Piracy out of Control

I dont pirate DVDs cause theres some cool stuff on them. Especially when they have two discs. So whats the fuss with the movie market. I'll tell you what, they are pushing out alot of crap I dont want to watch. In the past 5 years I'v gone to watch a movie at the theater 3 times cause theres really not anything worth spending my money on. and I bet there are a lot of other people out there who feel the same and the reason for lost profits. I think they lose more money on crap that piracy. Its like they dont want you to preview the move before watching it. The trailors are not real previews. They are misleading. Ive been pissed before when I saw a trailor and the movie was not what I thought it would be. I think the same thing is happening with music and its cought on. The same thing with software. It's not always as advertised. I've come to know that advertising has become misleading and deceptive and has really pissed some people off. It all comes back to bite them now. Now people want to try before you buy or down load a movie to see what it really is like. I prefer to watch a good quality move anyway with all its fetures. Theres nothing like watching a good action movie in DTS. It sounds awsome. Still I think the music industry should offer more on their CDs. maybe start moving to DVDa. I mean make people want to buy them instead of downloading individual songs ether illegal or legal.
 
movie production houses, i'm sure, will be moving to simultaneous dvd and theatrical releases in the next few years.. there have been a few trial releases and they've found that it doesn't hurt ticket sales or dvd sales. If i had the choice between seeing a movie with someone for $10x2 tickets or buying the dvd for $20... well, it's not a hard choice. basically, i'm just trying to say that production of standard media (music, movies, software) are trying to keep up with the times but are taking slow, cautious, steps that are costing them money. ... plus, most movies are garbage nowadays. sky captain and the world of tomorrow....pffft.
 
dgatwood said:
This brings me to two conclusions in these cases:

1. The software costs too much. If most of your market is saturated with pirated copies, you probably would have made much more money with a lower price. Try cutting the price in half.
2. Eventually, when those people find themselves able to afford the software (whether by fnding a better price or by finding a better source of revenue), most of them will come clean and buy it. For most people who aren't making money with the software, this never happens, and therein lies the problem. See solution for #1.

Just my $0.02.
Click to expand...




First off, I don't think most people do come clean. Just look at the responses to threads like this. If they can steal something for free, they will.

Second, music software companies shouldn't have to lower the price. Its a very specialized field, and takes a lot of resources to develop these products, and they have every right to charge what they want. Any other product or service, you have no choice, if you want it, you have to pay for it. Just because there is a means to obtain this without paying, does not make it right, and any arguements trying to convince yourself your right, is rationalizing.
 
I haven't read all of the above...but...I'm against piracy, no doubt. I want to see the next release of programs and new albums from artists. Allthough I do think they charge the hell out of people to get what they want...and so much more as well. They're still making money, despite the huge amounts of piracy out there. That kinda says alot as well. Let's put this in perspective here.

Say 5-10 years from now(even as we speak)...go up to design companies(audio/visual), labels, recording studios, animation studios, production studios, newspapers/magazine productions, concept artists for: say...Porsche, Ferrari, Ford, Boeing, whatever machinery you can imagine, basically everything around us...and do a survey: "How many of you have piracy to thank for this job and good life?", "Could you have gotten this job without stepping out on the edge and "borrowing" some software in a less legal way?"
The outcome of this will probably shock the hell out of anyone.
I once heard that Adobe wasn't bothered with the piracy amongst private persons, cause they know that the companies that use their software, that get big money out of it, they buy their products. Good policy. I wouldn't be surprised if you won't find someone working in Adobe that has downloaded something from them. Got the job cause he got mad skilled at one of their programs. Piracy is bad...no doubt, but there's a good side of everything and this time around we get more skilled people and we up the average quality when it comes to alot. I don't expect anyone to agree with me, but you have to admit that it sounds pretty sane?
The better part of skills is located in the thousand homes around the planet, not yet discovered.
 
