INSANE!! FL Academic Version Price Increase

[birrbits]

hi5's Hink for simultaneous moral posting

[pj geerlings]

which is why you can get the world's best Hammond emulation for a mere $28 if you really hurry

Yo Muff! The Hammond emulation is free, if you want a Leslie emulation with that you gotta pay...

I should probably add - you only have to pay once. This looks like a tremendous opportunity to plug my plug ...

NuBi LE - like a Hammond only lighter!

sorry - I couldn't help myself

[Hink]

hi5's Hink for simultaneous moral posting

owe, those are my hands Except I a spelled accept except which is unacceptable..

[fabi]

hi5's Hink for simultaneous moral posting

owe, those are my hands Except I a spelled accept except which is unacceptable..

and very often (always?) you spell thEn in cases where it should be thAn... just something i noticed.

[play]

no, you're not doing that at all...I see the point quite clear...sure there are degrees of stealing. degrees of lying, whatever...but in the long run they are all dishonest, that's just the bottom line. To except some dishonesty and condemn other dishonesty is a bit hypocritical imo, no matter what you base it on. Now don't get me wrong I'm npt calling you names, I am saying how I look at it.

Hink, I think we're in total agreement on that point: all degrees of dishonesty are just that in the long run: dishonest. The question is: what counts as dishonesty?

My point was that big software companies (as opposed to small developers) do at the same time act unethically and within legal bounds. The question of honesty of their practice doesn't arise soley because of the way copyright laws are designed at the moment. This goes for the share of multliplied revenue the programmer (or designer) receives (or better: doesn't receive), no matter what agreement or contract owner and programmer have. But it also goes for the questionalbly multiplied purchasing power. It's sort of a remuneration without sacrifice (or even output) for the owner.

Just to make it clear once again: I'm not rationalizing theft (like pj sparky seems to think) but I'm questioning the ethics of the current lawful use of software as a commodity.

[Muff Wiggler]

i'm gonna plug it too PJ.

NuBi LE totally kicks ass. Seriously, I love it to bits

[Hink]

hi5's Hink for simultaneous moral posting

owe, those are my hands Except I a spelled accept except which is unacceptable..

and very often (always?) you spell thEn in cases where it should be thAn... just something i noticed.

guilty as charged

[pj geerlings]

...Just to make it clear once again: I'm not rationalizing theft (like pj sparky seems to think) but I'm questioning the ethics of the current lawful use of software as a commodity.

NO, sparky, my full name is PJ Geerlings. Try to stay on topic, 'K?

FWIW, in the case of NuBi LE (et al) I am a small developer. I understand this issue vastly beyond the discussion in which I'm willing to engage you

Be cool dude - you are fighting a losing battle here ...

[pj geerlings]

i'm gonna plug it too PJ.

NuBi LE totally kicks ass. Seriously, I love it to bits

THANKS!

Now, if I could just get your email right

peace,
pj

[birrbits]

hi5's Hink for simultaneous moral posting

owe, those are my hands Except I a spelled accept except which is unacceptable..

and very often (always?) you spell thEn in cases where it should be thAn... just something i noticed.

also the correct English spelling is OW*

*unless you are suing me for malpractice

[Muff Wiggler]

i'm gonna plug it too PJ.

NuBi LE totally kicks ass. Seriously, I love it to bits

THANKS!

Now, if I could just get your email right

peace,
pj

tell me about it!

no worries.... I always know where to find you!

[kevmo]

Hink

First let me say I respect your point of view with regard to honesty and stealing.
With that said, perhaps you could make something clear to me. Are you saying that under no circumstances would you either contemplate or engage in dishonesty or stealing. Also are you saying that it has always been this way for you.

kevmo

[Hink]

no, you're not doing that at all...I see the point quite clear...sure there are degrees of stealing. degrees of lying, whatever...but in the long run they are all dishonest, that's just the bottom line. To except some dishonesty and condemn other dishonesty is a bit hypocritical imo, no matter what you base it on. Now don't get me wrong I'm npt calling you names, I am saying how I look at it.

Hink, I think we're in total agreement on that point: all degrees of dishonesty are just that in the long run: dishonest. The question is: what counts as dishonesty?

My point was that big software companies (as opposed to small developers) do at the same time act unethically and within legal bounds. The question of honesty of their practice doesn't arise soley because of the way copyright laws are designed at the moment. This goes for the share of multliplied revenue the programmer (or designer) receives (or better: doesn't receive), no matter what agreement or contract owner and programmer have. But it also goes for the questionalbly multiplied purchasing power. It's sort of a remuneration without sacrifice (or even output) for the owner.

Just to make it clear once again: I'm not rationalizing theft (like pj sparky seems to think) but I'm questioning the ethics of the current lawful use of software as a commodity.

I understand you point, but Im not sure with calling it dishonest, I will agree there are morality issues. However if say developer works for a company and they make a lot of money off of his work, he does have some options. If he had the means he could do it buy himself, the corporation does contribute to his success, they have provided him the tools he needs, the workspace, the materials and other support. He could work for the compition, if there is dishonesty most states have laws protecting "whistle-blowers".

So I do not see that as dishonesty, the morality issue here is that of exploitation and ethical treatment of employees. Of course if they paid someone very poorly and tanked the numbers to make it look like they werent making a profit and exploited the employee that would be dishonest...but I think most companies exploit employees and do not care enough to even be dishonest about it. In fact I think classism enters into the formula and the excutives have no problem looking down on employees and being right in their face about it, "I'm better then you, I make more money then you, take what I pay you or leave"....

[play]

Be cool dude - you are fighting a losing battle here ...

And you behave condescendingly towards others without discussing the topic at hand.

[fabi]

although one has to be careful not to see mistakes, where there aren't any, which can happen with regional differences in spelling - e.g. offence as opposed to offense.

gol has said in a recent thread that he has met many people who used warezed copies of FL - he didn't seem overly mad about it. there once was a survey over at looptalk, too, where they asked whether one had used a cracked copy prior to purchasing a license of FL. thinking of hink's suggestion that one notify developer's of using a cracked copy - actually that's something i would have loved to do when i used cracked software and be it only to give the developers some feedback and praise, when i couldn't afford to give monetary reward for their efforts.

they said they wouldn't crack down on us if we pleaded guilty, so i was honest and admitted to having used FL for over a year before finally purchasing a license.