Slashdot Mirror


BSA Claims Half of PC Users Are Pirates

judgecorp writes "Despite continued pressure on business users to buy legitimate software, the Business Software Alliance (BSA) reports that the campaign seems to be failing. Well over half (57%) of users surveyed in a global survey admit to using pirated software. That's a big increase from the same survey last year — when 43% admitted to using pirated software. The BSA surveyed 15,000 people in 33 countries."

585 comments

  1. Underestimation? by GloomE · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only half?

    1. Re:Underestimation? by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cmon, we can do better than 57%

    2. Re:Underestimation? by exomondo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well:
      Over half of PC users worldwide have admitted to using pirate software

    3. Re:Underestimation? by similar_name · · Score: 1

      It's probably how many people know what pirating means. Copying or downloading software you would normally pay for... oh that's what that's called. :)

    4. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more like 57% of the 15000 people we bothered to ask in the worth admitted to it.

      But yeah, I can see why they'd like to make that sound like it reflects all 7 billion of us.

    5. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only half?

      What wasn't apparent from just reading it in text was the emotional context. Specifically, the giddy excitement over the fact that they now have a whole half of a country to sue, meaning, by their logic, they'll be rich beyond their wildest dreams!!

      Have you ever seen a lawyer drone squee? It's hilarious.

    6. Re:Underestimation? by InspectorGadget1964 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sorry, but I believe the number should be going down. Soon enough, people will realize they don't need buggy siftware when they can get Linux and Open Source software that is better and mostly free

    7. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's 57 percent of the people the BSA sued. The rest were the ones who 'paid their compliance' up front. Also half of those interviewed were BSA employees :)

    8. Re:Underestimation? by mrclisdue · · Score: 1

      The *percentage* doesn't have to be going down to indicate a switch FLOSS....

      cheers,

    9. Re:Underestimation? by sofar · · Score: 1

      the other half used free software...

    10. Re:Underestimation? by wvmarle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      TFA is just a troll. Or flamebait. Or both. I don't know.

    11. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Considering the population of China, India, Africa, half is rather surprising. Looking at the study, in the top 20 the only places UNDER 50% are the US, Canada, Western Europe, Japan, S Korea and Australia. Interestingly they twist the logic around so the USA, with the lowest rate of piracy at 19% has the highest "value" of pirated software. Not really sure how we beat China at a 77% piracy rate, which seems both low as a rate and low as a $ value. Maybe the Chinese just pirate cheap software?

      The quick conclusion I draw after looking at the actual study is that people generally pay for software they can afford (affluent western countries) and people who can't afford it don't pay for it. Is this supposed to be surprising?

    12. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This study is meaningless. A quick perusal of the results reveals ridiculous assumptions and obvious conclusions which are not made, or in some cases made but not explored. From the second page -

      "frequent pirates — people who admit they acquire unlicensed software all of the time, most of the time, or occasionally — also are the most voracious software users. They report installing 55 percent more programs of all types on their computers than do non-pirates. This gives them an outsized impact on the global piracy rate."

      So, people who don't pay for their software install a bunch of crap they don't really care about or use? So how can they possibly count those as lost sales?

    13. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the already overpriced PhotoShop is $700(US) and sells for the equivalent of $2000+ outside the US, can you blame people? The blame lies 100% at the door of the greedy corporations who are gouging. Worse still, the have gorillas like the BSA and complicit (read: bought) courts & governments in many countries. Time to stand up to the bullies and their cronies.

    14. Re:Underestimation? by InspectorGadget1964 · · Score: 2

      No, it does not have to, but as less people have to pay for rubbish, I assume that the percentage of people that are paying for rubbish decreases, therefore, the motivation to use pirate software should also decrease and so should piracy. Eventually, the BSA will become irrelevant and this world will be a happier place.

    15. Re:Underestimation? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 3, Informative

      butbutbut, Canada's on the US Piracy List, how could we possible have a low piracy rate?!?

    16. Re:Underestimation? by exomondo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The blame lies 100% at the door of the greedy corporations who are gouging.

      Not really. If you believe they are gouging then don't use their products, use a free alternative, like GIMP instead. Now the reason I say that is because I believe piracy is not a way of protest, in fact it just makes it worse. Consider that - as many here will attest - piracy != lost sale so piracy isn't necessarily 'hurting' the company, what it does is cement the idea that the software in question is the best (or at least 'necessary'), superior to cheaper or free alternatives, thus making it the de-facto standard in the market and driving out cheaper or free competitors.

      The same thing happens with other software too, Windows for example. People claim to not like it and to pirate it to only use it out of necessity, but that just drives its use in the market leading to more people to use it out of necessity so to a degree piracy drives legitimate sales.
      Obviously if legitimate sales start to sag but usage continues to grow then the companies see piracy as a problem.

    17. Re:Underestimation? by exomondo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I should have put this in the above post but personally I think the 'Free for non-Commercial Use' model is a good method for most paid software companies. I see it as viable predominantly because it wouldn't be far from the system we have now (as in it would require minimal changes) except that these home users - that are probably just using the software for hobby or educational purposes and can't justify the cost nor the infringement penalties anyway - would not be painted as 'criminals' and those who derive income from the tools they use would be the ones who pay for the development of said tools.

      It's not a perfect solution and it's not the only solution, but it's more harmonious while being not too far removed from what we have now.

    18. Re:Underestimation? by travbrad · · Score: 1

      Are you saying this will be the year of the Linux desktop?

    19. Re:Underestimation? by Coward+Anonymous · · Score: 2

      The other half, being average PC users, didn't realize they were doing it.

    20. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure we are.
      I think this just means more people dare to admit it.

      Which means it's becoming more mainstream, more accepted, which is what the BSA truly fears.

    21. Re:Underestimation? by Endo13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pretty much this. A program sells for $700 when a reasonable facsimile is available for free, legitimately. Same is true for almost every other piece of software that sells for hundreds of bucks. People realize the stuff really just isn't worth that much.

      It doesn't even matter if the alternative isn't identical or not as good. It's free. By normal human rationale, that means the other similar one can't possibly warrant a price that high. Sure, it may be a little better, but not $700 vs $0 better. And that's how I believe most people rationalize piracy.

      These companies would probably be ahead giving away the core software for free to home users and collecting some here and there on microtransactions.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    22. Re:Underestimation? by advocate_one · · Score: 3, Insightful

      software piracy is software piracy... if it were a real problem for Microsoft and the other companies, then they'd implement proper locks on the software, but no, they like it because it means the competition isn't getting a look in... to Microsoft, a pirated windows install means someone isn't using Linux... a pirated Office install means someone isn't using Open Office...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    23. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. I don't want software which can be pirated.

    24. Re:Underestimation? by bryan1945 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do you have any idea how many people steal Linux? It is OFF THE CHARTS how many people don't pay for it! It's an epidemic, I tell you, horrifying!

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    25. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Proper locks? Have you heard of this thing called "cracking"?

    26. Re:Underestimation? by IDOXLR8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I almost agree... I dual boot win7 and Ubuntu and there is still no comparison. I get more work done while in win7...as soon as (insert your fav brand of Linux) can properly install my video, network, sound drivers without a glitch... I'm all there... as for pirating... Give me what I want to watch...when I want to watch it, otherwise...your business model sucks...

      --
      Shutup and get them panties off!
    27. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, what? I'm sorry but HAHAHAHAHA! Good one! HAHAHAHAHA!

    28. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      do you have any idea how long ..wait..I see 1964 in your name. I suspect you DO know PRECISELY how long people have been saying this and continue to say it as if it's going to happen tomorrow anyway.

      What you're failing to even begin to recognize is that the "Linux and Open Source" software you speak of is already being sold to users. All users of Apple products, to be precise. Which btw, is where the market is going. Which is further proprietary, not less. See you in the app store, homey.

    29. Re:Underestimation? by exomondo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which is exactly why - if anything - software piracy is helping companies get market share and eliminate competition. Better to use an alternative than to pirate.

      In other markets this balances out because if a company's product is too expensive people turn to alternatives, when that company loses marketshare they either adapt - by lowering their price or adding more value - or they die, but in the case of software people can pirate and since in most cases a piracy != lost sale that won't kill the company but it will increase their marketshare. That can then get to the case in point where the market leader is perceived - by many - to be massively overpriced but since they are effectively the only game in town there are few - if any - viable alternatives.

    30. Re:Underestimation? by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cmon, we can do better than 57%

      Now now, they surveyed 15,000 people and worked out that 170 million of them are using pirated software. So that's pretty typical anti-piracy maths.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    31. Re:Underestimation? by Artifakt · · Score: 0

      "Should be" sounds like a moral evaluation, like you are claiming that with more free and open source alternatives piracy should drop because there's less temptation. The real point here is that it has become so much easier to get free software that does everything the user wants from the expensive alternatives, and the hassles of getting pirated copies have supposedly increased due to DRM systems and such, so how could the real numbers NOT be going down? What the BSA seems to be claiming is not just that people have become, overall, less moral, but that they have become selectively stupider. They will try even harder to get illegal software if there's more legal alternatives, they will put up with increasing risks of arrest, of pirated copies with embedded malware, and of having any pirate software get inactivated at possibly inopportune times, just to stick with using those illegal copies, just BECAUSE they don't really need to as much as the last time the BSA looked at the problem.
                People try weird things such as Laetrile in increasing numbers when they are told there is no conventional treatment for their cancer - they don't go desperately searching for bank account draining quack treatments in unlicensed third world clinics when they are told there is now a cheap cure available in a nice, clean local doctors office. In the same way, Linux or Libreoffice or Chrome may or may not make piracy actually go down, but its pretty strange to say their presence has been accompanied by piracy percentages going up.
                If the numbers are being honestly reported, yes piracy should begin dropping. But the claim that the numbers are being honestly reported is itself an extraordinary claim, given what else we know. It's not just a matter of free software either. Microsoft has extended customer support several times for people with legitimate copies of their older operating systems. The BSA seems to be showing that not being under as much pressure to get a legal copy of whatever is newer from MS at the time actually has made MS OS piracy increase. Maybe this younger generation is somehow both 'less moral' and dumber about the risks, but that's a pretty strong claim given what else we know.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    32. Re:Underestimation? by rtb61 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I just read it as the bull shit association ie M$ wants what now. Let's see window 8 compatible PCs are supposed to have operating system lock out. Let's guess M$ are extended that to unlicensed operating system lockout. Buy a windows 8 compatible PC and it wont run at all no matter what you do until you install a licensed copy of windows 8, no windows 7 pirates, no Linux, no nothing other than a licensed version of windows 8. M$ is just trying to do an end run around monopoly complaints and stealing users rights by babbling on about pirates, raise the jolly roger, the only one trying to steal anything here is M$.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    33. Re:Underestimation? by NerdmastaX · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I believe the number should be going down. Soon enough, people will realize they don't need buggy siftware when they can get Linux and Open Source software that is better and mostly free

      true, however you forgot media.

    34. Re:Underestimation? by davester666 · · Score: 3, Funny

      They only download it to try it out, then uninstall it and reinstall Windows...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    35. Re:Underestimation? by donaldm · · Score: 1

      Only half?

      I would assume more like 99% and I am being generous, however while I myself don't pirate software since I run pure Linux machines I do download TV shows (not movies) so even though that is a grey area I think this would still be classified as piracy.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    36. Re:Underestimation? by digitig · · Score: 2

      No, not half a country: half of the world. The report says that the bulk of the piracy is in developing countries (not that they have much chance of suing there). Oh, and the report uses made-up numbers for the financial losses as usual.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    37. Re:Underestimation? by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Interesting

          Sadly, there are an abundance of reports stating exactly that. During BSA audits sysadmins can't produce paid licenses and receipts for every install of Linux and all the FOSS they have installed. That's reason #1 to refuse to cooperate in any sort of way with them until they produce a warrant. It'll cost you in legal expenses, but that's cheaper than their "fines" and licenses to come into compliance.

          I've known *many* business owners who have received their bulk mailed warnings of impending audits, and offered to let the install the BSA audit tool to bring themselves into compliance. {sigh}

          This topic has already been discussed ad nauseum on here over the years. I'm surprised they are still able to operate at all. Oh ya, they're sponsored by big corporations, they can do whatever they want.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    38. Re:Underestimation? by donaldm · · Score: 2, Informative

      I dual boot win7 and Ubuntu and there is still no comparison.

      There in lies the problem "dual booting". If you are serious about running a Linux desktop you have to have your favourite Linux distro as your only OS and for those who still need their Microsoft fix then run the MS OS in a virtual machine otherwise you may just as well forget it and run a Microsoft OS. As for getting "more work done in Win 7" are you talking about MS Office or something else and have you or your work paid for it. I have been using a pure Linux (Fedora) distribution for a few years now in the corporate sector and have not had any major issues with collaborating with customers and colleagues who are running a Microsoft OS and Office.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    39. Re:Underestimation? by Microlith · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Note that the above is true only on ARM. They're making PCs a pain by mandating default Secure Boot to Windows and leaving it up in the air if it'll be possible to customize the bootloader keys, but not mandating lock down on them.

      They would if they could, yes, but their own legacy is too big for them to do so, let alone anti-competiton concerns.

    40. Re:Underestimation? by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No I'M sorry friend but people would rather pirate Windows than take Linux for free. After all if you pirate Windows you only have to install it once, most distros now will tell you in the forums the only way to upgrade without problems now is clean install which is bi-annually again for most. I have taken bog standard laptops and desktops and tried in place GUIs with every "consumer friendly" version of Linux and have yet to have one come through with 100% functional drivers, Wifi and that damned pulseaudio being the worst offenders. Finally with the vast majority of the software that people want its as simple as 'download and run" on Windows but most of the software people want simply doesn't exist on Linux or you get some ersatz that just isn't nearly as good, Gimp for Photoshop, Calc for Excel, Gnucash for Quickbooks, etc. They just aren't up to the level of the software they are emulating, sorry.

      But what both you and the BSA fail to take into consideration is many of these companies WANT PIRACY TO EXIST. Lets take Windows which by mentioning Linux you are obviously trying to make a comparison to. Well Vista was harder to pirate, even had a kill switch, what happened? IT BOMBED. It also didn't run on netbooks which if MSFT wouldn't have dusted off XP and practically gave it away then linux might have had that market instead of being wiped out in less than a year. So what did MSFT do when it came to Win 7? It made its "anti-piracy" so damned trivial that damned near every pirate site had it cracked before RTM and what's more they made it so that pirate versions get full updates! All the pirate has to do is block a single Windows Update (that Windows will then happily hide if you wish and never show again) and Win 7 will get full updates for the life of the OS!

      If MSFT wanted to wipe piracy completely off the map in the west they could do so tomorrow, all they have to do is offer Win 7 HP for $50 and Starter for $35. When they had that "Buy Win 7 HP for $50 or $100 for a triple pack" deal going on? I never saw a pirated version of Win 7, never. They were ALL Win 7 HP legits. MSFT killed that program and no every Craigslist is filled with $100 machines running Win 7 Ultimate.

      But MSFT knows if they lower the price permanently the stock price will tank because wall street wants iMoney, so instead they just do a "wink wink nudge nudge" and made Win 7 the easiest OS to pirate EVAR, hell you don't even need a fricking key! Of course the one this does hurt is Linux because if piracy was wiped out then some corp might decide it was worth spending the money fixing the problems in Linux so as to undercut MSFT and give them some competition. This of course would not be in MSFT's best interests and since they get the majority of their money from OEMs and not refurbers or DIYers they would rather allow piracy than cut the price. You see the same thing with programs like Photoshop where they could cut the price and eliminate piracy but instead they just let students pirate the thing and then sell it to their employers that hire the kids who learned how to shop on the pirated version.

      You mark my words, if the BSA managed to find some way to block piracy tomorrow it would be MSFT and Adobe along with several other corps that would be fighting it. They know that piracy is the market saying their price is too high and that those people would go somewhere else if they couldn't pirate so you have what you have now where piracy is allowed. I'm not sure if the MAFIAA cartel are likewise aware of this but they seem pretty damned worried about alternatives to their media channels and non MAFIAA content so I'm sure if they ever manage to wipe out piracy they too will find out the hard way that rather than pay their fees people will just go elsewhere.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    41. Re:Underestimation? by Warma · · Score: 1

      Not really. If you believe they are gouging then don't use their products, use a free alternative, like GIMP instead.

      The problem is, that whether you like it or not, GIMP just isn't good. I have to use it at work, as the university doesn't invest in proper image manipulation software, but despite years of usage, I've failed to grow to like it. Common, often used tasks such as duotone transformation of the image are work-intensive, and I could bicker about a hundred other things that are unnecessarily convoluted for some reason. Ten years ago I still pirated CorelDraw/PhotoPaint (yes, I do like it better than Illustrator/Photoshop) at home to get around this limitation, but these days I have proper work, and can buy that software instead. In cases like this, piracy actually is a lost sale, as I don't know how many others actually get the software when they can afford it.

      If the open source movement wants to wrest market share out of commercial products, they need to have products, which are viable alternatives or even the best options in a given field. Linux already has this position in all kinds of server architecture, and OpenOffice is a good product, but other than that, things are looking pretty grim.

    42. Re:Underestimation? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Soon enough, people will realize they don't need buggy siftware when they can get Linux and Open Source software that is better and mostly free

      Actually people DO need buggy software, because there is no other kind.
      Linux and Open Source software is ALSO buggy software. And free doesn't necessarily mean cheaper, or better.

    43. Re:Underestimation? by chrismcb · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The blame lies 100% at the door of the greedy corporations who are gouging.

      The blame lies 100% at the door of the greedy users.

    44. Re:Underestimation? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Pretty much this. A program sells for $700 when a reasonable facsimile is available for free, legitimately.

      So why are they then pirating the $700 program instead of using the reasonable facsimile for free? In some cases people don't know about the "reasonable facsimile for free" but in most cases its because that free version isn't quite a reasonable facsimile.

    45. Re:Underestimation? by Sique · · Score: 1

      The corporate laptop I use is still running Windows XP, and then there is a Windows XP system in the house, which my children use to play - mainly minecraft and some browser games. So this one doesn't need to be Windows at all, but it is out of historical reasons (e.g. never reinstalled). All other computers are running some Linux variant, even the netbook I plan to give my son tomorrow for his birthday, which has a vanilla ubuntu install.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    46. Re:Underestimation? by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      If you are going to count media, I think you are right in saying 99% is generous. I have yet to meet a person over the age of 5 that hasn't pirated some form of media. Unauthorized derivative works, and unauthorized public performances run rampant in the under 8 set.

    47. Re:Underestimation? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Actually that is just another reason why Win 8 will bomb. Vista had nasty DRM to keep from being pirated, even a kill switch and what happened? it bombed. Its the pirates that end up working in the little shops that support their ass, its the pirates that are usually the "tech guy" in the family that the rest go to to find out what to buy, and they ALL avoided Vista like the black death. So along comes Win 7 and the DRM is so damned trivial to bypass that you don't even need a key with the pirate versions AND it gets full Windows updates! So what happened? Win 7 is a hit, all those pirates went all over the net gushing about it, told all their friends and family, who then went out and bought laptops with Win 7.

      Maybe after Win 8 flops they'll fire Ballmer and bring in someone who isn't retarded. if they sold Win 7 starter for $35 and Win 7 Home for $50 then piracy of Windows would be nothing but a memory, at those prices nobody would bother. In the end whether they like it or not piracy is the market saying your product costs too much and without the pirates MSFT is in trouble because they all recommend staying with an older version and nobody buys the latest and greatest. Nice to see Ballmer didn't learn a damned thing from Vista, he should win the PHB of the year award for sure!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    48. Re:Underestimation? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, I'm not suggesting GIMP is necessarily the solution, or that FOSS or cheaper solutions exist. But your case highlights the potential advantage of the Free for non-Commercial Use suggestion.

    49. Re:Underestimation? by JonJ · · Score: 1

      That's odd. The last time I installed Fedora it detected all my hardware including wifi and I was online in about 5 seconds after logging in. Windows 7 on the other hand... Hell, Ubuntu will even suggest to install the proprietary AMD/nVidia drivers automagically for you.

      --
      -- Linux user #369862
    50. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using Open Source works well to replace most pirated software, but not so much for games, music and movies/shows.

    51. Re:Underestimation? by DrBoumBoum · · Score: 0

      Please somebody point me to anything even vaguely comparable to the masterpiece that DirectoryOpus is on Windows. That will be the day when I switch to Linux on the desktop.

    52. Re:Underestimation? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I run Mint as my work OS, Win7 as play. I need Win7 as dual boot so it gets unrestricted access to the excessive hardware I bought to play games. "Serious about running a Linux desktop" doesn't mean that I can't dual boot another OS. I use Linux for everything except playing games. It just so happens that I like PC gaming too, and the games I enjoy don't run (well) on Linux.

      "Horses for courses", mate.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    53. Re:Underestimation? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

      No, it does not have to, but as less people have to pay for rubbish, I assume that the percentage of people that are paying for rubbish decreases, therefore, the motivation to use pirate software should also decrease and so should piracy.

      Indeed, some of us don't pirate any software at all. We use Linux variants exclusively at home, and the vast majority of our software is FOSS (LibreOffice, Gimp, Inkscape, Scribus, VLC, Octave, LaTeX, Chromium, etc.), or at least freely licensed (Opera).

      However, we do pay for licenses for some software, including Mathematica, Bibble Pro, Noise Ninja, and FotoPlayer. These vendors were farsighted enough to make Linux or cross-platform versions of their software, and their products happen to fit our needs better than any free alternative. BTW, it was a toss-up between Mathematica and Maple, both of which are available for Linux.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    54. Re:Underestimation? by alfredo · · Score: 1

      That's why I use GIMP 2.8 instead of PS. I am not a pro, so why spend all that money on something I don't need. http://www.flickr.com/photos/alfredo_tomato/

      --
      photosMy Photostream
    55. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah.

      Most Piracy is not of the kind the BSA wants you to think it is. The BSA just takes a snapshot of TPB and counts all the download counters over a year and goes "there that's how many lost sales we had"

      Doesn't take into account
      - Archivers, who download but never use
      - Collectors, who want every thing of X but will never use
      - Intermediators, who download it, but burn it to disc for someone else, sometimes multiple times (see the dude who sends pirated DVD's to the US miltary overseas)
      - Wholesale pirates, China.

      At no point can the BSA say these are being used. They have no proof unless the software tattles on them. The thing is, the activation/DRM, particularly in Adobe software is defective and can't withstand being reinstalled legitimately, let alone moved to another hard drive on the same system. So the DRM says "help, I'm a different computer, should I deactivate" and the activation server goes "yes, lets get that thief", so you then get grilled on the phone for an hour about how you should uninstall the software properly, blah blah blah.

      Treating customers like thieves just vindicates people when they do steal the software. Things need to start ticking the other way. One way to start sticking it to the pirates is to release self-contained sandbox images that don't operate if hacked. Then when you backup the computer you just move the whole damn install to another drive. Make as many damn copies as you want, but if you share it, Adobe can trace it back. This is over-simplifying it, but it's much easier to keep track of site licenses this way. Simply run the same copy from the central location, and the software will stop allowing additional copies from opening when the licence limit is met. Then connect this licence to a support glue. So Adobe can simply blacklist pirated copies from accessing support. Problem solved. Can even do one more dickish thing further and collect system profile information in the support glue so that Adobe can pull the DMI serial numbers from pirates machines and figure out which businesses are pirating things.

      Yes you can do that. lookup dmidecode.

    56. Re:Underestimation? by progician · · Score: 1

      Can we drop this "automagically" word? It freaks me out...

    57. Re:Underestimation? by VoidCrow · · Score: 1

      I grinned like a wolf when I stole my copy.

    58. Re:Underestimation? by Trilkin · · Score: 2

      Sure, except that most home Windows users don't use their computer strictly for work related things. They write the occasional document in Word and keep track of certain things using Excel, but they don't at ALL do the same things that Linux is best at.

      Another thing is that a lot of people do get different devices over the lifetime of a computer and since manufacturers have no real incentive to write Linux drivers for their hardware, well, you're at the mercy of the community that may or may not have one available for you at the time of purchase. Most devices work out of the box, sure, (and a surprising amount with a lot of issues that require extensive work to get working properly) but not all.

      They could use Linux and potentially spend a lot of time and heartache setting it up. I guess some people would consider that the 'fun' part of having a Linux box. Most people, however, just want a computer that works and runs the software they care about, so switching to a Linux distribution for most of them is just trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Remember, not everyone feels like they need to play a statement. Sometimes people just want an OS that runs they games they play and the office software they're familiar with.

      Wine's not bad, but it's just not there yet and, again, is just an additional complication whose only ultimate benefit is being able to say 'I don't use Windows.'

      --
      Nobody cares what the CAPTCHA for your post was.
    59. Re:Underestimation? by VoidCrow · · Score: 2

      I think it depends on your hardware, as ever. Pangolin installed and ran flawlessly on my two (different) laptops. The older one was an upgrade from 11.10. I also run Windows 64 for games, and for the record, it's as solid as a rock. I have no particular axe to grind with regard to this position.

    60. Re:Underestimation? by progician · · Score: 1

      Couldn't be just the fact that with the proliferation of the computers/internet/software usage and with the people got a bit more understanding how software can be acquired, the number of people using cracked propriety software should naturally go up. Add the fact that most of the user ask his friendly nerd to install teh Micro$oft Word instead of just asking for a word-processor. Not to mention computer games on PC (a market traditionally the most reluctant to go FLOSS).

      Software cracking (who came up with the word, piracy?) will only drop seriously after the FLOSS would replace the propriety model. And this won't happen as long as sysadmins of all companies do not push forward for a free solution for their user, as long as governments are still ambivalent over what standards and what software do they use and contribute to, and as long as there's no serious FLOSS gaming.

    61. Re:Underestimation? by GNious · · Score: 1

      might be that they are only surveying Windows/Mac users, and that those not wanting to "pirate" software are simply switching to Linux :D

    62. Re:Underestimation? by progician · · Score: 1

      Finally with the vast majority of the software that people want its as simple as 'download and run" on Windows but most of the software people want simply doesn't exist on Linux or you get some ersatz that just isn't nearly as good, Gimp for Photoshop, Calc for Excel, Gnucash for Quickbooks, etc. They just aren't up to the level of the software they are emulating, sorry.

      Perhaps the problem really that these software suck because enough people are using them on a regular basis. I mean, if gimp was being used by millions of computer artists and photographer, it would evolve much faster, and would go even beyond Photoshop in quality as in features. Gimp needs some pirating... :)

    63. Re:Underestimation? by progician · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute... I see what you did there!

      I don't know whether did you noticed but the software that you seem to be so addicted to is not part of the Windows as such. It is a third-party software and you know, applications can be developed on Linux too! If this company would have the balls they would release their software for other platforms too, such as OSX and Gnome/KDE. If you love that software, you should email them to send over the source code so you can make a version for Linux. Predictably, they won't send you the source code to use it on the system of your choice.

      So you're saying that you're confined to Windows because of this piece of software. It's really sad because gnome and nautilus can be enhanced to whatever you would like to do with them. Also, there are other file managers like this Laziness isn't a good excuse, especially when you are already using a third-party software.

    64. Re:Underestimation? by semi-extrinsic · · Score: 1

      Have you given Dolphin (the default KDE file manager) a shot? The only two things I see on the DirectoryOpus feature list that Dolphin doesn't have is CD/DVD burning and folder synchronization, but there are other good Linux tools for this. k3b (burning) and grsync (synchronization) come to mind.

      However, after using Linux for a while, you will come to realize that file managers are unneccesary. If you learn to use the terminal (bash or preferably zsh) along with grep, find and friends, you will be able to do magic that leaves any file manager looking dumbstruck.

      --
      for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
    65. Re:Underestimation? by Rogerborg · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well, derp a herp derp to you. Of course Lunix installs "depend on your hardware", and that's the problem. Its compounded by cretins who claim that graphics chipset X or WiFi dongle Y "work" with Lunix drivers, using a definition of "work" that reasonable human beings wouldn't recognise. Sure, that dongle will connect to my WLAN just fine... if I don't mind it dropping out every 30 seconds unless I turn off WPA and even WEP.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm on SUSE, Red Hat, Ubuntu and Mint all the time, but "depends on your hardware" just isn't good enough for Joe User.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    66. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This, basically.

