Dongle Crack for SX 2

[Flight 16]

I received an anonymous email stating that my software was cracked the same day that the increase occured. Coincidence? I doubt it. I pulled the software and went with an online distributor. They do the encryption of the executable and add their code to allow purchasing online. I left the option to purchase by telephone initially (still handled by softwrap). It wasn't more than a week and I received another email stating my software was cracked. I have since done away with the telephone purchase option. It has to be purchased and unlocked through an online process that seems pretty crack proof at this point. Downloads have returned to their previous levels.


Take it however you want. These people that do this shit just for fun are still fucking assholes.

they probebly are...i dont care

if you know you can get a hack of somthing you might be happy to get it and check it out and show your mates.....but it does not mean you would have paid for it if the crack was not there...

 

[Bass Master "K"]

taking a hack is not leaving Steinberg empty handed...and in fact advertises its product to lots of people. ..it is simply taking a scrap that has fallen off the wagon....yes it is taking something that is not yours, but we dont live in a perfect world and somtimes it does no harm braking them...you ever taped somthing off TV?? ....CROOK!....

Flight, I would invite you to take the time to go back and read this whole thread. I know it is long, but you keep continuing to spout out lies and suppositions that have already been addressed and shown to be incorrect. It is NOT illegal to tape something off of TV. It WOULD be illegal if you taped something off of TV and rebroadcast it or charged people to see it. This has all been discussed here and laid to rest yet you keep reaching back and bringing it up in an effort to make your case that sometimes stealing is good. Steinberg already has free product to "advertise" to people, it's called demo's. And if they still have Cubasis, well that was next to free.

The fact is, Steinberg knows their business and their bottom line better than you do and unless you can show us a quote where they say they really don't mind cracks for their software because it brings them more business, then I would guess that they know the cracks are costing them more than it is bringing in in increased revenue from those who are exposed to cracks and then decide to make a purchase. I don't think that they would go to the trouble of having a dongle to protect their software if that was the case, do you?

To top this all off before you hopefully go back and really reread this thread and the false arguements posed by your side of this issue and the arguements on the side not supporting software theft, I would like to say this.

The reason I ask someone who steals software to repeat the statement: "If everyone turned to cracked software, no one would be hurt by it." is because there is a generation, a "subculture" as some here would like to paint it, of people to whom software theft is absolutely NOT wrong. Not only that, it is their RIGHT in their view to get this stuff for free. Well, I teach private music lessons, and spend a lot of time in local high schools and junior highs and I am around kids 12 to 18 a lot and I am here to tell you that this attitude that stealing music and software on the net is not wrong, is not only growing, it is BY FAR the prevailing attitude of kids I meet in this age range. We talk about music all the time and what is popular and new bands we hear and like and so the subject pops up all the time when they offer to "burn" me their new favorite album. They know I make my living playing and teaching music, and they literally have no idea that I would consider that wrong. To them it is a simple fact of life of a way to get something without having to pay for it. I bought a CD recently and inside the CD was an insert for a one-time free song download at Napster from the band, an unreleased track. So I was with three of my students and some of their friends and I asked them if any one of them had Napster accounts (because I don't use the service and don't want to do the download for one song). Every single one of them said they didn't use Napster since they moved to the "pay for music" format. They were talking about how cool it used to be and then one of the kids said "well at least we still have Kazaa". This IS the attitude of the future.

So you can say to my "thief kryptonite" statement, "well, everyone doesn't use cracked software so it's okay". How long will it be okay? Will it be okay if only 10% of the population uses cracks? How about 25%? How about 50%? Can you see the problem we are facing if we can't get people to see this ultimate truth that stealing is WRONG. That stealing, regardless of how you want to paint it, does HARM to the software, and the music industry. Stealing hurts artists and software developers alike, not just the record companies and software giants. If you can't look enough into the future to see the problem we are going to be facing soon, your not being honest with yourself. But I would imagine most thieves have honesty issues and probably don't really care about the future, as long as they get what they want for free in the present.

I imagine once you start stealing software and music, and you see that you are not getting caught, that it would be hard to not keep doing it. But I would respectfully ask you to think about the previous paragraph and really be honest with yourself about where software and music theft are really headed, because from what I have seen, the percentages that I posted above ARE coming in due time. It's not just about how the theft affects us today, it is also about how the GROWING of theft will affect us tomorrow and the day after. Then you have to ask yourself...are you going to be part of the problem, or part of the solution?

 

[Burden of Proof]

Well Stated, Bass Master K

First, let me respond to your first statement.
"I have a few friends who are willing to take morality out of the question. Could you post your home address please...they want to see which of your resources are available to them. After all, how can you deny them? You said it yourself."
Hey, you're absolutely right - if their morals dictate breaking into people's houses and stealing their possesions is okay, then they're gonna do that, whether you or I or anyone else says otherwise. I can't deny them. You think they'd stop if I said, "hey, that's not right!"? That doesn't mean I'm going to tell you where I live, just like Steinberg isn't going to release Cubase without a dongle. They may know it can be cracked, but that doesn't mean they're going to send a mass mail about how you can get it for free. Your asking me to post my home address is the analogical equivalent of the post that started this thread. Should I start a poll about what name we should be calling you? Think about it.

That being said,
Your most recent post has a 100% valid point. I keep saying that you have to accept that filesharing and downloads of music and cracked software (not to mention movies, other media, games, etc) is a fact of life. Sounds like you've encountered this yourself. I am at times amazed at how the younger generation feels about this. I work in an office which has a large customer service staff, staffed mostly by recent high school graduates and college students, and even I get a little shocked by people's attitudes towards downloading illegal cracks and copyrighted music. I've been asking them lately where they draw their line, since this thread has really got me thinking on the subject.

I've gotten responses as diverse as, "I download whatever I want" to "I only download mainstream music, I pay for independant music" to "I only download movies and music, but not software". But the answer always included downloading in one form or another, no one at all said "I never ever download anything". Most of them see it as taking from a gigantic company that won't miss it, or even as some kind of 'retribution' for the RIAA or software mega-corps who set their prices too high in the first place. This, for the most part, is out of line with my morals, and constitutes some of those nasty rationalizations which I do not agree with.

Believe it or not, I do have a concience. I pay for things I think are worth my money - although that has never stopped me from downloading it first to find out whether it is in fact worth my money. I do not consider myself to be a part of the problem, as I am still supporting the capitalist paradigm by rewarding financially those services and products which are worth the money. I have always had the ability to determine what is worth the money, but with the advent of internet filesharing now I can have more evidence to support my decisions.

To do something like, say, download a cracked version of Cubase, learn it real well, start doing recording with it, and then start distributing recordings made with your cracked software goes entirely against my morals. In fact, it goes against my morals long before distribution of recordings, it starts going against my morals once the user has learned enough about the software that it is clear they would like to posess and use it regularly. My morals clearly state that at that point, you're cheating the company by continuing to use the software. My morals say, "Buy it, Dumbass."

All of my arguments in support of accepting filesharing as a part of if not a way of life have to assume that the downloader's morals are the same as mine, and they're going to use their resources responsibly. Like if I posted my home address and BassMaster came over to my house and we had a nice little chat about how people's moral values dictate their actions - that would be responsible. But he wouldn't - he'd use it irresponsibly and send some thug buddies of his to come perpetrate some violence. That's why I keep asking to take morality out of the question. Regardless of morals - if you wanted my address, and I gave it to you, you'd use it... right? Everyone uses the resources available. How could you not?

Anyway, point being, we have to start addressing the moral inadequacies of "those kids these days". My morals keep me in line. I know that even when I download software or music, I still have an obligation to support the bands/companies that produce the things I like/use/listen to/whatever. The younger folks do not seem to feel they have any such obligations, and in fact have a lot of this 'retribution' attitude for how they've been 'wronged' by the 'system'. I'm old enough now to be a part of the 'system'. The 'system' is what feeds me, my wife, and my two kids. I understand my moral obligation to not 'take without giving back'.

I just think it's dumb not to be informed. With a filesharing program and an internet connection, I now have the ability to be informed about any music/software I want to be without an up-front financial investment. If all downloaders looked at it this way, *I THINK* we'd be okay. The problem is, this is not everyone's same thinking. Too many seem to think that the ability to get something for free absolves them of the need to pay for it at all.

I keep saying I ride the line on this one. Anyone have similar experiences, or I'll ask again, where do you draw your line? A lot of people reading this download some kind of content from the internet. How do you use it and what dictates the allowable/not allowable decision about downloading or using it? I know I'm not alone here or this thread would have been done a LONG time ago.

-The Burden-

 

[Flight 16]

Flight, I would invite you to take the time to go back and read this whole thread. I know it is long, but you keep continuing to spout out lies and suppositions that have already been addressed and shown to be incorrect. It is NOT illegal to tape something off of TV. It WOULD be illegal if you taped something off of TV and rebroadcast it or charged people to see it. This has all been discussed here and laid to rest yet you keep reaching back and bringing it up in an effort to make your case that sometimes stealing is good. Steinberg already has free product to "advertise" to people, it's called demo's. And if they still have Cubasis, well that was next to free.

The fact is, Steinberg knows their business and their bottom line better than you do and unless you can show us a quote where they say they really don't mind cracks for their software because it brings them more business, then I would guess that they know the cracks are costing them more than it is bringing in in increased revenue from those who are exposed to cracks and then decide to make a purchase. I don't think that they would go to the trouble of having a dongle to protect their software if that was the case, do you?

To top this all off before you hopefully go back and really reread this thread and the false arguements posed by your side of this issue and the arguements on the side not supporting software theft, I would like to say this.

The reason I ask someone who steals software to repeat the statement: "If everyone turned to cracked software, no one would be hurt by it." is because there is a generation, a "subculture" as some here would like to paint it, of people to whom software theft is absolutely NOT wrong. Not only that, it is their RIGHT in their view to get this stuff for free. Well, I teach private music lessons, and spend a lot of time in local high schools and junior highs and I am around kids 12 to 18 a lot and I am here to tell you that this attitude that stealing music and software on the net is not wrong, is not only growing, it is BY FAR the prevailing attitude of kids I meet in this age range. We talk about music all the time and what is popular and new bands we hear and like and so the subject pops up all the time when they offer to "burn" me their new favorite album. They know I make my living playing and teaching music, and they literally have no idea that I would consider that wrong. To them it is a simple fact of life of a way to get something without having to pay for it. I bought a CD recently and inside the CD was an insert for a one-time free song download at Napster from the band, an unreleased track. So I was with three of my students and some of their friends and I asked them if any one of them had Napster accounts (because I don't use the service and don't want to do the download for one song). Every single one of them said they didn't use Napster since they moved to the "pay for music" format. They were talking about how cool it used to be and then one of the kids said "well at least we still have Kazaa". This IS the attitude of the future.

So you can say to my "thief kryptonite" statement, "well, everyone doesn't use cracked software so it's okay". How long will it be okay? Will it be okay if only 10% of the population uses cracks? How about 25%? How about 50%? Can you see the problem we are facing if we can't get people to see this ultimate truth that stealing is WRONG. That stealing, regardless of how you want to paint it, does HARM to the software, and the music industry. Stealing hurts artists and software developers alike, not just the record companies and software giants. If you can't look enough into the future to see the problem we are going to be facing soon, your not being honest with yourself. But I would imagine most thieves have honesty issues and probably don't really care about the future, as long as they get what they want for free in the present.

I imagine once you start stealing software and music, and you see that you are not getting caught, that it would be hard to not keep doing it. But I would respectfully ask you to think about the previous paragraph and really be honest with yourself about where software and music theft are really headed, because from what I have seen, the percentages that I posted above ARE coming in due time. It's not just about how the theft affects us today, it is also about how the GROWING of theft will affect us tomorrow and the day after. Then you have to ask yourself...are you going to be part of the problem, or part of the solution?

I really could not be arsed to read all that but boy are you talking crap!

at least..in the UK, it is officially against the law to record TV programs ...just those silly laws that everyone brakes....like J walking over there...

People sell there Programs on DVD but if I taped the hole lot then I would not need to buy it...is that fare...its there program why should i get it for free???

you talk rubbish and it is you who is ignorant to what I say...

of coarse Steinberg wont say they don't mind hacks!! ...you think there stupid or something!? ...they would like to make it as hard ass possible and I guess if they could stop it they would...but I bet you if they did stop it there would be a SX2 and an SX3 demo for all to try...

all your views come from a selfish point of view not a view that most of the world would share...

to be honest most here probably get pissed as they know the more home studios getting set up the less work there is for them!! ...isn't that the truth!!

you talk crap, and it is you who overlook my comments...which is why I only got through half your message and then though ..."who is this guy?"

I think the only way this will end is if we agree to disagree.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

all your views come from a selfish point of view not a view that most of the world would share...

What an unfuckingbelievably stupid thing to say....... I see idiocy runs rampant in Europe too...

 

[Flight 16]

What an unfuckingbelievably stupid thing to say....... I see idiocy runs rampant in Europe too...

O yeah! were catching up big time!

 

[Burden of Proof]

Okay already - Flight 16 agrees to disagree...

you talk crap, and it is you who overlook my comments...which is why I only got through half your message and then though ..."who is this guy?"

I think the only way this will end is if we agree to disagree.

I don't think anyone's been overlooking your comments, but they might start overlooking them very quickly when you post telling us you're not even reading the whole post before writing back all hurt-sounding.

I think most readers here will agree that they disagree with you, and if you want to end it just stop posting. That's the quickest way.

I agree there may be a little ego-bruise for the folks who have worked very hard to get what they have seeing punk ass kids picking up the same software for free and treating it like it's their right to have it. But I don't think that the punk ass with the crack is really any competition for a recording professional, so don't go thinking people's adversity to theft is entirely due to a bruised ego or feeling like their business is threatened.

To take your other points...
Bass Master was not talking crap. No name calling, no off-base statements - just talking. An opinion different than yours does not necessarily constitute 'talking crap'.
Illegal to record TV in the UK? I'm from America, so I'm not the utmost authority on the subject... but... um... no. Not a chance. I looked around, and didn't find anything too definitive, but how 'bout this:
Instructions for recording BBC television (bbc.co.uk)
There ARE demo versions of Cubase to try, even free versions with certain pieces of hardware. Maybe not SX, but still the same codebase.
Most of the world would share the point of view that theft is wrong.

Oh man. For the only other guy on the board with an opinion other than "filesharing is bad", you sure know how to make us look stupid. Try reading the whole post you're responding to before posting (or at least don't advertise that you didn't). And really think about the arguments you're arguing against, instead of replying simply because your own ego is bruised. That's all.

-The Burden-

 

[manning1]

i still say , if you feel the urge to take something without paying
like software consider that this might put an engineer out of work somewhere who has a newborn baby to feed.
years ago i saw this happen once to someone i knew well.
and i saw the pain he went through.
he wasnt worried about himself but his kids. and whether he could afford christmas presents that year.
i'm not a religeous zealot - but the old adage do unto others etc....
is a good code. i also have the feeling somehow, how we treat each other in this world is logged somewhere in the great computer up in the sky .
as a friend of mine often remarks. this world is but a test of how decent we are as human beings before moving onto another level of a very long eternal eons lasting video game....

 

[NYMorningstar]

Hey, you're absolutely right - if their morals dictate breaking into people's houses and stealing their possesions is okay, then they're gonna do that, whether you or I or anyone else says otherwise. I can't deny them. You think they'd stop if I said, "hey, that's not right!"? That doesn't mean I'm going to tell you where I live,

Why not tell? If they decide to steal what's in your house they may find a cracked copy of software you're thinking of buying and then they could use it and decide for themselves to 'buy' their own copy. What, you don't think thieves would ever consider buying a copy? Maybe they'd steal your stereo and after using it decide they should pay you for it aye? What do you mean thieves don't do that? Oh, I'm sorry, that would be at your expense. You're nothing but a hypocrite Burden.

Believe it or not, I do have a concience. I pay for things I think are worth my money - although that has never stopped me from downloading it first to find out whether it is in fact worth my money. I do not consider myself to be a part of the problem,

What's concience exactly or do you just preach using a spellchecker or are you trying to "make yourself look illiterate", hypocrite.

To do something like, say, download a cracked version of Cubase, learn it real well, start doing recording with it, and then start distributing recordings made with your cracked software goes entirely against my morals. In fact, it goes against my morals long before distribution of recordings, it starts going against my morals once the user has learned enough about the software that it is clear they would like to posess and use it regularly.

You moral fiber is corrupt. Where do you get off deciding how long someone can use a product before they should buy it? You don't own it. It is up to the owner of the product to decide this, not you AND if you decide to use it outside their permission you are simply a thief. All you do is weigh your guilt and fear against the almighty dollar and when it comes to buying what you've been using you fold. LIAR!

My morals clearly state that at that point, you're cheating the company by continuing to use the software. My morals say, "Buy it, Dumbass."

Morals, what morals? It's your guilt and fear of getting caught that's driving you to buy it Dumbass.

Anyway, point being, we have to start addressing the moral inadequacies of "those kids these days".

Try some introspection before you try teaching the next generation hypocrite. Then you won't be screwing them up too. They'll be able to see right through you if you don't fix you first.

My morals keep me in line.

Why are you repeating yourself? Sure say it enough times and you believe it. It's your guilt and fear of being caught that keeps you in line.

I just think it's dumb not to be informed. With a filesharing program and an internet connection, I now have the ability to be informed about any music/software I want to be without an up-front financial investment. If all downloaders looked at it this way, *I THINK* we'd be okay. The problem is, this is not everyone's same thinking. Too many seem to think that the ability to get something for free absolves them of the need to pay for it at all.

Too many think that if they steal something and don't like it they don't need to pay for it too. Ever go to a concert and ask for your money back when it is over because you didn't like it all or try to negotiate the price because you didn't like the opening act? No, didn't think so, where's your consistency hypocrite?

I keep saying I ride the line on this one.

You've said you ride the line so many times maybe you believe now but the facts speak for themselves. You are over the line and nothing more than a polished lying and hypocritical thief.

 

[Burden of Proof]

Another time waster

Why not tell? If they decide to steal what's in your house they may find a cracked copy of software you're thinking of buying and then they could use it and decide for themselves to 'buy' their own copy. What, you don't think thieves would ever consider buying a copy? Maybe they'd steal your stereo and after using it decide they should pay you for it aye? What do you mean thieves don't do that? Oh, I'm sorry, that would be at your expense. You're nothing but a hypocrite Burden.

Maybe I'm all alone in thinking that you can download and still decide to pay. Maybe I'm not. Ask around, and find out. Other people have different opinions than yours. If you had read carefully, you would notice the comparison to the dongle for Cubase. I'm not giving my address because you're right - most burglars don't have consideration. However, if a burglar comes on my street, and my house looks ripe for the picking, they sure will steal from me anyway. And you don't think a thief has ever stolen something for money or drugs, then later bought one for themselves because they thought it was cool? No amount of whining or wishing it wasn't so is going to make it so there are no more burglars. It's a fact of life - accept it.
But then filesharers often have different motivations than burglars, and stereos can't be copied like software, so consider the imperfections of the analogy before trying to stretch it any further - I think it's already been stretched far too thin.

What's concience exactly or do you just preach using a spellchecker or are you trying to "make yourself look illiterate", hypocrite.

What, I miss an 's' and all of a sudden I'm illiterate? Grasping at straws my friend.

You moral fiber is corrupt. Where do you get off deciding how long someone can use a product before they should buy it?

You can think that. And I can make my own decisions, and get off wherever I feel like it. I don't decide for you, or even 'someone' - I only decide for me. I have a strong sense of my own morality, and what I do is entirely based upon it. Including posting a contrary opinion in a forum to feel out other peoples opinions. But you don't seem to have one - just animosity. Sorry I hurt your delicate feelings.

All you do is weigh your guilt and fear against the almighty dollar and when it comes to buying what you've been using you fold. LIAR!

I like how you keep calling me a liar. I'm not lying, I'm speaking my mind. What, are you insecure about telling the truth? Which sentences are lies? The ones where I say that I agree that stealing is wrong, or the ones where I say that people use the resources afforded to them? Which? Or is the lie where I'm asking others to define their moral line? Do you have one? Or are you going to ride your high horse off into the sunset?

Morals, what morals? It's your guilt and fear of getting caught that's driving you to buy it Dumbass.

Hey buddy - ask the Christians about the relationship between guilt, fear, and morality. If not for guilt and fear we'd all steal from and kill each other, if it helped us eat. For me, I try to live by that golden rule that manning1 mentioned. If I didn't, I probably *would* be consumed by guilt and fear. But I go to bed at night with a clean conScience. At the end of the day, I know I'm not ripping anyone off. You seem to think otherwise.

Try some introspection before you try teaching the next generation hypocrite. Then you won't be screwing them up too. They'll be able to see right through you if you don't fix you first.

'See right through me?' What's on the other side? That bad-nasty thief you're so afraid of? Or are you confused that someone can be on both sides of this issue and still retain some moral dignity and self respect? I'm comfortable with myself, and obviously glad to share my opinions. Are you? Or are you just going to try attacking me and calling names some more?

Too many think that if they steal something and don't like it they don't need to pay for it too.

Err... kind of confusing here... stealing by definition means not paying for it... the downloading of the cracked version part is so you only have to pay for it if you want to. And only your morals can tell you what you should or shouldn't be paying for. Which is why it's important to teach kids strong morals. Because they're exposed to cracked software already - it's a fact of life (how many times I gotta say it?) - and most of them right now don't have the integrity to realize that even if they do get cracked software (because they can, and they do) they're still obligated to buy the software they use.

Ever go to a concert and ask for your money back when it is over because you didn't like it all or try to negotiate the price because you didn't like the opening act?

Yep, and movies too. And succeeded in getting my money back. At least with a file download I don't have to argue with anyone that I've been ripped off.

You've said you ride the line so many times maybe you believe now but the facts speak for themselves. You are over the line and nothing more than a polished lying and hypocritical thief.

Yes, I'm a hypocrite, and so are you. If you say you're not - you ought to re-evaluate your definition of 'liar'. Think about it. I'm over your line, but I'm not over mine. I've drawn mine, and I know what I'm morally comfortable with. What IS your line NY? Ever listened to a burned CD? Installed someone else's copy of some software? Never? Your high ground isn't as high as you think it is. You need to come down from your pretentious cloud and hang out in the real world for a while. Things are not so black and white.

I'm just looking for other people's opinions. I'll say again, I can't be the only one who feels this way - just apparently the only one willing to put up a real fight in a forum that obviously has a strong bias to one side of the issue. Funny, but I'm not even really trying to 'fight'. I just want to be clear that FILESHARING IS A FACT OF LIFE and all we can do at this point is accept it, move on, and try to make a better world for the children of today and tomorrow. I think we can agree that no one wants an apathetic world where moral values are corrupt for all and theft is the norm rather than the deviation. Likewise I think we might all be able to agree that the answer is not going to be to hunt down and punish all those dirty dog filesharers - unless genocide or totalitarianism is on your agenda for this generation.

NYMorningStar, I've got no personal issues with you but you seem to have them with me (although I will admit your attacks can get me a little riled up). You can feel the way you want to feel. You're totally free to express those feelings publicly, someplace such as here, in a public forum. Even if it includes calling me names and making assumptions about how I live my life. Just don't expect to convince me of anything that way. I'm here to have a real discussion, not play "LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE". I'll save that (and any other nursery-rhyme level exchanges) for my 2-yr-old at home.

It's late, I'm tired - I don't even know what all I wrote here. Hopefully it's not too offensive. I really hope people are just starting to see that there are other opinions out there, and some of them might actually be valid (especially to those expressing them). I personally can never be satisfied with just one way of thinking. I have to explore many to see what really makes sense. And to explore them, I have to be open minded about them. Try it. It's both fun AND healthy.

-The Burden-

 

[NYMorningstar]

I'm going to keep this short because there is no need to rehash the above.

Err... kind of confusing here... stealing by definition means not paying for it... the downloading of the cracked version part is so you only have to pay for it if you want to. And only your morals can tell you what you should or shouldn't be paying for.
-The Burden-

You're right. This is where the confusion sits.

Stealing is not restricted to your narrow minded definition. By definition stealing also means - to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as an habitual or regular practice(Merriam-Webster Collegiate). Intent is not a consideration. It also has many other meanings with or without intent but this particular meaning is what makes your downloading cracked versions wrong. Sure, your version of restitution is noble(blah) but the argument is de minimis non curat lex. I know you're pretty smart, you understand it's still stealing, so that is why I question your morals. You know it is wrong and yet you continue to do it and lie about it. A thief and a liar, two peas in a pod.

I'm not here to fight either but when you decide to teach this crap you're in denial about I get concerned.

 

[Flight 16]

seeing punk ass kids picking up the same software for free
-The Burden-

LOL ...dear me

 

[Flight 16]

i still say , if you feel the urge to take something without paying
like software consider that this might put an engineer out of work somewhere who has a newborn baby to feed.
years ago i saw this happen once to someone i knew well.
and i saw the pain he went through.
he wasnt worried about himself but his kids. and whether he could afford christmas presents that year.
i'm not a religeous zealot - but the old adage do unto others etc....
is a good code. i also have the feeling somehow, how we treat each other in this world is logged somewhere in the great computer up in the sky .
as a friend of mine often remarks. this world is but a test of how decent we are as human beings before moving onto another level of a very long eternal eons lasting video game....

LOL LMAO!!!!!
LOL LOL

thee who uses hacked music making software shall burn in hell!! ...LOL LOL

 

[Flight 16]

ok this is my last post on this matter...

1, Is downloading or using hacked software against the Law? ...

YES


2, Do companies like Steinberg suffer allot due to hacked copies...

I think they lose sales from the odd home user and hobbyist ..allthough most of them would normally just go a buy a cheep program if they could not get the hack...they would not go and pay for Cubase... Steinberg would also make sales due to people seeing what Cubase can do while working with hacks ... so as much as they may lose sales to Hacks ..they make sales and I think over the coarse of 20 years Steinberg can now estimate how much sales they lose and make...it does not seem to slow them down.

Yes it would be stupid for them to get slack on hacks as if its too easy then they will lose more money but as it stands its quite hard to be a pro and use hacked software ..and very risky...


5, Do hacks hurt people?, ..

Steinberg are a Huge company that will always make lots of money as they are established and allot of Pro people use it and pay for it, like a workman will pay for his tools... I don't think hacks hurt these people as software has not doubled in price or changed much as a result of it...and it certainly has not held up development in making Cubase a better tool....so despite a hanging fear that Hacks could tempt Pro users away...(which is not likely) No I don't think Hacks hurt people like Steinberg....even if they do cost a huge firm a few quid a year...


4, Is braking the Law evil?

There are MANY laws some that are extremely fare and give the world more security...although I have learnt not to have full faith in the Law and the system as it is not always fare to people ...so the way I see it if I can get something for nothing with out hurting anyone else then I will quite happily brake the law. If I don't need to then I wont...its called survival....Hurting someone now thats a diforent story and has nothing to do with the Law.

