Slashdot Mirror
Adobe Considers Withdrawing from Asian Markets
Max Groff writes "This brief ZDNet article (printer-friendly version) describes how Adobe is considering leaving its Asian markets due to the apparently high levels of piracy across the Pacific. This change would not only cut off the marketing of Adobe products to Asian markets, but also halt the development of much of the company's Asian-language software."
Take your ball home; might open some eyes. But I'm sure that somebody else would step in to produce the right software, and Asia can be a BIG market.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
A professor at a local US University handed our help desk a CD labeled "Adobe & Macromedia's Greatest Hits, Vol. II"
She wanted us to install Photoshop and Dreamweaver off the disk. The help deskers explained how it was a pirated copy, and how her dept. could legally purchase the software for significant discount for educational purposes. She protested, saying it was legit because she'd paid 5 dollars for it on her travels in Malaysia.
Yes, ok. So now I can't legally buy it, and I used to.
If I want it, I *HAVE* to pirate it!?
Sounds like a great idea adobe.....
i hate pansy republicans
... of course that they will still have Adobe's products.
Photoshop 4.0 works just as good as 6.0.
Get your Unix fortune now!
Korean version was produced (or planned) provided that a korean company would help in creating version plus guarantee certain number of sold copies; apparently (south-)Korea has similar problems but situation is perhaps not quite as bad.
The English versions will just be pirated over IRC, etc. There are little windows tools to turn the English in programs into Chinese (or any other language). So withdrawing from the market will not really kill priacy. It is only worth withdrawing if your not making money (obviously).
If nothing else, even domestic users who need to work with Asian-language materials should assure that. Adobe's main products are high-end, and in the case of programs like InDesign, are sold into markets where international audiences are common. I can only imagine that removing Asian language support would hand back any marketshare they have managed to take from Quark, despite the convenience of a basically all-Adobe publishing workflow.
I get the feeling that Adobe is not just doing this for financial reasons, but also to punish the area by not providing Asian versions of it software. It's too bad that they're going to stop development of Asian language versions, but if punishment is their goal, somehow I think that it will have little effect, and may even backfire.
The thing is that while their programs set the standard here in the US and many companies now depend on their products, the same is not true in Asia, where Linux is actually being adopted quite rapidly, especially now with Windows XP having copy protection in place (although that hasn't stopped many hacked versions from being produced). This may in fact be a big boon to the Linux industry as more and more users may come to find more full fledged Linux graphics solutions (GIMP is getting there).
"The only normal people are the ones you don't know very well."
I do not advoate software piracy. I've been weaning myself off of illigitimately copied programs for several years now, and encourage friends to also not use pirated materials.
That said, I believe that the equivalent dollar cost in pirated products is highly mis-leading. People who pirate software wouldn't buy the programs if they lost access to it. They would just do without.
Chizen said in the article that it can cost up to $750,000 to produce a Chinese-language version of a product, and extensive piracy makes it difficult for Adobe to recoup those costs.
That said, I can appreciate theirt reasons for leaving. If they spend $750k to produce the Asian version, and don't sell sufficient copies to recoup costs and profit, then they should leave. My understanding is that most companies require a 15% return-on-investment from a product, or they shut it down.
ShoutingMan.com
yea, scroll down and read something more interesting
-shpoffo
Yes, it's justifiable to pay $600 for a flimsy cardboard box and a plastic CD.
If you make $600 with said flimsy cardboard box and plastic CD, I think the product has paid for itself.
Justification's from Adobe's view? If the $600 price funds the development of the next version of Photoshop and keeps employees and the company afloat, that's justification.
Can anybody possibly justify taking property that doesn't belong to you?
GPL Deconstructed
I've been waiting to see when M$ would launch an all-out assault on Adobe and Macromedia, with their own graphics and video editing software apps.
Maybe this will be the opportunity they've been waiting for...
Of course, M$ suffers from massive piracy in Asia too.
"Apparently" high piracy? You're talking about a market in which people do not generally realize that software exists in shrinkwrapped form. I have talked to people that literally were not aware of shrinkwrapped software before coming to America. Most software is purchased in the form of $5 CDs containing EVERY SINGLE PROGRAM EVER MADE by a particular company.
;-).
I should know; I have a copy of just such a CD full of Adobe software
ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
Nah...what's REALLY happening is that their Asian languages translator(s) quit, and they can't find a new one in time for their next release :)
It's so much easier to just forget about a substantial portion of the world, you know?
It'll certainly prevent them from pirating the localized Chinese (etc) versions. If it costs Adobe more to translate, test, distribute, etc. their localized products than they make by doing it, then they'll have to leave that business. Not good for people that don't speak English. (Or another Western language.)
Indeed, i am absolutly sure that Adobe will give up on half the world's population (Asia) containing the only big market that's still growing at 7.8% (5 times the european rate) a year (China).
Yes, i can just see how incredibly briliant that market strategy is!!!
I see a lot of posts here saying that this will not stop piracy of the Adobe's products, because it will eliminate the only legal way to obtain the software, so people will be forced to pirate it. Adobe knows that, but that's not the point. The point is that Adobe is actually spending money to support the Asian money, and that money is wasted.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
It doesn't hurt them at all to have English language versions pirated in Asia, in fact they probably prefer that to having their competitor's products pirated.
But if it costs $650,000 to produce an Asian languages version of their products (a number I can easily believe, having done localizations of much smaller products), and they don't recoup that cost, there's no point in doing it.
This is news?
I've been waiting to see when they'd do it. Adobe and Macromedia are some of the only major producers of desktop apps that M$ hasn't yet gone after.
This may be the moment Bill's been waiting for. Of course, he has his own piracy troubles in Asian markets...
However, I don't think this will hurt the pirates. Anyone willing to go to the lengths necessary to acquire the software and circumvent anti-piracy measures (serial numbers, dongles, etc.) is probably willing to put up with English menus. Photoshop and Illustrator aren't exactly language intensive applications -- they're intuitive graphics apps.
The people who will really suffer are the people who do pay for asian versions of Adobe's software (businesses, schools, etc.) and the employees who work on those versions at Adobe. If you're an internationalization guru who got laid off because international piracy is just too rampant, you're in trouble.
