A case, a lion, a witch and IKWIL in your wardrobe

[stefancrs]

Still, "blaming" for instance Pace on the pirates is a bit weird

How so? If there were no pirates, no one would need a copyright protection scheme. I've had no experience with Pace, BTW, but I've heard horror stories from others. But software dongles and all the rest only exist because people ripped off the software companies.

They wouldn't exist anyway, even with piracy, if the developers didn't decide upon implementing them. Or if the pirates parents gave them a better upbringing. Or if the pirates parents would've skipped giving birth to them. And so forth. You can't really blame anyone specific for it, and it's still the developers decision. There's plenty of developers who chose much "lighter" or even no copy protection schemes, even though their software is being pirated. But I don't know if it increases or decreases their sales. It probably make their customers happier though

And, with regard to Pace, Waves uses Pace, right?
Everyone I know that has LEGALLY bought Waves has used the cracked version instead, due to compability and stability issues with their copy protection scheme. Maybe things are better now though, haven't got a clue.

[Muff Wiggler]

[hao nao]

something unexpectedly wonderful might come of this

[Squids]

Is that a form of birth control called the Sponge?

Okay, I changed the thread title to be less scary. You know if you don't read the posts carefully and you take things out of context then things can look quite different than they really are. Had this guy been what I had originally thought which was someone who bought or sold just 6 items illegally and was sent to jail for 3 years (again, this is the only information on the letter I saw) then, shit, that probably WOULD be scary/interesting/shocking! Some people might want to know about THAT one. I certainly was shocked about it myself (thinking that was the case). But, and PLEASE read this part, since in the evolution of the thread we discovered through a link and someone researching into it that the guy was pirating a million dollars worth of software (not just music software either) that changes everything. It isn't as surprising that he got 3 years in prison for that. It wouldn't have even been interesting enough for me to post about it probably.

However, I'd appreciate it if that wasn't misunderstood, especially after explaining it several times.

Please don't read into it further than that. I don't have some deep dark commercial motive going on or some plot to take over the world. It's just a poxy thread, a topic of chat and it started with "Check this out, I can't believe it" and ended with "No, it's not that it is this" and then from there it is all just off topic ranting and repetition, misunderstanding, information being taken out of context and more.

The thread is dead. Anything more (drifting into other interesting topics... at least for some) should probably just be another thread unless anyone has anything to add about the original case. I think we know everything now though.

[3*s]

What if the person who buys the copy for $30 would have otherwise paid $1,800?

How many times is that actually the case? I'm willing to bet 95% of people warezing $400+ software wouldn't have bought that software in the first place. Most of them couldn't even afford it.

This is the main reason why arguement's like this don't stand.

For example, If the recording industry lost the cost of every song downloaded on the original Napster in it's prime, they would have made nothing that year, and been put out of buisiness real quick. Instead they actually made more income that year than in 10 years past. They continued to profit until they started suing people.

Obviously a "few" people who downloaded and didn't buy wouldn't have bought in the first place.

They made a lower income in the coming years, but failed to mention that they released much fewer albums. (getting offtopic, I know)

What if the person is selling a copy of a copy? How about multiple copies (such as what the guy this thread is referencing did)?

What if someone robbed multiple houses (through a gang maybe)? That might get you life at some point (200 houses say). Should it be the same for someone who sells 200 pieces of pirate software?

I'm not trying to condone piracy, I'm simply saying the punishment for actual theft doesn't nearly fit the punishment for piracy (to the point of it being comical sometimes, the RIAA losing "millions!" from each music pirate).

[Squids]

I apologize for giving the impression that I am interested in discussing what form of punishment is just for what crime. I am not really that interested in that.

Really, I was only interested in this if it was what I thought it was. Since it turned out to be different than I originally suspected and was revealed to be about just "another pirate selling hundreds of software illegally and getting caught and punished" then that's it for me. I've lost interest in it myself. As I said, I don't even like waste my time thinking about this stuff much and it is certainly not a passion of mine! I'd rather talk about music, sounds, software etc. Productive and/or fun stuff.

So, bye!

[intel]

Funny you should end your comment with that statement, because what you're essentially saying is that copyright theft, that is, the theft of intellectual property, isn't theft at all.

If you spent 3 years using your brain to come up some brilliant new software and then you found out that some schmuck had copied it and was selling it on line for 1/10th of what you're asking for it . . . you wouldn't feel pissed off? You wouldn't feel like all your hard work was for nothing 'cause some thief had swiped it and was using your work for his gain?

It's thinking like this that has ended up in all of us legal users of software having to suffer the horrors of copyright protection schemes.

And BTW, if all the civilized countries of the world make laws prohibiting copyright theft . . . then, yes, technically it IS theft.

User your friggin' brain, will you?

ah, but you're making a mistake in your logic here. theft of intellectual property has nothing to do with piracy. if I were to take the brilliant new software you had spent three years developing, swapped out the GUI, renamed it and marketed it as a completely new product that I had developed, that would be theft of intellectual property. piracy (in the modern media sense) is illegal distribution of copyright-protected material. if I were to get my hands on a copy of a novel you were about to have published, change the name and had it published as my own work, then I would be guilty of stealing your intellectual property. if I were to wait until after the novel was published and start selling copies of your novel that I'd printed on my HP Deskjet, that would be bootlegging.

[Voidoid Surrealist]

something unexpectedly wonderful might come of this

Very nice!


I'll see your Morchella esculenta, and raise you some Langermannia gigantea