Blue Bear Sound
New member
Count me in.........mike722 said:
All my s/w is completely legal and I don't download music.............
I'm not the type of person that doesn't practice what I preach............
- Status
All my s/w is completely legal and I don't download music.............
I'm not the type of person that doesn't practice what I preach............
C
crankz1
...
Count me in .... I paid hard earned money for all my software and I don't care for mp3's .... I just listen to my CD's.
knightfly
GrouchyOldFartOnBatteries
Me too - few (intentionally) freebie mp3's, wasn't impressed - I paid for all software on all my machines, not once but every upgrade for 2 to 4 full versions. Goes for Samplitude, Cake, Sonar, Sound Forge, Midi Quest, and a couple others.
Speaking of hypocrites, how many of you thieves out there would bitch to high heaven if someone illegally downloaded (or uploaded) YOUR hard-earned album for free, therefore depriving you of income you earned? It's ALL just "software", whether it's music or programming - get a fucking brain, or at least some MORALS - be unique in your neighborhood... Steve
Speaking of hypocrites, how many of you thieves out there would bitch to high heaven if someone illegally downloaded (or uploaded) YOUR hard-earned album for free, therefore depriving you of income you earned? It's ALL just "software", whether it's music or programming - get a fucking brain, or at least some MORALS - be unique in your neighborhood... Steve
C
ColdAsh
New member
I couldnt be bothered reading this whole thread but i thought i'd put my $0.02 in.
I'll admit to using a craked version of cubase. I was using logic gold (which i paid for) but i dont have windows 98 anymore and it wont run on XP (plus why use a product which isnt being supported anymore)
But i feel what im doing is okay. The reason is i only downloaded it to get a good feel for the software and to try it out. I've played around with it for a little while (obviously not having a manual means i cant explore all the features) and decided i like it. So i'll pay for a copy. I do this quite alot with music. I download songs from kazaa. If i like them i'll go out and but the CD. If not i get rid of it. I've gotten into quite a few bands that way and bought alot of CDs i otherwise wouldnt have.
Yes piracy is illegal and is stealing but i dont feel ive done any wrong. Maybe im full of shit. Please let me know what you think (but try not to abuse me)
I'll admit to using a craked version of cubase. I was using logic gold (which i paid for) but i dont have windows 98 anymore and it wont run on XP (plus why use a product which isnt being supported anymore)
But i feel what im doing is okay. The reason is i only downloaded it to get a good feel for the software and to try it out. I've played around with it for a little while (obviously not having a manual means i cant explore all the features) and decided i like it. So i'll pay for a copy. I do this quite alot with music. I download songs from kazaa. If i like them i'll go out and but the CD. If not i get rid of it. I've gotten into quite a few bands that way and bought alot of CDs i otherwise wouldnt have.
Yes piracy is illegal and is stealing but i dont feel ive done any wrong. Maybe im full of shit. Please let me know what you think (but try not to abuse me)
F
foreverdown
New member
not sure about the cracked version, but when I installed Cubase, the manuals were installed to the program file DIR as well. In PDF form. But def buy a copy. Its more than worth it! 
C
ColdAsh
New member
foreverdown said:not sure about the cracked version, but when I installed Cubase, the manuals were installed to the program file DIR as well. In PDF form. But def buy a copy. Its more than worth it!
Yeah but who can be bothered reading through a huge pdf file like that. Anyway ive learnt enough to know i like the software and know how to do the basics.
I have got a few questions, maybe i should do this in a seperate thread but this seams like as godd a place as any.
Is there any ability to set up scenes like in logic where pressing 1 can give you just the project window, and pressing 2 can give you the mix, 3 can give you both, 4 can give you a differnt view of the mix ect. I know you can bring up the mixer by pressing F2 and you can have the device panel and all that, but i prefer being able to have different set ups, especialy with only 1 monitor.
Secondly can you have more then one row of channels in the mix window? Its annoying that you have to scroll across the get to tracks and can only have a limited number of channels on screen at a time.
Thirdly, it doesnt seem like there are many plug ins included. I will be getting a UAD project pack but id still like a decent eq plug in and may be compressor to run along side that. If the cubase ones arent any good i may have to buy some i guess.