Look, for 15 years US software houses have been charging nearly ten times as much money as they should for their applications. Our original AMX Pagemaker desktop publishing software launched in 1985 for the BBC Microcomputer sold for £40 (about $65), which was just within the budget of most people who needed it. Today your typical application or application suite is $300-$500. And then, you have to constanly pay to upgrade. And I'm a Mac user, so I now have to 'upgrade' all my apps from OS 9 to OS X which will cost thousands. What makes all this far more serious is the complete niavity of American business culture to the reality that the rest of the world (and I include the UK in this) have MUCH less money. To a Brit, spending £50 ($80 approximately) is equiv to a middle class American spending about £250 ($350). For those who do not believe me, if you're a Brit, go live in the US for a few years. If you're an American, come live here. So, in Asia, where the standard of living outside of wealthy communities is even lower than the rest of the Western world, the situation is even worse! Price it right, and people will PAY for it. People want their original user guide, colour CD insert etc. We did it! We created http://www.onumber.net at just £14.95 (about $23) a pop for 5 years, feature upgrades included. It's on the net, so why should we screw people for more? A little more global understanding and increase use of ASP business model, and mass software piracy will be a thing of the past.
O'WONDERWe're working on it.
That's like selling what, 10 copies of photoshop? ;)
-- Dan
It is my understanding that a lot of Asian country citizens are bi-lingual(sp?) They often take english as a second language so I'm not sure how this will stop piracy. If they speak english and you stop selling your software there, then they will just download and burn the english version. Right?
Uhm.. sounds like Adobe has abandoned the goal of stoping or even slowing down piracy in Asia.. all they are saying is "We will no longer fund the development of Asian language applications, because you guys just pirate them anyways".. they could care less if their stuff is pirated after they leave.. it's not their market anymore.. they aren't taking financial hits to make software that doesn't get purchased..
I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!
It's not that pirates wouldn't buy the software, it's that some pirates wouldn't buy the software, some pirates couldn't buy the software, and some pirates would have to buy the software.
The question is how to separate all of them enough to target the payers, and get them to pay.
People who do without aren't interesting to this equation or argument. It's the people who make money with the product, and people who need the product, that should be targetted.
In a very fair market way, if there isn't enough pirates who can pay, if they had to, to support the product, the product should go away. If there is enough pirates who can pay, then they can afford to sell, as long as they can convince the pirates to pay.
The question is how lack of an Asian version of the product will affect the market. Will Chinese users, for example, start to use English or Japanese versions? Older versions? Does this mean that Chinese OS X users will be, literally, up the creek?
GPL Deconstructed
They'll just come out with a translation "patch". With native OS support in Windows 2000 for Asian languages, all you really have to do is to load the Adobe binaries into a resource editor and replace the strings.
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
...for Photoshop, or $100 for Acrobat, or other outrageous prices for desktop software, maybe people wouldn't pirate it as much. Most buyers of pirated software over in Asia are normal Joes, who just want to do some photo work on a picture of his cat.
Why spend $200 on something like that? It's ridiculous, especially when something like The GIMP is free. If a powerful program like the GIMP is free, shouldn't Photoshop be closer to it?
Remember: only poor people pirate software.
Zodiac Survey
Despite the whining from the (lets not mince words here) pro-piracy segment of the slashdot readership, this sounds like a perfectly sound business decision.
Face facts people, corporations are not charities. If they can't get a Return On Investment, they need to invest money elsewhere. Nor will any other business simply step in, because they're not going to get any ROI either. This has already elminated entire markets. The Hong Kong movie business is basically dead because piracy is so culturally acceptable in China.
These companies are crying babies. Come on, ain't they the proponent of free market? Don't they understand the market supply and demand?
They priced their product out of reach of 99% of the population, and they now complain about people not buying it. People can get creative, if they don't have the means to buy it. One copy of their software costs more than the income of a whole family for more than 80% of the population in China. Imagine you are US consumer, and your whole family earns $60K/year, and a copy (a license for a single user!) of Photoshop costs $80K. And imagine you get a chance to buy it at $100 on the black market. Go figure.
Maybe Adobe should be more creative in pricing too, if they want to get into this kind of market? Otherwise, don't fucking complain, and stick to the US/EU markets.
Open Source, while it's a great thing, really isn't enough of an answer. There are no OS equals to programs like Photoshop, Media 100, Oracle. (Yes, Virginia, I know about GIMP and PostgreSQL.)
Copy protection isn't the answer, either. Fair use, monopolistic control, hell, you all know the arguments.
Lassiez-faire isn't the answer, either. Given the option to purchase something or steal it without risk of repercussion, far too many people will do the latter. Adobe deserves revenue for their efforts, and they're apparently suffering enough in Asia that they're considering dropping the whole thing. Say whatever you will about the quality of their work beyond version whichever-you-love-most, but is this the norm you want to see developing with -other- companies?
What do you see as the middle ground?
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Your comparing two very different things. People don't need Photoshop to edit images, hell most people couldn't make use of most of the features even if the package was free. Photoshop and applications in its price range (and higher) are priced based on the work that went into them and the value of what comes out. If someone can use Photoshop to make an image for an advertising champain that they get payed thousands of dollars for then the 600$ price tag of Photoshop is well worth it. Having people bitch that they cant afford Photoshop to edit pictures of their grand kids is just dumb. There are lower end packages that cost less then 50$ which will serve their purposes just fine.
Bottom line, if you think the software costs too much then you don't really need it. Go use something else, be it Gimp or Adobe Image Effects. Dont bitch and moan about the cost of Photoshop and don't condone the piracy of the software.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Cool, if I'm ever pulled over by a cop and have a happen to have some marijuana or hashish on me, I'll just tell him I bought it in Amsterdam since it's legal there and I paid for it fair and square.
That should keep me out of jail.
For Photoshop maybe, but for some other products (InDesign etc) the support for localized versions has to go beyond just translating the menu texts and help files.
In many cases support for multi-byte character sets needs additional work (since apps were developed before standards like Unicode); the text flow may go from right to left (and/or from down to up), and the input methods may be platform dependant.
That is, english version might not have all the required feature for even inputting stuff, and will be useless. For some software this is not an issue, for many it is.
I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
I don't think Adobe expects to curb piracy at all. But that's not really their goal -- their goal is to spend their R&D money in a way that they can get the most bang for their buck.
If they have to spend $750,000 to develop a Chinese language version of Photoshop, which only sells a thousand legitimate copies (at $600/each), they've just lost money. They'd be better off putting their $750,000 in a savings account (except maybe a BofA savings account, which would charge them a $300K "We gotta count your money" fee) and selling only a hundred copies of their English language version in China.
What's tougher to determine is if, by not creating a Chinese version, they're hurting themselves in the long-term. Let's say they don't develop a Chinese version of Photoshop. Somebody like JASC could develop a Chinese version of Paint Shop Pro and gain a large following in China. Then, if we assume that at some point in the future, the Chinese market is profitable, Adobe might be in trouble. Everybody in China will be used to using Paint Shop Pro, and might not bother swapping over to Photoshop.
