Editorial: "How piracy changed my life" • Hacker News Board

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#61

Post by gizmo686 » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:04 PM UTC

yason wrote: post #26

siliconc0w wrote: post #3

The side effect of privatizing what could be a public good is that is means denying to billions what they could have for free so that a relative handful will have an incentive to pay for it.

This, exactly this. Moreover, I think that piracy mostly happens because either it's the only way or because it's way too cheap. The first case is similar to how I was as a kid: I pirated all my games and software and copied all my music, and then bought the best games and the best albums that I could afford . I owned the games and cds that I considered the best, and worth owning. I paid for them so that I could own…

>There's a third case of "piracy" which is just casual copying, to sample the products. People first download music and torrent movies and sample what they've got. If they find a good director or a good band, they buy a collection or a set of albums. I don't really consider these people a problem since they're consumers at heart and they use downloading mostly to find stuff to buy. If they couldn't download, they wouldn't find much music or games or movies, and they would subsequently buy less.

I think this is (close to) the case of people who are actually a problem. The first two cases don't represent much lost oppurtunity. In this case, the people pirating might go out and buy the stuff. Because of this, the oppurtunity cost of them already having some of the stuff is far more significant than in the first two cases (where there was minimal oppurtunity lost)

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#62

Post by markokocic » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:05 PM UTC

eli wrote: post #23

lumberjack wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same with Windows and Office. It's better to have them pirate your program than run somebody's else.

Though it'd be better still if they paid something. Microsoft offers special low-cost editions of their products for developing nations, don't they?

No, they don't. I even remember that the prices for legal Microsoft software in one of those "developing nations" were higher than prices in the USA.

And it's not only Microsoft, some other companies (Audodesk, Adobe, Apple) also keep higher prices and worse quality in some of poor countries than in the USA. It's kinda like they try to punish people that want to buy their software legally.

For me, it's an easy decision, I just don't use their software at all, but some people have to use their software, and I totally understand why some of them decide to pirate it.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#63

Post by ddorian43 » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:07 PM UTC

ender7 wrote: post #49

meritt wrote: post #9

It's always been rumored that Adobe software, especially Photoshop, has been easy to pirate to encourage adoption with a user base that might otherwise seek alternatives. As those people hone their skills and eventually find jobs, Photoshop is the norm and what their employers purchase licensing for.

Well, I must admit that when I was a kid I taught myself how to use most of the Creative Suite via pirated copies (back then it was the Macromedia Suite plus whatever Adobe was calling its software at the time). I'm now employed because of those skills, and my employer has to purchase annual copies of said software for me to use.

Why annual? Do you really need the latest CS(n)? Or do you buy by subscription?

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#64

Post by bjustin » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:10 PM UTC

cremnob wrote: post #27

Devilboy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stealing a car deprives someone of a car. Copying a car does not.

This trope comes up every time piracy is discussed. The point is no one is talking about the legal meaning of "stealing" versus "copyright infringement". What people are saying is that it's immoral. The fact that a content company's product is easily stolen simply because the nature of his business means it is effortless to do through the internet doesn't change anything. If you go to a lawyer for legal advice and th…

>This trope comes up every time piracy is discussed. The point is no one is talking about the legal meaning of "stealing" versus "copyright infringement". What people are saying is that it's immoral.

It comes up every time because piracy and stealing are worlds apart morally. Were I to steal someone's car, they would be incredibly inconvenienced. Were I to illegitimately obtain a piece of software, the developers just get a smaller check at the end of the month.

As the article says, things are not black and white and we should not treat them as if they were. There are degrees of 'badness', and piracy is not as bad as stealing.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#65

Post by ladzoppelin » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:14 PM UTC

Tyrant505 wrote: post #40

meritt wrote: post #9

It's always been rumored that Adobe software, especially Photoshop, has been easy to pirate to encourage adoption with a user base that might otherwise seek alternatives. As those people hone their skills and eventually find jobs, Photoshop is the norm and what their employers purchase licensing for.

What exactly is HARD to pirate? edit: More specifically, Crack. I remember x-force having sources in all the major places ready to dump it to their cracker division.

Things that use codemeter are impossible (At least right now).

