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."
Anyone knows an FTP site when I can download Linux Warez? K Tnx!
This is like the chicken and the egg story. Only with warez, what came first, extremely high prices for software or software pirates? Software developers always whine about how pirates drive costs through the roof, and pirates always whine about how they dont but their software because its too overpriced.
In college, really poor, need a flatscreen.
Last week, at age 29, John Sankus Jr. moved out of his parents' house for the first time.
Wait, a warez d00d aged 29 still living at home? NO WAY. This totally shatters my image of them.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Leader of an international warez group... works as a gateway tech. Priceless :)
Here's a nice quote from the article:
"It's the same reason that people join gangs," said Allan Doody, the Customs Service investigator who led the DrinkorDie investigation...
Um.. yeah, script kiddies trading software like baseball cards is exactly like joining a gang so you won't get beat up on the way to school. I just love when the government/media feels the need to subtly add words that make things sound more evil than they really are.
Have you hugged your Karma Whore today?
*snip*
"It's cool to release something that costs $18,000," said Mr. Grimes, the DrinkorDie member from Arlington, Tex. "Basically, if it wasn't for us, you would never see this piece of software."
*snip*
I understand how they figure that companies "lose money" whenever they're software is pirated. But do they figure into those billions of lost dollars statements like the one above? Seems to me it's hard to find out just how much money the software companies are really losing because not all people who pirate their software are people who would ever pay for it.
Still, the worst part is that because software piracy is so rampant, it enables people who would (can?) pay for proper licensing for software to obtain illegal licenses.
I certainly feel bad that small businesses that rely on software licensing for revenue are having their stuff pirated, but another company like Blizzard who sold something like (correct me if I'm wrong) 1 millions copies of Warcraft III on pre-sell alone... how are we supposed to feel sorry that their "losing" money, when we can't be sure that people who pirated that software would never have bought it because they don't have the money or whatever? Maybe that's a lame example, but you get my point. Replace Warcraft III with some $500 publishing software, like Photoshop or CorelDraw. Is everyone who pirates those someone who would pay for them if they couldn't obtain them illegally?
Now here's a good hypothetical question: Suppose someone illegally downloads a copy of Warcraft III just to "try it out", with the intention of buying it if they like it. They play it and don't like it because of the 90 food limit, or something like that. They delete the game and never play it again. Do they owe Blizzard $55 because they should have bought the game in the first place to "try it out"?
These guys need to lay off a bit. One or two unarmed agents would have sufficed to bring the guy in.
Well, keep in mind that back when we were all on 14.4s (I still have my old Practical Peripheral's external, with the LCD screen.. *sigh*) stuff was a lot smaller. Ultima VI is one I remember fondly because it was large for it's day, and it was what, 6 1.44mb floppies? When games are that small, you can trade them across a modem link if you're determined. Try doing the same with a whole CD.. ouch!
So yah, the bandwidth has gone up significantly, but so have the size of the files. Maybe it's not proportional, and I agree with you that it's faster and easier now, but I just wanted to make a point.
Besides, don't you think there was something cool about the local warez communities we had back in the day? When your name could mean something to everyone within your area code? To this day I meet people in real life who remember me, who called the same BBSs I did and downloaded stuff I had a hand in cracking or distributing or whatever.
This article shows just how out of control our government is, when 40 armed agents "bust" a guy who's pirating software.
First off, let me point out that I'm a software developer, and I'm in the process of creating a shrink wrapped application which I intend to charge for and which I expect a number of people are going to try to pirate. Since I am a one man startup in this situation, if piracy affects anyone, it affects me directly in my pocket book.
But this situation is absurd. Teh government should not be wasting time going after people who are pirating software who aren't profiting from it.
If someone steals my software, then they are liable to me under the law-- not to the feds. The feds have no rights to my code and no rights to lock people up for violating my rights in this way.
If someone pirates my software, then I should be able to take them to civil court and sue them for damages-- possibly twice actual damages, but I have to show damages to recover the money.
The Feds are busting people, claiming that "millions of dollars" have been stolen when this is a bald faced lie-- millions of dollars have NOT been stolen.