It's a question of determining when it'll be profitable to spend money developing Chinese language versions of software, and deciding just how much the Chinese care about getting a native language version of their software.
"Do you expect me to talk?" "No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!"
Anyways, I doubt they'll discontinue the print drivers. Just a few non-profitable apps.
They aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about their profit margins. If they only make $X in the asian market and it cost only slightly less than $X to produce the asian version of thier product, it doesn't matter to them why $X isn't more, wether it's beacuase of piracy or the phase of the moon. If a market isn't yeilding good returns, it's in their best interest to give it up and focus on better markets.
"Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
A more complete version of this article was released four days ago by C|Net. The decision only seems to effect the Chinese language versions.
my blog
Perhaps commercial software just isn't the right model for the rest of the known universe.
:)
It'll take more than hardware DRM to shut down that distribution network, I promise you...
...so why not free software? Emergin' Market nation-states could finance GPLed code development/I18N as a means of pushing their economic interests forward.
They're already used to $5 software, dammit! This market is perfect for us!
- undoware.ca
What would you lower the price to? What price-point would maximize profitability? What does the supply/demand curve for Photoshop look like?
For Photoshop Elements.
What do you say to that?
Adobe has every right to charge whatever they want.
Consumers have every right to *not* buy something more expensive.
Consumers don't have the right to pirate, just as Adobe doesn't have the right to take the bits from your bank account.
GPL Deconstructed
I think in all seriousness it'd be cheaper for people in Asian markets to just learn english than pay $600.
Sure-- you are not paying for the plastic CD and the card-board box. You are paying for the man-hours of development time that the product required. You are paying the developers saleries.
In the proprietary software industry, the only way you can lower your prices and still maintain profitability is to make up for it in volume sales, and this is not one thing that a high-end photo-editor can do, so you are stuck charging $600 for the right to run the software.
THe answer to this problem is not piracy, but rather open source. Don't use Photoshop, use the GIMP instead. Open Source software also benefits from economy-of-scale, and this is a great way to help make the software more competitive. The reason is that if you base your process on the use of pirated software, you are dependent on that software, and that places you at the mercy of the manufacturer that does not care about your reaction because you are not bringing them money.
So Adobe really does not have much of a choice-- this is an area that they simply cannot compete without throwing lots of money away without any real effect. (Note: Most people pirate the most common products in their categories-- when was the last time you heard of someone selling pirated copies of Solaris for the x86?) However, this is still a problem for Adobe because other products could move in on their market-share by exploiting piracy as an advertizing method esp. if Adobe were to require product activation ala Microsoft. (Piracy blocks competition.)
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
I am a programmer. I do it for a living. I make a living because people can't just take what I make and sell it without my knowledge, without paying me. These people make a mockery out of my livelyhood.
.sg, .my or .cn ISPs.
We care about companies breaching GPL-licenses, and we should care about these people breaching the commercial software world's licences.
Asia will never get a software industry of their own if they continue this way, and will be doomed to producing cut-throat priced commodity hardware for the rest of the world.
I hope Adobe makes it real hard to use their programs on computers where the clock is set to Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur or Beijing time, or the internet connection reveals they are connected to
If they can't pay for commercial saftware, they'll just have to settle for GPL'ed alternatives!!!
By pulling Chinese support, aren't they doing exactly that? Sticking to the US/EU markets?
Photoshop's price point isn't targetted to consumers, at $600. Photoshop elements, at $89, is targetted towards consumers.
They do understand supply and demand. They supply Photoshop at $600, and the demand doesn't exist for the product. Therefore they exit the market, since it can't support them.
GPL Deconstructed
If Adobe were to pull out, some Asian competitor (or, gasp, free software) would fill their market niche, at a lower cost and probably higher quality. And those Asian competitors would have a much easier time delivering English-language versions than the other way around.
Adobe won't pull out. They are just saber rattling. Pulling out would be foolish. They'd rather give their software away than let some other company take over their market niche.
Only $89! Over 9x cheaper than Photoshop :P
GPL Deconstructed
Then how are we supposed to be able to buy or download cheap pirated versions of adobe software in the US??
I have known Chinese (in China) who own little more than 2 white shirts, a pair of pants, and a bicycle.
However, they may use a computer at work to do personal jobs. They may run software on a computer at work that costs, in the U.S., more than their entire net worth.
This is not lost profit for companies like Adobe. It is free advertising and free trademark promotion.
No amount of law-making or law enforcement will make these people pay hundreds of U.S. dollars for Adobe Photoshop. However, advertise that you need someone who knows how to use Photoshop, and hundreds will apply. Is this a bad thing?
People in the U.S. get little accurate news of other countries. They often unconsciously make the assumption that other people are as rich as they are.
U.S. Senator Biden, who is an intelligent and educated man, and who is the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, doesn't even pronounce the words correctly, yet he talks of changing (my article, see the Biden interview) the Saudi government and controlling the development of the government of Afghanistan. If Senator Biden is like this, make a guess about the knowledge of other countries of the average Adobe executive.
Adobe executives should not consider that every pirated copy is a personal attack on Adobe profitability. There are many social situations that require more social sophistication than that.
Bush's education improvements were
Yes, it's justifiable to pay $600 for a flimsy cardboard box and a plastic CD.
If you make $600 with said flimsy cardboard box and plastic CD, I think the product has paid for itself.
Justification's from Adobe's view? If the $600 price funds the development of the next version of Photoshop and keeps employees and the company afloat, that's justification.
Can anybody possibly justify taking property that doesn't belong to you?
That's the problem, isn't it?
If everyone, or even enough people, believed in 'taking' what they wanted, rather than through peaceful exchange, you get a much more brutal and hostile world.
GPL Deconstructed
Almost any piece of software with a business market will COMPLETELY IGNORE the broke average Joe. You tell me one person who is willing to pay $600 for a copy of Photoshop, who is not doing it for business work. They will pirate a copy of it EVERY TIME.
Now, I'll admit that GIMP is not quite as good as Photoshop, but it's good enough. Having a $600 gap between The GIMP and Photoshop for a little bit of difference is not right at all.
True that piracy is illegal and they don't "have the right" to pirate software, but piracy is a form of protest. People protest high software prices through illegal piracy, just like blacks protest segregation by illegally sitting on the front of the bus. Most people may do it for more practical reasons than political (like "should I pay rent with $600 or buy a fucking piece of software?"), but it still acheives the same effect.
If only the software companies wouldn't be so blind to why they are doing this...
Zodiac Survey
I am amazed that this off-topic screed got moderated up in the first place. If I hadn't used my last mod point this morning....