Anyway thanks guys. I can wait untill i have a slightly proper demo studio up and running (even if i will have to borrow a bit from the bank)
F
foreverdown
New member
I am not sure what you mean by project vs mix window. You can have 3 different mixer setups for each project. Then if you want diff versions I would save different versions of the project file and then have both open. Only one can be active at a time, but you can at least look at both of them by tiling or cascading the windows. As for the question about more than one row of Channels... I don't know what you are talking about, but I have several channels on there at a time. Then again you may be talking about the waveform editor thing. If that's the case then I don't know of a way to have more than one track like that, but you can increase and decrease the size of that to result in you having less scrolling. And then as for the plugins. I would just invest in a few good plugins. The ones that come stock are decent, but there are better ones out there. Just do some reading and see what would be best for you. Also try the trials out if the demo has it. I hope I helped some. I may be way off
P
playit
New member
I also don't have any illegal MP3s or software.
I thought this thread was over a couple weeks ago, which is the last time I checked it.
I am completely incredulous that anyone would argue that piracy is okay. You make an argument, and then defend it, but don't you have a conscience at all? You don't need logic to tell you what you are doing is wrong. You should know it innately.
A group of committed people worked long and hard to create the software in question. They've been doing it for years. They are not faceless. Their livelihood rests on this product. You are enjoying the result of their labor without any compensation. If the price is too high, then it is not for you! You don't just take something when you can't pay for it. I'm honestly saddened to see so many people in here who believe that piracy of any sort is okay.
On another note: I'm making a list of you who pirate software and you won't be getting any help from me for any of your questions. You obviously need consequences before you will sit down, think, and honestly evaluate what you are doing, and know that it is wrong.
I thought this thread was over a couple weeks ago, which is the last time I checked it.
I am completely incredulous that anyone would argue that piracy is okay. You make an argument, and then defend it, but don't you have a conscience at all? You don't need logic to tell you what you are doing is wrong. You should know it innately.
A group of committed people worked long and hard to create the software in question. They've been doing it for years. They are not faceless. Their livelihood rests on this product. You are enjoying the result of their labor without any compensation. If the price is too high, then it is not for you! You don't just take something when you can't pay for it. I'm honestly saddened to see so many people in here who believe that piracy of any sort is okay.
On another note: I'm making a list of you who pirate software and you won't be getting any help from me for any of your questions. You obviously need consequences before you will sit down, think, and honestly evaluate what you are doing, and know that it is wrong.
Bass Master "K"
New member
LOL, well it's nice to know that some things don't change. I've been gone three months and when I come back we are rehashing the old argument of the ages.
You can mark me up as someone who also does not have any illeagle software or mp3's or copied CD's or any of that stuff on my computer or in my house. Even if I didn't make my living in the music field I would still feel the same way about the whole subject. A thief is a thief is a thief. This whole argument just comes down to how coragous of a thief you are. If you would walk into a car lot and steal a Corvette, well I would label that as pretty brazen. If you steal things using your computer, feeling safe because you know that there are so many other thieves like you out there that there is little chance for you to get caught, well your still a thief, your just a thief that is a coward.
When I evaluate the correct action to take in certain circumstances, I frequently will use the "what if everyone in the world did as I did, would it make the world better or worse". When you look at it that way, it's pretty obvious what the proper course of action is.
If EVERYONE in the world felt that stolen software and stolen music was perfectly acceptable, the worlds computer and music markets would crash. There would be no Cubase, no Logic, no ProTools, the companys would go bankrupt. The record companies would all go belly up, that means no CD's for distributers to distribute, they go belly up and people lose jobs. No CD's means no record stores...again more lost jobs. National markets would only be possible by indie's on the internet, and I don't know of too many bands who make a living without national distribution. Their internet sales won't sustain them alone.
Since not everyone is a thief however, these markets don't crash, they are sustained by those of us who are honest enough, and good enough people to do the right thing. So who does it hurt when you steal since there are people like me who keep the markets going? You hurt me that's who. I have to pay more money for what I do buy because the company has to protect itself from people like you. Do you know why I have to pay extra for a dongle in Cubase? Because of thieves. Do you know why Steinberg can't afford more people on it's staff who could help in design and updates and customer service? Because of thieves. You know why there are fewer bands signed by major labels now, and why they are only looking for gaurenteed one hit wonders and won't take a chance on a band who is musically superior but doesn't have the material for a top 100 hit? Because of thieves, the money is just not there and the profit margin is so slim they can't afford to take chances anymore. In the end it all ends up hurting me and other honest people, and the musicians, and the computer geeks, and everyone else who puts their heart into making this whole thing work.
I hope that future generations will have parents who give a damn a bit more than the "me" generation parents who haven't taught their kids sh*t about honesty and integrity in everyday life. It would be nice to see a world where everyone is not a thief because stealing is wrong...not becuase they think they won't get caught.
You can mark me up as someone who also does not have any illeagle software or mp3's or copied CD's or any of that stuff on my computer or in my house. Even if I didn't make my living in the music field I would still feel the same way about the whole subject. A thief is a thief is a thief. This whole argument just comes down to how coragous of a thief you are. If you would walk into a car lot and steal a Corvette, well I would label that as pretty brazen. If you steal things using your computer, feeling safe because you know that there are so many other thieves like you out there that there is little chance for you to get caught, well your still a thief, your just a thief that is a coward.
When I evaluate the correct action to take in certain circumstances, I frequently will use the "what if everyone in the world did as I did, would it make the world better or worse". When you look at it that way, it's pretty obvious what the proper course of action is.
If EVERYONE in the world felt that stolen software and stolen music was perfectly acceptable, the worlds computer and music markets would crash. There would be no Cubase, no Logic, no ProTools, the companys would go bankrupt. The record companies would all go belly up, that means no CD's for distributers to distribute, they go belly up and people lose jobs. No CD's means no record stores...again more lost jobs. National markets would only be possible by indie's on the internet, and I don't know of too many bands who make a living without national distribution. Their internet sales won't sustain them alone.
Since not everyone is a thief however, these markets don't crash, they are sustained by those of us who are honest enough, and good enough people to do the right thing. So who does it hurt when you steal since there are people like me who keep the markets going? You hurt me that's who. I have to pay more money for what I do buy because the company has to protect itself from people like you. Do you know why I have to pay extra for a dongle in Cubase? Because of thieves. Do you know why Steinberg can't afford more people on it's staff who could help in design and updates and customer service? Because of thieves. You know why there are fewer bands signed by major labels now, and why they are only looking for gaurenteed one hit wonders and won't take a chance on a band who is musically superior but doesn't have the material for a top 100 hit? Because of thieves, the money is just not there and the profit margin is so slim they can't afford to take chances anymore. In the end it all ends up hurting me and other honest people, and the musicians, and the computer geeks, and everyone else who puts their heart into making this whole thing work.
I hope that future generations will have parents who give a damn a bit more than the "me" generation parents who haven't taught their kids sh*t about honesty and integrity in everyday life. It would be nice to see a world where everyone is not a thief because stealing is wrong...not becuase they think they won't get caught.
B
BlindCowboy
New member
mike722 said:
He, hee. You went for the put down, then got stuffed by the other's who have the same moral fiber that I do. That was funny...
As for downloading for purchase:
Eh, it's still illegal. But, you know that. My dad does it. Downloads five or six songs from a band that he heard of, takes a listen, then deletes them or buys the CD online.
Would I do it? Nah. The music store down the street sells independent and commercial music. There are several listening stations throughout the store, and I can listen to any CD they have in stock. Do I fault my dad for doing it? No. He's providing payment for the product that he purchases, or deleting the files. I can put that into the same context as borrowing a friend's CD for a listen and then giving it back.
Bass Master "K"
New member
Oh ya, and I forgot to mention:
Can't afford a copy of Cubase because your a student? Well guess what, Steiny actually cares enough about your financial plight to provide their software at a HUGE deduction (I can't remember exactly but I think it's about 25-33% of normal cost) if you have a valid student body ID card. It's the exact same program at a fraction of the cost.
Are you only using a crack because you want to see what the program can do to see if you want to buy it? Well, Steinberg understands that too which is why they offer up FREE DEMOS!
Can't afford a copy of Cubase because your a student? Well guess what, Steiny actually cares enough about your financial plight to provide their software at a HUGE deduction (I can't remember exactly but I think it's about 25-33% of normal cost) if you have a valid student body ID card. It's the exact same program at a fraction of the cost.
Are you only using a crack because you want to see what the program can do to see if you want to buy it? Well, Steinberg understands that too which is why they offer up FREE DEMOS!
L
Lanstar0
New member
foreverdown said:
I 2nd that. I am also 19 and have worked very hard to obtain what I have now, including a legally purchased academic version of Cubase SX2.
