Does a person who writes software deserve payment from every person on Earth for his software?
Morally : if they all use it, yes.
Of course, if only 3/5 of them pay, the other 2/5 should know that they are using the relative anonymity and security-free atmosphere of the net/BBS/FTP site/whatever to do something they probably wouldn't do if they knew the author personally.
I'm not saying we should put everybody in jail for copying software. But, the people who do it should know that they are breaking a law that is meant to uphold contracts in situations where there is no producer to user contact.
assume i wrote an app that prints a $50 bill every time the return key is pressed. and, assume i want to charge $100 for it. (also assume the bills are real, and that i don't want to use the app to generate money - i want to collect the registration fees, instead).
do you seriously believe it won't be cracked within hours of being released?
even though it would only take 2 presses of the return key to generate enough cash to cover the inital cost of purchasing the program, this $100 would be "too much" for some bored college student; and i would become the "greedy" capitalist that the little thieves would claim was making too much money from the registration fees.
The software companies would probably make a killing if they charged only $15 for their stuff
nonsense. my software is all below $30 and it is still pirated like crazy. theives are theives, it doesn't matter what the stuff costs, they steal it because it's easy to steal.
As far as I can see, the company is not losing money by having its software copied by people who are too poor to pay for it. If you have anything that that back up your own statement, I'd love to hear it.
Software is not a right. If you can't afford it, you don't get to have it. It's really that simple.
I don't write software so that you can get a better job. I write it because it is my job. If I don't get paid because people think they are above upholding their end of the deal, I don't eat. It's that simple.
You don't deserve software. It isn't a right. The privilege of software use is not guaranteed anywhere. Software is not an entitlement.
Like it or not, you are breaking the law. You cannot disguise it behind the fact that bits are hard to hold onto.
Someone puts in effort, you use the resulting product, but only if you fuphold your end of the bargain. It's that simple.
Piracy is a big middle finger to people who put the effort into creating useful software. It's the pirate saying "Fuck you and your laws and your right to make a profit. I can copy this app, so I will. I will post it on the Net for all of the world to take, as well. I am above reproach because I am saving the world from greed and crappy software". It is all total nonsense; the ravings of spoiled children and future criminals.
Creating software takes skill and knowledge in a very specific area. And this knowledge and these skills are not things you find in the general population. I don't walk around telling carpenters that they should build houses for free and I don't expect software to be handed to me for free.
Piracy is never going to go away so the software companies could at least focus on the real issues instead of quoting ridiculous numbers so that the goverment and clueless people feel bad for them.
You're saying I should give my software away (work for free) and focus on the "Real Issues" ?
What are the "real issues" ? They better be pretty damn important if they outweigh my need to provide myself with an income.
The reason I am less-than-calm when someone tries to defend copying software because it is a) easy, or b) no big deal to the author, is that I am one of those authors. And if I lose 200 sales next month to piracy, I have lost all of my sales for the month. If MS or Adobe loses 200 sales, they won't even flinch (well, MS won't anyway). But, yet when people make these kinds of claims, they casually lump me in with these other software companies. Yes, MS is too big, but using MS as a symbol of the whole software industry is stupid. I cannot afford to produce software if I don't get paid for it.
Yes, I know software is intangible and easily copied. But, this doesn't change the fact that the end result, the a.out, represents the sum of at least one person's efforts. If I didn't write the program it wouldn't be out there for people to use.
So, I have decided that I want to trade unlimited use, forever, plus free tech support, of each of the programs I have created, for less than the price of a single decent meal (I hope you agree that this price is not unreasonable). And still, I have to spend many hours each week tracking down pirate web sites, tweaking my potection schemes, adding user names to my blacklists, etc., just because a) it's easy to copy applications and b) when you really get down to it, the people doing the pirating are much more selfish and greedy than the people they are stealing from, no matter what moral high ground they claim to stand on while they do it.
Just because someone valued a piece of software enough to make a pirated copy does not mean they would have bought it otherwise. Even if piracy were impossible, not everyone that does pirate software would purchase that same software. Some can't justify the cost; others couldn't even afford the cost. There are also those who make a pirated copy just because they "might need it someday".
This is total crap.
I might need a new car someday, but I'm not going to go out and steal one, just in case.
Software doesn't fall from the sky. People work at it. If they want to give it away, then that's their decision. If they want to ask for some money in return for their efforts, that's also a valid decision. You don't make that decision. The world does not revolve around you.
Software isn't a right. It is the result of someone's effort, just as making a car is, or cooking a burger or smuggling an ounce of pot through customs. And it isn't written anywhere that you are entitled to steal any of these things just because you don't want to pay for it. Grow up.
The Americans never had war on their territory and therefor react very senitive to own miltary losses
Go back and check your history books. There have been plenty of wars on US soil - the American Civil war, for one. I believe more American soldiers were killed in the Civil war than in WWII.
Yes we are sensitive to losing our own, but it would be more noteworthy if we weren't.
After being/.'ed today, i've received a bunch of letters from people who are exploring my site in this manner. needless to day, i've placed a bunch of dummy index.html's everywhere.
The hard part is getting a source library of a couple thousand tiles (10s of thousands?). This is probably why porn was used.
Yes, as the creator of that image, I can confirm this. And, honestly, for a picture of a face, you do need a lot of flesh tones, if you want to avoid having to modify the output tiles. So, that porn CD finally got some good use.
The whole thing took less than a minute on my P-pro 180.
Where did you get the idea that "Evolve" implies that something is getting better or more sophisticated? Evolution has no bias towards improvement or increasing sophistication. Evolution is simply about one entity finding a way to better exploit the environment than the competition can. "Better" is relative to which side of the teeth you're on; and sophistication has nothing at all to do with it.
There are only 12 notes (in western music, i know, i know), so it would be impossible to copyright a "C# quarter-note @ 100 BPI". but, if you string enough notes together to come up with something that sounds enough like "He's So Fine", you'll attract the attention of a copyright lawyer and then you'll have to go to court. ask George Harrison.
in music, the test is subjective and context-sensitive. i would suspect the test for source code would be, too.
I read it and I have no idea what it's about. For me, it was like reading an object-oriented design textbook : endless demonstrations of abstract and useless ideas. I kept thinking "would you just get to the point?".
You claim that cracking has momentarily outstripped copy protection? Unless that "momentarily" dates back to the earliest days of the C64 I can't agree. There has never been a time in the history of modern software when pirates haven't found ways of getting around copy protection. It would only be a matter of time before hardware dongles were defeated too, if they became commonplace. So, we should just give up on trying to profit from our work just because there are people who would rather steal than pay? Just because it's easy doesn't make it right. Copyright, like many other things simply keeps honest people honest. If there were no copyright it would be "choose to copy not to buy". If I disliked it, I wouldn't buy the official version. How very rational. Now, if you can guarantee that every person who does like and use my stuff will pay for it, I'll gladly give up the hassle and considerable cost of government-sponsored copyright protection.
If you take a loaded gun with a label that says "Point in face and pull the trigger for a hell of a good time" and pass it around to a random group of people are you to blame for the morons who pull the trigger and blow their heads off? That guy was e-mailing a loaded gun
Actually, it's more like this : Your desk suddenly decides that it is going to send a package to all of your friends. Your friends are not wary of this perfectly normal looking package; it is addressed from you, after all. And, even though they weren't expecting a package from you, they know you and trust you.
Your friends take this package to their desk, sit down and open it. They find that the package contains a bunch of teen porn magazines. So now they're a little suspicious, of you, not of the package.
But, while they weren't looking, the package has told your friend's desk to send identical packages to everyone of your friend's friends.
Two things : Should a package be able to talk to your desk? Should a desk be able to send a package?
they don't really need any/charges/. the fact that he was arrested for doing it, regardless of if he serves any time, or pays any fines, pretty much ruined his employment prospects: unless he changes his name...
Slashdot Mirror
Does a person who writes software deserve payment from every person on Earth for his software?
Morally : if they all use it, yes.
Of course, if only 3/5 of them pay, the other 2/5 should know that they are using the relative anonymity and security-free atmosphere of the net/BBS/FTP site/whatever to do something they probably wouldn't do if they knew the author personally.
I'm not saying we should put everybody in jail for copying software. But, the people who do it should know that they are breaking a law that is meant to uphold contracts in situations where there is no producer to user contact.
-c
assume i wrote an app that prints a $50 bill every time the return key is pressed. and, assume i want to charge $100 for it. (also assume the bills are real, and that i don't want to use the app to generate money - i want to collect the registration fees, instead).
do you seriously believe it won't be cracked within hours of being released?
even though it would only take 2 presses of the return key to generate enough cash to cover the inital cost of purchasing the program, this $100 would be "too much" for some bored college student; and i would become the "greedy" capitalist that the little thieves would claim was making too much money from the registration fees.
deny it. i dare you.
The software companies would probably make a killing if they charged only $15 for their stuff
nonsense. my software is all below $30 and it is still pirated like crazy. theives are theives, it doesn't matter what the stuff costs, they steal it because it's easy to steal.
but, it's still illegal.
-c
As far as I can see, the company is not losing money by having its software copied by people who are too poor to pay for it. If you have anything that that back up your own statement, I'd love to hear it.
Software is not a right. If you can't afford it, you don't get to have it. It's really that simple.
I don't write software so that you can get a better job. I write it because it is my job. If I don't get paid because people think they are above upholding their end of the deal, I don't eat. It's that simple.
You don't deserve software. It isn't a right. The privilege of software use is not guaranteed anywhere. Software is not an entitlement.
Like it or not, you are breaking the law. You cannot disguise it behind the fact that bits are hard to hold onto.
Someone puts in effort, you use the resulting product, but only if you fuphold your end of the bargain. It's that simple.
Piracy is a big middle finger to people who put the effort into creating useful software. It's the pirate saying "Fuck you and your laws and your right to make a profit. I can copy this app, so I will. I will post it on the Net for all of the world to take, as well. I am above reproach because I am saving the world from greed and crappy software". It is all total nonsense; the ravings of spoiled children and future criminals.
Creating software takes skill and knowledge in a very specific area. And this knowledge and these skills are not things you find in the general population. I don't walk around telling carpenters that they should build houses for free and I don't expect software to be handed to me for free.
Neither should you
Piracy is never going to go away so the software companies could at least focus on the real issues instead of quoting ridiculous numbers so that the goverment and clueless people feel bad for them.
You're saying I should give my software away (work for free) and focus on the "Real Issues" ?
What are the "real issues" ? They better be pretty damn important if they outweigh my need to provide myself with an income.
Come back to Earth.
OK. nothing personal, but...
The reason I am less-than-calm when someone tries to defend copying software because it is a) easy, or b) no big deal to the author, is that I am one of those authors. And if I lose 200 sales next month to piracy, I have lost all of my sales for the month. If MS or Adobe loses 200 sales, they won't even flinch (well, MS won't anyway). But, yet when people make these kinds of claims, they casually lump me in with these other software companies. Yes, MS is too big, but using MS as a symbol of the whole software industry is stupid. I cannot afford to produce software if I don't get paid for it.
Yes, I know software is intangible and easily copied. But, this doesn't change the fact that the end result, the a.out, represents the sum of at least one person's efforts. If I didn't write the program it wouldn't be out there for people to use.
So, I have decided that I want to trade unlimited use, forever, plus free tech support, of each of the programs I have created, for less than the price of a single decent meal (I hope you agree that this price is not unreasonable). And still, I have to spend many hours each week tracking down pirate web sites, tweaking my potection schemes, adding user names to my blacklists, etc., just because a) it's easy to copy applications and b) when you really get down to it, the people doing the pirating are much more selfish and greedy than the people they are stealing from, no matter what moral high ground they claim to stand on while they do it.
Just because someone valued a piece of software enough to make a pirated copy does not mean they would have bought it otherwise.
Even if piracy were impossible, not everyone that does pirate software would purchase that same software. Some can't justify the cost; others couldn't even afford the cost. There are also those who make a pirated copy just because they "might need it someday".
This is total crap.
I might need a new car someday, but I'm not going to go out and steal one, just in case.
Software doesn't fall from the sky. People work at it. If they want to give it away, then that's their decision. If they want to ask for some money in return for their efforts, that's also a valid decision. You don't make that decision. The world does not revolve around you.
Software isn't a right. It is the result of someone's effort, just as making a car is, or cooking a burger or smuggling an ounce of pot through customs. And it isn't written anywhere that you are entitled to steal any of these things just because you don't want to pay for it. Grow up.
The Americans never had war on their territory and therefor react very senitive to own miltary losses
Go back and check your history books. There have been plenty of wars on US soil - the American Civil war, for one. I believe more American soldiers were killed in the Civil war than in WWII.
Yes we are sensitive to losing our own, but it would be more noteworthy if we weren't.
-c
After being /.'ed today, i've received a bunch of letters from people who are exploring my site in this manner. needless to day, i've placed a bunch of dummy index.html's everywhere.
-c
I'm proud to say that Tyler has been around since 1995. It was the first program I ever wrote for windows...
We stole the idea from the cover of Wired, Nov. 95, though. They got their app from someone at MIT, i think.
-c (the guy who made that lara croft image)
The hard part is getting a source library of a couple thousand tiles (10s of thousands?). This is probably why porn was used.
Yes, as the creator of that image, I can confirm this. And, honestly, for a picture of a face, you do need a lot of flesh tones, if you want to avoid having to modify the output tiles. So, that porn CD finally got some good use.
The whole thing took less than a minute on my P-pro 180.
There are other images there : Click me
Actually, I got mail from someone today who wrote a GIMP plug-in that does essentially what Tyler does. I'm sure you can find it easily enough..
(Chris, author of Tyler)
how in god's name does your processor make the internet faster? someone want to explain that one to me?
I think it has the ability to suck harder on your phone line than most other processors can.
Where did you get the idea that "Evolve" implies that something is getting better or more sophisticated? Evolution has no bias towards improvement or increasing sophistication. Evolution is simply about one entity finding a way to better exploit the environment than the competition can. "Better" is relative to which side of the teeth you're on; and sophistication has nothing at all to do with it.
The same situation comes up in music copyrights.
There are only 12 notes (in western music, i know, i know), so it would be impossible to copyright a "C# quarter-note @ 100 BPI". but, if you string enough notes together to come up with something that sounds enough like "He's So Fine", you'll attract the attention of a copyright lawyer and then you'll have to go to court. ask George Harrison.
in music, the test is subjective and context-sensitive. i would suspect the test for source code would be, too.
I read it and I have no idea what it's about. For me, it was like reading an object-oriented design textbook : endless demonstrations of abstract and useless ideas. I kept thinking "would you just get to the point?".
I may try again. I may have more patience now...
-c
You claim that cracking has momentarily outstripped copy protection? Unless that "momentarily" dates back to the earliest days of the C64 I can't agree. There has never been a time in the history of modern software when pirates haven't found ways of getting around copy protection. It would only be a matter of time before hardware dongles were defeated too, if they became commonplace. So, we should just give up on trying to profit from our work just because there are people who would rather steal than pay? Just because it's easy doesn't make it right. Copyright, like many other things simply keeps honest people honest. If there were no copyright it would be "choose to copy not to buy". If I disliked it, I wouldn't buy the official version. How very rational. Now, if you can guarantee that every person who does like and use my stuff will pay for it, I'll gladly give up the hassle and considerable cost of government-sponsored copyright protection.
If you take a loaded gun with a label that says "Point in face and pull the trigger for a hell of a good time" and pass it around to a random group of people are you to blame for the morons who pull the trigger and blow their heads off? That guy was e-mailing a loaded gun
Actually, it's more like this :
Your desk suddenly decides that it is going to send a package to all of your friends. Your friends are not wary of this perfectly normal looking package; it is addressed from you, after all. And, even though they weren't expecting a package from you, they know you and trust you.
Your friends take this package to their desk, sit down and open it. They find that the package contains a bunch of teen porn magazines. So now they're a little suspicious, of you, not of the package.
But, while they weren't looking, the package has told your friend's desk to send identical packages to everyone of your friend's friends.
Two things :
Should a package be able to talk to your desk?
Should a desk be able to send a package?
they don't really need any /charges/. the fact that he was arrested for doing it, regardless of if he serves any time, or pays any fines, pretty much ruined his employment prospects: unless he changes his name...