Piracy out of Control

As an old old pirate (to give you an idea how old a pirate I am my first PC was a Tandy Color Computer and I used Peter Norton's Sector Mod to hack early IBM PC software) it has been my experience that piracy does not impact profits as the people who pirate often can't purchase the software in any event or have any real interest in retaining it.

The following applies only to individuals, not the widespread piracy that occurs in corporations perfectly able to purchase legitimate software.

I can understand someone being irate thinking that every occurance of piracy equates to a lost sale, but that is simply not the case. Much pirated software is discarded, and in my case where pirated software proved truly useful it always resulted in my purchasing it. Software that had effective copy protection (remember when publishers burned marks on 5 1/4 floppies with a laser?) was simply discarded for software that mirrored the functionality but was more accessible. Also I found that most people were perfectly willing to purchase software that was both truly useful and reasonably priced. Too often software proved to be crap and the money effectively flushed.

The following only applies to truly useful top-of-class software, and I hope you appreciate the Catch-22. Publisher's price their software so high as to assure piracy, but were the software priced more affordably the rate of piracy would be lower.

It is truly a complex topic that most likely needs a PhD in economics to argue effectively. Naturally I am rationalizing my own actions, however I now purchase software or go without.

It's just a safer way to go nowadays.
 
RhythmRmixd said:
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.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. I've bought software directly from manufacturers that was shipped on a CD-R. It's particularly common in A/V software, where the cost of mass-stamping CDs is high, version turnover is fast, and your customers always want the latest. Just because it was a CD-R, that doesn't mean it wasn't legit.

In fact, I just checked, and my competitive upgrade copy of Digital Performer 4.0 came factory-fresh with a registration card from Musician's Friend (I think), and it shipped on a CD-R. No paper label, though. It was a silk-screened CD-R. That said, processes change, and it wouldn't surprise me if your original copy was legit... just defective.
 
xstatic said:
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.
Click to expand...

I don't see anyone trying to justify it. I see a bunch of people explaining the most likely motivations for it. There's a difference....

While I see the possible reasons (and admittedly, there are a few shareware plug-ins that I haven't found useful enough to actually pay for), I don't pirate software. When there's software I can't afford, I do the following, in the following order:

1. Look for free/open source alternatives.
2. Look for better prices.
3. Look for competitive upgrades.
4. Save up money to buy it if at all possible.
5. Write my own and make it available under the GPL (or port an existing open source or free software project).

Depending on the severity of the need and on how far it is out of my price range, I reserve the right to stop at any step along the way.

That said, I can definitely see the allure of pirated software, particularly for someone who is doing this stuff largely as a hobby. Paying hundreds of dollars for something you only use occasionally gets harder and harder to justify. Thus, I'm finding myself more and more often choosing #1 and #5....
 
NL5 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Exactly - if 'the wheel' had been subject to current intellectual copyright laws the car may never have been invented...
 
NL5 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Very true. Hollywood in general, and Disney in particular, along with the prostituting bastards laughingly refered to as 'senators' and 'representatives' are responsible for the latest perversion. If Mickey Mouse is still a money maker seventy years from now look for 'copyright' to be perverted still more.
 
NL5 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Very true. Hollywood in general, and Disney in particular, along with the prostituting bastards laughingly refered to as 'senators' and 'representatives' are responsible for the latest perversion. If Mickey Mouse is still a money maker seventy years from now look for 'copyright' law to be perverted still more.

During my tenure on this spitball I had the dubious pleasure of managing a software store. We actually sold software that the publisher KNEW did not work, in any way shape or form. Zero, nada, zilch. The publisher taking money from you for such crap was/is perfectly legal. You taking money from the publisher by pirating the software was not. While there are remedies for recovering your money from publishers that engage in this behavior (all products have 'implied warranties'), they are not economically viable for the overwhelming majority of purchasers, and thus effectively nonexistant. This economic inequity is not a reflection of some inate morality, but rather a reflection of the disparity bought by successful 'lobbying'.
 
downloading for use and download for sale is not the samething. If you bought a piarated CD-R then you got screwed by an organized prate ring. If you downloaded software from kazza for your own use thats not the same and it didnt contribute to you getting screwed. yes they are both illegal. but these are two different catagories.
 
Philosophy sucks

Heres my view the whole morals pertaining to the economic backlash of software piracy... As I surf the internet with an eye patch and parrot on my shoulder (whispering what software to get next)...

