Solved What's wrong with digital piracy?

Microsoft Windows xp tablet pc edition 2...
August 24, 2012 at 20:55:36
Specs: Windows XP, Intel Pentium 1.60GHz / M32.9 GB
What's so bad about piracy? I get yelled at for it all the time, but I don't see how it's hurting anyone.

See More: Whats wrong with digital piracy?

Report •

✔ Best Answer
August 25, 2012 at 01:59:23
If a product is copyrighted it belongs to someone somewhere, they have invested time and want recompense, or if you prefer profit.

Using without paying robs the Copyright holder of income.

My stance in respect to Computer Software is that if you do not want to pay for a product, find an alternative which is Freeware, this is called compromise !

In regards to films, music etal either rent or buy..........

Though I would state that "piracy" is a wide spread subject matter and in short sentences here it can not cover all situations..............

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate...

ARM Devices the future. Windows have accepted the fact!



#1
August 24, 2012 at 22:22:43
If you had a watermellon patch, how about if I sneak in and steal all your watermellons. I don't see how it's hurting anyone. :)

Report •

#2
August 24, 2012 at 22:41:36
If you did that I would lose the watermelons you stole. With piracy, the developer does not lose a copy of the software. If I had 10 melons, and you took 2, I'd only have 8 left. With software, it's infinite. No one loses a copy.

Report •

#3
August 24, 2012 at 23:00:41
Come on! you wouldn't miss two little old watermellons.

OK, how about if you own a movie theatre and I sneak in without paying. That should be be alright because you aren't losing anything. Right!?



Report •

Related Solutions

#4
August 24, 2012 at 23:00:58
XPFan99... in Australia we have a phrase for trouble makers... "stirring the possum" and I think you are stirring the possum!

Report •

#5
August 24, 2012 at 23:23:09
Come on guys - don't feed the Troll.

Report •

#6
August 24, 2012 at 23:24:09
@nails, I would be losing something. The seat you would be occupying. It would be used up by you, and a paying customer would therefor not get that seat.

@Ewen

I'm not causing trouble. I'm just curious. But hey, curiosity killed the cat.

@iJack

I'm not a troll! I'm just asking a harmless question. I always hear "piracy is EVIL!", but I never hear why. It's just treated as an "everyone knows" situation. I want an honest answer from some helpful users.


Report •

#7
August 24, 2012 at 23:26:36
Stirring the possum? Isn't that what granny did when she was fixing vittles for Uncle Jed, Jethro and Elly May?

Report •

#8
August 25, 2012 at 01:59:23
✔ Best Answer
If a product is copyrighted it belongs to someone somewhere, they have invested time and want recompense, or if you prefer profit.

Using without paying robs the Copyright holder of income.

My stance in respect to Computer Software is that if you do not want to pay for a product, find an alternative which is Freeware, this is called compromise !

In regards to films, music etal either rent or buy..........

Though I would state that "piracy" is a wide spread subject matter and in short sentences here it can not cover all situations..............

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate...

ARM Devices the future. Windows have accepted the fact!


Report •

#9
August 25, 2012 at 07:33:07
Ask the person that spent a year writing code and still has the bleeding fingers to prove it, and now can't make his/her house payment because people that use the software for free aren't hurting anyone....

:: mike


Report •

#10
August 25, 2012 at 08:25:22
@JoliCloud

It doesn't "rob" them. Their wallets don't spontaneously vanish into the aether. If they made 22 billion from an OS, they're not going to become bankrupt from a download. And no freeware does what costware does.

@Mikey

"Can't make his/her house payment" Nice strawman! Look, their money isn't going anywhere. If I pirated, there are still millions of people who will still buy the product. In fact, sales in music CDs and computer software have GONE UP since pirates and torrents came about.

Also, if I'm not supposed to pirate, how am I supposed to know whether or not I like a piece of software? If I buy it, I have to pay BEFORE I can see it. So I won't know whether or not I like it.


Report •

#11
August 25, 2012 at 08:57:01
Piracy is Piracy if it is illegal however you dress it up.

All good software comes with a Trial Version.................

Anyway the stance of CN is to verge on the side of caution re Piracy and I wholeheartedly agree with this situation.

If you want to be a Pirate, do not ask other people to collude with you, keep it to yourself unless you may have a big bill like this story:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technolog...

ARM Devices the future. Windows have accepted the fact!


Report •

#12
August 25, 2012 at 11:26:14
With piracy, the developer does not lose a copy of the software.

Yes he does.
Because the copy you have is not the copy you would have had, had you bought it.
And the developer loses the monies you would have paid, had you bought.

MIKE

http://www.skeptic.com/


Report •

#13
August 25, 2012 at 11:57:31
If you can't see how piracy hurts anyone, then avoid any boat trips around Somalia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy...

If you you not understand the meaning of "digital piracy" then search using Google. There is only a limited number of ways people can explain this sort of thing. Clearly you either don't or won't understand, so it is pointless keep trying to justify pirating and infringing copyright, by raising this on various posts on these forums. If you wrote software for a living you would soon take a different view.

You make your own choices in life. The only reason I can see for seeking approval for illegal actions is so that you feel better. We do not claim to be qualified in psychology.

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Report •

#14
August 25, 2012 at 12:21:08
Let's say you design an operating system for microsoft. You componsation for this is say $10 for every copy sold. Two months later you notice over a hundred copies being used and you get your first check for $20. What gives? There are you know over a hundred copies out there? Where is the rest of your bloomin money? You inquire with microsoft and they inform you that they have only "sold" two copies.

You were not at all hurt by this. You only lost $980 in two months. Or do you view it as "WOOOOOO HOOOOOOO I made twenty bucks"?

Great job!

Likely


Report •

#15
August 25, 2012 at 12:26:34
XPFan99

Let me explain it to you this way. Lets take a video game as an example. The game developer invests ten million dollars to fully develop a game. That game is going to appeal to a finite number of people. The developer does what he can to circumvent piracy but he knows that a certain amount of piracy will happen. So he has to calculate to number of BUYERS fro that game by subtracting the pirated copies. The net number divided into the ten million cost plus reasonable profit determines the selling price of the game.

If there were no piracy the game could sell for less. Therefore you are stealing from every legal user in the form of higher prices.

Where I diverge from this formula is when copy writes are arbitrarily extended or the same material is released on different media.


Report •

#16
August 25, 2012 at 12:49:46
"If there were no piracy the game could sell for less. "

I doubt it. Idiots like this guy would just continue to pull numbers out their ass and "improve" their DRM. Stuff like that encourages people to pirate.

mATX Beast | LGA2011 i7-3930K @ 4.2GHz | 16GB quad-channel DDR-1866 | GTX 670
240GB SSD+2TB HDD | Asus Rampage IV Gene | Seasonic X560 | Silverstone TJ08-E


Report •

#17
August 25, 2012 at 17:52:40
The bottom line is, if you want to use pirated software, that's your business. I use the torrents all the time & my guess is a lot of these guys do too. Just don't mention it in your posts & they won't get deleted.

Report •

#18
August 27, 2012 at 07:38:26
Piracy is a nice, quaint word. It doesn't make it seem so bad. But piracy IS theft.

No matter how you try to justify it, it's stealing and stealing is not only illegal, it's also morally wrong.

What do you do for a living XPFan99? Whatever it is, how would you like it if I contracted with you to do about $100,000.00 worth of that work for me and then didn't pay you?

How about if I sneak into your home when you're not there and steal everything of value that you own?

Now please explain to me why would you think stealing from someone else is ok if you wouldn't want anybody stealing from you.

Either you're stupid and didn't realize piracy is theft or you are a troll who does know. Which is it?

It matters not how straight the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul.

***William Henley***


Report •

#19
August 27, 2012 at 23:46:33
A lot of examples were given on why piracy is stealing but none addressed probably the most common form of piracy--piracy of software for which the user wasn't going to buy anyway. "Oh look, I can get that sofware for free. Well I'll go ahead and try it then." Under that particular set of circumstances the developer/license holder would be hard pressed to show a loss.

Of course that doesn't make it legal. I'm just pointing out that not every instance of piracy involves someone losing money or not receiving money they normally would get. It's not a zero sum game (gain?).

When old, outdated, no-longer-supported, replaced software is involved I think it makes good business sense for developers to 'turn a blind eye' to the piracy of those products. Those pirates are familiarizing themselves with the product and in the future when they may need new software they will be more likely to buy the same brand. I mentioned that in relation to MS operating systems in this thread:

http://www.computing.net/answers/wi...

and a link there to an earlier one.

Of course it's up to the developer/license holder to decide if that's what they want to do. The pirate can't just assume that's the case.


Report •

#20
August 30, 2012 at 15:44:46
Not taking any sides here but the thing that annoys me is when software /music company's say things like "500 copies of photoshop (example not real price etc) were downloaded illegally @ £50 so we have lost £25000.

This for me is rubbish because whats to say the 500 who downloaded it would have bought it anyway.

Same with music someone who was caught with something like 200,000 songs cost the music industry over 2 million quid
Do we really think if that person had to pay he would buy 200,000 songs at over 2 million quid.

Its still illegal mind you but just something that annoys the hell out of me.

and before anyone good at maths trys to work out the figures they are only there as an example not fact.


Report •

#21
August 30, 2012 at 23:46:04
It annoys me when people complain about someone stealing a $200,000 Ferrari. I mean, it's not as if the guy was going to buy a Ferrari if he hadn't stolen it.

Report •

#22
August 31, 2012 at 08:22:45
I have to pipe in here. I am of the school that believes punishment should be commensurate with the crime.

ijack

Your analogy would work better if you said the guy took the Ferrari for a ride, did no damage and replaced the gas before returning it where he found it. That is a better comparison to digital theft. While the potential for additional profit may be lost, actual profits are not lost and the original product remains intact.

That is the difference. That and the trumped up value the RIAA has gotten the courts to buy into.

I know this is not an original concept but one worth repeating occasionally. The imbalance in our legal system grates me to no end. I don't think I need to cite examples in order to make my point.

When someone shoplifts from a brick and mortar store they are charged according to the value of the goods actually stolen. Not so when pirating music.

One other point to make. How many folks have lost access to music they PAID for but can't access because the provider is no longer there to provide access to that music.


Report •

#23
August 31, 2012 at 10:26:52
Awe come on. The guy who had the Ferrari stolen will get his money back from the insurance company. What's the harm? And the insurance company make huge profits out of their customers so they can take the hit. No-one is really losing anything, are they?

What about stowing away on a ship, or riding on a train for free? Again, no-one loses, do they? What if you were to break into a company that printed banknotes and steal $1,000,000 in newly printed bills. It will have cost the printer next to nothing to print those bills - perhaps the thief could leave a $100 bill to recompense them. So who's
losing anything?


Report •

#24
August 31, 2012 at 13:00:56
ijack

If you don't see the difference then there is no sense in debating it further.

I never inferred that piracy is OK. Just that there are many facets to the issue.

Stowaways are still a liability to the ship/train company so there is another facet/ potential cost. The insurance company incurs a cost.


Report •

#25
August 31, 2012 at 14:24:38
going on a point made by Othehill you can be fined £1000 per music file that's not legal found on your computer.

But only fined a £100 for stealing a car

And as for the Ferrari comparison by ijack its not really the same is it


Report •

#26
August 31, 2012 at 19:06:35
Yeah, ijack's examples again seem to miss the point. An insurance company may make a lot of money but that doesn't negate the fact that it's a loss for them when they pay a claim. And stealing $1,000,000 in paper money isn't about the cost of the paper. It's $1,000,000 loss for the government and although that may seem neglibible when they're throwing around trillions of dollars it's still a loss.

Report •

#27
August 31, 2012 at 21:57:46
@Jolicloud

But what if the software doesn't have a trial version? Or what if the trial version is so limited that I don't get to see the "real" product (e.g. videogame demos showing levels and enemies that aren't in the game)?

@mmcconaghy

If I was going to pirate something, I wouldn't have bought a copy anyway.

@likelystory

That $20 is what I would have made anyway. Most pirates wouldn't have bought the product anyway.

@riider

That's a good point! In all honesty, my piracy views are this: I'll probably pirate software soon, and if I make software, someone else will probably pirate it. And I won't care.

@Curt R

"Morally wrong"? Oh no, rich billionaire CEO won't have all teh monies!

"What do I do for a living"? Go to redstatebluestate.net. I sell board games. I have made hundreds of $$$.

If you stole everything I owned, I'd LOSE all of it. If I had one television, and you stole it, I would have no televisions. But if I had a self-regenerating television that would always copy if you tried to take it, I wouldn't care!

And I'm neither an idiot or a troll, but I have seen examples of the two in this very thread. I am an intellectual. I see what laws should be outlawed.


Report •

#28
August 31, 2012 at 23:01:58
@DAVEINCAPS I think you are wrong. How is the Government losing? They don't pay $1,000,000 for those bills. It is a notional loss, just like digital piracy.

If you don't like that, let's cut out the middle man. I set up my own printing press and start churning out $100 bills. There is no real loss to anyone, but I think you can see that this is not a morally correct thing to do. Ultimately, all money is a fiction unless backed up by some physical object. But we have to abide by the rules for that fiction to work. In the case of dollar bills the rules say don't print your own. In the case of music and software the rules say respect what the producer asks you to pay for it.


Report •

#29
August 31, 2012 at 23:53:18
You're subscribing to the 'they're so big it won't be noticed' theory. That's irrelevent even if it were true. A loss is still a loss.

OK, how about this; counterfeiting is inflationary. That hurts--causes a loss--to every human being who uses the money. Also, banks are pretty good at recognizing funny money. If you accidently deposit some you picked up innocently in circulation they take it and you sustain the loss. And of course the government has to hire people to identify the money and catch and prosecute the perpetrators. Another loss.

The discussion here is mostly about alleged losses due to digital piracy--not about whether it's OK to do it.

I like the OP's 'self-regenerating television'. It reminds me of that South Park episode where Cartman collected a bunch of stem cells and put them next to a Shakeys Pizza and the cells dutifully created a second Shakeys Pizza.


Report •

#30
September 1, 2012 at 05:23:35
xpfan99

Try to justify it any way you like, it's against the law and if you participate in taking things that do not belong to you without paying, you're a thief.

It doesn't matter if you think the law is wrong. It is the law.

You are no intellectual. I wouldn't even rate you as a pseudo-intellectual. You're a thief trying to justify behaviour that he already knows is illegal as well as immoral.

It matters not how straight the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul.

***William Henley***


Report •

#31
September 1, 2012 at 07:58:22
Curt R

I think you are being a little harsh with xpfan. He/she sounds like a teen that is trying to find their way in the world. I didn't take the original post as a justification as much as a challenge. That is what I have been doing in this thread too, challenging the status quo.

The purpose of copyright and patent protection is to assure the developer a fair return on their work. Ultimately the progression of society relies on advances in virtually every field that is protected by copyright or patent.

In order for an idea to be built upon it must be available. The concept of an expiration date exists so that eventually society as a whole can benefit from these works.

When a pharmaceutical company can take two drugs that have expired patents and combine them into one pill and get a new patent is ludicrous. It happens all the time though.

Can we see how open source software has helped the entire software community and the end users? There is no stimulus to build upon copyrighted works if they have corner on the market. Expiration dates are that stimulus.

How about the US patent office granting patents on naturally occurring human genes just because someone isolated them. This is ridiculous on the face of it.

I could go on and on but I think the point has been made. Society must challenge the status quo. That is what xpfan is doing here.

This doesn't mean we throw away the current protections on intellectual property. Just examine why thing are the way they are and what changes may be beneficial to both the holder and society.

As I stated above, I do not pirate anything. That said, I believe some changes to the system are needed. Just look at the way other countries handle these issues. If there was only one right way, everyone would be doing the same exact thing and they aren't.


Report •

#32
September 4, 2012 at 23:19:11
I see the board game sells for $20.00. There's bound to be a copy on Torrens, maybe I'll download it and make copies for 30 of my friends. That's $600 out of your pocket but as you have said earlier you don't care!

Report •

#33
September 5, 2012 at 06:30:13
@mmcconaghy

If I was going to pirate something, I wouldn't have bought a copy anyway.

So if you would not have bought a copy in the first place,
what is your reason for pirating a copy of software you don't want?

MIKE

http://www.skeptic.com/


Report •

#34
September 6, 2012 at 09:32:53
@Curt R

Stealing means the person who it was stolen from loses. There is no loss with piracy.

@Othehill

I'm 13 to be precise. I knew how to write coding since I was 8. I check out college computer books every day. I'm an IT guy for the local college.

@Ewen

No, it's not $600 out of my pocket. I never got $600 from you to lose. IT AFFECTED NOTHING.

@mmcconaghy

I never said I don't WANT it. It could be that it's too expensive. Or it wasn't released in the USA. Or it lost support and wasn't sold by Microsoft since 1995. And the only way I CAN get it is with piracy.


Report •

#35
September 6, 2012 at 11:03:05
XPFan99

You're avoiding the point I'm making. Stealing is illegal and immoral. If you take something without paying for it, you are in fact a thief and are in fact stealing.

Comments?

This is aside from your wrong statement about there being no loss.

If you steal a song the artist loses that money. The same is true for movies and software.......someone loses money. Instead of stealing after the fact, you're stealing before the fact. But no matter which way you cut it, or attempt to justify it, it's still stealing!

At age 13 you're smart enough to know right from wrong. I bet your parents taught you stealing was wrong. Your other statements are mistaken and a poor attempt to justify stealing

You claim to be a coder. Let's say you write the next best and greatest online game. You've created a game that could potentially make you rich. Do you give it away to everybody for free because you never had their money in your pocket so it's no loss? Or do you sell it and make money?

If you opt for selling it and making money, are you going to be happy with people stealing your product and not paying for it? Or would you prefer everybody paid for it and put that money in your pocket where it belongs.

Please respond to the above questions

It matters not how straight the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul.

***William Henley***


Report •

#36
September 6, 2012 at 14:47:26
Aw, this topic is just grinding on - not only on this thread either.

I'm an IT guy for the local college
I hesitate to imagine with the ideas you seem to have about piracy.

At age 13 you're smart enough to know right from wrong
I'm not so sure, or are you just playing devils advocate with us all?

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Report •

#37
September 6, 2012 at 14:54:18
I never said I don't WANT it.

I WANT a Bugatte Royale,

It could be that it's too expensive.

$10 million asking price

it wasn't released in the USA.

None of the six produced were initially offerd for sale in the USA

Or it lost support and wasn't sold by Microsoft since 1995.

Hasn't been manufactured since 1933

the only way I CAN get it is with piracy??

MIKE

http://www.skeptic.com/


Report •

#38
September 6, 2012 at 17:06:53
This fellow is a troll and he is being deliberately obtuse. He knows very well that he is in the wrong, he is deliberately baiting the members and we are all rising to it.

The quicker we stop responding to his ridiculous argument and responses the quicker we'll shut him up. Derek is right the thread is "grinding" on and getting nowhere.

Pack it in XPFan99 and go back to your college and do your IT thing and don't complain when someone robs you blind!


Report •

#39
September 7, 2012 at 11:36:00
@Curt R

No, the artist doesn't "lose money". The downloads don't empty the artist's wallets. The music industry is alive and well despite piracy. Microsoft is still a bunch of billionaires. No one is losing money.

Also, being an IT guy doesn't mean I have to be against piracy.

13 =/= stupid.

@mmcconaghy

A Bugatte Royale is not a file. If there were five Bugatte Royales, and you took one, there would only be four left. Yet with piracy, NO ONE LOSES ANY FILES. *facepalm*

@Ewen

I'm not trolling, I'm just curious. I question what makes society tick. I wonder, what defines "good"? What the government tells you is good? Might makes right?

"In the wrong"? What is "right" but another man's "wrong"? Things to think about. ;)

"Shut me up"? I have freedom of speech. You can use yours to not be so rude.

"Rob me blind"? Notch allows Minecraft to be pirated. He's not bankrupt. Piracy affects nothing.


Report •

#40
September 7, 2012 at 11:55:26
A Bugatte Royale is not a file. If there were five Bugatte Royales, and you took one, there would only be four left. Yet with piracy, NO ONE LOSES ANY FILES. *facepalm*

You missed the whole point of the reply,
or you chose to ignore it.

Either way, I feel sorry for you.

MIKE

http://www.skeptic.com/


Report •

#41
September 7, 2012 at 12:43:21
being an IT guy doesn't mean I have to be against piracy

Nope but if you think it's fine then presumably you wouldn't hesitate to use it in your IT work. If you do then it might get others in trouble.

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Report •

#42
September 7, 2012 at 15:20:48
This fellow is a troll and he is being deliberately obtuse. He knows very well that he is in the wrong, he is deliberately baiting the members and we are all rising to it.

Considering the so-called "kid" doesn't want to address the issue that stealing is stealing and therefore wrong, illegal and immoral, I'd have to agree.

If he really wanted a discussion, he would address questions and issues brought up and not just ignore them.

To sum up, I have to agree and will no longer partake in a useless discussion with yet another troll

Oh and just for the record

13 does equal STUPID

Once you reach around 25+ you'll understand, and agree.

It matters not how straight the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul.

***William Henley***


Report •

#43
September 8, 2012 at 17:16:48
To sum up, I have to agree and will no longer partake in a useless discussion with yet another troll

Spot on Curt R... I'm with you on this one.


Report •

#44
September 10, 2012 at 20:33:36
@mmcconaghy

I KNOW what your point was. Just because you want something doesn't mean you should be able to take it. But your analogy was flawed.

@Derek

I don't use piracy for IT work. Why would I?

@Curt R

Wow, a grown man calling a 13 year old boy stupid. How mature.

PIRACY. ISN'T. STEALING.

With stealing, you're taking something from someone else. How is piracy like that?

I have neen addressing points people made. It's just that a lot of them are flawed.

13 equals stupid, huh? And what high paying job are you making loads of $$$ from?

@Ewen

Yes...

Go with the flow, might makes right. Let the corporations make the laws. Support PIPA, SOPA, ACTA, CISPA!


Report •

#45
September 11, 2012 at 07:27:33
But your analogy was flawed.

So you say.

You seem to be hung up on this false idea that property must have a physical presence.

Have you ever heard of the term Intellectual property?

MIKE

http://www.skeptic.com/


Report •

#46
September 13, 2012 at 03:06:01
Im pretty late in this conversation but i have to comment. I really cannot understand where you are coming from XPFan99. You are completely wrong. You seem to think that downloading something does not mean stealing because the developer is not loosing anything from your download. Wrong let me explain why.

Say i produce a song and i potentially have 10 customers. i want to sell this song for £10 each.

I need to make £1000 at least for my efforts, costs, time, etc.

Now 8 of these potential customers suddenly realise they can download this song for free and only 2 customers buy it.

2 x 10 = £20 that i have made

8 x 10 = £80 i have now lost

these 8 customers are now enjoying my song for free, and i havent got their money in my pocket/wallet/bank whatever.

So basically what i am saying, develeopers will always have a cost of producing something ok, and as piravcy increases, their income decreases as the number of people PAYING for the product decreases. It doenst matter if 100 pay for it, that may not be enough to cover the cost the developer incured to produce the product. maybe they needed 1000 customers to pay to make a profit.

So to contradict your comment/belief about "no one looses from a download" The developer looses a paying customer!!!!!

I write software and I try my hardest to ensure my licences/software cannot be given out to others, i know people have tried. If 10 people use my software i want 10 payments for it otherwise someone out there is using my software that i produced in my time, at my cost for free.

Its not only illegal it is also morally wrong, why steal something that someone has spent time to produce. We all work we all make money might as well spend it on something.


Report •

#47
September 13, 2012 at 21:04:15
@mmcconaghy

...

In order for the developer to LOSE something, it would have to be tangible.