It honestly astounds me how many people can come in here and make some sort of justification for stealing software. There is NO justification. If it is too expensive for you, don't buy it or use it. What I hate the most is the people who try and find some moral justification for using stolen software. THERE ISN"T ONE! Grow some balls and own up to it. Don't deny it. I find it much easier to respect someone that knows it's wrong yet decides to do it anyways. Rather than the person who tries to hide it and at the same time pretend it is OK for one reason or another.

Sorry guys, this kind of thing frustrates me. If this stuff kills the majors and the indies rise, then we will next lose the indies too because at that point they will be the majors. I guess I just can't fathom how people can justify this stuff. It is proof to me how rampant this problem really is:(
 
I have a funny story regarding this topic (well, it wasn't funny at the time to me). When I first got into electronic music sequencing, me and a buddy of mine went to Mars Music (before they closed for good) and I picked up a few essentials, a MIDI capable keyboard, small MOTU MIDI interface, Korg 12 track recorder, a microphone, a couple of sound modules and a copy of Digital Performer 3.0. The day before I had purchased one of those cube shaped Apple EMAC computers, to use with DP. So I get home, all hyped up and ready to start setting things up. Things are going well, until I get to the point where I am ready to install DP 3.0 onto my EMAC. I pull the install disc and stick it in the drive tray, close it, and now my EMAC is telling me the CD is not readable. WTF. So my buddy looks at the install disc, and we find out that the friggin' thing is a CD-R disc with a fake DP label plastered on it!! I was pissed. Anyway, long story short, we ended up taking the software back to the store, and I waited another 3 weeks for MOTU to ship me a real CD. I wasn't even one day into starting my recording hobby, and I had already become a victim of the piracy war.

But all else aside, the people that suffer from this type of crap the most are those that do buy the software, because the companies raise prices to fight the lost revenue from stolen software.
 
There's a disturbing part of this to me (I'm going to sound "old" here) -

There are very positive and very negative points to the whole internet revolution... It keeps the capitalism engine fueled nicely... Competition to build a better (anything) is heated, but the sheer amount of (anything) along the way can be staggering -

There's also a *good portion* of an entire generation coming into this - Not just in the recording industry, but even end-user/consumers, that suddenly expect there to be a FREE solution to almost everything... The "why should I have to pay for it?" syndrome is blowing my mind.

Not that I have a problem with free software, or the old MP3.com where you could download music (sanctioned, of course). But a lot of people are forgetting that even free things have value to them. And many things that are valuable aren't free.

I suppose it's a "greed" thing... But it's also quite obvious that (as an example) these people never dropped tens of thousands of dollars just for a very basic and modest home-studio setup. The anguish and care over every single piece of gear down to the power cables... Because now, they can get a PC for under $1k, and some crack-ware for nothing.

Of course, this is just a micro-peek at what I imagine will be a much bigger problem later in some of their lives...
 
dgatwood said:
Actually, in both cases, that's not really true.

The best way to get a lesser-known band into the spotlight is to give away music to anybody who will listen. For every person who pirates those songs, that's one person who probably had never heard of them before.

The same thing tends to happen with software, though most of this "piracy" is really just people abusing demo licenses. Eventually, many of these people buy the software. Most of those people are people who might never have heard of the software had they not found some link to "cool free software"....

The real question, then, is whether the gains from piracy outweigh the losses. Hard to say, really.

The other question that must be asked is whether those people would have bought the software had they not been able to pirate it. If the answer is "no", then you haven't lost a sale. You've just gained mindshare. The real question then becomes why the answer is "no".

If the answer is "no" because the software doesn't work well enough... well, you know what you need to to. If the answer is "no" because the software costs too much for what it does... again, the answer is obvious.

Most often, though, the reason that the answer is "no" is that your software costs too much in general (even if it seems reasonable given the complexity of the software). There are certain absolute maximum prices that most people are willing to pay for software. These vary according to the target audience. Most music software costs much more than those limits for that particular audience, so most software is pirated. Frankly, it's the fault of the corporate execs who are oblivious to the realities of the music market....

