• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Have/Would you use pirated software?

Have/Would you use pirated software

  • Yes, all the time

    Votes: 26 37.1%

  • Yes, only if necessary (No money, unsure of program)

    Votes: 29 41.4%

  • No, I'm a good samaritan 0:)

    Votes: 15 21.4%
  • Total voters
    70
lordofthereef said:
You have educated me sir. Any reason why they still tack on "LP" to some album titles?
Click to expand...

Because of the little-known fact that at one point in early CD distribution, they tried the 45 model - you could buy a CD with just one or two big hit songs on it.

I found this by accident many years ago when I picked one up at the used rack - it tried to compensate for this silliness by having the _extended_ version of the song. lol
 
EarlyMon said:
Because of the little-known fact that at one point in early CD distribution, they tried the 45 model - you could buy a CD with just one or two big hit songs on it.

I found this by accident many years ago when I picked one up at the used rack - it tried to compensate for this silliness by having the _extended_ version of the song. lol
Click to expand...

Ah ok, that makes sense. I guess most LPs only have a handful of songs on them. I guess I am most familiar with 4-6 songs rather than 2-3 though, but same concept; "less than full album" essentially. Gotcha!
 
There is an interesting grey area though that I fit in. The RIAA feels that music should be bought per device but I buy it per household. I buy music but buy one for my whole house and put it on any and all devices we own.
 
lesliegodwin said:
If you were in a store, would you steal something you wanted if it were hard to get? Or if you didn't have enough money to buy it?

If your best friend was a developer, and you saw how hard (s)he worked on projects and how little money he earned, would you pay for his/her software or buy a pirated copy (for the same reason you buy others' pirated stuff)?

If your job was writing music, books, software, or anything else that requires creativity and pays only when you sell it, would you understand the "reasons" given above for why someone wouldn't pay a fair price for what you've produced?

I don't believe any of you who buy pirated stuff are horrible people.
I do believe that you aren't thinking through your decision to buy pirated apps or software, and that you don't equate it with stealing or with cheating the person/company who developed it.

Sorry to go Dr. Laura on you, but it occurred to me as I read these posts that maybe you haven't really thought about this.

LG
Click to expand...

(the following link is NSFW and not family-friendly... click at your own risk)

 http://pictures.mastermarf.com/blog/2009/090720-download-a-car.jpg


To be honest.. I think this poster makes a very valid point.. I am NOT directing it at any one.. but, I think it makes a valid point which I will get to later.

I DO NOT promote or agree with piracy.

However, I am also tired of BOTH sides not looking at the situation fairly.

If you walk into a store and steal something, you are physically taking it. The store no longer has said item.

With piracy... The owner still has their copy.

Would I download a car if I could? Damn right I would seeing as the original owner still would have his!

If my best friend was a developer? I am a computer science major who has a pretty big chance of ending up developing not just stuff for companies.. but, apps ect as well..

And I will be the FIRST person to understand the "reasons" people pirate.

I absolutely hate it when people paint piracy as a black and white subject.

I have grown up as one of three children. Do you really think my parents were about to pay for 3 copies of every game we got :/

And do you really expect 3 kids to "play fairly" with time on a game? My parents would pretty much always let the youngest do whatever he wanted just to get him out their hair.

Solution? make copies or download them

50$ or 60$ a game is way to expensive.

Also I am tired of people parading about correlation as causation.

A video game does well on consoles but, flops on the computer. "OH IT MUST BE BECAUSE, IT WAS PIRATED SO MUCH!"

Or its because people who spent 1,500$ on a gaming computer have higher standards than a shitty port from xbox 360, and they want to play the game before they pay for what is really a blatant attempt to screw people over.

On top of that.. When people looking at these numbers see "this song/game was pirated 14 million times" they automatically assume that if piracy were impossible the creator would have sold another 14 million copies.

That is an out right lie. The truth is odds are a lot of those 14 million people would have just gone without the game/song/whatever if they couldn't get it for free.

