Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

littlebitofcode.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 268 posts

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#201

Post by reissbaker »

joshma wrote: post #192
vectorpush wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they were the same thing, then that would mean downloading a copy of Star Wars is equivalent to pocketing the Star Wars DVD in your entertainment center. When does the act of stealing occur? If I download a torrent and then delete it without watching/playing/listening, did I steal it? If so, then does that mean repeatedly copying the file to and from an external hard drive is repeated theft? Does it become stealin…

It's equivalent in an ethical sense, not equivalent in the legal sense. I think it's perfectly fine to call it stealing, since it embodies the core meaning "steal" is meant to convey. You're depriving another of something that is rightfully theirs, control over their creative content. Let's not get pedantic here, lest we devolve into discussing what "to steal the spotlight" means.

"Stealing" generally connotes taking something away from someone else. With piracy, a potential sale is lost: the pirate might have bought the item were it not available illegally for free. With theft, there is both potential sale loss and property loss: if you steal a car from Toyota, they lose the ability to sell the car to you, and they also lose access to the car itself (which prevents them from selling it to anyone else). So Toyota loses twice, whereas the RIAA loses only once.

Of course, the ethical difference is probably larger than simply double. To use an old saying, let us assume that:

    potential sale = a bird in the bush
and,

    access to physical product = a bird in the hand
As we know from the ancient algorithm,

   a bird in the hand = 2 * (a bird in the bush)
Piracy loses a potential sale, and theft loses a potential sale and access to a physical product. Therefore, given the following equation:

    a bird in the bush = x * (a bird in the hand + a bird in the bush)
We should be able to solve for x, where x is the amount that piracy is as morally reprehensible as theft.

    a bird in the bush = x * (2 * a bird in the bush + a bird in the bush)
    a bird in the bush = x * (3 * a bird in the bush)
    a bird in the bush / 3 = x * a bird in the bush
    1/3 = x
As you can see, piracy is clearly 1/3rd as bad as theft. But, I have a feeling that the above algorithm still doesn't sufficiently illustrate the ethical difference between piracy and theft. Let's try again:

With piracy, the RIAA has lost the potential sale to the individual pirate. However, they still can sell the same DRMed AAC file to someone else. With our theft example, not only has Toyota lost the ability to sell to the thief: they've also lost the ability to sell that car to anyone else in the world. Therefore, if

    X = likelihood of sale to one individual
and we assume that reduced likelihood of a potential future sale (which is the RIAA's claim of loss) is equivalent to some loss of income, Toyota's lost income is:

    X * world population * price
And the RIAA has lost:

    X * 1 * price
Meaning that piracy, at the time of writing, is approximately 7 billion times better than theft, and increases in its relative virtue at every moment.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#202

Post by pbsd »

jebblue wrote: post #190
Karunamon wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crux of the matter is that "steal" implies you've deprived the owner of something. (Actually, the us supreme court ruled on this a long while ago and clearly delineated the two..) The only reason for the tap on the shoulder is the effort by the industry groups to get people to conflate the two things. I hate seeing people be tricked, especially by such an odious organization :)

>> The crux of the matter is that "steal" implies you've deprived the owner of something. Yes, earnings. When you grow up you will need to work and earn money and pay bills and balance a checkbook and without "piracy" (meaning stealing) controls, your Internet usage will be even higher than mine as you grow older.

Yes, let us ignore the conclusions of the individuals that thought long and hard about the issue, and just go with what "common sense" (aka "the gut") tells us.

Allowing "theft" be defined as depriving someone of something turns pretty much every crime in existence into "theft". Maybe we should just have 1 commandment - thou shalt not steal?

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#203

Post by nzjames »

MatthewB wrote: post #138
Karunamon wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take your pick. There's: Using unlicensed software copyright infringement downloading a torrent pirating ..among others. None of them roll off the tongue as nicely as "steal" or "thief", but copyright infringement is just as illegal as stealing. The industry groups have been campaigning for years (with great success) to ensure they mean the same thing. They do not. Please don't fall into their trap.

Hmm...interesting. I see the difference you are trying to illustrate but to me, obtaining something illegally that was intended to be purchased is stealing. We're talking about the same thing though:)

This is really interesting for me. I've infringed a bit of copyright in my time. Cassettes when I was young, VHS from TV (I cut the ads out - does that count?) my high school physics teacher gave us photocopied exercises with clear copyright notices in the footer, IRC, Napster, torrents.

I remember before it was called stealing, because we were doing it without mass attention on a young internet. I've learnt to gloss over stealing and theft when reading about piracy because I've always seen it as hyperbole because I knew the net before was labeled that. I put it in the same basket as hacker vs. cracker, as much as I wanted everyone to know the difference - they don't care and its a boring argument.

It seems (correct me if I'm wrong) that people have been exposed to copyright infringement == stealing from so much media for so long that it is accepted by default. It didn't used to be this way.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#204

Post by xtracto »

jcnnghm wrote: post #70
Groxx wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're just reinforcing their argument. By not using the competition, you're ensuring the market for those products on the competition's OS doesn't exist. It's actively strengthening Microsoft's hold on the markets you frequent.

OK. The primary application that I need Windows for is Quickbooks Enterprise. I also still use my Windows Photoshop license since it was expensive, and not transferrable to OS X. My primary operating system is already OS X, and I only use Debian Stable on servers. I run Windows in a VM when I need those application, and only when I need those applications. How would you suggest replacing Quickbooks Enterprise? Do I j…

Get Virtualbox for mac, buy a very cheap (sealed, legal copy) Windows98 or XP CD from Ebay and install all those in your OSX.

Use your Windows only software in there

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#205

Post by slavak »

hendrix wrote: post #143
MatthewB wrote: post #71

These are great points and a good portion of piraters do so for these exact reasons. There are always going to be people who steal content/apps instead of paying for them but I am sure more than a few people pirate purely because it is a better user experience than what is currently offered. TV shows are a great example. I cut my cable about a year ago and haven't looked back since. I refuse to pay a premium for chan…

You wouldn't download a car...

When you pirate MP3s, you're downloading COMMUNISM!

http://www.twopotscreamer.com/images/when_you_pirate_mp3s_yo...

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#206

Post by xtracto »

steve-howard wrote: post #44
[deleted] wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

A pirated .iso already modifies the data from the official release because it has to break the activation code somehow. Thus, you can't check it against any official hash. From there, the best you can hope for is to find a "canonical" hacked version and check against that, but since most people aren't really capable of breaking protections, they'll trust whatever shows up on the pirate bay.

Actually, you can download the Windows (Vista and 7) ISOs legally provided by Microsoft ( see http://forum.notebookreview.com/windows-os-software/428068-l... ).

Then it is your decision whether to buy a license or download an activator (which you can download after installing all the antivirus programs in the world)

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#207

Post by billpatrianakos »

This is laughable! User gets pissed by activation system. User does the exact thing that causes the activation to not only exist but become more infuriating as time goes on.

How about you either deal with it or not use Windows. If its that much of a pain then there's no reason to use it. Come on. How do we not see the blatant excuse to pirate something here?

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#208

Post by harpastum »

Karunamon wrote: post #162
sanderjd wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you link to that decision or do you perhaps know the name of the case so I could search for it? The deprivation idea doesn't seem to be intuitive to most people I've talked with and it would be great to know the actual case law.

Sure, the case you're looking for is Dowling v. United States. I'd give you a Wiki link, but.. The general gist of the case is that a man made a business out of pressing and selling Elvis records without distribution rights. Because of this, he was indicted for (among other things) distribution of stolen property and conspiracy of the same. The supreme court struck down all of the stealing charges, with an opinion th…

Karunamon does a pretty good job describing it, but now that Wikipedia is back up, here's a section of the court's opinion ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v._United_States_(1985) ):

The phonorecords in question were not "stolen, converted or taken by fraud" for purposes of [section] 2314. The section's language clearly contemplates a physical identity between the items unlawfully obtained and those eventually transported, and hence some prior physical taking of the subject goods. Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#209

Post by xtracto »

majorlazer wrote: post #55
valverde wrote: post #2

"Why do pirates have a better experience than customers?" This pretty much sums it up. I couldn't agree more.

In many cases, like downloading movies, I agree. But with Windows, I couldn't disagree more. I used to pirate every version of Windows I owned, back in the days of Windows 98 and up to Windows XP it was a breeze. Starting around Windows XP SP3, it got a bit more difficult. It was easy to pirate, but after a few weeks/months of use, you get the Genuine Advantage warning. With Windows 7, it is even worse. So I decided…

Nope, in windows 7 activating via pirate methods is still easier than activating via normal methods. The pirate, illegal method of activating involves downloading a program, 1 double click (to open said program) and 1 click (to run the activation).

I wont say which program is it because I do not condone piracy, but it is widespread in the internet.

I agree that Microsoft should remove all anti-piracy stuff in their products. It only makes their products more expensive.

Re: I'm Pirating the Next Version of Windows

#210

Post by jcnnghm »

jongalloway2 wrote: post #196
jcnnghm wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.kodyaz.com/articles/how-to-activate-windows-7-by-... Go down about half way. It's actually 54 digits, not 100. But the IVR isn't 100 percent accurate, and I have found I usually have to enter at least a few of the sets multiple times. And the voice system is one of those unskippable ones, so you can't just start entering numbers again right away after it detects a mis-enter. You have to listen to a 30 seco…

Why would you need to do this? No internet connection?

No, because the automated online system erroneously rejects the activation.
Post reply on HN