Chriss
Jitens Half Brother
those free demos aren't worth shit. if i may quote myself:Bass Master "K" said:
Chriss said:
if people get a cracked version of a program and then either buy it or delete it, what is the moral difference from downloading a demo?
I sure as hell know i needed more time and function on both cubase, logic, digital orchestra and cakewalk than the demos allowed, before i could make up my mind about what to buy...
should i have bought all four programs just to dump three of them anyway? don't be stupid. i wouldn't have had the money for that if i had saved up untill now. i know cakewalk wouldhave sucked for me, while digi-orch was too limited, but i didn't know that then, and i needed to find out...
same goes for the audio editors... cooledits demo is a joke. i wouldn't have bought it had i only used the demo, i would prolly have bought wavelab or sawplus... as it turned out, cooledit was much better for me so i bought that... should i have bought three programs here aswell?
that's just rediculous...
S
skipper
New member
Just my take on this as a newbie to the forum (hi all), every time I have to put in a Challenge/Response for some software I have, I damn all crackers.
It is all a real pain in the butt, but sadly they will always be around, with the same old arguments. The day will soon come when software will be linked to some hardware card which we will have to install. May not be a bad thing, as additional processing and facilities will be built in, as per UAD etc now.
It is all a real pain in the butt, but sadly they will always be around, with the same old arguments. The day will soon come when software will be linked to some hardware card which we will have to install. May not be a bad thing, as additional processing and facilities will be built in, as per UAD etc now.
ecktronic
Mixing and Mastering.
Bass Master "K"
New member
Chriss, I like your test drive analogy, I might have missed it on my first read through this and I think it makes my point. Let's say you are going to test drive a killer new sportscar...what is the company going to say when you say that to get a complete test you need to:
1) Drive it over 120 mph to see what she will really do?
2) Take it for a week trip up to the mountain to see how it handles in the snow?
3) Take it for another week to the desert to see how it handles in the heat?
4) Try to do power braking exercises and 90 degree turns at high speed
5) Keep it overnight to see if it fits in your garage.
6) (.....I could go on and on all day)
The simple fact is this, you will get to get in the car, you can drive it around the block once or twice maybe, you get out of the car and then you are free to buy it, wait, get more info it, look at literature on it, not buy it, or if you think you really want it, maybe take it for one more trip around the block. You get to try out the product only in the LIMIITED WAY that the auto dealership is allowing you to test it out. Plain and simple. So Steinberg let's people try out their software in a limited way of their choosing, as is there right...the same right the auto dealership exercises when not letting you have free reign over a car you don't own. The difference is that there is an employee from the dealership watching you to make sure you are honest. Steinberg has to rely on people's honesty, and since that doesn't work very well we have our dongle which totally blows.
What is the difference between downloading the crack erasing it if you don't like it and buying it if you do, and downloading the demo which doesn't give you long enough to figure out if you like it? Well, simple answer would be because it is wrong. It is not the way in which Steinberg wants their product tested and it is stealing. I have read so many threads from crack users that claim that Cubase sucks and it's a horrible program, and it turns out they are using cracks that aren't stable and are exhibiting classic "crack" tendancies. How is that showing the true power of Cubase and supposed to win over people to buy it? They provide their demo's and I'm sorry if they only let you drive it around the block a few times, so to speak. You seem to have actually bought the program after using a crack so my hat is off to you for being honest enough to jump aboard and buy the program once you saw how great it is. Unfortunatley there are many out there, who when faced with spending $700 for a program they basically already have, and spending that cash on other gear and shorting Steinberg, well alot of them have a hard time paying for what they already have.
The thing is, Steinberg is not some faceless company that doesn't feel it when they are ripped off. There are many faces in that company, it's just it doesn't feel as good to steal from them when you realize that there are people's jobs at stake, so people make up lies to make themselves feel better about their dishonesty.
Anyhow, congrats on upgrading to SE, when I moved from vst to SX it was a great move. I'm thinking about jumping up to SX2 to get some of those midi features I've been eyeballing....
1) Drive it over 120 mph to see what she will really do?
2) Take it for a week trip up to the mountain to see how it handles in the snow?
3) Take it for another week to the desert to see how it handles in the heat?
4) Try to do power braking exercises and 90 degree turns at high speed
5) Keep it overnight to see if it fits in your garage.