    67. Re:Underestimation? by Rainbowdash · · Score: 1

      Me too, but then my 30 day trial ran out :( While installing....

    68. Re:Underestimation? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Hell, Ubuntu will even suggest to install the proprietary AMD/nVidia drivers automagically for you.

      Which is exactly where it screwed up my latest install -- it set up the proprietary drivers for my Broadcom wireless, and they didn't work (compatibility issues with another module in the kernel needed to support my wired network card, AFAICT). Uninstall the proprietary drivers and use the open source ones and everything was fine.

    69. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Therein lies the problem -- this " all or nothing" mentality of many (or most) Linux users. It turns off a lot of potential new Linux users. I have been using Linux for about 7 years, but I dual boot Windows for games. EVERYTHING else, I do in Linux.

    70. Re:Underestimation? by QuantumRiff · · Score: 1, Informative

      Wow! you must be a professional troll.. I work in a dual shop, and deal with Linux and Windows on a daily basis.. My Linux servers take 15 min to deploy. One reboot, and they are fully updated. My windows machines take several hours.. Countless updates, reboots, etc.. (wtf do I have to install 4 updates, reboot, find 12 more, reboot, then 3, reboot, then 17, wash, lather, repeat). If its a laptop, I get to deal with either taking the factory image, and removing all the crapware (dear god, why does MS let hp put so much slow crap on their machines!) Or, I can spend hours building a master windows image. At least with windows 7, the hardware drivers are getting better, and a single image can work on more computer..Not as good as Linux, but getting closer. I still have to update every single freaking application, because for some reason, they all have separate update tools... so each time I update the master image, we have to test like crazy. Then, maintaining these tools, if its windows, and we need to remove/upgrade drivers, its kind of a crapshoot.. from my experience, (and my business doesn't buy cheap hardware, or the stuff that just came out today) Linux actually provides more drivers that work better than windows. Does your 4 year old scanner have 64 bit windows 7 drivers? Doubt it.. most of them just work with Linux.

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    71. Re:Underestimation? by rohan972 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Can we drop this "automagically" word? It freaks me out...

      It's the correct word. The installation is done by invoking a daemon.

    72. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      After all if you pirate Windows you only have to install it once, most distros now will tell you in the forums the only way to upgrade without problems now is clean install which is bi-annually again for most.

      The only way to upgrade Windows without problems is a clean install, too...
      Just because new versions come out, doesn't mean you have to use them.

      Anyway, at least it's obvious now that the law's broken - if over 50% of people actively break it, then there are probably more who disapprove but don't want to do something illegal (me included), and that means there's a significant majority in favour of change.

    73. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      best post evar!

    74. Re:Underestimation? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      Which 33 countries surveyed is important, since percentages vary and also why people pirated is also important. You can't start fixing a problem until you understand the motive behind the act. For example Photoshop is probably heavily pirated amongst home users because of the $1000 price tag and they use it no more than a few days a year.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    75. Re:Underestimation? by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      I often don't remove windows, so i can use win fonts without troubles (i put symlinks of the win partition's FONTS mounted as read only into user's .fonts folder, so that no questionable copy of copyrighted font files occurs).

      Never had any problem with dual booting.

      Possibly because I rarely boot the main windows partition...

      I call BS on GP getting more work done in win (xp, vista, 7, whatever). You must live in a parallel universe where AV never expires or get in the way, Java never updates, drivers for old peripheral always install and work cleanly, clueless colleagues never let the browser (yes, chrome included) redirect to a different home or search page, and application updates never require rebooting.
      For some days I worked out of a live cd distro, reconfiguring the printers every time I booted up, and yet I was still more productive than under windows.
      It's all about familiarity. Linux is not more familiar than win, but a particular distro of linux sure might.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    76. Re:Underestimation? by bleedingsamurai · · Score: 1

      That is because up until recently Broadcom was not an open source player. With there latest chipset they are actually developing a set of open source drivers (brcmfmac and brcmsmac)
      So with the proprietary drivers you end up with only a handful of people actually looking at the code and fixing the issues, versus the new chipset, I can say "Hey, look I fixed this, want my patch?"

    77. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After all if you pirate Windows you only have to install it once, most distros now will tell you in the forums the only way to upgrade without problems now is clean install which is bi-annually again for most.

      Sorry, I stopped reading after that. Do you remember this graph?
      http://tothepc.com/pic/vista-windows7-upgrade-chart-2.png
      The vast majority of Windows 7 upgrade cases say "Custom Install", which means backup + format + clean install + reinstall programs + restore documents.

    78. Re:Underestimation? by bleedingsamurai · · Score: 1

      That is why I use Gentoo Linux, whenever there is a link issue because I upgraded a library, I just recompile against that library.

      You have to stop thinking that all open source projects are out there to "emulate" a proprietary product. In some cases this is exactly what they do, for example ReactOS aims to be binary compatible with Windows NT. But most of the time they are there to offer a different point of view, a different way to accomplish a task, and they are aimed at a different type of person. For example Adobe Photoshop is aimed at people who just want to pull a product of the shelf, click buttons, wave their mouse about and have an edited/digitally painted image. GIMP is all about the plugins, it lets people build their own tools literally, Photoshop only lets you create batch jobs out of existing tools, there is some room for end user plugins but not every much.

      So what more people go out of their way to pirate Windows? I think that has to do with the fact that it is very easy to figure out how to work a torrent client or some other downloading client and Google for "free Windows download" coupled with all the dirty/borderline illegal if not flat out illegal business tactics carried out by the Wintel trust back in the day that made sure only Wintels where stocked at your local computer shop.
      Most people only ever know about Windows because when you walk into Radio Shack or Best Buy or where ever, they only have Wintels if you are lucky maybe a few AMD boxes, but they still run Windows. And every time retailers or manufacturers try to do something a little different Microsoft does its best to threaten the company back into submission.
      From my point of view, it seems like more people choose to pirate Windows then download a Libre operating system because they only know about Windows.

      Though I do like your argument on why companies like a bit of piracy, I think there was a story while back highlighting Microsoft allowing large quantities of Windows XP piracy over in China because it got their name out.

    79. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's reason #1 to refuse to cooperate in any sort of way with them until they produce a warrant. It'll cost you in legal expenses

      How does that cost you in legal expenses? Someone comes round asking to poke around in your business and you say 'no, not without a warrant'. It might cost them from that point but it's over for you unless/until they come back with a warrant.

    80. Re:Underestimation? by isorox · · Score: 1

      I almost agree... I dual boot win7 and Ubuntu and there is still no comparison. I get more work done while in win7...as soon as (insert your fav brand of Linux) can properly install my video, network, sound drivers without a glitch... I'm all there

      Funny that, I say the same about windows.

      What's a driver? I just pop a usb key in the slot, boot, give it a name, and 40 minutes later I have a fully working linux machine.

    81. Re:Underestimation? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      One half of the PC owners do not know how to pirate software. This is how I read this shocking news.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    82. Re:Underestimation? by Relayman · · Score: 1

      I think you're missing the point: The survey number is totally bogus and has no bearing on the actual percentage of people pirating software or the amount and value of the software being pirated.

      It's also like asking people if they jaywalk. Just about everyone jaywalks occasionally but only a few do it every day. So if I say 57% of people admitted to jaywalking, it tells you nothing.

      --
      If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    83. Re:Underestimation? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      My question would be: Is the BSA counting freeware (either open source or closed source freeware) as "pirating" since it could be considered a "lost sale" when someone uses freeware instead of paid software. (Where "could be considered" means "would only be considered such by the BSA, MPAA, and RIAA.")

      I could have sworn hearing at one point that freeware inflated the BSA piracy figures and sure enough I found this Slashdot article from 10 years ago: http://slashdot.org/story/02/07/24/051207/free-software-inflates-bsas-piracy-claims

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    84. Re:Underestimation? by Relayman · · Score: 1

      I don't have mod points, so I have to respond: Mac OS X is not derived from Linux. It has open source pieces, but open source is not the same as Linux.

      --
      If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    85. Re:Underestimation? by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Ever thought of it as a feedback loop, mate?

      If they don't make PC games for Linux, you run Windows and buy Windows titles.
      Since they don't see "any interest" in gaming on Linux, they don't make Linux titles.

      Lather, rinse, repeat...

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    86. Re:Underestimation? by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      Because they still want Photoshop over Gimp, because they like it a little better. And since Gimp is free, how can Photoshop possibly be worth $700? Clearly, it's vastly overpriced. They feel a lot better robbing "about $20" from the "Big Greedy Corporation" than they do about letting the "Big Greedy Corporation" rob them of "about $680". The "Big Greedy Corporation" won't miss that $20 anyway. And besides, there's no way they could have afforded it at $700 anyhow, so the BGC is out nothing. Right?

      I believe that's the subconscious thought process, though most don't realize it.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    87. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but I believe the number should be going down. Soon enough, people will realize they don't need buggy siftware when they can get Linux and Open Source software that is better

      What? most Linux software I have tested against their paid counterparts often have more bugs, not less! YMMV.

    88. Re:Underestimation? by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 2

      I thought that too.. in 1995.

    89. Re:Underestimation? by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      Microsoft *does* have controls. They support your point though. Microsoft designed the controls to prevent wholesale counterfeiting, not private piracy.

    90. Re:Underestimation? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I don't want software which can be pirated.

      An executive for a software company would see what you said and conclude "Users want DRM" rather than "Users want FOSS software."

      You should really be careful about how you phrase things.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    91. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I think it can get a little bit more complicated than that. Let's say you have a worker who brings a value of $60,000 per year to a company. You can either use the free version, or the $700 version that increases the worker's productivity by 10%. Well, from a business point of view, that $700 is worth it for the gain of $6,000 in extra productivity.

      I've never studied business and that's probably way too simplistic, but my point is that the productivity gains can easily outweigh the licensing cost.

    92. Re:Underestimation? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Considering the mess it is to install Windows from scratch, that's an awful lot of trouble to be going to.

      A VM is much less bothersome. So is a LiveCD.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    93. Re:Underestimation? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > ..as soon as (insert your fav brand of Linux) can properly install my video, network, sound drivers without a glitc

      Linux has been doing this for me since 1996.

      Troll harder.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    94. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given his complaints, he's apparently talking about watching movies. It's unclear how that translates to "getting work done", but there you go.

    95. Re:Underestimation? by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      If you are really serious about running both, it probably makes the most sense to have Linux host a minimal Windows VM.

      If you absolutely positively need to run some bit of Windows software, run it in a minimal environment that will have the smallest possible surface area vulnerable to the wide array of malware that tends to infect Microsoft products.

      It's useful to separate out the OS from the apps. The fact that some of the apps might be interesting is quite distinct from the fact that the OS is crap.

      People were buying MS-DOS just to run Lotus and we're still suffering for it.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    96. Re:Underestimation? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Windows installs also "depend on your hardware".

      The main difference is that every respectable PC hardware vendor will offer you a machine with Windows pre-installed and sorted out. Otherwise, idiots like you would never get Windows fully installed.

      I had a Dell Netbook running XP that was a total disaster when it came to wireless. So even getting something pre-loaded from a DOS hardware vendor is no gaurantee either.

      People are trying to set a bar for Linux higher than what Windows can manage.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    97. Re:Underestimation? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      People use the big names because certain types of people fixate on big names. That's the only reason.

      That mindless brand fixation then gives that product a leg up in a market dominated by needless vendor lock.

      If you are trying to confuse Gnucash with Quickbooks, you don't really understand any of these applications and you are just mindlessly throwing brand names.

      Photoshop and Quickbooks both are mostly irrelevant for the vast majority of users. They are not "end user" tools.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    98. Re:Underestimation? by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      > Another thing is that a lot of people do get different devices over the lifetime of a computer

      It's not the 80s anymore. This is not nearly the problem it used to be. With the exception of a few notoriously proprietary hardware vendors (basicially Apple) most stuff is simply not that hostile to unsupported platforms.

      It's a new century. There's this thing called USB. Perhaps you've heard of it. Fixes a lot of these problems. You don't need monopolyware just to use peripherals.

      I find it terribly ironic that the main force pushing people away from Linux on PCs is Apple. Their refusal to play nice with end users reverse engineering their own support is a great big crutch for Microsoft.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    99. Re:Underestimation? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Image manipulation is a complex task. No amount of whining about GIMP will alter this. It is an activity that involves highly trained specialists. So the idea that GIMP might not replace Photoshop is hardly tragic.

      Photoshop is an expensive professional tool.

      It's not a toy for loser pirates.

      If there is no middle ground here, then count yourself as part of the problem.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    100. Re:Underestimation? by ve3oat · · Score: 1

      Clearly they asked the wrong question. What they should have asked was :

      Have you ever, in your entire life, ever, installed on your computer software which
      you knew to have been pirated, whether or not you ever actually used said
      software in any meaningful way? Ever?

    101. Re:Underestimation? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      What you say is certainly true for an artist.

      Most people whining about Photoshop are not in fact artists.

      What you really have are "collectors" that like to brag they have a copy of AutoCAD despite the fact they have no real clue what to do with it. Photoshop kind of seems simpler. Although it really isn't. So clueless people think they can get away talking BS about it and that no one else is clued in enough to call them out on their nonsense.

      Some know.
      Some know what they don't know.
      Loser pirates don't even know how clueless they really are.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    102. Re:Underestimation? by WeatherServo9 · · Score: 1

      software piracy is software piracy... if it were a real problem for Microsoft and the other companies, then they'd implement proper locks on the software,

      Implement proper locks?! And how do you do that? Normally I keep reading comments here about how DRM is always destined to fail, which so far is true as far as I know. And they seem to be trying, such as Ubi's always available internet connection, Microsoft's online activation and 'trusted computing', and others that people have complained about. How do you implement a proper lock on software while making the experience decent enough for the user to use your software yet effective at preventing copying (heck, even screwing the user, how do you implement uncrackable copy protection? Remember, it just takes one person to get past it, the vast majority of people don't need to be that smart to pirate...) You may be right about the love/hate relationship with pirating to avoid people from using the competition, but implementing copy protection that works isn't exactly a trivial task.

    103. Re:Underestimation? by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      I am not sure what you do for a living. I can say this though. I am a systems manager for a cab company in California.
      Running a supervisor GUI that is windows only. Digging through logs, looking up old non GUI data for police, cleaning up servers running an account every morning. (Routing about 30 people living at different addresses all to one location) Communicating with vendors and everything but that Windows only GUI I can do faster and better in Linux. The GUI took me about 10 min to set up with WINE. So I can do that as well. Running dual NICs on separate networks an have had no problem with basic installs.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    104. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is installing Windows difficult? You pop in the disc, click next a few times, it automatically detects everything, installs/downloads all appropriate drivers and that's it. No need to scavenge for drivers or dependencies, no having to jury-rig stuff and no having to edit inconsistent cryptic scripts as is required for any Linux distro.

      Which was the last version of Windows you tried installing, Windows 95?

    105. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but I believe the number should be going down. Soon enough, people will realize they don't need buggy siftware when they can get Linux and Open Source software that is better and mostly free

      Yadda yadda yadda. I've seen the FOSS competition to Microsoft Office. Sorry, but all software has bugs, FOSS or closed source. I will use the product that, you know, gets the job done right the first time. For email, that product is MS Office. There simply isn't a better email client on any market. Of course, that is merely one AC's humble opinion.

      However, better is subjective. If mostly free means better for you, you can't really say and... You can say FOSS is better for you because it's free. Find me a viable FOSS email client that is 90%+ similar to MS Office and they can get my business (well, they could get me to stop paying Microsoft, but it's FOSS so they don't really get my business, so-to-speak).

    106. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but I believe the number should be going down. Soon enough, people will realize they don't need buggy siftware when they can get Linux and Open Source software that is better and mostly free

      LOL, and this tale has been told for how many years now by the linux nerd crowd?

      Put up or shut up, is my take on it. And linux, so far, has proven that it needs to shut up since it obviously can't put up in the end-user marketspace.

    107. Re:Underestimation? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      A good point. Let's address it.

      To break the loop, there needs to be a change. Either I begin purchasing Linux titles to demonstrate a market for Linux gaming, or games developers begin producing Linux titles to create the market themselves.

      As I am unable to purchase anything which does not exist, I cannot be held responsible for the market not existing. I would purchase all of the games I own as Linux native binaries, should they be available and stable on my system, and perform at least similarly to the equivalent Windows release. However, until such titles exist, all I'm left with is F/OSS ports or rehashes of 1990s titles, or gaming on Windows. I choose the latter, as I was alive for the former the first time around.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    108. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. If you believe they are gouging then don't use their products, use a free alternative, like GIMP instead.

      WOW. Just... WOW is all I can say. You literally just said "if you think Ferrari is gouging, than buy a Yugo instead."

      How about, since you think Adobe if gouging you with Photoshop prices, and considering the cost of digital replication is near zero, steal it instead? That way you get to drive a Ferrari and pay LESS than a Yugo!

      I believe you have to be a shill, because I refuse to believe anyone is mentally retarded enough to offer advice like that AND follow it themselves.

      Finally, it's not stealing because the "owners" of the "intellectual property" have not been deprived of anything tangible, not even compensation. The people doing the "unlicensed replication" of Photoshop are not pirates, they are, most likely, impoverished serfs or indentured studen-loan servants.

      Fuck you very much, sir.

    109. Re:Underestimation? by snsh · · Score: 1

      The other half are ninjas.

    110. Re:Underestimation? by spasm · · Score: 1

      BSA probably counts linux installs as examples of piracy. You know, because SCO told them it was.

    111. Re:Underestimation? by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 1

      It's a global survey. That would include China, which is a well known piracy haven.

      --
      Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
    112. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you either specifically tailor your hardware configuration to your OS, or you're a liar. With Windows, we don't have to worry about matching up the hardware we buy to some tiny list of approved hardware. We can buy what we want and Windows just works with it. Windows has been rock solid stable for at least the past decade, so try a more recent version. It's embarrassingly obvious that you haven't used anything remotely modern.

      The only troll here is you. You started talking false shit and flinging insults about Windows and Windows users before anyone even mentioned their truthful experience with Linux. People like you simply can't stand hearing about the cracks in the Linux armour so you feel the need to jump to its defense on every post that isn't a glowing endorsement. The fact that you feel Linux can't stand on its own merits and that you invariably resort to childish name calling indicates that deep down, you must really not have much confidence in it yourself.

    113. Re:Underestimation? by WebCowboy · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I believe the number should be going down.

      You have to looks at BSA's surveys with a skeptic's eye. Their definition of "pirated software" is very fluid. The BSA in essence decides what the results are supposed to be then manipulate their data to conform. They don't say exactly that "we want the survey to show 57%" or "company X is short 15 MS office licenses", but they DO certainly go into the process with the full intention of reporting a "growing number of pirates" or "company X is out of compliance". Survey results are then manipulated to that outcome. (disclaimer: I do not have "smoking gun" evidence, but anecdotally in terms of how they've conducted themselves with those I know who have been audited--there were pretty convincing indications that they had decided the outcome of the audit in advance).

      What the BSA also does not report clearly is that they DO consider this survey a sign of success in a certain sense. It is a survey of people "admitting" they pirated, not a report of audit results. This does not indicate growing piracy--it indicates growing AWARENESS of piracy. For example, with Windows there are retail, OEM and volume licenses of the OS, and you cannot, for example, LEGALLY format the hard drive of an OEM XP machine and use a "full OEM Win 7" disc and license (perhaps because it was obtained cheaper than the upgrade version) to upgrade, even if you can technically achive this. Though "BSA education" more people know this is piracy even if you "legally own and paid for" the OEM version (the OEM version can legally only be used on a new PC).

      So, it isn't that more pirating is going on, it is that more people are aware of (or being made aware of) the complexities of closed software licensing and are admitting to "pirating" by way of such practices as incorrectly purchsing and using OEM installations.

      Soon enough, people will realize they don't need buggy siftware when they can get Linux and Open Source software that is better and mostly free

      Again, this is a survey measuring what the respndants THINK is piracy (or are led to believe is piravy). There could be a lot of false reports. People are becoming more AWARE of piracy but are still trying to fully understand what it really is. Although as I stated above more people know that you more often than not do NOT "owm" the software but rather "the right" to use it, and that those rights are limited in varying degrees (ie. OEM vs volume vs retail vs upgrade Windows grants you different levels of rights), there is still a (mis) conception of "no monetary payment == piracy"--of all misconceptions that is one BSA is trying to preserve and perhaps even enhance.

      Especially the way BSA frames its reports and debates, how possible is it that "pointy haired bosses" out there reponding to BSA surveys know that their IT guys swapped out their creaky old file and print server running Windows 2000 with a new box running CentOS, and since there is no record of payment, or an activation certificate, or a product key, that perhaps they were convinced by the BSA survey that perhaps it is a "pirated copy" of RHEL? The thought is that there must be concrete evidence of licensing like a receipt or activation certificate ot whatnot that can be presented as proof in an audit, so just downloading and burning ISOs or installing from a repository on the internet just looks like piracy even when it isn't.

      Even if they know their Linux systems are in compliance, it is known that some businesses make sure to have records of a Windows license for them "just in case". Some schools an librares in the past have had their Linux machines called "out of compliance" merely because the BSA auditor believed they were converted to Linux AFTER the effective audit date (the date on the letter informing the target of the audit--any licenses purchased or software installs altered after that date to comform with licensing is not considered sufficient to pass an audit). In m

    114. Re:Underestimation? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I should just reply with a facepalm jpeg because honestly? that is all that is required. Did you even read your first fucking sentence before you posted it? All you have to do is RECOMPILE...yeah, because Suzy the checkout girl can FUCKING RECOMPILE SOFTWARE.

      It is THIS, this right here, which is why people will gladly pirate Windows than EVAR take Linux, because even the fucking advocates are so damned indoctrinated they think that total bullshit like recompiles should just be ACCEPTED and that EVERYONE CAN DO THIS.

      But you know what? it should NOT be accepted, in fact you should be muthafucking PISSED OFF because that is SHITTY DESIGN. it is the classic "shit sandwich" approach where someone says "hey, want a free dinner?" and when you say "Sure!" they plop down a shit sandwich and say "You have NO RIGHT to complain because its free" well bullshit! You have EVERY RIGHT to complain because there is no damned way in hell such Micky Mouse bullshit will ever, in a million fucking years, be tolerated by the general public.

      If you can't bring your a game then go the fuck home. that first sentence says it all, broken Micky Mouse bullshit. The fact that you're so indoctrinated to believe that shit is acceptable is frankly fucking sad, just fucking sad.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    115. Re:Underestimation? by Taxman415a · · Score: 1

      As you seem to be aware of by the end of your post, the companies such as Microsoft that fund the BSA, and thus the BSA, are well aware of the benefits of piracy to their bottom line. But they also want to ignore that fact and throw piracy out there as the big bogey man for a number of reasons including pressuring for ever more draconian copyright laws so that they can squeeze those that they do manage to catch those pirating or just without proper software license documentation. Not having saved all the documentation perfectly isn't the same thing as pirating it, but the BSA and it's contributors such as Microsoft will sure use the laws they've bought and paid for to charge you the same.

    116. Re:Underestimation? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      of course the real numbers don't create the desired level of FUD

    117. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. You know what's even easier to "pirate" than Windows 7? Visual Studio. Download the trial. Google for the key. Everything works and you get all the updates. Even the online content is accessible.

      Encourages people to develop for Windows (or at least become dependent on the Visual Studio IDE).

    118. Re:Underestimation? by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          About the time someone's threatening, it's a very good time to retain a lawyer. You can file for an injunction against them, as the action of serving the warrant can be detrimental to your business. Look around for people's first hand accounts on what has happened with the BSA. It ranges from installing their software on your computers to audit with, to seizing all of your IT gear, to be returned sometime in the future. In some cases, they seized all servers, desktops, and all backups. For most companies, they may as well close the doors, without any of their It assets functional.

          Doing the legal stuff after your equipment is seized means you can try to rebuild from scratch (quite literally), but you will lose most of your revenue while that's happening. You may not see your old equipment again for years. As they already secured one warrant, they can always get another one to take your new gear.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    119. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I tried installing Ubuntu on a VM, but apparently Ubuntu doesn't like the drivers emulated by Windows Virtual PC. The walk-throughs I found online that suggested you could successfully get it running were all written for versions 7 and 8. After downloading ISOs for 3 different versions of Ubuntu, and getting exactly one of them to boot once from the ISO, but not to install, I gave up.

    120. Re:Underestimation? by green1 · · Score: 1

      I suspect it's worse than that. the BSA often simply assumes that any PC that was sold without windows on it must be running a pirated copy of windows. They do not see the possibility of someone running something else. therefore everyone running linux falls in to their "pirate" category, even if all their software is legit.

    121. Re:Underestimation? by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      The only time I have ever had Windows install all the appropriate drivers automatically was when I installed Windows 7 on a Pentium III.
      No current hardware that I've ever used has all the drivers built in to Windows.

      It's certainly not as hard as some Linux diehards make it seem, but neither is Linux anything like what you claim. Speaking of which, what was the last version of Linux you tried installing? Linux From Scratch on a 2.0 kernel?

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    122. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A program sells for $700 when a reasonable facsimile is available for free, legitimately. Same is true for almost every other piece of software that sells for hundreds of bucks. [citation required]

    123. Re:Underestimation? by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      I call BS. Give us the make and model of the machine that Linux cannot install onto without a glitch.

    124. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Linux for everything except playing games.

      This.

      It's the same as my pitch to users - if you want to play heavy games, you'll need MS Windows.

    125. Re:Underestimation? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      It's ok, the way they're fucking up DRM on Windows games they'll soon stop seeing demand there too.

    126. Re:Underestimation? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I call BS on GP getting more work done in win (xp, vista, 7, whatever). You must live in a parallel universe where AV never expires or get in the way, Java never updates, drivers for old peripheral always install and work cleanly, clueless colleagues never let the browser (yes, chrome included) redirect to a different home or search page, and application updates never require rebooting.

      Hmm. I don't run AV, Java never updates because I only enable it when I need it, drivers for old peripherals are already installed and work cleanly and clueless colleagues use their own fucking PC.

      Application updates occasionally but rarely need a reboot, but I shut down every night anyway. Uptime records are kind of old hat.

      It's all about familiarity. Linux is not more familiar than win, but a particular distro of linux sure might.

      It's all about software support. Linux doesn't run the software I use.

    127. Re:Underestimation? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      It's useful to separate out the OS from the apps. The fact that some of the apps might be interesting is quite distinct from the fact that the OS is crap.

      I'll confess, I've only been using Linux since '94, so I'm still a little new to the system.

      I would challenge however that Windows 7 is crap. It's not, it's a perfectly capable OS, very stable, well supported and only around four times the price I'd prefer to pay.

      It's also pathetically easy to keep malware free if you're remotely competent, but I guess if you're only used to Linux then it might seem a little scary having to learn a new system.

    128. Re:Underestimation? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Linux has been doing this for me since 1996.

      Linux has been trying this for me since then, but couldn't even recognise the CD drive on my previous laptop.

      Of course, the '95 copy of Yggdrasil I have on CD includes multiple warnings about the ability to permanently break your monitor if you don't correctly enter its parameters, so I have pretty clear memories on that front.

    129. Re:Underestimation? by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      Give me what I want to watch...when I want to watch it, otherwise...your business model sucks...

      I think you're right, lack of driver support is one of the big reasons Linux never gained traction for non-programmers. A big part of the reason drivers on Linux are so flaky is that hardware manufacturers are withholding the technical information necessary to write good drivers. It's not that Linux has a bad business model; it's that the makers of sound and video cards (and motherboards, and network cards, etc.) are actively blocking Linux from working smoothly on their products. Why this remains true, I can only speculate.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    130. Re:Underestimation? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Insightful? Give that moderator a big WOOSH!! I know that most of you got the joke, but for the poor foolish moderator who didn't get it, in the first place you don't have to install Linux to try it out. Insert the CD, boot, and run it off of the CD. Second, although installing Linux is a piece of cake, installing Windows (at least as long ago as XP, it's probably better now), Windows is a royal pain in the ass to install.