Another portion of those people may actually go out and buy the product because, the pirated copy made them feel it was worth paying for.

Lets also not forget the DRM issue.

I support people's rights to protect their work.. in a heartbeat I am for that.

I don't support products getting limited or broken functionality just because the manufacturer is so scared it will get pirated.

"Hm... I can A. pirate this product in working condition.. or I can buy the legal copy which is going to check with some remote server every 3 seconds in order to make sure it is a "legal" product and if the server goes down I can't use my product!"

Is a pretty good reason to just pirate a product.

Also.. I understand creators do get some money off of their products.... But, I don't see developers bitching about piracy.

I see CEO's of corporations who are scared they won't get their "hard earned bonus".

I have pirated in the past, I admit this and I am not proud of that fact at all.

I have changed my stance drastically in recent years.. If a game isn't worth me buying and it is a shitty port.. Then I will not pirate it.

Why? I want to give these companies a bitch slap. I want them to go "Man our product is so horrible, it wasn't even pirated! maybe we should actually try next time!"

Will that happen? who knows.

There is a lot of grey area with piracy that people are too eager to throw one way or the other.

The truth is the world is changing and people are holding on to archaic business models which need to adapt or businesses will fail.
 
Snow_Fox said:
If you walk into a store and steal something, you are physically taking it. The store no longer has said item.

With piracy... The owner still has their copy.
Click to expand...

But what if you went into the store, paid them what the item cost (at cost price not markups), and walked out the front door? I think most people agree that your are STILL stealing.

FWIW I agree with what you said, for the most part. I am just playing devil's advocate here.
 
Roze said:
People are forgetting another source where you can listen to music for free...the radio :)
Click to expand...

You are also heavily limited to what you want to hear and when you want to hear it; far more than you are with streaming even. You also get to listen to all the songs that you disllike... or find another channel, which may still not have the song you like, and the cycle continues. Again, radio is paid for by adds. Is it so crazy to think that all of our media could/should be paid for by ads? I think the companies that are pushing their ads are happy to oblige!
 
Well, this exposes the whole problem with casting in terms of piracy.

Words mean things. The suppliers want the word piracy associated with this because of all of the baggage it entails.

It's copyright infringement and profiteering.

Reasonable use is another issue entirely. Many people don't realize that for years, their fully-paid, separately-purchased copy of MS Office allowed them to put it on a desktop and a laptop - legally. Thinking being: you can only use it in one place at a time.

We make copies of store-bought CDs and keep the store-bought one away and use the copy until it's damaged. We don't give it away or sell it - that's perfectly legal, but the big labels fought against that under the guise that any copy is illegal.

Even if you give some copied music away, both you and the other party profited from the exchange, just not monetarily.

Not piracy - think profiteering.

In my opinion.
 
I think I like where you are going with this, Early. At the end of the day, it is just words, as you said. So let's say it was officially renamed profiteering, or, better yet, profiteering was added to the "legal jargon" to explain a situation where you are technically breaking the law, but not quite pirating anything. So, where does that get us? Aside from using words differently, have we changed the issue at hand, or even made the money grubbers happier?
 
lordofthereef said:
You are also heavily limited to what you want to hear and when you want to hear it; far more than you are with streaming even. You also get to listen to all the songs that you disllike... or find another channel, which may still not have the song you like, and the cycle continues. Again, radio is paid for by adds. Is it so crazy to think that all of our media could/should be paid for by ads? I think the companies that are pushing their ads are happy to oblige!
Click to expand...

Just saying :P free music!!!

I actually like the radio because it introduces me to the newest hits/singles out on the market.
 
Roze said:
Just saying :P free music!!!