I see no problem with piracy***(see below). These companies need to stop pushing customers around with their prices and other bullshit. Piracy is a now a natural way of life keeping these manufacturers on their toes. If it weren't for us, you'd see a new release, upgrade, beta version or some junk every other day with a price tag rising exponentially! With a decent economic background, I can say we are just accelerating the pursuit for the supply/demand equilibrium. What we are doing is good for the economy! Forcing new solutions to be made opens new opportunities and better choices for consumers. This is more of a longterm view of the overall picture...

Short-term what is happening? Company exec's have to wait another 2 weeks for their golden toilets! Oh no! Drop in sales will just cause them to cut stupid expenses like their 50" flat panel plasma tv for video conferencing when their two rooms apart(I'm saying this from experience :eek: )! These companies already waste so much money on useless stuff! There are probably other consequences, but those consequences are an incentive. This change will be turbulent at first but in the end I believe will be for the better. Either way, its inevitable!

***However, I do draw the line at making a profit off this piracy. I do not make money of things I've been using, they are for personal enjoyment. If I were to professionally record I would much rather legal own the product.

I also totally agree with the try before you buy method, theres a damn good chance you won't get what your looking for. I see this as an investment, and as a business man I will take the necessary steps to ensure my investment can fulfill my expectations.

PS: I apologize if this post was interpreted with insulting tone! Check out my thread about a good mixer for computer recording! Thanks!
 
I think the 80% statistic in reflective of the pricing. Is it so expensive BECAUSE of the piracy or did they shoot themselves in the foot with high-pricing to begin with? I find it hard to believe that more man-hours of coding went into a music app than Win XP or Doom 3.
 
If you copied just one cassette tape back in those days then you deserve 7 years in the pen. Stealing is stealing. At least that’s how the whiners see it. If you whine about people that download software then tell me you have never copied a tape before in your entire life. If you have then you need to shut up you hypocrite.
 
my 2 cents

ok i am a kid as it says up above this post.
when i first got started in recording i was an idiot i purchased $300 that i had worked very hard to get the money for. and i was not even sure if it worked the right way on my computer, some of it was the idiot that sold it in the stores just wanted his money and did not care if it worked for me or not (but thats another story) any way i found that it did not work on my computer and also that i could not take it back for reasons we already talked about. so i had to get some other stuff and with all that money tied up in software i had no money for better gear so i ended up using some cheap stuff and then later on a cracked copy of cooledit pro which was no longer made any more. i never made any money on the cracked recordings, in fact most of them never even got saved...
i did learn a lot using cracked software that helped me make better recordings. so i also earned the money for a better computer as time went on and now i am using a iMac computer running a legal copy of cubase LE (which i am glad i did not shell out for a better copy of i still think that cubase sucks) and also a lite copy of Ableton live and REASON these all came with hardware that i got at other times. i have not got any cracked software any more and i will not have any of it. also i have looked at open source software and am waiting for the mac copy of such programs as ardour to release. ok now for recordings... i think that what is hurting the record people is that kids like me can also get into a real studio. and make a recording that people will like just as much as a high mass market product sold at wal-mart. i find that i like to know an artist maybe meet them after a show or something, unsigned bands you can most of the time. now i think that we will see more small bands showing up that are making a very nice recording in their own homes, selling it at their own shows and also selling their own Tshirts and what not. i think this will hurt the record biz more than piracy will. i cannot stand the way a record company will take some chick with a great body and no talent and make her into a singer. and then we also have male singers out there who cant even play guitar that well let alone write their own songs. chet atkins before he died had some choice things to say about this as well. i want to hear a CD of talented musicians making their own thing happen. the classic home recording band is "Better Off Dad" who did it all their own way and used other home recording musicians to help out with the sound, made a great CD! that is something i would like to see more of in the long run. movies are not something i want to talk about right now.
 
Codmate said:
Exactly - if 'the wheel' had been subject to current intellectual copyright laws the car may never have been invented...
Click to expand...

Exactly!!! Hmmmmm...maybe I will try and patent it! I would be RICH! :D
 
Well, I guess I am the only person that doesn't think that software is overpriced. I find $99 for an entry level version of Cubase to be fair. I also find $600 for the full version to be fair. Look at what it does for you and how powerful it all is. If you are a hobbiest recorder, than you don't need anything more than the basic software. If you are a professional, then you may want the full on deluxe version, but then again you are using it to make money and should be able to afford it.