The only way a pirated piece of software is "theft" is if the person who uses it would have OTHERWISE bought the product. IF someone tries it out and then discards it and never would have bought the product, then the software company has not experienced damage-- they got some free advertising and didn't happen to pick up a customer.
IF someone pirates your software and then sells it, well then that would be theft. But those who give it away a guilty of mischief, but do not belong in a federal prison.
As for the guy who claims his software costs $9,500 but lost out because it was pirated-- make your software not work without authentication with the mothership. This is really easy these days-- get the MAC address, and send it in, and return a cryptographically signed authorization code that the program needs to run-- if the MAC address changes too much, or you['re getting identical requests from dozens of IP addresses, then don't return the key. Hell, make it such that a key set of code for the App is stored in an external runtime-loaded framework, and encrypt that bit with the key so that it never exists on the CD or hard drive in decrypted form... and of course keys have an expiry so that the program has to check in every 90 days or so. Or whatever less draconian version of this works for you, hell dongles are cheap enough.
Yes this can be defeated, but my experience with warez sites is that they just have CD images, the programs security hasn't been defeated, and people just share license keys-- in this case reporting the key to a central server and the ability to turn it off when it becomes obviously shared is easy.
This seems to be working for ambrosia and idsoftware.
But sending the feds in is NOT the solution-- we cannot tolerate this. MS has sent teams of armed men into small offices where they suspect the people are not licensing all their copies of windows. This is unacceptable.
As long as we accept government stormtroopers doing the bidding of private companies we will not be free-- it will just get worse and worse.
What's next- 40 armed marshalls bust some 13 year old for sharing MP3s?
All the while real crimes are going on and are ignored.
These are civil issues and belong in the civil courts. And anyone who doesn't protect their IP is just asking for it.
This is the equivalent of cops busting down dorm room doors because 20 kids in the same class photocopied pages from a library book to study from.
But because its computers they're "pirates" and the idiot press and public go along. Who's to stand up to the invasion of police in what should be civil matters? If anyone- US. Don't tolerate your company using stormtroopers-- protest loudly if they do. And protest to anyone who has the ability to affect change in this area-- such as your congressman (though I don't hold out much hope that they will listen, idiots that they are.)
Civil disobedience is going to be what this comes down to eventually-- sooner or later, they will be tightening the noose. who here doesn't have an MP3 that they can't prove legal ownership of?
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
Right now, the MPAA is trolling IRC for servers, and reporting infringing IPs back to Time Warner, who promptly warns customers against their usage. I've seen some of the letters.
:)
If thats sucessful, they will just move to an IRC server that doesnt support finger/dns. I know a few irc servers that you cant get other peoples ip, you can dns/finger them all you want (get your mind out of the gutter!) but it will still return YOUR ip. With that said the MPAA/RIAA might try and force the server to release the ips of certain people, but the server has every right to deny that request do to 'security' reasons.
"I want the list of ips for all these people!"
Sorry, that poses a security threat not only to our servers, but to our many faithful users
*sigh* Please dont flame me for what I have just said...Im only stating what will most likely happen.
In college, really poor, need a flatscreen.
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.)
They can arrest all the people they want. Realistically though .. People have been pirating software since the 80's.
.. or obtained market share if they didn't embrance piracy.
.. but they have better sales over lightwave because of college piracy of their product.
.. legel or not?
.. ask Games Workshop how much of their product is illegally produced in Russia or Poland.
.. (or at least the big boys are) is because it gives upcoming companies the same ability to snake them like they did to others in the past.
.. crying wolf about lost sales during their HIGHEST sales year in history.
.. is that its better to be a company that sells billions and looses 5% revenue to piracy .. than a company that sells hundreds of thousands, and looses 2%.
Anyone remember Mr.Nibble ?
Not that its justification, but there are products that wouldn't have market share
Microsoft, Adobe, Macromedia, Quark.
All of these 'big names' became the 'standards' becuase folks were able to play with them.
3dMAX hates to admit it
College kids graduate, and eventually get into positions in companies that decide what software to actually buy. Do you buy something that you have never seen before ? or software that 1/2 of your staff already has at home
Internet piracey is a joke, You want real piracy
[were talking toy soldiers]
or Ask Black & Decker how many chineese companies made a knock off of the snake light.
piracy is nothing compaired to actual industrial espianage. How many car manufactureres buy, and reverse engineer their compeditors autos?
Or pick the solid state electrical giant of your choice. Chances are they are on the beta test list of all compeating companies through a friend of a friend of a friend.
The reason Software companies are so loud about it now
Its kind of like how the music industry was all over MP3
What people tend to forget
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
*snip*
:= real lost revinue the company would have gotten were it not for copyright violators := profit per copy of software company makes when it is purchased legally. This isn't the same as the retail price, as Id probably makes domething less than the $30.00 sticker price of a retail copy of Quake, for example. := Number of copies obtained illegally := Ratio of people who would have paid for the software had they not gotten an illegal copy over the total number who got a copy illegally (value 0.0 - 1.0),
:= C * P * N
"It's cool to release something that costs $18,000," said Mr. Grimes, the DrinkorDie member from Arlington, Tex. "Basically, if it wasn't for us, you would never see this piece of software."
*snip*
I understand how they figure that companies "lose money" whenever they're software is pirated. But do they figure into those billions of lost dollars statements like the one above? Seems to me it's hard to find out just how much money the software companies are really losing because not all people who pirate their software are people who would ever pay for it.
If we define
R
P
N
and
C
then
R
C is a value between 0.0 and 1.0, and probably almost never equals 1.0. E.g. if out of 500 copyright violators 250 would have bought the program otherwise, while the other 250 would have done without, C = 0.5
Still, the worst part is that because software piracy is so rampant, it enables people who would (can?) pay for proper licensing for software to obtain illegal licenses.
Actually, the value of money lost probably approaches $0.00 the more expensive the software becomes. I suspect C is quite high for really cheap software that is copied illegally, while it approaches 0.0 for really expensive software copied illegally.
Two factors play a significant role in this: (1) commercial entities almost always want to have their licensing in order (due to audits, liability, etc.) and (b) individuals have very limited budgets (comparitavly speaking).
I doubt very much a single copyright violator of an $18,000 program would have purchased it legally had it not been available on the internet. Indeed, I suspect C = 0.0000 in that particular example.
On the other hand, illegal copies of a $50.00 program (e.g a game) probably do mean that some percentage would have gone out and spent $50.00 on it had they not obtained it, so C is probably higher.
For a $2.00 piece of software (assuming its really easy to find and pay for), C probably approaches 0.9 or higher.
Of course, even this equation ignores the effect of advertising (someone copies the $18,000 program, then finds a need for it in their professional life and talks their employer into purchasing one or more copies), as well as the 'bleedoff' effect (a kid copies one $50.00 game, but goes and spends the $50.00 he would have spent on the first game on another game instead, perhaps by the same company, perhaps by a competitor. Statistically, assuming both games are roughly the same popularity, this is a wash, and neither company loses anything despite the kids having twice as many games as they could have afforded). It also ignores the very common practice of 'try before you buy', where people will in fact borrow a friend's copy of a commercial package, use it, get used to it, then quite often chose to buy a copy (for the documentation, for support, etc.).
I think it is obvious even to the IP zealots out there that the real losses due to copyright violations are tiny fractions of the amounts being deceitfully presented to the FBI and the courts, and in some cases (e.g. Napster) copyright violations have been shown to have the opposite effect, and even increase sales.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
From the article:
"It's the same reason that people join gangs," said Allan Doody, the Customs Service investigator who led the DrinkorDie investigation, part of a broader anti-piracy campaign called Operation Buccaneer. "They're hanging out on the cyber-street corner."
But in contrast to petty criminals and warring gangs, Internet piracy groups have a worldwide impact of at least tens of millions of dollars, if not more. Such groups secure their reputations by releasing thousands of free movies, games, music and software programs on the Internet each year.
So, distributing copyrighted materials is worse than such "petty criminal activity" as drive-by shootings, drug sales, and car theft? I'm glad our law enforcement dollars are being invested wisely to get this vicious criminals off the street.
(And yes, they are criminals, I just object to the implied severity of their crimes.)
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
It kills me everytime I hear people equate software piracy with actual theft.
When Joe Blow downloads Photoshop, he doesn't deprive the company of the money of someone else buying it.
When Joe Blow steals a car, he completely deprives the company, not only of his money, but of ANYONE ELSE that might have bought the car.
See the difference? No? The world is not black and white. It's shades of gray. Is Joe Blow wrong? Yes. Is Joe BLow "as wrong" as a car thief... no way.
Were the horrible pirates mentioned in the times article wrong? Yep. Do you think they caused more pain than Mr. Enron? Hahahah!
If people don't understand why its wrong that our government is criminally prosecuting people at the behest of corporate america, over CIVIL crimes, then I truly don't know that you ever had an understanding of what our country was supposed to be about.
Now when will we read more about the CEOs and other corporate executes who have deprived the good citizens of this country of billions of REAL dollars through their skimming and shady accounting practicies? Can we give this corporate rape a nickname? Can we make comparisons like "The CEO of suchandsuch is kind of like the guy who robs the 7-11 except he hit 10 million of them and left behind several million victims. Their sentences should be served concurently."
Yeah, piracy is illegal, but I'm not seeing it at risk of pushing the world into a recession or worse depression, as investors and fund administrators move their money out of corporate stocks faster than they did in 1929...
So the reason why software developers are chasing pirates is so that they can lower prices?
Don't buy the BS from either side. Software developers (like this Mr. Vold) charge money for what they create because like everyone else they must eat, but would like to do what they love (create software) to fill their needs. Large corporations(and governments?) are a different sort of entity. I don't think I need to go into what they care about or how far they will go...
Personally, my feeling is if you're going to charge big $$$ for a stream of bits, your support and other benefits should be good enough that piracy can never truly devalue what you sell. If you're selling to tons of people for low prices, there should still be that "something extra" between what you offer and warez. If you're missing that "something extra" prepare for a difficult time staying in business.
That said, speaking as a developer for a small company: I'd still throw the book (minus the DMCA) at anyone I might catch infringing our software. We've spent a lot of time and money on development effort, and the law currently says we control who has rights to own "a copy" and what price they will pay. Just don't expect me to make any corollaries with murder on the high seas, burning houses, or physical theft.
Bottom Line:
Intellectual property is different than physical property but has meaning nonetheless. Further, information will eventually be free, or people won't be. The equation is that simple. History will decide the rest.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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).
Then let's look at the REAL problem of this analogy.
When Joe CEO buys a JAG for $60k, what is he buying, really. S-T-A-T-U-S. (I can think of no other luxury car, perhaps except the Cadillac or Lexus where the customer is charged so ridiculously much higher for what is essentially not much of a car, compared to say, a Porsche, BMW, or frankly, a Corvette). All to be seen driving down the road - careful man, I'm a big shot. I pay more to park this car than you do for rent. My suit costs more than your college education. I can afford the gas guzzler tax, unlike you SUV posers.
So is that what really is troubling people here? Paid $600 for the top of the line premier professional graphics software - I'm a hot shit pro graphic artist, yet can't stop those snotty little pimple-faced warez d00ds from getting to use a copy (perhaps developing pro-level skillsets in the process) for nothing?
I can see where it would be unfair for a professional to use a pirated copy of software to compete with other pros who are legit. I say bust those motherfuckers.
But for casual, or even educational purposes, you'd be hard pressed to make a case with me that that's as wrong (and as deserving of enforcement effort) as Accountants shovelling fraud trial evidence into a shredder. (yes, where were the 40 heavily armed agents when they were shredding documents at Arthur Anderson for MONTHS, and it was not only public knowledge, but a top news story, while they continued to shred?).
Again - this illustrates the sheer triviality of the crime of software copy infringement. And the low regard in which I hold the BSA, and current government policy.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.