      Third and most importantly, nobody is going to try Linux unless they're just curious (few), or are just fed up with Windows' shortcomings (most). I seriously doubt many people will try Linux and go back to Windows unless they try a really crappy distro (it would have to be pretty bad to be wors than Windows) or they have brand new equipment that doesn't yet have Linux drivers.

    131. Re:Underestimation? by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

      People are trying to set a bar for Linux higher than what Windows can manage.

      I know! I also love how they explain how easy it is to install software for Windows and on Linux it is so hard. All the major Linux distributions have package management that makes finding and installing software as easy as putting apps on an iPhone or Android device. And all updates are done by the system rather than the user or hundreds of separate task manager programs running in the background grinding your computer's performance into the dust!

      --

      -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
    132. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem I have with the Linux Open source scene is the the software seems amateur at best. Gimp vs PS and what about a decent Solid Modeling program. Solidworks, Pro-E, Inventor. I'll stick to piracy. It's not like the companies are losing money because I'm pirating their software. Their software is too expensive and I'm priced out of the market already. How about a CAM package for Linux? Mastercam, GibbsCAM, DelCAM etc. We have EMC2 but that's a machine controller not CAM software. I did purchase a copy of MACH3 for $150 (which I easily could have pirated) because it is far Superior to EMC2.

    133. Re:Underestimation? by next_ghost · · Score: 1

      And then you go play Minesweeper because there's nothing else you can do unless you spend another 2 days juggling installation CDs for third party software, clicking "Next" for hours. You see, when you're connected to the net through a fat pipe, you can install fully functional and up-to-date desktop Linux system in less time than it would take you to clone a fully functional Windows installation from one disk to another. The last time I was installing Linux on a new machine, I spent about 10 minutes configuring the basic stuff like hostname and keyboard layout, then I just took a list of installed packages from another machine, fed it to the package manager and went out for a few hours. When I came back, the system was ready for use. I don't know how much you enjoy clicking "Next" but I certainly don't.

    134. Re:Underestimation? by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      > drivers for old peripherals are already installed and work cleanly

      The scanners I got for free from win users beg to differ. But ok, my anecdotes are statistically irrelevant. Everybody should compare any story to his own experience anyway.

      It still reminds me last time that I had to install a printer and win7 made me wait 20 mins to get the full list.

      Recent CUPS on linux is a PITA too, having to wait for it to identify a printer, but I wait less than 60 secs.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    135. Re:Underestimation? by bleedingsamurai · · Score: 1

      Difficult to recompile software? This is why I prefer Gentoo over Linux From Scratch. See Gentoo has a package manager so you don't have to bother with funky make errors. Let me show you what a typical compile looks like, type this at a shell prompt:

      sudo emerge firefox

      And off it goes compiling happily. Now lets pirate Windows, open your web browser, go to your favorite download site, type this in their search bar:

      Windows 7 Ultimate x64 cracked

      You just have to wait for the download to finish, but then I have to wait for my compile to finish too, seems fair enough.

      As for me needing to be "pissed off", I prefer Gentoo Linux over say Debian Linux or RedHat Linux or Windows or OS X because it is a system which you compile all the software you want. I happen to enjoy tweaking my system and having the bare minimum required to run. But that is just me. There are plenty of distributions that offer binary archives, some of the more popular ones even have big fancy GUI based package managers, something that Windows lacks. Lets face it, the install wizards aren't up to snuff, talk about "Micky Mouse bullshit".

      If anything, I'm pissed off at binary based operating systems that limit what I can do. I realize not everyone wants to do the same things I do, and then you have people that really just don't care, naturally different people have different goals, therefore different system exist.
      Notice I didn't say "everyone should compile every last piece of software they will ever use" and instead said "this is why I use Gentoo Linux"

      Maybe you shouldn't make such glaring assumptions.

      Now as for "the general public" not tolerating compiling software, no shit.
      People pay me handsomely to do the digital equivalent of wiping their ass because you know what, they can't figure out how to; set up their email account in Microsoft Outlook, they can't figure out how to update Adobe Flashplayer, they have a hard time grasping that their is a difference between the username and password they use to log into the network at work and the username and password they use to log into their personal email at home. They can't even install Microsoft Office by themselves either, it isn't that they don't have the account privileges, they are local administrators, they literally don't know how to click "next" a few times. Even after I show them step by step. I even had a lady who entered financial information into a "security warning".

      So I have every right to be pissed off at shitty designs that cater to the computer illiterate; but because they are shitty, the computer illiterate end up not figuring it out anyways. Instead of little Suzy checkout girl being able to fend for herself, she calls me up and says "set this up I don't know how" and now I'm stuck with something designed for people who don't know what they are doing.
      If I have to do everything anyways, I don't see a problem with systems that compile software, it isn't like Suzy was going to install it herself anyways, she is just going to pay me to do it instead.

    136. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that too.. in 1995.

      According to WineHq, Wine still needs some special configuration for certain games.

    137. Re:Underestimation? by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      Read the first half of the sentence you go on such a rant about:

      "Whenever there is a link issue because I upgraded a library..."

      The same users who won't recompile against the new library WOULD NEVER UPGRADE TO THE NEW LIBRARY IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    138. Re:Underestimation? by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      Win7 activation methods that produce "genuine results" are exactly the same as Win Vista. Both are trivial.

    139. Re:Underestimation? by sudon't · · Score: 1

      Pfft, I've been using Photoshop since v 1.0 and they've never gotten a penny out of me. Nor have I ever met anyone who's paid for it, though there must be some suckers out there. But if they ever dropped the price to something reasonable - something below $100 - I'd be happy to pay. Just like I pay for all reasonably priced software. And they'd make a lot more money, because many more people would be willing to pay.
      Software simply doesn't have much intrinsic value because, once created, it can be easily and infinitely reproduced. They argue that it costs a lot of money to write the code. That's true, and that is why it's worth paying something. But it costs a lot more money for, say, the Rolling Stones to record an album than your friend's band would cost. But no one would pay $700 for a Stones album. You expect to pay the same amount for any album. They're both just as easily reproducible once recorded. But if your album - or software - is better, (or more popular), you'll sell more copies. That's how it works, ya'll.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    140. Re:Underestimation? by InspectorGadget1964 · · Score: 1

      If by “marketplace” you are referring to desktops, your opinion could perhaps in a M$ world have some weight, however when a company needs reliability, performance and security, they go for the software and operating systems you are trying to put down. All the mayor stock exchanges and financial institutions run on Linux. The last mayor stock exchange to move on to it was London several years ago now. Your proprietary world is slowly crumbling and you are in desperation trying to grasp any tiny branch to hold you from falling into the void. You have found some solace in the fact that the screen in from of you displays some sort of logo that implies a company is making money from selling garbage for your desktop and you mistakenly believe that this image implies some way of market dominance. Wake up!

    141. Re:Underestimation? by InspectorGadget1964 · · Score: 1

      A file manager? Is that your excuse to stay with an inferior operating system? Well, perhaps you should say “Give me a replacement for the comfort of a cruise ship and I’ll start flying”. Well, I have a message for you. Keep the comfort of the Titanic and sink with it and use your glorified file manager while doing so. And please post a reply, I need to have another laughtoday!

    142. Re:Underestimation? by InspectorGadget1964 · · Score: 1

      So, are you advertising your lack of technical skill? Or your inability to follow clear instructions?

    143. Re:Underestimation? by InspectorGadget1964 · · Score: 1

      So you are unable to configure your hardware? Hardly exhilarating.

    144. Re:Underestimation? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Pfft, I've been using Photoshop since v 1.0 and they've never gotten a penny out of me. Nor have I ever met anyone who's paid for it, though there must be some suckers out there.

      Given the value it provides to my business I'm happy to pay for it because its quality makes me a lot of money. If I could find someone equally adept with GIMP then fine, no reason not to switch, but when we were looking for designers they were all experts in Photoshop.
      However as i mentioned in another post, perhaps the better model is a 'Free for non-Commercial Use', that way hobbyists and home users get it for free and if it's any good then if they start working in the industry that will be their product of choice and the software vendor will get paid.

      They argue that it costs a lot of money to write the code. That's true, and that is why it's worth paying something. But it costs a lot more money for, say, the Rolling Stones to record an album than your friend's band would cost. But no one would pay $700 for a Stones album.

      Because their market is enormous in comparison, larger bands have more reach and a larger market than smaller bands so obviously even if they sell it for the same they will sell more copies so they can spend more money on the recording, pretty basic economics at work there.

    145. Re:Underestimation? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      WOW. Just... WOW is all I can say. You literally just said "if you think Ferrari is gouging, than buy a Yugo instead."

      No i literally said: If you believe they are gouging then don't use their products, use a free alternative, like GIMP instead. And followed it up with a justification for the suggestion, which you clearly didn't read otherwise you wouldn't have post such a nonsensical rant.

      How about, since you think Adobe if gouging you with Photoshop prices, and considering the cost of digital replication is near zero, steal it instead?

      Steal? What's stealing got to do with it? The idea of 'stealing' doesn't even make sense in this context. But if no-one was paying for it then all you'd have are the free alternatives and judging from your response you're not too keen on them.

      I believe you have to be a shill, because I refuse to believe anyone is mentally retarded enough to offer advice like that AND follow it themselves.

      I can see you don't have the mental capacity to comprehend the post because you rebutted the first sentence rather than rebutting the justification, there was even a hint given the next few words are: Now the reason I say that is...
      A 'shill'? You mean someone who gets paid to advocate for a company? You do realize i advocated for a 'Free for non-Commercial Use'? So no, obviously not a 'shill'.

      Finally, it's not stealing because the "owners" of the "intellectual property" have not been deprived of anything tangible, not even compensation.

      HAHAHAHA Then why did you call it stealing? I know i never called it stealing, you're so confused you're arguing with yourself:
      How about, since you think Adobe if gouging you with Photoshop prices, and considering the cost of digital replication is near zero, steal it instead?

      The people doing the "unlicensed replication" of Photoshop are not pirates, they are, most likely, impoverished serfs or indentured studen-loan servants.

      Hence the reason i advocated for a 'Free for non-Commercial Use'...duh!

    146. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd rather spend 2 days installing my quality software than struggling with scripts and compilers just to get my Wifi, video, sound or some other devices working in Linux and then spending the next month trying to find Linux software that can even do the same things as my professional software.

    147. Re:Underestimation? by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      Nope, I can back him up. Same thing. You're the troll, keep trying.
      Oh, and remember those "winmodems"?

      --
      C|N>K
    148. Re:Underestimation? by blackest_k · · Score: 1

      perhaps you might enlighten me how do you do a split view in the file manager in windows7?

      i'll give you an example of the annoying way it seems to work.
      if you want to transfer certain photo's from a memory card you seem to have to open the folder with typically a 1000 images find a selection select copy switch to the destination drive paste switch back then search back to where you got to before select the next group and repeat.

      with nautilus i'd press f3 have one half pane with the source and the other with the destination and work through the list copying and pasting the required photo's.

      it's not a new concept dopus on the amiga and i think midnight commander in dos let you work the same way. Actually Dopus was probably better than nautilus as you could customise it to do pretty much anything easily.

      Anyone use Gmail or Hotmail? How do you select 5 or so emails from different suppliers and forward them to a single email account without having to load each email in turn and selecting forward using the web interface? I don't particularly fancy downloading all my email including attachments to do this either. There are lots of emails e.g confirmation email from paypal i don't intend to read unless i have to (trouble is maybe one day I will have to).

      Now I am not saying that Windows is inferior or Hotmail or Gmail just that some of the limitations really are annoying. Eg Google docs ever tried to print a spread sheet from that? only loads about a 100 rows at a time you have to scroll down through the sheet to get it to load all the rows quicker to download the sheet and open locally.

      it is really annoying when a computer makes you do donkey work.

      People do pretty dumb stuff too those 5 emails i wanted to forward all have attachments called availability list xx date, trouble is that is a useless name for a spreadsheet because once detached from the email you don't know which supplier it is unless you open the thing. everyone does them different and they are lists not spreadsheets not a single formula in them, but nobody is capable of creating tables....

      Unity is quite possibly more annoying than windows7 simply because they got rid of menus with software grouped in categories, such as graphics for graphics related software or office for ...
      Now unless you use a program everyday you have to play wtf was that program called to be able to launch the thing.

      They all suck to some degree and it seems there is a long way to go before they fix the problems.

    149. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take the Humble Indie Bundles as an example. Pay what you want, even as low as 1cent. You can even choose to give it all to charity. And still if you go onto any torrent site, people are downloading the bundle for free. People pirate because its easy, if obtaining a copy of a car was just as easy, I can tell you that everyone would be driving F40's and Veyrons and the 5k cheapo cars you can get now would be considered 'gouging' by people like yourself.

    150. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call BS on GP getting more work done in win

      Considering the library of software for Windows is not only much larger, but much higher quality it's hardly difficult to understand why people are more productive in Windows. There is also the issue of Linux tending to break itself or not supporting hardware or requiring hours of research and configuration just to get something as trivial as wifi working.

      AV never expires

      My AV software expires each year. In order to renew the (free) license, I have to click a link. Takes all of five seconds. The only time it "gets in the way" is when it detects an infected file, in which case it will alert me and offer to remove the file, quarantine it or continue to run it in a secure sandbox.

      drivers for old peripheral always install and work cleanly

      Yep, pretty much. I'm sure there are limits, but then I'm not trying to install decades old peripherals. Anything made within the past ten years, yeah, no problem.

      clueless colleagues never let the browser (yes, chrome included) redirect to a different home or search page

      How is this a problem? Redirection is a normal part of the web. If you're talking about someone changing the browser's start page, that's supposed to work that way. It would be pretty worthless if the user couldn't change their start page and it doesn't affect me since the change is applied to the individual user account.

      application updates never require rebooting

      They don't. These days, even installing most drivers doesn't require a reboot.

      There are many things that are simply not possible under Linux due to lack of quality applications. Music composition, audio editing, live mixing, video editing, graphics editing, 3D modeling, software development, editing documents, playing media and playing games are all areas where Windows software is vastly superior to anything else out there.

    151. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'll give you an example of the annoying way it seems to work.
      if you want to transfer certain photo's from a memory card you seem to have to open the folder with typically a 1000 images find a selection select copy switch to the destination drive paste switch back then search back to where you got to before select the next group and repeat.

      a) Open the directory or library in explorer, drag and drop directly to the destination in navigation pane.

      b) Open both directories or libraries, Aero snap the explorers side by side or top to bottom and copy between them as you wish.

      c) Select just the images you want by Shift-click or Ctrl-click or clicking the checkboxes on the image thumbnails then copy them.

      d) Copy all images over, then delete the ones you don't want.

      e) Use the Sync Center to automatically sync the memory card to a directory and never have to mess about with manually copying again.

    152. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your backup might be meaningful if you had an actual argument. Softmodems, or your preferred term of the trademarked brand name of "Winmodem", worked in Windows, as did every other modem, but generally not under Linux, so your point is what, to look like a clueless fool?

      He's a troll and you're just his personal sycophant.

    153. Re:Underestimation? by Trilkin · · Score: 1

      Uh, USB doesn't fix any of those problems, it's just another interface to use. Some USB devices work similarly enough that using the same calls works for all of a certain type (USB drives, for example,) but others don't - especially things like dongles.

      Besides, the main point is that all of the software a typical person uses works on an OS they're used to. Change for the sake of change isn't a good idea. Linux is not inherently more secure than Windows - there is just less malware targeting it. If a user already is using his PC with less-than-good practices, changing over to Linux isn't going to make them any more secure than a decent firewall and antivirus solution would under Windows.

      The FOSS argument doesn't matter to a typical user either. 'If you switch to Linux, you can work in an environment that's full of free and open software!' doesn't really appeal to most any given person who has already bought or pirated any of the software they care about anyway.

      The bottom line is - if what someone is using is working for them, there is no reason to change it no matter what your personal beliefs are. The same people who bitch about the changes in UI design are typically the ones pushing for a Linux desktop for people who really don't want or need it other than as a curiosity. Change for the sake of change. You don't like it and neither do most people.

      --
      Nobody cares what the CAPTCHA for your post was.
    154. Re:Underestimation? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      This is the normal M$ windows rule, one good version, the next version bad, the net version good and repeat. It seems to be a test of what they can get away with, how much they can screw around with the market with unnecessary and pointless upgrades. Windows 8 looks to be a real dog to ensure windows 9 looks really good in comparison it's the crazy M$ way to justify pointless operating system upgrades.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    155. Re:Underestimation? by Warma · · Score: 1

      I understand if a four-number user ID makes you feel entitled enough to both be rude and not read what you were replying to, but an observation is still not whining.

      While Photoshop is a professional tool, it also is a tool for loser pirates. They will have to use it before they can afford it simply to have the necessary qualifications and skills to compete in the job market for positions, which will eventually pay for said tool.

      The middle ground here isn't using free alternatives, as it leads nowhere, but being honest enough to pay later.

    156. Re:Underestimation? by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      You must spend a lot of time browsing through your files if that's what determines your choice of OS.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    157. Re:Underestimation? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Except they WOULD because the new library would be dropped on their ass when they clicked that little "update now' button in the taskbar. BTW I have YET to see that God damned thing work right on ANY system, this is tech that fucking MSFT has gotten right for damned near a decade and you STILL can't even upgrade the thing without software and drivers being shit all over just as the one that bragged about Gentoo, aka Use Distro X because no matter how many broken distros you try they will ALWAYS come up with another answer for X and then in the same breath do as that joker did and say recompiling software is just fine.

      Or are you HONESTLY gonna say that Linux is magical and never needs security updates? or that using old version with known vulnerabilities is fine in Linux because...what? RMS spreads magical toe funk? In the end its just the classic circle of the loon because it just goes round and round but it never gets fixed or ever gets better. sure they can do the initial install, but that is a static target, its the updates and upgrades and drivers that are the shit sandwich now and frankly haven't gotten any better in years.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    158. Re:Underestimation? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      So, which TM are you going for? The Linux makes me smart TM? Or maybe pay someone to fix it or its free you can't complain aka shit sandwich? From now on before pushing the same bullshit would you please go and pick the appropriate TM (which less than a dozen cover every FOSSie post ever placed here) so we can all save time? Thanks.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    159. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      come to Guatemala, you'll get a nice 95% hahaha

    160. Re:Underestimation? by InspectorGadget1964 · · Score: 1

      My description sadly fell short. You are not just technically incompetent and unable to follow clear instructions, you are also uneducated vulgar and I’m certain your IQ is below 80.

    161. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmmm...
      I'm sure that includes the ones using Linux.

    162. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better that than being Forever Alone Linux fanboi.

    163. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux and Open Source are bug free in your opinion? In my experience Ubuntu works only immediately after installation. Soon enough it goes out of control with completely arcane errors. May be in 20 years from now Linux will be fit for an non-geek PC user out there.

    164. Re:Underestimation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you want to transfer certain photo's from a memory card you seem to have to open the folder with typically a 1000 images find a selection select copy switch to the destination drive paste switch back then search back to where you got to before select the next group and repeat.

      Minimize all other windows.
      Open memory card folder. Set view to "Details" (or whatever it's called in Win 7, I forget).
      Open destination folder. Set view to "Details".
      Right-click Taskbar, Tile Windows Vertically.
      Highlight files, drag-and-drop from memory card folder to destination folder. Hold the Shift key while dragging if you want to move, not copy, the files.

      Was that so hard?

    165. Re:Underestimation? by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      In-release security updates don't change ABIs/APIs, except in exceptional circumstances. So you don't need to recompile anything against a security update. It just works.

      Quite frankly, I've never experienced the situation you describe, with the one exception being VMware breaking when you update a kernel. That more to do with the demented way VMware handles interfacing with the kernel, though, than the kernel itself.
      If VMware open sourced their kernel driver, and put it in the kernel itself, rather than being a binary blob that needed glue code to connect all the bits together, then it would just work. But since VMware changes their API every version, and the kernel driver is a binary blob, it breaks crap. But they're a closed source company. So obviously open source/Linux isn't the problem.

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  2. Different Approach? by exomondo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't that indicate that perhaps a different approach is required? This sue-happy, mafia-style campaign isn't working so perhaps that's not the right way to go about it. I don't have the solution but clearly neither do they.

    1. Re:Different Approach? by Lord_of_the_nerf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

      When you have lawyers on staff, every problem looks like an ambulance.

    2. Re:Different Approach? by artor3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Quite the opposite. This is great news for the RIAA and the like. Now whenever they do their scattershot lawsuits, they have a rock solid legal argument. "No your honor, we don't have any evidence. But statistically speaking, the defendant is almost certainly guilty!"

    3. Re:Different Approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why worry about being competitive if you can just sue everyone?

    4. Re:Different Approach? by couchslug · · Score: 3, Funny

      They should continue it in order to make using their software suck even more.

      I suggest "anvil-sized, spiked, parallel port dongles painted with necrotizing fasciitis" be required for every closed-source program.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    5. Re:Different Approach? by slazzy · · Score: 1

      I think it probably does show that better pricing models and more flexibility would increase their sales.

      --
      Website Just Down For Me? Find out
    6. Re:Different Approach? by loneDreamer · · Score: 1

      It should tell you that no-for-profit piracy should be legal. At least if you believe that it's not a natural law but a social contract (with specific trade-offs) that a majority of the people living in democratic countries seem not to want.

    7. Re:Different Approach? by statusbar · · Score: 1

      Does this mean that the BSA likes apple's iPad as a platform better since it had a very tiny percentage of people pirating apps?

      Or perhaps they would prefer to be able to write off the equivalent losses?

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    8. Re:Different Approach? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 2

      When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

      When you have lawyers on staff, every problem looks like a wambulance.

      FTFY

    9. Re:Different Approach? by Fluffeh · · Score: 2

      When you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

      When you have lawyers on staff, every problem looks like an ambulance.

      When every problem looks like a nail, and you have a hammer, you are likely going to need a lot of lawyers and a lot of ambulances.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    10. Re:Different Approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I take this as a clear democratic gestalt that copyright is not really a right at all. So if the BSA is unhappy about all the piracy we can easily fix that by doing the democratic thing and declaring all software to be in the public domain, and nullify corporate ownership of intellectual property. Then 0% of users would be pirates.

    11. Re:Different Approach? by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure this result demonstrates that their tactics "aren't working". Who can say what the number would be if there were no BSA?

    12. Re:Different Approach? by exomondo · · Score: 2

      Well the BSA is in the business of stamping out piracy and they are claiming piracy has sharply increased, they're obviously doing something wrong.

    13. Re:Different Approach? by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      I think that's a misstatement of their goal. Their goal is to mitigate piracy. That is to say the level of piracy in the presence of the BSA should be less than the level of piracy in its absence. If all we know is that the level of piracy went up then we can't know what the BSA's effect was. Maybe it had no effect. Or, maybe, the level of increase in piracy would have been even steeper in the BSA's absence. We just can't say for sure.

    14. Re:Different Approach? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      If all we know is that the level of piracy went up then we can't know what the BSA's effect was.

      It seems you're missing the point: They haven't achieved their goal of mitigating piracy. Has piracy lessened? No, in fact it hasn't even stayed flat, it's increased! So what they are doing now obviously isn't right, it may be better than nothing but it's quite categorically not achieving their goal.

    15. Re:Different Approach? by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      It seems you're missing the point: They haven't achieved their goal of mitigating piracy. Has piracy lessened? No, in fact it hasn't even stayed flat, it's increased! So what they are doing now obviously isn't right, it may be better than nothing but it's quite categorically not achieving their goal.

      Yes, the BSA would like to see piracy become less prevalent in an absolute sense. But I still don't think it's obvious they're doing a poor job. Maybe they're actually doing the best job possible and there are forces at work that are going to increase the rate of piracy regardless of what the BSA does. Who's to say that isn't the case?

      In your original post you said that an increase in the rate of piracy implies the BSA should change its tactics (assuming it wants to improve over the status quo). I'm sorry, but the former just doesn't imply the latter. Consider a hypothetical:

      The weather is 100F outside and my air conditioner goes out. My current indoor temperature is 75F. Wanting to stay cool, I rig up some fans to create an air flow throughout the house. The temperature gradually rises to about 90F, which is lower than what it would have been sans fans. Is the temperature increase clear evidence that my solution was the wrong one and I should try something different? No it's not. Now, maybe there really was something I could have done that would have been more effective. But the mere fact that the temperature increased doesn't require that some superior solution exist.

      That make any sense? Certainly the BSA should be open to alternate tactics that might prove more effective than what it's doing now. I just don't think we can conclude from this result that their current methods are obviously inferior.

    16. Re:Different Approach? by exomondo · · Score: 2

      The weather is 100F outside and my air conditioner goes out. My current indoor temperature is 75F. Wanting to stay cool, I rig up some fans to create an air flow throughout the house. The temperature gradually rises to about 90F, which is lower than what it would have been sans fans. Is the temperature increase clear evidence that my solution was the wrong one and I should try something different? No it's not.

      Well actually yes it is, it's obviously the indication that fixing the air conditioner is thing you should do...duh.

      But what's the 100F outside temperature in this case? You don't know, you're just speculating that such a thing could conceivably exist, if you apply that idiotic theory to everything then you can never prove anything.

      So the way it works is that if you think i'm wrong you're welcome to try and disprove it with some facts, but of course you can't, not only that but my conclusion is based on the fact that even the BSA - the 'experts' in the field - aren't specifying what this 'outside factor' could be but more to the point they aren't even suggesting that such a thing exists!

    17. Re:Different Approach? by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      So the way it works is that if you think i'm wrong you're welcome to try and disprove it with some facts, but of course you can't

      That's my whole point. I can't "prove" that the BSA's current tactics are optimal just as you can't "prove" they're suboptimal. What you've asserted, though, is that the increasing rate of piracy is prima facie evidence that the BSA's tactics are suboptimal. That doesn't follow.

      if you apply that idiotic theory to everything then you can never prove anything.

      Here's a hypothetical scenario I'd find more convincing. Let's say there's no BSA in the U.S. and no equivalent organization in Canada. This goes on for a longish period of time. Say ten years. Over that period, piracy rates are virtually identical between the two. At approximately the same time, the BSA comes into existence in the U.S. and some similar organization in Canada. The BSA starts doing what it's doing now. The Canadian organization takes some radically different approach. This goes on for another longish period of about ten years. Over that period, a wide delta emerges between U.S. and Canadian piracy rates, with U.S. rates trending much higher (relative to those in Canada). That scenario would lead me to believe in the likelihood that the BSA's tactics are suboptimal. Because there would exist a point of reference against which to compare them..

    18. Re:Different Approach? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      That's my whole point. I can't "prove" that the BSA's current tactics are optimal just as you can't "prove" they're suboptimal.

      But there is evidence to support the theory that they are sub-optimal, which is that during their tenure the rate at which piracy has spread has increased. There is no evidence to suggest that they have been optimal, the only evidence suggests that they are sub-optimal.

      What you've asserted, though, is that the increasing rate of piracy is prima facie evidence that the BSA's tactics are suboptimal. That doesn't follow.

      That's because it is prima facie evidence that the BSA's tactics are sub-optimal, and assuming you actually understand the concept of prima facie evidence you know that you do indeed need to rebut it, something you are unable to do, hence it follows perfectly.

      That scenario would lead me to believe in the likelihood that the BSA's tactics are suboptimal. Because there would exist a point of reference against which to compare them..

      Well since we don't have that scenario what would lead you to believe the BSA's tactics are sub-optimal? Are you suggesting it - and by extension pretty much everything else - is un-provable because there could always exist some other unknown force?

      You can't prove dinosaurs existed, there could potentially be some magic force that created all the evidence of their existence, but until you come up with some plausible explanation for what that force is your opinion holds no weight.

    19. Re:Different Approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you fucking retarded? To use your analogy If its 100 degrees then you turn on the airconditioner and it doesnt get cooler only a fucking retard would go "well i cant prove that the airconditioner is broken because it could be some other unspecified factor".

    20. Re:Different Approach? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      ...If you have no cooling and use fan for airflow, with an outside temperature of 100F the inside temperature would be 100F ... Fans don't cool they just move air around (and put out heat a little)

      If this is what the BSA are doing they they have lost already - either fix the Aircon.. or give up ...

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    21. Re:Different Approach? by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      But there is evidence to support the theory that they are sub-optimal, which is that during their tenure the rate at which piracy has spread has increased.

      That's not evidence that they're sub-optimal since we don't know what "optimal" is. Nor do we have any examples of anyone doing it better under comparable circumstances. It could be that the rate of increase is the very best they could have hoped for. Unless you can eliminate that possibility, i.e. give an example of tactics that would have produced demonstrably better results, then you can't say definitively that their tactics are sub-optimal.

    22. Re:Different Approach? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      then you can't say definitively that their tactics are sub-optimal.

      No, just that the theory that they are sub-optimal is more plausible given the evidence. If you can make a case that their tactics are indeed optimal and that piracy is going to increase due to some other factor that you have evidence for i'd like to hear it.

    23. Re:Different Approach? by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      The case I'm making is that, in the absence of an alternative that is either demonstrably superior or reasonably likely to prove superior, we can't assume they should try something different simply because piracy is increasing. That view is premised on another one: that there's something they could be doing that would actually decrease the piracy rate. They could make it go up or they could make it go down; it's going up, so they're doing something wrong. I don't necessarily buy the premise that there's anything they could do to make it go down.

    24. Re:Different Approach? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone considers the approach of BSA-style 'guilty until proven innocent' software audits and threatening lawsuits to be the optimal solution to piracy.

  3. The BSA should sue the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Boy Scouts of America have been using that TLA for a lot longer than the Business Software Alliance has existed. The former should sue the latter for damaging the reputation of their acronym.

    1. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by pecosdave · · Score: 4, Funny

      So in other words we should have the Boy Scouts go all WWF on the BSA?

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    2. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by pecosdave · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    3. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Why not both?

    4. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      So in other words we should have the Boy Scouts go all WWF on the BSA?

      The real BSA would have to shoot those little kids. Then ride away on motorcycles.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    5. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I checked, Boy Scouts of America said they can use it if they drop the A.

    6. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by RodBee · · Score: 1

      Panda Wrestlers.

    7. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      I just pictured the panda in a wrestling ring with a BSA enforcer's head in its mouth!

    8. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      So in other words we should have the Boy Scouts go all WWF on the BSA?

      The real BSA would have to shoot those little kids. Then ride away on motorcycles.

      The real BSA is a motorcycle.

    9. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      So in other words we should have the Boy Scouts go all WWF on the BSA?

      The real BSA would have to shoot those little kids. Then ride away on motorcycles.

      The real BSA is a motorcycle.

      Replied to wrong comment, didn't read my comment, or didn't read the link?

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    10. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by H0p313ss · · Score: 2

      Pay per view, I'd buy it.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    11. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by pecosdave · · Score: 1
      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    12. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Can you put it on a torrent after you whatch?

    13. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      British Small Arms. Brooom, brooommm, bbrrroooooommmmmm!

    14. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      So in other words we should have the Boy Scouts go all WWF on the BSA?

      The real BSA would have to shoot those little kids. Then ride away on motorcycles.

      The real BSA is a motorcycle.

      Replied to wrong comment, didn't read my comment, or didn't read the link?

      Judgement clouded at "shoot those little kids" (Boy Scouts) and did not read the link (which was excellent). Sorry about that.

    15. Re:The BSA should sue the BSA by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. I suppose my text could be inflammatory to some.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  4. And 43% of those surveyed... by multiben · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... are liars.

    1. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Technician · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not all of the 43%. Some of us have learned from the Ernie Ball story and moved off closed source entirely.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    2. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of us (me for one) use both open source and closed source. The latter we pay for (except for special deals like Visual C++ Express).

      Don't tar us all with the same brush. Just because you steal product, doesn't mean that we all do.

    3. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Mabhatter · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see the questions they use.

      I can safely say in at least 2-3 years I have acquired any pirate software. I don't have anything I'll-acquired on my in-use systems... Bout there might be something on old HDD somewhere.

      I used "pirate" opposed to "licensed" because they take their definition a set FURTHER than LEGAL definition of "infringement". Use stock Ubuntu... You're a pirate because of patents and such like you didn't PAY for it.

      along the same line, my workplace actively locks down PCs from users acquiring software not licensed and verified by them. Of course, the BSA based its definition on CONTRACT terms.. Which are often outright illegal... Oops, your check was a day late.. We should have claimed $50k for each PC in your business.. That's how they get the crazy numbers.

      You can call "liar, liar" of course the BSA itself has been sued in court for not properly licensing the software THEY use. They can cry, but THEY can't follow all the rules they claim to be enforcing.

      Of course the REASON for my new found legality is the Apple App Store for Mac and iOS. I've spent more money on software there 2 years than in the 5 years previous to that. It's beautiful. Restoring shared purchases to a fresh install of Mac OSX is a breeze. Apple figured out how to make it fun to buy stuff. Not to mention waiting for the little update badge each day for new things.

    4. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I can't technically say you're wrong since I wasn't one of those surveyed, I'm pretty sure I do not currently have any unlicensed software installed on any of my in-use computers. I haven't always been able to make this claim and probably do have some old, disused computers lying around that have unlicensed software on them. But for the last several years I've really had no reason to pirate any software. This is a result of using more free OSS, plus there simply not being any compelling paid software apps. There are actually several apps for which I've purchased more licenses than I ended up using.

      We aren't all deadbeats software thieves.

    5. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. I have not pirated any software (Master of Orion II was close, but the 1.31 patched exe replacing my key-locked direct download exe was completely legitimate - and I've bought the damned game twice already, it's time enough that I don't have to deal with that crap).

      To be fair, you'll note I didn't say I haven't pirated anything. I did record music (downloading is a fairly idiotic way to get yourself caught) back when iTunes had ridiculously draconian DRM.

    6. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see the questions they use.

      Knowing the BSA, it was "are you using any software you didn't pay for?" BAM, pirate!

      The average also included developing countries, like China, where of course a lot of pirated software is used (by comparison, only ~1/4 of UK computers have pirated software... supposedly). Also, the study found current enforcement measures were "insufficient." Shocking that the BSA would find that. Looks like we'll need more laws to help them extor... I mean pay for all their software.

      Especially the FOSS stuff, that is double-stealing: not paying people and not using their stuff.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    7. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by MacDork · · Score: 1

      Do you exe strange attachments in your email too? Count me in the 43%. The only thing "cracked" is your computer if you're downloading and executing "free" software on P2P.

    8. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We aren't all deadbeats software thieves.

      This reeks of illogical emotions. You're trying to associate illegal copyright with something much more harmful.

    9. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by multiben · · Score: 1

      Calm down Charlie Brown. It was a bit of a joke. I'm not suggesting you're a malicious thief. My point was that most people at some juncture in their lives will have been in possession of pirated software whether they realised it or not. That doesn't make them habitual pirates. In the same way that I may jay-walk sometimes, or go over the speed limit or break the law in other minor ways doesn't make me a criminal.

    10. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Knowing the BSA, it was "are you using any software you didn't pay for?" BAM, pirate!

      Does that line of reasoning not also mean that if you are breathing air that you didn't pay for, then you are stealing air?

    11. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Technically neither of those are crimes, they are traffic citations.

    12. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by RodBee · · Score: 1

      Yes. Stop your illegal air siphoning and eco-unfriendly production of CO2 right now, mister!

    13. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Nope, just borrowing it for a few seconds.

    14. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by smart_ass · · Score: 1

      Depends on just how FAST you are speeding.
      At least where I am from ... going sufficiently fast becomes criminal in the form of criminal negligence ... even if you cause no accident / damage / death.

      --
      Ouch ... did I just say that.
    15. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they don't call that "speeding", they call it "reckless endangerment" or "driving without due care and attention". It's like calling spitting a crime because you could be spitting on a person (which is battery and possibly assault depending on the situation).

    16. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Fluffeh · · Score: 4, Informative

      In case anyone is wondering, here is a nice interview that covers the story pretty much start to finish.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    17. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you've probably pirated something in the past. Making you a pirate, therefore.

    18. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Nursie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, or there's open source, which you don't have to pay for, and you can get the source too.
      I realise this is of little consequence to most, but I like it.

      I do think that the BSA should go after everyone they cam though. High visibility lawsuits against users will drive many more people to open source, some of whom may eventually be the sorts of folks that contribute.

    19. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 1

      I see what you meant, but I have to point out that certainly you didn't actuallly meant "closed source". You can only freely access a copy of a software package without paying anyone anything if the license explicitly states that you are free to do it.

      For that, the right to access the software's source code is irrelevant, as you are granted such a right by using either freeware, which doesn't necessarily provide the source code, or free software, which does.

      This is one of those cases where clearly open source software != free software, and the difference between those licensing terms, particularly in this case, are extremelly important.

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    20. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Funny I had the same thing when it came to Steam and games. I mean what is the point of pirating the things if Steam has them so damned cheap? you look in their under $10 section and there is more games than you could ever possibly play, and of course they have Steam sales several times a year that puts the biggest titles in the cheap bin right next to the great indie titles, so why bother?

      In the end I still believe piracy is simply the market saying you are charging too much. Whether with piracy or a black market time and time again we have seen that when artificial scarcity is imposed for something that isn't actually scarce then the market simply routes around the problem and that is exactly what i believe piracy is. Does anybody believe that if Windows were $50 and Photoshop $75 that you would have massive piracy of these pieces of software? Of course not, just as I'm sure if the price of most games were cut in half frankly the increased sales would more than make up for any losses while wiping out a good chunk of the pirates. just look at how Valve made 1700% profit off of L4D when they put it at a $2 price point as an experiment. You just can't magically force something that isn't scarce to be scarce and insane prices on non scarce goods simply doesn't work in a market based system. I'm sure that if it weren't for piracy many alternative would spring up tomorrow as companies saw a chance to grab a chunk of the market but by letting the majority walk the big corps can keep the status quo.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    21. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scratching my head here, too, trying to think of something we'd have. Machines are all linux with some legit Win dual-boots -- usually because they came with the laptops and the partition just got reduced to make room for linux. Wife thinks she needs Adobe products, unfortunately. They're paid for and Thaaaat's All, Folks.

    22. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      that's 9 years old... where are we now with Ernie Ball and Linux use? A follow up would be nice to see how they're coping and if they have any lessons to share with their success...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    23. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by humanrev · · Score: 1

      Indeed. The haters like to pull out the Ernie Ball story every now and then to show someone standing up to Microsoft, but the pathetic thing is that it's the only real high-profile story out there. Maybe there's a reason for that.

      --
      Most people on Slashdot are fucking idiots.
    24. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Ah, but open source/freeware users are the worst pirates* of them all.

      * Using the BSA definition of "pirate."

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    25. Re:And 43% of those surveyed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't pirate software. I use a lot of closed source stuff, too. I probably spent about $2000 on various kinds of software last year. ...Being rich is nice.

  5. Gonna need more jailhouses built by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Better get cracking on building those jails to keep all these pirates

    1. Re:Gonna need more jailhouses built by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's what the conservatives in Canada are doing, building super prisons for copyright infringers.

      In the States the super prisons are being built to house whole families of people who question the status quo of the government. By the current definitions, Ron Paul is actually a local terrorist.

    2. Re:Gonna need more jailhouses built by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      That's what the conservatives in Canada are doing, building super prisons for copyright infringers.

      In the States the super prisons are being built to house whole families of people who question the status quo of the government. By the current definitions, Ron Paul is actually a local terrorist.

      What mean ye by that matey? And who are ye calling local?

    3. Re:Gonna need more jailhouses built by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what the conservatives in Canada are doing, building super prisons for copyright infringers.

      I was under the impression those super prisons were for those evil people who smoke or sell a bit of pot, but I suppose copyright infringers could be on the list too.

      Back on topic...honestly, the only software I can recall paying for in recent years is multiplayer games that require a legitimate copy for online functionality, Valve games being pretty much the only exception because I love them. While I fully believe in supporting the software developers, musicians/actors/etc when it comes to music and movies, when you have limited financial means you have to prioritize. I won't deny myself and my family access to the vast array of entertainment and software in the world today simply because it's not within our means.

      Some might call that a sense of entitlement, but if I was to limit myself to legally licensed software and purchased movies, I'd have played only a handful of games, watched a dozen or so movies and definitely wouldn't have access to software like the Adobe Master Collection or Microsoft Office. I've experimented with some of the open source alternatives and generally get left with the feeling that they lack polish or features enough so that I'll continue to use pirated software.

      In addition, when it comes to television and movies, since I pay out the ass for cable (and internet + phone), I already have access to pretty much everything I download 'illegally', just without the commercials and the ability to watch it when I want, where I want on what I want. So no moral qualms there at all.

  6. Democracy? by Grax · · Score: 1

    If that many people are pirates, shouldn't we just use our voting power to deem the BSA as an illegal racket trying to hit us up for protection money?

    1. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That "voting power" is powerless against giant corporations with lots of bribe money.

    2. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is good. I don't think either of us would be happy with direct democracy^Widiocracy.

    3. Re:Democracy? by Grax · · Score: 1

      Yes. Thank goodness the corporate giants are there to protect with their giant wads of cash.

  7. Their lips are moving... you know what that means. by Jerry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Obviously...

    --

    Running with Linux for over 20 years!

  8. Need to come up with a final solution for piracy! by mykos · · Score: 2

    Clearly, the solution is to incarcerate 60% of the population, or at least monitor all their activities, North Korea style.

  9. You To Can Report Software Piracy by thestudio_bob · · Score: 3, Funny

    Do you know a company using illegal software? Report it now and you could be rewarded with cash!

    "Hi, I reported that my company was using pirated software by clicking the link below. It was easy and I received a cash reward for squealing. Now, I'm recommending it to my friends and family. They too can make easy money by turning in their boss and/or employer."

    What are you waiting for, click on the link below, now!!!

    --
    The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains /.
    1. Re:You To Can Report Software Piracy by rrohbeck · · Score: 5, Funny

      OK I clicked on the link below (it said "Reply to This".)
      Now what? Where is my cash reward?

    2. Re:You To Can Report Software Piracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this new facebook logon doesnt work properly....wheres my stuff?????....why cant they leave things along....

    3. Re:You To Can Report Software Piracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm going to be rich! I'll just report every company i find on the yellow pages. With more than 50% of them admitting to have pirated software in use I'll be richer than Zuckerberg! And unlike facebook I already got a business plan..

  10. At this rate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Over 100% of users will be pirates within just four years.

    1. Re:At this rate by jamesh · · Score: 2

      Over 100% of users will be pirates within just four years.

      Things will be so much better when that happens. The authorities can then just arrest anyone they don't like and have a guaranteed conviction!

  11. Re:Need to come up with a final solution for pirac by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

    It's the only way to stop the evil pirates! People who copy copyrighted material illegally will bring about the end of the world!

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  12. In a related report, math skills are declining... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Half Of PC Users Are Pirates, Says Study

    One in four UK computer users have installed unlicensed software, says BSA

    --- Brian

  13. This clears me by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2, Funny

    I use a Mac!

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  14. Phrasing by cranky_chemist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Do you know what the article doesn't tell you?

    How the question was phrased, which makes a helluva lot of difference in the results of any poll.

    "Tell me, sir, do you still pirate software?"

    "Well... uh... no."

    "So you admit that you USED to pirate software?"

    "Well... no."

    "So you admit you pirate software now, but didn't used to?"

    "Well... uh..."

    "So how often do you beat your wife?"

    1. Re:Phrasing by JoeCommodore · · Score: 2

      The wording may not be so blatant, surveys can paint a picture without leading on to what they are actually asking. It would be very informative if the BSA actually posted the survey questions/responses and other details to see how it was conducted.

      --
      "Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
    2. Re:Phrasing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So how often do you beat your wife?"

      Only the third Tuesday of every other month.

    3. Re:Phrasing by pjtp · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, this reminds me of an episode on Yes Prime Minister where Sir Humphrey Appleby discusses this very thing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA

    4. Re:Phrasing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      From the Report:

      By a wide 71-percent to 29-percent margin, respondents aligned themselves with the idea that “it is important for people who create new products or technologies to be paid for them, because it provides an incentive to produce more innovations. That is good for society because it drives technological progress and economic growth.”
      Computer users around the world rejected the alternative proposition: “No company or individual should be allowed to control a product or technology that could benefit the rest of society. Laws like that limit the free flow of ideas, stifle innovation, and give too much power to too few people.”

      Looking at the beginning of the statements, the tone for the Pro IP statement is very positive - "it is important" - where as the Against IP starts off very negatively "No". People are more likely to agree with a positive statement. I would assume the rest of the questions have a similar tone imbalance

    5. Re:Phrasing by aztektum · · Score: 1

      Especially if they're asking grandma or Bill the barber.

      "Did you pay for all the software you use on your PC?"

      "Have you downloaded software for free?"

      Downloading iTunes or AVG would be counted as piracy.

      Really need to see the questions before taking this seriously.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    6. Re:Phrasing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >"So how often do you beat your wife?"
      Every night she's a horrible card player... I beat her at tic-tack-toe too.

    7. Re:Phrasing by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      My guess is that the wording went something like this:

      BSA: "Have you paid for all of the software you have installed?"

      Company: *looks at Linux boxes and/or Windows boxes with freeware* "No"

      BSA: *gasping on horror while pointing* "PIRATE!!!!!"

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    8. Re:Phrasing by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      It was probably phrased "Do you use software you didn't pay for?" or similar, thus lumping all free/open source software with pirated software.

    9. Re:Phrasing by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they conducted the survey on September 19th.

      "Tell me, sir, do you still pirate software?"

      Yarrr!

      "So you admit that you USED to pirate software?"

      Aye, we sea dogs ALL be bit buccanneers!

      "So you admit you pirate software now, but didn't used to?"

      Avast! Ye already have yer answer, ye lily livered cur!

      "So how often do you beat your wife?"

      Every time i be seein' one o' them in port!

    10. Re:Phrasing by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Are you telling me that you'd take a BSA research seriously if they showed you their questions? That's quite naive.

    11. Re:Phrasing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, they did a survey across 33 countries, which likely have different rates of software piracy. Were they careful with the statistics so their numbers weren't messed up by the fact that they were not sampling a single uniform population? I suspect they wanted a higher number so they probably surveyed more people in countries with more piracy and declared the sample representative.

    12. Re:Phrasing by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      I hate to drop a Bill Clinton, but it really does matter what "are" means in this context. During high school, college, and even post college, I did occasionally pirate software, primarily stuff that I wasn't in any position to afford, mostly either to play around with or for home use when I had a valid copy at the office. Now that I'm in my 30s, have a reasonable income, and also have some intentions to have legitimate home business, I buy what I need. In many cases what I buy is new versions of the stuff I had formerly pirated (Photoshop, Office, etc.) because I want to keep using the same stuff I've used over the past decade or longer. I don't think I've had pirated software on the last two or three computers I've owned.

      I'm not sure what this survey would categorize me as. Would they say I "am" a pirate because I've done it in the past? Or that I'm not one because all my current software is legit? Does pirating anything, once upon a time, make you a pirate for life?

  15. Crackpipe statistics by hangar47 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "UK is firmly below the global average, with just 27 percent of computer users admitting they have acquired software illegally last year. This translates into an approximate £1.2 billion loss by the software industry." - "People who use software without paying for it" != "People who would pay for it if they couldn't get it for free". Only a group like the BSA (and it can't be coincidental that their acronym so nicely fits with BullShitArtists) would use stats like that.

    1. Re:Crackpipe statistics by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      It's likely that many of these companies would actually make a much bigger loss if there was no piracy...
      Piracy is about the biggest factor keeping use of free software down, those who can't afford the well known proprietary brands simply pirate it and that keeps the marketshare up and ensures that free alternatives remain niche.

      If you eliminated piracy entirely, then based on a very conservative estimate of 27% using pirate software (im sure more do, and simply didn't admit it), and half of those moving to at least some free alternatives because they cant afford (or refuse) to pay for all the software they use... You would see a 10% marketshare for free software.
      At the moment desktop linux is a small enough niche that hardware manufacturers and oems generally ignore it, 10% would be high enough that it wouldn't be ignored, and you'd end up with a cascade reaction.

      People are generally frugal, and will not waste money frivolously unless they have plenty of it... If you have two products which do the same thing, one is free and one costs even a relatively small amount, the one that costs has to be both significantly better and still easily affordable. People compromise quality for price all the time...
      And of course, a quality tradeoff isn't always the case, a lot of free software is superior to commercial alternatives and even that which isn't would rapidly improve once it attracts more attention.

      So i wish the BSA all the success in the world!

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    2. Re:Crackpipe statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only a group like the BSA (and it can't be coincidental that their acronym so nicely fits with BullShitArtists) would use stats like that.

      Not only that, but nobody mentions how much software they acquired unlawfully, or how much it was worth. Therefore the £1.2 billion number is, if not completely made up, completely meaningless.

    3. Re:Crackpipe statistics by coofercat · · Score: 1

      Also, my work computer has something like $2000 of software on it (if I bought it all down at PC World). However, if I put a "free for personal use" copy of some little app on my machine (I dunno, Winzip or something, that maybe I needed once and never used since), that makes my whole machine "running pirated software".

      My point is, from a moral standpoint, a computer like mine is basically law-abiding (and in fact is a benefit to "society"). It's about the equivalent of driving 2 miles an hour faster than the speed limit. It's not worth dealing with, other than maybe sticking an ad on the TV saying "speeding kills".

      Trouble is... morals don't apply here.

    4. Re:Crackpipe statistics by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 1

      "UK is firmly below the global average, with just 27 percent of computer users admitting they have acquired software illegally last year. This translates into an approximate £1.2 billion loss by the software industry." -
      "People who use software without paying for it" != "People who would pay for it if they couldn't get it for free".

      I admit that I have and occasionally still do pirate software and download music albums without paying for them, however...

      The more I hear that argument, the worse it sounds. The point isn't that a person wouldn't pay for it if they couldn't get it for free; it's that they actually have it without paying for it. How is it deceptive to call that a lost sale?

      --
      People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
    5. Re:Crackpipe statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... you're saying that the Brits are better liars?

  16. What about Free Software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Instead of the usual sarcastic blather about the BSA, shouldn't FOSS advocates be wondering why an estimated 57 percent of the population would rather pirate proprietary software than use a free alternative?

    This isn't how it was supposed to work.

    1. Re:What about Free Software? by mrclisdue · · Score: 2

      It's 57% of *users* (not population.)

      The remaining 43% could be using FOSS, or FOSS users weren't counted.

    2. Re:What about Free Software? by 6ULDV8 · · Score: 1

      They could have also used a select demographic that would skew their results. Or just as likely, they could have made up the numbers.

      --
      Pull my finger for my public key.
    3. Re:What about Free Software? by mug+funky · · Score: 1

      i like this troll :)

    4. Re:What about Free Software? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Pirated proprietary software *is* free...

      The way the end users see it, is they have a choice between an open source product they have never heard of or which they believe to be inferior, which costs nothing, and a big name proprietary product they have heard of which also costs nothing. Because they can get the big name product for free, they never even bother investigating the open source one at all.

      If they were forced to pay for proprietary software instead of pirating it, then users would be far more likely to consider cheaper alternatives and do some research.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:What about Free Software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or they asked "Did you pay for all software on your computer?" and counted everyone answering "No" as confessing software pirates.

      Wasn't BSA the people that counted every computer sold without a operating system as "pirated copy of windows" in the past?

  17. Did you know that 93.5% of invented statistics is. by FalafelXXX · · Score: 1

    ..complete and total nonsense. Especially if you paid a survey company with a clear understanding of what kind of results you want. Can you imagine them publishing a survey saying "1% of surveyed users admit to copying illegal software, the rest either did not know or care".

  18. This can only mean one thing. by DieByWire · · Score: 2

    Gonna need bigger prisons.

    --
    Never shake hands with a man you meet in a fertility clinic.
  19. Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by rueger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can bet that BSA surveys are rigged to generate the highest numbers possible. After all, if "piracy" was declining they couldn't really insists that all of the draconian laws and penalties were needed.

    Cops figured this out decades ago - no matter that crime stats have been falling for ten years, somehow the police always need more people, more equipment, and tougher laws.

    Any survey by the BSA - or any group with a vested interest - is automatically suspect.

    1. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how that works, if you don't want your budget slashed you have to keep asking for more money. You likely won't get it, but it will make it less likely that you'll have your funding cut.

      Unfortunately, the only cure for that is to stop voting for people that promise to lower your taxes and or shrink the government. Mysteriously these politicians rarely if ever tell you what they'll cut if elected, it's always something vague.

    2. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by mark-t · · Score: 2

      Crime stats have indeed been falling in many areas... but those statistics are generally only per-capita. Populations, on the other hand, have always been growing. In general, populations tend to grow faster than how fast crime rates shrink, so the end result with all growing populations, even though crime rates can certainly be down, is that there is always more crime, overall, which requires more policing.

    3. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Cops figured this out decades ago - no matter that crime stats have been falling for ten years, somehow the police always need more people, more equipment, and tougher laws.

      I don't claim to be a sociologist, but isn't a reasonable explanation that crime stats have been falling because the police get more people, equipment, and tougher laws?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      I don't claim to be a sociologist, but isn't a reasonable explanation that crime stats have been falling because the police get more people, equipment, and tougher laws?

      Actually it's because criminals are getting older, and not committing as many crimes or have simply stopped. That's how it's reflected in our crime data in Canada. Though our violent crime rate is going up, and so is petty crime.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    5. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      People born a long time ago were more likely to be criminals? That's interesting, how does that work?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People born and raised under the same general conditions are more likely to behave the same to the same environmental pressures. What those conditions are is anyone's guess (some say legal abortion reduced the number of potential criminals), but there are differences in the demographics.

    7. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      People born a long time ago were more likely to be criminals? That's interesting, how does that work?

      Younger people are more likely to commit crimes. As the population in general gets older, with fewer people in their late teens and early twenties, crime rates go down.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    8. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      Well, here in the Netherlands a recedivist burglar on a mobility scooter has been arrested yesterday. Here only eldarly people use those things.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    9. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      That's kind of hilarious

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    10. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by pantaril · · Score: 1

      You can bet that BSA surveys are rigged to generate the highest numbers possible

      Maybe you are right but i'd bet that piracy is increasing regardless of BSA. It's simply a function of ammount of available content (which is increasing over time), number of users downloading the content (which is also increasing because the total number of inet users is increasing, users are becoming more technicaly proficient in pirating content and pirating is getting easier then ever before) and failure of copyright to provide any technological mean to efficiently detect and prevent pirates activities.

    11. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      People born a long time ago were more likely to be criminals? That's interesting, how does that work?

      Failing to understand crime stats? No problem. Taking things out of context? Also not a problem. So to make things simple for you here's a longer answer.

      Yes, and yes.

      First there were more youth 50 years ago then today, also when criminals are younger they commit more criminal acts. As criminals get older they mellow out and/or stop committing crimes, unless it's generational(see Chicago school of criminology). Jump ahead to todays youth(in the 12-18 and 19-25 ranges) and you'll see a progressively lower crime rate, but a higher violent crime rate.

      So yes, more people = more crime. Difficult right?

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    12. Re:Sounds like Cop Statistics to me. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Failing to understand crime stats? No problem. Taking things out of context? Also not a problem.

      No, lol, I was genuinely curious, not sarcastic. Thanks for answering, because I was wondering.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  20. It has probably gotten lower by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would say the number is far higher than self reported as most home users don't understand license issues, copyright or DRM etc.
    People don't realize that the license for their ASUS laptop isn't transferable to their new desktop.

    Additionally I would say the number has fallen . Not because of prosecutions, or an effort on behalf of users but because of licensing changes from software vendors over the years and the new abundance of quality freeware and open source apps. (remember when everyone pirated winzip and wirar now 7zip is more common)

  21. *shrug* by koan · · Score: 1

    Just more hype to further the Internet lockdown.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  22. If *most* of the population are criminals... by gman003 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is it really a crime?

    This country is, at least in theory, a democracy. If more people break that law than voted for the current president, doesn't that indicate that the majority of people don't believe that piracy is "bad"?

    I feel like there should be some eloquent Latin quote for this... Ubi omnes sontes, nemo sontes? Did I get that right?

    1. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The country is also, at least in theory, rigged to protect the rights of minorities. Founding fathers were scared to death of majority rule; that's why we have representatives and don't directly elect the President.

    2. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by brit74 · · Score: 1

      > If *most* of the population are criminals... is it really a crime?

      I have to question that kind of logic. For one thing, I bet something like 99% of the population have broken traffic laws at some point - whether that means speeding or rolling through a stop sign or whatever. If your logic is correct, then we should get rid of a lot of traffic laws as well. Even worse, some recent reports say that more than 1 in 3 men in South Africa have admitted to rape (http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-202_162-7092661.html). Assuming your logic is correct, South Africa is getting really close to legalizing rape.

    3. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by gman003 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would, in fact, argue that the current traffic laws *are* broken as currently used.

      Speed limits are rigged to bring in ticket money. There's a section of highway I drive daily that's marked as 45MPH (with an advisory limit of 35)... that is completely safe at 65MPH+, and regularly driven at 70. I was once passed by a Mustang I swear was doing at least 120. There are no pedestrians (it's an overpass, no foot traffic), no sharp turns, no visibility problems, no oncoming traffic, nothing that makes such a low limit (for a highway) logical. And since it merges into 65MPH traffic after just a mile, I would argue that 35MPH is in fact completely *unsafe*.

      It's also been demonstrated that traffic lights with red-light cameras are almost always set to LESS safe timings to boost revenue. As for "rolling stops", yeah, those shouldn't always be illegal as well. Go on and tell me that it's unsafe to slow down to a crawl long enough to see that there's NO ONE else on the road, then continue on. Blowing through a stop sign's obviously a Bad Thing, but I see no reason to come to a complete stop when I'm the only one on the road.

      So if the laws that are being broken are primarily being broken in ways that harm no one, they are obviously in need of at least revision. Should we completely throw them out? Of course not. But should we improve them? Yes.

      Your point about South Africa does have merit - obviously something as harmful as rape shouldn't be legalized (although I'll not that "33% of men" is only 16% of the population, so while your general idea has significant merit, your particular was perhaps poorly-chosen). I suppose one could argue that no man-made law can violate natural law, and thus you cannot legislate away the "right not to be raped" or other such natural rights. However, as copyright is clearly an artificial legal construct, I don't think natural law is particularly relevant.

    4. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If above 60% of the population, habitually brakes a civil (non penal) law, and a bi percentage of the other 40% doesn't give a crap about whether it is enforced, then it should be revised.

    5. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you live in America as i do then you live in a Republic not a democracy. Democracy is majority rule where as Republic is majority rule with protections for minority.

    6. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by brit74 · · Score: 2

      > "I would, in fact, argue that the current traffic laws *are* broken as currently used."

      I thought someone might counterargue that traffic laws need to be changed. You can argue that traffic laws should be changed/liberalized but you need to make some extreme changes to the laws to be consistent. You need to argue for the more extreme position of making the traffic laws so liberal that a large majority are *never* breaking them. I'm doubtful that you can do that without also making the roads much more unsafe. For example, maybe you can change the speed limits in neighborhoods from 25 MPH to 50 MPH, and the large majority of people would not travel over 50 MPH because it would be self-evidently dangerous (although I guarantee most teenage males would still break the speed limit for the thrill of driving fast - most of us have, at one time or another, taken a car out on a road and seen how fast it would go). But, putting 50 MPH speed limits in neighborhoods would drastically increase the danger of car accidents. I doubt there's a solution which changes the traffic laws so that most people would *never* violate them AND accomplishes the goal of keeping people driving safely.

      I'd also bet that the *large* majority of people have, at one time or another, texted while driving (even I've done that, though over the past six months, I've been doing a good job of never doing that). It's dangerous for the driver, other people on or near the road. I also think it's perfectly fine for the police to give you a ticket if you are seen driving while texting.

      I'd also say that breaking a law doesn't mean you disagree with it (as with the speeding example). Heck, if I had to accept the position of legalizing every law I've broken, it would be a bad world to live in. For example, when I was a kid, I shoplifted once. I do not agree with eliminating laws against shoplifting. I wouldn't be surprised if most people alive have, at least once in their life, shoplifted. This does not mean they condone it.

    7. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by brit74 · · Score: 1
      I'm actually not sure if the statistic is about "habitual" law breaking. It was a little unclear from the article. It could be interpreted as "over half of PC users have, at one time in their life, knowingly used pirated software" or maybe it means "over half of PC users currently have at least one piece of pirated software on their computers". I really don't know what exactly the claim is.

      Also, just so you know: roughly 2/3rds of Americans consider piracy to be "theft". Your claims about 60% habitually braking the law and most of the other 40% not giving a crap seems overblown.

      "A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 67% of Likely U.S. Voters agree that someone who downloads a movie online without paying for it is stealing from the company that made the film. Eighteen percent (18%) do not view this free downloading as theft. Fifteen percent (15%) are not sure." http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2012/71_see_government_censorship_ of_internet_as_bigger_threat_than_illegal_downloading

    8. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming your logic is correct women don't count when voting. 1 in 6 people not really close to a majority.

    9. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      I thought someone might counterargue that traffic laws need to be changed. You can argue that traffic laws should be changed/liberalized but you need to make some extreme changes to the laws to be consistent. You need to argue for the more extreme position of making the traffic laws so liberal that a large majority are *never* breaking them.

      It is funny that you think that is an extreme position when that is actually the way the laws are intended to work. National DOT guidelines specify that speed limits should be set according to the "85th percentile speed" which is determined as the speed at which 85 percent of drivers naturally limit themselves to on the particular road. Most, probably all, states have incorporated those national DOT guidelines into their traffic laws. The extremists are the local yokels who post unwarranted speed limits in violation of their own traffic codes.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    10. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by buddyglass · · Score: 0

      I'm so sick of this little factoid. See the wikipedia page or dictionary definition of "democracy". The United States fits the bill.

    11. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      This is a stupid Republican-created meme that needs to die. "Republic" and "Democracy" have absolutely nothing to do with each other. The two terms are completely independent.

      A country can be a republic and a dictatorship (indeed all dictatorships are republics). And it can be a democracy (representational, direct or otherwise) in anything from a republic to a constitutional monarchy.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    12. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by ReTay · · Score: 1

      Um No?
      A Democracy is 51% or more can change everything.
      A Republic has a core of laws that are not changeable by simple majority vote.
      I realize that people are using the two interchangeably (out of ignorance or perhaps trying to move the Overton window) but they are NOT the same. True Democracy is a very short lived and violent form of government. In history Republics tend to be stable forms of government.
      At the moment the US is a representive republic I am aware some people ignorant of what they are asking for have been clamoring for a true democracy. I very much hope they never get their way.
      More details can be found here.
      http://lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspects/demrep.html

    13. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by techno-vampire · · Score: 0

      This is a stupid Republican-created meme that needs to die.

      Wrong. "And to the republic for which it stands..."

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    14. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by buddyglass · · Score: 2

      A Democracy is 51% or more can change everything.

      Nope. That's the definition of a specific type of democracy: direct democracy. It's not the definition of democracy in general. In addition to being a democracy, the United States is also a federal, constitutional Republic. That is not mutually exclusive with it also being a representative democracy.

    15. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by tftp · · Score: 1

      Blowing through a stop sign's obviously a Bad Thing, but I see no reason to come to a complete stop when I'm the only one on the road.

      There are some obvious flaws in this reasoning. Traffic laws apply equally to a healthy young man with perfect eyesight and to an elderly grandma who ventured out in her $old_vehicle to visit the church. The same laws will apply at night and in the rain. The same laws will apply to bicycles - especially those that you cannot see because the riders are wearing dark clothes and dark shoes after dark. I saw plenty of such geniuses.

      I have a stop sign near where I live, and I pass through that intersection wherever I go. I always stop for 1 second and look around. Not everyone does that; I have no clue what those guys are (or are not) seeing. One second does not make any difference.

      The trained habit of always stopping at stop signs also relieves your mind from the need to make a quick decision whether to run it or to stop. Perhaps your mind is fast enough to make that determination. Plenty of people are not so fast; they can be older, or tired, or not feeling well, or distracted. They can look around, observe an oncoming car and fail so see it. Human mind is quite capable of such tricks; most of our field of vision is synthetic. Tired people probably shouldn't be on the road, but with life being what it is, what choice do they have? Not to go home after work?

    16. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There isn't a latin phrase but there is an english one:

      Tyranny of the majority.

    17. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 2

      Don't be obtuse. I didn't say the US wasn't a republic. I was dismissing the bizarre rightwing meme that the US isn't a democracy because "Democracy is majority rule where as Republic is majority rule with protections for minority."

      The terms "Democracy" and "Republic" are completely independent from each other. A nation can have democratic government and not be a republic. (Such as the UK or Canada.) It can be a republic and have democratic government (such as the US or France.) It can be non-democratic and non-republic (such as Saudi Arabia and a handful of other absolute monarchies.) Or it can be a republic but not a democracy (like every dictatorship, oligarchy or similar country out there.)

      The two terms are describing different things. All "republic" means is the highest power is not vested in a monarchy, it has nothing to do with how the government is chosen. It sure as hell doesn't mean that a republic "is majority rule with protections for minority."

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    18. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by techno-vampire · · Score: 0

      So what you're saying is, you're objecting to the OP's definition of the term "republic," and throwing in an irrelevant ad hominim attack on conservatives just because you don't like them.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    19. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      I've been watching as this meme has been created and spread over the past few decades by the US Right. This idea that the US isn't a democracy. Initially it was seen only in the far right extremists, popularised by the founder of the John Birch Society, Robert Welch. But over the years it has been moving further and further into the mainstream ideology (and increasingly the cultural "Shibboleths") of the conservative movement. You can now see it on posters at most right-wing rallies or protests.

      It seems to be based on a bizarre notion that "democracy" can only mean mob-rule, and that "republic" can only mean a system where the individual is protected from mob-rule. (Poster 1. Poster 2.) And the even more bizarre idea that democracy is some kind trick being played by the left-wing to destroy America, and anyone who says the US is a democracy is part of (or victim of) the liberal/socialist/fascist conspiracy. States have even passed laws banning schools from teaching that the US is a democracy. Likewise, they play on the idea that Democrats want a "democracy" (which is bad), and Republicans want a "republic" (which is good.)

      Google "US is a republic" and instant-results suggests "...not a democracy" without any further prompting. It's a major conservative meme. And it certainly isn't irrelevant, since it would be where the AC got the notion in the first place.

      The US is a republic. It is a democracy. It is a federation. It is a commonwealth. It is a nation. It is a sovereign state. It is a regional union of independent states. These words describe different aspects of your nation, not different nations.

      [Weirdest is the tendency of proponents to appeal to authority of the founding fathers. Weird because Jefferson's party were called the "Democratic Republicans", suggesting that they weren't quite as dark on democracy as the proponents of the meme would like to suggest.]

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    20. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      It is a regional union of independent states.

      Actually, it isn't. If it were, there'd be two nations here, the United States of America and the Confederate States of America. And, I can assure you that not all (or even most) conservatives think that the USofA isn't a democracy. I have a friend who's (among other things) a conservative and a political commentator, and I'm sure that he'd laugh at anybody who made that claim. Of course, one of his doctorates is in Poli Sci, meaning that he's not exactly uneducated on the subject. I suspect that what you're seeing is more the result of poor education than anything else.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    21. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      And, I can assure you that not all (or even most) conservatives think that the USofA isn't a democracy. I have a friend [jerrypournelle.com] who's (among other things) a conservative and a political commentator, and I'm sure that he'd laugh at anybody who made that claim.

      So because of your assumptions about your conservative friend, who you haven't actually asked, you are rejecting my decades of observation of this issue, and the hundreds or thousands of conservative and libertarian websites talking about this (as noted in a google search for the phrase "us is a republic not a democracy"), and the recent and increasing use of the slogan by conservative demonstrators?

      But since you brought him up:

      "It was not all that long ago that everyone in America understood that this nation wasn't founded as a democracy, and that democracy, having been considered by the Framers, was rejected for a constitutional republic of limited and precisely defined powers. As to democracy, most of the founding figures of the American Republic rejected it flatly. John Adams was particularly vigorous in his rejection: 'Democracy while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.' - John Adams " -- Pournelle, 30/5/2012, taken from the blog you linked to.

      [Emphasis mine.]

      (This is also exactly the sort of "appeal to Founders" than prompted me to write: "Weird because Jefferson's party were called the "Democratic Republicans", suggesting that they weren't quite as dark on democracy as the proponents of the meme would like to suggest.")

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    22. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      Thank you for that quote. I'll point out only that both of his docotrates (Political Science and Psychology) were earned, meaning that there's a good reason to think that he knows what he's writing about. Just to be fair, I'd like to ask you what courses in this subject you've taken?

      Also, the fact that you can find lots of sites on the Internet saying what you're objecting to proves nothing except that every wacko out there is able to put up a website to push their agenda.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    23. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      I'll point out only that both of his docotrates (Political Science and Psychology) were earned, [...] Just to be fair, I'd like to ask you what courses in this subject you've taken?

      Rest assured that Dr. Pournelle's penis remains larger than any mere mortal.

      Speaking of assurances, are you still assuring me that Pournelle would "laugh at anybody who made the claim" that "the USofA isn't a democracy", or are you no longer laughing but defending the claim one the grounds that Pournelle "knows what he's writing about"?

      Also, the fact that you can find lots of sites on the Internet saying what you're objecting to proves nothing except that every wacko out there is able to put up a website to push their agenda.

      And are you including or excepting Pournelle from the list of wackos who are saying exactly the same thing as Pournelle?

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    24. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      Rest assured that Dr. Pournelle's penis remains larger than any mere mortal.

      In other words, none. And we're all supposed to think that you know more than he does, why?

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    25. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      And we're all supposed to think that you know more than he does, why?

      So just to be clear, in just 2 hours, and all without a trace of self-awareness, you have gone from:

      - criticising me for attributing the claim that "America is not a democracy" to the broad conservative movement

      to

      - assuring me that "all (or most)" mainstream conservatives would "laugh at anybody who made that claim", including and especially your conservative friend, Dr. Pournelle

      to

      - criticising me for daring to challenge Pournelle's claim.

      You brought up Pournelle as an example of someone who would never accept the claim, would laugh at it. When I quoted Pournelle matter-of-factly repeating the claim, you switch to challenging me to show my credentials.

      So I'm done. You have a nice life now.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    26. Re:If *most* of the population are criminals... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, let me see if I get this straight.

      What you're saying is, there is a universal standard of right and wrong, such that it doesn't matter if the majority rule says something is okay, it's still not okay, because the universal standard says it's not okay.

      Please, expand on that idea a little. I'd like to see where you're coming from, and where you're going, with it.

  23. who pirates software any more? by Surt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I haven't needed to pirate anything in years, everything has a free and good-enough equivalent now. What does anyone pirate today?

    --
    "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    1. Re:who pirates software any more? by lakeland · · Score: 1

      Well, TPB will give you leeching statistics for software. I'm sure it's not entirely representative of overall pirating rates but I'd imagine it's a good approximation

    2. Re:who pirates software any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure the BSA questions were designed so that if you answered honestly, you would be counted as a pirate.

      Perhaps something like, "Do you use software that you downloaded from the internet?"

      If you answer yes, then clearly you are a pirate.

    3. Re:who pirates software any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've pirated TV shows, music, and games in the last few years, but I've pretty much stopped that now; I feel guilty about not paying for content I want to encourage the creation of. A friend of mine recently pirated a British TV show that wasn't (easily) available in the US. I've pirated an old game I lost the CD to, though that hardly qualifies. Oh, and I downloaded a Final Fantasy 7 ROM when I never owned the game itself (borrowed it). I've hardly ever pirated non-game software, and not recently.

      With free software alternatives, services like Netflix for video and Spotify for music, and with my desire to encourage new content I like, I don't have a reason to pirate anymore except in odd cases.

    4. Re:who pirates software any more? by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Well, I needed a non-free alternative to the otherwise very nice Avidemux: Avidemux is unable to sanely re-encode h.264 videos - it loses audio sync catastrophically. Yes, there are other free re-encoders that handle h.264 better, but none that will generate an AVI container.

      So, for this particular case, free alternatives don't exist.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    5. Re:who pirates software any more? by humanrev · · Score: 1

      Simple - why settle for "good-enough" when you can get the best by pirating? Why bother to learn the GIMP and have limited support for the scattering of users out there when you can obtain Photoshop and be a part of the largest community around. Why settle for LibreOffice when you can use Office 2010 and not have to worry ever again about compatibility of file formats used by the overwhelming majority of people? And for what it's worth, you still can't vertically align in LibreOffice easily whereas in Word it's a couple of clicks. Why deal with the bullshit of Linux distros when I can pirate Windows 7 and enjoy something with far more polish and support?

      The way you phrased your comment, you're stating something as fact and without any basis. There are a LOT of deficiencies in free software, not that there aren't plenty of people who would rather ignore this because they personally haven't come across them. /fucking Slashdot, you're all idiots

      --
      Most people on Slashdot are fucking idiots.
    6. Re:who pirates software any more? by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      XP and Office for me. I much prefer them to the FOSS alternatives. When I eventually migrate off XP I'll either shell out for the current version of Windows or just get a Mac. Though I'll probably keep using my volume-licensed copy of Office 2003 if I go the non-Mac route.

    7. Re:who pirates software any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, quite right. As far as Windows is concerned, I simply use portable apps. http://portableapps.com/
      (Windows 7 + Portable Apps = finally ready for the desktop)

      At home it's Debian.

      Why pirate at all?

    8. Re:who pirates software any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pirate software that someone else makes me use, and that I can't afford on a student loan anyway. For instance, I need Spartan, Matlab and Maple for university tasks, so I downloaded them. And I needed a copy of Windows to run it on, so I downloaded that too.

      Of course, I could have just done all my work at the university computers, since they already pay licence fees for all that software. But the computers at school are always occupied, and it's just more convenient to be able to work where I want when I want, so I don't really mind resorting to piracy.

    9. Re:who pirates software any more? by Inda · · Score: 1

      My mother recently bought a new laptop.

      "I need Office 2012" she said, fully expecting me to provide a copy as I have done in the past.

      "Google Docs (Drive) will do you fine" and it has for the half-dozen letters she writes a year.

      Pirating software is an old passtime.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    10. Re:who pirates software any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in the days when I used to buy PC games (Probably mostly in the DOS era but I persisted for a little bit after that as well).
      Every game had a pretty reasonable demo so you could find out if you wanted to buy it or not.

      (The best usually shareware games gave you a full chapter out of 3)

      The commercial ones gave you a demo (That if it was a Windows game was fairly likely to cause a right mess to your machine but oh well).
      That was a decent enough proportion of the game for you to work out whether it was decent or not.

      I don't buy games any more really other than the Humble Bundles (Don't like DRM and it kind of restricts the other Indie bundle's I can get I think - I did take a look but they don't seem to have a minimum Windows/Linux DRM free version (Codes is not what I want for services that may have a DRM free version it is too much hassle).

      I know for sure if I was in my teens (And into AAA titles) I would pirate everything and then buy something if I wanted multiplayer and it was really great.

      If you are not from a super affluent family it is hard enough to keep a gaming pc up-to date by doing odd jobs etc.

    11. Re:who pirates software any more? by pantaril · · Score: 1

      I haven't needed to pirate anything in years, everything has a free and good-enough equivalent now. What does anyone pirate today?

      Well i pirate mostly movies/TV series/manga which are not available legally in english (the only existing translation is illegal from fansubbing groups), or the version for western market is censored, or the original dub is missing, or there are commercials in the show.

      You would be surprised how many works of art/entertainment are out of print, abandomed by their original authors or locked in vault by distributors. Actualy i'd argue that majority of copyrighted works are unavailable legally.

    12. Re:who pirates software any more? by humanrev · · Score: 1

      Meh. The story is specifically about pirating software, not media. I bet most people who don't pirate software anymore and are proud of their F/OSS habits are probably big piraters of movies, music and TV shows (because you know, the MPAA/RIAA suck and so they deserve it apparently). But I'm just a bit irritated by that group so my apologies if I seem like a dick.

      --
      Most people on Slashdot are fucking idiots.
    13. Re:who pirates software any more? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are other free re-encoders that handle h.264 better, but none that will generate an AVI container.

      Both FFMPEG and MEncoder can encode h.264 into AVIs just fine.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    14. Re:who pirates software any more? by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      They have been busy pirating torrent software left and right.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    15. Re:who pirates software any more? by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      A little over a year ago I gave my mother LibreOffice, and just told her it was the newest version of MS office. No problems and I don't have to feel bad about pirating MS office.
      To be honest I probably had fewer questions than if I had pirated a copy of Office 2010, because it doesn't have that horrible ribbon interface. Changing the interface will completely baffle a 60 something woman.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    16. Re:who pirates software any more? by babthooka · · Score: 1

      What does anyone pirate today?

      Movies

  24. Inaccurate by LocalH · · Score: 2

    Something tells me they didn't even probe further, but even if they did they wouldn't have reported this part of the data. I bet that a significant portion of the 57% of "admitted pirates" are also legitimate customers who are using pirated software to bypass the annoyances (activation, DRM) that generally comes from high-profile commercial software.

    --
    FC Closer
  25. 57% is enough to win any race by AG+the+other · · Score: 1

    If I were a politician, which I'm not, too lazy for one thing and don't like people that much, but if I were I'd be totally delighted to win any race with 57% of the voters voting for me.
    I believe that's what most winning politicians would call a mandate for their policies.

    --
    Non bene pro toto libertas venditur auro
    1. Re:57% is enough to win any race by rrohbeck · · Score: 2

      So where's the American Pirate Party?

    2. Re:57% is enough to win any race by Anarchduke · · Score: 1

      We already have two parties that rape and pillage.

      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
  26. misleading statistics by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As usual when someone with an agenda throws statistics at you, you can rest assured that they've manipulated them in such a way to achieve their own goals. In this case, it's rather easy to see what they are doing. Worldwide? When I was in Africa 2 years ago, the hotel I stayed in had a computer in the community room. Windows Genuine Advantage warnings kept popping up. I fixed that for them... much to the bemusement of the Microsoft employee that was staying their with us. After traveling to several other locations we found that, at least to our limited exposure, ALL the software on EVERY computer was pirated. The Microsoft guy was appalled. I asked him where he expected these people to buy his software? Shipping to that part of africa was somewhere in the neighborhood of $500... There were no walmarts, or any sort of software vendors. The fastest data connection I came across was at a coffee shop at it was 56k. So you can be fairly certain that the entire continent of Africa's piracy rate is well above 99% Take the population of Africa... oh and China... and India... are you starting to get the picture? Did their poll ask people if it were possible for them to buy the software they needed in the first place? I doubt it.

    1. Re:misleading statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One could argue that if they couldn't buy the software then how could they buy the computers that were running it? The stats are still misleading.

    2. Re:misleading statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not buying new, perhaps?

    3. Re:misleading statistics by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 1

      You're right in that people with agenda will find a study somewhere some place that paints the picture in the way they want. It happens all the time anymore. I once got a laugh when they tried to sell Lucky Charms as a health food because the oat flakes are known to be good for your heart.

    4. Re:misleading statistics by uolamer · · Score: 1

      People in a situation/country where things are that bad, the last then they should care about is the legality of their software. I think its funny the Microsoft employee didn't know it was like that before he got there it is common knowledge to IT people.

      --
      s/©//g
    5. Re:misleading statistics by orlanz · · Score: 2

      Or how General Mills - Naturally Flavored Honey Nut Cherrios still says "More WHOLE GRAIN than any other ingredient!*" They even shamelessly explain "That's why it's first on the ingredient list!" and footnote "*as compared to any other single ingredient".

      So what's right after "Whole Grain Oats"? Sugar, Modified Corn Starch, Honey, Brown Sugar Syrup. So basically: "sugar" in various forms, split just enough to keep #2 from overtaking #1. I guess we should be happy little mindless drones that atleast #2 or #3 isn't HFCS.

      I remember when they just had the big heart and dumb ads on "Can Help Lower Cholesterol**" where each serving only gives you 1/4 of what can actually or may help lower cholesterol. The real atrocity would be if their Marketing guys weren't the highest paid in the industry.

    6. Re:misleading statistics by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Pretty well all those computers found in Iraq were running a version of MS Windows that was newer than the sanctions so could never have been legally sold there - so pretty close to 100%.

  27. Who is the winner, really? by TuckerBag · · Score: 1

    I guess this is something that has probably been said a thousand times before, but, If pirating stopped overnight, then surely open source would become the standard within months? There's no way that pirates would suddenly start paying for software. And I mean NO WAY! In a way, pirating is doing corporations a massive favour by indirectly stifling open source, yes? Anyway, I love reading threads about this kind of topic, so I thought I should start to contribute :-)

    1. Re:Who is the winner, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends, depending upon the countries in question they may not even have the option of buying software legally. I know around here it's a real PITA when I want to pay for legitimate media, so I generally don't. My only option often times involves PayPal and if I don't use a VPN the payment gets automatically reversed by PayPal and the vendor gets frustrated.

      I'd gladly pay for what I'm pirating, but the companies are just not going out of their way to make that feasible in most cases.

  28. Another poll..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    100% of men polled claim to have large penises!

  29. I think we've all pirated at some point by ZorinLynx · · Score: 2

    Don't pretty much all computer users, especially those of the geeky variety, pirate software when they're kids and have little to no money to buy it?

    I sure as hell did! Not because I wanted to "stick it to the man", but because I had no other way of getting software. I was a kid, I had no cash, no income. The software publishers lost nothing on me because had I not been able to pirate, I wouldn't have been able to buy the software anyway.

    Now as an adult, I spend quite a bit of money on software and media. The only time I'll still download something questionable is when I cannot obtain it legally otherwise.

    So surveying people asking if they've ever pirated software is going to be a naturally inflated number, because many of us did when we were kids.

    1. Re:I think we've all pirated at some point by clarkn0va · · Score: 1

      Don't pretty much all computer users, especially those of the geeky variety, pirate software when they're kids and have little to no money to buy it?

      No doubt many do, but when I built my first computer and couldn't possibly justify the extra cost of a Windows license, it was a no-brainer for me to outfit it with Linux. Thanks to that can-do attitude (yeah, it was a much bigger challenge in 2003 compared to now), I'm now an accomplished IT professional with no formal training. I work on Windows as well these days, but have never had to purchase or pirate a copy for myself.

      --
      I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
    2. Re:I think we've all pirated at some point by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 1

      Was an even bigger challenge when I built my first computer in 1989. Much easier to copy an existing MS-DOS disk.

    3. Re:I think we've all pirated at some point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The software publishers lost nothing

      Actually, sometimes they gain. Photoshop used to be trivial to crack, and Adobe did nothing to make it harder. Because that gave them a huge industry foothold in the crucial early years. Everybody knew how to use Photoshop, and every company taking resumes got a truckload of people who were already completely skilled in a fairly difficult application. That went a long way to making Photoshop /the/ standard, and Adobe profited big time.

      And unlike releasing "free for non-commercial" or "student" versions, this strategy gave them a way to turn off the tap faster.

      Photoshop wasn't trivial to crack, version after version, because Adobe was dumb. They deliberately gamed piracy to profit.

    4. Re:I think we've all pirated at some point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and now that we are adults, we can all chip into a PAC and finish this RIAA group off by purchasing some effective government.

    5. Re:I think we've all pirated at some point by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Don't pretty much all computer users, especially those of the geeky variety, pirate software when they're kids and have little to no money to buy it? I sure as hell did! Not because I wanted to "stick it to the man", but because I had no other way of getting software. I was a kid, I had no cash, no income. The software publishers lost nothing on me because had I not been able to pirate, I wouldn't have been able to buy the software anyway.

