MS Attempt to Find Pirated Software Fails Miserably 458
Anonymous Coward writes "Microsoft set up an outdoor booth outside San Francisco City Hall yesterday offering to trade free licensed MS software for pirated versions. The only visitor they got was the guy picketing to have Clinton impeached for treason against 12 galaxies." Here's the SF Chronicle story about the "event." Read it and weep. Or laugh. (You choose.)
160 law suits?? (Score:2)
What if you are one of these computer sellers and you get sued by MS. Before you even make to court you have two problems:
1) You have legal fees to pay.
2) You no longer get legal copies of Windows at competitive OEM prices.
In other words, MS can sue any company they want out of business , whether or not they are doing something illegal.
Re:Piracy isn't caused by misinformation (Score:1)
Re:Why? (Score:1)
--
Re:Why? (Score:1)
I agree that this is the right way to go, but people have a natural tendancy to resist this.
Consider that this exact same argument is used in support of the decriminalising and legalising of hard drugs (ie. to stop the pushers and makers from being profitable). It hasn't got very far there, just like I think it won't get very far with software.
Which is why I believe that free software is the only solution, and why I just don't concern myself with non-free software anymore, as much as possible.
Re:18,000 jobs? (Score:1)
Re:I've come to some too. (Score:1)
Can we learn not to reply to trolls? (Score:2)
Everybody who replies to stuff like this effectively negates the work of the moderators by making large segments of the thread leap into visibility; I'm sure nobody wants to spend moderation points downgrading replies of varying intelligence and humor because the original poster was an idiot. And so we end up with a big string of off-topic score:1 and score:0 (unmoderated reg users and ACs, respectively) posts telling this guy off.
Sure, he deserves it. And I bet it felt good too, especially those of you who came up with clever retorts. But IMHO it's not worth it if the rest of us then have to wade through dozens of posts having nothing to do with the original topic. People like this will generally disappear quietly if we don't rise to the bait, and in the meantime the moderators help make it easier for us all to ignore them and keep
Re:Missed the point (Score:1)
Re:Its garbage if.... (Score:1)
It still doesn't make Linux garbage. It just doesn't fit what you do. Yet.
Re:Piracy vs Industry Lies (Score:1)
we have a winner.
And I bet that most people who have tried pirated software found that it did not live up to the claims of the company that was hocking it.
CHING NOSALE...
Re:Because it's funny; that's why. (Score:1)
> statistics. That either means computers aren't as useful as we think, or the
> statistics are wrong.
Or could it mean that the standards are rising? I haven't read the material in question, though it sounds interesting, but I know that a lot of times, when capacity to produce increases, demand for production increases at twice the rate.
Also, it could be due to improper use of the resources. In the $VBC I work for, we manage to get rid of any time-saving benefit of computers by a). layering the whole process around with procedures, rules, forms, etc, and b). NOT using the capability of the computing resources that we have at
Re:What's so funny .. (Score:1)
Heh, it is now considered propaganda to educate people about law ?
It is still illegal to pirate software, isn't ?
Re:Microsoft's real clients (Score:1)
Piracy is a serious issue. Estimates on the impact of piracy on the industry are more accurate than most of us know (or want to admit.)
Re:WINDOZE users ought to be butchered (Score:1)
Re: ignoring twits with kill files (Score:1)
And what happens when he dials up on a different IP? Besides, whatever happened to free speech? You shouldn't stop him from speaking, you should stop listening.
Which prompted me to think of a neat idea. Previously Rob's said to set your threshold up to weed out the twits. Problem is that sometimes you then miss out reasonable stuff that's sitting on score 1 or 2.
Better would be to have an extra option which is a kill file, where you can list the nicks or uids of people you never ever want to read stuff from. Kindof like a
Then we just have to get ESR to put Bruce Perens in his, and Bruce to put ESR in his, and maybe then slashdot wouldn't explode when one of them posts a story or comment...
Re:WINDOZE users ought to be butchered (Score:1)
MS in 12 galaxies (Score:1)
Maybe...
Re:How to compromise Slashdot (Score:1)
> folks lurking here.