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#66

Post by chasing » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:15 PM UTC

angersock wrote: post #43

chasing wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Piracy is different from stealing, yeah. But I find it kind of short-sighted this notion that it's "victimless." Not intending to bite your head off. :-)

A very simple thought experiment: A rap artist is hired by a label to create an album. Said artist later dies. The label goes bankrupt soon thereafter, or perhaps simply folds up shop and leaves the business without auctioning off its assets. I have produced a copy of the album, which I host at my own cost from my server, once these events have transpired. There is no reasonable "victim" left for this crime of infrin…

No, it's pretty far off from reality. It's an extreme edge case that doesn't at all justify pirating Photoshop.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#67

Post by amy_seqmedia » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:16 PM UTC

I grew up in Silicon Valley in the 80s and I was not one of the fortunate---anything more than $5 was crazy expensive. But having a way to access the technology definitely changed my life trajectory. I don't condone piracy but I understand it. And yes, now I work in high tech and I pay for everything---even donate and occasionally volunteer because of all of this.

I think the article wasn't so much about the glory of piracy and how you can make a profit out of it. Rather, it is a perspective on desire and finding a way to feed it. I think that this is the one of the best things about living in our current state of the internet: if you can get the initial tool (the computer or the smartphone) you open up access to so much opportunity.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#68

Post by cremnob » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:17 PM UTC

kybernetikos wrote: post #59

cremnob wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This trope comes up every time piracy is discussed. The point is no one is talking about the legal meaning of "stealing" versus "copyright infringement". What people are saying is that it's immoral. The fact that a content company's product is easily stolen simply because the nature of his business means it is effortless to do through the internet doesn't change anything. If you go to a lawyer for legal advice and th…

> Some people are honest about it and say "I just don't want to pay for it". But most people I hear justifying piracy feel entitled to it and don't think there's anything wrong. And what is dishonest about that? When a builder builds a house he gets paid for his work. If he wants more money, he has to do more building. He can't just sit back and take a payment every time someone enters that building for the rest of h…

If a builder wants to take a payment every time you enter the building he is free to do so, thinking otherwise is highly presumptuous. Whether that business model will be viable in the market will be left for him to see (hotel managers operate exactly like this except they don't get paid for entering their building but for getting a room for the night).

What's dishonest about it? The mental gymnastics to rationalize their actions when it's really about "I don't have to pay for this and there are no consequences if I don't so I'm not going to".

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#69

Post by angersock » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:18 PM UTC

chasing wrote: post #66

angersock wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A very simple thought experiment: A rap artist is hired by a label to create an album. Said artist later dies. The label goes bankrupt soon thereafter, or perhaps simply folds up shop and leaves the business without auctioning off its assets. I have produced a copy of the album, which I host at my own cost from my server, once these events have transpired. There is no reasonable "victim" left for this crime of infrin…

No, it's pretty far off from reality. It's an extreme edge case that doesn't at all justify pirating Photoshop.

Ah, you're correct--we were talking about software mainly, not music.

Software companies never go out of business without selling off their assets, and it's the extreme edge-case where people continue to distribute the works.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonware

This truly seldom happens.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#70

Post by paulhauggis » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:21 PM UTC

Devilboy wrote: post #7

chasing wrote: post #5

I'm glad things worked out for Vlad -- when I was younger, I pirated a fair amount of software and games, and, like him, I think it enabled me to get inspired to learn more about computers in general and, indeed, now I stare at them all day for work. But. I'm not sure what the bigger point is, here. Should we be okay with piracy as long as the pirate is using it for self-betterment? Do games count for that? What abou…

Stealing a car deprives someone of a car. Copying a car does not.

Identity theft is still called "theft", even though nothing is actually stolen.

Piracy is more like counterfeiting. It's much worse than stealing. Stealing a TV only deprives someone of that physical value. Pirating software has the ability to destroy the value of the entire product line (why would someone pay $99 when they can just get it for free).

The same concept also applies to things like the app store. Now that games are 99 cents, it's not easy to create a game and charge $30 anymore (because the value is what people are willing to pay. If everyone were giving these games away for free or they were pirated and everyone knew these games could be downloaded for free, that value would be $0).