On Sunday 30 September 2007 04:25:44 pm feba thatl wrote:

I'm curious as to what some of you think of Windows piracy.

I haven't run windows for about four or five years now, and was just saying that I've completely lost track of what software is available for it, whether commercial, shareware, or free.

I used to run a BBS, and I didn't distribute warez, though I did distribute cracking tools.

I have never bought the whole SPA (or MPAA or RIAA) "Piracy" theory that a shared program constitutes a lost sale. 99% of the people who I know who have pirated a program (movie, song) would NEVER have bought the program. I never did like the roll-of-the-dice quality of commercial software either.

My rule regarding pirated commercial software has been that if you want to use it privately, it's up to you. If it's something you rely on regularly, like your base operating system, you should probably pay for it. (This is especially true since Linux is a reasonable alternative.) If it's something you use once in a while or are just trying out, you're smart to try before you buy.

On the other hand, if you're using it in a commercial setting or to make money, you should pay for software just as readily as you expect to be paid for whatever you do. I have ZERO tolerance for companies that pirate commercial software - with the exception of the need for small support companies to do testing and evaluation without having to pay the full price for an MSDN subscription. There I figure the gained sales justify a casual attitude about licenses - provided that all sales are legitimate. Selling illegal copies is also a zero-tolerance matter, that's about the worst offense I can think of.

(That's the only thing that ever should have been called or prosecuted as piracy. Calling file sharing piracy has given piracy a good name.)

Are you referring to people pirating windows, or windows pirating other software? I think the two balance each other out pretty nicely.

On 9/30/07, feba thatl febaen@gmail.com wrote:

I'm curious as to what some of you think of Windows piracy. Do you think it's alright if it's only done to run software that only works on Windows due to MS's monopolistic tactics? Do you think it's alright if it replaces the purchase of a legit copy, as it hurt's MS's profit margin? Do you think it's always bad? Do you think that software should always be free anyway? Are your decisions about this based on law or morals?

Personally, I don't pirate software anymore, and it pisses me off to see my friends downloading *yet another copy of windows* to reinstall with *again*, instead of trying linux, but that's more about their lack of a brain than it is piracy.

---

Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug

--- feba thatl febaen@gmail.com wrote:

Do you think it's alright if it replaces the purchase of a legit copy, as it hurt's MS's profit margin?

This argument appears regularly in news about the MPAA/RIAA's strongarm techniques to try and reduce and eliminate music and video piracy: the "stick it to the man" argument. The problem with this reasoning, as FOSS creators, indie bands, and indie film producers will be only so happy to point out, is that the music, movie, and software corporations are overstating their profit losses due to piracy, and your "act of rebellion" is like jumping up and down really hard on the Earth and expecting some dramatic change.

The other point those independent, low-budget producers make is that every time you download a new illegal MP3 copy, illegal movie copy, or illegal software copy, you have extended the market share of the corporation and reduced the already tiny market share of the free music/video/software group. You may not have paid for that MP3, but your friends will hear it and some of them will buy the CD to have the music for themselves, negating the entire "hurts their profit margin" argument.

The same is true for the software industry: if your friends are never exposed to anything other than Windows, and never accidentally discover it on your home PC, then they will shell out money to Microsoft for more legal copies of Windows. Monopolies benefit from piracy in ways where smaller companies do not, because monopolies are dependent on brand loyalty to reinforce their monopolies.

Frankly, "Genuine Windows Advantage" is Microsoft shooting itself in the foot, because not only does it discourage Microsoft piracy, it encourages those who do engage in piracy to create unprotected Windows machines which reduce the security of legal Windows machines. Don't get me wrong, piracy is not a good thing, but if Microsoft was only thinking about its bottom line then "Genuine Advantage" was thought up by someone who was neither an accountant nor an engineer, though certainly by someone who thinks that Microsoft is not a monopoly.

____________________________________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC