[Peder Rice]

I'm reading more and more about software and music piracy lately, as software companies are cracking down on piracy, and users are downloading more free software. I like to look at the online piracy issue this way:

The music industry overcharges for CDs. If they actually wanted to cut down on piracy, they'd lower prices and not raise them--which is what they are doing (just like Target and the likes claim that they charge more because of petty theft, even though they have no intention of lowering prices if people stopped stealing). Instead of bundling one or two good songs on a CD, maybe they should fill a CD with fifteen hit songs. Maybe they should even allow you to build custom CDs online for a fixed rate on Amazon.com or the likes.

Software piracy has a problem with pricing, too. Why would anyone spend a few hundred dollars on WindowsXP (please leave your biased opinions on XP at the door of this thread)? And on top of that, per license! I can barely think of a company that can afford this, let alone most consumers. I have three Windows machines, and I'm not spending near $1,000 just for an operating system. In other countries around the world, WindowsXP sells for double or even more than it sells for in the US (like the Philippines).

With these conditions, it's no wonder that a generation of internet users will likely never purchase an ounce of software if they can find it free. I'm sixteen, and I am the only person that I know in my age group that has ever made an attempt to purchase software legally. As long as there is a way to pirate the software, you can bet that thousands if not millions of people will follow the inexpensive route.

[juanvaldes]

There is a reason "NOW MUSIC vol xx" is the best selling CD's now, because with one cd you get all of the hit songs for the past few months. 1 CD @ $20 vs 15 Cd's (one hit song per CD) @ $20 = $300.

[Millennium]

Online piracy is a problem, but how much of one isn't possible to measure in anything even remotely resembling an accurate way. The software and music companies are certainly exaggerating the numbers by at least an order of magnitude, and probably more.

That said, software may well be the most overpriced thing in the world at the moment. This doesn't excuse piracy, but it does make it more understandable. And I'd be more than willing to bet that if companies would charge something more reasonable for their products (it's amazing how much you could cut the price of most software and still have it be massively profitable) you'd see a both a disproportionate increase in volume, thus more than making up for the decreased markup, and a decrease in piracy, as you put it within financial reach of people who would otherwise have resorted to theft.

[scaught]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Geneva, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="1" face="Geneva, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif">Originally posted by Peder Rice:
<strong>I like to look at the online piracy issue this way</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="1" face="Geneva, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif">of course you like to look at it that way. thats how it benefits YOU.

[11011001]

And really there is not a thing they can do about software piracy.

No matter how hard they try, their protection methods will be cracked within a month.

The underground community is going to stay around... it is impossible to get rid of it.

But if software is really good, people will buy it. I really can't wait to get my hands on a legal copy of Adobe Photoshop 7! If ever I have the money I will have it.

Alot of software is designed for the pro user... one who will be using the stuff comercially, will be making a living using the software. They should pay for it. If they are making money off their piracy they should certainly have to pay for it... But if a home user wants to mess with Maya they have to pay the 3,000 price tag. Sure there is a learning edition, but quite frankly educational versions and such of software suck! They have useful features disabled, freaking watermarks every which way one looks, they are not nearly as fast... oi.

But I certainly understand why software costs money. If it was free, there would be no software. Yes granted the open source community would solve much of the problem, but when you have a company like AliasWavefront or Adobe pouring millions of dollars into massive software projects (Maya is the most complicated App ever ported to OS X at this point) you tend to be able to achieve things that the open source community just can't do.

So yes, stealing software is morally wrong. It should not be done, but people are far from being perfect... piracy won't die as result of any government action. It can be reduced... It is a messy situation... yes... lets leave it at that. A messy, two sided situation. One side is right, the other is somewhat right, and somewhat wrong.

One of those quirks I guess.

[OwlBoy]

hmmm nm

<small>[ 07-05-2002, 10:08 PM: Message edited by: OwlBoy ]</small>

[ringo]

It's true, consumers know that they're getting screwed when they pay full price for music and some software...but that doesn't mean it's OK to steal from the musicians and programmers who do this for a living.

I'd rather see a new distribution model, something where I can pay the artist a royalty and get what I want at a discount for downloading it.

The artists and coders would probably make more in the long run because they wouldn't have the cost of packaging and distribution...of course the middlemen who make most of the money would never allow it...which is why they deserve to lose money to piracy...people have realized that the middlemen make most of the cash and that they're really not neccessary.

Things will change eventually...right now everyone's getting screwed (artists, consumers, and distribution companies).

[ReggieX]

I have no problem paying $18 for a CD that I'll listen to 50 or more times. That's good value for the money!

I also have no problem downloading MP3 copies of albums that are out of print and unavailable any way else.

It's a wash.