I have seen plenty of justifications on this post and many others for stealing software. Not the least of which is the price of software. I just haven't seen a compelling and valid argument yet.
 
I'm on the side of the people who really don't care about pirated software that much, same with trading mp3's. to be honest, pirated software and illegal mp3's has made me spend more money than I would if neither existed. If I never downloaded mp3's back in 1999, I would probably be listening to the same garbage that I hear on the radio every day. Mp3's have opened me up to new artists and I've purchased many CD's and been to many gigs and shows that I wouldn't have gone to if it weren't for mp3's :0)

Pirated software, I completely agree with the fact that if people are using something, they definately should buy it. But when you're 15 years old, the only work you can get is mowing lawns and random stuff, then there's no money for software since whatever I earned back then was just enough for computer hardware. I'll be open about it, I've downloaded many cracked graphics programs, programming tools, video and sound editing applications. If it weren't for that,

1. I wouldn't be knowledgable about any of this stuff, thus I wouldn't have a single interest in audio software or hardware today if I never had a real chance to experiment and complete projects with fake copies before.

2. Some of you might think I'm being a big egoistic? here but I've generated brand loyalty because of pirated software, at work I've purchased Adobe Creative Suite, because I didn't like the corel stuff, pirated software is the only reason I know how to use illustrator, photoshop, and indesign. Same with video editing, I have purchased Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5, but before I had a cracked version. Adobe should be proud of me, I'm giving them free advertising, because once I finish a slew of music videos or a short movie that I put together, if anyone asks me how I do it, I immediately point fingers to adobe, they in turn will probably get pirated software but if they improve and eventually want to make a career/something serious out of it, then they will buy it.

3. I have all my strange songs on mp3 format on my website, and I've been averaging 0.8gb's of transfer upload a day, that means a crapload of people are downloading my mp3's. I know a lot of local bands lead by ignorant garage band guys who think their music is worth a lot, they don't offer mp3's, or any way for the listener to preview their music asides from live concerts (but who's going to pay to watch a band they don't know?). They fear that nobody will purchase their music if it's available for free.

Here is my approach, give people a reason to buy the CD. If some people are satisfied with low quality 128kbps mp3's, then let them be. But instead of offering a CD with just plain music I've been working hours and spending lots of time working on the CD artwork, I'm going to spend a few hundred dollars and print out stickers (kids love stickers, *free advertising* win, win) to include with the CD and also offer a "custom drawing" with ever purchase. Spend like 5 minutes drawing a detailed cartoon or something to put in it. The Fans are tired of these greedy bands that think they're polished and perfect. Music is about sharing and letting the fans be a part of you, and once they become that then it's win win for both of everyone, more business, more joy, more everything, my poorly written opinion applies to all aspects of life, not just mp3s and software, but everything.

*plus* I agree with the guy above, I'm glad that that software vendors have affordable versions of software for people that don't have the money for all the features they won't need to begin with anyways.
 
I bought my software because it was the cheapest, most efficient I could afford. Adobe Audition 1.0. I plan on buying the upgrade as soon as $ permits.

I own 1 pirated plug in only because I feel that it's not worth the amount of money the company is charging. Everything else I earned.

Company's are still making plenty of money to stay in business. I'll start siding with the big labels and bands that bitch when one of them goes broke because of pirates. RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
 
If software companies were to find that magic anti-copy protection that no one could copy or install it on more than one pc or crack it, I dont think their profits will increase. I think they will actually spiral down cause there will be less people using them. I'm talking about the expensive software. Then they would try to find some reason to blame endusers. And they would have to lower theres prices any. So they would not win in keeping prices high. what goes up must come down. weather they willing or forced.
 
Rationalizations, rationalizations, rationalizations.

What I've heard here is a disturbing sense of entitlement.

The bottom line is, you have no right to pirate the software. It is someone's work, the work of people who want to and deserve to make a living from their efforts.

No one owes you the right to use their software. No one owes you to price their software according to what *you* think it's worth.

If you find it useful, and worth the price use it. If you don't, find another solution or write your own.

I understand the rationalizations to priate software, but they are just that: rationalizations. If you pirate the software, at least grow a set and admit that it is theft and not your right.

My $0.02.
 
fraserhutch said:
Rationalizations, rationalizations, rationalizations.

What I've heard here is a disturbing sense of entitlement.