6) (.....I could go on and on all day)
The simple fact is this, you will get to get in the car, you can drive it around the block once or twice maybe, you get out of the car and then you are free to buy it, wait, get more info it, look at literature on it, not buy it, or if you think you really want it, maybe take it for one more trip around the block. You get to try out the product only in the LIMIITED WAY that the auto dealership is allowing you to test it out. Plain and simple. So Steinberg let's people try out their software in a limited way of their choosing, as is there right...the same right the auto dealership exercises when not letting you have free reign over a car you don't own. The difference is that there is an employee from the dealership watching you to make sure you are honest. Steinberg has to rely on people's honesty, and since that doesn't work very well we have our dongle which totally blows.
What is the difference between downloading the crack erasing it if you don't like it and buying it if you do, and downloading the demo which doesn't give you long enough to figure out if you like it? Well, simple answer would be because it is wrong. It is not the way in which Steinberg wants their product tested and it is stealing. I have read so many threads from crack users that claim that Cubase sucks and it's a horrible program, and it turns out they are using cracks that aren't stable and are exhibiting classic "crack" tendancies. How is that showing the true power of Cubase and supposed to win over people to buy it? They provide their demo's and I'm sorry if they only let you drive it around the block a few times, so to speak. You seem to have actually bought the program after using a crack so my hat is off to you for being honest enough to jump aboard and buy the program once you saw how great it is. Unfortunatley there are many out there, who when faced with spending $700 for a program they basically already have, and spending that cash on other gear and shorting Steinberg, well alot of them have a hard time paying for what they already have.
The thing is, Steinberg is not some faceless company that doesn't feel it when they are ripped off. There are many faces in that company, it's just it doesn't feel as good to steal from them when you realize that there are people's jobs at stake, so people make up lies to make themselves feel better about their dishonesty.
Anyhow, congrats on upgrading to SE, when I moved from vst to SX it was a great move. I'm thinking about jumping up to SX2 to get some of those midi features I've been eyeballing....
Codmate
New member
This thread is very bizzarre indeed. Some of the arguments make no sense to me...
For a start, we can't use a car in an analogy for a piece of software. A car is a physical thing, which once taken away cannot be copied. If you were to use a *design* for a car as an analogy that would be much more accurate as what is being discussed here is intellectual copyright, not property.
A car is physical property, software is intellectual property.
They are in no way similar other than they are products of work. The form the products take is entirely different; and this difference is crucial to the argument.
Right - that's point one. If I see another car (or any other physical product)/software analogy I will scream!
Let me state the obvious once again; intellectual copyright breach is not equal to theft. It is breach of contract. It is not 'the same as stealing a car'! It is an entirely different crime. Not the same. Got it yet?
OK, now to address the practicalities of software piracy.
What is software piracy?
Breach of intellectual copyright is not common theft. You have not walked into the software company's offices and stolen a computer. You have breached an intellectual copyright agreement.
Software piracy is the same brand of crime as taping a film off the TV (that you 'paid for the film' when you paid your cable bill or bought the casette is a myth - at least in the UK), giving a friend copy of a CD you own, making a photocopy of a book etc.
Software piracy is most often identified as the use of a piece of software without owning the requisite licence for it. This is not exactly the case in law, but it holds for a casual definition.
Who does software piracy *hurt*?
Firstly the pirates are mostly (see cavet a few paragraphs down) correct when they say their actions do not directly or indirectly hurt the company who creates the software they are using, as long as they had no intention of buying the software regardless of whether it was available to download a crack or not.
To argue otherwise is a logical fallacy. If the money was never going to be available to the company in question then it is not even *potential* revenue.
However, if somebody would otherwise buy the software, but uses a crack instead, that takes potential revenue away from the company in question.
It still does not equate to theft though as we are talking about *potential revenue*, not actual revenue. You are not hacking the software company's bank acount when you pirate software.
The law takes a dim view of software piracy nevertheless - so somebody must be getting 'hurt', right?
Yes, of course they are. It is mostly the small compaines who make lower-priced, more accesible software who take the brunt of software piracy.
What would the people who use pirated software do if it was not possible to crack any music program?
They would buy a cheaper program thet they _could_ afford. Steinberg et al do make cheaper programs as well as their more expensive products - so this is the caveat to "pirates are mostly correct when they say their actions do not directly or indirectly hurt the company who creates the software they are using...".
The upshot is that it hurts the music software industry as a whole.
Steinberg et al have a huge user base for their more expensive products, and can pretty much guarentee a certain amount of revenue each upgrade cycle. They aren't going out of business any time soon. I also doubt piracy has any direct impact (see below for an indirect impact) on the pricing of their software. It doesn't take a genius to work out that, if their program was uncrackable, their user-base for the expensive programms would not increase by a large percentage as people would use cheaper software (including their own low-end products). Cubase, Nuendo et al will remain very expensive (and overpriced IMO - but that's a different debate).
It is the small software devlopers who we should feel sorry for. The people whose software is out-marketed, out-branded and under-used due to cracked copies of the 'the best' recording software being widely available. How can competitors to the 'big boys' grow and develop if their software is ignored?
This is where piracy *does* have an impact on price. If there was more competition would the prices of the more expensive software not fall?
So what's my personal stand on the issue?
Piracy is obviously wrong, but the over-simplified pompous attacks on people in this thread are not properly justified. Check your logic first before attacking people - if your argument is fatally flawed you don't have an argument.
Also I believe somebody once said "Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.".
Anybody here 'without sin'?
Thought not.
Most of the people being attacked are students who want to learn to use the software as it is 'industry standard' now. IMO that's morally fine. Do you think Steinberg approve of the fact they are one of few 'industry standard' software houses for audio? Would they rather not be making 'industry standard' software and lose the 'educational pirates'? I would wager that they would prefer to have people learning their software when they can't afford it and buying it many times over later on when they are heading up some studio somewhere, rather than students learning a competitor's software and providing another company with revenue.
That's just a guess though. They are possibly too short-sighted to see this sort of piracy as a kind of investment.
I'm sure they would rather people be using the 'educational' versions of their products - but they don't seem to realise that the products are quite different and thus the 'educational' version is not as useful simply becuase it is *not* a full version.
I think it's pretty churlish for people who have a regular disposable income to take a pop at music-tech students who are using cracked versions of software in order to learn it. Learning is a wonderful thing - would you rather they were smoking crack and robbing your house? Give them a few years to get their skills together and soon they will be contributing to society like the rest of us - and what damage will they have done exactly?
Very little, as I have shown above.
It's not their fault that industry standard software is out of their reach price-wise. It's also not their fault that the cheap alternatives are not used in a professional context and are thus not as beneficial products for study.
IMO big software houses should solve this issue by giving colleges home-licences for their students. It would benefit both sides hugely.
IMHO:
If you are making money off the software you should buy it.
If you can afford the software you should buy it.
If you can't afford the software, but want to make music on your computer you should buy cheaper software (or use GNU/Linux and other GNU stuff).
If you are learning the software for a future career, can't afford it anyway and are following a recognised college course, good luck to you!
For a start, we can't use a car in an analogy for a piece of software. A car is a physical thing, which once taken away cannot be copied. If you were to use a *design* for a car as an analogy that would be much more accurate as what is being discussed here is intellectual copyright, not property.
A car is physical property, software is intellectual property.
They are in no way similar other than they are products of work. The form the products take is entirely different; and this difference is crucial to the argument.
Right - that's point one. If I see another car (or any other physical product)/software analogy I will scream!
Let me state the obvious once again; intellectual copyright breach is not equal to theft. It is breach of contract. It is not 'the same as stealing a car'! It is an entirely different crime. Not the same. Got it yet?
OK, now to address the practicalities of software piracy.
What is software piracy?
Breach of intellectual copyright is not common theft. You have not walked into the software company's offices and stolen a computer. You have breached an intellectual copyright agreement.
Software piracy is the same brand of crime as taping a film off the TV (that you 'paid for the film' when you paid your cable bill or bought the casette is a myth - at least in the UK), giving a friend copy of a CD you own, making a photocopy of a book etc.
Software piracy is most often identified as the use of a piece of software without owning the requisite licence for it. This is not exactly the case in law, but it holds for a casual definition.
Who does software piracy *hurt*?
Firstly the pirates are mostly (see cavet a few paragraphs down) correct when they say their actions do not directly or indirectly hurt the company who creates the software they are using, as long as they had no intention of buying the software regardless of whether it was available to download a crack or not.
To argue otherwise is a logical fallacy. If the money was never going to be available to the company in question then it is not even *potential* revenue.
