Slashdot Mirror
NYTimes Looks at Warez
Flamerule writes "The New York Times has a new article up that relates the end result of the DrinkorDie copyright infringement case (the "ringleader" and 5 other guys are in prison), and talks about warez in general. They at least tried to get a story from both software companies and denizens of the warez scene. Pretty interesting stuff, even if you haven't been following the case closely."
Although release and courier groups engage in little direct commercial activity, a 1997 extension in federal copyright law made piracy a crime even if there is no monetary profit.
How were pirates prosecuted before then? I seem to recall that they busted hacker rings long before 1997.
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
Yes, in that sense it's different. And I quite agree with what they're saying, but you pulled it out of context.
His next workds were: "They're hanging out on the cyber-street corner." I used to in the priacy rings; and it -is- like a gang, it's a place to be accepted, to be around similarly-minded people, etc.
Then again, joining the football team is also like a gang. Adolescence is about joining "gangs" regardless of whether or not you commit crimes.
(Read: A gang is a group of people, not a group of people who kill other people.)
The `warez scene' was alive and well long before that. Back before the Internet explosion, warez was traded via BBS's, and by people bringing boxes full of floppies to their friends houses who had copy parties. Or they'd borrow a school's computer lab (rows of Apple II's) and set every one copying ...
It seems that the NYT thinks that the warez scene needs the Internet to `take root' in. Not at all -- it'll root in anything it can, be it face to face meetings, BBS's, the Internet, or whatever comes next.
There's this sweet Jag that I jacked last year
You need to stop watching the BSA/SPA propaganda films.
When you take a Jaguar, someone else is missing a Jaquar.
When you pirate a copy of software, no one has fewer copies of it.
If you pirate a copy of Photoshop instead of buying it, you deprive Adobe of income.
If you pirate a copy of Photoshop instead of buying Paintshop Pro, you deprive JASC of income.
If you pirate a copy of Photoshop instead of using the GPL GIMP program, no one has been deprived of income.
Now, this being the Internet, I'll sit back and wait for the self-righteous indignation, unfounded accusations, and heavy-handed diatribes about the legality and morality of software piracy (despite the fact that I never addressed the morality or legality of it).