Study: More than a third of PC software pirated
Thursday, May 19, 2005 by Island Dog | Discussion: Personal Computing
| More than a third of the software installed on PCs worldwide during 2004 was pirated, with losses from unauthorized software increasing by $4 billion from 2003, according to a study released Wednesday by the software trade group Business Software Alliance (BSA). |
Link
 |
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
_02
Reply #22 Friday, May 20, 2005 9:02 AM
I believe it comes with a higher cost, and justifiably so. In the States it is a Federal Crime. As long as people think it's alright to take what is not given to them, or what does not belongs to them, the rest of us will contiue to pay higher and higher costs. That is the simple truth. Go ahead, keep telling yourself I am not stealing. And those of us who have to keep paying the higher costs will continue to know that you are.
Reply #22 Friday, May 20, 2005 9:02 AM
| But first... piracy is stealing, stealing is bad, if you are caught pirating you should be punished in line with what you would get for stealing a copy off a store shelf. |
I believe it comes with a higher cost, and justifiably so. In the States it is a Federal Crime. As long as people think it's alright to take what is not given to them, or what does not belongs to them, the rest of us will contiue to pay higher and higher costs. That is the simple truth. Go ahead, keep telling yourself I am not stealing. And those of us who have to keep paying the higher costs will continue to know that you are.
1ke us
Reply #24 Friday, May 20, 2005 9:22 AM
Reply #24 Friday, May 20, 2005 9:22 AM
Well-put, Zoomba.
The anti-piracy witchhunts and the general tone of the movement recalls McCarthy's paranoiac crusades and prohibition-era panicking all at once. It's knee-jerk policymaking and it'll die down eventually. The use of excessive penalties for white-collar crimes is a scare tactic, and a damned good one. It works, it's leverage, crowd control. Take ten random transgressors and put them up against a wall and shoot them, tell you you're next; chances are you're going to change your behaviour. But once we figure out the actual enforcers of our laws are too busy with public safety and important matters and don't give half a shit if you're sitting there violating some company's copyright, we reach a kind of stalemate; you stop hearing so much hue and cry in the media about it, people stop talking about it, and companies focus on improving their product to the point where it's so damn good you'd never even dream of stealing it.
* * * * *
The anti-piracy witchhunts and the general tone of the movement recalls McCarthy's paranoiac crusades and prohibition-era panicking all at once. It's knee-jerk policymaking and it'll die down eventually. The use of excessive penalties for white-collar crimes is a scare tactic, and a damned good one. It works, it's leverage, crowd control. Take ten random transgressors and put them up against a wall and shoot them, tell you you're next; chances are you're going to change your behaviour. But once we figure out the actual enforcers of our laws are too busy with public safety and important matters and don't give half a shit if you're sitting there violating some company's copyright, we reach a kind of stalemate; you stop hearing so much hue and cry in the media about it, people stop talking about it, and companies focus on improving their product to the point where it's so damn good you'd never even dream of stealing it.
* * * * *
Jafo
Reply #25 Friday, May 20, 2005 9:29 AM
Reply #25 Friday, May 20, 2005 9:29 AM
| companies focus on improving their product to the point where it's so damn good you'd never even dream of stealing it. |
Crap yet again.
The kiddies will just trip over themselves trying to steal it faster.
Tarkus
Reply #26 Friday, May 20, 2005 10:45 AM
I give up. There's only so much beating my head against the wall I can take.
Reply #26 Friday, May 20, 2005 10:45 AM
| ... It's a loss of $10,000 of property belonging to the software company.....sales is immaterial. A stolen car is not a lost sale either, if that's the case. It's a perfectly good analogy. Property is obtained without payment. What, how or why is irrelevant. |
I give up. There's only so much beating my head against the wall I can take.
craeonics
Reply #27 Friday, May 20, 2005 11:15 AM
Reply #27 Friday, May 20, 2005 11:15 AM
*cough*youdon't"own"softwaretobeginwith,youlicenseit,soit'snot"property"*cough*
craeonics goes fix the hole in the wall
craeonics goes fix the hole in the wall
unckle fester
Reply #28 Friday, May 20, 2005 4:54 PM
Reply #28 Friday, May 20, 2005 4:54 PM
What I see is this...
people go to a store to "buy" software but what they are really buying is not the software, they are only buying the right to use the software... so... what it comes down to is... it's not the software being stolen, it's the "rights" of use that is being stolen! The comparison of the Ferrari being stolen is not a viable comparison because when you buy a Ferrari you get a Ferrari not just a "right" to use a Ferrari!