I don't know about anyone else, but when I'm moderating, I don't take personal opinion into account. It seems to me that modpoints are not for promoting a personal agenda, but for pointing out reasonable, well-constructed comments. I have in the past moderated up sentiments with which I did not necessarily agree, but which seemed to me to be important or well-reasoned. I've been reading
Re:Who cares? (Score:1)
Re:Radio ads (Score:1)
Re:I HAVE GROWN BORED OF YOU ALL (Score:1)
But until you do, go away. And don't come back.
You've enlightened us to nothing except your stupidity.
Re:Piracy vs Industry Lies (Score:1)
Pirating increases market share (Score:1)
Of course Microsoft doesn't mind pirating, because it means people get their software for free. You get Windows 98 for free, and then decide to BUY Office 97. You wouldn't have bought Office if you didn't already have Windows.
Granted, of course they'd rather we all paid for the software, more money to them, but they understand the economics. Better to "give away" a free OS and then charge a packet for the applications.
Of course, I'd be more inclined to pay AU$150 for Linux, and AU$5 for Windows, but that's just a pipedream.
"Only now, at the end, do you understand..."
Pirated Windows (Score:1)
It would be much easier to buy a copy from everyone who's selling windows and check out the product.
Re:You just dont get it then... (Score:1)
Anyone who belives that companies don't cook the books when it come to priated software and loss ROI is a fool.
Current law should not be taken as given (Score:1)
Let me illustrate with an example. Suppose you are living in pre-Civil-War US, where slavery is legal. Illegally helping someone else's slaves escape does in fact hurt the plantation owner. Does this fact alone mean that it is bad to illegally help slaves escape? No. Nearly everyone nowadays agrees that the law was wrong, and that slavery should never be allowed. Even if it does help some people (plantation owners), it hurts other people more (slaves).
You may have a different opinion, but I am completely convinced that current copyright law in the US hurts consumers more than it helps producers, and as such is a bad law that ought to be changed for the better.
Hah (Score:1)
The missing money never existed ... (Score:1)
For some people, a particular app is worth $20, and for others it's worth $1000. If you price it at $200, you're just not going to get any sales from the guy who only thinks it's worth $20, whether he uses it or not. You can't count those folks and say you lost $200 for each one.
Where did I see a chart that showed this kind of thing? ESR's site?
Even the best Y2K estimates predict that there will be lots of annoying little problems. Add those to the lots of annoying little problems Windows has already made computers famous for, combine with the fact that the gov't is suing the biggest and best known shrinkwrap maker for allegedly being the biggest assholes ever to take a meeting and you'd think that the software industry would really want to avoid getting into anyone's face right now.
This is like the "no lending" clause that appeared on CD's a while back. You just make yourself look like a greedy bastard in a situation where goodwill and a dialog with your users will get you much greater returns. If you please them, they will pay.
Re:Who cares? (Score:1)
We posted it just to piss you off. No other reason.
We hired a psychological consultant to draw up a profile of konstant so that we could determine which stories would make him go berserk.
Smile for the camera.
Treason against 12 galaxies (Score:2)
Think their monopoly has really grown that big yet?
Re:Pirated Windows (Score:1)
The companies weren't there to throw violators
in the slammer but would have exchanged genuine software for illegal copies. Then the illegal programs would serve as evidence to hunt down the real perpetrators -- the people who actually copied and sold the software.
maybe that's the problem... people *know* they are pirating software
how would they really "hunt down" the perpetrators? traced registration numbers to the original person that registered the program??
Re:... (Score:1)
--
Re:I disagree (Score:1)
I've begun using mozilla more and more regularly due to the fact that Netscape on Linux is a piece of trash, and I just don't like using lynx for all my browsing.
When I started to really pick Mozilla apart (especially under the hood) I realized that in a few months Microsoft will have finally lost their browser war. Adobe will lose massive "market share" to the GIMP within the next year, even on the Win32/64 platforms.
And, to top it off, I was playing with the most recent build of Win2k at a friend's house, alongside an NT4.0 machine. To tell the truth, I couldn't tell which was which (other than the "Win 2000 build number ...." at the corner of the screen). The biggest improvement I could see was that windows minimize really quickly -- they still start up slow as dogshit through a panty, and the disks still sound like someone is testing a cache-busting head scheduler on them everytime you access the file system.
Leading me (along with the exponential-feeling progress of the major linux distros and GNU software in the past year) to comment more than once to people that "Microsoft is in trouble.".