@AlwaysWillingToLearn

Funny, your comment contradicts your username. Piracy does NOT cause someone to lose a paying customer. Pirates wouldn't have bought it anyway. Meaning no money is lost. If someone downloading makes someone lose, simply not buying the software should have the same effect.


Report •

#48
September 14, 2012 at 00:37:43
My comment actually does not contradict my username! - care to explain?

i kind of see where you are comming from now, but still i think you are wrong in fact, you are wrong.

The point is, a potential paying customer, ie someone who WOULD have bought the software, has NOW decided to pirate as the software is available illegally. So basically they were not pirates before as they always bought what they wanted, but because everything is now freely and illegally available, they decided to pirate, so a potential paying customer has been lost,.

I think you are refusing to understand because you want to justify your actions of pirating software, which is fair enough, but the general consensus is that piracy is illagl. Full stop.


Report •

#49
September 14, 2012 at 12:25:20
In order for the developer to LOSE something, it would have to be tangible.

There you go again with your false premise that the property has to have a physical form.

It does not.

Intellectual property, by it's nature is intangible.

MIKE

http://www.skeptic.com/


Report •

#50
September 14, 2012 at 14:31:51
While I recognize piracy is illegal the owner of the intellectual property is NOT losing anything. Look at the three links below for definitions of loss. Also consult with the IRS concerning what constitutes a loss for income tax purposes.

I am not justifying illegal downloading of copyrighted materials, simply pointing out that there IS a difference, as XPFan99 has pointed out. When tangible property is lost or stolen, destroyed, etc. there is a real loss.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dict...

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/loss

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/...


Report •

#51
September 14, 2012 at 15:24:03
While I recognize piracy is illegal the owner of the intellectual property is NOT losing anything.
YES he is.
If you pirate a copy of the software, the software producer is LOSING a sale.
XPFan99 has been arguing the same thing. That if it is not a tangible piece of property, then nothing is lost.

That is wrong, because software falls under the Intellectual property or intanable property rights.

If I write a book, then I get a copyright, and I have control over who publishes or in any way uses my work.
If I have a trademark, I have control over who uses and how they use that trademark
If I have a patent for a new invention, I have control who produces or uses that idea.

All of these are property, non-tangible property, and if you pirate any of them, then I suffer a loss in some form.

I am not a lawyer so I am not going to try to explain the legalize of it all, if you are interested then Google it.

Pirating is illegal.

I’m finished with this thread.

MIKE

http://www.skeptic.com/


Report •

#52
September 14, 2012 at 16:39:13
I did Google the word loss. Look at the links.

Did you bother to read the definition of loss? If you had you would see they owner of the software has NOT lost anything. Their copyright has been violated but there is technically no loss to them.


Report •

#53
September 15, 2012 at 23:25:46
The last time I read up on copyright law was a great while ago but what I can remember:

( Dummied down for those in the cheap seats ) Copyright infringement is not the taking, removing, or stealing of property but rather making a copy of it. In this you're right nothing has been taken or stolen. The holder of said copyright has the right to designate who if anyone may make copies. This person also has the right to make profit from each copy made. This includes the copy you made when you pirated it.

Under federal copyright law you’re absolutely right. You did not steal anything. You have denied the registered holder of the copyright his/their profit from it. This is punishable by law. You can google all this for yourself. I would think any 13 year old IT guy could?

Likely


Report •

#54
September 22, 2012 at 10:07:44
@AlwaysWillingToLearn

Actually, everyone I know who pirates software does it because it's too expensive. That means they wouldn't have bought it anyway.

Also, illegal =/= bad.

@mmcconaghy

But pirates WOULD NOT BUY THE SOFTWARE. Full stop. That's why they don't "lose a sale". If I made a videogame, and some guy wouldn't buy it because it was "too expensive", and then he pirated it, I wouldn't pitch a fit!

Also, illegal =/= bad.

@likelystory

Those copyright laws are messed up. Some people can't afford a videogame, or the game isn't exported to someone's country. What are they supposed to do? Not play the game? Also, let's face it, anyone who played Mother 3 is a pirate. Yet do we screech "Oh no, someone pirated a game he can't play otherwise!"? No we don't.

Also, what profit? If I was going to buy something, I'd just buy it! I only pirate WHAT I DON'T PLAN ON BUYING.


Report •

#55
September 22, 2012 at 18:32:17
I cannot afford tickets to the movies. I really want to see the movie so just walk into the theater. Sit down and watch it. The theater hasn't suffered any "Loss" because that seat was empty anyway. I didn't "steal" anything because the theater still has their physical seats and still has the movie available to sell tickets to other sessions. I got my entertainment because I really wanted it and didn't want to/couldn't afford to pay for it. No-one got hurt.
How about you try sneaking into eg. the next Springsteen concert ( or maybe you are into One Direction or something else). If you get away with it who suffered a loss? The promoter ? The Band ? According to your warped sense of morality no.
They were playing the music anyway and besides you couldn't afford to buy a ticket but you really wanted to see the concert. Ahhhh but if the bouncers caught you jumping over the fence........ What do you think they might have done to you?
Lets face it XPFan99. Any way you try to justify it your arguments don't stack up. If you cannot afford a licenced copy of a game then play something else. If you cannot afford to buy copyrighted music or videos then listen to the radio or watch TV. And if you don't like the laws as they are written then wait til you grow up, Get yourself elected to the legislature and change the laws. Oh sorry.... you cannot stand for public office because you have a criminal record for digital piracy. You are a petty criminal with emphasis on the word petty. Back in the day, you would have been the one hiding in the trunk sneaking into the drive-in movies. Maybe you are one of the menaces to public order who evade paying for bus/train fares. Where's the loss if the bus or train is going there anyway? Come off it. The world is under no obligation to provide you with free entertainment just because you cannot or do not want to pay for it. "I only pirate WHAT I DON'T PLAN ON BUYING." Substitute the word STEAL for pirate.

Goin' Fishin' (Some day)


Report •

#56
September 23, 2012 at 20:48:08
We have been here before and still getting the same answers. Does XPFan99 think that if he raises the question often enough he will get a different answer.

I think that has already been described as a symptom of insanity,

http://www.computing.net/answers/wi...