Stealing is wrong, granted, software piracy is partly the fault of the companies because of the way they sell it to the public as "buy the software" when they should be saying "buy the rights to use my software". I know if I where to go buy a Ferrari its mine to do with as I want weather I sell the original wheels I replaced or what ever.
lets say someone has a company and buys a vehicle that anybody can use for company business, not a concern of the automaker but, if a company buys a piece of software that everybody needs to use for company business, the software company wants to make sure said customer also buys the right for all employees to use it just because they have separate work stations. Good thing they're not required to buy a separate vehicle for each employee to use (any ones blood pressure jump just now?) as this would cut across the grain of what we know and understand, just as the way software is sold/licensed.
Yes, there are thieves in the world of every kind. Some steel Ferrari's, some steel the right to use a piece of software. This is a part of life as we know it in the modern world and probably not going to change in my life time. But it's my opinion that a large part of this piracy issue is the fault of the software company’s terms of use policies that just don't fit the way society views purchasing. When we go to the store and buy anything we expect to own it. But when we go and buy software we're not aloud to own it in the way we think we should own it and this is what I see as the biggest part of the problem.
So what this brings me to is an understanding that software piracy is mostly because of the fallout of corporate greed and partly because of human nature to keep up with the Jones’s.
In the near future I plan on building a new PC and will probable use the same programs I use on this one that I plan on giving to my child. Do I see this as wrong? No! I did pay for it and I consider it mine. I see the requirement of replacing all of it for my future computer as ludicrous. I will not remove it because I want my daughter to experiment and learn to use some of it. She is a nine year old with downs syndrome and she tries to use Photoshop like her dad does. Will I keep it from her or help some over paid executive buy a third Mercedes so he has one more than the guy next door? I think not!!!
If that makes me a PIRATE than so be it!!!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
~~~FESTER~~~
people go to a store to "buy" software but what they are really buying is not the software, they are only buying the right to use the software... so... what it comes down to is... it's not the software being stolen, it's the "rights" of use that is being stolen! The comparison of the Ferrari being stolen is not a viable comparison because when you buy a Ferrari you get a Ferrari not just a "right" to use a Ferrari!
Stealing is wrong, granted, software piracy is partly the fault of the companies because of the way they sell it to the public as "buy the software" when they should be saying "buy the rights to use my software". I know if I where to go buy a Ferrari its mine to do with as I want weather I sell the original wheels I replaced or what ever.
lets say someone has a company and buys a vehicle that anybody can use for company business, not a concern of the automaker but, if a company buys a piece of software that everybody needs to use for company business, the software company wants to make sure said customer also buys the right for all employees to use it just because they have separate work stations. Good thing they're not required to buy a separate vehicle for each employee to use (any ones blood pressure jump just now?) as this would cut across the grain of what we know and understand, just as the way software is sold/licensed.
Yes, there are thieves in the world of every kind. Some steel Ferrari's, some steel the right to use a piece of software. This is a part of life as we know it in the modern world and probably not going to change in my life time. But it's my opinion that a large part of this piracy issue is the fault of the software company’s terms of use policies that just don't fit the way society views purchasing. When we go to the store and buy anything we expect to own it. But when we go and buy software we're not aloud to own it in the way we think we should own it and this is what I see as the biggest part of the problem.
So what this brings me to is an understanding that software piracy is mostly because of the fallout of corporate greed and partly because of human nature to keep up with the Jones’s.
In the near future I plan on building a new PC and will probable use the same programs I use on this one that I plan on giving to my child. Do I see this as wrong? No! I did pay for it and I consider it mine. I see the requirement of replacing all of it for my future computer as ludicrous. I will not remove it because I want my daughter to experiment and learn to use some of it. She is a nine year old with downs syndrome and she tries to use Photoshop like her dad does. Will I keep it from her or help some over paid executive buy a third Mercedes so he has one more than the guy next door? I think not!!!
If that makes me a PIRATE than so be it!!!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
~~~FESTER~~~
ParaTed2k
Reply #29 Friday, May 20, 2005 5:16 PM
Reply #29 Friday, May 20, 2005 5:16 PM
Yes, it is stealing, but the scum software companies bring it on themselves.
ryvon
Reply #30 Saturday, May 21, 2005 6:36 PM
Reply #30 Saturday, May 21, 2005 6:36 PM
My only comment is. Where do all of you see this conversation going? In all cases all are right and all are wrong. Each of you has one little peice of a much larger puzzle. Its very simmilar to dealing with illegal aliens in the united states. You cant keep track of them, they commit crimes, they do damage to property, the don't pay taxes, they don't have insurance, they cause higher health care premiums, etc. But if you get ride of them, then the entire construction industry in the US would completely shut down. Not to mention alot of the auto industry, fast food (dishwashing and other) They fill millions of jobs in the US that the US citizens are too proud to take.
Perhaps its not what is wrong you should be looking at but how the right. How many more software licenses are sold each year because the person who bought it knew someone who pirates (and most pirates know their software) how many of them bought the software because they trusted someone who knows it.
Do any of you care to see how it helps the industry. I do admit that it does alot of damage, but you have to be willing to look at both sides of the picture. If anyone is limited to only one view on things you are being decieved, either by others or by yourself.
Moderation in all things my friends. Seek information not opinion.
Perhaps its not what is wrong you should be looking at but how the right. How many more software licenses are sold each year because the person who bought it knew someone who pirates (and most pirates know their software) how many of them bought the software because they trusted someone who knows it.
Do any of you care to see how it helps the industry. I do admit that it does alot of damage, but you have to be willing to look at both sides of the picture. If anyone is limited to only one view on things you are being decieved, either by others or by yourself.
Moderation in all things my friends. Seek information not opinion.
Jafo
Reply #31 Saturday, May 21, 2005 8:23 PM
Reply #31 Saturday, May 21, 2005 8:23 PM
| ". I know if I where to go buy a Ferrari its mine to do with as I want |
Wrong.
Try putting an 'Uncle Fester' badge on it and selling it as your own creation.
Guess what? Ferrari still owns the design and any/all inherent trademarks, etc.
You can crash it into a tree all you like....but you cannot claim it as your intellectual property...that still belongs to Fiat.
unckle fester
Reply #32 Saturday, May 21, 2005 11:27 PM
so now the subject is copy right infringement? i thought it was software piracy...
nothing in there about copy rights and i'm not stupid enough to change the name from photoshop to festers artstudio and try to sell it.
people in school, includeing some friends, that know i have photoshop have asked me to make them a copy for them. i'm not about to do that with any of my software, i had to buy it and so can they. if they can't aford thirteen hundred bucks for the creative suite they can allways pirate it.
LMAO besides, it gives me one up on the ones who don't have it. what can i say, it's a dog eat dog world out there. LOL 
Reply #32 Saturday, May 21, 2005 11:27 PM
| Try putting an 'Uncle Fester' badge on it and selling it as your own creation. |
so now the subject is copy right infringement? i thought it was software piracy...
| More than a third of the software installed on PCs worldwide during 2004 was pirated, with losses from unauthorized software increasing by $4 billion from 2003, according to a study released Wednesday by the software trade group Business Software Alliance (BSA). |
nothing in there about copy rights and i'm not stupid enough to change the name from photoshop to festers artstudio and try to sell it.
people in school, includeing some friends, that know i have photoshop have asked me to make them a copy for them. i'm not about to do that with any of my software, i had to buy it and so can they. if they can't aford thirteen hundred bucks for the creative suite they can allways pirate it.
LMAO besides, it gives me one up on the ones who don't have it. what can i say, it's a dog eat dog world out there. LOL 
Jafo
Reply #33 Saturday, May 21, 2005 11:31 PM
Reply #33 Saturday, May 21, 2005 11:31 PM
Citizen unckle fester ...amongst other things [such as property theft] warez is about theft of copyright....distribution rights.
Just because YOU haven't had it spelled out for you in the subject title does not negate its reality...
unckle fester
Reply #34 Saturday, May 21, 2005 11:48 PM
Reply #34 Saturday, May 21, 2005 11:48 PM
warez is a program for downloading shared files and yes that is a big part of piracy. how many pirated copys of software are modified to look diferent and sold as a diferent piece of software by a diferent company? not many i bet...
Jafo
Reply #35 Saturday, May 21, 2005 11:57 PM
Reply #35 Saturday, May 21, 2005 11:57 PM
| warez is a program for downloading shared files |
No, 'warez' is an accessible and unauthorised [stolen] program, either on a compilation CD or somewhere on the net.
Call it trend-speak for 'stolen property', nothing more...
unckle fester
Reply #36 Sunday, May 22, 2005 12:20 AM
Reply #36 Sunday, May 22, 2005 12:20 AM
okay, i'll give you that. i heard of it in the past as a P2P site much the same as kazaa. your talking about copy right infringement though, not the stolen rights of use that piracy is about.
Jafo
Reply #37 Sunday, May 22, 2005 2:05 AM
Reply #37 Sunday, May 22, 2005 2:05 AM
| not the stolen rights of use that piracy is about |
Strangely it's the same animal, actually...
horiz0n
Reply #38 Monday, May 23, 2005 9:08 AM
Reply #38 Monday, May 23, 2005 9:08 AM
I do think the tons of the stolen software, and mostly photoshop is stolen by people that never use or know how to use it. Which if you do steal photoshop and only use it once or so a month, really no point in paying 700 bucks for it is there? Which must be why adobe is generous enough to basically give away free copies of elements.
I think the way they figured this number, or perhaps just the way they word it is flawed. 4 billion is the amount of theft, not the amount of lost sales. They could at least say lost 4 billion in potential sales. You could say they don't lose anything tangible as in an item that they sale, but they lose a potential customer for sure from each successfully stolen copy. None of the people that steal a product are goign to then buy it. So they have lost something.
But ferrari and adobe and other companies all let you take test drives. Although test driving a ferrari isn't as simple
I think the way they figured this number, or perhaps just the way they word it is flawed. 4 billion is the amount of theft, not the amount of lost sales. They could at least say lost 4 billion in potential sales. You could say they don't lose anything tangible as in an item that they sale, but they lose a potential customer for sure from each successfully stolen copy. None of the people that steal a product are goign to then buy it. So they have lost something.
But ferrari and adobe and other companies all let you take test drives. Although test driving a ferrari isn't as simple
Tarkus
Reply #39 Monday, May 23, 2005 10:33 AM
Reply #39 Monday, May 23, 2005 10:33 AM
I'm probably the only guy who still uses Photoshop 5.0 LE, that came with one of my scanners years ago. 
unckle fester
Reply #40 Monday, May 23, 2005 9:41 PM
Reply #40 Monday, May 23, 2005 9:41 PM
Looks to me the hole number is greater than the number quoted because it says "increasing by $4 billion from 2003". To get the complete figure you would have to add the number from 2003 and I’m not going to look it up but it would be interesting to know what it is.
More than likely it’s probably higher than the true figure just to emphasize the point. To get the true number they would have to know exactly how many pieces of software where illegal. If they knew that they would know who had it. If they knew that there would be even more overcrowding in prisons across the globe.
More than likely it’s probably higher than the true figure just to emphasize the point. To get the true number they would have to know exactly how many pieces of software where illegal. If they knew that they would know who had it. If they knew that there would be even more overcrowding in prisons across the globe.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Friday, May 20, 2005 8:59 AM
Yeah, right.
You'd 'like' to think that.
And 'thou shalt not kill' is archaic English....doesn't make it any less valid, darling...
It's Friday night here in Oz....I've had a long week of dealing with Architecture as well as protecting artist's/skinner's copyrights here on Wincustomize.com, and am mildly merry on the odd red wine or three but am STILL more rational and logical than 'some' of the arguments here.
Keep trying, kids, but you won't convince anyone with a brain, only your peers.....