I actually like the radio because it introduces me to the newest hits/singles out on the market.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you. The thing is, it isn't really free. This is why I don't understand why other methods of listening to music shouldn't also be "free". If the public perceives things as free, they are happy. Free, to mos people, means that I didn't have to pay for it in order to enjoy it.
 
lordofthereef said:
I completely agree with you. The thing is, it isn't really free. This is why I don't understand why other methods of listening to music shouldn't also be "free". If the public perceives things as free, they are happy. Free, to mos people, means that I didn't have to pay for it in order to enjoy it.
Click to expand...

I believe that there's nothing wrong with streaming stuff... pertaining to stuff like Youtube and the radio because you're given permission to listen to it through streaming... or not, depends on the song and album. It gets touchy when people willingly violate property rights to have a downloaded, full copy of the song without giving any sort of payment to the artist. If you download a copy from a torrent site... you're giving 0 money to the artist and everyone else involved in the making and advertisement of the song. Artists, producers, labels, staff, etc. etc. rely on album and single sales in the capitalist music industry. No sales... say hello to a hobby.

Don't get me wrong, I think it would be a great thing to be able to give free music to the masses. As evidenced by jamendo, it's possible. Can it ever replace the current ways of selling music (CDs, iTunes Store, subscription services, Amazon MP3s, and so forth)? Extremely doubtful... especially with the domination of iTunes Store.

http://www.cultofmac.com/infographic-most-artists-earn-more-revenue-through-itunes-than-at-retail/38097

I don't exactly know how accurate that is but if it is fairly accurate... then the best way to support an artist is to purchase from them directly or through iTunes. I hope this isn't Apple-sponsored. lol
 
lordofthereef said:
I think I like where you are going with this, Early. At the end of the day, it is just words, as you said. So let's say it was officially renamed profiteering, or, better yet, profiteering was added to the "legal jargon" to explain a situation where you are technically breaking the law, but not quite pirating anything. So, where does that get us? Aside from using words differently, have we changed the issue at hand, or even made the money grubbers happier?
Click to expand...


We already have the legal term - copyright infringement.

I simply advocate a way for education so that it doesn't become unnecessarily confusing.

Pirates are bad - but have some romantic appeal, I would think. (As do profiteers for those familiar with The Sea Hawk.)

The money grubbers are at fault - but so are those insist that they're entitled to things not gained by fair trade: either by for-fee royalties, by-advertising royalties, or royalty waivers.

Just because the money grubbers may be evil doesn't justify another evil to "rip them off" or "teach them a lesson" or "they never considered."


Forget the money grubbers and forget the sense of who deserves what and forget what words confuse what issues - just don't be evil.
 
EarlyMon said:
Forget the money grubbers and forget the sense of who deserves what and forget what words confuse what issues - just don't be evil.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, people will truly only stop when they get caught and charged... or grow out of it. It's very uncommon that someone will actually learn and understand that it's unacceptable. When they go to court, they're not sorry for doing wrong deeds but not doing enough to prevent getting caught.

I don't know if this is legal or not to do... but cant the RIAA plant popular mp3s on torrent sites that have some kind of ISP recording thing to document who's downloading it? I'm sure if the RIAA released a flood of them onto the torrent sites and let everyone know about it... it would at least scare some people away from illegally downloading them. If I was a lawyer, I would work to try to streamline the court process so lawsuits can go by relatively efficiently. EVIL... I know.
 
I "pirate" things that I own already.

I admit to looking for a cracked copy of Sims 2, University, and Pets... because I own all three, but my DVD player is broken on my computer. (In the end, a friend with a legit digital download gave me his password to "re-download" it myself.) Books and CD's, as well. I don't think it's right to expect a consumer to pay for something all over again just to get it in a digital format, especially when you're charging as much or MORE for the digital version.

The only thing I really pirate that I don't already own is an occasional movie. I don't own a TV, can't rent and watch on my computer (see the above DVD issue), and occasionally just want to check out a movie without having to sign up for a long subscription. (Note that I watch maybe one movie every two years, if that; netflix and the like are a complete waste of money for me). Honestly, though, if there were an option to just pay a couple of bucks and stream a single movie, I'd choose that. (And someone let me know if there IS the option to do that... I haven't watched a movie other than in a theater in about three years, so I'm a bit out of touch with the options.)

Oh, and one TV show, because the most up-to-date episodes aren't available in the US. Though, that's changing soon, and will be able to legitimately stream from the show's website. Woot!

One of the things I would absolutely love to see happen is that when you buy a hard copy of music, movies, or books, you get the downloaded version included. I'd even be willing to pay a few bucks extra for that. But it cheeses me to no end that you're expected to purchase the same thing over and over again if you want it in different formats.
 
lunameow said:
One of the things I would absolutely love to see happen is that when you buy a hard copy of music, movies, or books, you get the downloaded version included. I'd even be willing to pay a few bucks extra for that. But it cheeses me to no end that you're expected to purchase the same thing over and over again if you want it in different formats.
Click to expand...

Actually there are a lot of studios that have digital copies on them, like WB, Universal, and Liongate. I wish that every single studio did this. Unfortunately though... since your DVD player is broken in your computer, you can't get them because a method such as iTunes Digital Copy allows you to transfer video from DVDs to digital. All you'd have to do is put in the DVD/CD and then put the redeem code into a box in iTunes and then you get your digital copy.

You can have your songs from your CD in digital format with CD ripping to your computer. It is considered to be "fair use". Again though... since the DVD/CD player in your computer is broken, you can't take advantage of this.

Now with books and ebooks... they're two very different mediums. It's not like having a digital CD or digital movie where they're essentially the same thing. Paper to digital is more complicated, especially when the ebook is playable only with certified devices. For one thing, it would make books more expensive for everyone, including people who don't want a digital copy, because of licensing issues with companies like Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Apple, and so forth. There's also the complication with the digital copy of the book... what form is it going to be on? Kindle, Nook, iOS? Certainly you're not entitled to have it on all 3.

I understand where you're coming from and there are solutions available for DVDs and CDs but for paper books to ebooks... much more complicated.
 
I have a friend who I went to visit one day - he was carefully tearing all of his books up, page at time. Shocked, I asked what he was doing. He pointed to his new scanner, new server and a Handspring (it was that long ago this happened) and simply said - e-books. Radical but doable.

Amazon and Blockbuster offer single movie streaming without monthly fees. Not sure about tv, other than Hulu.com and slashcontrol.com for older tv shows. (And slashcontrol is being run by villains who recently withdrew the entire free Babylon 5 series from their service.) You might also try crackle.com for stuff from Sony's catalog for free - and now that I've just checked, their name isn't resolving. They do have a YouTube channel, you can look for them there.

(Great. Another shakeup in streaming services must be brewing.)

Anyway - the one thing that's probably a must have for any entertainment viewing via computer is Miro | Video Player | Free video and audio podcast player and torrent client. and their guide is at Miro Guide - Video Podcast Directory

Lots of cool stuff there, despite the dreaded torrent word in the description. (Not all torrents are bad.)
 
Vihzel said:
Infographic: Most Artists Earn More Revenue Through iTunes Than At Retail | Cult of Mac

I don't exactly know how accurate that is but if it is fairly accurate... then the best way to support an artist is to purchase from them directly or through iTunes. I hope this isn't Apple-sponsored. lol
Click to expand...

I remember when this came out, you can find the same chart on other web sites except amazonmp3 store is listed on it because the artist makes like $1.10, so cultofmac left amazon off on their version since it gives more to the artist than itunes.
 
lunameow said:
One of the things I would absolutely love to see happen is that when you buy a hard copy of music, movies, or books, you get the downloaded version included. I'd even be willing to pay a few bucks extra for that. But it cheeses me to no end that you're expected to purchase the same thing over and over again if you want it in different formats.
Click to expand...

Disney does this, I have several that came on dvd/bluray/digital in one box. But the digital only works in itunes or windows media player so if you want to use that you have to have one of the two worst media players there are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom