zhahai@nbires.UUCP (06/03/83)
Some netlanders seem to have very strong feelings about piracy. I am not here concerned with the legal definition (of which there probably isn't one), nor with the issue of breaking a contact/ license (if you contract to never use the label "sneeze" within some software, you are breaking your contract if you do - but that is not piracy; ie: special terms in a license are just that). I am wondering what the perceived "ethics" and peer norms are for the following situations: 1. You transfer a binary (legally obtained) from cassette to floppy, or from floppy to hard disk. (Or from disk to ramdisk, or ...). 2. You copy a prom from a 2708 to a 2716 during hardware upgrade (in every case here assume legally obtained unless otherwise stated). 3. You make a backup copy for your own use and protect it. 4. You change the cpu card or chip (moving from 8080 to z80) of your system. 5. You buy a new system and move your purchased software to it, no longer using the old system and removing any copies from it before diaposal. 6. You disassemble the ROM which came with your system to understand certain quirks of the i/o ports. 7. You disassemble your purchased BASIC interpreter. I think you get the point - do you feel that the "spirit" of the laws is non-comerciality (depriving the rightful owwners of a sale) or total non-copying? INterested in Responses Zhahai Stewart
strom%brl-bmd@sri-unix.UUCP (06/05/83)
From: Charlie Strom NYU <strom@brl-bmd> I spoke to my lady friend who happens to be a lawyer, though she admittedly has no patent/copyright experience (she is a criminal lawyer) so take this response for what is worth: her feelings are that the spirit of the copyright law indeed is to prevent a second party (presumably the liscensee) from making a profit by selling the copyrighted material to a third party. This would include rental of software as well, the key being turning a profit from other people's work. I suppose this can be compared to charging admission to a group to see an HBO presentation in your home or renting video tapes. I suspect there is little point in speculation until someone has the gumption to bring a suit.
michaelk@tekmdp.UUCP (06/06/83)
What if you have a multi-user type operating system
(but, say with just you on it) that you use to execute a
program that you bought legally, and execute it in both
background mode, and in foreground mode. Is it piracy if the system
produces two memory images of the program at once? Is it piracy if one job
is swapped out to disk (you have then, *two* disk copies, one in the swap file)?
I use a cp/m 8"SSDD system, the software I purchase is in standard 8" SSSD
form, am I a pirate when I convert the distribution density over to my system's
unique double density format? Should I be forced to use those programs on a
SSSD disk forever?bstempleton@watmath.UUCP (Brad Templeton) (06/07/83)
The "piracies" noted in 169@nbires are really not too bad. The problem is that in the user community of today, many people who consider themselves "honest folks" are quite happy to steal software, ie. take a copy on a floppy from somebody with a legitimate one. I have had people come up to me and ask me questions about my software when they stole the copy they have. This really irks me, and if I am in front of people, I hold out my wallet to them and say, "Here, why don't you just take $10 out of my wallet directly. That's the royalty I didn't make because you stole my software." This makes some of them feel bad, but I am sure they go out and steal again. People do this who would never steal merchandise from a store. How do we stop that! -- Brad Templeton - Waterloo, Ont. (519) 886-7304
lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA (04/18/84)
You don't read very carefully, apparently. I didn't say that people that disagree with me are cretins -- I suggested that the sort of person who copies and never pays (be it software, books, etc.) is a, well, there's a stronger word I'd like to use, but "cretin" has to suffice in this public forum. In fact, it's not so much the people who break the law that bother me, but the ones who attempt to equate a high moral purpose to such a simple act as stealing. There have been some messages to this list from people who drew a comparison between stealing software and not being able to stop smoking. There have been "pirates" who admitted that stamping out software piracy would be a good thing. If nothing else, I can respect such people for being relatively honest in their statements. But when other people show no respect for such a simple concept as not ripping off other people, I have very little patience. Software piracy is only a high moral issue in the eyes of such people -- since they don't want to spend the money they rationalize their actions any way they can. Very human, but still worthy of considerable contempt. --Lauren--
KYLE.WBST@XEROX.ARPA (04/20/84)
IS THERE AN "INFO-PIRACY" GROUP THAT ALL THIS TRAFFIC CAN BE SHIFTED TO?
mckeeman@wivax.UUCP (04/21/84)
The contention that the value of an object (software) is what someone will pay for it, is right out of Marx. He considered them fighting words. The problem with moralizing on this topic is that, historically, when the powers-that-be have been used to enforce an economic policy that was felt unfair by the body politic, there have been rebellions. It is wrong to steal. Yep! And it is wrong to exploit one's power. Often enough the "people" have risen against property rights when they have felt them abusively applied. What is stealing today becomes military heroism tomorrow. In the end the law bends to the people when its enforcement is seen to benefit the few at the expense of the many. The Robin Hood reaction to the 414 Hackers and your local friendly software thief is built on such a political base. Only so much can be accomplished by preaching against the evils of theft and calling for better enforcement. One is also advised to notice a rebellion developing and making an adjustment in the state of affairs (extortionate prices) before it gets out of hand. /s/ Bill McKeeman ...decvax!wivax!mckeeman (please abuse me privately -- I buy my software)
lauren@Rand-Unix.ARPA (04/21/84)
Look, if we're going to discuss software piracy, that's one thing. But I'm getting a bit weary of people trying to make comparisons with "the airwaves are free" arguments. Most of these people obviously haven't checked the laws lately -- there are FCC, federal, and also state regulations (in many states) that specifically address the reception of scrambled (STV) and microwave (MDS) pay-tv transmissions. The old Communications Act is NOT the only law on the books and has been effectively ammended by other regulations. In some areas, there are agents who roam around looking for "funny" antennas on people's houses (those who are not subscribers to pay-tv services), and if the antennas are pointed in the "right" direction, they can apply for search warrants in some cases. Most of the recent court decisions on this issue have gone in favor of the pay-tv services. There are cases almost daily of people being "shut down." The era of the "free airwaves," modified only by third party disclosure laws, is already well past and getting further away all the time. In any case, I fail to see how any of this applies to the cretins who steal software, Xerox entire books and magazines, and in general sponge off the rest of society because they somehow feel that *they* are the ones who should determine how much a product should cost. I don't advocate putting all of the software pirates in jail. Instead, let's bring back the cat-o-nine-tails for software piracy! --Lauren--
ctk@ecsvax.UUCP (04/21/84)
I love it. Stealing software is an act of liberation!
barryg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Barry Gold) (04/21/84)
The traditional capitalist cure for "extortionate prices" is free market
competition. It might be worth discussing what factors seem to be
impeding this in software development/marketing.
The Robin Hood approach to entrenched power doesn't work nearly as well
against service/idea property as against either real estate or tangible
property. It's hard getting good service or ideas out of someone who feels
unhappy. Merely taking a person's land/valuables away is a lot easier.
--Lee Gold
--
Barry Gold
usenet: {decvax!allegra|ihnp4}!sdcrdcf!ucla-s!lcc!barry
Arpanet: barry@BNLbatie@omsvax.UUCP (Alan Batie) (04/30/84)
The question 'Would I have bought the software?' is valid IFF (if and only if)
you ask the question in such a way that the choice is between buying the
software or not having it at all. Otherwise, it is a simple rationalization
(or worse).
From the fireplace of:
Alan Batie ...!decvax!tektronix!ogcvax!omsvax!batie