Fact of the matter is, IMNSHO, within 2 years they will be falling back upon the Office Suite which was their foot in the door for so many years. Whatever the outcome of the court case, it will be moot,as many predicted -- but not for the reasons they predicted. People thought that Microsoft would be penalized too late for issues (like the bundling of IE) that would be unimportant. Instead, the outcome of the case will be moot because Microsoft is already on the downhill slope of a long and steep descent into ruin.
Hrm... (Score:2)
Wow. I think the most effective weapons against software piracy are:
a) Lower prices
b) Incentive to purchase (make the customer feel worth it)
and finally,
c) Software coded on punchcards that are 3 feet by 5 feet.
But that should apply for all companies. Maybe if they were to focus more on fighting software piracy on-line. I bet many of the folks present upon the street had little experience with software piracy... in that case, Microsoft should have focused more on the education of the public, instead of trying to acquire pirated software.
Ah well, life goes on in Redmond.
Why? (Score:2)
More importantly:
Why do poeple pirate software?
There are, from my experience, three types of "pirates", if you will:
1. Warez D00dz. Enough said. These are the sort of people that use pirated software because they think they're cool. So what if your average flamer has 3dsMax, True Space, Illustrator, Quark, etc. on his hard drive? Odds are it's only to impress his friends and the applications get little to no use. These people have enough trouble typing- their artistic capability is more than likely lacking. I'm sorry, but you could have every program ever and you're still not going to impress me. I'm more impressed by my roommates- one has rewritten LiteStep into a respectable GUI and the other has created the Max Script from Hell and is doing high-profile freelance for a big company. And he hasn't even graduated yet.
2. High-end criminals. The fly-by-nighters who sell the stuff for cheap at trade expos and in the back of catalogues, on ebay, or web sites, etceteras. These people usually have the resources to fabricate the packaging, and are going to charge you a fairly reasonable amount of cash for the goods. What the software should be priced to begin with, IMHO. If companies like Adobe and MS slased prices, then these goons would have to drop theirs, which isn't something they can reasonably do while keeping up a front of "respectability".
3. The "Morally Ambiguous", or Rational Anarchists, if you will. These are the sort of people who have legal copies of the stuff at work and school, and natrually, their home machines are loaded to the gills. They have indirect access to the latest and greatest at no personal cost- do you expect them not to take advantage of it? If you do, leave now: it's a mentality that is difficult to reason with. If programs that were as powerful and useable as Director, After Effects, Photoshop, etceteras, were available in Linux, these types would scarf them up instantly. And no, Gimp can NOT compete with a base install of Photoshop 5.02 in the hands of a capable user. Sorry. Flame me all you like. These people do as they please because they are in an environment where it is condusive to do so. The issue of license holding can always be brushed aside, since someone in the chain of command actually owns one. Just not the Rational Anarchist.
The rational anarchy standpoint is an interesting one, particullalry in the case of apps like Photoshop and Director: the project work gets done, but in a more convenient setting. And the company laready has the license for the stuff.
If you really, REALLY want to stomp out piracy, go the Media100 route. Media100 software requires a board of varying capabilities and costs to be physically insterted into a PCI slot for your software to perform at something approaching peak useability. Oh, yo ucan dupe that CD as much as you want, but there's only one board per license- and good luck fabricating THAT. But then, do really want a bunch of dongles and PCI boards cluttering up your box? Didn't think so.
If it isn't already obvious, I firmly stand for the third category. If Linux ever developes apps that are useable for what I do for a living, then I'll jump on the bandwagon. It's a concept I believe in. But then, I also think Eight Tracks and Bubble Memory are cool ideas too. Linux is to me the way the Mac is to Windows users: it goes, and it does a lot of neat things you can use, but overall, it doesn't have anything you want or need. But that's me. Of course, as is much the case with things like Quake and Star Wars, Linux has its share of Zealots. Followers who really need to get a life. Let them flame me if they like. In my opinion, Slashdot is an open forum for this sort of thing. And in the tradition of freely developed stuff, if the people in charge see a reason to do something off-topic (Hemos losing his living quarters, for example), then as the people in charge, they can. I doubt that the bulk of the detractors out there have any idea what it is that goes on behind the scenes, what makes Slashdot tick. These people are more than likely ignorant louts who have no idea what Perl is or how talented Rob is when it comes to its implementation.
