said was rather brash and insulting to some.)

 

[Guest]

;D

 

[Schism]

I'll play devil's advocate a bit more and give some slightly better arguments. (I'm sorry, but the slippery slope thing... I don't see pirating photoshop as a gateway to more piracy.)

It was just an example. Doesn't matter if it's photoshop, Mr. McGangsta's new hit single, or the newest Harry Potter movie. Ultimately, it's all stealing, but that fact seems to hit home a bit harder when you're talking about something expensive. All I was really trying to say is that once you start pirating, (and the FBI doesn't come busting down your door and drag you off into the night) most people keep doing it, and the frequency/amount escalates. There's always appeal in getting something for nothing, and piracy often doesn't really feel like stealing. Most people who pirate would never walk into a store and steal a box of software, but when you get it off the internet, it's just code. So it's easier to turn a blind eye to any moral implication.

The first time I downloaded something I shouldn't have, I felt guilty. But after a while the fact that I was stealing was largely forgotten. That's what I meant by a slippery slope.

(These days I've cycled back to guilt, and I make an effort to pay for the things I can and live without the things I can't, but piracy is a remarkably hard habit to break.)

 

[Guest]

;D

 

[Ceroscuro]

I mean... it sounds to me like you are all acting like you can't possibly see a downside of this for software developers. I don't fully buy the "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" idea because you obviously want the software, otherwise you wouldn't download it in the first place.

The price may be too high, yes, but really you never know. For example: I started using RMXP when I was like... 14. $60 was a pretty high price for me then (parents would never buy me things like that, and I didn't really have a job). It seemed a bit ridiculous to me at the time. Now I'm 20. I can make $60 in pretty much no time, and I can totally see how Enterbrain is well within their rights to charge that.

Then I would imagine there are people here (and everywhere!) who are web designers, who once thought Photoshop to be WAY too expensive, but then as they grow to make that their career, they see it as a necessary tool, and can justify the price.

I guess it's a bit ridiculous, but I often make the analogy to a real, physical store. I can't walk into McDonalds and say "your burgers are nasty (which they are), so I'm taking one for free, just to try it out." Sure, it wouldn't really hurt them. Sure, they throw out tons of food every day. But this just gives an example to the next guy that HEY YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR BURGERS and starts a downward trend.

I do understand where you guys are coming from, but you can't truly say that there's no disadvantage to piracy... there are quite a few.

 

[Ellie]

There are disadvantages, yes.

But in the example I was talking about, I would only use photoshop if it was free. If it wasn't I could easily use something else, GIMP for example. If I had the money, I might buy it, but in my current situation no job, Uni fees approaching, etc it's just unfeasible to pay for something that I could be getting for free via GIMP.

I'm probably not the best person to talk about this though, I mean I have legal Educational Studio MX 2004 on my PC, neither GIMP nor photoshop. I'm talking purely from... hum. Example.

I know it's extremely petty of me to say I could be using GIMP for free instead of photoshop when the same goes for if they were both free. Could still easily use GIMP over photoshop. Perhaps it's the name, or the fact that it is so expensive, that makes it so... sought after?

 

[So fist]

So basically, to sum this topic up so far, everyone here is in favour of getting something for nothing?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlPjxz4LGak

That's the way you do it!
Money for nothing and your chicks for FREE!

/Me plays main riff

Piracy in general is stealing. Doesn't matter if you think you're Robin Hood while you're doing it. Countermeasures against it are likely impossible though prolly the most effective is simply freeware or cheapware that contains the sought after features that attract people to developer programs like photoshop in the first place. In the case like photoshop, the common user who is likely to pirate is only interested in being able to resize, perhaps color correct, crop, and cut and paste photos. Why would you pay $200 - $350 just to do that? If photoshop had a simpler program that was simply a utility for the average family snapshotter or beginner photographer they could prolly release it for free and make a dent in the amount of piracy on their developer suites by the fact that it could be more user friendly and have the brand name. No risk of nasty viruses.

There is plenty of legit freeware and open source but its impact is limited due to such things kind've only being known of by technorati and well travelled users. People who know nothing about computers and rarely use the internet will prolly be able to rattle off photoshop as the name of a computer app. And I'm sure only a handful of casually experienced users would be able to name open source freeware like open office and GIMP. Brand names for the casual user are very enticing since there is an implication that the software will work well and will not contain anything malicious or exploitable. It doesn't matter if that implication is objectively true or not.