The bottom line is, you have no right to pirate the software. It is someone's work, the work of people who want to and deserve to make a living from their efforts.

No one owes you the right to use their software. No one owes you to price their software according to what *you* think it's worth.

If you find it useful, and worth the price use it. If you don't, find another solution or write your own.

I understand the rationalizations to priate software, but they are just that: rationalizations. If you pirate the software, at least grow a set and admit that it is theft and not your right.

My $0.02.
Click to expand...

When you use the western diatonic scale do you pay copyright to the people that came up with it?

If not - I think you should 'grow a set' and admit that it is theft and not your right to use the efforts of others to your own advantage...

Software is similar to music in that it is made up of many component parts.

Virtually every program written in C starts with the line:
#include <stdio.h>

If the stdio header was copyrighted and the writers charged for every usage then NOBODY would use C.
Likewise, Perl is an incredibly popular language, in part due to cpan - (http://www.cpan.org/) a library of FREE modules.

I guarentee you that a piece of software like Cubase uses many of these resources. The skill lies in putting them together, writing the plumbing, designing the GUI etc etc. However, this doesn't change the fact that much of the code is re-cycled from somewhere else.

So, are Steinberg 'stealing' people's code and selling it to us? Of course not - as I said there is great skill involved in the design and coding of a large application like Cubase and they should be rewarded for their efforts.

However - the measure of the reward should not be endless. Copyright runs out for a reason. It is useful to human society that 'good ideas' are not owned by anybody and are the property of all. Why re-invent the wheel when it's perfectly good as it is?

The primary reason open source software has achieved more in ten years than Microsoft achieved in twenty is down to the free and open nature of its development.

IMO intellectual copyright laws should free software automatically after five years. I think that's a reasonable period of time for a developer to recoup their expenses and make a tidy profit. After then the source code should be open and we can all reap the benefits of better software as a result.

I've said in another post why I think that downloading software is basically wrong (and I think the reasoning is important) - but claiming that it's equal to theft is just a falacy. If somebody copies something they have not stolen anything - theft requires the transfer of an item, not its cloning. You may think this is pedantry, but it's an important issue that needs to be thought about in an era where cloning and distruibution of intellectal property is so easy and widespread.

I'm not saying it isn't as morally wrong as theft - although it doesn't strike me as having such directly disadvantagous consequences. It is important to consider it as being something different though.

Rather than coming up with ever more unweildy and unenforcable laws we should be contemplating the nature of intellectual property, why it exists, what the owner(s) should expect to get from their efforts and how ideas can be used to best benefit by society as a whole.

I would like to see many different ways of paying for copyrighted software for instance.

How about a system whereby the software doesn't even live on your machine. It runs on a central server and you pay per minute to use the latest version?

There are many ways to work this out - it just requires a re-think of outdated concepts...
 
I'm not so shocked or dissapointed by that figure. Take this for example:

You're a home recording guy like most of us, and with a limited budget. I have either the chance to download something illegally, or not have the program at all. It's never a download-vs-buy thing with me, since there will be no buying what-so-ever, untill I am seriously in bussiness. And when that moment comes, I will have the money and the means to buy all the software I want/need.
If you look at it that way, there's really not that big a loss for the companies that make the software. The only real loss is from those people that would have bought the software if it was not available illegally, and I really don't know many people like that (all the studio's I know have 100% legal software).

Also: why did Steinberg release Cubase 3 a while ago if they were doing so badly? Why did Adobe buy Cool Edit? Why is native instruments still releasing new pluigns? Why is Waves still releasing new plugs? Just to name a few. If they were really doing that badly, they'd be forced to stop.
 
I've heard of something like pay per use software. you pay for a year of use. like virus updates. I thought I read some where that Microsoft in the future will have an annual fee for its operating system. Still, Steinberg has my 500+ buck for the Cubase I purchased. I used a cracked version before I even bought it. I never would have bought it if I hadn’t used it prior to buying it. I never would have even thought of buying a small mixer or a pair of monitors if I hadn’t used Cubase. Now I want and I’m saving for a new PC cause I already took mine beyond it’s capability. Not only did Steinberg benefit from the cracked version I used but so did other companies that I bought hardware from because I wanted better stuff to record with. Knowing how to use Cubase inspired me to buy more stuff to record with.

But still I didn’t steal it. Some friendly chick on kazza let me download it from her heard drive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top