Stuart


Report •

#57
September 24, 2012 at 00:05:19
Justin I know you encourage intelligent debate on this forum but surely this discussion has gone beyond the limits of "intelligent discussion"... I would think the stage has been reached where it should be locked!

Report •

#58
September 27, 2012 at 17:38:57
You know what it is about Trolls? Their heads are bolted on loose!!

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

Please reply and let us know if our help worked. Your feedback helps others. Maybe you?


Report •

#59
September 28, 2012 at 22:15:33
@Rick59

If I snuck into a movie theater or concert, something would be lost. The space I'd be occupying. Same with a bus or train. I'd be taking up a seat that a paying rider could sit in.

@StuartS

That post wasn't about piracy. It was about a download. I got yelled at so much, I made a separate post to discuss why people hate digital piracy so much.

@Ewen

Oh noes, the user isn't thinking inside the box! Quick, get the Thought Police!

@MrGoodguy

You know what it is about People Who Go With The Flow? They don't have independent minds!!


Report •

#60
September 29, 2012 at 11:57:58
You go to a concert and video the whole thing even though they clearly state that this is not allowed. They have laid down the rules and you are breaking them, without taking up any more space than you would have without doing so.

Similarly, the rules laid down about piracy are called "laws". Anyone found breaking them is undertaking an illegal action.

But I doubt you will understand this because the box you are thinking outside of has been created by you and for you.

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Report •

#61
September 29, 2012 at 12:33:18
XPFan99

If digital piracy as you describe it were a perfectly legitimate activity and it was perfectly legal to make any other persons software available for download on the pretext that it would only be downloaded by those that could not afford to buy it, how many people do you think would actually buy it.

I will tell you if you cannot work it out for yourself, I would guess about 1 in 10,000. Consequently depriving the software authors of there rightful return.

Unless you would like to introduce a system of means testing where you take a test first to see if you fall into the free software category.

The reason why people have such a strong aversion to piracy is because it is illegal. If you have a problem with that, speak to your representative in Government and get the law changed to make it legal. I wish you luck,

Stuart


Report •

#62
September 29, 2012 at 13:24:58
Good to see some here still believe stealing is wrong. Sad to see some who want something find it perfectly acceptable to simply take it.

Skip
Audares Juvo


Report •

#63
September 29, 2012 at 13:47:30
If one wants to steal it is between that person and their conscience. What is absurd is to try to convince the world that "stealing is not stealing".

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Report •

#64
September 29, 2012 at 13:52:43
He's a Troll, their heads are bolted on loose.
We have a set of forum rules, you should read them. I know it's only an opinion, but it is an illegal one. Go write to your politician if you feel so strongly about it. And stop Trolling this fine site :(

Please reply and let us know if our help worked. Your feedback helps others. Maybe you?


Report •

#65
October 1, 2012 at 08:13:52
Although I decided to not waste further time discussing this with someone who is either:
a) incapable of discerning right from wrong (ie: a sociopath)
or
b) a troll

I decided I had to make one last comment.

You know what it is about People Who Go With The Flow? They don't have independent minds!!

Sorry son, you ARE indeed going with the flow. Only you're going with the flow of people who steal and try to justify their illegal/immoral activity. You do not have an "independant" mind. You're just regurgitating the same garbage that has spewed out of the mouths of many other trolls like you who are too lazy to earn what they want so they steal it and try to pretend they're not a thief.

I've known some thieves in my life. The majority didn't kid themselves, or others, about what they were. You however, are either deluded (a sociopath), lieing to yourself (know what you're doing is wrong but do it anyhow and try to pretend it's ok because "nobody's getting hurt") or you're a troll.

I believe you're a troll.

I do not believe you are 13. I do not believe you're some kind of IT person either. Nobody hires a 13 year old to do their IT. At best, if you are 13, you're an unpaid "helper" who knows a little something about computers.

In your case, that "knows a little something" would amount to how to turn one one, start and play a game, and steal software/movies/music with it. That does not make you an IT person.

In all honesty though, I don't believe you're 13. I suspect you're in your mid to late 20's. You live at home. You're unemployed by choice and your parents support you. Your mommy cooks for you, cleans for you and does your laundry too. You've never kissed a real girl or had a real date and you spend your life playing games, "pirating" and trolling. I wager none of that will have changed after another 20 years have gone by.

To all the sane and normal folks who hang out here on CN. This type of person is only looking for an audience for his inanity. If you respond, you're only feeding him. Let's all just boycott this thread and if nobody else responds again, he/she/it will be talking to themself and to them, that is the epitomy of "boring" and they will go away and find another forum to be the troll on.

It matters not how straight the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul.

***William Henley***


Report •

#66
October 1, 2012 at 13:12:08
@Derek

Illegal =/= Bad.

@StuartS

But I can't vote. I'm 13, remember?

@SkipCox

Piracy isn't stealing.

@Derek

...

Piracy isn't stealing.

@MrGoodguy

I'm not trolling. In fact, this is the last time I mention piracy on this site!

@Curt R

I AM 13. I am an unpaid techie who fixes college computers. Happy now?

Also, I'm not trolling. I'm questioning society's laws and rules. I'm daring to challenge society as a whole.


Report •

#67
October 1, 2012 at 13:50:37
Almost every teenager that has ever lived has questioned the rules, because they didn't happen to suit them. When they grew up and sought pay in order to make a living they realised why most of them were necessary.

All you have to do is wait for voting age, then convince the law makers to make the necessary changes (assuming you still think the same way at that time).

There are good reasons for setting a voting age.

As a distraction from all this nonsense, here's a little poem for bloggers:
http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2006/04...


Report •

#68
October 1, 2012 at 14:52:54
"Also, I'm not trolling. I'm questioning society's laws and rules. I'm daring to challenge society as a whole." as I said earlier. If you feel strongly about this, Petition your local politician about law changes. Not us.

Please reply and let us know if our help worked. Your feedback helps others. Maybe you?


Report •

#69
October 1, 2012 at 16:23:16
Like Curt R I declared that I would no longer post to this thread but what I must ask is why we are arguing the point with a 13 year old who refuses to see any reason at all?