You know, I could say the same thing about... your blood, or your life, or your shoes.
GPL Deconstructed
As I said in an earlier message (which is playing hard to find), I knew someone from India living in the United States. He made minimum wage to make his way though college. His father was one of the top engineers in an Indian company. Guess who had the higher salary? My friend, not his father.
A $15,000 yearly salary in other countries is enough to make one live like a king. In India (I've been told; perhaps someone can comment), a $15,000 U.S.-equivalent salary is enough to have a personal cook prepare your lunch, and a personal servant bring it to your workplace.
$15,000 may seem like a lot to many students, but there are countries out there where people make $1.50 an hour or less. Companies make items abroad where it is cheaper yet attempt to sell said items abroad in the same countries at U.S. pricing.
Personally, I'm predicting a severe devaluation in the U.S. dollar to come sometime within the next century or so; one cannot price an item at price A in country X and price B in Y without a third party Z coming along and moving the item from A to B at a lower cost. Given that most other currencies are worth less than the United States', the dollar likely will be devalued as we start kicking and screaming and wondering why.
How dare they not pay for software like Photoshop, especially when it's at the eminently reasonable price of $600! The nerve!
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
> I am under the impression that English-language versions will just be pirated instead of the localized Chinese/Korean/whatever versions.
And this impacts Adobe's bottom line... how?
Frankly, I think Adobe's doing the right thing here -- if sales don't justify the cost of porting/localizing, don't port/localize.
Adobe's recognized that they don't have the right to force people to buy their products -- they've merely stated that, in response, nobody has the right to force Adobe to write the products in the first place.
If you want Asian-language Adobe products, support those who create them by purchasing them. I applaud Adobe for being honest enough to pick up its bat and ball and go home.
Contrast that with RIAA's hining about how "If we allow people to copy Titney Spheres CDs, she won't make any more music" -- I dare Hilary Rosen to make good on that threat.
(Of course, every time I turn on the radio, I pray Ms. Rosen makes good on that threat ;-)
The only problem with this argument is that .pdf isn't a proprietary format. It's true that most people who use it read and write .pdf using Adobe's products, but they are not by any means the only programs out there that use .pdf. On my Linux box, for instance, I read .pdf using xpdf and write it by printing to a .ps file and using ps2pdf. IIRC, OSX now uses display pdf, so it has pdf creation and interpreting abilities built in to the core of the OS. This is possible precisely because .pdf is not a proprietary format. It's well enough defined that other programmers can create software that reads and writes it perfectly.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
What, they're not profitable?
You mean they're not enjoying having a huge marketshare and no competition because software piracy gives them all the benefits of "dumping" without any fingers of blame to point at the company?
They're just a bunch of whiners trying to justify a clampdown on our rights to their paid lackeys in the government.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
There stillis a legal way - use the American verion of the apps.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
On Pirating software:
.nib files then all that is needed is to change some strings since OS X supports nearly all language formats.
I myself pirate some software titles. Yet even I can see that this article is not about Adobe trying to stop piracy. Adobe's products are aimed towards businesses and professionals, not home users. I personally dont think they expect a home user to pay the $600 for the software. In fact they probably dont mind piracy by the home user because it would extends their user base. However I do think they expect someone who makes money from the software to pay it. The artists are the people who Adobe makes photoshop for. If you are an artist who has the cash it is probably in your best interest to pay for the software. Adobes continued existance would be a good thing for them.
On the discontinuation of asian localization:
Adobe is losing money when they localize the software. If they continued to localize while losing money it would go against all business logic. does 2+2=5? Also Asians can localize the software themselves. If some korean was using OS X and an adobe app used
how does Adobe afford the production costs
Release the non-trade-secret parts of the application as free software. That'll help a bit. Splitting the most proprietary parts into modules priced at $49.95 a piece might help further.
and the support costs
"No support except to registered users." That's one of the proposed models for making money off open source.
and the bandwidth costs
If they can get their install down to 10 megabytes (perhaps by not including all that d*rn clip-art), bandwidth becomes relatively cheap.
if they don't make any money on top of the distribution costs?
For downloadable software, bandwidth costs == distribution costs.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The funny thing is is that Bill does not care, Balmer even said that they don't really mind it becouse they are using MS software, now in 3 or 5 years when Asia has a better market going on eveyone will know how to use MS software and the big corps don't want to be bothered so they will fork over the money.
hmm... for fun I enjoy launching DDoS attacks against 127.87.42.5
And yes... people are up to the task of translating entire applications. There is a flourishing underground market in asia for subtitling un-released movies and translating video games. As a matter of fact, for most billingual people, it would probably be only one or two days work to translate every menu in photoshop if all they had to do was edit strings in a DLL.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
The Acrobat format is not proprietary. I have the entire spec in a binder right here. I downloaded it from Adobe and printed it freely, then used it to create code that writes PDF files.
.ps files. But I can't see spending much time decoding a paragraph that contains the phrase donkey jiz in it.
I have written web based programs that generate PDF without using any Adobe code. (When you need to be in control of the exact layout and 75dpi is not good enough, it is a great choice.)
TeX is happy to make PDF files. My Mac is happy to write anything I wish out as a PDF file instead of printing. In linux I have a little program to convert postscript to pdf. No Adobe software required on those systems.
I do tend to use Acrobat Reader for reading them, but I also use xpdf (launches much faster under linux) and, under OS X, Preview to read them.
I don't even understand that part about scanned documents and
It is possible that there is another format that provides precise display at high resolution in an easily navigable, on demand downloadable format, but I haven't heard of it. Long live PDF.
Why should I price software that I create at anything other than the price that I want. If you can't afford it, then tough, don't use it. Photoshop, Pagemaker, Framemaker, etc are not needed to sustain human life. People don't die because they don't have them. Newspapers can still use other means to create their publications.
There are plenty of other free or cheaper products out there that will remove red eye from your pictures of the kids. If you need more than those programs will provide, then BUY it! Nobody has a god given right to software. We've already given the rest of the world blue jeans and knight rider episodes, why should we be expected to give you photoshop as well?
Over 2000 years of contract laws and beliefs go out the window then.
Do I have the right to take your shoes?
GPL Deconstructed
I mean, come on, pirates can't get on a plane?
sulli
RTFJ.
Anyone have any idea how much these products are in China? I mean, China has a per capital GDP of $3600 (see here), vs. $36,200 in the USA (see here), so if Photoshop costs $600 there, that would cost 2 months of salary, equivalent to at least $6000 here, in addition to the fact that they still need to spend money for life's necessities (i.e. food, clothing, shelter).