      I've got no reason to get on my high horse since I did that too but even as a kid that's a bit of a cop out. Somebody gave you clothes and food and toys and presumably an allowance, you probably got birthday presents and Christmas presents and such. If you had to pester them to buy software for you they would, of course not everything you pointed at but piracy was always the easy way. That way you could wish for things you couldn't pirate and pirate the things you could pirate, eating your cake and having it too. Even as adults people commit their money then claim they've nothing to buy software for, thus rationalizing a position they've construed for themselves. There's very few that really have absolutely no money they could choose to spend.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:I think we've all pirated at some point by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      Exactly, this is why we need to monitor everything that everyone does on a computer from an early childhood. This way, when someone from the BSA produces a report about pirating software, we can refute anything they say, because they themselves have broken the rules in the past.

  30. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  31. Piracy went up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Piracy when up during a shitty economy? NO .. WAY ..

    Consequences will never be the same! /fear

  32. Re:Need to come up with a final solution for pirac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I read final solution I immediately thought you were going to talk about just killing everyone with illegally downloaded software.

  33. Democracy by Luckyo · · Score: 1

    And since we live in democratic countries, clearly piracy should be decriminalized.

    Ah, yes, representative democracy and majority of MONEY. Never mind, carry on.

    P.S. One start to wonder when one thinks about German Pirate Party and their direct democracy drive in relation to this piece of news.

  34. A word of warning to the Pirates out there. by TheInternetGuy · · Score: 1

    Do not look at BSA statistics with remaining (unpatched) eye!

    --
    If my comment didn't sound as good in your head as it did in mine, then I guess we all know who's to blame
  35. Well... by MitchDev · · Score: 2

    57& is a majority, so it's no longer a crime since the majority does it and think it's OK. The BSA can close its doors and die now...

  36. Progression by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Lies, Damn Lies, Statistics, and BSA Statistics.

    I see a "avoid pirating tax" forcing to pay for BSA associated company software just for owning a computing device (no matter for which use or what will have installed), so won't be an anticompetitive measure of Microsoft, but Congress mandate this time. And then an obligatory agent that must be installed everywhere to be sure that you aren't using any pirated (or competing, or alternative) software. And is just time till they add national security, terrorism and "think on the children" to the mix.

  37. The purpose of law by jgoemat · · Score: 1

    If 57% of people break a law, is it the people's fault, or the law's fault?

  38. WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2, Funny

    C'mon! Let's get to 100% PEOPLE!

    That'll be just for the attitude of those bastards. ;-)

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      C'mon! Let's get to 100% PEOPLE!

      That'll be just for the attitude of those bastards. ;-)

      Actually BSA thinks that all the PC users are pirates - but they are scared that if they tell the truth as it is, they'll look like loons

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    2. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Jessified · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Isn't that right. If the majority of the population breaks the law, there is a problem with the law.

    3. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not fully. I fully respect that companies need a way to make profit.

      This is not a problem with the law, its often a problem with the companies. Asking way too much for certain products or having a horrible distribution scheme. Say about bittorrent what you wish, but if I actually look for some software, I find it, usually having to only look for 1 site. And it doesn't annoy the fuck out of me during installation.

    4. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a dumb study obviously. They targeted countries and areas they knew were high on pirating. Next year they will claim 80% so the US gov, and or other governments will put this on there "things we got paid off to do list".

    5. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually BSA thinks that all the PC users are pirates - but they are scared that if they tell the truth as it is, they'll look like loons

      They may seem like loons, but that doesn't make them any less right. If you consider "a pirate" anyone who has already committed copyright infringement in their life, at least once (the same way you'd consider "a murderer" anyone who has already committed murder at least once in their life), the number is pretty much ~100%. Particularly so if you take the common criteria for copyright infringement in the US, where even downloading something you have no explicit license for can be considered copyright infringement.

      Example: ANYONE who has every used YouTube is pretty much guaranteed to have watched, at least once, something neither they nor YouTube had explicit licenses for.

      During the age of the printing press, figuring out copyright was easy: he who publishes something is copying something. These days, it's not so easy simply because _everyone_ has a printing press, they're all connected together and, even just the act of reading a document, requires you to use your printing press to make copies of it.

      TL;DR: You give us information replicators, connect them together, then get surprised when everyone is infringing on copyright (consciously or not). Great.

    6. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by mumblestheclown · · Score: 0

      Isn't that right. If the majority of the population breaks the law, there is a problem with the law.

      Copyright Infringement is a crime (or at least an infraction) that you can commit in the privacy of your own home. The relative rewards are quite large (you get free stuff) and there are some social pressures to do it (your friends are talking about that tv show / movie / etc.) while the chances of getting caught are, realistically speaking, very low.

      Maybe, just maybe, there is no problem with the law. Maybe, just maybe, the problem is with its enforceability.

    7. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not fully. I fully respect that companies need a way to make profit.

      Why? Profit is a means, not an end. If the profit motive isn't serving man in some area, then it need not be there.

      You might as well say, "I fully respect that worshippers need a gold-plated Church in every town."

    8. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by master_p · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Once upon a time, the majority of the population believed the Earth was flat.

      What the majority believes may be wrong some times.

    9. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by pantaril · · Score: 2

      Isn't that right. If the majority of the population breaks the law, there is a problem with the law.

      Well this is not necessarily always true. Consider traffic laws. Most people break them occasionaly but that doesn't mean there is problem with them.

      But in a case of copyright, i indeed agree that it is broken horribly:)

    10. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by progician · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But this is not a belief it is a factual thing. What people believe is one thing, but what they do en masse that's the real deal. Now in this case, if more than 50 percent of the people do something and what they do is harmless (there's no such thing as right to profit making from old and bad business practices - though recently it seems that the banks and the publisher companies are entitled to it). The law must recognize the reality: if it fails to do that, it will be by and large ignored. You see, there were not so long ago (or perhaps there still are) laws against oral and gay sex in some states. Such a backward an irrelevant laws must be overturned. A lobby group should not get bigger powers than the majority of the involved population.

    11. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by FunPika · · Score: 2

      Wrong, 99% is sufficient. ;)

      --
      After years of not using a signature, I am going to make one to say the following: Fuck Beta
    12. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sounds old.. but "Or a problem with the business model of software companies"

    13. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by tirnacopu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What the majority believes may be wrong some times.

      This is a well-known let's say 'urban legend', refuted several times throughout history but which keeps coming back as a way to stress just how dark the Dark Ages were or to make a Mayan discovery look more spectacular. Educated people over the millenia have always known that Earth is round, and belief otherwise is just that - a dogma imposed by some religions, methinks as a simple yet powerful way to describe how precious and rare life as we know is. See the "Myth of a flat Earth" page references for some amusement.
        There will also always be nutcases that deny common sense and science, some of them might even go as far as to negate Darwinism in American schools, but I do hold hope that humanity can work around those.

    14. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by AdrianKemp · · Score: 1

      Or increase the penalty. It's in our nature to kill, rape and beat the living crap out of each other and everything around us (see: the reason we exist). We're only stopped by rather stiff penalties in doing so.

      I say the real solution here is the death penalty for all law breaking no matter how mundane (see how stupid that sounds?)

    15. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by PenquinCoder · · Score: 1

      We're only stopped by rather stiff penalties in doing so.

      The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. If stiff penalty stopped criminals, then we wouldn't have a need for prisons.

    16. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if the majority breaks the law against owning slaves, the law is wrong? There's a big problem with the idea that "majority = morality".

    17. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether or not the Earth is flat is an objective matter. Your beliefs can be right or wrong precisely because there is something to compare them to, namely, reality.

      How do you tell someone they are wrong about their values without being able to point to some objective reality? How do you know it isn't you that is wrong?

    18. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by kanto · · Score: 1

      Actually BSA thinks that all the PC users are pirates - but they are scared that if they tell the truth as it is, they'll look like loons

      It might be more that admitting the reality of "all PC users are pirates" would make even regular people think the BSA are loons.

    19. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by AdrianKemp · · Score: 1

      You know that statement is bullshit (in context), and yet you posted it anyways. Mind my asking why?

      Unless of course you actually think that prison sentences are in no way a deterrent for anyone. You'd be wrong, but that would lead you to post something like that.

    20. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by mangu · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Copyright Infringement is a crime (or at least an infraction) that you can commit in the privacy of your own home.

      Just like interracial sex. If it harms no one, you do it in the privacy of your home, why should it be a crime?

    21. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Steam more or less entirely stopped my piracy of games.

    22. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those credit card number fields are SO annoying.

    23. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Can't, resist, NOOOoooooo, "Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

    24. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      That'll be just for the attitude of those bastards. ;-)

      Sterling Ball, CEO and founder Ernie Ball's son said almost the exact same thing:

      Humiliated by the experience, Ball told his IT department he wanted Microsoft products out of his business within six months. "I said, 'I don't care if we have to buy 10,000 abacuses,'" recalled Ball, who recently addressed the LinuxWorld trade show. "We won't do business with someone who treats us poorly."

      Ball's IT crew settled on a potpourri of open-source software--Red Hat's version of Linux, the OpenOffice office suite, Mozilla's Web browser--plus a few proprietary applications that couldn't be duplicated by open source. Ball, whose father, Ernie, founded the company, says the transition was a breeze, and since then he's been happy to extol the virtues of open-source software to anyone who asks. He spoke with CNET News.com about his experience.

    25. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Jessified · · Score: 2

      But laws aren't "supposed" to be for protecting companies. Laws are supposed to serve the people. And that's just the point isn't it. Copyright doesn't serve the people.

      Even copyright is supposed to be about promoting progress, hence serving the people...seen as it doesn't really do that, not to mention nobody respects it, it's time to scrap it. That you think it's about protecting profits is telling.

    26. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Actually, I believe interracial sex should be the law. I don't support same-race marriage, on this basis.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    27. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      There is no evidence that at any time in history the majority of the population believed the world was flat. In addition, there is evidence that suggests that the majority has always believed that the world is round.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    28. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Copyright Infringement is a crime (or at least an infraction) that you can commit in the privacy of your own home.

      That's not entirely true. You must have external activities for copyright laws to be violated. Note that copyright is the right to distribute copies, not make copies. You can create 1000 copies of something, and until you distribute (or have the intent to distribute which AFAIK, IANAL, has always been shown after you have distributed something else) you have not violated copyright.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    29. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by gx5000 · · Score: 1

      BINGO !

      --
      End of Line.
    30. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by paladinsama · · Score: 1

      What the majority believes may be wrong some times.

      This is a well-known let's say 'urban legend', refuted several times throughout history but which keeps coming back

      He said that once upon a time, the majority of the population believed the Earth was flat. He never said that time was the Middle Ages. Now you are just assuming things.

    31. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe, just maybe, there is no problem with the law. Maybe, just maybe, the problem is with its enforceability.

      Indeed. We should implement deep packet inspection at the gateway level for all residential customers. Mandated in law. Would not require a massive infrastructure upgrade at the ISP level, and the costs could very easily be passed onto the consumers. We could also provide a backdoor for law enforcement at each residence while we're at it.

    32. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by AaronLS · · Score: 1

      This is the truth. There's lots of things I would happily pay for, if it weren't for the fact that they're tied to some horrendous system.

      1) Stop spending money on server based DRM. Stop spending money on anti piracy advocates. Stop spending money on prosecuting pirates.

      Now you product is more affordable.

      2) Cut that price in half. (Publishers with games on Steam know all about the impact of this. You can get a lot of impulse buys like this.)

      You might end up with the same amount of profits in the end with the money saved and increased sales.

      Look at sites like emusic. I have spent more money there in a matter of months than I have in 30 years of my life.

    33. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clearly have never driven in the United States.

    34. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by green1 · · Score: 1

      I would disagree and say that there IS a problem with traffic laws. that doesn't mean we necessarily know a better solution. but obviously there is something wrong with the laws as they are currently written, and they appear to need some tweaking at the least. (My preferred solutions include ideally eliminating all traffic laws other than dangerous driving. and enforce that one heavily (unfortunately it's easier to enforce arbitrary numbers) or if looking strictly at the speed limits, you could set the maximum on most roads up about 20km/hr from where it is now, and then enforce it with zero tolerance. make "maximum" actually mean maximum, as in never to be exceeded. (of course first you'd have to look at what a safe speed really is on a road in a modern vehicle, something that whoever sets the current limits obviously does not))

      Any law that makes the majority of the population in to criminals is a bad law. Laws are supposed to be passed by our elected representatives to represent the will of the people. It is highly unlikely anyone would want to write a law that makes themselves a criminal, therefore any law that makes the majority a criminal is unlikely to be the will of the majority.

    35. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by green1 · · Score: 1

      So you're telling me that the only reason I don't go around killing people is fear of being caught? what utter BS! Most people have morals and ethics, by and large people do good things because they know that it encourages others to do good things for them in return.
      Yes there are people who do not have the best interests of society in mind, however to say that this represents the nature of humans in general, and that the only reason the rest of people don't do it too is because of laws is absurd.

      There are many things that I never do that are not illegal, things I do simply because I don't believe them to be right. Conversely there are many good things that I do for others without any legal obligation, or direct benefit to myself in return. Have you ever helped a friend in need? ever had them help you? That alone proves that fear of being caught isn't the only thing making us "good".

      As for harsher penalties. Studies have shown that increased penalties do not reduce the likelihood of offences being committed. States with the death penalty do not have lower rates of violent crimes than states without it. Countries with longer sentences for offences also do not have lower crime rates.

      There are several factors that affect likelihood of people to commit a crime:
      1) expectation of being caught (this differs from severity of punishment, amazingly people are less likely to commit an offence for which they know they will be caught and scolded for, than one where there is only a small possibility of being caught, but involves a fairly severe punishment)
      2) agreement with the law (if people don't think the law is just, almost nothing will make them follow it. see violent revolutions to overthrow dictators. these people know that if they are caught (and there is a high likelihood of being caught) that they will likely be tortured and killed. but their disagreement with the law is strong enough to make them risk it anyway.)
      3) social status. (desperation is a strong motivator. countries with smaller gaps between rich and poor, countries with lower levels of poverty, countries with higher levels of education, all have lower crime rates)

    36. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by green1 · · Score: 1

      When you take all the people in to consideration, the majority never did own slaves, nor did the majority ever agree with the law.

    37. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by AdrianKemp · · Score: 1

      Countries with no punishment for rape, oddly enough, *do* have a higher frequency of it.

      You talk a lot about society and your status in it, but what you completely ignore is that there are societies where murderers *are* at the top of the social ladder. Those constructs could not exist if you were correct about anything you've said.

      You also fail to understand that being removed from society (either forcibly or by being shunned) is a penalty.

    38. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Uh, you *do* realize that ALL (legal) laws are arbitrary right?

      Legalism != Morality

      Prohibition (in the US) was a perfect example of this.

    39. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by next_ghost · · Score: 1

      Let me put it this way: If unauthorized copying of content were a serious threat to the ability of creators to make a living, there would be no copyright industry around to make fuss about it by now. The recording industry would have gone bankrupt about 10 years ago and the movie industry would have died about 5 years ago. Since they're both still here despite all their effort to go bankrupt by actively screwing their paying customers over, and the most pirated movies break one box office record after another, unauthorized copying is not a problem. Quite the opposite.

    40. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by green1 · · Score: 1

      Countries with no punishment for rape, oddly enough, *do* have a higher frequency of it.

      That goes to likelihood of being caught. As I said in my example, catching someone and giving them a minor penalty is a bigger deterrent than a huge penalty when you are unlikely to be caught (a complete lack of any penalty is a guarantee you won't be "caught") Under the description in your previous post though a country with no penalty for rape would not have simply a higher frequency of it, but would in fact have nearly every person engaging in it as frequently as possible

      It's in our nature to kill, rape and beat the living crap out of each other and everything around us

      when in fact we still do not see that even where no penalty exists, the incidence is higher, but only to the point where the morality and ethics of most people kick in, in fact you still won't see a majority of people engaged in it. What actually reduces the incidence of rape further though tends not to be the implementation of laws against it, but rather social programs promoting the idea of woman as equals, education, and prosperity have a larger impact than simply enacting a law on the subject (this goes to my point about unjust laws, if people believe the law to be just, they will follow it, if they do not, they will not.)

      You talk a lot about society and your status in it, but what you completely ignore is that there are societies where murderers *are* at the top of the social ladder.

      citation needed. If people gained social status by killing, the society would quickly fall apart as everyone killed each other. we do not see that in any current society on earth.

      Those constructs could not exist if you were correct about anything you've said.

      Actually the first reinforces what I said, and the second seems extremely unlikely.

      You also fail to understand that being removed from society (either forcibly or by being shunned) is a penalty.

      Where did I contradict this in any way?

      The original post stated that the only reason anyone ever does anything good is to avoid punishment. I strongly disagree. I say the majority of people do good things all the time for no reason other than the benefit of society (where it is known that an improved society benefits everyone including themselves) Social studies repeatedly show that increased penalties do not in any way reduce undesirable behaviour, however increased social programs do. This would indicate that people are driven more by generosity than by punishment.

      Now I'll admit that this is not a black and white issue, and you can not say that no harsh punishment is ever required to combat undesirable behaviour. But stating that we only do things to avoid punishment is patently absurd.

    41. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by next_ghost · · Score: 1

      In 1535, France enacted death penalty for operating a printing press. Guess what: It. Didn't. Work. How far do you want to take this copyright madness before you realize absurd how absurd it is?

    42. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 1

      As one wise man here on slashdot said not too long ago.
      Computers copy things. Get over it, it's the nature of the beast.

    43. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 1

      I fully respect that companies need a way to make profit.
      Yes by walking on the heads of the people. Treating us, the very people that give them their profit, like shit. That buy our lawmakers to do their bidding and treat us like criminals..They want us to be good little drones. O wait it must be ok if it makes a profit. And how much is enough? When does it end? Copyright and IP are broken, and needs to be done away with. Corps are not people, and you are a shill.

    44. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You probably meant "anal" sex instead of gay sex, as straight people engage in it just as often as gay people do. The only 100% gay sex is lesbian scissorfighting, as it doesn't require oneholeoneplug.

    45. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but 2003 says this is old news.

    46. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by AdrianKemp · · Score: 1

      Well first of all, your link has nothing to do with copyright; it was a censorship law.

      There are some things people are willing to die for, so obviously no penalty will dissuade them. In every other instance, there is a penalty which will do so.

    47. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by next_ghost · · Score: 1

      Well first of all, your link has nothing to do with copyright; it was a censorship law.

      Actually, it has everything to do with copyright. Copyright started as a censorship law in the first place.

      There are some things people are willing to die for, so obviously no penalty will dissuade them. In every other instance, there is a penalty which will do so.

      If you really believe that death penalty would deter everybody except religious and political martyrs from copying, you're completely wrong. The same thing repeated about two centuries later again in France, this time with fabric patterns. Surely, nobody would risk their lives for a piece of colored cloth, would they? Well, actually, a whole lot of people did and were executed for it.

      People don't stop doing harmless activities just because they're forbidden by law under harsh penalty. They just take better care not to get caught. Let's make a little experiment: What kind of penalty would dissuade you from using your legs to walk and make you handwalk all the time, even when nobody's around?

    48. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Not if you haven't seen it before.

    49. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by AdrianKemp · · Score: 1

      You aren't intelligent enough to have a conversation with; so I'm going to leave you to read what you just wrote and hopefully you'll realize how stupid it is.

    50. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by next_ghost · · Score: 1

      I don't see anything stupid in my post. Intentionally absurd, perhaps, but not stupid. So would you care to point out what you consider stupid in my post so I can explain why it's not?

    51. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by cdmsr · · Score: 1

      Good luck trying to combat this myth. I run into this more often than you'd believe. I point out that since Eratosthenes -- who died in 194 BCE -- calculated the circumference of Earth, he must have known it wasn't flat. When someone says 'people thought' or 'people believed' they mean the uneducated masses who haven't improved much since The Dark Ages. (See: Kansas)

    52. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Isn't that right. If the majority of the population breaks the law, there is a problem with the law.

      How can you say there is a problem with the law. The law is not the problem, it is the overly priced software that people need, but it is out of reach of most pocket books.

      I bet you that people will gladly pay a dollar a week for the privilege of pirating the software on a temporary basis because, they so badly need the software. Many people pirate software, not to use it, but to collect it. The software they pirate are "traders". Others just collect the software, but never find the time to more than explore it, and certainly not to use it for anything but to satisfy a curiosity.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    53. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Jessified · · Score: 1

      How can you say there is a problem with the law.

      Because law is supposed to codify social norms and societal concepts of morality, not the other way around.

    54. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by alexo · · Score: 1

      Once upon a time, the majority of the population believed the Earth was flat.

      1) Are you conflating scientifically-testable facts and moral guidelines?

      2) <engineer>
      For most practical purposes, Classical Mechanics is a reasonable approximation of the actual physical laws governing motion.
      Ditto, for most practical purposes, "flat" has historically been a reasonable approximation of the actual shape of the Earth.
      </engineer>

    55. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's FLAT? OK!!! So let's all just push the MPAA,ASCAP, BMI, RIAA, BSA, [wait, wasn't BSA the Boy Scouts?] and all the other noxious moronic hypermanic idiots off the edge and be done with 'em!

    56. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by master_p · · Score: 1

      The issue here is that the majority believes it is harmless. It is not.

      Profiting from one work's is not bad business practice, first of all.

      Secondly, reality doesn't make laws, laws make reality. Otherwise, it would be ok to persecute Jews in Germany in the 30s.

      Thirdly, the gay and oral sex laws is exactly what reality did: people passed their prejudices to laws. It should be the other way around.

    57. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by master_p · · Score: 1

      Although the recording industry does not claim it cannot survive due to piracy, there have been cases in the past that whole sectors were eradicated by piracy: Amiga and Atari, for example.

    58. Re:WHAT'S STOPPING US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You probably meant "anal" sex instead of gay sex, as straight people engage in it just as often as gay people do.

      Define "just as often". They certainly don't engage in it just as often as a percentage of having sex. Not many straight people have 100% anal and oral sex. Most straight people like to stick it in the pussy now and then.

  39. Ambiguous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Have admitted to using pirated software last year"

    Does that mean:
      - in the last year, they admitted they have at least once ran pirated software at some point in their life?
        - they admitted they have ran pirated software in the last 365 days since taking the survey?

    I used to pirate. Over a decade ago. It cost me a job through denial of security clearance. Seriously... WTF--the feds really do believe piracy is support of terrorism and equivalent to lifting product at a market. Now I don't pirate. Ever. I'm not sure which one the question means though.

    Refusal to pirate cost me a job too... not blatantly, but obviously enough that somebody got audited a few months after I left. Ooops. Previous coworkers got ticked off when I told them if they wanted me to use Word format during travel (they actually did use features that required the real thing), the office could buy a fucking copy, plus a laptop for home and travel use as my personal thinkpad was never going to get windows on it. Or they could piss off. Or effectively fire me by offering 'promotions' without pay it turns out.

    "Well that's the industry standard, that's what we pay you to use" -- Then pay for it, bitch. Pay for every last copy. All $500 extra per CPU-user it comes out to. One for the desktop, one for the laptop, another one for the testing machine that you demand be able to read email. And don't forget I'll need the real office--plus upgrades every three years in order to email clients using the latest version. No...no...upgrades for every seat.

    No, not a raise. No, you don't pay me enough to buy an extra copy. No, I won't pay even $20 for an "academic license" with my old university ID --but please do give me that suggestion in writing.

    Can't win.

    But frankly, it's just easier not to pirate these days. No more maintaining full disk hardware encrypted drives with door breaching shells and strike-anywhere match heads mounted above and below the software raid array, over old IDE drives wrapped magnesium embedded duct-tape and thermite pouches buried inside flowerpots in my extra large server case. No more waking up to loud noises at 4AM and wondering "is now the time to throw the dead man's switch?"

    Just not worth it.

    If they want to whine about piracy, I won't pirate. And suddenly, the 'computer guy' can no longer answer your questions about office, or it's email setup. Or take screenshots for the CxO late at night to help him before an important meeting.

    But you're free to pay extra for a helpdesk technician, or remote desktop support. To pay twice for what they should have been paying full cost for up front.

  40. BSA STILL MAKES BIKES, YES !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BSA is British Small Arses, you know. Steve McQueen swore by them, and then he died, but he lived a good life. Only, at the end, he had a whopper of a tummy ache !!

  41. Honest pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't necessarily mean piracy is on the rise. It could be that people are becoming more honest.

  42. Load-o-crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't have any bootleg software on my machine and don't know anyone who does. Porn, that's another matter.

  43. Do you use software downloaded from the internet? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    You filthy Pirate!
    Do you use free software?
    You filthy Pirate!
    Do you know where your purchase receipt is for your software?
    You filthy Pirate!

    I bet those were some of the questions.

  44. Re:Do you use software downloaded from the interne by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    Add:
    What is your MS Office license key?
    Don't know off-hand? Pirate!
    Happen to know and provide it? Pirate! Disseminated a license key!

  45. Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This doesn't mean there couldn't be possibly ANYTHING wrong with the most commonly used software business models, could there?!

    If almost a third of consumers didn't buy a product because it was overpriced or they couldn't afford it, would their industry get the same treatment?

  46. Let He Who Is Without Sin .... by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

    More overhyped yet totally meaningless claims by some business with an axe to grind.

    Seriously folks, 95% of drivers ARE CRIMINALS but that doesn't mean we need to throw them all in jail.

    By the previous claim I mean that pretty much just about *every* driver has broken at least one road-rule (ie The Law) at least once during their driving career.

    BSA argument/statistic is clearly based around examples like: if you've *ever* downloaded a "shareware" or otherwise "honor based" paid product but you never paid for it THEN YOU'RE A PIRATE (!!!!!!)

    For the life of me I dunno why slashdot gives these people airtime, it's nothing more than FREE ADVERTISING for their business.

    --
    Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
  47. Who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The BSA can sucks a dick.

  48. computers or computer users? by issicus · · Score: 1

    one job plus one house equals two ips

  49. I'd like Anonymous to hack these guys by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    I'd really love to see Anonymous hack this outfit to find out A) where the money goes and B) if they themselves use pirated software. This outfit smacks of Soviet-style tattle on your neighbor tactics.

  50. Let's see here now... by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

    Hm...

    I use Ubuntu. I never paid anybody that $699 'license' fee that SCO claims I owe for some reason or other.

    Guess that makes me a software pirate.

    Anybody got any tips on getting parrot shit outta my shirts?

    --
    Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  51. BSA by dskoll · · Score: 2

    The Bullshit Statistics Association reports that not only to 57% of PC users pirate software, but that software piracy rate among Somali pirates is actually lower than average.

    "This epidemic of out-pirating the pirates causes us great concern," said BSA's chairman Slammem N. Jale. "But it's not too late. We have examples of rehabilitated pirates."

    "Aaaarggh!", roared Cap'n Bluebeard. "Me mateys and I used ta blow each other ta smithereens with an illegal copy of Mine Sweeper. But we've seen the light and sent our booty ta Microsoft, aargh. What good does gold do ya when yer conscience weight upon ya like a two-ton anchor?"

    Jale concludes: "Send us all your money, and you can sleep easy."

  52. And the other half are ninjas... by timboc007 · · Score: 1

    ... everyone knows that!

  53. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With global economic problems I am confident we will be able to surpass 57%

  54. Most mac software by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

    does not use serial numbers or any sort of DRM to begin with.

    This may be partially caused by the general belief that only civilized people use Macs because only civilized people can afford to buy a Mac.

    1. Re:Most mac software by 6ULDV8 · · Score: 2

      does not use serial numbers or any sort of DRM to begin with.

      Most of my tools use registration keys.

      SecureCRT, FinalCut Studio, MS-Office, TextMate, IntelliJ, etc... It's a long list.

      --
      Pull my finger for my public key.
    2. Re:Most mac software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that a general belief in the sense that it is generally believed by a significant number of people or a general belief as in you have no real specifics, but you believe it anyway?

    3. Re:Most mac software by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Because Apple are usually smart enough to realise that serial numbers and drm schemes only cause inconvenience to paying customers...
      I have seen countless paying customers inconvenienced because they lost their serial or had problems with a drm scheme.
      I know plenty of pirates, and none of them have such problems because they downloaded fixed versions.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    4. Re:Most mac software by exomondo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because Apple are usually smart enough to realise that serial numbers and drm schemes only cause inconvenience to paying customers...