However, if somebody would otherwise buy the software, but uses a crack instead, that takes potential revenue away from the company in question.
It still does not equate to theft though as we are talking about *potential revenue*, not actual revenue. You are not hacking the software company's bank acount when you pirate software.
The law takes a dim view of software piracy nevertheless - so somebody must be getting 'hurt', right?
Yes, of course they are. It is mostly the small compaines who make lower-priced, more accesible software who take the brunt of software piracy.
What would the people who use pirated software do if it was not possible to crack any music program?
They would buy a cheaper program thet they _could_ afford. Steinberg et al do make cheaper programs as well as their more expensive products - so this is the caveat to "pirates are mostly correct when they say their actions do not directly or indirectly hurt the company who creates the software they are using...".
The upshot is that it hurts the music software industry as a whole.
Steinberg et al have a huge user base for their more expensive products, and can pretty much guarentee a certain amount of revenue each upgrade cycle. They aren't going out of business any time soon. I also doubt piracy has any direct impact (see below for an indirect impact) on the pricing of their software. It doesn't take a genius to work out that, if their program was uncrackable, their user-base for the expensive programms would not increase by a large percentage as people would use cheaper software (including their own low-end products). Cubase, Nuendo et al will remain very expensive (and overpriced IMO - but that's a different debate).
It is the small software devlopers who we should feel sorry for. The people whose software is out-marketed, out-branded and under-used due to cracked copies of the 'the best' recording software being widely available. How can competitors to the 'big boys' grow and develop if their software is ignored?
This is where piracy *does* have an impact on price. If there was more competition would the prices of the more expensive software not fall?
So what's my personal stand on the issue?
Piracy is obviously wrong, but the over-simplified pompous attacks on people in this thread are not properly justified. Check your logic first before attacking people - if your argument is fatally flawed you don't have an argument.
Also I believe somebody once said "Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.".
Anybody here 'without sin'?
Thought not.
Most of the people being attacked are students who want to learn to use the software as it is 'industry standard' now. IMO that's morally fine. Do you think Steinberg approve of the fact they are one of few 'industry standard' software houses for audio? Would they rather not be making 'industry standard' software and lose the 'educational pirates'? I would wager that they would prefer to have people learning their software when they can't afford it and buying it many times over later on when they are heading up some studio somewhere, rather than students learning a competitor's software and providing another company with revenue.
That's just a guess though. They are possibly too short-sighted to see this sort of piracy as a kind of investment.
I'm sure they would rather people be using the 'educational' versions of their products - but they don't seem to realise that the products are quite different and thus the 'educational' version is not as useful simply becuase it is *not* a full version.
I think it's pretty churlish for people who have a regular disposable income to take a pop at music-tech students who are using cracked versions of software in order to learn it. Learning is a wonderful thing - would you rather they were smoking crack and robbing your house? Give them a few years to get their skills together and soon they will be contributing to society like the rest of us - and what damage will they have done exactly?
Very little, as I have shown above.
It's not their fault that industry standard software is out of their reach price-wise. It's also not their fault that the cheap alternatives are not used in a professional context and are thus not as beneficial products for study.
IMO big software houses should solve this issue by giving colleges home-licences for their students. It would benefit both sides hugely.
IMHO:
If you are making money off the software you should buy it.
If you can afford the software you should buy it.
If you can't afford the software, but want to make music on your computer you should buy cheaper software (or use GNU/Linux and other GNU stuff).
If you are learning the software for a future career, can't afford it anyway and are following a recognised college course, good luck to you!
Last edited:
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Yet another (extremely long-winded) rationalization of theft....... (like we needed yet another one...)
Codmate
New member
Double post
Codmate
New member
You appear to have not read the post as I am not defending pirates or rationalising theft.Blue Bear Sound said:Yet another (extremely long-winded) rationalization of theft....... (like we needed yet another one...)
You seem like an otherwise intelligient person.
This is a far more complex issue than many people here seem to realise. If you would stop confusing yourselves with false analogies you might take this argument somewhere.
Read the post and comment on specific parts of it that you disagree with if you must. Otherwise I will take your argument to be analagous to the rest of the tripe in this bloated and logically unsound thread.
Try engaging your brain before your knee hits the bottom of the desk each time you read a post that doesn't exactly express your over-simplified views and suspect attempts at logic.
- Status