"I have not failed. I've simply found 10,000 ways that won't work." --Thomas Edison
Everyone thinks they are the biggest market in the world, but here are some facts about china's "market".
Out of 3 billion people, 900 million of them are rural peasants who don't have a pot to pee in. These are people that are so poor that they go for months without even seeing currency, let alone using it.
100 million of them are rural farm workers who may sometimes receive a "paycheck", but who are not employed for long periods of time. These people make a fraction of what a McDonalds grill cook makes in the US.
Of the remaining 2 billion, you have a tiny elite of maybe 120-80 million people who make money in a range that is remotely similar to the west. Of all the people who receive somewhere in a living wage range, maybe 500 million of them, save 40% of their income and use 60% to live. They do this because their economy is fragile and they are subject to losing their incomes rather easily. Compare that to Americans where 4% of people's income (on average) is saved.
The Chinese do not have descretionary income to spend on software. This is what Adobe is really coming to grips with. If it were made to be incapable of stealing the software, they would just go without!
Companies that make money in China are like Coke-a-Cola, Pepsi, Marlboro. These are companies that make 80-90% of their money outside the US anyway. The rest of the companies (like Adobe) tread water for years and never turn the corner. This is the reality of the Chinese market: they are an export economy with a weak domestic economy. A place where slavery was "abolished" in 1929. A place where children participate in forced labor programs to pay for their educations. Where you recieve the death penalty for selling a fossil you dug up in your own backyard to a non-Chinese buyer.
(I have no idea why we have a normalized trade relationship with this country and yet Cuba is still under an embargo)
What do the "poor" need with a moderately-high-end photo editing suite?
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
(I honestly don't know if this has been posted yet, but...)
It seems maybe Adobe is just simply noticing things that are already out there. No piracy, just smart minds coupled with fast fingers. Adobe is trying to make a buck. Others do it because they need to (or just want to, whatever. Sortof the same thing IMHO).
Just a thought.
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
The same thing college students need it for - doing some decent photo editing.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
In using software from a Pirated CD, you're going to have to copy it to the computers. In the case of the teacher there, she's be copying it on to dozens of machines that probably would be running licensed software.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
That's not really true, Copyright laws help out big corporations, whereas most drug laws help absolutely no one.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
I wish I could find a pirated copy of psp4. 6.0b loads like a pig.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
yeah but they made a deal with the biggest OEM in China to bundle Windows with all systems sold. I'm wondering how many profit this will bring them.
The article says that Adobe is considering withdrawing from the *CHINESE* market, not all *ASIAN* markets. Japan is currently Adobe's largest overseas customer, in large part b/c Adobe has better Japanese language support than any competitor. Adobe is not about to abandon that market.
In most cases, a handshake means more than a contract. Contracts in china are worth S_ _T. The government isn't going to enforce a law the entire country percieves as stupid. The chinese culture believes in practicality and utility. Take the phrase "Kung-fu". It isn't just martial arts. The phrase is applied to anyone who has refined/exceptional skill and strong work ethic. A businessman can be said to have "kung-fu" in the art of negotiation. A teacher can have "kung-fu" in inspiring students.
Adobe needs to first learn about the culture and understand it before they try to dictate how chinese people should behave. Chinese are very proud of the culture, history and tradition. No self respecting chinese is going to roll over just because adobe says so.
A proprietary standard is better than no standard.
.ps files are too problematic for general exchange. In other words, the .pdf file type is that much better than anything else out there.
PDF is a very widely used standard. In fact, its about the only standard for exchanging high quality print documents. And yes,
While PDF may be a proprietary file format, you do not need Adobe software to create or view PDF files. Mac OS X creates and views PDFs with the default - and Adobe free - default install. It just so happens that Adobe currently produces the best software for creating and viewing PDFs.
I'd tell you to take your open source bigotry elsewhere, but this is slashdot...
Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
Alliance estimates that more than half of the software in use in Asia is illegally copied, resulting in annual losses of more than $4 billion for the software industry.
Of course, like every other piracy report, they are assuming that every person who has a copy of their software would have purchased it if they couldn't get their hands on it. Which of course isn't true at all, the people would have just moved on to another piece of software.
I'm surprised at a move like this. After all, it was piracy that largely resulted in Adobe getting the market share they have now.
Asia Pacific is pretty much the biggest mostly-untapped customer base on the planet. If I were an Adobe shareholder, I'd be very much concerned by these statements. Compare "losses" from piracy, which won't show up on your balance sheets, versus profits from the folks who WILL deal. Not to mention the vast sums you could potentially bring in from services and hardware, which can't be pirated...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Then try buying the low priced high quality photoediting software called Photoshop Elements ($99) or some of the cheaper but pretty good ones for $50! Or use GIMP for free! Geez, anything to justify stealing...
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
English or European language software cannot cope with the double-byte characters for Japanese, Korean, and Chinese.
You mean "Poorly written English or European language software cannot cope with the double-byte characters for Japanese, Korean, and Chinese." For example, the Mozilla browser I'm typing this comment into supports Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Arabic, Hebrew, and several other languages that have their own scripts. Windows 2000 and Windows XP include full support for Unicode text processing, input methods for the double-byte languages are just a Windows Update away, and it's trivial to hack localized resource strings into an application.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The question is how lack of an Asian version of the product will affect the market. Will Chinese users, for example, start to use English or Japanese versions?
What's the Chinese word for "gimp"? Seriously, many people who have learned both GIMP and Photoshop Elements have commented that GIMP has a shorter learning curve than Photoshop Elements unless you already know Photoshop Elements. (Photoshop Elements is Photoshop 6 minus prepress.)
Does this mean that Chinese OS X users will be, literally, up the creek?
No.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Apple added support for Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese in Mac OS X yesterday (as well as Brazilian Portuguese, Danish, Finnish, Korean, Norwegian, and Swedish), so now you could also use OS X to create PDF files from any application.
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
If Adobe goes through with this, you can be assured that other companies will follow. Know what that means? Asian pirates will just start swapping and selling English-language versions, unless Asian companies can create and poularize comparable software. In the long run, this will lead to an asian technical elite that uses english more and more, as well as a great boost for english among asian college students. This will help solidfy English as the common language for international business, and put Americans in an even better position.
Shweeet.
I'm not going to pretend the GIMP is as powerful as Photoshop. (It isn't.)
What does Photoshop Elements do that GIMP doesn't? Photoshop Elements is Photoshop without high-end prepress and without the expensive PANTONE royalties that prepress brings, but retaining all the ability to photoshop "ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US" onto a road sign.
But lots of people buy (or copy) Photoshop who don't need all that, and the GIMP would suit their needs.
You're right. GIMP for Windows doesn't compete with $600 Photoshop. It competes with $100 Photoshop Elements (successor to Photoshop LE and PhotoDeluxe) and with $100 Paint Shop Pro. Why people who would be happy with $100 Photoshop Elements or with GIMP go and pirate $600 Photoshop Professional beats me.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Adobe wins because, as mentioned before, they save on development costs and don't lose much in sales anyway.
China wins because if they do want to use Adobe products (pirated or otherwise) they have to use the English version, and anything that reinforces the de facto standard of English in the IT world is a good thing. You'll understand if you ever have to deal with a mixed-language environment of Simplified Chinese (PRC), Traditional Chinese (Taiwan/HK) and English versions of software, none of which really "play nice" with each other.
Plus, it's especially hard to port technical documents to Chinese, which isn't an alphabet- or syllable-based language. So, to translate something technical, they have to either use homophones (Chinese characters that sound like their English equivalents, but mean something completely different), or string together two or more characters to create a very loose, easily misinterpreted translation.
Hey, working in China, I hope more companies follow Adobe's example... =)
property? Sometimes.
Like.. if I kno wit's going to sit on a shelf in a warehouse for 50 years, then get thrown in the garbage, I'll take it. I'm not 'depriving'anyone of anything.
Software.... if I can't afford said software, then I'm not really hurting them by not paying for it, becaues I CANNOT buy it in the first place.
Who said anything about brutalize?
GPL Deconstructed
Look, for 15 years US software houses have been charging nearly ten times as much money as they should for their applications.
I know this is hard to grasp for some of the socialists on Slashdot, but: It isn't one man's business to tell another what he should charge for a product. (note, I don't mean to imply that you are a socialist, but a lot of people on Slashdot are and just won't admit it).
The only legitimate exception to that is when the product is a government granted monopoly. Notice, just because you are selling IP does *not* mean that you have a government monopoly. The market is still competitive because comparable products can still enter the market.
Now if I were Adobe I would try lowering the price to something comensurate with the salary of the average Chinese citizen to see if I could make profit on larger volume. That's just my opinion though. There is absolutely no moral imperitive for anybody to lower the price on software.
Too many people on Slashdot look at high-priced software as a problem. By gosh! It's not a problem at all: IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY. Let that sink in. Whenever there is an overpriced product in any market, IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMPETITORS TO ENTER.
This is exactly what Be Inc. tried to do, and as much as people would like to think it was killed by MSFT, it wasn't: It was killed by Free Software. Free Software makes enterring the market look like a really bad idea. If you want to kill competition, just give the product away for nothing--Internet Explorer.
So, if you think that any product (not just Chinese PhotoShop) is over-priced, here is what you do: Attempt to enter the market at a lower price. Either you will discover that it can't be done (which means that the product was fairly priced) or you will do it (which means that you are good at business).
Now, Slashdot is supposed to be a site for nerds. What are nerds? Well, they are *supposed* to be the people who produce this stuff. So, instead of complaining, why don't you have a go and enter the market?
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Actually they tend not too, for example they lack the ability to mask out part of an image to run a unsharp mask on (many even lack the full unsharp mask). Many also lack multiple levels of undo (which is far more useful to the untrained dabbler). Many also have no layer support either.
The GIMP is a notable exception, it comes quite close to PhotoShop in most areas. It doesn't look to have the same color space handling, and last I tried it the trace tool was nowhere near as good. However it is amazingly cheaper then PhotoShop :-)
That part is true, something being overpriced seldom gives one the right to steal it (food might be an exception - it is at least an understandable).
Just as well you aren't in charge of anything important. It doesn't matter how many people there are in a country, it matters how many people have computers and how many of those can afford to pay the required price for the software (and are prepared to do so). Hmmm, easy to see how 'brilliant' you are...
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
Smart move!!!
You can see book distributors doing this, when the booksellers have gotten smart. Textbooks cost a lot in the US, but are cheap in Asia. Why? Becuase distributors lower the price significantly to let the poorer nations pay for what they want, at a reasonable price. Often the binding is cheaper and more "mass produced". Sure they make less profit, but at least everyone is happy.
Remember boy, you can't ride a wave a when the surf is down, but you can at least keep aflost!
I believe Adobe is run by a bunch of scum! They used to be a really cool company, but nowadays, they're just getting people arrested and withdrawing from the Asian market because they're racist! Why are they racist, you ask?! Well, simply because they're saying that Asians are thieves, that Asians pirate more software than, say, Whites or Latinos or Indians or something. That's why! I think the community should get together and bring back the "BoycottAdobe" website!
On the other hand, perhaps it would be benificial to all parties involved if some representatives from these "Asian" countries got together with Adobe management and knocked some sense into them through their thick skulls, because making, say, 50% profit because of piracy is better than making no profit at all because you're not even SELLING in the region, you IDIOTS!!!!
What threat is there when you WITHDRAW from a market. You sophomoric Randists make me laugh with misperceived reality.
On the other hand, when Adobe walks away from a market just like that, without seeking further solutions, that is not a crime. Just pure plain lack of vision and stupidity.
You Randians sound really goofy when you think Adobe has clout in a pirate haven. I think the Ant shrugged, and walked away from the foodpile.
I wonder if someone in Redmond just said in slow motion... Ohhhhhh shhiiiiiiiiitttt.
Since Adobe is being pirated out of a profit anyway they have nothing to lose. I wonder what percentage of illegit copies of Photoshop are running on legit copies of Windows? Oh wait, they can still fire up paint.exe. :)
You know just like the newly emotional commander Data when the enterprise crashed to the ground.... "ooooooohhhhh shhhhiiitttt".
I enjoyed that way to much, perhaps I'm mental or somthing.
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
Consumers don't tell businesses what the price should be. They either buy or don't buy. In response to that the producers either reduce the price or stop selling the product. That's capitalism. If consumers had the right to tell producers what the price should be, they would be dictating the price, and historicly they tend to dictate as low as they can. In the extreme case they dictate as low as possible and you end up with a broken Soviet style system.
In my previous post, I was criticizing the moralization from the Left, not the action of the market. Adam Smith called the market the "invisible hand" not the "obnoxious baby who keeps crying 'gimme, gimme, gimme'".
I think we probably agree on all this. It's just that you either misunderstood the semantics of my previous post, which is forgiveable; or perhaps you are just being difficult which sucks, but online forums are full of people who like to be difficult.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Why not? It's not as if the businessman must actually follow the advice right? Doesn't (potential) consumer feedback factor in somewhere?
I once had to buy MS Office that way because of some problems with my notebook whilst travelling in Central Asia. I needed to reinstall but the real licensed s/w CDs were in Germany. So I bought a local copy and it was fine. I kept my keyt rather than using the one enclosed, so I guess it was ok.
Only one difference, the pirates actually include the service packs on the distribution CD to make it easier to bring stuff up to date.
See my journal, I write things there
Over a decade ago, Autodesk faced the same problem. The English version of AutoCAD was #1 in the USSR, but the copies were mostly pirated. So Autodesk cut a deal with the USSR for a bulk buy of a custom Cyrillic version. That brought in a revenue stream, and the USSR got a version that their non-English speakers could use.
In a very significant way, the ability to sell copies of software on a profit-per-copy basis is very much a product of government fiat.
It's only through the artifical imposition of copyright that software producers can charge per copy. It's artificial, because having sold it to one party, that party would otherwise be able to give an identical product to a third party without depriving themselves of it.
Copyright is a comprimise, used to encourage the creation of intellectual property - it's perfectly legitimate to question where this comprimise ought to be taken, or whether or not it is in fact of net benefit to society.
Not that I claim that these are necessarily viable, but there do exist alternatives to the artificial imposition of copyright.
One is support through taxation in order to add to the capabilities and richness of society. I don't really expect this one to be popular on Slashdot :) But it does correspond to arts grants and the like. In fact, it is siginificantly better than a grant to support a performance or art installation: software's easy and nearly-free duplication ensure that it can benefit a very large number of people very easily.
This form of funding already exists for many people involved in the creative arts, and in a slightly different form, for those involved in research at public Universities and the like.
The second major alternative is to treat software creation like a service (which it is.) If a company or consortium feel they could benefit from the creation of software package, they could (and in fact can right now of course) go out and commision that package. So the software may be copied by third parties? I imagine in many circumstances this won't take away from the original benefit acrued by the commisioners of the software, and that in the remainder of cases it is could be protected in the same way that trade secrets already are.
Given that these two forms of IP creation are already extant in industry, it doesn't seem unreasonable that they could work for software as well.
This is only addressing one of your points, and then tangentially - but I feel it's important to keep in mind that copyright is very much an artificial construction, and as such, needs to be carefully weighed in terms of the benefits and hindrances it bestows upon society at large.
Really? Because there is a pretty good Windows port of the GIMP, a fair number of people working on the OSX version (it works under X11), and a lot of bad under $100 Windows Photo Paint programs (don't know about under $50). I assume the photo paint programs mostly survive because digital camera componies want to bundle something, and PhotoShop LE is too costly for some of them.
P.S. I think PhotoShop Elements is also about $100, I forget exactly what it leaves out, but lack of Actions makes it worthless to me.
I see an emotional argument that appears to be racist.
I'm profoundly confused by this statement. Could you please explain it? His numbers appear to be wrong, but his general point appears correct. China does in fact have a very large population yet the vast majority of that population is very poor and the small portion of it with the discretionary income sufficient to purchase software is really rather small and devotes much of that income to savings.
I don't see any emotional content in the argument whatsoever. I will concede he points out certain facts that may arouse an emotional response in you or I - the relatively recent abolition of slavery and the continued existense of practices very near to slavery. Yet he did not explicitly pass a moral judgement or appeal to emotions (i.e. we should not trade with China because of human rights abuses) but simply pointed out that an economy with these features is not one that will offer a large market for computer software despite it's large population.
Nor did he say or even imply anything racist unless it is racist to point out the fact the China is poor. If you do percieve an implicit moral argument in his bringing up child and forced labour it would NOT be racist to hold them to the same moral standards that we hold whites to. On the other hand it IS a racist argument that the Chinese (because of their race) are to be held to a lower standard than whites (Don't be hard on them, the poor savages don't know any better.)
How many other countries had abolished slavery before the US did?
Umm.. very few before the first abolition of slavery in the USA in Vermont (1777) Then three European states and their colonies (England, France, Dutch Colonies) and a few Latin American countries.
Of course I don't know how that is relevent. I took the posters main point to be that China is economically backwards only emerging from a slave economy 73 years ago (though 1929 is a generous estimate - slavery was known to exist in some remote chinese provinces as late as 1958 though the government moved aggresively against it) and still retaining many features of such an economy.
Do you know the dates for that?
Again, doesn't seem relevent but OK: Vermont 1777, Pennsylvania 1780, Massachusetts 1780, France 1791, French Colonies 1794, Reestablished in France 1801, England 1807, Chile 1823, Central America 1824, Mexico 1829, Bolivia 1831, Rest of British Empire 1833 (though Britain kept conquering colonies and abolishing slavery in them after this) France (again) 1845, French Guiana in 1848. Venezuala in 1854. Dutch Colonies 1863, USA 1865.
For the really late abolitions and continued slavery today (mostly in Africa) there is a good article here on slavery into the 21st century.
How many US states wanted to keep it and went to war over "states rights".
11
What was Davy Crocket fighting for at the Alamo? I'll give you a hint, Mexico had abolished slavery.
Granted.
And this is relevant to software sales in China... How?
...but I call a spade a spade.
And you're accusing him of being racist?
First, even Adobe recognized that this was a case of their CEO having little social sophistication. From the article:
On Monday, Adobe confirmed Chizen's comments but downplayed the potential of abandoning Asian markets."
"Adobe remains committed to the Chinese market and to developing Chinese-version products,
This was not an issue of Adobe not making money on a Chinese version of its products, the company is making money. There are Chinese buyers who don't live in China, for example. This was an issue of a CEO with little social ability.
(Remember the Skylarov incident, and how that was handled in such a way as to give Adobe millions of dollars worth of bad publicity? What Skylarov did is legal in his country. He was only here for a technical conference. Also remember how Adobe treated the author of the program initially called Killustrator. It was handled with the same self-destructive crudeness.)
As Caudipteryx indicated, you would be amazed at how many of the products you use every day and find in the stores are made in China for U.S. companies.
The article said, "China's piracy rate is more than 90 percent." However, China's poverty rate may be (I'm guessing.) about 80 percent. Not all of the piracy represents lost sales. Although there is very rapid growth, most of the population are peasants.
Certainly, piracy is bad. However, there are many, many worse things going on in the world. It is backward to expect that the world be perfect just for one's own concerns, while ignoring that 20% of the people in the world don't have enough to eat, for example. It is a very imperfect world. Socially capable people find creative ways of dealing with this.
Slashdot readers who live in the U.S. should know that arrogance and insensitivity may cost them real money. Taking too much out of China, and putting too little in, may start a war between China and the U.S., ostensibly about Taiwan. The cost of this would come out of your pocket.
Bush's education improvements were
Because nothing comes close to Photoshop, of course. Gimp doesn't support color management because of - guess who - Adobe's and other's patents on the matters. Not to mention a number of other features.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
If your implication is that I group people like he did then you have yet to provide support for your claim, just some innuendo.
...The US wouldn't be leading the pack if we did that.
Sorry, you misunderstood my post. I was making a (probably bad) joke based on your word choice. (Just in case you don't know "spade" is a derogatory slang term for "negro".) I made a more substantive response to your post elsewhere. No I don't think you are really a racist - just having some fun with your choice of words.
Should we make a scale about how modern a society is based on the date they gave up slavery?
The issue of slavery seemed a minor point in the original post - an aside mentioned in the last paragraph. The actual argument (while the specific numbers are wrong) is valid. China has a huge population but that does not translate into a huge market for some items (like software) because it is also a very poor country whose government is still politically and economically oppressive (though it allows a measure of freedom in a few very selective regions).
Not really - we don't do so badly at all by such a metric. The northern states would lead the world and the southern states would come about the middle of the pack - shortly after Europe and a few latin american states - but well before the rest of the world*(see note below) Actually, you may be on to something since that is not far from the economic realities either.
* Granted much of the rest of the world was under the rule of those abolitionist European powersand so slavery was outlawed there as well. However abolition was imposed by imperialist edicts and not initiated by the people of those nations. Many nations not under colonial rule continued to engage in slavery until very recently - a few STILL engage in slavery. Of those under colonial rule many of them flouted the imperial laws and some reverted to the practice of slavery after their imperialist masters left.
I believe we should better China as the more affluent a society is the less problems you have with it. Ever notice a correlation between a nations wealth and the problems that aris from it? Give China a taste of capitalism/free market and they'll take care of their Government.
All valid arguments and a reasonable point of view. And one could have a reasonable debate about which is cause and which is effect (are political and economic freedom the result or the cause of wealth). Your argument that wealth causes freedom and so we should strengthen our economic ties with China could reasonably be countered by an argument that freedom is the cause of wealth and that our economic engagment with China is just propping up an oppresive and potentially dangerous regime. My own view is middle of the road on this issue - I think we should engage with China in the hopes that such engagement will foster openness and freedom but that we should be aware that currently there is very little of either, and there should be some things that we are willing to walk away from the table over. Tolerating a little oppression in the short run because we think it will lead to greater freedom in the long run is a tricky path and we should tread it very carefully
All of this however is irrelevant to the main point of the original poster that the actual size of the Chinese market for expensive items (like Adobe's software) is smaller than it would appear becuase it's poverty and economic backwardness.
Why do you think you have to upgrade? If OS9 and whatever apps you have for it do the job, why upgrade? No one is forcing you to get new software or hardware.
People commonly fall into that trap of "it's better so I have to upgrade" that sucks up so many IT dollars. No matter what my boss says, reading email does NOT warrant a 21" flat panel and a 1.8 GHz machine.
The idea that IP is not a natural right is currently one of the most popular ways to deconstruct it.
It may have been easy to ignore (or difficult to discern) the value of IP in Jefferson's time. In those days, IP constituted only a small part of the effort in most endevours. Patenting a new type of bridge design makes little sense when it takes 2 man-months to come up with the design, and 1000 man-years to actually build the bridge.
As technology has prorgressed, the proportion of intellectual labor to physical labor has shifted for some products. Wherever this occurs, ordinary people immediatly recognize the value of IP. Only a certain class of fashionable intellectuals seem to be interested in rationalizing things differently (the other class of people who tend to be AIP are warezers, but their arguments are hardly worth addressing).
It took the printing press to shift the labor balance from the hands to the head. Before then, copyright was a non-issue and the types of funding you describe were best because they were the only practical means.
Copyright does indeed protect a natural right--the right to benefit from one's own labor in the way one sees fit. Anything else is slavery.
This does not preclude the limitation of copyright. Copyright may be limited for the same reason wages may be taxed, but not for any other reason. This *does* preclude the elimination of copyright.
I shudder to think what kind of software we would get if it were all government funded, and for most people, choosing among 20 different shareware applications for $50/each is infinitely preferable to comissioning a custom app for $50,000.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
The problem is nothing to do with owning the media - what you do not have, and need, is a license from the copyright holder to *use* the copyrighted material by loading the code onto a computer and executing it. I don't know US law to this level of detail, but in many countries mere posession of the media is a minor offence or none at all, likely to be ignored.
:-).
:-)
Unlike with printed matter, software licensing is totally divorced from copies of media - it's perfectly possible and legal to write a software license that says you can only use the program on Wendesdays, or that you have to pay by the number of CPU-hours the code runs for (I have actually licensed CAE software under the latter).
A more down to earth example is DVD's - you may buy one for $19.95 in Best Buy, while Blockbuster has paid $50-$80 a pop for discs with the same sequence of bits in a slightly different wrapper; theirs came with a license to rent them out, yours didn't.
It's not uncommon for enterprise software media to be freely available - with the advent of CD-ROM, Digital (DEC) used to do this with VAX/VMS; anyone with any number of machines on software support got a full media set, including install kits for *all* VMS software, whether or not they had it licensed. Oracle install "media" is freely available - you can download their full product set from the technet web site.
Software is the ultimate in mass production goods - the cost is all R&D, and the unit manufacturing cost is effectively zero.
Licensing terms are all about price discrimination - they allow the licensor to systematically charge different licensees different amounts, based upon the value delivered, or more cynically, ability to pay, and thus maximise their revenue.
It's not even uncommon for enterprise *hardware* to work this way - Sun will ship you an E12000 with 32 CPU's installed, and only charge you for and activate 24 of them - and you can pay to activate more on request. When you consider that most of Sun's cost for these $2k-4k CPU chips is R&D, it makes perfect sense as an upsell opportunity.
Microsoft does the similar things with server-side software - the primary differences between basic MS-Exchange and the "enterprise" version is that the former (a) is at a much higher price point, and (b) is not crippled by having an arbitrary limit on the total amount of stored email (the former does, 18Gb I think - we of course use sendmail at work
For a wide range of software, up until now, per-desktop has been a pretty good metric as the sole axis of price discrimination; as internet-based services become more nebulous, expect to see a who range of more sophisticated enterprise pricing models you've never heard of make it down to the consumer, as well as completely new ones.
Combined with micropayment technologies, you may one day literally end up paying $0.003 every time you press a key in MS-Word-2008-.NET running in your Mozilla 3.0 browser on FreeBSD