This brings me to two conclusions in these cases:

1. The software costs too much. If most of your market is saturated with pirated copies, you probably would have made much more money with a lower price. Try cutting the price in half.
2. Eventually, when those people find themselves able to afford the software (whether by fnding a better price or by finding a better source of revenue), most of them will come clean and buy it. For most people who aren't making money with the software, this never happens, and therein lies the problem. See solution for #1.

Just my $0.02.
Click to expand...

That is the textbook definition of overshot/undershot customers which leads to disruptive innovation.

Just wait, things will change soon enough and software companies will either have to change their ways of doing business because we WILL get the tools we need at the price we can afford (from current or new software companues) or they will end up in bankruptcy.
 
Last edited:
brzilian said:
That is the textbook definition of overshot/undershot customers which leads to disruptive innovation.

Just wait, things will change soon enough and software companies will either have to change their ways of doing business because we WILL get the tools we need at the price we can afford (from current or new software companues) or they will end up in bankruptcy.
Click to expand...


You put it right, companies will go bankrupt from us not purchasing stuff, (sorry from people stealing stuff!), and then where are we left? No one is going to develop anything. There will be no point in development, or creativity. That will also lead into created music. If no one buys it, then no one can afford to make it either.
 
In Tune Audio said:
You put it right, companies will go bankrupt from us not purchasing stuff, (sorry from people stealing stuff!), and then where are we left? No one is going to develop anything. There will be no point in development, or creativity. That will also lead into created music. If no one buys it, then no one can afford to make it either.
Click to expand...

This is why I completely support ideas like ilok, and software that only works for so long without registration of the product, and other security features the software companies are using to deter theft. We need to make pirating software a complete pain in the ass for those doing it.
 
First off, I don't think most people do come clean. Just look at the responses to threads like this. If they can steal something for free, they will.
Second, music software companies shouldn't have to lower the price. Its a very specialized field, and takes a lot of resources to develop these products, and they have every right to charge what they want. Any other product or service, you have no choice, if you want it, you have to pay for it. Just because there is a means to obtain this without paying, does not make it right, and any arguements trying to convince yourself your right, is rationalizing.
Click to expand...

They dont have every right to charge what they want and it has affected their sales too. The higher the price the higher the piracy. They can jack up the price as much as they want and it will only cause more people to become pirates that normaly would not be. I mean if the software you own has a new version and its now $6,000 would you still buy it? most likely not. There is no justification for downloading pirated software. and the developers are going after the super nodes.
If you spent $600 on a program, would make it avaliable for othes to download? I dont think so. I dony think anyone who spent money on software or music would put it on KAZZA or any other P2P network. So who is putting it there? well for one thing in movies is the screeners. now whos fault is that? the people that prescreen the movies record and put it on the internet. These are not your common movie goers. But I want to know who would put cubase sx on KAZZA. Its not the one who paid for it thats for sure. I think the companies need to focus on the original source(the ones uploading it for download) in stead of the end user. and the ones uploading it are not the ones who paid for it. I'm talking about when it first hit the internet.
 
This is just an observation... I'm not accusing anybody... just an observation...

I read quite a few recording forums... I've seen this topic raised many times. Below is an observation I've made on many different forums:

For instance, we'll call a particular forum poster, "Poster1"... Poster1 will post in this type of thread that he hates piracy. Pirates should be jailed. He owns all of his software... Most all of the Waves stuff, Antares Auto Tune, plus many more...Sometimes into and above the $5K range just in plugins...

If you 'keep up' with the forums, and I do, usually at one time or the other, either in a previous post or later, you'll see this same "Poster1" complaining about wanting to buy a cheaper piece of gear, say in the $300 range... Saying, it may take 6 months or so, but he'll save up and buy it... Or saying that he'd sure like to have 'that new mic pre', but $1000 is WAY, WAY out of "Poster1's" range and he'll have to settle for the mic pre in the $200 range...

