jtn@potomac.ads.com (John T. Nelson) (06/28/90)
>First of all, your software piracy justification has no place in >music groups. I suggest you go back and READ my posting. I said nothing about justifying software piracy. The focus of my posting WAS about record companies. Pay attention. I also drew a parallel with copying software you don't pay for because copying music and copying software are in fact the same problem. >Of course, neither does my rebuttal, but I am directing followups to >comp.misc. I don't believe record companies lose money from >"sampling" because if someone likes a some, they have to go buy it. Or copy it from a friend. >Any you quote Wozniak (a hardware maker). You actually think it makes no >difference to a software company that people can just call up some pirate BBS >and download a $400 piece of software?? Did I say it didn't make a difference? >There was an Atari computer convention in Pittsburgh last month and pirates >were walking right up to software vendors saying "Nice program, but I have a >friend who can get it for me for free..." It turns out that the vendors didn't >even get enough from sales to pay for their trips to Pittsburgh! And you say >piracy doesn't make a difference! Wake up and smell the coffee, guy. Software >Piracy is a crime. You sound like someone with a huge axe to grind. Please don't lump me in with your favorite whipping boy i.e. software pirates. The words "piracy doesn't make a difference" came from your keyboard, not mine. Wozniac has a good point when he states that you cannot claim loss of revenue through loss of anticipated software (or record) sales. My complaint is with both record companies and software developrs who use these "anticipated sales" to prove how much money they are loosing through piracy.