home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!manuel.anu.edu.au!huxley!tal691
- From: tal691@huxley.anu.edu.au (Tonio Loewald)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
- Subject: Re: Why the Piracy? Here's why...
- Date: 26 Jan 93 12:05:28 GMT
- Organization: Australian National University
- Lines: 75
- Message-ID: <tal691.728049928@huxley>
- References: <JASON.93Jan19162605@ab20.larc.nasa.gov> <tal691.727518516@huxley> <1993Jan20.141942.23817@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> <JASON.93Jan20140342@ab20.larc.nasa.gov> <tal691.727611868@huxley> <1993Jan24.123955.27107@foretune.co.jp>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.2.12
-
- trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) writes:
-
- >tal691@huxley.anu.edu.au (Tonio Loewald) writes:
-
- >>The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the poor as well as the
- >>rich to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, to steal bread.
-
- >Forgive my arrogance, but poor under-bridge-dwellers don't have
- >computers. Anyone who can afford to buy a computer can afford
- >to buy software.
-
- In our society, it is perfectly possible for a writer, starving
- in a garret, or a student starving in a college, to own or have
- access to a computer. When I was a student, I -- and all of my
- friends -- operated solely with pirated software. I had a
- computer, but many of them simply used public access machines.
-
- Anyone who can afford a tape player can afford legal tapes.
- I don't pirate music, but I occasionally photocopy bits out of books
- written by living writers whose books are available in
- libraries or local bookshops. I think that writers are far
- worse off, in general, than computer programmers.
-
- >What it boils down to is that you are willing to honor and compensate
- >the creators of tangible things (computers) but not the creators of
- >intangible things (software that makes the computers useful)
-
- No. What it comes down to is that most people CAN pirate software
- but CANNOT pirate computers. If they could, with as little risk
- and inconvenience, they would.
-
- >And yet, you paid for your college education. Why? Obviously,
- >because you couldn't get a copy of someone else's degree on a
- >floppy...
-
- Sleeping under bridges ain't doing you much good. (a) Don't
- assume everyone lives in the US with US conditions prevailing.
- I didn't pay for my college education, because I'm an Australian.
- I am paying back some of it through my taxes now, but this law
- was passed when I had all but completed my degree.
-
- (b) What's your point?
-
- >Bottom line, the creators have the right to set the price; if you
- >think it isn't worth it, don't buy it. By stealing, all you are
- >doing is screwing over the poor suckers who have respect for other
- >people's work.
-
- I'm not stealing. I buy my software. The fact that I argue that
- piracy is not theft does not mean I practice it. I even pay
- licence fees for shareware. (When I was poor, and couldn't
- afford these things, I did pirate, as mentioned earlier.)
-
- In any case, as I have argued -- successfully it seems, since
- no-one has bothered to argue the point -- piracy is not theft,
- it is morally akin to illegal taping, videotaping of movies
- off TV, and so forth.
-
- I don't know if anyone remembers an early BMUG newsletter where
- there was a licence agreement (joking) to the effect that the
- book was licenced for one user only. It was very funny. Very
- outrageous. Very close to the bone. If book publishers tried
- to get away with the licencing crap that software publishers do,
- they'd be laughed out of court. Eg. when I "bought" Modelshop,
- I discovered from the licence agreement (only available for my
- perusal once I have purchased the package) that I had bought
- a licence _only_ and that this would _expire_ in 2020 or somesuch.
-
- Tonio
-
- --
- Tonio Loewald | tal691@huxley.anu.edu.au
-
- "Yes!! For the hundred and fiftieth time!
- We're burning in hell!!!" (John Callahan)
-