Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Here's a situation that may strike a chord closer to home with some of the readers of this list. When people "steal" and distribute "stolen" copies of an application, that application's profitability goes down. It is not a direct loss as in stealing a more physical commodity, but potential profits have been eliminated. This is a similar claim to what many record companies are making against MP3 distributors. The less revenue that a company is taking in, the smaller the staff they can employ. In a software development company the low people on the totem pole are the actual code writers. These guys are much more likely to get laid off as a result of software piracy than any administrator or executive. I'm a musician and a software developer and I can tell you from my aspect that I would love to be writing music oriented applications rather than the work I do at my current job. For that reason I'd suspect a larger than average portion of the software developers at companies which are making music based software are musicians. It is then reasonable to suspect that "stealing" of music software is likely to hurt --- MUSICIANS! When a big fat corporation's profits fall they don't just grin and bear it. They struggle to survive and more often than not this will result in layoffs. Many of these code-writer-by-day-amatuer-musician-by-night will be the guys to get the pink slip. And when an amatuer musician loses his/her job expenses on non-essentials such as new gear and matienance to old gear is one of the first thing to go. Knowing that this situation is possible is enough to keep myself from using illegal copies of software. I don't feel that I have the right to enhance my music making abilities at the cost of another musicians. ----- Original Message ----- From: Kevin Mulvihill <kmulvihill@mediaone.net> To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2000 10:11 PM Subject: Warez - A Rebuttal > Alright. Well, I'm not one to flame but the email below gets me as close to > that feeling as I think I can go... > > Nonetheless, here are my non-flame, hopefully rational, comments... (and > sorry for their length)... > > I DISAGREE STRONGLY WITH THE ATTITUDES THAT SUGGEST THAT IT'S OKAY TO STEAL > SOFTWARE. > > Please allow me to make my case... let's take Gregor's comments below in > turn. > > He says a lot of folks couldn't make music if it weren't for free software. > My response is that we always get those things we truly want... you'd pay > for the software if you *had to* because you love making music. You'd *find* > a way to buy it or "coerce" someone into buying it for you. :-) The > temptation is software that is very easy to steal - and the reality is that > we simply *justify* not paying money for it because it's easy to do so >and > we want to keep that money for ourselves. That's really what's happening... > I wonder how many of you are fully taking in that deep thought? If Gregor > couldn't steal software like he can't steal hardware, he'd find a way to buy > what he needed if he loved music enough. He found a way to buy the hardware > right? So, it's that simple. C'mon folks - we are not talking thousands >of > dollars here! Is there anyone who would disagree with this? > > Then he says he wants to test the software and that justifies piracy. Well, > okay, I don't entirely disagree with this idea of testing... I've been > ripped off by software (and hardware) that didn't do what it promised. >And > because we live in an age where retail stores won't even let you return > opened software, we're stuck. I say there should be some protection for >us > as consumers. OTOH, how long is an appropriate testing period? My guess >is > that Gregor has probably been "testing" some of his software for years. I > definitely don't think that's right. I think there comes a time, usually > about a month or so down the road, when you realize that you *like* this > software and you know you're going to continue to use it. That's the time to > pay. > > Gregor says that the folks who make and sell pirated software are the >ones > who are stealing. Let me tell you something, Gregor... stealing is when you > take something for your own that doesn't belong to you. Now, I don't deny > that the commercial pirates are stealing, but I say to you point blank -- > *YOU* are stealing too! The difference between you and them is one of > degree, not of kind. > > Let me tell all of you something: *People* create software. *People* who > have kids, and mortgages, and bills to pay. Good people. *People* you'd like > if you ever met them. *People* like you. They may love what they do, as Tim > noted in another email, but is this a reason to pay them any less? I >don't > think so. If they love what they do, so much the better, because they'll > likely create better products. If anything, we should be paying them >more! > But, my gosh, let's not penalize them just because they do their job >well! > Can you see that this is, effectively, what you're doing? I challenge you to > take a moment and think about this now. > > Gregor argues that he's a "bedroom musician" and so his theft doesn't >hurt > anybody. But if no one paid then there wouldn't be any software right? So > somebody has to pay. Who gave any of you theives out there the right not to > have to pay, while I have to? What makes you better than me? Aren't we >all > fundamentally equal as human beings? It's a selfish, arrogant person who > steals. > > Software piracy is such a big problem that software prices have to be higher > to compensate for the lost revenues resulting from piracy. In this sense, > Gregor, you and the others are not only stealing from the software > companies, you are *also* stealing from those of us who pay money for the > software, because we're paying more than we would otherwise have to. You're > stealing from your fellow musicians. Did that ever occur to you? I don't > know about the rest of you, but I don't like being put in this position. > > To those of you who use pirated "warez" on a regular basis, I say this to > you: I question your ethics. What you are doing is wrong and, if you >carry > it through to it's logical conclusion, it inevitably leads to a double > standard too - another ethical issue. Who wants to be mired in all this > crap? Let me give you an extreme example: let's imagine for a moment that > Gregor writes a song and it becomes a #1 hit worldwide. However, Gregor > doesn't make one red cent off of his incredibly good fortune because > everyone pirates his song and no one pays for it. Can anyone honestly say to > me that Gregor is going to happy with this? Is it going to be okay >because > individuals did the theft and not some deep-pocket corporation? Of course > not! Gregor's going to be screaming bloody blue murder for his money! He > will definitely want to be paid, won't he? And wouldn't you? And yet... how > is this different from the software piracy issue? The only thing that's > different is that little Gregor is now losing some money. You know, in this > situation, the tune he will sing will be different from that espoused in the > email below. > > Remember also that software developers expect to be paid for their work, > just like *we* do. And it's fair to exchange something of value with each > other right? You do it every time you drop into a McDonalds, buy a car or go > see a movie. So why shouldn't the developers be paid? I say to you all: > what's wrong with caring about these people too? Are we all so concerned > with ourselves and our needs that we simply can't do the right thing? Taking > anything without paying for it is stealing, plain and simple... and >that's a > fact! > > I have found that a life without some sense of personal integrity is an > unsatisfying life. We only pass this way once, and other human beings, > including software developers, have such an incredible capacity to enrich > the lives we lead and make them more meaningful. For all of you on this > list, your own lives are made more enjoyable because of the music you >play > and the software you use. > > But how can you write honest music if you are not an honest person? > > Where is the *artiste* in you folks? Wouldn't you feel a little better if > your music wasn't tainted through it's creation with stolen software? I > suggest that the good feeling you get from doing the right thing can improve > your music... can you, too, see how it could become more joyful, more > honest, more "in tune" because you yourself are? Isn't it inevitable? > > Moreover, I'll also suggest that it's when the money is hardest to come >by > that you stand to make the largest deposit to your personal integrity > account by buying the software you use to do that which you love. You'll be > repaid tenfold by the terrific boost in self-esteem you'll get - and you can > legally use the software too. For some of you, the difference in your music > might be night and day... > > I remember when I got my first Macintosh in 1984. I went to a user group > meeting expecting to find out more about this wonderful new computer I had. > Instead, I found a bunch of guys sitting around copying software as fast as > they could. The second meeting I went to I brought a bunch of disks too and > I made my copies. Sometime after that, I actually sat down and thought about > what I was doing. I mean, folks, I *actually sat down and thought about > this*. I realized that what I was doing was wrong. > > I hope at least one of you will sit down and think about this as I did. I > mean... just get off by yourself in some quiet section of your home and > think about this for a few minutes. Do it now. And if you do - if you are > honest with yourself and have some sense of personal integrity - you'll > reach the same conclusion I have. I suggest that there is only one >logical > result to be had: > > * Stealing is an ethical and a legal issue... and stealing is wrong. > * When you *use* software that you have have not paid for, you are stealing. > > I ask each of you: How do you want to live your life? What kind of person - > and musician - do you want to be? > > Kevin > > > > > hi, > > > > I just wanted to say that it shouldn't matter if somebody bought the > > software or just got it from a warez site. I think there are quite some > > facts that speak for warez. The first point would be that a lot of people > > couldn't make music if there wouldn't be cracked software. I'm not capable > > to buy all the programs i use because the prices are just to > > high. So, if i > > would stick to the stuff i could buy, guess then i would have to use that > > piano site for making music (and we really don't want that, do we?:))) > > The other thing is that we have the possibility to test things. I think > > software in general is sort of a user phenomenom. Most of the > > software has a > > lot of bugs. Would anybody buy a t-shirt with a hole or a car which could > > have general protection fault?:)) > > What I don't agree with is, that pirates are making profit with > > selling the > > software. That's were IMO the stealing lies. In china they copy and print > > the cds which look like the original and they sell it as an > > original!! that > > is wrong. The software companies all in all don't want to get > > bothered with > > a bedroom musician. If I copy a program, I don't cause any damage > > to anyone, > > because I wouldn't buy it anyway (because of the reasons > > mentioned earlier). > > So if we put in a little of economic science, the society net wealth curve > > would be higher as I would feel better and no one would be damages. >"the > > allocation" would be pareto efficient. (sorry got carried away because of > > the exams). > > > > greetings, > > > > gregor > > > > >