Just seems odd to me, that when discussing recording equipment, it's always the hardware that seems to be out of most posters price range...(maybe because it can't be pirated...) but they 'rightfully own' all those plugins... Just makes me wander how many forum posters who are critical on piracy, acutally have/use pirated software...but are in denial about their own wrongs...

At the same time rate it took to 'save-up' to buy that $300 piece of hardware, it would have taken 15 years to 'save-up' to legally own those plugins... Just don't make sense to me...
:confused:
 
altiris said:
They dont have every right to charge what they want and it has affected their sales too. The higher the price the higher the piracy.
Click to expand...


The do have every right. They own that product, if they want to charge thousands of dollars, that is their right. And it doesn't make it right for people to steal it because they can.

If your selling a used car that is a piece of crap, and asking $30,000, thats your right. If someone is willing to buy it, great. If not, your stuck with it. But just because your charging that much, doesn't give someone the right to steal it from you, just because they think your asking to much.
 
In Tune Audio said:
You put it right, companies will go bankrupt from us not purchasing stuff, (sorry from people stealing stuff!), and then where are we left? No one is going to develop anything. There will be no point in development, or creativity. That will also lead into created music. If no one buys it, then no one can afford to make it either.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understood my post.

There has been extensive research on the subject of disruptive innovation.

What Makes a Good Disruptive Business Model?
Clayton Christensen's six characteristics to look for

1 | It enables a larger population of less skilled or less wealthy people to do something more simply and conveniently that could historically be done only by experts or the wealthy.

2 | It exploits the innovation's unique attributes in new applications rather than stretching to meet the product or service requirements in the mainstream market.

3 | It disrupts markets that are underserved rather than seeking to disrupt overserved markets.

4 | It reshapes the retailing business model to earn profits in a new way.

5 | It facilitates existing patterns of customer behavior rather than assuming a change in customer behavior.

6 | It focuses on a specific customer need and builds a brand positioned squarely on that need.
Click to expand...

The topic at hand seems to meet most, if not all of these criteria which means the DAW software industry (if not the entire software/music/ entertainment industry) is ripe for change.
 
In Tune Audio said:
You put it right, companies will go bankrupt from us not purchasing stuff, (sorry from people stealing stuff!), and then where are we left? No one is going to develop anything. There will be no point in development, or creativity. That will also lead into created music. If no one buys it, then no one can afford to make it either.
Click to expand...

Open source software...

People will always make music - whether they get paid for it or not...
 
Software piracy is *not* like stealing a car.
It is like having a machine that can clone a car.

The 'original copy' is unaffected. If I come along and steal your car you don't have a car anymore.
If I copy your piece of software you still have your piece of software and your license to use it.

This is why 'piracy' is not theft under law. It is breach of contract - i.e. using a piece of software without a licence.

However - stealing a boxed copy of some software from a shop *is* theft as it is stealing a physical item.

Intellectual copyright is a strange beast and not nearly so black & white as people seem to think. Sure - it is morally wrong to clone something in this way - but not for the reasons people think.

It is wrong as it prevents competition taking place.
I'm not a big fan of capitalism at all, but the only way for it to work is for there to be strong competition. When somebody downloads a copy of a very expensive piece of music software they are depriving a smaller company of a sale, which means that smaller company cannot grow to compete with the larger one.

It is not Steinberg that lose money when somebody downloads Cubase - it's some tiny developer whose software the downloader *could have afforded to buy but didn't*.

In this way software piracy actually works in favour of the big companies such as Steinberg et al. People download their packages and learn them. If they go on to get jobs in the industry they order copies of the software they know. Many instances of piracy have ended up resulting in legitimate sales. Few have resulted in lost sales.

I really don't think it's as big a problem for the industry as it's being made out to be here. If people really value something (and their reputation) they will buy it eventually, if and when they have the funds.

As for music piracy...

Remember the early 80's.
Remember "Home Taping Is Killing Music!"
Where is music now? In a different place for sure - but just as popular and just as profitable as it ever was.

As an aside, I personally work on open-source software, nothing earth shattering, but I do it for free. Indeed, Linux is a great example of what can be done for nothing. I would wager that the very server we are posting these messages on is run on free software under the wonderful GNU public license. Most internet servers are.

Basically I don't think there's any reason to panic. The big softco's aren't about to go under and neither is the music industry. If people are willing to pay (and they are) both industries will find a way of extracting the cash and keeping people happy.

I think it's about time the music industry was given a kick up the arse anyway. Traditional distribution methods and formats are horribly inn efficient. Paying to download tracks at a time in wav-quality format is the future I'm sure, and we will all be much better off for it when it happens. Think of the un-biodegradable landfill that CDs represent. Anyway - I'm going off on a tangent now...
 
Codmate said:
Software piracy is *not* like stealing a car.
It is like having a machine that can clone a car.

The 'original copy' is unaffected. If I come along and steal your car you don't have a car anymore.
If I copy your piece of software you still have your piece of software and your license to use it.

This is why 'piracy' is not theft under law. It is breach of contract - i.e. using a piece of software without a licence.

However - stealing a boxed copy of some software from a shop *is* theft as it is stealing a physical item.

Intellectual copyright is a strange beast and not nearly so black & white as people seem to think. Sure - it is morally wrong to clone something in this way - but not for the reasons people think.

It is wrong as it prevents competition taking place.
I'm not a big fan of capitalism at all, but the only way for it to work is for there to be strong competition. When somebody downloads a copy of a very expensive piece of music software they are depriving a smaller company of a sale, which means that smaller company cannot grow to compete with the larger one.

It is not Steinberg that lose money when somebody downloads Cubase - it's some tiny developer whose software the downloader *could have afforded to buy but didn't*.

In this way software piracy actually works in favour of the big companies such as Steinberg et al. People download their packages and learn them. If they go on to get jobs in the industry they order copies of the software they know. Many instances of piracy have ended up resulting in legitimate sales. Few have resulted in lost sales.

I really don't think it's as big a problem for the industry as it's being made out to be here. If people really value something (and their reputation) they will buy it eventually, if and when they have the funds.

As for music piracy...

Remember the early 80's.
Remember "Home Taping Is Killing Music!"
Where is music now? In a different place for sure - but just as popular and just as profitable as it ever was.

As an aside, I personally work on open-source software, nothing earth shattering, but I do it for free. Indeed, Linux is a great example of what can be done for nothing. I would wager that the very server we are posting these messages on is run on free software under the wonderful GNU public license. Most internet servers are.

Basically I don't think there's any reason to panic. The big softco's aren't about to go under and neither is the music industry. If people are willing to pay (and they are) both industries will find a way of extracting the cash and keeping people happy.

I think it's about time the music industry was given a kick up the arse anyway. Traditional distribution methods and formats are horribly inn efficient. Paying to download tracks at a time in wav-quality format is the future I'm sure, and we will all be much better off for it when it happens. Think of the un-biodegradable landfill that CDs represent. Anyway - I'm going off on a tangent now...
Click to expand...

Excellent post. The issue is far more complex than most people realize.

One thing you left out - Copyright laws have only existed a brief while, and have been twisted and contorted into something that they were NEVER intended to be. They were designed as "short term" protection for developers of intellectual property to recoupe their investment and to make a tidy profit before the information became public domain. The notion that an idea can be the "property" of someone is actually quite ludicrious if you think about it. Mankind has built on the backs of people before him Ideas are built off previous ideas. How would Stienberg EVER be able to build their software if the guy that invented addition had a copyright on it, and didn't allow anyone else to use addition. All progress would have come to a halt. That is an extreme example, but the princple is the same.


Also, I believe the true power of the internet is barely being scratched. When information is truly universally available and readily traded, progress will reach a never before seen rate. Linux, and the open source movement is but a glimmer of the potential. Microsoft employs THOUSANDS of people with a GINORMOUS payroll. Linux was all done for free by unpaid people and is better in a lot of ways.
 
I personally don't think that much profit is lost because of softeware pirates. Now days it isn't easy to pirate good software anyways. You can easilly get old versions, but the newest and best software is generally hard to get. if you're very very wealthy and serious about your recording, then your going to buy the expensive stuff. You'll want specific stuff and not a cracked unstable version. If your poor and you have a cheap setup, what's the harm in using a free pirated version of software that you would have never bought. As far as I'm concerned the real customers are still buying, it's just that poor folks are able to experiment and get a taste of software they can't afford. In my opinion software piracy might even boost profits. Once these software pirates get into recording with their pirated software and once they start getting serious, they may become buyers.

I don't understand why anyone besides the company would be so upset about software piracy. Besides, it's not like your litterally stealing from them. They don't lose money when their software is pirated, but they also don't gain money. It's an innocent transaction that simply doesn't affect the company anyways. I think that if a company doesn't want their software to be pirated, then they should make it so that it can't be pirated. Most new mulitracking software nowdays can't be found pirated anyways. Sure it's easy to pirate plugins, but anyone who can afford the plugins in the first place isn't going to want a pirated version. a poor kid with a cheap begginer setup isn't even going to know what to do with $2,000 dollars worth of plugins and certanly wouldn't buy them anyways. So quit bitching about it and worry about your own wallet.
 
The dollar

Personally I think price and accesability to software is the problem.

A computer without software is useless and a car without petrol is useless.

Now if the petrol you pay for is more than you paid for the car no one would be driving.
But this is what has happened to the prices of sotware cause I know I could buy a new computer at the price of what some programs cost.

Software is overpriced and not accessable to the average joe bringing up a family and paying the morgage and the demand for technology forces him to find
other means to access this technology in the form of Piracy.

Ok then don't buy a computer then if you can't afford the software, Solved.
No our education system now puts demands down in the area of learning computers and research for projects and so on, so parents need this technology accessable for our kids, and this is the direction and future for them and we cannot afford not to have access to computers for our kids or they will fall backwards.

As for music software, It is overpriced as I said but I tell you what if I or anyone else could but sonar, cbase or something for $100, Nearly every muso would own it legitimately.
The software companys or should I say Distributers are greedy and should look at low price high turn over rather than exclusiveness and high prices and low turn over..
I sorta think serves their own rights for this pirating epedemic due to their greed.

As far as the industry what does the signed up performer make out of a Cd sold after Marketing and recording and so on.
Not much by what I understand and its alway the companys screaming but at the end of the day they recoop but the Artist is left dry.
The companys will always make their money wheather piracy is happening or not.

The risk is still on the performing artist when signed up to a label by what I understand as you get a loan basically and if your song does not make it you must pay the outstanding amout back.

I mean big business will not take risk and its the hard working artist that is screwed.
Does piracy effect the artist { Yes ) but the companys will not lose a cent cause they will take care of their costs before the artist.

Why don't they give the artist a higher cut if they care so much.

It is high time to get realistic and realise that products can be marked up to 400% from the original price by the time we buy it.
And they will say its due to this and due to that but it still doe's not justify day light robbery.
Personally I am on a disability pension due to an injury and I cannot do physical work including gigging anymore.
I now do backing tracks for Duo's and record demo's for them with what I have got.
I cannot afford all the wiz bang software as I support a family and thank god I have musical ability or else My family would be screwed.
But what do I do because the demands of music today, Sample rates, and whatever demands software and equipment to make satisfactory music and keep up just so I can have a meal on the table.

I cannot afford Software that is $900 as I would rather buy my kids clothes or take them out on the weekend for a drive or see the football ( Whatever )

So you download the stuff.

But again I don't think piracy is neccesary if the prices of software where more realistic and accessable in price for everyone.
I have to pay alone quit a bit just to legally do backing tracks I mean where does it end.

You will make just as much money selling at cheaper prices and high turnover as high prices and low turn over.

Anyways thats my thoughts as I do not condone piracy but man its not hard
to understand why people do it.

We live in a greedy world.

Regards Raver
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top