SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (12/15/87)
Doug Gwyn writes: >This is the second note you've recently posted bragging about stealing >software. Be advised that this is not a "cracker" or pirate bulletin >board, but rather an Apple II information newsgroup. 1) I agree 2) Present or potential pirates might take note of the number of developers who contribute to (and presumably read) comp.sys.apple. If we want to continue to benefit from their presence, let's not insult them. 3) Because the newsgroup originates on, and makes extensive use of, federal government sponsored networks, a cavalier attitude toward copywrite (or any other law) could result in termination of the group. In short, lets take care not to mess up a good thing. --------------------- ARPA: sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu Murphy A. Sewall BITNET: SEWALL@UCONNVM School of Business Admin. UUCP: ...ihnp4!psuvax1!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL University of Connecticut
griswof@jacobs.cs.orst.edu (Griswold Frank Steele) (12/17/87)
About piracy: There are surely more than "practical" reasons not to do illegal
acts. I would hope that potential thieves of software would consider also
1: The golden rule. (I'm sorry if this offends those who know it..)
which says in essence: "Do unto others as you would have them
do to you."
2: One's own character (development): Do you really WANT to be a thief?
3: Teaching by example: (this borders on the practical reasons...)
Some of us have neighbors, friends, CHILDREN, who look (up) to
us for guidance.
4: Honor (see 2): It seems to me that one can only be truly happy,
(fill in a different adjective) if (s)he is being completely
honest with (him)self. The only really (happy) folks I know
are like that, anyhow.
ANOTHER point: I dislike (maybe hate is better word) copy protection. It is my
intent to never buy such protected software, and except for a few games, I have
lived up to the intent. I, too have had possession of software which is copy-
righted, and for which I did not pay. AND I DONT FEEL BAD OR WRONG about that:
I used it briefly while deciding if I needed it, and then either (really!) I
discarded it or bought my own copy. I have done both. So I can't really flame
too effectively at the guy who bragged about his pirated copy. As long as
he doesn't hurt anyone else by his 'piracy'. Which brings us full circle back
to where we started from: practical reasons not to (talk about) piracy (on the
net). Hope I've started some folks thinking that needed it. Hope I didn't bore
all the rest of you too much.
Feel free to flame me by email if you think I need it. Probably this discussion
should move over to another subject if it stays on the net.
Frank Griswold: griswof@jacobs.cs.orst.edu (CSNET)
903 NW 30th Corvallis OR 97330 (U Smail)
** * * **
* * * *
* * * * *
*** Merry Christmas ***
* * * * *
* * * *
** * * **abc@BRL.ARPA (Brint Cooper) (12/17/87)
The most practical reason for not advocating piracy or any other illegal activity is that info-apple's primary distribution is made from host smoke.brl.mil, a government-owned (i.e. owned by the taxpaying public) computer. The rules for using our machines are made by other agencies and are much less tolerant than those at universities. If the wrong person gets wind that illegal acts are being advocated over a government owned network and government owned hosts, they very likely would shut down info-apple, at least from this host and on the Milnet. Sorry, but that's the way it is. _Brint Cooper AKA info-apple-request@smoke.brl.mil
REWING@TRINCC.BITNET (12/19/87)
I agree with Mark. Although it was pretty dumb to out and out mention blatent piracy on a governmnt-maintained bulletin board, but I think that he and we all have gotten the message, so I vote that in the Christmas and Hannukah holiday spirit that we let by gones by by gones and bury this thread now. Any more discussion of it now probably won't prove to be beneficial to anyone, especially this bboard, which has better things to discuss. _____________________________________________________________________________ INTERNET: REWING%TRINCC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU-------Richard A. Ewing, IV Bitnet: REWING@TRINCC---------------Trinity College Mac/Apple ][ Consultant Compu$erve: [76474,1732]---------Box 1520 Trinity College, Hartford, CT 06106 USENET: ...ihnp4!psuvax!trincc.bitnet!rewing----(203)-524-5152
dale@pro-colony.UUCP (System Operator) (12/19/87)
To those of you that say Beta copies of software arn't for sale... take a look
at any recent StonEdge Ad. They are selling Beta Copies of DB Master.
UUCP: [ ihnp4 sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pnet01!pro-sol!pro-lumen!pro-colony!dale
ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-sol!pro-colony!dale@nosc.mil
ProLine: dale@pro-colony
pro-colony :-> 1 214 370-7056 - 300/1200/2400 - 24 hrsGREYELF@WPI.BITNET (04/21/89)
>I personally don't think they should close the loophole. After all, each >computer is not buying the program - the school is. It's not practical for >the school to pay hundreds of dollars TIMES the number of computer they own. >This fact is keeping the cost of tuition high and the number of computers low. >If the school (or other institution) has that large of a software budget, >I'd rather see them buy more different programs than pay repeatedly for one. >(And yes, I know I'm going to get flak from those on the other side of the >fence - mainly, the members of the software industry. I know that authors >should be paid for their work, and I wholeheartedly agree, but I don't think >any one consumer should pay for a program more than once.) >Todd Davis >Student, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign >trd10523@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu >Disclaimer: They're my ideas, not UIUC's. We welcome replies to this >editorial. Most shareware companies license schools for a given product, in other words, instead of buying 200 copies of a give program they get 30 copies, information, and a site license to allow the program to be run on any machine, like if they pay for 30 copies they're licensed to run it simultaneously on up to 30 machines. I believe WPI does this with pcwrite, minitab, lotus, etc. Its much more reasonable than buying 200 copies. -- Michael J Pender Jr Box 1942 c/o W.P.I. I wrote SHELL and Daemon, greyelf@wpi.bitnet 100 Institute Rd. send bug reports, suggestions, greyelf@wpi.wpi.edu Worcester, Ma 01609 checks to me. Yes, I know Lotus is not shareware.
sysop@pro-generic.cts.com (Matthew Montano) (05/14/89)
jb103206@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > Who pirates paperbacks when you can get an original for $4.00 Paperbacks are slightly more than $4.00 at last check, but there are TWO valid points made here. Cheaper software would NOT solve the piracy issue, there is still the idea and market for "inflated products", i.e. $1300 for the developers version of DBase IV for MS-DOS, or A/UX technical support from Apple at $120 an hour (guessing here.. but EXPENSIVE). Look at products that are pirated! Video tapes (up until recently), pornography, first run movies on pay per view satelitte on tape, expensive software, sattelite descramblers and so on. Most of these products are limited market items that just aren't availible like "paperbacks" are. Now seriously, if person A sees product B advertised on magazine C, will he phone long distance or travel a long distance, or spend mucho dineros on shipping charges or otherwise inconvinience himself when he can sit at home and download it from a pirate software BBS? In Toronto here we lack a good supply of Apple // software through distributors and retailers, it just isn't here. The pirate community must be large in a city like this. But IBM software can practically be found in the local convinience store and a good supply of a large variety, I am quite sure that the IBM pirate community is quite different than an Apple one here. If a person just can't get the product off a store shelf within a few miles of his home and he doesn't want to risk Mail Order (like many of us), is he going to refuse a pirated copy of the program he wants or NEEDS? If a pirated piece of software was placed in one hand, and the legit thing was placed in the other, it is more likely that the average decent human will take the legit piece of software. But if he/she just can't get that legit piece of software, they have no choice, and therefore a sale is lost because the product just isn't there. That is a harsh reality that software developers and distributors must face. Especially being in the position of both salesperson and minor software developer. The smaller selection of //gs software we have, the more gets pirated, the more gets pirated, the less we can bring in and sell, the smaller selection we have, the more... get it? It goes the reverse way to. Matthew ============================================================================== ProLine: sysop@pro-generic |DDN :crash!pnet01!pro-generic!sysop InterNet:sysop@pro-generic.cts.com|UUCP: hplabs!crash!pnet01!pro-generic!root ==============================================================================
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (05/16/89)
In article <8905142016.AA29682@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-simasd!pro-generic!sysop@nosc.mil writes:
- If a person just can't get the product off a store shelf within a few miles
-of his home and he doesn't want to risk Mail Order (like many of us), is he
-going to refuse a pirated copy of the program he wants or NEEDS?
If he's a decent human being he will.krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (05/16/89)
Accepting a pirated copy of some piece of software doesn't make you an indecent human being, it only reflects your opinion: whether the designer's deserve the cost of the software, whether your $49.95 really makes a difference to the sum, etc., etc.. I don't condone piracy, but I don't hate people who do. Ken krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) (05/17/89)
In article <10268@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <8905142016.AA29682@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-simasd!pro-generic!sysop@nosc.mil writes: >- If a person just can't get the product off a store shelf within a few miles >-of his home and he doesn't want to risk Mail Order (like many of us), is he >-going to refuse a pirated copy of the program he wants or NEEDS? > >If he's a decent human being he will. Or if he/she has *any* concept at all of what it takes to create a decent program. Cary Farrier
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (05/18/89)
In article <113300063@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
- Accepting a pirated copy of some piece of software doesn't make you
-an indecent human being, it only reflects your opinion: whether the
-designer's deserve the cost of the software, whether your $49.95 really
-makes a difference to the sum, etc., etc..
It's a moral/ethical question. By my standards people who steal from
others are immoral/unethical, i.e. indecent.cs1552ao@charon.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) (05/18/89)
gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes: >> Accepting a pirated copy of some piece of software doesn't make you >> an indecent human being, it only reflects your opinion: whether the >> designer's deserve the cost of the software, whether your $49.95 really >> makes a difference to the sum, etc., etc.. > > It's a moral/ethical question. By my standards people who steal from > others are immoral/unethical, i.e. indecent. The whole piracy debate is a lot like the abortion debate -- most of the arguing is an argument of definition. Anti-abortionists think that aborting a fetus is killing a human being, pro-choice people don't think the fetus is human yet. Pirates don't think copying software is "stealing property" any more than pro-choice people think that abortion is "killing people" and until there's an agreement on definitions both arguments are nothing more than handwaving. Personally I'm in the camp that thinks our copyright laws are horribly, horribly outdated, and inadequate for the task that the information age brings to them. You have a situation where virtually every person in the country has the capability to instantly duplicate things with the mere push of a button, whether that button's on a computer, a tape deck, or a photocopier. Under those circumstances, I don't think that the concept of Information As Property is going to be realistic for much longer . . . if you can even really say it is right now. Lazlo (cs1552ao@charon.unm.edu) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "d'you know how many Time Zones there are in the Soviet Union? ELEVEN..."
mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) (05/19/89)
In article <113300063@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > > Accepting a pirated copy of some piece of software doesn't make you >an indecent human being, it only reflects your opinion: whether the >designer's deserve the cost of the software, whether your $49.95 really >makes a difference to the sum, etc., etc.. I don't condone piracy, but >I don't hate people who do. > Ken > krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu I disagree. If you believe the designers don't deserve the asking price of a particular piece of software, then don't pay it. But don't steal their program, accepting the labors of their work for X months or years, then dismissing their right to compensation with "It's not worth it." It's like walking into a bookstore and reading an entire magazine, then putting it down and saying "That's not worth $2." Most of us don't have $100+ per shot to throw away on programs that don't suit our needs. In days where software costs, especially for productivity software, keep rising (software costs are *usually* based on the cost to produce the program, not on the "perceived value" of the program, although there are exceptions), informed choices are necessary to make sure the programs you buy suit your needs. So look at demos, and talk to other people, and read reviews. But don't steal a copy and use it and then say "it's not worth it." And I don't want to start a huge debate about whether piracy is stealing or not. You are taking something that is copyrighted and offered for sale without paying the copyright holders the compensation they have, as holders of the copyright, asked for. This, in my book, technicalities notwithstanding is stealing. I'm also one of those people who believes that you shouldn't do things like break traffic laws or cheat other people -- not because I know I'll be punished if I get caught, but because it's *wrong* to do them. Standard disclaimers apply, probably more than ever. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to: | should not be construed to imply that AppleLink PE: Matt DTS GEnie: AIIDTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its CompuServe: 76703,3030 | subsidiaries, in whole or in part, Usenet: mattd@apple.com | have any opinion on any subject." UUCP: (other stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | "So there." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
tmurphy@wpi.wpi.edu (Tom [Chris] Murphy) (05/19/89)
In article <113300063@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > > Accepting a pirated copy of some piece of software doesn't make you >an indecent human being, it only reflects your opinion: whether the >designer's deserve the cost of the software, whether your $49.95 really >makes a difference to the sum, etc., etc.. I don't condone piracy, but >I don't hate people who do. By that 'reasoning', is it okay for me to steal a car, just because I don't think the designers deserve the money, or that the $15,000 won't matter to the sum of GM's sales? Good greif, are people that immature? Piracy is theift, pure and simple. Easy to pull off, sure, but a crime noneless. -- Thomas C. Murphy Worcester Polytechnic Institute CAD Lab Internet: tmurphy@zaphod.wpi.edu tmurphy@wpi.wpi.edu BITNET: TMURPHY@WPI BIX: tmurphy CompuServe: 73766,130 -- Guns don't kill people, people kill people - with guns. --
dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) (05/19/89)
I think the original posting on piracy indicated a general inability of the poster to get original software, because of the small Apple market in Canada. If you lived outside the United States, piracy might seem less of a crime and more of a necessity. Do mail order houses in the States accept orders from Mexico, Korea, or Sweden? If they do, do you need to have funds drawable from a US bank? Suppose you don't know. Well, you could call the mail order house here in the states, get put on hold, ask your question, and only spend about 25 cents a SECOND for the call. Oh, they don't take foreign orders? Scratch one fifteen dollar phone call. How do you even know what is the latest version of a particular program? If you aren't lucky enough to be on internet or bitnet, magazines take about a month or two to reach other countries. What about support? What if your original disk gets fried? Ship it back with insurance by airmail...very expensive. Or send it seamail, which itself can take months. What if the program gets to you and you find it's the wrong version? Or it doesn't work? Or customs holds it for a few weeks? What happened? Do you make another $15.00 phone call to the mail order house? If you are originally from the States, you will probably know people here, and can get them to send you software...if they are well informed about your particular computer. Should you let them order it and hope they got the order right? So what would be the practical (not moral or ethical) action to take? Try to get original software, or just copy someone elses copy and be on your own? Is piracy justifiable in this case? Buying software is so convenient here in the States, but what about Out There? Dave Seah (dseah@wpi.wpi.edu)
davidbrierley@lynx.northeastern.edu (05/19/89)
One facet of the piracy issue that I'd like to bring up is the
question of early version penalties (EVP - a.k.a. upgrade fees). When a
software item is upgraded to a newer version the same suggested retail
price is kept. People with older versions usually must pay an early version
penalty in order to trade in their old version for the new one. These
EVP's often reach 30 to 40 percent of the original cost of the package. The
dilemma here is that user A buys a spreadsheet version 1.5 for $180, then
user B buys version 1.6 a month later for $180. User A must shell out about
another $30 to get version 1.6, so the real cost of the version for a more
long term customer is $210. The question is whether or not this is a case
of piracy on the part of the software publisher (discriminatory pricing).