      So how does that explain the DRM in Final Cut Pro X which uses the iTunes receipt in the app folder to validate the install? The definitely have DRM in there.

    5. Re:Most mac software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't you learnt not to question a Mac fanboy's fantasy? Obviously.. everyone using Windows is in some painful depressed slave-ish existence and people using Macs are in some kind of utopia where programmers never write buggy software.

  55. When the majority of people break a law... by swillden · · Score: 2

    When the majority of people break a law, it's the law that's wrong. Laws exist to support and further societal norms. When the norm is illegal, the law needs to be corrected.

    Note that I'm not saying copyright should be eliminated, or that it has no value. Just that the present implementation is wrong.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    1. Re:When the majority of people break a law... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the majority of people break a law, it's the law that's wrong. Laws exist to support and further societal norms. When the norm is illegal, the law needs to be corrected.

      Note that I'm not saying copyright should be eliminated, or that it has no value. Just that the present implementation is wrong.

      Montana tried getting rid of speed limits. They changed their minds after a few years, and a bunch of dead drivers. That many people break a law does not necessarily imply that the law is bad.

    2. Re:When the majority of people break a law... by swillden · · Score: 1

      When the majority of people break a law, it's the law that's wrong. Laws exist to support and further societal norms. When the norm is illegal, the law needs to be corrected.

      Note that I'm not saying copyright should be eliminated, or that it has no value. Just that the present implementation is wrong.

      Montana tried getting rid of speed limits. They changed their minds after a few years, and a bunch of dead drivers. That many people break a law does not necessarily imply that the law is bad.

      Your example doesn't imply your conclusion. They tried one fix to a broken law, and it didn't work. But there may well be another that does.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:When the majority of people break a law... by swillden · · Score: 1

      When the majority of people break a law, it's the law that's wrong. Laws exist to support and further societal norms. When the norm is illegal, the law needs to be corrected.

      Note that I'm not saying copyright should be eliminated, or that it has no value. Just that the present implementation is wrong.

      Montana tried getting rid of speed limits. They changed their minds after a few years, and a bunch of dead drivers. That many people break a law does not necessarily imply that the law is bad.

      Oh, I should also mention that Montana didn't change their minds after "a bunch of dead drivers". They were forced to change their minds after the Montana Supreme Court ruled that the "Reasonable and Prudent" standard (they hadn't really gotten rid of all limits, just declined to set a numeric value on them) was so vague as to be unenforceable and that it therefore violated constitutional due process requirements. Even after that, it took six months for the Montana state legislature to get around to creating a new law -- and the reason they weren't in any hurry is because it wasn't really a problem.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:When the majority of people break a law... by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 1

      I, like most people, like analogies. When we discuss copyright and the various conventions used to protect IP, I find myself comparing how it would work in other industries.

      Let's say a buddy of mine (let's call him "The Scene" and pretend he's from Jersey) knows how to make a McDonald's cheeseburger exactly the way they do, and he can do it for 1% of the price. McDonald's, on the other hand, would rather sell me one for a 200% markup on the ingredients (duh). Would I have my buddy come by to make cheeseburgers at home, hoping he's got the latest Big Mac recipe now, or would I just cruise through the drive-through, happy to spend 4 bucks for the convenience? Hell yes! Drive-through for sure! This ready-to-roll type of convenience is worth a shit-ton to me, much as I love my buddy.

      But if McDonald's made their cheeseburgers so they tasted like shit if I leave the restaurant, or required I fill out periodic surveys proving I paid for the cheeseburger as it travels through my digestive system, lest I get food poisoning... well, that's a little bit different, isn't it? I'll get em from my buddy and tell McDonald's to fuck right off.

      This is the spot so many people find themselves in, and copyright has gotten us here. Faced with this type of bullshit, is it any wonder that piracy is steadily increasing? The law being wrong is barely relevant; it doesn't matter if it is or not, because people are proving they won't put up with being treated like thieves from the very point of purchase, even if the only way to circumvent it is to commit low-risk illegal acts. What needs to change is the idiotic corporate mentality that says "Protect profits at all costs!" instead of "Give customers excellent service, appreciation, products, and delivery!".

      Corporations: People don't just pay you for their product because your box is so fancy that you deserve to be paid; people pay you because your product makes it easier, more fun, faster, more professional, less expensive, etc than doing a thing all by themselves. This is true in ALL cases, going back to the very first time a dude gave another dude 6 potatoes for a clay pot*. I guaran-fucking-tee that any successful shop that can conduct business and then actually shake hands with their customers knows this, and exceptional customer service and convenience are really the only way to compete in a price war. Hmm? Well, actually... yes... you are most DEFINITELY engaged in the mother of all price wars, and denial won't change that. I do hate to be the bearer of such bad news.

      I'm amused, sometimes, to think that these huge corporations that have gone stomping through the market, setting prices and taking names for decades, find themselves faced with the ultimate price war (free!) and they don't remember how to compete. They think they're big enough to keep stomping and stomping, while the rest of the consumer world just looks on with pity. I sure hope there are up and coming tech companies that DO remember how to give customers a red carpet treatment, and can swoop in fill their shoes.

      *Strictly speaking, I don't know the current potato/pot exchange rate, so don't take this as investment advice.

    5. Re:When the majority of people break a law... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I won't lie and say I've never pirated anything. But, get real. This isn't about social norms, this is about accountability. If there were no repercussions to stealing cars and killing people there'd be a whole lot more of that. But, there are consequences, sometimes dire consequences to committing such acts.

      I realize everyone wants something for nothing, but that’s not really fair or sustainable to those that are giving things away or having them taken. But, since you are the one taking then I’m sure it seems just fine to you.

    6. Re:When the majority of people break a law... by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      But if McDonald's made their cheeseburgers so they tasted like shit

      IF????? Everything at McDonalds tastes like shit. Try eating some real food and you will taste the difference.
      Totally off topic I know, but i gave up junkfood to lose a few lbs, and when I reached my goal I thought I would treat my self. I tossed most of it in the trash, went home and cooked some good food.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    7. Re:When the majority of people break a law... by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 1

      Well, that's true. Maybe I should have used a fine-dining restaurant as my example, and used atmosphere/service/etc. Or, even better, a bar. I'll just drink at home if the bar treats me like shit, but I'll happily pay for their booze instead if I'm having good time. The point is, if you don't take care of your customers, they'll go somewhere else, and when that "somewhere else" is free, you have a lot of "taking care of" to do. Instead, software corps bitch-slap their customers for short term gain and long term alienation.

    8. Re:When the majority of people break a law... by swillden · · Score: 1

      What makes you think I pirate? I don't. I'm just observing that any time the majority of the people do something, it's silly for society to try to call that thing wrong.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  56. Re:Did you know that 93.5% of invented statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, always give 135% and have at least 43% left over.

  57. To Err is human... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To ARR is pirate!

  58. Re:Need to come up with a final solution for pirac by greg1104 · · Score: 1

    Killing everyone with illegally downloaded software? You're really taking this Blue Screen of Death thing seriously.

  59. one of them by Sebastopol · · Score: 1

    oddly, i was trying to think of the last thing i pirated, and i haven't pirated software since probably 1997. fortunately my company gives me a laptop with MS office on it. feels kinda weird, I guess, to be legit. because i remember looking for copies of autocad, proengineer, 3dstudio max, and photoshop back in the 90's. i remember getting a lot of stuff off zurich.ai.mit.edu via ftp.

    jeez, not even games. oh wait, i tried to pirate doom3 off ... limewire? shit, i can't remember, it was a napster clone... but i ended up downloading a warez trojan and never did that again.

    so... yay me? i guess...

    huh.

    --
    https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
  60. Call me cynical but... by DocSparkle · · Score: 1

    Whilst the big software providers continue to push software that gives me way more than I want at a price well more than I should have to pay and provide non existent interoperability and closed shop mentality you will have to forgive me for opting out and choosing freeware. Others with less tech savvy will feel the need to pirate to be able to compete. Government need to take some responsibility for not forging a non brand centric path. It would help if we could agree on alternative standards but the fast changing OS world and the cut throat market make it a perfect place for the big players. Shame

  61. BSA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who wondered why the Boy Scouts of America were doing statistics on pirating?

  62. Re:In a related report, math skills are declining. by Analog+Penguin · · Score: 1

    You know people use PCs in places other than the UK, right?

  63. A more detailed breakdown would be useful by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    Region, type of piracy, frequency, demographics (age, gender, race, income level, religion... etc.), time period, etc.

    Saying 57 percent pirate and that's up from last year isn't useful. That doesn't tell you WHO is pirating and why. We don't even get any correlative information out of that much less the actual cause.

    There's no way to use these statistics in a productive way unless the numbers are broken down a bit.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  64. What a joke! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The sample size is far too small. It represents, if I have done the math correct, 0.00021% of population.

  65. I use Linux by seeker_1us · · Score: 1

    Up yours, BSA.

    1. Re:I use Linux by Rick17JJ · · Score: 1

      I use Linux and other free software such as LibreOffice, Firefox, GIMP, Gramps, Recoll, Mirage, and various other free programs. Like you, I do not have any need for pirated software. I use the Synaptic package manager to easily download and install whatever free programs I want, directly from the official Ubuntu repositories.

      Free programs such as those, are properly licensed under one of several free software licenses such as the GPL, LGPL, MPL, or some other similar license.

      I have also purchased and installed the Linux versions of a couple of commercial programs, such as Autopano Giga. But other than those two exceptions, I do not use commercial software on this computer.

      It gives me the warm fuzzies, knowing that almost all of the software I use, is properly licensed under various free software licenses such as the GPL, LGPL, or the MPL. I do not need to worry about what companies such as Microsoft or the Business Software Alliance (BSA) think. Fuck them, and their annoying attitude.

    2. Re:I use Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mp3 license?
      dvd decryption license?

      you are a pirate.

  66. BSA bs by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    Whew. Thought they were accusing the Boy Scouts of America....

  67. BSA is full of idiots by aenigmainc · · Score: 1

    almost 7 billion people in the world. they ask 15000. any conclusion they come to is statistically irrelevant. its a rounding error. but, to make it sound like we need stricter legislation, they make it sound bad. its a bullshit statistic;.

  68. Re:Need to come up with a final solution for pirac by mug+funky · · Score: 1

    not much illegally downloaded software could actually be used to kill someone though. at least not something the BSA is interested in. i suppose if you programmed something stuxnet-esque and offered it under a commercial license, you could possibly kill with pirate software.

  69. How the hell do they come up with these statistics by seeker_1us · · Score: 1
    "Hi, I'm from the BSA, the group who sues lots of people and strongarms them with questionable tactics. Do you use pirated software?"

    "Oh of course."

  70. Fifteen men on a dead's man's computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yo-ho-ho and a bottle of Red Bull!!!!! :-)

  71. Yes! by SlashDread · · Score: 1

    Now if your Dutch, vote for the party that protects your PC and oh, the Internet!

    https://www.piratenpartij.nl/

  72. What would you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would you expect anything less? The BSA is a lobby group so it is supposed to artificially inflate a problem with dubious research and win influence of politicians to pass ridiculously tough anti-piracy laws. The BSA engages in the lobbyist time-honored tradition of lying to politicians to support the motives of its members. I don't engage in piracy. I have to use Windows, CentOS, and OpenBSD. Sometimes I need to use Office 2010. I own Windows 7 and Office 2010. I really believe that 50% number is bullshit! Try more like 10-15%.

  73. Getting back to its roots by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    I haven't needed to pirate anything in years, everything has a free and good-enough equivalent now. What does anyone pirate today?

    Oil tankers off the coast of Somalia apparently. Clearly piracy today is getting back to its traditional roots.

  74. What now? by cockroach2 · · Score: 1

    How do you "pirate" software? Are they talking about GPL violations? :)

  75. why do they care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the hell does the Boy Scouts of America even care??

  76. Arggghhh! by ehiris · · Score: 1

    Half of the internet can't figure out how to download a file. Why does it surprise me?

  77. The downside by Grayhand · · Score: 1

    It puts extra pressure on the remaining 43% to cover development costs. I purchased every piece of commercial software I use. I do graphics and have probably spent 25K to 30K just in the last few years on software. Am I rich? Far from, more like dead broke, I simply spend most of my cash on software and hardware and rarely spend money on anything else. It's wildly unfair that some one else can have the same software and not spend a dime. Why not just pirate? Some one has to pay for the development of new software. Other than maybe Photoshop most of my software needs more features so I hope they keep developing. Everyone can call people like me stupid or a troll but we are the ones paying to provide the software that others pirate. There are open source options and I even use a few. I overall like Open Office more than Microsoft products because it's easier to use and has all the features I need. I bought my first copy on Word in the late 80s but I abandoned it in the late 90s because every time I slipped and hit the wrong key it reformatted the document and the computers of the time were too slow and I always managed to type more before it reformatted making it impossible to undo. After I discovered Open Office I never went back. There are open source options for most things it's just the commercial software is generally better so people generally don't bother with the open source they just pirate. I have to point out where will we be when the 43% throw in the towel? The companies aren't government funded so they'll have little choice but to throw in the towel. Ultimately the problem would be solved if commercial software disappeared since there would be nothing left to pirate.

    1. Re:The downside by pantaril · · Score: 1

      I feel for you, the current state of affairs is clearly unfair. But imo the correct solution is not for commercial software to disappear, but for copyright to disappear. Lets use tax funded grants, taxt-deductible coupons and platforms like kickstarter to raise money and distribute them between creators. There is no need for copyright, rather it makes the situation much worse and unfair.

  78. The solution is obvious! Voodoo economics: by Hartree · · Score: 1

    Put all of the more than half of computer users that admit to using pirated software in jail forever where they can never buy software again.

    By the BSA/MPAA/RIAA 's logic that will more than double the amount of software they sell, right?

    If that's right, won't it also double the amount of taxes the government will collect from them?

  79. No way by Adam+Appel · · Score: 1

    There is no way half of all PC users know how to download pirated software.

    --
    They come in the dark, only in the darkest.
  80. Re:Did you know that 93.5% of invented statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That line works 60% of the time, every time.

  81. Lies, damn lies and... Trialware? by beaverdownunder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Of course, there are lies, damn lies and statistics like these. But there is some truth to this figure -- especially in terms of expensive applications such as Photoshop. People who wouldn't pirate _anything_ else _will_ pirate Photoshop or Microsoft Office because they can't justify the expense until they establish the demand.

    Of course, once they establish the demand, since they already have the software, it's 'easy' for them to 'forget' to buy a paid copy.

    Happily, Adobe has seen the light and offers trialware versions of its stuff -- if more companies did the same, had reduced prices for trialware users, and so-forth, that 50-odd percent figure would likely drop dramatically.

    1. Re:Lies, damn lies and... Trialware? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      MS Office isn't that bad anymore. There are cheaper official versions that come with most of what you want. The "Office Home and Student" version is usually around 100-120 USD not on sale. Which really isn't THAT bad considering how much some people wind up using MsWord + MsExcel.

      Honestly, if there's a piece of software that's I feel is too expensive then I simply won't GET IT. I don't pirate at all; I'll either try to find a cheap or open alternative or skip it all-together. And if it's a game... if I want it I buy it. If I don't want it, or the review or "meh" then I skip it.

      Would I like Photoshop? Sure.
      Would I use it enough to warrant the expense? No
      Is Gimp "good enough" for a free app? Sure

  82. Totally the fault of software developers by EzInKy · · Score: 0

    If the data proves true, this is the totally the fault of proprietory software developers for making their products too easy to pirate. What they need to do is make their products impossible to install and run on systems that can't prove that the appropriate funds have exchanged hands. Further, I'd even suggest that their installation software provide links to free alternatives so that those who will never pay have an easy out to avoid becomming criminals.

    Picture if you will this. You go to install a program and either don't have the funds to pay for it or do but are unwilling to part with them. If said software's intallation routine provided a button such as "install free alternative" wouldn't potential pirates choose that option instead?

    Seriously proprietory software developers, all you have to do to prevent piracy is to provide people ways to achieve the same functiality that your product provides without the cost.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  83. Outlier by shiftless · · Score: 2

    The only stuff I possess which isn't pirated, is free software...

    Fuck copyright.

  84. BSA are no Boy Scouts by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

    After they have the nerve to get on the radio at encourage me to rat out my employer, perhaps destroying my own job, They Can Go Straight To Hell.

    And NO I don't use pirated software.

  85. Idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Either they're lying, likely, or people surveyed are idiots. If you are being surveyed, and the question is "are you breaking the law" and you answer yes, even if it is truly anonymously, the people in charge of law enforcement will take the results of the study and use them to argue that more needs to be done to stop law-breakers and law-breaking.

    If someone is conducting a survey, and asks "are you doing x?" where x is something someone in a position of authority has a reason to want to stop, FUCKING SAY "NO", EVEN IF YOU ARE!!!

    The surveys should always come back with "no, no one is pirating software, games, music, movies, etc." People admitting the opposite are fucktarded. Don't tell me they should get points for honesty... being honest about doing something dishonest is not truly honesty. So everyone shut up, and when they ask, tell them first, that you don't pirate shit, and second, that you never have. Try to do so with a straight face. Otherwise, they just keep on being little bitches about it.

    I personally would love to have been able to play Diablo 3, but won't buy it since I found out that as an anti-piracy measure, it has to connect to Battle Net every time you launch it. I wanted to be able to play it the way I played D2, but I am not willing to let this fucking thing authenticate every time I want to play.

    What if the internet is down? What if I just don't have a connection? What happens when their servers shut down, they stop supporting it, or they go out of business? All thanks to Blizzard being convinced that if they didn't pull this bullshit, people would steal their precious fucking game. I had every intention of buying it, but thanks to their calling me a thief, to my face, (they think the whole world is just thieves, apparently) they have permanently lost my business.

    So to recap, fuck the BSA, don't use software made by people who think it's a good business model to spit in your face while begging you for money, and when someone asks you if you steal... JUST SAY NO! (Even if you do, so you don't fuck it up worse for everyone else.)

    Why does anyone, especially pirates, have to be fucking told this? (OTOH, again, they could be full of shit on those figures.)

    1. Re:Idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Had to LOL at this one...

      If someone is conducting a survey, and asks "are you doing x?" where x is something someone in a position of authority has a reason to want to stop, FUCKING SAY "NO", EVEN IF YOU ARE!!!

      Why do things have to be spelled out for people? Seems legit, I'm sure all these studies are completely in the name of knowledge itself, so it couldn't possibly be used for anything nefarious, right?

      Right?

  86. BSA tries to justify its existence by Trogre · · Score: 1

    news at 11

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  87. It's the licenses that are rigged. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My wife and I both use personally owned laptops for work. We replace our laptops on average every 3 years. So in the last 10 years we have bought 5 laptops (2 Dells, 2 Toshibas and a Lenovo). So what happens to all those old laptops? My kids use one, but they whine because it's useless for games so they use the desktop, the others are sitting in a box downstairs because they are not even worth selling on Craigslist.

    Each and every laptop is purchase with the latest version of Window Home Premium (OEM version) installed (we were both fortunate enough to skip Windows Vista). As for MS Office, my wife is an academic and gets academic pricing, so she gets the latest OEM version of MS Office Profession new with each laptop. The OEM recovery disks won't install on the next laptop anyways. I pay full price so I have bought shrink wrapped versions of MS Office Professional 2000 and more recently 2007. I was forced to upgrade to MSO 2007 when clients started providing documents in the 2007 file format. So far I haven't needed to upgrade to 2010. However because my retail versions of Visio 2000 Technical and MS Project 2000 don't integrate well with Office 2007 and require old, buggy VC6 Run Time libraries, I have had to update those as well.

    There is absolutely NOTHING that has been added to Window Vista (what a POS) or Windows 7 that provided useful functionality that was not in Windows XP. There is nothing in Office Professional 2010 that was missing from MSO 2000, or 2003 or 2007, and in fact I configure Office to save files in the 97-2003 format for compatibility reasons.

    We also have a Desktop that runs a grey market copy of Windows 7 Home Premium (a friend has a some sort of Microsoft Tech membership and has a fixed number of installs - one of which he used on my kids computer) and I have installed my version MSO 2007 on it.

    Technically, by BSA rules, that desktop is pirated. However I have in a box downstairs, 3 OEM versions of Windows XP Home Premium and copy of Windows 7 Home Premium. I also have purchased, but no longer used copies of MSO 2000 Professional (both retail and OEM versions) and MSO 2007 Professional (OEM version) not to mention the currently used (and purchased) copies on my wife and my laptops. Oh yeah - I also forgot about all the Windows/Office 95/98/2000 OEM and Shrink Wapped copies I have paid for over the years.

    In short, I have bought the full stack of MS tools for my management consulting business twice and I am not at least a version behind. There is absolutely no functionality in the latest versions of any of these programs that would compel me to purchase them except for compatibility with other, newer Microsoft products.

        My wife is probably good because she gets the full MS productivity stack with each new hardware purchase. But I don't have an academic slush fund, grants or academic pricing, so if BSA raided my home, they would likely find me in violation of license agreements.

    1. Re:It's the licenses that are rigged. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why on earth would you want to re-purchase software you already had, and was good enough, just because you replaced your laptop?

      I bought a laptop 43 months ago with full versions of ESET's NOD32 antivirus and Microsoft Office 2007 Home edition (the only version I know of which was licensed for use on up to 3 computers at once - I gave a copy to my brother).

      I ended up losing that laptop (stolen) and had to buy a new one 8 months ago. I've renewed the NOD32 license, and Office 2007 is still perfectly acceptable, so I declined the antivirus and Office software they were recommending for me to purchase with my new laptop. Unfortunately, my original install media was destroyed by heat - the license keys are still readable, but the disks are melted. So I was in the position of needing to download off the internet the software I already owned licenses for, so that I could activate it with my license keys.

      ESET makes this incredibly easy: just download the trial version, enter the license key, and it unlocks to the full, licensed version.

      Microsoft makes it virtually impossible: they no longer allow you to download Office 2007, because everything is now Office 2010. I had a nightmare of a time trying to find the correct Office 2007 Home edition (the others didn't work, they reject the license key). I think I ended up downloading it from some pirate site. Once I had the correct digital copy of the ruined installation disk, it accepted the license key and installed just fine, and I'm still using it.

      Why should I buy new software when I'm still licensed to use the software I had, and I'm content to continue using it?

  88. Republic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You keep using that word...

  89. More BS from the BS Association. by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    Who cares about the drivel they emit?

  90. Majority by sjames · · Score: 1

    If over half of the people routinely break a law and think nothing of it, how can that law be justified?

    1. Re:Majority by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      If over half of the people routinely break a law and think nothing of it, how can that law be justified?

      Through the need to improve ourselves?

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    2. Re:Majority by sjames · · Score: 1

      Apparently not, or more than half would obey it. In a functioning democracy, a minority isn't allowed to elevate their preaching to the level of law.

      The minority are welcome to use the nearest soapbox to convince the rest of us if they can.

    3. Re:Majority by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Apparently not, or more than half would obey it.

      I don't buy that logic.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    4. Re:Majority by sjames · · Score: 1

      Why not? I doubt that there are many sane people who would freely support a law that results in their own significant civil and criminal liability. If the majority thought the law should exist, they would obey it. If the majority do not obey it AND they are not insane, then they do NOT support the law existing and would vote against it.

      In other words, if new law X is passed, you will be liable for $100,000 right now. What is your vote?

    5. Re:Majority by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Why not?

      The majority of people at one point in the UK lived in relatively poor hygiene compared to now, laws and actions were implemented to resolve this, for a very long time (many decades), the state of did not improve and many people were in violation of various laws. During this time, some people ended up prison for making available some of the worst living conditions available.

      Before comparisons are brought on regarding it being incomparable, I beg to differ - As we all climb the 'Maslow' pyramid, the focus of laws on what parts of life become more relevant in today's society.

      If the majority thought the law should exist, they would obey it.

      Many people agreed, many people didn't agree, many people didn't know and many people didn't care regarding hygiene - Many did not obide by the laws for numerous decades. I don't see this being much different. You just happen to be one of the people who disagree in my example.

      If the majority do not obey it AND they are not insane, then they do NOT support the law existing and would vote against it.

      I like how you just justified some of the worst existing democracies (which are more dictatorships ran out of fear) out there.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    6. Re:Majority by sjames · · Score: 1

      I got the improvement part, but not the democracy part. The entire hygiene example is an example of not democracy. About as far as a proper democracy can go is a law that people grumble about but the majority obey.

      Note, a democracy and a dictatorship are mutually exclusive. A dictatorship that has the trappings of democracy but coerces the vote is still a dictatorship, not a democracy. A 'democracy' that presents only one choice on the ballot (or multiple choices that amount to one choice) is not actually a democracy.

  91. Forgetting the qualifier. by Chas · · Score: 1

    What constitutes piracy in the purview of the survey?

    Using software you didn't pay money for?

    Filezilla: PIRATE!
    Firefox: PIRATE!
    Linux: PIRATE!
    VPN Software licensed for you by your company? PIRATE!
    Free antivirus suite? PIRATE!
    A program you slapped together yourself? PIRATE!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Forgetting the qualifier. by Sentrion · · Score: 1

      Well, according to statistical models, the so-called "free" software included in most Linux distributions or any other open-source project includes at least some code developed by current Microsoft employees, and their employment contract explicitly states that any software they develop while under the employ of Microsoft is property of Microsoft. Therefore, any distribution of "free" software is presumably pirated distribution of Microsoft's intellectual property. Violators, you have been warned:

      http://blogs.pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/tux-love/2006/11/ms_owns_linux_intel_patents_sk.html

  92. it's in the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, people. Just frame the question in a proper way and you get a high percentage.

    "Do you use software you haven't paid for?"

    Ta-da!

  93. Bullshit question by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 1

    The question they asked was "How often do you acquire pirated software or software that is not fully licensed".

    Unless the two sets "software that is pirated" and "fully licensed" make up 100% of all software the conflation of the two in a single question will produce meaningless statistics.

    I have a beta of a game which anyone is free to download. No licence. So anyone doing so would answer Yes if they were being truthful. As would I, since I acquired the software by writing it (A definition of Acquire is : To get by one's own efforts).

  94. Arrr! by Sentrion · · Score: 1

    Arrr! Say here now! What be this talk o' pirates on Slashdot? There be no pirates here. Sir, I am mortally offended that you even suggest such a thing is possible.
    We are honest business men. It's not our fault if things just happen to fall off of the back of the merchant freighters.

  95. Because... by el_jake · · Score: 1

    Half of all software is utter crap.

    --
    In order to form an immaculate member of a flock of sheep one must, above all, be a sheep.
    1. Re:Because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ted Sturgeon would disagree.

  96. Not piracy increase but irrelevance of BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reason for the increase is the number of people who no longer give a shit about the BSA and don't mind saying it to their face. Every employee who has been shown the door has the BSA on speed dial regardless of merit. BSA has outlived its sell by date and making any noise it can to stay relevent.

  97. Well now. by Cosgrach · · Score: 1

    The BSA can kiss my lily-white ass.

    Them and all the other **AA douchebags as well.

    --
    Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
  98. Everyone's crime... by jprupp · · Score: 2

    ...is nobody's crime.

  99. Huzzah! by Skrotus · · Score: 1

    Pirates > Ninjas

    1. Re:Huzzah! by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      But only in number.

  100. Alternative title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know you're spending too much time in molecular biology if you read the title as "Bovine serum albumin claims half of pc users are pirates"

  101. Because software companies treat users like shit? by JohnnyMindcrime · · Score: 2

    Case in point...

    I recently purchased a new Asus laptop with Windows 7 pre-installed. I've nothing against Windows 7 but currently it does nothing for me that Windows XP won't and I therefore see no point in learning a new OS that, in every other respect, is just change for change's sake in the way that everything has been moved around and renamed by Microsoft.

    I have a shop bought copy of XP but discovered that despite XP still being supported, Asus doesn't have drivers for all of the hardware in the laptop for XP. So in this case I resigned myself to keeping Windows 7 on the laptop.

    I'm mainly a Linux guy and wanted to partition the laptop to dual boot Gentoo Linux. I backed up the Asus Windows installation partitions and then trashed the hard drive with the partitions that I wanted. But when I re-installed Windows 7 from the back-up, it trashed my partition structure and put itself back on exactly as it was when I bought it.

    A friend of mine is an MSDN subscriber and gave me an ISO of Windows 7 Home Premium, exactly as on the laptop originally. So I partitioned the drive as I wanted it and installed from the Windows 7 installation DVD I had made from the ISO. When it came to putting in the W7 License Key, I copied in the one from the base of laptop, but when it finished installing W7 it told me the License Key was invalid.

    I read in a magazine article that an ISO image of W7 contains all W7 versions and you can prompt W7 to ask you what version of W7 to install by removing a config file from the ISO image and reburning to DVD.

    So I repeated the installation and, sure enough, I got asked which version to install - again, I chose W7 Home Premium as the laptop had come with. But once again it rejected my license key.

    Having done a few searches on Google (I'm reasonably competent with Windows but more Linux orientated), I discover that I have only an OEM license for Windows 7, which basically means I am piece of shit on the bottom of Steve Ballmer's hand-made shoes and am therefore not worthy enough to install the version of Windows 7 I legally have a license to use from an installation DVD that has that version on it.

    At that point in time, I could have got a W7 license key from the Internet, or maybe scrounged one from my MSDN-subscribing friend but I'm not into using pirated software any more, for the simple fact that when the time I stopped using pirated software about 5 years ago, I have never had a virus or piece of malware on Windows XP since.

    As of now, I've given up with W7 on the laptop, I actually wish I'd not accepted the Microsoft T&Cs and got a refund because it's of no use to me - instead the laptop is now a Linux-only PC and I shall put my legitimate copy of XP on as a VirtualBox VM.

    I do wonder if I have a case under "Fair Usage" with UK Trading Standards in this instance since it does not strike me as unreasonable to want to partition my hard drive the way I want to and to then install the provided W7 installation files onto that partition structure so I could build a dual boot.

    Maybe the BSA would be interested in taking the case up as someone who, despite being treated like shit by a software company, has not chosen to pirate software as an easy solution to the problem of getting fair usage?

    --
    Windows 10 is great - I used it to download Linux.
  102. Of course by alfredo · · Score: 1

    if you use Linux you will have to produce a valid receipt or you will be harassed until you buy expensive, buggy corporate shovel ware.

    --
    photosMy Photostream
  103. Is it really a crime anywhere? by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Copyright violation is really a civil problem instead of a criminal one IMHO and the laws in a lot of places reflect that. However there is so much money involved that various agencies have been induced to go as far as international paramilitary operations (dvd jon, megaupload etc) to what comes down to arguments about copyright. I'd say there are real crimes such as bribery occuring to inflate the response to copyright infringement.

  104. mp3 listening? pirate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ok, you use only f/loss, but you have canverted a few mp3 files from CDs. Did you buy a mp3 creation license? what about a mp3 listening license? you are a pirate. get over it. accept.

  105. what changed by Tom · · Score: 1

    When numbers change, you always need to ask what actually changed. Especially on surveys. Especially on surveys where people self-report.

    The "increase" in piracy rate may well be a combination of effects, the most obvious one being an increase in the percentage of people admitting it (i.e. a reduction of the dark figure. It could be a slight decrease of actual piracy, and a large decrease of the dark figure. Or it could be a huge increase in piracy, with a decrease in people reporting it.

    So, in summary, it basically tells us very little about piracy.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:what changed by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      After we discover the questions, methodology, and if the BSA is being honest (for a change), we can conclude that we learned very little from the research. Before that, there is nothing to learn from.

  106. Nope, not going down by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    This is the BSA, not paying for their members software is PIRACY!!! And TREASON!!! And TERRORISM!!! And THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!

    This is the BSA, they don't care about right or wrong, they care that you payed the maximum fee possible and don't you dare sell on licenses forced on you that you don't need. That would mean the terrorists have won!

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Nope, not going down by Relayman · · Score: 1

      This is also the BSA that won't accept a valid license as meaning that you are licensed to the software. You must show a receipt, even if you bought the software 10 years ago.

      --
      If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    2. Re:Nope, not going down by e70838 · · Score: 1

      This post is under appreciated: the BSA is primarily an association of gangsters having often illegal practices.

  107. Not me by 1s44c · · Score: 1

    I run Linux and OpenBSD and software with GPL, BSD, or other free licences for all my personal stuff. I have everything I need and more for free.

    On the other hand at work we often get people asking us to save a few hundred by buying Windows student edition or wanting to install software on multiple machines when we have licensed it for only one. I won't do it, we either pay for the correct license or we don't use it. It's one thing for a home user to rip off some software but companies never should.

    1. Re:Not me by smash · · Score: 1

      So, do you play DVDs?

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  108. Today is different by jabberw0k · · Score: 0

    If I say that a majority of scientists believes global warming is true, then IT MUST BE -- and you are a shameful oil-company shill if you think otherwise. Science clearly is about unerring Belief In What We Say and has nothing to do with facts and proof.

    1. Re:Today is different by realityimpaired · · Score: 3, Informative

      Global warming *is* happening. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record

      We've been measuring the global average temperature for 150 years, and the graph in the top right tells the story of what's been happening to global averages. Only an idiot looks at that graph and says that the temperature is actually going down.

      What may or may not be in question is how much of an impact we're actually having on it, and how much of it is a natural trend. They argue that there was actually a mini ice age in the middle ages, and that this is a natural warming of the world as a result of coming out of it. They point to what the Vikings called Vineland, and remind us that they used to grow grapes for wine in Greenland. What they forget is that this mini ice age was caused by the Romans deforesting Europe, and that most of those trees have not grown back... there has to be another reason that the global cooling they caused has been reversing itself.

      Beyond that, the thing that's particularly annoying about climate change deniers is that we know that these hydrocarbons (which most climate change scientists are saying is the root cause) are not good for human health. They have been linked to several types of cancers, and are a contributing factor to other quality-of-life diseases like asthma. We also know that exposure to smog has detrimental effects on the local flora and fauna. (well, some plants it's like super fertilizer, but it kills others). Knowing these detrimental effects exist, what surprises me is that some climate change deniers are actively campaigning against change, because they believe global warming to be a myth. Even if we can't agree whether humankind is responsible for the climate change, can we at least agree that reducing hydrocarbon emissions is a good thing to be trying to do regardless on its impact on the global average temperature?

    2. Re:Today is different by next_ghost · · Score: 1

      What may or may not be in question is how much of an impact we're actually having on it, and how much of it is a natural trend.

      This question is really simple to answer. Troposphere is getting warmer while stratosphere is getting colder. That means troposphere is absorbing energy radiated from surface even before it reaches upper levels of atmosphere (a.k.a. greenhouse effect). And this is not the only evidence pointing at the culprit. There are satellites in orbit measuring the spectrum of energy radiated from Earth. Those measurements clearly show that energy radiation in wavelength ranges absorbed by CO2 is decreasing. Do I need to say more?

    3. Re:Today is different by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Do I need to say more?

      To me, no. But I'm a tree-hugging dirt worshipper, and that's essentially preaching to the choir. In my mind's eye there can be no doubt that we're at least partly responsible for the quickening global warming, and as a scuba diver to boot, I have seen first-hand the impact that man is having on some of the most fragile ecosystems in the world.

      That being said, I was trying to meet him halfway, and give him a reason that didn't depend on global warming to try to reduce emissions and plant trees, because he seemed to think that global warming/climate change is a load of bunk. :) If the end result is the same and beneficial for everybody, I don't really care how it was rationalized.

    4. Re:Today is different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Vineland, and remind us that they used to grow grapes for wine in Greenland.

      They never grew grapes in Greenland. What has confused is that 'Vinland' is not French and does not mean 'land of [grape] vines', it means 'pasture land', land that has few trees or bushes, and that is exactly what is found in Greenland and Newfoundland.

    5. Re:Today is different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sources for all of your wonderful insights?

    6. Re:Today is different by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      A possible increase of less than 1 degree Celsius in 130 years? Of those 130 years the trend was clearly downward for about 50 or about 38% of the total period. What was the accuracy for digital thermometers in 1880? Of course they had all kinds of fancy digital circuitry in the 19th century. For analog thermometers how much accuracy was lost due to the parallax effect when trying to estimate the meniscus level? Was the fact that thermometers tend to have a nonlinear tolerance range taken into account? What was the margin for error? We can be pretty sure it wasn't +/- 0.000 degrees.

      Even in the distant future here in the 21st century our inexpensive traditional thermometer designs often have tolerances of +/- 1 or 2 degrees celsius. When did the more expensive hyper-accurate environmental thermometers that we now have begin to be used by defualt? What about rounding errors? if the thermometer at a station read 23.23 degrees did 19th century observers round it down? Did we have the same number of weather stations in 1880 as in 2012? If the rising CO2 really is the cause of the temperature increase then why is the temperature going down for almost 40% of the time? I would expect at least a more or less steadily increasing temperature to go along with the steadily increasing level of CO2.

      So I don't think the results are quite so certain and even if the results were 100% certain statistically it still doesn't change the fact that the CO2 increase is being measured in parts per million and not percent and, considering how complex all the climate variables are in the real world, an increase of 1 degree celsius over more than a century just isn't all that convincing. It's a small change no matter how you want to look at it. Maybe it is due to the additional CO2 from human combustion. It's certainly possible, but if you just consider the temperature record evidence it is by no means conclusive. And even if it were conclusive, fossil fuels could easily run out or become too expensive before the planet is rendered uninhabitable to human life. Or a superior energy source might be discovered/invented before Armageddon rendering combustion as obsolete as whale oil energy. I could just imagine how panicked everyone must have been when they did the math and realized that eventually they would simply kill all the whales and run out of oil.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  109. Piracy = supporting the biggest market player by coder111 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You described a case when free software competes with commercial software. But imagine following scenario:

    * There is an entrenched piece of software by company A used by most people that costs 700$.
    * There is a startup company B producing similar thing that costs 50$.

    Now in case you pirate the software produced by company A, that's not a lost sale for company A. That's more a lost sale for company B.This kind of behaviour will lead to demise of company B and company A will become a monopoly. Add to this network effects and zero distribution costs and file format lock-in etc- they will only speed things up.

    What I want to say is that software market in general is easily dominated by big established companies. It's almost impossible to compete with established players, even if you sell a similar/better product for less. And piracy is one of the things responsible for that.

    Now markets where you need to offer support or adaptation/localization of software (enterprise markets) are somewhat different. And that's where Linux shines.

    --Coder

    1. Re:Piracy = supporting the biggest market player by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      The near zero marginal price is the reason software markets tend to be monopolies. Piracy is just one manifestation of it, and the others won't go away even if piracy stops.

    2. Re:Piracy = supporting the biggest market player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget the fact that any serious start up needs to find a way to convince people that they're a reputable company and not just poorly written software wrapped in malware. I used to purchased acrobat through my college so I could print to PDF, but now I just use ghostscript. I won't use one of the many PDF printers available, or even try them, for fear that I'll end up with the ask toolbar or some other malware/spyware installed on my machine.

    3. Re:Piracy = supporting the biggest market player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both PDFCreator and CutePDF work well and don't have any toolbars or other unwanted software. Well, at least I don't think they do. Run a "Custom" install and read it, there might be a checkbox you need to unmark.

  110. You're not thinking from RSA point of view by coder111 · · Score: 1

    Their STATED goal is stamping out piracy. Their ACTUAL goal is make millions performing services of "stamping out piracy". So if piracy is up, the demand for their services and their profit obviously goes up as well- who else will defend poor huge software companies and their profits from the scary pirates?

    An entity established to solve a problem will ensure that the problem will NEVER be solved. They will make sure they maximize their own gain from CONTINUING to solve the problem. Especially if its a government entity, but corporations like this work the same way.

    --Coder

    1. Re:You're not thinking from RSA point of view by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Their STATED goal is stamping out piracy. Their ACTUAL goal is make millions performing services of "stamping out piracy". So if piracy is up, the demand for their services and their profit obviously goes up as well- who else will defend poor huge software companies and their profits from the scary pirates?

      They are a non-profit organization.

  111. I'm an alledged pirate according to MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shit this thread is already 9 hours old here it goes anyway ...

    I have a purchased copy of Office XP. Purchased from my college's bookstore in '02 when I started grad school. A couple of years ago, MS decided to slam on that software that checks to see if you have a valid copy of software - I have auto update (Yeah, yeah yeah) because I had a bad habit of forgetting to update my machine or put it off when I saw the little yellow shield.

    The first few months it was on their, it didn't have a problem. Now, whenever I run Office XP, it says I need to purchase a license. It's calling me a liar. It might be because I replaced the motherboard, I don't know. Windows had a problem with my new motherboard too, but it ran some utility and all's well now.

    My point? I think most of those numbers include folks who are falsely being accused of pirating software.

  112. For pay suckers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just keep charging those for pay suckers more and more I'm sure that will work.

  113. yea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BSA is just a microsoft partner. They just want to sell. this is their sales tactic. They dont have to find customers just take the calls.

  114. All BSA members are pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you look at the definition of piracy, I think it is rather more applicable to the BSA's members, and the way they plunder businesses for licencing revenue.

  115. WRONG and RIGHT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    right about vista being avoided BUT WRONG about windows 7 and its because of the following:
    you need new hardware
    and because of vista
    and because i want to keep using what i am now and upgrading breaks too much stuff
    win 8 and beyond will fail to do what xp did just for this reason

    1. Re:WRONG and RIGHT by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I normally don't reply to ACs but your post intrigued me...WHAT new hardware? I have Win 7 running on a 1.8GHz Sempron with 1.5Gb of RAM in the shop, I have it in dual boot with XP because frankly as long as XP is getting updates (and the only thing I use the box for is downloading drivers and as a patch server) there really isn't a point in switching that particular box but you know what? it runs fine. I've also tried Win 7 on old P4s and Athlons, old laptops, and frankly as long as you have 1Gb or better (which surfing is so nasty with 512Mb now with all the bloated JS you'd be nuts to use less than 1gb anyway) then it runs just fine. Sure you won't get Aero, but who gives a shit? I turn most of the Aero bling off anyway as all those animations just slow me down. Not really missing anything by tossing Aero and for multimedia especially the stack in Win 7 is head and shoulders better than Xp.

      So I really don't know what you are gonna see "break" because the only trouble I had with Win 7 was a CCC (Cheapo Chinese Crap) TV tuner that frankly didn't want to run on anything but XP Sp2. A quick trip to Woot! and I replaced it with a USB Tuner, problem solved and the new one supported digital which the old one didn't. The only trouble I've had with customers and Win 7 was one that had an OOOOOOOLLLLLLLLDDDDDDD Scanner, we are talking Win98 era crap, that I couldn't find a driver for, that's it. That's all. So I have to give MSFT credit for Win 7 as the amount of hardware that "just works" without even looking for a driver is just insane. So what EXACTLY is breaking?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  116. I wonder by Gonoff · · Score: 2

    What would the figure be if they removed all the people who admit to using Linux etc. I think that the BSA and fellow criminals consider FOSS to be theft and "piracy".

    Perhaps the numbers are 7% of people actually use non-free software without paying for it and 50% of people do not use any Free software.

    The number of people, even those running Windows, who are not using any open source software is shrinking all the time. I have come accross the most un-technical people using GIMP or Open Office.

    --
    I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
  117. Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No Piracy, or Copyright infringement, or theft, or any other crime will ever be completely eliminated, so they need to get that straight.

    Much of the software piracy happens because people are tired of paying for, then having to give a bunch of personal information, and turn over control of their own computer to some other parties on the Internet to do whatever they want with it, and still the software is so full of bugs, that they are often identified by the person that purchassed it within the first five minutes of installing it. Do you really believe the company that made it had no idea of the bugs in it?

    I don't care what it is. As a general rule, I will download and try it out. If I like it, and I am satisified that they don't violate or threaten my security or personal information, then I go purchase the original.

    If they do violate by security or personal information, then as far as I am concerned, thiose companies are criminal in their acts, and the law should not reward the unsuccessful criminal. I keep using it, and they can kiss off.

    I use similar rules with videos and music. If the soundtrack has all the music that was in the film, then it was a great investment. If the soundtrack is missing songs from the film ("American Beauty", "Casino Royale", then they ripped me off and I would give copies to anybody that wants them.

    Where movies are concerned, it's all a matter of their copy protection causing problems so I can't play it without it pausing, or locking up, or skipping. If that happens, as far as I am concerned, they ripped me off, then I would rip the video for others to copy.

    The entertainment and software industries are causing their own problems.

  118. Re:Because software companies treat users like shi by Sabriel · · Score: 2

    "A friend of mine is an MSDN subscriber and gave me an ISO of Windows 7 Home Premium, exactly as on the laptop originally."
    "I discover that I have only an OEM license for Windows 7" [...] "I legally have a license to use from an installation DVD that has that version on it."

    There's your problem. It's actually *not* exactly the same, and you were given the wrong ISO. There's more than one distribution image for Windows 7, each almost identical to the rest - except for the code that handles activation, which accepts only certain key sets depending on whether the disc is intended for OEM, retail, etcetera. It's a PITA as you discovered, just not for the reason you thought. They do the same with their Office line, more of those same-but-different discs depending on whether it's OEM, Academic, Retail, Corporate, etc. It inconveniences their paying customers but has no deterrent on pirates that I can discern (if anything, I think it would only encourage them).

    Machines that come with Windows 7 should (ethically at least) come with recovery media, but skinflint OEMs instead tend to sell them with a recovery partition and a one-shot image burner app to create your own set of discs - which many customers utterly fail to understand, or even know about, until it's too late.

  119. Puzzling, actually by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    There's more than enough free software to run almost any business you could name. Admittedly, you might need a commercial license or two for some very specialized stuff, but if all you need is office and some web presence, I'm a little hard put to understand why you'd have to buy any software at all.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  120. Half of PC Users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    claim BSA stands for "Bull Shit Assholes".

  121. Actually, what the figures really state .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. is that the BSA campaign obviously stimulated piracy. I'd say they should be done for stimulating crime. Scandalous.

  122. Shouldn't the walled gardens be stopping this by BetaDays · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't the walled gardens be stopping this in the future?

    --
    Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
  123. Which neatly proves that by sidragon.net · · Score: 1

    Software piracy has not caused the industry to collapse.

  124. Yar Har by Tifer · · Score: 1

    Ahoy and avast, maties.

  125. 57% really?? by stedlj · · Score: 1

    57% really?? Most users are lucky they know how to turn a computer on, and most likely didn't know what they were even answering. Ask the questions the right way and you will get the answers you want.

  126. Lack of productive cooperation, for sure by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 1

    I think the biggest problem is a lack of the usual compromise between a customer and a vendor. Of COURSE piracy has gone up; any mass produced, commercially polished applications I've purchased legally in the past year phones home so often that my laptop is literally useless for many purposes without a wi-fi connection.

    It's becoming a case of cutting off a nose to spite the face, and it's a real problem. I don't want to see companies that make good, useful products go out of business, but the bullshit DRM coming out of the software sector is simply ludicrous. Everything from various operating systems the latest games needs to phone home periodically these days; and some applications need *constant* reassurance from daddy that there's no stranger-danger from the big bad user.... it's enough say "Fuck it all; piracy's easier."

    I wonder if the big corps are doing it on purpose, so when piracy reaches more than 95% of users, they can ask for a bail-out and even MORE draconian laws. Oh, and so the leaders can float to the Bahamas on golden parachutes.

  127. Unlicensed... by Terwin · · Score: 1

    My company produces a certain software product for which our customers buy licenses.
    I on the other hand make changes to that package and have roughly 20 copies of it sitting on my hard-drive right now. (customized for different deployments mostly)

    I just copy them down from the repository and build.

    It would be hard to say that I have a license for each and every copy of the platform I have, and thus you could technically say I am running unlicensed software.
    On the other hand, my employer owns all the copyrights to this platform and they pay me to make these changes, so I am also not in danger of being pursued for this.

    If I were asked if I had a license for every piece of software on my work computer, I would consider the truthful answer to be 'no' just on the situation specified above(one that is no doubt common to many if not most in the software industry).

    As the BSA wants to scare their supporters with this sort of survey(to get more $upport), I have little doubt that they make the question as vague as possible to get lots of 'Yes' answers. As such I would consider this survey to be about as accurate as a pop-up alert in my web browser claiming to have found malware on my PC.

  128. Re:Need to come up with a final solution for pirac by V.+P.+Winterbuttocks · · Score: 1

    Maybe you could use pirated IBM software to keep track of the people you haven't killed yet.

    --
    I'm the real Vorokrytin P. Winterbuttocks.
  129. it's called consuetudinary law, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A law becomes obsolete when the whole society is breaking it.
    If you were a jury, what your veridict would be for someone who downloaded a song?

  130. Aaaarg! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a lot of people running around hijacking ships, kidnapping crews, murdering, etc... Unless, we are just failing to distinguish between copyright infringement and capital crimes.

  131. It should be going down because of app stores by Marrow · · Score: 1

    If all your software comes in via an app store and the media goes away, how can piracy occur. The question is, when all software comes via this conduit, what are the stupid BSA guys going to do for jobs.

  132. bullsh*t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BSA is completely FULL OF SH*T

    Just like with music and movies, if it sucks you can't get your money back... so what do they expect to happen?

  133. Majority Rules? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about some "free" elections!

  134. Outlaw PC ownership then by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Like those freedom loving countries like North Korea.

  135. I Am A Confirmed, Admitted Software Pirate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Posting AC so I won't get busted, but ... I have committed illegal acts. I have done historical research into copyrighted software published in the 1980s and early 1990s. I have obtained this software illegally through web sites and file sharing networks (and sneakernet). Because THERE IS NO WAY TO LEGALLY OBTAIN COPYRIGHTED SOFTWARE FROM THE 1980s! The law is broken beyond repair when historical research is illegal. There is no legal way to obtain historically important and rare, but obsolete, software, since it is under copyright and it is illegal for anyone to dissiminate it. I personally think this issue needs to be fixed before the BSA does their annual whine-a-thon about piracy.

  136. Which half? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bottom or top half or left versus right or front versus back?

  137. Do the fucking math by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1
    1 in 5 people live in developed countries. Everyone in a non-developed country uses pirates software. That means 4 out of 5 people at least have pirated software.

    And from this, what follows? Answer: nothing.

    None of those people were customers to begin with.

    So the BSA can go F themselves if they think this statistic is a good reason for new and more draconic laws impinging on end user's rights.

  138. Re:Do you use software downloaded from the interne by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We'll do what we want, accuse you of piracy!
    You are a pirate!

    We're here to levy a fee,
    checking your stuff for legitamacy,
    Doesn't matter if it's Linux or BSD,
    You are a pirate!

    Kapersky, Norton, or Avast
    Rumours around it's not enterprise class,
    Harangue for reciepts at the end of the day!
    You are a pirate!

    You are a pirate! Way!

    You've got yourself an app, (an app!)
    That torrents from a hidden box,
    That's all filled up with warez, (with warez!)
    Cryptographic streams all day!

  139. That would mean Half of the BSA are pirates too. by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

    ARghhhaa matey!

  140. A photo is worth . . . by sgt_doom · · Score: 1
    a BSA payoff? This photo below, of Thomas "three chins" Friedman (a k a the Freakman) meeting with Washington state Governor Gregoire begs the question: which one is paying off the other for doing so much work on behalf of the BSA? ? ?

    http://www.thestranger.com/binary/02ba/1337178666-greoigre_friedman.jpg

  141. And about their taxes. . . by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    BSA also undercounts taxable income? ???? (Wonder of wonders?)

  142. Only 15,000 samples? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a good start for their first country. When do they plan on completing the research?

  143. Re:mp3 listening? pirate by Surt · · Score: 1

    I listen to pandora, actually.

    --
    "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  144. Dear BSA, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go fuck yourself.

    Sincerely,
      Humanity

  145. And to get it legitimately... by jgostling · · Score: 1

    I've been going back and forth with the vendor for 2 weeks already. It starting to feel like they don't even want my money.

  146. well yeah... by smash · · Score: 1

    I'll bet that maybe 1% of people who used Winzip (beyond the 30 day eval period) ever paid for it. Ditto for Winrar.

    Never mind the other piracy, mp3s and videos...

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  147. Huh? by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    What do the Boy Scouts of America have to do with software piracy?

    Just askin...

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  148. Overinflated numbers to justify their existence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There, I said it... numbers are probably going down in reality, they filtered 10 times as many users to get a sub-group that shows 57%...

    It's called padding the ballot, and it's obvious they are doing it.

  149. Boy Scouts of America? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Boy Scouts of America care about piracy? :b

  150. The actual question asked... by anyGould · · Score: 1

    (from http://portal.bsa.org/globalpiracy2011/)

    "How often do you acquire pirated software or software that is not fully licensed - all of the time, most of the time, occasionally, rarely, or never?"

    Results were:

    • Always: 5%
    • Mostly: 9%
    • Occasionally: 17%
    • Rarely: 26%
    • Never: 38%
    • Don't Know / Refuse: 5%

    So that 57% number can be interpreted as people who have acquired "pirated" or "not fully licensed" software at some point - it makes no effort to differentiate how often that software is used.

    Not to mention, I'm not sure how FLOSS software fits into the definition - considering who's asking, I wouldn't be surprised of "fully licensed" is explained as "you paid for it".

    Either way, almost half of their "OMG" number is in the "rarely" category, which really cuts the legs off the argument.

  151. 57% Only???? by lucidboomer · · Score: 1

    Ruined by Suits

    The software industry would have been great if we could have just kept "the suits" out of it. Any time you let techno-peasants with degrees make decisions, you create a "value detracted" situation. I remember attending one of the first COMDEX conventions. Encyclopedia Britannica was at the convention. I asked the dude in the booth about his 'wares'. He informed me that he had the entire EB on DVD for ONLY...... $1997.00 What a deal! "Hey Dude", I said.... "Did you know that a dvd costs only ...like 50 cents?

    I suggested that if they found one idiot willing to part with $1997 for the data, please send me his email. I have some swamp land to sell him. I further suggested that If they marketed the product for $37 they might sell 30,000 of them. Nope. These guys with degrees couldn't wrap their heads around this concept. Where ae they today? Gonzo.

    Google was later invented and Google showed us all how it's done. Microsoft grew so rapidly at first because with right from DOS 3, they used setup.ini so that pretty much anyone could copy the OS. I think their early marketing was based on pirate propulsion. For every one OS purchased there were likely a dozen copied. This was the original virus. In very short order, they owned the planet. Wordperfect lost to Word because they made their software more difficult to copy than Word. Wordperfect was a better word processor, but because only 1 in 300 were savvy enough to know how to copy it, Word walked all over them. Word was probably copied by 1 in 40.

    Software companies need to learn a few things still. They need to price their products so that it is not worth it to copy them. Adobe is going to have to learn this lesson with its CS suite. $3000??? Who are you kidding Adobe? $499 should be the top. And don't yack at me about support costs. Screw support. In 30 years I've never found a support system worth anything. All you get is FAQ's (boy does that suck. Another invention by some techno-peasant). With bandwidth what it is and with rapid elearning solutions, companies should just create "how to" videos. People learn visually. My entire IT career has been vastly enriched by me just creating "How To" videos for anyone that wants to learn any software. When I get requests, I learn the software, then create rich media how to videos to provide private tutorial assistance to clients. Software companies would be well advised to just let the private industry take care of support like I've just explained. For those of us who do this kind of work, the earning potential is virtually unlimited.

  152. You're right: no comparison :) by dgharmon · · Score: 1

    "I almost agree... I dual boot win7 and Ubuntu and there is still no comparison. I get more work done while in win7...as soon as (insert your fav brand of Linux) can properly install my video, network, sound drivers without a glitch...

    Out-of-the-Box I can watch videos and brows, without a glitch and including the MP4 files Microsoft don't want me to use. I also find with each new dumbed-down iteration of Windows, it gets harder to perform the simplest task without the GUI getting in the way.

    --
    AccountKiller
  153. Off topic by alexo · · Score: 1

    You see, there were not so long ago (or perhaps there still are) laws against oral and gay sex in some states. Such a backward an irrelevant laws must be overturned.

    They were.