Posted on 07/08/2004 4:58:29 PM PDT by Golden Eagle
Got anything contrary to offer, other than opinion?
Walking the plank and all that, I suppose.
Of course, these type of scare-mongering articles never address one very important fact:
The vast majority of people who violate copyright would not use these software packages at all if they couldn't get them for no cost.
So, the bottom line is that these companies have not incurred any real loss.
This tactic of howling that you've been robbed is an exact match to the kind of whining that Democrats always make when their pet programs don't get the funding increases they want. Some how, in their minds, it's a cut in the program.
As a Open Source advocate, I fully endorse any methods that closed-source software publishers wish to use that prevent unauthorized use.
Those who can't use a pirated copy of Windows or Office, and I mean can't due to DRM or some such not just a waggling finger and some whining, will gladly use a truly free and open solution.
Oh, and one more thing, before the screaming starts in:
Copyright violations are not, NOT, theft. Theft implies that the rightful owner has had something removed from him. If someone steals your car you don't have it anymore. That's theft.
When someone makes a copy of your software, you still have it. They have an unauthorized copy, but it's not theft.
And no, it's not a property right. Copyright is a government provided and enforced limited monopoly granted to the creator of a work. It's NOT a right, it's a limited privilege.
Yes I do, but this dangnabbit copy of Excell won't let me open the spreadsheet.
Got any proof of any of that, or is this just your way of saying software theft is A-OK?
Wow, it only took till post 5 before the "It's all Microsoft's fault" posts showed up.
Obviously you can't read for comprehension.
Besides, where are the numbers that show that any of these "thieves" would buy the software if they couldn't get it for nothing?
Care to produce those for us, or are you going to continue to cast aspersions without proof?
And another part of it is that after said limited time, the work goes into the public domain.
How, precisely, are DRM controlled products to be available to the public domain once the copyright expires?
Or copy-protected disks? Or serial-number, auto-deactivating products? Or proprietary file formats?
Seems like some companies have already conspired to violate the terms of the limited privledge they've been granted. If they won't hold up their end, why should the public be bound to a broken agreement?
I don't either; they're probably much worse. Travel to any country outside of North America, Western Europe, or Japan, and you will find pirated software readily available at any street corner bazaar, dirt cheap. More often than not it works just find (not that I know this from personal experience or anything, but I digress. You can't stop it and it's BIG business.
There are none, just like there are none saying not one of them would be willing to buy it as you implied.
Care to produce those for us, or are you going to continue to cast aspersions without proof?
My only assertion is that software is being pirated, and it hurts our economy in many ways. The figures of how much it is may vary, but these are considered the most reliable, at least to my understanding.
The real bottom line is something needs to be done about it, not statements rationalizing it as a victimless crime.
Good way of looking at it.
So then I suppose you would support allowing intellectual property owners to create trojan horses that destroy the computers of people who download illegally?
Sure.
After all, treating your customers like theives and destroying their property has always been the path to success, right?
With friends like you, closed-source software doesn't need me to speak against it.
These are inflated numbers sponsored by the number one growing loser in software... your buddies in redmond.
These numbers are lies, used to gain legislative sympathy and tax breaks for non existant "thefts" via means that are virtually non existant.
LIES LIES AND MORE LIES, JUST like the RIAA lies.
Won't fly.
The jig is forever up.
Just like the "linux is communist" propaganda.
Willie the G, is very sad.
Did I take a wrong turn somewhere? Open Source advocate? My company loses some of those billions in revenue and we don't like it.
Meaning, all this whining is for nothing.
My only assertion is that software is being pirated,
Only it isn't, unless you can produce a witness that can testify that their software was taken from them on the high seas.
The figures of how much it is may vary, but these are considered the most reliable, at least to my understanding.
well then you don't understand much, but I think we had already established that. So, if therer aren't any figures either way, how can those non-existent figures "vary" as you claim they do?
How about this. Without evidence of loss, there isn't a crime. You are yelling that there's been a crime, but can't produce any evidence. Until you do, it's not just a victimless crime, it's not a crime at all, even if it was theft, which it isn't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.