Some people use this as an argument to justify piracy. Perhaps EVPs
should be limited to $10 or ten percent of the suggested retail price,
whichever is higher - unless the new version has a higher retail price, thus
the user with the older version need only pay the difference. Perhaps we
could throw in an allowance for postage and handling, too.
I feel that some type of EVP control will entice people who have
legally obtained a version of a software item to buy newer versions instead
of pirating them.
P.S. I realize that newer versions do not always have the same suggested
retail price as the older ones.
davidbrierley@lynx.northeastern.edunazgul@obsolete.UUCP (Kee Hinckley) (05/19/89)
One facet of the piracy issue that I'd like to bring up is the
question of early version penalties (EVP - a.k.a. upgrade fees). When a
software item is upgraded to a newer version the same suggested retail
price is kept. People with older versions usually must pay an early version
penalty in order to trade in their old version for the new one. These
...
When was the last time you went to a car dealer and complained
because they wouldn't give you this years version of your car for
30% of the price you paid for the old one?
You have two choices with software. You can do what you do with
your car - sell the old one and buy a new one. Or you can do something
unique to the software industry, upgrade to the new one for a small
percentage of the full price. Of course if you do the latter you
relinquish your right to resell the original, but that's because
it's an upgrade, not a new sale. If you want to sell the old one
you have to buy a new one - just like your car.
Now you're telling me this is unfair? Frankly I'm amazed by the
concept. In fact Zip is planning on doing the same with the Zip
Chip, which is even more amazing, given that the media cost is
presumably a bit higher :-).
I can possibly see your reasoning if you think you are paying for
the amount of work that went into a particular product. However
believe me, the amount of work that goes into an upgraded product
is usually equal to or greater than the amount in the original.
With the original you could do things anyway you wanted, with the
upgrade you have to maintain compatibility (even when you did it
wrong the first time), plus fix all the bugs that were found, but
*without* creating any new ones. Starting over from scratch would
often be much simpler.
-kee
-------STEVENS@SENECA.BITNET (05/19/89)
From: info-apple@BRL.MIL To: MURRAY STEVENS <STEVENS@SENECA> CC: Subj: re: Re: Piracy >> Accepting a pirated copy of some piece of software doesn't make you >>an indecent human being, it only reflects your opinion: whether the >>designer's deserve the cost of the software, whether your $49.95 really >>makes a difference to the sum, etc., etc.. I don't condone piracy, but >>I don't hate people who do. >By that 'reasoning', is it okay for me to steal a car, just because I >don't think the designers deserve the money, or that the $15,000 won't >matter to the sum of GM's sales? Good greif, are people that immature? >Piracy is theift, pure and simple. Easy to pull off, sure, but a crime >noneless. > -- >Thomas C. Murphy Worcester Polytechnic Institute CAD Lab >Internet: tmurphy@zaphod.wpi.edu tmurphy@wpi.wpi.edu >BITNET: TMURPHY@WPI BIX: tmurphy CompuServe: 73766,130 > -- Guns don't kill people, people kill people - with guns. -- HOLD IT HOLD IT This is getting a little rediculous!! I can HARDLY equate the 'STEALING OF A CAR' (Grand theft) with one person using a copied peice of software (Petty theft) EVERYBODY is using the term "piracy" when describing a single person who uses an illegal copy of software, when IN FACT a pirate is one who copies or Breaks copy protection and then SELLS that software to make a profit! Personally I doubt that software vendors or authors are going to charge a possible or real client (who is simply getting a later version) with theft for using a copy of there program even, though it is Illegel. BUT they will prosecute a PIRATE! who IS stealing Plenty from them! As Murph could probably tell you, Shrinkage is a thing that Suppliers or retailers HAVE to accept, (or at least live with). (it is GOING to happen!) BUT someone who CONTINUALLY STEALS from you, or STEALS A GOOD PERCENTAGE of your business from you, HAS to be prosicuted if possible (ie. A Pirate) 1 more thing! ( * Matt Deatherage! * ) I know you are probably a VERY decent person, BUT :-) (I'm SMILING Matt) I bet you do SOMETHING illegal in your car! whether it's not using your signals to change lanes, or doing 2 miles an hour over the speed limit when your late for work, or even Disobeying an Amber at a stop light! * COMON ADMIT IT! * :-) Murray Stevens@Seneca ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU, in Advance, In Retrospect And Otherwise for LISTENING P.S. * How does one 'Snort' MS-DOS anyway? *
delton@pro-carolina.UUCP (Don Elton) (05/19/89)
Network Comment: to #2759 by obsolete!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!krb20699%uxc.cso.uiuc.edu
Interesting attitude re: receiving stolen goods being ok if the recipient
doesn't believe the stolen goods are worth their purchase price. Wonder if
that would work with cars or televisions?
UUCP: [ sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pro-carolina!delton
ARPA: crash!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil
INET: delton@pro-carolina.cts.com
Pro-Carolina: 803-776-3936 (300-2400 baud, login as 'register')
US Mail: 3207 Berkeley Forest Drive, Columbia, SC 29209-4111cs1552ao@charon.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) (05/19/89)
delton@pro-carolina.UUCP (Don Elton) writes: > Interesting attitude re: receiving stolen goods being ok if the recipient > doesn't believe the stolen goods are worth their purchase price. Wonder if > that would work with cars or televisions? Probably would if you could make exact dupes of cars or televisions at little or no cost without damage to the original. Lazlo (cs1552ao@charon.unm.edu) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "d'you know how many Time Zones there are in the Soviet Union? ELEVEN..."
farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) (05/19/89)
In article <2332@wpi.wpi.edu> dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) writes: >I think the original posting on piracy indicated a general inability of the >poster to get original software, because of the small Apple market in Canada. > >If you lived outside the United States, piracy might seem less of a crime and >more of a necessity. Do mail order houses in the States accept orders from >Mexico, Korea, or Sweden? If they do, do you need to have funds drawable > [rest of article deleted for brevity] So what you are saying is that it is ok for you to steal something if it is too hard for you to get it legally. Let's face it: Piracy = Theft Theft = Crime Crime = Punishment There is no way to debate it, copying software is stealing software. That is a fact. It cannot be justified *any* way you look at it. Cary Farrier
farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) (05/19/89)
In article <8905182340.aa16502@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> STEVENS@SENECA.BITNET writes: >HOLD IT HOLD IT >This is getting a little rediculous!! >I can HARDLY equate the 'STEALING OF A CAR' (Grand theft) with one person >using a copied peice of software (Petty theft) Theft is theft (parts is parts?). Sometimes people tend to justify piracy by saying "Well, it's only thirty dollars anyways". How would these people feel if somebody took thirty dollars from them? They would scream bloody murder and call the police. The analogy of stealing a car vs. stealing software is just to illustrate this point. >EVERYBODY is using the term "piracy" when describing a single person who uses >an illegal copy of software, when IN FACT a pirate is one who copies or Breaks >copy protection and then SELLS that software to make a profit! Wrong. A pirate is a person who illegally copies software. Period. > Personally I doubt that software vendors or authors are going to charge a >possible or real client (who is simply getting a later version) with theft for >using a copy of there program even, though it is Illegel. Why don't you ask the vendors and authors what their opinions are. I'm sure they won't have the same opinion as you. I for one don't, and I work for both vendors and authors. Cary Farrier
jb10320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jawaid Bazyar) (05/19/89)
To: nazgul@obsolete.UUCP In article <8905190127.AA18493@obsolete.UUCP> you write: > > One facet of the piracy issue that I'd like to bring up is the > question of early version penalties (EVP - a.k.a. upgrade fees). When a > software item is upgraded to a newer version the same suggested retail > price is kept. People with older versions usually must pay an early version > penalty in order to trade in their old version for the new one. These >... > >When was the last time you went to a car dealer and complained >because they wouldn't give you this years version of your car for >30% of the price you paid for the old one? We're dealing with two totally different forms of 'product' here. Software can be easily duplicated, cars cannot. What the software houses need to ask themselves is "What can we offer the buyer that the pirate does not get?" "What can we sell him for a REASONABLE price that will make him buy (not copy)?" Pirating is to the software publisher what going to the dealer down the road is for cars. Your analogy is inappropriate. >[stuff deleted] >the amount of work that went into a particular product. However >believe me, the amount of work that goes into an upgraded product >is usually equal to or greater than the amount in the original. >With the original you could do things anyway you wanted, with the >upgrade you have to maintain compatibility (even when you did it >wrong the first time), plus fix all the bugs that were found, but >*without* creating any new ones. Starting over from scratch would >often be much simpler. > -kee >------- I take it you're not a programmer. If they designed it properly in the first place, you wouldn't have to start from scratch, wouldn't have many bugs, wouldn't have to worry about upward compatibility (ever hear of Abstract Data Types?). If it WASN'T designed well, then people are paying for a product just as useless as a lemon car (to stick with the ever-popular "let's compare piracy to totally inappropriate situations"). I think a major distinction has to be made simply because megabytes of computer information can be duplicated cheaply and quickly. Attitudes about intellectual "property" need adjusting. Only then can this industry truly mature. =============================================================================== jawaid bazyar "The history of the world is the history of jb10320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu the warfare between secret societies." Junior/Computer Engineering @ - Ishmael Reed, Mumbo-Jumbo Univ. of Illinois ===============================================================================
dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) (05/20/89)
In article <5116@charon.unm.edu> cs1552ao@charon.unm.edu.UUCP (Lazlo Nibble) writes: >delton@pro-carolina.UUCP (Don Elton) writes: >> Interesting attitude re: receiving stolen goods being ok if the recipient >> doesn't believe the stolen goods are worth their purchase price. Wonder if >> that would work with cars or televisions? > >Probably would if you could make exact dupes of cars or televisions at little >or no cost without damage to the original. Software counterfeiting? :) Looks like the real thing, but it ain't! I wonder if this is the attitude that Lotus and Apple are taking towards people who make clones of their interfaces. Is the interface as inviolate as an original painting? I used to think that Look and Feel arguments were real lame, but in this context it seems almost reasonable. Dave Seah (dseah@wpi.wpi.edu)
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (05/20/89)
In article <2332@wpi.wpi.edu> dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) writes: >So what would be the practical (not moral or ethical) action to take? If you don't think the moral is the practical, you've already got a problem.
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (05/20/89)
In article <memo.127827@lynx.northeastern.edu> davidbrierley@lynx.northeastern.edu writes: >dilemma here is that user A buys a spreadsheet version 1.5 for $180, then >user B buys version 1.6 a month later for $180. User A must shell out about >another $30 to get version 1.6, so the real cost of the version for a more >long term customer is $210. The question is whether or not this is a case >of piracy on the part of the software publisher (discriminatory pricing). I don't know what notion of "piracy" would include charging for upgrades, but it would have to be a very warped notion. Part of what one user A obtained for his money was the ability to use the product for a period of time. There is no need for him to upgrade just because a newer version has been released; his original purchase decision was based on the value to him of the earlier version of the product. There is no such thing as an "early version penalty". You (or somebody) just invented that in an attempt to justify ripping off software producers.
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (05/20/89)
In article <8905182340.aa16502@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> STEVENS@SENECA.BITNET writes: >(I'm SMILING Matt) I bet you do SOMETHING illegal in your car! >whether it's not using your signals to change lanes, or doing 2 miles an hour >over the speed limit when your late for work, or even Disobeying an Amber at >a stop light! * COMON ADMIT IT! * :-) If Matt drives like I do, he tries very hard to follow the procedures that he agreed to in exchange for a license to operate a motor vehicle. Not everyone believes that the only crime is getting caught.
STEVENS@SENECA.BITNET (05/20/89)
From: info-apple@BRL.MIL To: MURRAY STEVENS <STEVENS@SENECA> CC: Subj: re: RE: Piracy From: Kee Hinckley <obsolete!nazgul@BLOOM-BEACON.MIT.EDU> >> One facet of the piracy issue that I'd like to bring up is the >> question of early version penalties (EVP - a.k.a. upgrade fees). When a >> software item is upgraded to a newer version the same suggested retail >> price is kept. People with older versions usually must pay an early version >> penalty in order to trade in their old version for the new one. These .. >When was the last time you went to a car dealer and complained >because they wouldn't give you this years version of your car for >30% of the price you paid for the old one? Pardon ME BUT YOU CAN!! It's called a "trade in!" You give them Your present car + 30% (approximately (maybe as high as 50%) and BLAM you have the new car! Murray Stevens@Seneca Thankyou, in advance, in retrospect and otherwise for Listening P.S. * How do you "snort" MS-dos anyway? *
nazgul@obsolete.UUCP (Kee Hinckley) (05/20/89)
>When was the last time you went to a car dealer and complained >because they wouldn't give you this years version of your car for >30% of the price you paid for the old one? We're dealing with two totally different forms of 'product' here. Software can be easily duplicated, cars cannot. What the software houses need to ask themselves is "What can we offer the buyer that the pirate does not get?" "What can we sell him for a REASONABLE price that will make him buy (not copy)?" Pirating is to the software publisher what going to the dealer down the road is for cars. Your analogy is inappropriate. Wait a minute. Two things here. First of all I was not attempting to address the issue of stealing software. I was addressing the complaint that charging 20% for an upgrade was too much money. Those are two independent issues (or at least they can be). Secondly, the "stealing == different-dealer" analogy doesn't fly. I go to different dealers for software all the time in order to save money. Sometimes I buy a different piece of software, sometimes I just find a different distributor. I can save as much as 50% doing that, which is certainly a lot better than I'll ever do with a car dealer. What I'm not going to do is get into an argument about stealing software. I will merely say that just because you may believe that the GNU Project is right and all software is free, doesn't mean you aren't guilty of stealing when you "pirate" software. If you want to do it and live with it - fine, but don't try and justify it legally. >the amount of work that went into a particular product. However >believe me, the amount of work that goes into an upgraded product >is usually equal to or greater than the amount in the original. >With the original you could do things anyway you wanted, with the >upgrade you have to maintain compatibility (even when you did it >wrong the first time), plus fix all the bugs that were found, but >*without* creating any new ones. Starting over from scratch would >often be much simpler. I take it you're not a programmer. If they designed it properly in the I beg your pardon. I've been programming for a living for almost 10 years now. first place, you wouldn't have to start from scratch, wouldn't have many bugs, In the real world you rarely have time to spend as much time as you should in up-front design. Even if you do you often find you missed things, or you simply discover that your competitor can now do something that you can't, and it turns out to be non-trivial to add that to your model. wouldn't have to worry about upward compatibility (ever hear of Abstract Data Types?). If it WASN'T designed well, then people are paying for a product Abstract Data Types are not much help. They provide very little when you have to worry about dynamic binding, global libraries, and release to release upward compatibility. Procedural abstraction and object-oriented models are much more useful. just as useless as a lemon car (to stick with the ever-popular "let's compare piracy to totally inappropriate situations"). Over time any design is going to be insufficient to unforseen needs. Might I point out the case of the BinaryII format and forked files as a classic example. I think a major distinction has to be made simply because megabytes of computer information can be duplicated cheaply and quickly. Attitudes about intellectual "property" need adjusting. Only then can this industry truly mature. I don't disagree here. For system software I tend towards the GNU Project philosophy, for specialized software I don't. However! And this is a big "however". I do *not* believe that the correct way to deal with the problem is by breaking the law and stealing software. If you think that software should be free, then support the people who are giving it away rather than hurt those who are trying to sell it. (Did I say I wasn't going to get dragged into this argument?) Right now for every Pirate freedom- fighter there are 10 Pirate terrorists pretending to be freedom fighters. -kee -------
EFAA279@BGUNOS.BITNET (05/20/89)
unsub
christer@ikaros.cs.umu.se (Christer Ericson) (05/20/89)
In article <31108@apple.Apple.COM> farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) writes: >In article <2332@wpi.wpi.edu> dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) writes: >>I think the original posting on piracy indicated a general inability of the >>poster to get original software, because of the small Apple market in Canada. >> >>If you lived outside the United States, piracy might seem less of a crime and >>more of a necessity. Do mail order houses in the States accept orders from >>Mexico, Korea, or Sweden? If they do, do you need to have funds drawable >> [rest of article deleted for brevity] > > Let's face it: > Piracy = Theft > >Cary Farrier I hate to disappoint you Cary, but piracy isn't the same thing as theft, not really anyway. Here in Sweden the government hasn't been able to keep the laws up to date, due to the speedy progress of computing in general. [Footnote: We have one of the most bureaucratic bureacracies (sp? sp?) in the world] Therefore copying of programs is still legal here (perhaps it's better to say it's not illegal to copy programs). So perhaps piracy = theft in the US, but your laws don't apply here. Selling pirated stuff is entirely another matter though (sorta). For a year (or two) ago a guy was convicted for selling copies of commercial software, however he only got convicted because he had sold games not because he had sold spreadsheets, wordprocessors etc. Yes, that's pretty strange, but the court came to the conclusion that games are of an original concept and therefore can be copyrighted while there isn't anything innovative with wordprocessors so the same won't apply to them. I will leave this at this point as I don't know that much of this incident. Now to an entirely different(?) subject. Why would I want to pirate programs? That's easy, if I want an Apple II program I would have to order it from the US. [Neither programs nor Apple II's, or GS'es for that matter, are sold here in Sweden. If I were to call Apple Computer Sweden and ask if they could sell me an Apple II they would say 'A WHAT?? We don't have that. Our only computer is the Macintosh, silly.' Hear that Mr Farrier, go beat Mr Sculley on the head with an Amiga!]. That means that I cannot look at a program before buying it. It also means that I have to pay about 3 times as much as you would have to play for the same program (toll, freight, telephone order etc.). As Dave Seah also pointed out, how do I know that I get the latest version? I has happened that friends have recieved old versions from software retailers like Program Plus. I think that piracy, at least here in Sweden, is good since the few Apple II owners that are left (some 300-400, 'all' pirates) get to know what's available and if they like a program they can order it from the US, pay blood for it and recieve the manual you need to run the program properly anyway. One thing that was common (still is?) was that a number of people got together and ordered some 4-5 programs they really wanted, say Appleworks utilities, cracked these, copied the manuals and they each got a copy of the program for about the same price they would have to pay if they lived in the US. The companies got to sell their programs, so they're happy. These people got their copies of the programs for a reasonable amount of money, so they're happy also. Did anyone loose on this? No, because if they hadn't got together and ordered those programs, no one could have afforded to buy them. (Yea yea, they COULD have afforded it but to what price??!) No Cary, Dave Seah's letter was right on. I have only kept my Apple II since I got it far back when Apple Computer still was a company that cared about it's customers and I feel it is an outstanding machine (I mean, WOZ is a true genius, look at the coding of Sweet-16 for instance) and I have invested a lot in software and peripherials and I don't want to throw that away just because Apple wants me to. Also who would want a lobotomized machine like the GS when one could get an Amiga instead... Suckers! Now if the GS had some sprites, alternate screens, multitasking perhaps, and speed THEN... May the ghost of Apple II forever haunt the Macintosh people at Apple. /Christer Now if someone could tell us about the situation in Mexico and Korea... | Christer Ericson Internet: christer@cs.umu.se | | Department of Computer Science, University of Umea, S-90187 UMEA, Sweden | | >>>>> "I bully sheep. I claim God doesn't exist..." <<<<< |
sysop@pro-generic.cts.com (Matthew Montano) (05/20/89)
> I think the original posting on piracy indicated a general inability of > the poster to get original software, because of the small Apple market > in Canada. Just because software is not availible doesn't make piracy any more "allowable". Other than the fact that software IS readily availible in Canada just the same way as it is in the US but in different proportions. I also take deep offence to the phrase "out there" or "up there". Something like 60-70% of our population lives south of the 49th parrallel (pull out a map), and it isn't cold! :). It is more of an issue on how to control the piracy problem. Piracy is well defined and very clear. I can get most any piece of software I want, working in a computer store, with access to reams of software catalogs and three day shipping times or less. But generally software is not that easily attainable and as a result there is a lot of illegal distribution. In countries where imports are restricted for foreign currency or other political restrictions there exists a huge black market. Countries like Guyuna (in South America) have a huge black market trade for motors - gasoline or electric, not that there are neccessarily required but there is a demand. The same with software, even in the 'good ol US of A (I really HATE that phrase), software can be sometimes hard to get a hold of. The solution I believe is to increase the accessibility to software and it seems that the only way to feasible do this is to make Mail Order houses slightly more regulated or trustworthy. Many of these places have large amounts of software and good prices, but after numerous horror stories of mail order, many people are weary. Mind you, you still will get the typical pirate who pirates the game anyways. (easily identifiable in a computer store by asking the phrase "do you have any manuals for Lotus 1-2-3", or "We lost the manuals for XXXX game, can we photocopy yours"). Just my opinion. Oh, for those that think canada is cold, Edmonton may of had 25 centimetres of snow but it is a balmy 20 degrees celsius here for the past week (80 degrees F or more). Matthew - sysop of the second canadian proline system ============================================================================== ProLine: sysop@pro-generic |DDN :crash!pnet01!pro-generic!sysop InterNet:sysop@pro-generic.cts.com|UUCP: hplabs!crash!pnet01!pro-generic!root ==============================================================================
dale@pro-colony.UUCP (System Administrator) (05/21/89)
Network Comment: to #6328 by pnet01!crash!husc6.harvard.edu!m2c!wpi!dseah How about just WRITING a LETTER to the publisher of the software. If you are concerned with getting the latest version go to the source. dale@pro-colony
pdinh@pro-nucleus.UUCP (Paul Dinh) (05/21/89)
Piracy lives for a few reasons. First, the pirates or crackers get a kick out of de-protecting the copy protection used on most software (especially games). Second, many pirates have the understanding that software are too expensive and what would be easier than to stay on the phone line for 15 minutes to get a $40 software? The documentation to the software is usually typed up within a week of the release.. Paul
lhaider@pro-sol.cts.com (Lawrence Haider) (05/21/89)
Network Comment: to #7427 by pnet01!crash!purdue.edu!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
I don't care for the idea of pirate software, but there have been instances
where I have asked friends or associates to borrow a copy of a piece of
software for evaluation. In turn they burn me a copy, because its the easiest
thing for them to do, and so they won't be without their computer that way.
I try the program and if I don't like it, delete the disk or return
it. Anything wrong with that? I feel that is what many people are doing, not
just outright stealing it, or intending to. I bought AppleWorks that way, and
MultiScribe GS, and several other packages. If I am impressed with a program,
I want to buy it. If I try a program, and am completely unenthused, all I
wasted was time, not megabucks to try all the vast numbers of really bad
software there is out there. Replys?samt@pro-europa.cts.com (Sam Theis) (05/22/89)
Network Comment: to #2679 by pnet01!crash!cornellc.cit.cornell.edu!STEVENS%SENECA.BITNET When was the last time that a car dealer sold you a car that many of the basic functions and options didn't work, then when you complained, you were told that you will have to get next year's model at a 30% cost differential. Software Publishers are in general a bunch of pirates in the same league as those that steal their software. They demand that they have the right to sell poorly written, poorly documented, poorly performing software packages "AS IS". The only responsibility that they want to shoulder is to take your money. It is to their advantage to put out half-baked programs. They can then fleece their customers for some more money for "upgrades". How would it be if the next time you went to the bookstore and purchased a $250 book, then took it home, opened it up and started looking at it, found that it was missing several pages, had several pages with messed up printing, etc. Then when you called the publisher, they said that you had the first edition and it had a few bugs; if you would send them the cover and $50 they would send you the second edition which would fix a few of the problems, some of the other problems won't be fixed until a future edition. That is a little more like the software business since both books and software deal with "intellectual property". When the software industry cleans up its act, then maybe it will get a little more sympathy. Sam
mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) (05/22/89)
In article <8905182340.aa16502@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> STEVENS@SENECA.BITNET writes: > >1 more thing! ( * Matt Deatherage! * ) I know you are probably a VERY decent >person, BUT :-) (I'm SMILING Matt) I bet you do SOMETHING illegal in your car! >whether it's not using your signals to change lanes, or doing 2 miles an hour >over the speed limit when your late for work, or even Disobeying an Amber at >a stop light! * COMON ADMIT IT! * :-) > >Murray >Stevens@Seneca >ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU, in Advance, In Retrospect And Otherwise for LISTENING > >P.S. * How does one 'Snort' MS-DOS anyway? * Other people have already addressed most of your issues, including the one where stealing on a small scale (piracy) is somehow more ethical than stealing a car or some other more expensive item. However, I feel I should respond to the above paragraph: This really strikes me as a "trash-tv" kind of approach to arguments - "W don't like or don't agree with the message, so we label the messenger as a hypocrite so no one will believe him." It's usually more effective than I'd like to admit - either the discussion gets sidetracked on the messenger's life as it has nothing to do with the subject at hand, or the messenger refuses to reply and loses credibility. There are many hundreds of thousands of laws on the books that affect each of us in thousands of ways we don't realize, wherever we may live. Many of them are disobeyed or broken on a daily basis by those who never knew they existed, and those law-breakers are not arrested by police and other authorities who don't know about those laws, either. Little traffic infractions, such as not using signals when changing lanes or exceeding the speed limit, happen every day in front of state troopers, who usually ignore them in the interest of insuring that everyone is driving safely - which is, after all, their main concern. The point is that those who illegally take and use copies of copyrighte software are not "driving safely." They seem to think they're changing from one lane into another on a completely empty road, or with so few cars around them that the fact they didn't use their signals won't make any difference. They are very much mistaken. So many people they can't see are doing the same thing at the same time that the whole works could come to an incredible, crashing stop at any minute. But they refuse to realize this, and react with scorn and disgust when someone tries to convince them of the situation. Piracy is not something that doesn't affect publishers and programmers. It does. Publishers are making so little money in certain markets close to our heart that they have virtually no incentive to publish new software. If you think this is an exaggeration, think again. Talk to those who work in the industry. Ask publishers and professional developers. Don't just look at your friends and decide "we're not hurting anyone." You are. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to: | should not be construed to imply that AppleLink PE: Matt DTS GEnie: AIIDTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its CompuServe: 76703,3030 | subsidiaries, in whole or in part, Usenet: mattd@apple.com | have any opinion on any subject." UUCP: (other stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | "So there." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
rs.miller@pro-harvest.UUCP (Randy Miller) (05/22/89)
Dave, I can tell you for a fact that piracy is rife overseas (especially in Europe). Some time ago, the president of my user's group got a letter from a student in West Germany asking if the group had any of the programs he listed in our disk library. ABOUT 99% OF THEM WERE COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS. It seems, the way the letter was written, if a commercial program goes through customs, IT WILL BE COPIED WILLY-NILLY AND GIVEN FREE DISTRIBUTION. There was also an account several months ago in Computer Shopper about a fantastic comm program for the ST that the author lent to a friend to test, and the friend turned around and freely distributed the program (which was a copyrighted and commercial piece) all over Germany. Needless to say, this programmer vowed he will NEVER write another program for commercial sale REGARDLESS OF WHAT KIND OF BOX HE OWNS. Needless to say, I trashed the letter and didn't bother responding. Randy Miller rs.miller@pro-harvest crash!pro-harvest!rs.miller rs.miller@pro-harvest.cts.com
delton@pro-carolina.UUCP (Don Elton) (05/22/89)
Network Comment: to #2880 by obsolete!pro-angmar!pro-europa!samt
Re: comparing software publishers to pirates because they want to have the
right to charge what they want for what they publish even if it's shoddy
merchandise (paraphrased).
Nobody holds a gun to your head saying you have to use software that you don't
feel meets your standards. If someone wants to sell something you think is
worthless then just do without it rather than try to rationalize stealing it.
The potential buyer's sole moral and legal recourse is to not use that which
he doesn't think is a good product. The publisher, as the owner of the
product has every right to set the terms of the sale or non-sale as the case
may be.
UUCP: [ sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pro-carolina!delton
ARPA: crash!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil
INET: delton@pro-carolina.cts.com
Pro-Carolina: 803-776-3936 (300-2400 baud, login as 'register')
US Mail: 3207 Berkeley Forest Drive, Columbia, SC 29209-4111orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) (05/22/89)
Network Comment: to #3665 by pnet01!crash!ucbvax.berkeley.edu!unmvax!charon!cs1552ao There is no doubt that pirating is unethical & immoral, but which shaft is worse, copying a program illegally, or paying $45 for $2 of material?
delton@pro-carolina.UUCP (Don Elton) (05/22/89)
Network Comment: to #2893 by obsolete!pro-angmar!pro-lep!orcus >... which shaft is worse, copying a program illegally, or paying $45 for $2 >of material? First off you won't find any software products that only cost $2 to sell and produce whether the media costs only $2 or not. You don't think you buy a book and only pay the price of the paper do you? Nobody forces you to pay $45 for $2 software though even if it did exist. The publisher doesn't get a choice if you steal from them. If you pay $45 you do it because you want to. Do pirates really feel they have a right to steal that which they'd rather not pay for? Are they this way only with computer software or is this how they operate with other products too? UUCP: [ sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pro-carolina!delton ARPA: crash!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil INET: delton@pro-carolina.cts.com Pro-Carolina: 803-776-3936 (300-2400 baud, login as 'register') US Mail: 3207 Berkeley Forest Drive, Columbia, SC 29209-4111
farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) (05/22/89)
I knew that when I got involved in the discussion on piracy it was a big mistake (As someone mentioned earlier, it is like arguing over abortion, because what it boils down to are opinions). Well, now that we all know how each other feels about Piracy, how about following my lead and dropping the subject? Then perhaps we can get back to discussing the Apple II line... [Marking subject Re: Piracy as read...] Cary Farrier
orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) (05/23/89)
Network Comment: to #3800 by pnet01!crash!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!obsolete!pro-carolina!delton Ok, let's face it, Pirating is wrong, but some companies ask for it when they try to sell something like Gauntlet GS for $35. To me that is the same as saying "pirate me, pirate me, pirate me." Warz like Merlin 16+, Paintworks Gold, etc., are worth the cash (if you're a developer), but some stuff SHOULD be pirated in protest of trying to cheat the public out of their hard earned money.
nazgul@obsolete.UUCP (Kee Hinckley) (05/23/89)
There is no doubt that pirating is unethical & immoral, but which shaft is
worse, copying a program illegally, or paying $45 for $2 of material?
Copying a program illegally.
Any other questions?
Home: obsolete!nazgul@bloom-beacon.mit.edu
Work: nazgul@apollo.com
BBS: obsolete!pro-angmar!nazgul@bloom-beacon.mit.edu
or
nazgul@pro-angmar.cts.com (somewhat slower though)
617/641-3722 (300/1200/2400)
-------SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (05/23/89)
>Ok, let's face it, Pirating is wrong, but some companies ask for it when they >try to sell something like Gauntlet GS for $35. To me that is the same as >saying "pirate me, pirate me, pirate me." Warz like Merlin 16+, Paintworks >Gold, etc., are worth the cash (if you're a developer), but some stuff SHOULD >be pirated in protest of trying to cheat the public out of their hard earned >money. No, no, no!!! The ONLY moral way to protest over-priced products is DON'T BUY THEM! If a product is worth having, then it's worth paying for. You can't rationalize shoplifting on the grounds that your local department store's prices are too high -- you wait for a sale. If software is truly overpriced (hardware too as it happens), then one or more dealers will find they have too much inventory that's not moving and, by mail order or "sale," the price will come down. Has it occurred to you that there IS A CONNECTION between the level of piracy and the desertion of the Apple 2 market by large numbers of software developers (who find the Apple 2 market unprofitable)? The Macintosh market has a reputation of not only paying for the software but of having a willingness to pay for "premium software." So, if you're going to whine about all the new stuff being developed for the Mac you can't in good conscience rationalize piracy. Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM] -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)
dcw@athena.mit.edu (David C. Whitney) (05/24/89)
In article <8905211959.AA07191@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-europa!samt@nosc.mil writes: >Network Comment: to #2679 by pnet01!crash!cornellc.cit.cornell.edu!STEVENS%SENECA.BITNET > >How would it be if the next time you went to the bookstore and purchased a >$250 book, then took it home, opened it up and started looking at it, found >that it was missing several pages, had several pages with messed up printing, >etc. Then when you called the publisher, they said that you had the first >edition and it had a few bugs; if you would send them the cover and $50 they >would send you the second edition which would fix a few of the problems, some >of the other problems won't be fixed until a future edition. How about two $30 books titled "Apple //GS Toolbox Reference", vols 1 & 2? The first release was buggy, and they fixed some and reprinted. If you happened to buy a copy of the first release, well tough. Shell another $30 to get the new copy (or $60 to get them both). Now, they send bug fixes to APDA, and you can get cheap unbound xeroxes for $15 or something. This should not have happened. Something like a programmer's ref (which was in beta test through APDA for some time) should go to quality press *without bugs.* It annoys me when I have to shell out money for bug fixes. I don't mind a hoot to pay for real upgrades, but publisher's mistakes should be taken up by the publisher - not the poor dope who bought it too early. Dave Whitney A junior in Computer Science at MIT dcw@athena.mit.edu ...!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!dcw dcw@goldilocks.mit.edu I wrote Z-Link & BinSCII. Send me bug reports. I use a //GS. Send me Tech Info. "This is MIT. Collect and 3rd party calls will not be accepted at this number."
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (05/24/89)
In article <8905230356.AA07964@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-lep!orcus@nosc.mil writes: >Network Comment: to #3800 by pnet01!crash!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!obsolete!pro-carolina!delton > >Ok, let's face it, Pirating is wrong, but some companies ask for it when they >try to sell something like Gauntlet GS for $35. To me that is the same as >saying "pirate me, pirate me, pirate me." Warz like Merlin 16+, Paintworks >Gold, etc., are worth the cash (if you're a developer), but some stuff SHOULD >be pirated in protest of trying to cheat the public out of their hard earned >money. Ummm, yeah. When a company sells something for $35, they are asking you to pay $35 for it if you want it. If you don't want it, don't buy it and don't use it. Easy, no? I see no evidence that anybody is trying to cheat you out of your allegedly hard-earned money. --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
hzink@pro-nucleus.UUCP (Harry Zink) (05/24/89)
Network Comment: to #930 by pnet01!crash!uunet.uu.net!mcvax!kth!draken!umecs!ikaros!christer
>From hzink Tue May 23 12:16:03 1989
Date: Tue, 23 May 89 12:16:02 PST
From: hzink (Harry Zink)
To: pro-sol!pnet01!crash!info-apple@BRL.MIL
Subject: Re: Piracy
Network Comment: to #930 by pnet01!crash!uunet.uu.net!mcvax!kth!draken!umecs!ikaros!christer
Thanks for bringing in your own experiences on this subject. It's about time
some reality from abroad got brought into this discussion. All of these
'piracy=theft' people live very comfortably in the US, only a phone call away
from cheap software, and only a block away from stores where they can look at
it (yes, I'm glad to live here). All of them do seem to be forgetting that
there is a whole rest of the world out there (of course, why should they think
about it - they're americans).
Anyway, just wanted to thank you for your comments. Tell me more about the
apple situation in Sweden, if you like. I'm always up for getting mail from
around the world.
+
UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-sol!pro-nucleus!hzink
Proline: hzink@pro-nucleus
+kevin@claris.com (Kevin Watts) (05/24/89)
From article <8905230356.AA07964@crash.cts.com>, by orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone): > Ok, let's face it, Pirating is wrong, but some companies ask for it when they > try to sell something like Gauntlet GS for $35. To me that is the same as > saying "pirate me, pirate me, pirate me." Warz like Merlin 16+, Paintworks > Gold, etc., are worth the cash (if you're a developer), but some stuff SHOULD > be pirated in protest of trying to cheat the public out of their hard earned > money. NO, NO, NO, NO!!! If you think something is too expensive, DON'T BUY IT! If enough people complain (by not purchasing, and maybe by writing the publisher) about the price, maybe the publisher will lower it. Same principle as with any other product. But if you want the program, you should either pay the price or do without. -- Kevin Watts ! Any opinions expressed here are my own, and are not Claris Corporation ! neccessarily shared by anyone else. Unless they are kevin@claris.com ! patently absurd, in which case they're not mine either.
mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) (05/24/89)
In article <8905230356.AA07964@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-lep!orcus@nosc.mil writes: >Network Comment: to #3800 by pnet01!crash!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!obsolete!pro-carolina!delton > >Ok, let's face it, Pirating is wrong, but some companies ask for it when they >try to sell something like Gauntlet GS for $35. To me that is the same as >saying "pirate me, pirate me, pirate me." Warz like Merlin 16+, Paintworks >Gold, etc., are worth the cash (if you're a developer), but some stuff SHOULD >be pirated in protest of trying to cheat the public out of their hard earned >money. I have to agree with most of the previous responses to this one - this bears as much resemblance to logic as I do to Arnold Schwarzeneger. "If it costs too much, just take it. Pay for it if it's con-VEE-nient." I just don't think so. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to: | should not be construed to imply that AppleLink PE: Matt DTS GEnie: AIIDTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its CompuServe: 76703,3030 | subsidiaries, in whole or in part, Usenet: mattd@apple.com | have any opinion on any subject." UUCP: (other stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | "So there." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
nazgul@obsolete.UUCP (Kee Hinckley) (05/24/89)
Ok, let's face it, Pirating is wrong, but some companies ask for it when they
try to sell something like Gauntlet GS for $35. To me that is the same as
Think about it. Media, duplication and packaging costs for a
single floppy game, with some kind of mimimal documentation,
probably run 5 to 10 dollars. That gives you 25 to 30 dollars with
which to pay advertising , marketing, support, development and
mailing costs. When you are all done you discover that unless
you have a blockbuster program you are unlikely to be able to
make money on anything under $50 in price *unless* you have
a large number of different programs to sell at that price (in
that case you find that a number of the costs can be shared
across products). That's why a number of the game companies
are actually just marketing companies, the game developers are
individuals or other companies.
So what do you do? You can't make a living for under $50, but
you can't sell a game for more than $50. And no matter what
you do, someone justifies pirating it and rips you off anyway.
Home: obsolete!nazgul@bloom-beacon.mit.edu
Work: nazgul@apollo.com
BBS: obsolete!pro-angmar!nazgul@bloom-beacon.mit.edu
or
nazgul@pro-angmar.cts.com (somewhat slower though)
617/641-3722 (300/1200/2400)
-------Kreme@cup.portal.com (Lewis Kreme Butler) (05/24/89)
Well, time for my $.02 worth: Over the coarse of the last few years I have "obtianed" numerable copies of pirated wares. Many of these have been wares I already owned, but that I wanted in Files to install on my Hard Drive (Pirates is a good example). Others have been peices of software that I was considering buying, but was unwilling to purchase with-out looking at first. I have to offen been burned by software that was not what it claimed. My attitude is this -- If I really like a ware (e.g. Ultima IV) I will purchase it anyway. Many wares are not worth buying, and I don't use them (Gauntlet). So yes, I pirate wares, but I =BUY= the ones I like, and I don't use the ones I don't.... -Kreme
Kreme@cup.portal.com (Lewis Kreme Butler) (05/24/89)
Many software developers are in fact ex-pirates. A good example is Greg what-is-name (writer of ProTerm). Now an advocate of "anti-piracey" this guy used to be a major league pirate. -Kreme
friedman@porthos.rutgers.edu (Gadi ) (05/24/89)
In article <10205@claris.com> kevin@claris.com (Kevin Watts) writes: > From article <8905230356.AA07964@crash.cts.com>, by orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone): > > try to sell something like Gauntlet GS for $35. To me that is the same as > > saying "pirate me, pirate me, pirate me." Warz like Merlin 16+, Paintworks > NO, NO, NO, NO!!! If you think something is too expensive, DON'T BUY IT! ... > Kevin Watts ! Any opinions expressed here are my own, and are not Isn't this what Brian is saying? Since the price is too high, he will not buy it. Now that he is already not buying the program, the company does not loose any money when he pirates it :-) :-) :-) Gadi Disclaimer: I am not advocating software piracy just practicing logic. -- uucp: {ames,att,harvard,ucbvax,iuvax}!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!friedman arpa: FRIEDMAN@ARAMIS.RUTGERS.EDU
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (05/24/89)
>Many software developers are in fact ex-pirates. A good example is Greg >what-is-name (writer of ProTerm). Now an advocate of "anti-piracey" this >guy used to be a major league pirate. So, what (if it's true)? The fact that there are hypocrites and cynics in the World doesn't justify immorality. Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM] -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)
csbrkaac@ariel.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) (05/25/89)
>> Ok, let's face it, Pirating is wrong, but some companies ask for it when they >> try to sell something like Gauntlet GS for $35. To me that is the same as >> saying "pirate me, pirate me, pirate me." Warz like Merlin 16+, Paintworks >> Gold, etc., are worth the cash (if you're a developer), but some stuff SHOULD >> be pirated in protest of trying to cheat the public out of their hard earned >> money. > > NO, NO, NO, NO!!! If you think something is too expensive, DON'T BUY IT! The problem is not that Gauntlet is too expensive, the problem is that Gauntlet is T-R-A-S-H. But there's no way for you to find out that it's trash until you've bought it, and there's no way for you to return it once you're found out it's trash, so you're out thirty-five bucks. I wish the worst on publishers who foist off this kind of garbage on the public -- getting pirated out of business is too good for 'em! At least with books you can flip through 'em in the store before you take them home. Every time you buy a chunk of software, though, you're rolling the ol' dice. Lazlo (csbrkaac@ariel.unm.edu) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "BRAAATT! Sorry, Hans...wrong answer!"
usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (05/26/89)
In article <8905211959.AA07191@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-europa!samt@nosc.mil writes: >Software Publishers are in general a bunch of pirates in the same league as >those that steal their software. They demand that they have the right to sell >poorly written, poorly documented, poorly performing software packages "AS >IS". The only responsibility that they want to shoulder is to take your >money. This sounds like trying to justify hurting somebody (the publishers) by saying "they're all mean and nasty and out to get me." It just ain't so. > It is to their advantage to put out half-baked programs. They can >then fleece their customers for some more money for "upgrades". No, it is NOT to a company's advantage. If I buy a program from a company and it's very buggy, that lowers my opinion of the company, and I'm not as likely to buy anything else from them. I may upgrade if the upgrade is inexpensive, but if the upgraded version still doesn't work, I'll give up on the company. Any software company that really worked this way would be out of business pretty soon. Upgrades are there for three reasons: (1) It is impossible to find all bugs during testing. (2) New features may be added. (3) New system configurations may be supported (i.e. ][+ ==> //e). If there are serious bugs, it makes sense for the company to give free upgrades (or shipping-and-handling). If the bugs aren't too bad, it makes more sense to fold them in with new features. If you're getting new features, expect to pay more for them. All that piracy does is to reduce the incentive to write (and publish) software. +---------------------------+------------------------+ | Anton Rang (grad student) | "VMS Forever!" | | Michigan State University | rang@cpswh.cps.msu.edu | +---------------------------+------------------------+
delton@pro-carolina.UUCP (Don Elton) (05/26/89)
Of course, the real reason why we still have piracy is that no one has come up
with a form of copy protection that will blow the head clean off anyone
pirating a package. Of course we're working on it though so stay tuned.
UUCP: [ sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pro-carolina!delton
ARPA: crash!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil
INET: delton@pro-carolina.cts.com
Pro-Carolina: 803-776-3936 (300-2400 baud, login as 'register')
US Mail: 3207 Berkeley Forest Drive, Columbia, SC 29209-4111orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) (05/26/89)
Network Comment: to #3896 by pnet01!crash!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!obsolete!nazgul WRONGO!!! Above it was stated that it costs ~$5-$10 to package a game and the rest of the $35 goes into advertising. The truth is (and Im in the business), that it costs about $2-3 tops to package, and advertising is not that much since not that many programs get advertised. Think about how many GS games you've seen ads for (Alien Mind, AppleWorks GS). The high prices of software is not to cover costs, but to cover TIME. You have to realize that it takes a long time to produce a software package, and the author and the publishers need to eat and have a place to sleep. Once a product is ready for market, the cost of distributing it (package, shipping, ads, etc) is tiny.
paul@pro-europa.cts.com (Paul Hutmacher) (05/26/89)
Network Comment: to #2818 by pnet01!crash!cunyvm.cuny.edu!SEWALL%UCONNVM.BITNET | Has it occurred to you that there IS A CONNECTION between the level of piracy | and the desertion of the Apple 2 market by large numbers of software | developers (who find the Apple 2 market unprofitable)? The Macintosh market | has a reputation of not only paying for the software but of having a | willingness to pay for "premium software." So, if you're going to whine about | all the new stuff being developed for the Mac you can't in good conscience | rationalize piracy. Thank you Mr. Sewall! I finally woke to the same fact about two months ago after watching the software market for the IIgs practically dry up over a period of time. Since then I've started looking for software houses that will let me return products I don't like. Consider a local software outlet that has a money back guarantee. You buy it, take it home, and if you don't like the product you return it for a full refund or an exchange. You can't go wrong with that. ______________________________________________________________________________ paul@pro-europa.cts.com | "Open the pod bay door HAL" ...!crash!pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-europa!paul | "Sorry Dave, I can't do that"
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (05/26/89)
>> NO, NO, NO, NO!!! If you think something is too expensive, DON'T BUY IT! > >The problem is not that Gauntlet is too expensive, the problem is that >Gauntlet is T-R-A-S-H. But there's no way for you to find out that Not so; I've never even heard of Gauntlet (I'm not really into games) but I've heard several opinions in the last couple of days that would make me extremely reluctant to buy it (there are lots of other games out there to consider). What do you do when you first consider buying a VCR (or even an Apple computer :-)? You ASK around. I'd guess that if you are thinking about buying a program you've only heard about from the vendor's advertising you'd ask on comp.sys.apple, AppleLink-PE, at your local computer club, etc. Most programs that sell at all well are reviewed in one magazine or another (if you just have to have the latest program within days of issue, expect to pay the price of impatience). Our local town libraries carry the major computer magazines (so you don't have to pay to subscribe to everything either). >it's trash until you've bought it, and there's no way for you to return >it once you're found out it's trash, so you're out thirty-five bucks. >I wish the worst on publishers who foist off this kind of garbage on >the public -- getting pirated out of business is too good for 'em! Two wrongs don't make a right. An ethical alternative is to write the editor(s) of your favorite computer magazine(s) and recommend they review the software. There's no better way to kill a bad product than to publicize it, and as Anton Rang said in another message, a poor reputation is likely to affect a company's entire line (you may be able to bankrupt them honestly). If you can write an objective review (one that establishes that a product is a poor value without resorting to emotional adjectives), you might even get paid for it (possibly enough to earn back the $35 bucks <otherwise consider that an "educational expense" -- not a waste> :-) Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM] -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)
nazgul@obsolete.UUCP (Kee Hinckley) (05/26/89)
> WRONGO!!! Above it was stated that it costs ~$5-$10 to package a game and the > rest of the $35 goes into advertising. The truth is (and Im in the business), > that it costs about $2-3 tops to package, and advertising is not that much > since not that many programs get advertised. Think about how many GS games > you've seen ads for (Alien Mind, AppleWorks GS). The high prices of software > is not to cover costs, but to cover TIME. You have to realize that it takes a > It depends on what you are selling. I was speaking from experience as well. But the programs in question did not have enough of a market to justify being mass produced or having the normal distributors pick it up. So they were hand copied, advertised, etc.. If you have the distribution channels then you don't have to worry so much about advertising. For what it's worth, one is a Hypercard stack called "HyperChef", the other an educational program (available on the ][, written in Aztec C (and as someone mention already, I certainly didn't use their I/O routines)) called "War or Peace? You Decide!" (I didn't pick the title). The company distributing them still exists, but it barely survives, and I've certainly never seen any money from the stuff. (I kind of keep hoping they'll give up and I can try and get the stuff out their properly.) -kee Home: obsolete!nazgul@bloom-beacon.mit.edu Work: nazgul@apollo.com BBS: obsolete!pro-angmar!nazgul@bloom-beacon.mit.edu or nazgul@pro-angmar.cts.com (somewhat slower though) 617/641-3722 (300/1200/2400) -------
suem@ihlpf.ATT.COM (McKinnell) (05/27/89)
From article <8905220256.AA00673@obsolete.UUCP>, by delton@pro-carolina.UUCP (Don Elton): > Nobody holds a gun to your head saying you have to use software that you don't > feel meets your standards. If someone wants to sell something you think is > worthless then just do without it rather than try to rationalize stealing it. This would make sense if you could *try out* software before buying, but locally (Chicago-area) there are very few stores where you can try software and even these are not set up to let you really get a feel for how the package works. It's also hard to return a package that just isn't right without paying a penalty. I see nothing wrong in taking a copy from someone so you can try the program out in your environment and see if it meets your needs. I *do* agree that if you are going to use a program, you should pay for it, but I don't think you should have to buy a program just to see if it's appropriate for you. -- Sue McKinnell ...!att!ihlpf!suem IH 6N311 x5313
syslep@pro-lep.cts.com (System Leprechaun) (05/28/89)
Network Comment: to #3967 by pnet01!crash!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!obsolete!pro-carolina!delton > Of course, the real reason why we still have piracy is that no one has come > up with a form of copy protection that will blow the head clean off anyone > pirating a package. Of course we're working on it though so stay tuned. As long as there is a requirement for the computer to be able to read data from an external storage medium, copy protection will be defeatable. It's just a question of how much time is involved to break it. As long as there are high school students, there will be people with the time and expertise to crack these schemes. Unfortunately, most protection schemes not only don't work, but they interfere with the normal operation of the program. What's needed is less work on protection and more work on education. ________________________________________________________________________ / / / /| | Don Patrick |ProLine: syslep@pro-lep| Source: ST9365 | | | 9100 Circle Drive | 512-288-2114 | GEnie: DONPATRICK | | | Austin TX 78736-7911 | AppleLink: D Patrick | CIS: 72355,1717 | | |_______________________________________________________________________|/
Kreme@cup.portal.com (Lewis Kreme Butler) (05/28/89)
|Has it occurred to you that there IS A CONNECTION between the level of piracy |and the desertion of the Apple 2 market by large numbers of software |developers (who find the Apple 2 market unprofitable)? The Macintosh market |has a reputation of not only paying for the software but of having a |willingness to pay for "premium software." And from the vast expanse of Pirated Mac software, I would say it is a wholly undeserved reputation at that. The fact is, Mac wares are more profitable because there are COMPANIES using them that can't afford to pirate, so they shell out $400-600 dollars for Excell, Word, Pagemaker, or what have you. The fact is, most private users do not spend oodles of dollars buying wares, whether you believe it or not. That's why all those Word "help" books (they are really manuals) sell so well. Companies purchase, users "borrow." It all comes down to the fact that the Mac has a business base, and the apple does not. that is why Mac software does better in sales. Now if Apple games and software was all priced in the $20-30 (instead of 40-60), their sales would almost certainly triple. I know I would buy a lot more software if it wasn't so damned expensive! Kreme@cup.portal.com "The flutter of a butterfly's wings spawns the tornado" "Yeah, magic" "No, fractal mathematics." "Same Thing" -John Constantine
delton@pro-carolina.UUCP (System Administrator) (05/28/89)
Network Comment: to #3127 by obsolete!pro-angmar!pro-lep!syslep
Re: copy protection that blows the heads off pirates
Sure they can defeat it if they get lucky before it kills them. I think a
copy protection method that removed the heads off potential pirates would be
quite a disincentive to try to pirate the program. Yeah, Go ahead, make my
day! :)
UUCP: [ sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pro-carolina!delton
ARPA: crash!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil
INET: delton@pro-carolina.cts.com
Pro-Carolina: 803-776-3936 (300-2400 baud, login as 'register')
US Mail: 3207 Berkeley Forest Drive, Columbia, SC 29209-4111orcus@pro-lep.cts.com (Brian Greenstone) (05/28/89)
The only way to prevent from being ripped off by buying a program and then finding out that it stinks and not being able to return it is to have demos. eg: 256 Paint, Sword of Sodan, etc. By being able to look at a demo, a person can make a fairly decent judgement and do it LEGALLY at the same time. If more companies would release demos of their products, I think they'd sell a lot more of them.
daniel@vicorp.UUCP (Daniel Dee) (05/29/89)
In article <31315@apple.Apple.COM> farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) writes: >I knew that when I got involved in the discussion on piracy it was a big >mistake (As someone mentioned earlier, it is like arguing over abortion, >because what it boils down to are opinions). > >Well, now that we all know how each other feels about Piracy, how >about following my lead and dropping the subject? Then perhaps >we can get back to discussing the Apple II line... > Good idea.
STEVENS@SENECA.BITNET (05/29/89)
From: INFO-APPLE@BRL.MIL To: MURRAY STEVENS <STEVENS@SENECA> CC: Subj: Re: Piracy >Network Comment: to #3127 by obsolete!pro-angmar!pro-lep!syslep >Re: copy protection that blows the heads off pirates >Sure they can defeat it if they get lucky before it kills them. I think a >copy protection method that removed the heads off potential pirates would be >quite a disincentive to try to pirate the program. Yeah, Go ahead, make my >day! :) >UUCP: [ sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pro-carolina!delton >ARPA: crash!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil >INET: delton@pro-carolina.cts.com As always Mr. Phelps... This Disk will self-destruct in 5 seconds ..... *&^%$%* HMMMM: the ultimate copy protection scheme! :-)
sysop@pro-generic.cts.com (Matthew Montano) (05/29/89)
Changing the price on products won't change much. It might open up the market less than 5% from the original position. Commodore software is typically priced $20 less than the same product for the IBM. Test Drive II for the C64 is $39.99 (cdn) and is $59.99 or $64.99 for the IBM. This is consistent through retailers pricing and distributors pricing, even though the entire package might be the same, except for the copy of the disk inside. Price won't halt the piracy that goes on. In my store, we have from time to time had a "sale" where all software is say 10% or 20% off (rarely, but it happens), you don't see people saying to themselves "great, it's cheaper, let's buy it", it just doesn't work. Sales attract those who are out for a bargain and in most cases don't know what they are buying (hence the popularity of Home Shopping Club). Price will not change the piracy problem. Quality of the product is a big issue. But since this is under control of the authors and usually the company releasing the software is full of pig-heads that don't know the difference between good software and poor software. The situation is getting better, and improved communication (through AppleLink and comp.sys.apple) is forcing companies to not release shoddy products (one of the MAJOR reasons AppleLink exists.. and why Apple released it when it did!). Only improved feedback to the companies involved will change things. I'll say it again, distribution is the biggest problem. Why steal what you can get legally for a few dollars? If the legal choice is not availible the product is likely pirated. There still remains a BIG fear of mail-order houses and anything through the mail, especially in Canada. I refuse to order software from a U.S mail order. Sure they say they can send it to you no problem, and are glad to do so (of course they are, they charge you $15 for delivery). Ordering two football games from Programs Plus consisted of the following nightmare: 1) 'product is here' 2) Call from them next day, 'product is NOT here'. 3) product arrives two weeks later 4) shipped, product total $70cdn - shipping $15 for overnight delivery 5) arrives the next morning at the border point in Toronto 6) call from UPS about how much we owe them! 7) It took 4 days to get it through customs and to our house. It cost almost $95 to get two games worth about $55 U.S to our place and almost a week or two. Most of the time it comes through customs without being checked, but not all the time. I will probably not order from an american mail order house again, I don't need the headaches (read: profitable business venture in Canada is a software mail order house). Mind you there are two different types of pirates, one being the casual pirate who in most cases wouldn't buy the product anyways and it sits in his "shoebox". The other more serious kind is companies who buy one copy and load it on a zillion machines. There is a firm in Toronto that buys one copy of Word for Mac and then photocopies the manuals and copies the disks and sells the new packages for $70. My uncle deals with him.. I don't want to associate myself with this fellow... it's WRONG and that is the person who is majorly responsible for piracy in any country. Corporate piracy sure has fallen in recent years, but still it is the biggest problem in the software market. The casual pirate is a nuiscence, but it doesn't represent the problem fully. How many people do you think will buy 10 copies of TOPS for the office, when they can buy one and modify each copy and give it an unique serial number? Improve distribution and availibility of the products and destroy the pig-headed and ignorant attitudes of the corporate pirates and matter fix. ============================================================================== ProLine: sysop@pro-generic |DDN :crash!pnet01!pro-generic!sysop InterNet:sysop@pro-generic.cts.com|UUCP: hplabs!crash!pnet01!pro-generic!root ==============================================================================
) (05/30/89)
Network Comment: to #4047 by pnet01!crash!pro-lep.cts.com!orcus True, demos would be nice...but that costs even more in production. When the demo is completed, how can you really be sure that's the product they will sell you? I don't know if there is anything on the lawbooks about demos having to really resemble their mother-software, but if not...the users who recieve it and are impressed MAY be in for a tough fall when the demo is fast and pretty as the real thing stinks up a wall. I like demos myself. I don't normally buy things, but I do enjoy looking at what's out there. Demos are just another way I can piddle with the new technology. Another problem would be this: would you have the demos spread via networks and bulletin board systems or on direct order from the company developing it? With the BBS option, it all works nicely. But-- when you are cornering only one small part of the userbase that could buy, you sell your product short. And ordering the demo would not save the company money by packaging and mailing costs. I'd be willing to bet that well over 50% of the buying populace are without modems or outside connection to their network where they could recieve such a demo anyway. So then it is made necessary to provide shipping. Jason Hughes PS-I'm not knocking the idea: I like it...just it could become as costly to demo software as would be to test and bug-zap the program it demos. "Hi Mom! 8^)" +-------------------------------- = --------------------------------+ ! Jason Hughes : ! ! ProLine: panther@pro-lep : "Nobody knows...(hic)...the ! ! Postal: 5812 Abilene Trails : Tribbles I've seen...(hic)" ! ! Austin, TX 78749 : ! +-------------------------------- = --------------------------------+
jb10320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jawaid Bazyar) (05/30/89)
In article <8905281836.AA00175@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-lep!orcus@nosc.mil writes: >The only way to prevent from being ripped off by buying a program and then >finding out that it stinks and not being able to return it is to have demos. >eg: 256 Paint, Sword of Sodan, etc. By being able to look at a demo, a person >can make a fairly decent judgement and do it LEGALLY at the same time. If >more companies would release demos of their products, I think they'd sell a >lot more of them. After reading this message I remember a long time back when I was in the local Apple shop and I saw a demo for Questron (an Ultima-like game). I was impressed and promptly bought a copy. I agree, if more publishers made demo versions of their products, more software would actually be bought (after all, who expects someone to buy a car without letting them test drive it first?) And if they think it'll cost too much to distribute the demo, think again. The appropriate channels are already in place (nationwide pirating network... you'd be surprised how large it really is) and all they would have to do is dump one copy on one of the boards, and within days would be in every major city. How's that for a solution! :-) Ever-changing my views on everything... =============================================================================== jawaid bazyar "The history of the world is the history of jb10320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu the warfare between secret societies." Junior/Computer Engineering @ - Ishmael Reed, Mumbo-Jumbo Univ. of Illinois ===============================================================================
paul@pro-europa.cts.com (System Administrator) (05/31/89)
Network Comment: to #2972 by pnet01!crash!pro-lep.cts.com!orcus I haven't figured this out then. Don't y'all have software stores out there that let you return software if you don't like it? I used to think it was a big deal but now almost any store I walk in to will allow me to return anything. An exmaple would be walking into a store, buying a game, taking it home and playing it, deciding it's not much fun (like _Manhunter_) and returning it within a week or two. That's the way I do it. I recently purchased _Sub Battle_ and _Final Assault_ for the IIgs for less than fifteen bucks each. All it takes is some careful shopping. I used to pirate everything until I found I could return stuff. I suggest buying only from companies that trust their customers enough to let us be honest. Paul ______________________________________________________________________________ paul@pro-europa.cts.com | "Open the pod bay door HAL" ...!crash!pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-europa!paul | "Sorry Dave, I can't do that"
rotten@pro-lep.cts.com (Johhny Rotten) (06/05/89)
Network Comment: to #3971 by pnet01!crash!ucbvax.berkeley.edu!unmvax!charon!ariel.unm.edu!csbrkaac Here in Austin, there are two companies (one with two locations) where you can rent software. This seems to be the only option, other than shareware, wherer you can try something out to see if you like it before you buy it. In fact, for the commercially available programs, renting it to see if it's worth the asking price is reasonable. This is not advocating piracy, since I'm not saying "Copy these programs", just try them out. The only other option is to look for reviews and articles on the software and study before you buy.
scratch@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu (Steven J Owens) (06/10/89)
In article <8905282233.aa13301@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> STEVENS@SENECA.BITNET writes: >>Re: copy protection that blows the heads off pirates >>Sure they can defeat it if they get lucky before it kills them. I think a >>copy protection method that removed the heads off potential pirates would be >>quite a disincentive to try to pirate the program. Yeah, Go ahead, make my >>day! :) >As always Mr. Phelps... This Disk will self-destruct in 5 seconds ..... *&^%$%>HMMMM: the ultimate copy protection scheme! :-) I always thought it would be... uhmm... 'interesting' to put together a disk with a flat battery (the kind they use in musical greeting cards) that would have a contact in a sector that would not (during ordinary use) be read. Try copying it and the flat battery zaps the drive head... or even *more* interesting, add a tiny thermite or plastique charge... Steven J. Owens | Scratch@PITTVMS | scratch@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu "DISCLAIMER: In no event will the author be liable for ANY damages arising from the use, misuse, abuse, inability to use, etc., etc., of this program, even if it were to initiate a complete mass to energy conversion of your personal computer, thus reducing the state in which you reside to a smoldering ruin. This program is distributed "as is" and the user assumes all risks. If these terms are unacceptable I hereby grant the user the right to erase this program from any storage medium said user may own or use." - disclaimer found on a piece of freeware.
ericmcg@pro-generic.cts.com (Eric Mcgillicuddy) (11/10/89)
In-Reply-To: message from MACAUSLANDR@vax1.cosv.tuns.ca When you buy software (or a book or a tape) you have the right to do do whatever you want to it physically. 99% of your rights extend only to the actual product, paper, plastic and other materials. You have almostr no rights to the data on that disk or written in the book. I think most people would agree plagaarizing a book is wrong, school knocks that into us at an early age. Few feel copying software in that way. How many copy a book for archival purposes? Many companies explicitly allow back-ups, many do not. CP implicitly forbids back-up copies to be made. If there is a problem replacement must be gotten from the company. If you deprotect or otherwise alter the data on the disk, you are performing and illegal act unless expressly allowed by the company. Note that add-ons are also covered by this provision. Ashton-Tate is using this argument to prevent Foxbase (and Clipper?) extensions to dBase. Apple is more enlightened and had allowed a whole cottage industry to grow around Appleworks extensions. Claris has continued this. If you wish to install a given program on you HD get written permission from the publisher when you send in the registration card. This serves two purposes, it lets them know you wish to improve the utility of their program and secondly that you do not approve of copy protection. The altermative is to never buy CP products.
ericmcg@pro-generic.cts.com (Eric Mcgillicuddy) (11/10/89)
In-Reply-To: message from TSEMM%ALASKA.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu Computist has vested interests in saying that you have the right to deprotection. The point is, you only have the rights outlined by the company from whom you purchased the product. You must get permission in writting if you wish to vary those terms of sale.
UD182050@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Mike Aos) (11/10/89)
On Thu, 9 Nov 89 12:54:42 EST Eric Mcgillicuddy said: >In-Reply-To: message from MACAUSLANDR@vax1.cosv.tuns.ca > >When you buy software (or a book or a tape) you have the right to do do >whatever you want to it physically. 99% of your rights extend only to the >actual product, paper, plastic and other materials. You have almostr no rights >to the data on that disk or written in the book. I think most people would >agree plagaarizing a book is wrong, school knocks that into us at an early >age. Few feel copying software in that way. How many copy a book for archival >purposes? Many companies explicitly allow back-ups, many do not. CP implicitly >forbids back-up copies to be made. If there is a problem replacement must be >gotten from the company. > >If you deprotect or otherwise alter the data on the disk, you are performing >and illegal act unless expressly allowed by the company. Note that add-ons are >also covered by this provision. Ashton-Tate is using this argument to prevent >Foxbase (and Clipper?) extensions to dBase. Apple is more enlightened and had >allowed a whole cottage industry to grow around Appleworks extensions. Claris >has continued this. > >If you wish to install a given program on you HD get written permission from >the publisher when you send in the registration card. This serves two >purposes, it lets them know you wish to improve the utility of their program >and secondly that you do not approve of copy protection. The altermative is to >never buy CP products. Do you honestly believe this, or are you just trying to impress someone? What is the possible point of letting the publisher know what you are doing? I read this newsfeed to see new things going on in the Apple world, and for tech help. I don't appreciate seeing all these rules of moral conduct, or whatever you wanna call them. The steps you have outlined are just plain STUPID! And what's gonna happen to me if I DON'T tell the publisher? Are the thought-police gonna come get me in my sleep? Get real! I'm really getting sick of these piracy "debates". It's illegal, and people do it. So's pot. So????? Do you think all this talking is doing ANYTHING? All it does it waste bandwidth! Mike Aos UD182050@VM1.NoDak.Edu UD182050@NDSUVM1 No nifty .sig, but I DO think it's stupid to pay for anything you can get for free, and I believe you get what you pay for.....
jerryk@pro-tcc.cts.com ("Jerry E. Kindall") (11/11/89)
In-Reply-To: message from ericmcg@pro-generic.cts.com Re: How many copy a book for archival purposes? Ha ha ha, that is REALLY funny. Last time I checked books were not subject to erasure by magnetic fields, or to total destruction by spilled liquids. In short, books are a good deal more permanent than magnetic spots on a floppy disk. You don't HAVE to back them up. _____ ||___|| Jerry Kindall | Internet: jerryk@pro-tcc.cts.com | o | 2612 Queensway Drive | UUCP: nosc!crash!pro-tcc!jerryk |__O__| Grove City, OH 43123-3347 | GEnie: A2.JERRY ALine: A2 Jerry
ericmcg@pro-generic.cts.com (Eric Mcgillicuddy) (11/11/89)
In-Reply-To: message from paul@pro-europa.cts.com You have the right to load it onto different devices, but extrapolate that idea. The local board has 66Meg of storage, Why should I not load the program onto that? It's a device and I can download it whenever I need it. If someone else downloads it so what? It's mine and I can use it so why bother anyone else. I hate the idea of copy protection as much as anyone, but why do you think it is there in the first place? There have been a couple of Amiga boards shut down locally in recent months for carrying copyrighted software for there members. Many people braag of never having purchsed software. Most considere Shareware a joke. sorry, but this is how I feel.
