A lot of old games were entertaining. They had to be. They couldn't just rest on having the best graphics. It actually needed to be a good game. The only decent games I've played in a while are Max Payne and Alice.
I think that a used software market doesn't exist because nobody wants a copy of doom anymore. There's tons of great, old music that people will listen to (depeche mode is a great band...), there's less of a market for old software (office 95 won't read office 2k files)
Seriously. Wasn't ms getting angry at that area for it's lax piracy laws? I'm not sure about korea, but think about it. You want to punish software pirates, and local governments don't want you to. What better way than to give them a virus?
I thought one of the reasons that OSS advocates gave for running linux was that it was cheap? I think it's a great thing. People will come to realize that linux is a great way to save $200 or so on a computer. Sure, some of them might be pissed off, but they don't matter, they'd never use linux anyways. It's the people that use it and are impressed that matter. Even not them, but their kids. Give the kids something and they'll want to learn more about it (at least I did as a kid) and probably move to a real distro.
The thing with that, is that they're the MPAA... They'll do something like that ad the RIAA made where the artist was poor, and the cd shop was closed all because some kid downloaded an mp3 of a song he'd never buy the cd for anyways (like my semi-collection of pop mp3's I have encrypted so my friends won't see them).
Trying to make the downloaders look evil just leads to a sort of "reefer madness" backlash against it.
I think the BSA (or whatever the acronym is) has it right. Bust the big distributors, leave the little kids alone.
Instead of paying some zaibatsu $16 or $17 canadian for a cd's worth of mp3's I download them off gnutella, and send the artist $3. It's a hell of a lot more than they're gonna make off the record company for that.
My cable provider's been doing this for a while, but not by raising prices on those of us who transfer a few terabytes a month, by offering a deal for a crippled connection. I pay about $40/month for high-speed access, and I have no bandwidth restrictions. They've been encouraging their customers to switch to their $20/month plan, where it's about 1/4 as fast as regular cable (still fine for web/email types) and there's some arbitrary download limit. This way, they get more customers (cheaper = better, evidently) from the ranks of the dialup users. (an unlimited time dialup connection is about the same price)
It's not ignorance you're claiming. You know full well the terms of the agreement, but you don't agree to them, so you rip it out.
Let me make an an analogy. You're driving along, and you have to go to the bathroom. You come up to a building with a big label that reads "OmniCorp Software and Petrochemical Division" and decide to use their facilities. When you get to the front doors, there's a sign that reads "Please sign this contract to use the bathroom" and there's no security or anything blocking you from getting in. You read the contract and there's a clause about giving up your first-born son, so you decide not to sign it. You walk straight in and use the bathroom. Now IANAL, but I'm pretty sure you aren't bound by that contract.
Same deal with EULA's. Don't agree with the terms, don't click okay to that contract
I wonder. If you were to remove the EULA from the install executable, using a hex editor or something, would you still be bound by it? Even though most software comes with anti-reverse engineering clauses in the contract, those are in the EULA (see what I'm getting at?). I'm not sure if that's banned under the DMCA, but I'm in the canada, so I'm not bound by that particular law yet.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of old games were entertaining. They had to be. They couldn't just rest on having the best graphics. It actually needed to be a good game. The only decent games I've played in a while are Max Payne and Alice.
I think that a used software market doesn't exist because nobody wants a copy of doom anymore.
There's tons of great, old music that people will listen to (depeche mode is a great band...), there's less of a market for old software (office 95 won't read office 2k files)
I'd just buy the CD new, rip it, shrinkwrap it (or not, depending on how dumb the cd store is) and return it for a full refund.
What's next? the RIAA demanding royalties on shrinkwrap?
Actually, I shouldn't say that. Next I know it, it'll be true
Seriously. Wasn't ms getting angry at that area for it's lax piracy laws? I'm not sure about korea, but think about it. You want to punish software pirates, and local governments don't want you to. What better way than to give them a virus?
I thought one of the reasons that OSS advocates gave for running linux was that it was cheap? I think it's a great thing. People will come to realize that linux is a great way to save $200 or so on a computer. Sure, some of them might be pissed off, but they don't matter, they'd never use linux anyways. It's the people that use it and are impressed that matter. Even not them, but their kids. Give the kids something and they'll want to learn more about it (at least I did as a kid) and probably move to a real distro.
The thing with that, is that they're the MPAA... They'll do something like that ad the RIAA made where the artist was poor, and the cd shop was closed all because some kid downloaded an mp3 of a song he'd never buy the cd for anyways (like my semi-collection of pop mp3's I have encrypted so my friends won't see them).
Trying to make the downloaders look evil just leads to a sort of "reefer madness" backlash against it.
I think the BSA (or whatever the acronym is) has it right. Bust the big distributors, leave the little kids alone.
x = ( -b (+/-) Squareroot(b^2 -4ac) ) / 2a
Instead of paying some zaibatsu $16 or $17 canadian for a cd's worth of mp3's I download them off gnutella, and send the artist $3. It's a hell of a lot more than they're gonna make off the record company for that.
My cable provider's been doing this for a while, but not by raising prices on those of us who transfer a few terabytes a month, by offering a deal for a crippled connection. I pay about $40/month for high-speed access, and I have no bandwidth restrictions. They've been encouraging their customers to switch to their $20/month plan, where it's about 1/4 as fast as regular cable (still fine for web/email types) and there's some arbitrary download limit. This way, they get more customers (cheaper = better, evidently) from the ranks of the dialup users. (an unlimited time dialup connection is about the same price)
It's not ignorance you're claiming. You know full well the terms of the agreement, but you don't agree to them, so you rip it out.
Let me make an an analogy. You're driving along, and you have to go to the bathroom. You come up to a building with a big label that reads "OmniCorp Software and Petrochemical Division" and decide to use their facilities. When you get to the front doors, there's a sign that reads "Please sign this contract to use the bathroom" and there's no security or anything blocking you from getting in. You read the contract and there's a clause about giving up your first-born son, so you decide not to sign it. You walk straight in and use the bathroom. Now IANAL, but I'm pretty sure you aren't bound by that contract.
Same deal with EULA's. Don't agree with the terms, don't click okay to that contract
Yes, and for only $60 CAD (about $40 USD I believe) you can play it. Mod Chips are cheaper.
I wonder. If you were to remove the EULA from the install executable, using a hex editor or something, would you still be bound by it? Even though most software comes with anti-reverse engineering clauses in the contract, those are in the EULA (see what I'm getting at?). I'm not sure if that's banned under the DMCA, but I'm in the canada, so I'm not bound by that particular law yet.
any thoughts?
Now do you really think that college students geeky enough to have one of these would have an other half?
Lord knows I never do...
Wouldn't you just take the 802.11 card out when you wanted some privacy?