I now have a paid copy and a home set up but I do not think I have a divine right to be able to make music...im lucky I have what I have and get on with it...if someone wants to use a hack..so be it...if their tunes kick ass then good on them!..I am happy to have a paid copy so I have no reason at all to be bitter


5, Will I ever use hacked stuff after reading this thread?

Well I have in the past which gave me the opertunity to buy the stuff. I am pretty geared out now so I don't really need to use Hacks really ...And I also have not got the cash to buy anything at the moment... but I guess if something came along that would really help things along...YOU BET!

Happy music making all !!

Buy!

 

[BentRabbit]

And then comes the day when we're supposed to sympathize with some of these jokers when they log on to these boards screaming that someone just stole their song/beat/riff/lyric...

Hey... at least it wasn't their guitar or sumpin

 

[Burden of Proof]

right, wrong, and the law

de minimis non curat lex

I like that, I hadn't heard it before. And you're absolutely correct - my actions are outside the law. I also drank some beer before I turned 21. I smoked pot too. Plus I do jaywalk occasionally. I copied many pages from my college textbooks on the library's copy machine. Once, I even made a mix tape of songs from other friends' tapes. I don't see anything morally wrong with those things either.

You know it is wrong and yet you continue to do it and lie about it. A thief and a liar, two peas in a pod.

You're still calling me a liar and not telling me how I've lied? I'm a very truthful person. This is the unsubstantiated and personal part of your argument. I can see your point of view, however hardlined and unrealistic I think it is, but I can't see where telling the truth makes me a liar.

And so far no one's answered my question. Where do you draw your moral line? I clearly stated mine - the line divides the difference between using a resource and abusing a resource. At least that's my definition. What's yours?

 

[Toki987]

What is Cubase SX ?



oops
never mind!
I thought I was there
but it's here I was,
carry on....

 

[Bass Master "K"]

And so far no one's answered my question. Where do you draw your moral line? I clearly stated mine - the line divides the difference between using a resource and abusing a resource. At least that's my definition. What's yours?

I think you already know mine. My line is stealing and/or theft. I don't do it. Somebody earlier said something to the effect of 'give me a break, there isn't one of you who doesn't have illegal music downloads or warez on your computer. Look at yourself before casting stones' (totally paraphrased). Well, I'm the guy who doesn't have any of that stuff. If an artist wants to let me download an mp3, then they post it up on their site and I will download it. If they don't want me to have it for free, then I don't take it. Same for demo's on computer programs. If they let me have it, great. If there isn't a demo, then if it is something I am interested in, I have to research it a bit, try to dig up a shop that might have it on display, or ask any friends if they know anyone who has it so I can check it out. If none of those pan out, then I read a crapload of reviews and check out the stats on the program to see if it suits my needs.

The thing about your line that I find interesting, is that it is an arbitrary line that can move at any different time. It's like trying to find the difference between using alcohol, and abusing alcohol. Where is that line? Ask varying degrees of not-admitted drunks and they will always say the line is at the next guy who drinks more than he does. The three drink guy will say the line is a six pack. The six pack guy says nine. The nine beers guy says a half case. Half case says eighteen. Eighteen says full case. You get the picture. I see a parallel with a line that allows for 'some' stealing, but not malicious stealing. That line will just move with the person. I don't believe there is a person stealing software or music out there who will say "I cross the line!". It's always the next person on down the line that crosses it.

It's obvious to me that Flight is a kid, you can tell from the way he writes and his thought process. I'm not going to change his mind. He lives in a life of selfish entitlement. Yet I have spent time, actually loads of time typing out the problems that come with software and music theft. Do you know why?

Because as a working musician, I see software and music theft all the time, and I have seen its effects on people I know. This isn't a faceless entity getting ripped off. I know two bands who were signed to major label deals. Put yourself in their place. They were on top of the world, finally having a shot at the big time. They got to quit their jobs, record in LA and live as a touring act. They both had at least one song each that got national radio exposure. Due to lower than expected record sales, one band was let go after six months, the other band lasted a bit longer and I never found out if they were let go, or shelved in the end, but it was the end of each band respectively. Now my old band used to play a lot of parties as well as the local clubs. At the parties it was very common to have music going when the band wasn't playing. I didn't always go and look over the CD's that people brought, but on occasion I would be there when they were looking through CD cases or packs. Out of the roughly dozen times I saw one of the bands name on a CD, only once was it actually the real CD. The rest were burned copies. If this was happening at parties I played at, it was happening at parties I didn't play at. Can I say that people copying their CD's and not buying them sunk each band? Not with 100% certainty. But can you tell me it didn't? No. Do you think they would have had a better chance to retain a label deal if people hadn't copied their CD? I think so. How do you think they would have felt if, after returning back to their day jobs they had been at these parties and seen these CD's? I don't they they would have been real happy about it and I don't think they would regard the copying as "harmless".

What gets me, is that this site is largly frequented by musicians. One woulld think that everyone here would respect the amount of time, energy, and creative bloodletting that goes into every song someone makes. We should be supporting them, not stealing from them, and I lump in software developers as well. It's a different type of creativity, but it is creativity nonetheless, and in this instance, a type of creativity that allows us to record music at home that rivals studios to one degree or another. I don't make a differentiation as to whether someone makes money off of a stolen copy of something, it hurts people regardless. No one at the parties were making money as a DJ service, but their collection of burnt CD's may very well have hurt artists. And judging from the literally THOUSANDS (not an exaggeration) of burnt CD's I have seen at these parties, I can say that they are in no way 'helping' the artists.

We shouldn't punish people for being creative in an area that is put on a medium that is copyable. The car maker gets his money. The stereo maker gets his money. The musican/engineer has to rely on the honesty of people to get their money. A moveable line of morality does nothing to help them get their money. Wouldn't you agree Burden?

 

[Burden of Proof]

It is what it is

The musican/engineer has to rely on the honesty of people to get their money. A moveable line of morality does nothing to help them get their money.

Holy crap. I know I'm wordy, but I just had to delete about 7 big paragraphs of text because it's wholly unneccesary to respond with. I'll put it this way: I think my moral line is pretty stable and immobile, although I'll agree that for many that kind of line is as wishy-washy as the drunk's. The musician/engineer has always had to rely on honesty, it's just that worldwide distribution via internet has made it a lot easier for people to be dishonest. Please if anyone wants a fuller explaination/discussion, PM me and I've got a whole bunch of thoughts to share with you, regarding everything from my own personal shortcomings as compared to those of my social group to shifts in popular thinking and the subversion of the RIAA.

The only point I've been trying to make (regardless of MY OWN inability to properly express it) is that filesharing exists and you can't just take it back (like you can't take back nuclear science or the electric lightbulb), so the only direction to go from here is forward. You have to accept that software gets cracked, music gets ripped, and the internet distributes it to people of all kinds of moral values. The only hope we have now is to ensure that the moral values of the people receiving these resources are strong enough to tell them how to be responsible about what they're doing. There are arguments on both sides about the impacts of filesharing/distribution of copyrighted and cracked material. Really, they're all moot since it's going to happen no matter what the implications are, so I'll stop trying to defend the benefits of filesharing or argue against the potential destruction it causes; everyone can make up their own minds about that (and everything else for that matter).

To shift the discussion yet again, let's play pretends (well it's not really pretending) that there's no escape from a future where all music/software is available in a cracked form to all people on the internet. Then what becomes the solution? You have to accept that even if there's a large contingent of people with morals as strong as yours, that there's an equally large (if not larger) contingent of those with significantly weaker morals. How do we create an environment which is still healthy for the development of good artists/programmers/companies/etc? I don't claim to have the answer, but I think it's worth discussing, because I believe it's the truth of the future for better or worse.

-The Burden-

 

[Burden of Proof]

I can't believe I just read 19 pages of posts

I went back through and read every single post in this thread, and I just wanted to say a couple things.

first and most important, I sincerely thank the regular contributors to this thread for their patience in dealing with me, since in retrospect it is painfully obvious some of the re-hash in my statements that were abundantly addressed earlier in the thread. Without your patience I never would have gotten to say my piece, and I truly appreciate that.

second, that comment about the bigger thieves winning at $50/barrel makes a lot more sense now.

third, I'm glad that this thread was never forcibly killed. I learned a lot just by re-evaluating my own thoughts on the subject based on the input here. I've said before what a 'norm' filesharing is in my daily life - I guess I'm glad to see that even if I don't agree with it that there actually is a contingent of morally vindicated folks telling off the filesharers who don't even think about it. It's always good to have balance.

finally, since this thread has been dead since my last post, I guess we've about exhausted the topic (well, we'll see). I just think that we need to accept the current situation if we want to do anything good for the future, that's all. Hope everyone is doing well, and that they're enjoying the art of making home recordings, even if it's on the two-slit microphone of an orange plastic radio shack cassette tape recorder, like my first recordings were. Using the software is practically irrelevant. Remember that making music is about making music, not about having expensive toys to do it with.

I'm done. (good riddance)
-The Burden-