ericmcg@pro-generic.cts.com (Eric Mcgillicuddy) (11/11/89)
In-Reply-To: message from samt@pro-europa.cts.com buy aagreeing to purchase a product you have implied consent to the conditions of sale. You may do what ever you wish a book (for instance) but supposing you change the title page and republish it? I think we can agrree that is wrong. Altering a painting which you purchased is also wrong (artist license). Basically, you have bought the physical presence of the software not the creative rights, or whaatever on the that disk. times up, bye
TSEMM@ALASKA.BITNET (Ed 'Apple Guru' Moore) (11/11/89)
Excuse me?? I have the issue right here. "It is not an infrigement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorze the makng of another copy or ADAPTATION of that computer program. United States Code title 17, 117 Either you are mistaken, or they are lying.
sschneider@pro-exchange.cts.com (The RainForest BBS) (11/12/89)
Comment to message from: UD182050@vm1.nodak.edu (Mike Aos) > What is the possible point of letting the publisher know what you are doing? > > I read this newsfeed to see new things going on in the Apple world, and for > tech help. I don't appreciate seeing all these rules of moral conduct, or > whatever you wanna call them. The steps you have outlined are just plain > STUPID! And what's gonna happen to me if I DON'T tell the publisher? Are the > thought-police gonna come get me in my sleep? Get real! > > > I'm really getting sick of these piracy "debates". It's illegal, and people > do > it. So's pot. So????? Do you think all this talking is doing ANYTHING? All > it does it waste bandwidth! > > Mike Aos > > UD182050@VM1.NoDak.Edu > UD182050@NDSUVM1 Errr.. Mike... what is wrong is anal retentives such as yourself that spend bandwidth justifying theft <piracy>... just because it's harder to get caught (if ever) and the penalties are minor doesn't make it any different from stealing a car because you can't afford the one you want... Grow up. /steve +===========================================================================+ | UUCP: crash!pro-exchange!sschneider COMPU$ERVE : 75166,2544 | | ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!sschneider@nosc.mil GENIE : sschneider | | INET: sschneider@pro-exchange.cts.com APLINK.PE : <shrug> | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | The RainForest @ 305-434-4927 / PO Box 841422, Pembroke Pines, Fl, 33084 | +===========================================================================+
jabernathy@pro-houston.cts.com (Joe Abernathy) (11/12/89)
In-Reply-To: message from ericmcg@pro-generic.cts.com > The point is, you only have the rights outlined by the company from > whom you purchased the product. Wrong. Your rights and liabilities under copyright law depend almost entirely upon the laws of the state in which you reside. To be completely legal, write to your state attorney general for the laws pertaining to documents published electronically and to shrink-wrap licensing (which is what you are referring to ... and which is illegal almost everywhere except California, thank goodness). In practice, of course, you can do just about anything you're smart enough to do. My general rule is that if I buy something that's copy protected, I take it back. If I have to have it, or really want it, and can't get something similar elsewhere, I'll do what's necessary to make it completely useable on my computer system. The fact is that copy protection renders software useless in conjunction with almost every performance enhancer. These days, any decent computer has at least one such device, and some of us have several such devices whose value runs into thousands of dollars. If you want to copy protect your software, write something good enough that they need the manual. I've been doing that for years, and I haven't been disappointed yet. Good after-sale support really encourages people to get legal, also. UUCP: crash!pro-houston!jabernathy ARPA: crash!pro-houston!jabernathy@nosc.mil INET: jabernathy@pro-houston.cts.com
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (11/13/89)
In article <8911121022.AA17345@trout.nosc.mil> sschneider@pro-exchange.cts.com (The RainForest BBS) writes: > just because it's harder to get caught >(if ever) and the penalties are minor doesn't make it any different from >stealing a car because you can't afford the one you want... Grow up. > It's a LOT different from stealing a car. When you steal a car, the original owner does not have the car anymore. When you copy software, the person with the original unit of software {purposely didn't say "owner" heh heh} still exists. I do not feel guilty in copying garbage software like Gauntlet GS. Only in the past few months have I felt guilty for giving software a "test drive" (that's sort of how I perceive it) unless it's really good software. I have felt a little guilty about things like Copy II Plus, Xenocide, and ProTERM and am in the process of finding the cheapest mail order prices for them to buy them. Sort of for Arkanoid (I and II) too. Those are the -only- pieces of software that I have found WORTHY enough of being paid for in about 5 years of computing. Oh, I forgot. I bought Pharaoh's Revenge for $5 by a deal I saw in A+ a few months before A+ died. The other things I try out then delete when I get bored of them. I will buy Ultima V GS if it ever comes out... It was advertized at AppleFest SF --88--.. When I find more software that is so useful and well made that I use it very often, I will pay for it. Otherwise, I don't feel I'm doing anything IMMORAL whatsoever. It's technically illegal, but not immoral. That's a lot different. (Just like some other person mentioned pot... He doesn't think that's immoral even though it's illegal. Just for the record, I feel it's immoral AND we know it's illegal). -- unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu Please use the former address. The latter is provided unknown@darkside.com provided just in case you can't contact the former.
huang@husc4.HARVARD.EDU (Howard Huang) (11/13/89)
In article <5724@lindy.Stanford.EDU> unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: > I do not feel guilty in copying garbage software like Gauntlet GS. >Those are the -only- pieces of software that I have found WORTHY enough >of being paid for in about 5 years of computing... > When I find more software that is so useful and well made that >I use it very often, I will pay for it. Otherwise, I don't feel I'm It's true -- a lot of software on the market isn't worth paying for. It's especially a problem since software returns are not usually allowed. I depend on magazine reviews to find out what's good and what's not. If it wasn't for reviews, friends, and sometimes comp.sys.apple, we'd all be in a fix buying software. Some stores do allow you to test your software before buying -- the Egghead store down the street has that policy, plus their stuff is always discounted. Compare that with those software stores that offer you NO service but still charge retail price! A couple of software publishers also have money-back guarantees. More companies should follow suit and make things a lot easier for us consumers. >unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu Do your friends know your name? Howard C. Huang huang@husc4.harvard.edu huang@husc4.BITNET huang@husc4.UUCP
mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) (11/13/89)
In article <5724@lindy.Stanford.EDU> unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: > > I do not feel guilty in copying garbage software like Gauntlet GS. >Only in the past few months have I felt guilty for giving software a >"test drive" (that's sort of how I perceive it) unless it's really good >software. I have felt a little guilty about things like Copy II Plus, >Xenocide, and ProTERM and am in the process of finding the cheapest mail >order prices for them to buy them. Sort of for Arkanoid (I and II) too. >Those are the -only- pieces of software that I have found WORTHY enough >of being paid for in about 5 years of computing. Oh, I forgot. I bought >Pharaoh's Revenge for $5 by a deal I saw in A+ a few months >before A+ died. The other things I try out then delete when I get bored >of them. I will buy Ultima V GS if it ever comes out... It was advertized >at AppleFest SF --88--.. > > When I find more software that is so useful and well made that >I use it very often, I will pay for it. Otherwise, I don't feel I'm >doing anything IMMORAL whatsoever. It's technically illegal, but not >immoral. That's a lot different. (Just like some other person mentioned >pot... He doesn't think that's immoral even though it's illegal. Just >for the record, I feel it's immoral AND we know it's illegal). "I got a copy of this game and played it for about two weeks and then it wasn't challenging anymore. Of course I'm not gonna buy it; it's no good." Yeah, right. Self-justification reaches new highs. I'll bet you wish you could go to a restaurant and order whatever you liked, and then decide after eating it if it was worth the menu price or not (and if it is, go to some other restaurant to buy the same dish as cheaply as possible). It don't work that way. In our economy, if you don't like what the producer produces, you don't buy it. You don't just take it and then decide if you want to pay for it or not. Any other description is just self-justification for illegal activities, no matter how you slice it. >-- >unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu Please use the former address. The latter is provided >unknown@darkside.com provided just in case you can't contact the former. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to: | should not be construed to imply that Amer. Online: Matt DTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its ThisNet: mattd@apple.com | subsidiaries, in whole or in part, ThatNet: (stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | have any opinion on any subject." Other mail by request only, please. | "So there." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
rnf@shumv1.uucp (Rick Fincher) (11/14/89)
In article <36425@apple.Apple.COM> mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) writes: > >"I got a copy of this game and played it for about two weeks and then it >wasn't challenging anymore. Of course I'm not gonna buy it; it's no good." >Yeah, right. Self-justification reaches new highs. I agree with Matt. If the software is "trash" why do you want a copy? The fact that you want a copy indicates that the software has some value. If we, as users don't buy the software we use, no new software will be written because all of the programmers will go broke. Since software drives sales of machines, you are killing the Apple II a lot more than Apple supposedly is by not paying for software. Rick Fincher rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (11/14/89)
In article <7229.infoapple.net@pro-generic> ericmcg@pro-generic.cts.com (Eric Mcgillicuddy) writes: >Computist has vested interests in saying that you have the right to >deprotection. The point is, you only have the rights outlined by the company >from whom you purchased the product. You must get permission in writting if >you wish to vary those terms of sale. If you signed a license agreement, then it is in effect a legal contract and you are bound by the terms of the agreement, possibly constrained a bit by applicable laws. If you simply purchased the product in a store, what the manufacturer thinks is irrelevant; you're governed by the applicable laws.
kreme@netcom.UUCP (Lewis Butler) (11/14/89)
In article <36425@apple.Apple.COM> you write: >In article <5724@lindy.Stanford.EDU> unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: >> I do not feel guilty in copying garbage software like Gauntlet GS. >>Only in the past few months have I felt guilty for giving software a >>"test drive" (that's sort of how I perceive it) unless it's really good >>software. I have felt a little guilty about things like Copy II Plus, >>Xenocide, and ProTERM and am in the process of finding the cheapest mail >>order prices for them to buy them. Sort of for Arkanoid (I and II) too. This is exactly what I do. I used Proterm for a while, kicked the tires and drove it around the block. Decided it was not worth $129 (or even $85) and bought TIC instead. Sure, it has it's problems, but it works. I also and trying out Zlink right now to see how it works... If I like it, I will buy the shareware license. If not I will delete it. By the way, do you remeber me? >"I got a copy of this game and played it for about two weeks and then it >wasn't challenging anymore. Of course I'm not gonna buy it; it's no good." >Yeah, right. Self-justification reaches new highs. This is total bullshit. I >STILL< play Ultima IV, Lode Runner, and Championship Lode Runner. As well as Lazer Maze and Hardball and Sargon III and quite a lot more. If a game is no fun after a couple of weeks why should anyone spend $40-50 bucks on something they are only going to use for a little while and then get bored with? > >I'll bet you wish you could go to a restaurant and order whatever you liked, >and then decide after eating it if it was worth the menu price or not (and if >it is, go to some other restaurant to buy the same dish as cheaply as >possible). It don't work that way. Once again, you are soo full of it that your eyes are turning brown. When you copy software you are not costing the company ANYTHING except a possible lost sale. You are not taking merchandise or produce from them that they paid for and destroying it. I suppose you don't test drive new cars either? > >In our economy, if you don't like what the producer produces, you don't buy it. >You don't just take it and then decide if you want to pay for it or not. Any >other description is just self-justification for illegal activities, no matter >how you slice it. No. In this economy if you buy something and don't like it/are not satisfied you RETURN it. This is usually impossible with software. It is the retailers that are causing so much of the 'pirating' activities. Thank God for Software Etc. abd others that allow you to return software up to 30 days after you buy it. If more retailers where willing to let you try software out a lot of people would be a lot happier. There is nothing more frustrating that laying out your own money for something and not having work as you expect it. > >>-- >>unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu Please use the former address. The latter is provided >>unknown@darkside.com provided just in case you can't contact the former. > >-- >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome >Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to: | should not be construed to imply that >Amer. Online: Matt DTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its >ThisNet: mattd@apple.com | subsidiaries, in whole or in part, >ThatNet: (stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | have any opinion on any subject." >Other mail by request only, please. | "So there." >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- | apple!netcom!kreme |All the towns in America and I have to move to | |The real cycle you're |the Bermuda Triangle. Nightmare on Elm Street | |working on is a cycle |Why do they fear the sunless lands? It is as | |called yourself. |natural to die as it is to be born. Sandman | | Robert Pirsig |WARNING:THESE OPINIONS ARE HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED|
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (11/14/89)
In article <36425@apple.Apple.COM> mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) writes: >"I got a copy of this game and played it for about two weeks and then it >wasn't challenging anymore. Of course I'm not gonna buy it; it's no good." >Yeah, right. Self-justification reaches new highs. > >I'll bet you wish you could go to a restaurant and order whatever you liked, >and then decide after eating it if it was worth the menu price or not (and if >it is, go to some other restaurant to buy the same dish as cheaply as >possible). It don't work that way. > >In our economy, if you don't like what the producer produces, you don't buy it. >You don't just take it and then decide if you want to pay for it or not. Any >other description is just self-justification for illegal activities, no matter >how you slice it. No, it's not that I played a game for two weeks, solved it or something like that, then "it wasn't challenging anymore." My, and many other people's example, of a piece of junk piece of software is Gauntlet GS. It wasn't even fun to play mostly because the controlling of the guy was so hard, if I remember correctly. Shouldn't I be able to use that for a little while to see if it's good enough to pay for? It's not, so I don't have it anymore. And, even if I -DID- have it still have it, it wouldn't be like eating dinner in a restaurant. This is my one idea how it's different from "stealing" something else. Other things are PHYSICAL, you are getting something physically valuable if you are getting it without paying for it, EVEN IF YOU WOULDN'T HAVE BOUGHT IT ANYWAY. But even though lots and lots of money and resources are put into making software, if I would not have bought it anyway, which is usually the case, they are not losing money. I honestly believe that I'd be a -MUCH BETTER- programmer if it were not for piracy as I'd program my own utilities because I'm so cheap! And as I've already said, things like ProTERM and CopyIIPlus are good enough that I use them very very regularly and they deserve to be paid for. -- unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (11/14/89)
In article <4528@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu (Rick Fincher) writes: >I agree with Matt. If the software is "trash" why do you want a copy? The >fact that you want a copy indicates that the software has some value. If we, >as users don't buy the software we use, no new software will be written >because all of the programmers will go broke. > >Since software drives sales of machines, you are killing the Apple II a lot >more than Apple supposedly is by not paying for software. > >Rick Fincher >rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu I will hopefully say a few things I've not said before, although I realize I will be at least partially repeating things I said in my reply to Matt Deatherage's (sp?) message.. I tried out Gauntlet GS. It absolutely stunk, and that seems to jive with most people's opinion about it too. The controls were horrible. If it were even 1/2 as good as the arcade game it would've been great. BUT NOOOOOOO! So I deleted it. Some people I know keep a copy of it just to have a record of what kinds of crud can be programmed. I deleted it to free up my relatively expensive disk space, and I had no use to either keep the copy or buy it as I didn't like it. I -TRY OUT- software, as I said before. In the cases of ProTERM and CopyIIPlus (and most likely Xenocide... Perhaps Arkanoid I and/or II), PIRACY HAS made me AWARE OF THESE WONDERFUL PROGRAMS AND I'M [admittedly GOING TO, as in future..still in the process of finding the best prices] become an owner of them. As I said before, I probably would be much more technically knowledgeable and a better programmer if it were not possible/easy/ whatever to pirate since I would be WRITING MY OWN software. Why should I buy things without using them for AT LEAST A FEW WEEKS? If there's something I don't like, I delete it to make room for something else. For the things that I like well enough (those 4 or 5 in about 5 years of Apple II computing), I feel OBLIGATED to buy as they are so useful and well written. The same goes for ShrinkIT GS actually. Even though I did think $40 or whatever was a little too high for it, I am going to send Andy some money when I get ShrinkIT GS for all of his work with ShrinkIT (non-GS specific and GS specific alike). Whew, this was long enough. Maybe this has gone long enough in public. Unless other people think this deserves to be kept public maybe this DISCUSSION (I don't consider it an argument) should be continued in E-mail. Other people can make the decision whether they think that is prudent or not. God, this was a hell of a lot longer than I had expected it to be. Had most of it written earlier tonight but a bunch of us went out bowling spontaneously and it wasn't saved, and now this new version is much longer. -- unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu
girardin@acsu.buffalo.edu (11/15/89)
if you consider copying software piracy, then i hope you have never made a tape of a record or cd, made a copy of a videotape, etc... piracy isn't limited to software. anthony girardin btw, i don't have any programs that i haven't paid for and i haven't taken any programs for a "test-drive" either. i'm clean.
SAB121@PSUVM.BITNET (11/15/89)
While I don't agree with piracy, check your parallels out again. A piece of software is not a meal, it is more like test driving a car. You can always borrow a car from a friend, drive it for a week or two, and then say that you think this car is a peice of garbage and wouldn't buy it for all the money in the world. I am now the proud owner of Copy II plus after using a copy I recieved from a friend. I'm not a pirate, I'm a test driver. I like it, so I bought it. PS: Anyone who doesn't own C2+ or has a copy of it, BUY IT. The customer support I've gotten from them has been well worth the money spent on the program and a few phone calls!
mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) (11/15/89)
I agree with the many that this discussion is getting nowhere, and will stop it. I will end my participation with two thoughts: 1) In the case of computer software, the disk, the manual and the box are not the product being sold. The information on the disk and in the manual are. If you use the information without the permission of the owners, something has gone wrong. This does not make any judgments on whether or not information should be protected or copyrightable. I merely state that it is and we are bound by the law to respect it, or work through the system to change it. 2) I fully support software stores that allow exchanges for bad programs (Two big chains that come to mind that have done this for me in the past are Egghead and Software Etc.) and encourage all in netland to do the same. And hopefully the debate ends not with a bang, but with a whiner. :) -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to: | should not be construed to imply that Amer. Online: Matt DTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its ThisNet: mattd@apple.com | subsidiaries, in whole or in part, ThatNet: (stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | have any opinion on any subject." Other mail by request only, please. | "So there." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UD041948@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Joe Carlin) (11/15/89)
Yeah, but if you went into a restaurant and ate a meal you absolutely hated, many people would still demand their money back, it's just that software companies don't have the immediate feedback from their customers like restaurants do. Joe
stephens@latcs1.oz.au (Philip J. Stephens) (11/15/89)
In article <89318.145910SAB121@PSUVM.BITNET>, SAB121@PSUVM.BITNET writes: > I am now the proud owner of Copy II plus after using a copy I ^^^^ > recieved from a friend. I'm not a pirate, I'm a test driver. I like it, so I > bought it. If you want to test drive a piece of software, why not just BORROW the disk from your friend and try it out, or actually go to his house and test drive it there. Why should you feel the need to COPY it first? After all, you might feel inclined to keep it! The parallel with test driving a car and test driving a piece of software is NOT the same. After all, you don't make a copy of the car first, do you? Just my 2 cents worth (actually, it may cost a little more than that :-)
gtolar@pro-europa.cts.com (Glynne Tolar) (11/15/89)
In-Reply-To: message from mattd@apple.com >In our economy, if you don't like what the producer produces, you don't buy >it. You don't just take it and then decide if you want to pay for it or not. >Any other description is just self-justification for illegal activities, no >matter how you slice it. There is one BIG flaw in that theory. Software manufactures seem to write WOUNDERFUL things about their products. When you buy the and take them home you quickly discover that it was not at all cracked up to be. This is not always true, but DOES happen. Thus sales are based on deception as opposed to usefulness. I'd love to see a software manufacture sued under the Texas Deceptive Trade Parctices Act when they try to sell you something that ain't. Then again, ZipChip ought to be nailed under those conditions! ---- UUCP: {nosc, nosc] ...!crash!pro-europa!gtolar ARPA: crash!pro-europa!gtolar@nosc.mil INET: gtolar@pro-europa.cts.com - BITNET: pro-europa.uucp!gtolar@psuvax1 ALPE: GlynneT CI$: 73557,2316 BBS: (713) 476-9998, User #2.
UD151606@VM1.NODAK.EDU (Steve Drees) (11/15/89)
>Yeah, but if you went into a restaurant and ate a meal you absolutely >hated, many people would still demand their money back, it's just that >software companies don't have the immediate feedback from their customers >like restaurants do. > >Joe And what's more most *good* restaraunts would either give you your money back, or give you another meal. And they leave that choice up to you. I think the mail order companies should really consider this. Sure it some people would use it as an easy way to pirate software, but I think the vast majority of people would use it for it's intended purpose. Steve ------------------------------------------------------------------------- UD151606@NDSUVM1 [] Reality is for people who can't handle drugs. [] -------------------------------------------------------------------------
chines@pro-europa.cts.com (Clifford Hines) (11/15/89)
In-Reply-To: message from netcom!kreme@apple.com I used to copy software when I started with the Apple II. I don't anymore because I have had to learn to do without. I have been out of work for amost a year and one of the things I have had to say no to has been new software. I just can't afford it. I feel that when I can afford it, I'll buy it. I think the support that you get when you buy the product beats copying it. I think this debate comes up way too often on national echos. Cliff UUCP: crash!pro-europa!chines ARPA: crash!pro-europa!chines@nosc.mil INET: chines@pro-europa.cts.com
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (11/16/89)
In article <13263@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> girardin@acsu.buffalo.edu () writes: >if you consider copying software piracy, then i hope you have never >made a tape of a record or cd, made a copy of a videotape, etc... >piracy isn't limited to software. Certainly software isn't the only thing that can be pirated, and copyright protection does apply to audio and video material. Does that contribute to the discussion or not? Theft is theft.
girardin@acsu.buffalo.edu (11/16/89)
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) >In article <13263@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> girardin@acsu.buffalo.edu () writes: >>if you consider copying software piracy, then i hope you have never >>made a tape of a record or cd, made a copy of a videotape, etc... >>piracy isn't limited to software. >Certainly software isn't the only thing that can be pirated, >and copyright protection does apply to audio and video material. >Does that contribute to the discussion or not? Theft is theft. i'm hoping it will put an end to the discussion. how many people have to justify taping a cd for their own use? or for someone else's use? how about "best of" tapes? how many people even realize that that is illegal? not many people get labeled "immoral" for doing any of those things. why the double-standard? after all, theft *is* theft. i'd be willing to bet that record companies lose a lot more revenue than software companies (due to illegal copies). and the record companies are fighting just to be able to copy-protect their digital audio tapes! (looks like i strayed a bit off track - sorry!) even though i don't know anyone on the net personally, i don't think that i'd be wrong if i said that most of the people condemning "piracy" would be considered "pirates" by music industry execs. i think that only the "non-criminals" should be allowed to continue this discussion. (that ought to kill the discussion completely.) i don't use any pirated software (great way to pick up a virus), but i can understand why people do and why they don't feel bad about doing it. anthony girardin just think, a "devil's advocate" is going to get flamed.
V128LL9E@UBVMSC.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (11/16/89)
Piracy can easily be stopped! I don't see why software companies
can't see this! The excuse (or legitimate reason, however you look at it)
that people use to get a disk archiver (copier) is to protect their software
investment. To get a back-up copy of a disk it costs $5 to $15, it is cheaper
to buy the copier (a lot cheaper). All the company has to do is to repair or
replace DAMAGED orriginals for a low price (say $1.00 to $2.00). The excuse
for copiers to exist will be gone and your software is safe from accidental
erasure or whatever.
I beleive software companies expect their software to pirated and
even include it in the price. If the companies would replace damaged orriginal
software I think piracy would be stopped to a practical standstill. Of course
this will not stop so-called "trading" societies.
Signed,
Fairly Sure This Would Workfadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Andy McFadden) (11/17/89)
In article <13354@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> girardin@acsu.buffalo.edu () writes: [ tons and tons of quoted text brutally dd'ed ] >i'm hoping it will put an end to the discussion. It won't. Try putting an end to the discussion on talk.abortion... it would have roughly the same effect. If anybody out there has a newsserver with a lot of old messages, you might want to make a gigantic compilation (along the monthly posting idea, but only posted if it looks like the topic is going to break open again). Here at Cal, all of the elected student officers try to make a big showing at the end of the year by proposing well-meaning but rather pointless bills. Some guy collected them all, and then when That Time came around next year, he and his colleages proposed all of the bills at once, saving countless hours of discussion. I think something similar would be appropriate here... Well, I just waded through 84 messages, but most were at least semi-technical. Looks like things may be settling back into the routine... >anthony girardin > >just think, a "devil's advocate" is going to get flamed. Perhaps you were expecting brimstone? :-) -- fadden@cory.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) ...!ucbvax!cory!fadden
TE880714%STUDTEW.UFSIA.AC.BE@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (Stef Bracke) (11/17/89)
I admit, I copy programs and don't pay for them.
Please understand, that till some weeks ago, I had 20 disks (I have an Apple
//GS for about 2 years now): 5 from Apple included in books and Hardware.
I bought Shangai,Paintworks,... for extremely high prices||| I also
bought a shell, assembler and editor (called SDE) which came from Holland.
$100 but worth every guilder. (I saw ORCA, it's like comparing
MS-DOS machines and Macs )
Now, I'm fed up with paying twice or more times the price you pay in the USA.
A rich friend of mine, has money enough and also a father who goes often
abroad. When he gets some new things, he comes over and fills my almost
empty 60 Meg Harddisk. Sometimes I pay him with a meal... Like the Unknow User
, I too erase all stupid programs. One of the things I like is Arkanoid.
As long as prices don't go lower overhere, I continue to copy software.
Another story are European products which are cheaper, so I buy them.
Also, If I ever have a shareware product worth keeping, I would gladly pay
for it. Only problem is, We don't have any BINSCII or SHRINKIT programs
to convert all Public Domain Soft. I'm gone look in the Netherlands for
it.
A year ago, the tought of piracy never came up.-What a unfair way to profit
from someone else program-, but now I don't know...
Stef from Belgiumericmcg@pro-generic.cts.COM (Eric Mcgillicuddy) (11/21/89)
In-Reply-To: message from TSEMM%ALASKA.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu I tend to get po'd at people bragging about never buying software, fortunately this person is a hardware addict and has moved on to MS-DOS systems. May he be infected by compuAIDS! The discussion has run the gamut from 'who cares' to 'don't boot it if you don't own it'. The middle ground seems the best solution, test your software before buying, but use the originals including the manuals (the manuals and support are really what you are paying for anyway). Rely on user groups product reviews, not mags who have the publisher as an advertiser. I've been stiffed on a couple of products, The Pawn and Fantavision specifically, this has made me cautious about CP programs. Frankly I would prefer the world to work fairly, but this just doesn't happen. Some people have no conscience and these are the ones who ruin it for the rest of us. Most of those who have responded, either personally or publicly, do not belong in this group. Perhaps that is because the readers of this feed are in higher education and thus smart enough to realize that piracy kills a product faster than non-support from the manufacturer ever could. "Anything useful will be abused until it is useless"