He has said I'm questioning society's laws and rules. I'm daring to challenge society as a whole. and this sentence in itself is a reflection on his mentality.

Stop pandering to him and boredom will eventually succeed where we haven't!


Report •

#70
October 1, 2012 at 16:34:28

But I can't vote. I'm 13, remember?

Thank God for that small deliverance.

I'm daring to challenge society as a whole.

By the time you grow up and have to face some of the realities of life, like having to earning a living and hoping you are not going to get ripped of by every greedy individual who thinks nothing of taking something that doesn't belong to them, perhaps then you will then begin to realise why these rules are in place.

I think we have the makings of a politician here; bags of intelligence and not an ounce of common sense.

I'm daring to challenge society as a whole.

A word of caution. The prisons are full of people who dared to challenge society and lost.

Stuart


Report •

#71
October 1, 2012 at 23:26:07
The OP started off by saying that piracy didn't (necessarily) have to involve a loss for anyone. He's being countered with moral and legal arguments.

It's like when you ask a politician a question and instead of answering it he rambles on about something else. Or an old-west gunfight but instead of the two sides shooting at each other they're pointing their guns in the opposite direction.

It seems to me both sides are correct because the arguments being made aren't mutually exclusive.

Now please STOP!


Report •

#72
October 2, 2012 at 07:00:33
I agree with DAVEINCAPS.

This position does NOT support Pirating of software.


Report •

#73
October 3, 2012 at 01:32:01
#71 & 72 - The OP actually asked "What's Wrong with Digital Piracy". Any answers, practical, legal, financial, moral are valid replies. Your attempt to limit the answers that can be given to this open question demonstrates that you recognize the validity of those arguments against piracy. Don't muddy the waters by trying to limit what people can debate. Don't seek to excuse immoral, and in some cases criminal, actions. We owe our 13-year olds - who are still learning about society and morals - rather more than that.

Report •

#74
October 3, 2012 at 07:20:32
Ijack

While I agree with your statement above, the fact of the matter is that XPfan has not been convinced, so the arguments presented here may not have been compelling enough.

Some countries have partially addressed this issue. Canada, I believe, still has a surcharge on recording media. Other countries view copying of others works in various ways.

No issue is black and white. If you go back to the intent of copyright/patent laws they are designed to provide incentive for individuals or companies to be fairly compensated for their efforts while providing advancement that all society can benefit from.

This concept is the reason there are time limits on the exclusive use of the created works.

Over the last 50 years this has morphed into the b---tardized laws we now have that allow grand kids to live off work produced 50/60 years before. This was never the intent of these laws.

The very hardware we are now using to communicate is an example of how the system should work. What if the patent laws locked up any advancement of the first generation of computer hardware? We wouldn't be having this debate because thee wouldn't be any of what we take for granted.

Corporations have lobbied to extend the length of copyright to the extent that as a practical matter they never expire. This stifles further creativity. One hit wonders live a lifetime off one song? I may own that song on a record album but need to repurchase it on tape, then CD, then digital? That is ridiculous.

That is what fair use is about.

Now, back to XPfan. You are correct that he should not pirate anything. However, if the length of copyright time was more reasonable, he might not have to.

Corporations themselves recognize they have users by the short hairs. Why else would drug companies sell patent drugs outside the USA for less and fight to keep re-importation.

The movie industry sells legal copies of their wares in the third world for a fraction of what they get in the Western world. Are they losing money selling a movie for $5?

What harm would come to MSoft if they put Windows versions prior to the NT kernel out in the open for all to use without support? My response is no harm. In fact, I think they would benefit.

To sum it up, my opinion is that the laws are too strict and should be changed to shorten the time frame for copyright and to some extent, patent.

The real monetary loss comes not from individuals but large scale pirating of all manner of protected material. China steals technology on a regular basis. Is anything done about it?


Report •

#75
October 3, 2012 at 08:19:24
I feel that you confuse too many concepts here - patents, fair use, individual choice, and piracy.

Patents are another issue, and I agree that the laws - or rather the way that they are being interpreted - require some revision in the light of modern ways of business. But that is not the issue under discussion.

Fair use is another issue. Many countries have, or are in the process of, enacted laws covering the situations that you describe. These allow consumers to back up software and produce versions of audio or video in alternative media formats.

Individual choice is another issue. You may feel that Microsoft should release their prior work to the community and ask what harm it would do. That is a matter for them to decide. Many companies do release old software to the public domain, but that is their choice not ours. At what stage should it be decided that software is obsolete and needs to be released as public domain? Well, copyright law covers that. What price a company chooses to ask for their product in particular markets is their business decision to make. I might feel that Ferrari ought to sell their products for £10,000 but it is not my choice to make.

Piracy is not another issue - that is what is under discussion here. We are not talking about people making copies of software that they already own, being unable to licence patents, or making use of software that companies have released in the public domain. We are talking about simple theft of material that people want but are not prepared to pay for. The argument that they wouldn't buy this software in the first place is specious - if they want it enough to steal it they should be prepared to pay for it. If you really want a copy of NT and/or the programs it contains, it is available for next to nothing on eBay or at computer fairs.

To take something that doesn't belong to you - whether it be a physical object or intellectual property - without payment is theft plain and simple (unless the owner has stated that he is happy for you to do so). Any other argument is pure bluster to try to excuse an act that is legally and morally wrong. Such bluster and moral confusion may be expected from a 13-year old, but not from an adult.

The harm copyright theft does, while perhaps not directly tangible, is to stifle creativity. If people are not going to get proper recompense for their work then they will not do that work in the first place. Whether I am a welder or a software engineer is irrelevant; if I do a job of work and don't get paid for it then I am the victim of theft.

If laws are too strict then they can be, should be, and are modified. But we do that as a society, not as individual acts of anarchy. That is what the ballot box if for; many people have died over the years to win us a democracy that protects the rights of the individual. Let us respect that democracy and the society that it underpins.

And don't get me started on the connections between organized crime and copyright theft!

I should declare an interest here - I worked for 35 years for a business that made it's living based on the idea of copyright and the protection of the rights of authors to benefit from their work. So I'm afraid you will never convince me that copyright theft is OK.


Report •

#76
October 3, 2012 at 11:36:25
Ijack

I am NOT trying to convince you it is OK. On the contrary, I am Home builder and have had my designs stolen from me. I am not condoning XPfans's behavior. Rather trying to point out the reasoning behind piracy and the unfairness of the punishment for users that are caught in the RIAA/MPAA web. I personally do not download any copyrighted materials but I do understand the motivation behind that behavior.

I agree that I may have changed the direction of this thread. XPfan is wrong when he states piracy is not wrong. If you saw my other posts you know I am playing with semantics here, but I feel I must.

I feel there is a difference between actual property and intellectual property. That is why copyright and patent laws cover the unauthorized use of intellectual property. When someone takes real property the LAW states that is classified as theft. Not so with intellectual property. The difference is how the law treats each type. You can be prosecuted and jailed for theft. You can be sued for unauthorized use of intellectual property but you aren't put in jail.


Report •

#77
October 3, 2012 at 12:15:33
OthHill,

While you last two sentences are broadly true you can still and up in jail
y unauthorised use of intellectual property.

Takes someone else intellectual property and pass it off as you own could get you a jail sentence as well as taking someone else's 'll trade marks and making counterfeit goods from them.

IN both instances, at least in Britain, you would be charged with fraud.

So misuse of intellectual property in itself is a civil offence, how you use that property can get you into a criminal court.

Stuart


Report •

#78
October 3, 2012 at 12:35:16
I believe the UK law is actually a little stronger than that. In essence, if you make a profit out of copyright infringement then it is a criminal offence. That would cover selling pirated software or music, for example.

In actuality it is probably easier for copyright holders that it is primarily a civil offence. This means that, unlike a criminal case, the burden of proof is not a matter of "beyond all reasonable doubt" but of "on the balance of probability it is likely".


Report •

#79
October 3, 2012 at 12:44:30
To nearly all of you:
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

79TH POST! W00T!

DOS/9x Gaming Rig | Athlon 600 @ 672MHz w/ Golden Orb HSF | 384MB | 60GB
Voodoo2 SLI + GeForce 256 DDR | SB Live | Asus K7V | 21" NEC CRT | Win98SE


Report •

#80
October 3, 2012 at 20:29:46
jackbomb and your valid and constructive opinion is...?

Report •

#81
October 4, 2012 at 00:19:33
I agree with what riider said:
"The bottom line is, if you want to use pirated software, that's your business."

This thread should have ended right there.

I don't download any of my stuff. I've been collecting music and movies in all sorts of different formats since around 1986. It's a hobby. I would never play MP3s and tightly compressed 720p MKVs in my home theater.

However, I can understand why others would, with all of the BS that paying customers have to deal with these days. Remember the Sony rootkit scandal?

Want a new movie on Blu-ray? No problem, but you'll also have to pay for a digital copy you'll never use, a special features disc and a standard-definition DVD version of the film! And that's just the beginning.

Put that new movie in your BD player and you'll first have to watch three different copyright warnings in two different languages, skip through five movie trailers, and then wait for the player to load the disc's pointless interactive features to memory. And that's only when it works at all! If you have an older player, your movie might not even start, thanks to new DRM. And Fox always changes their DRM, often breaking compatibility until player manufacturers release new firmware.

This is why I crack the DRM on every disc I purchase and dump the raw audio and video streams to MKV for storage on my file server. And I have absolutely no problem letting friends copy these files to external hard drives.

DOS/9x Gaming Rig | Athlon 600 @ 672MHz w/ Golden Orb HSF | 384MB | 60GB
Voodoo2 SLI + GeForce 256 DDR | SB Live | Asus K7V | 21" NEC CRT | Win98SE


Report •

#82
October 4, 2012 at 04:41:39
I think I agree with other posters that this thread has outlived its usefulness. It is turning into an endorsement of piracy.

Report •

#83
October 16, 2012 at 01:53:30
It's not really stealing as it's creating a copy of a file so the seller still has the original so it is nothing like sneaking into someones house and stealing something it's like if someone went round your house and created a copy of something and took it you would still have the original so you wouldn't really care and anyways people who sell music like itunes rip loads of people off theres no wonder theres piracy. and everyone knows it's wrong but so many people do it that the law can't really change it anyway or millions of people would get arrested and thats definitly not going to happpen. and anyways don't you think that people like Rihanna and Ed Sheeran have enough money anyway they dont need to take more money from people who sometimes don't have that much anyway.

Report •

#84
October 17, 2012 at 02:07:04
You are allowed to borrow software anyway to see if you want to buy it. it's like try before you buy but you don't end up buying the product in fact anyone who does download this sort of thing always ends up deleting a song or film after they're tired of it so they dont end up buying it anyway what's wrong with that? It's like trying a free sample of food before you buy it and saying you don't like it and getting labeled a criminal. Where's the sense in that? everyones allowed to try before you buy.

Report •

#85
October 22, 2012 at 16:16:08
Pack it in swordj ... the thread is dead and buried, don't revive the damn thing! Piracy is illegal and no amount of fancy theorising on your part will change it.

Report •

#86
October 28, 2012 at 19:03:48
I think digital piracy is something that is illegal. It doesn't hurt anyone, but if you look at the bigger picture, you are doing something that is considered wrong.

Report •

#87
October 29, 2012 at 17:01:28
Keeping this thread going should be illegal :)

Please reply and let us know if our help worked. Your feedback helps others. Maybe you?


Report •

#88
March 26, 2014 at 23:20:16
Can someone delete this thread?

Wow I used to be an idiot when I was younger


Report •

#89
March 27, 2014 at 06:50:59
Nobody will notice it now except those who have responded.

Send a private message to the webmaster Justin Weber - he will be able to delete it for you. Copy the address line to him.

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Report •

#90
March 27, 2014 at 11:54:10
wow nice bump

Trying to cover your tracks form something...?

~oldie
Not everyone can decipher Klingon script...
chay' ta' SoH tlhe' vam Doch Daq


Report •

Ask Question