Of course, said detractors more than likely fall into category one.
Bottom line: as long as large amounts of cash are charged for software, there will be piracy. As long as licencing is an issue, there will be the Morally Ambiguous to step around it and get the job done anyway. And as long as there is an "average" intelligence, those on the lower end will make fun of and yell at (in caps, of course) the things they can't understand.
Re:Hah (Score:1)
haha, bad place to ask for takers
the brains behind this probably cashed in their stock options before it split... LOL!
Re:I disagree (Score:1)
I don't have anything against KOffice but don't you think it is a bit amusing when people who consider MS to be the root of all evil in the industry, advocate free software that tries to be almost exact copy of MS Office
The real question now is... (Score:1)
Which galaxies are they, anyways?
As much as we'd all hate to see a continuance of spaced out legal chickanery in the US government, I must admit that I'd personally love to watch representatives of these 12 galaxies come down for a babylon 5-ish style court hearing. THAT would be worth switching over from X-files to watch ;)
--
rickf@transpect.SPAM-B-GONE.net (remove the SPAM-B-GONE bit)
Re:What's wrong with business trying to make more (Score:2)
company, the prices they charge are higher than
the free market (efficient) price.
Companies don't generally price goods and services
based on the cost. They price based on the
market. As long as the price they can charge in
the market will cover their unit costs, then
they'll sell product or services.
Piracy doesn't directly increase the PRICE but it
does increase the COST. The response can be a
price increase, exiting the market, etc...
depending on how much the cost increase is.
Putting a dollar value on software piracy is
tricky, though. You can't just count the number
of illegal copies around and multiply that by
the price. You have to take into account the
fact that some number of illegal users wouldn't
use the product at all.
Bolie IV
What is the world coming to? (Score:2)
An executive order had to be signed to mandate this??? You'd think our various government agencies would at least make an attempt at being honest without a law enforcing it.
Re:Microsoft's real clients (Score:3)
IMHO, the reason software is so expensive is not primarily because of piracy but because the main consumers are businesses who are more than willing to shell out the money for Windows products. That's the reasoning behind Windows 2000 "editions" (home, business, enterprise)
Individuals get screwed, price-wise, because they aren't the real target market on a curve of price-profit ratios
Who MS really IS losing money to are large piracy houses who manufacture fake MS Windows boxes, etc. and get them on the shelves. These should be busted by FBI, etc. though, not MS themselves.
Re:Treason against 12 galaxies (Score:2)
[unknown business vessel] "But why?"
"The Federation has reason to believe that you're using pirated MS software to run you're ship.
[to Geordi] See if you can lock onto their main database.
[Geordi] Aye, Capitan.
[Picard] Is it Access 3050?
[Geordi] Yes Sir!
[Picard] Mr. Warf, fire Photon Torpedos...now!
[Warf] Yes Sir!
[unknown business vessel] Aaaarrrggghh!!!
[Massive explosion of unknown business vessil]
[Picard] Well. Guess that will teach them!
[bridge crew laughs...]
Re:Another Conspiracy theory...but a good point (Score:2)
Wonder if they'd give me a copy of win9x in exchange, hardly a fair trade.
Re:Microsoft's real clients (Score:2)
Anyhow, MS keeps the door wide open for piracy and only has trivial obstructions for copying the cd. The only copy protection is the serial number you have to type in when you install the product. If MS were serious about doing something about the smaller software pirates, they could easily add some copy protecting stuff on the cd (which would make it hard for the average user to make a copy). But they don't, they choose to keep the door wideopen to piracy. This causes me to believe that they actually benefit from home users cheating a little with their software. They even allow those users to download updates!
All this (in theory
Re:How to compromise Slashdot (Score:2)
Just because this is slashdot, that doesn't mean it has to been this festering pool of anti-microsoft sentiment... I really enjoy the discussions around here where people intellegently debate the pro's and con's of each angle of everything.
I think you need to get over this paranoia of Microsoft trying to invade and influence your life. Next thing you know, you're going to start thinking that all the computers you buy funnell money back to microsoft due to components that you don't need, or that maybe that pro microsoft letter to the local newspaper originated in their PR department, and that they're buying opinions of major corporate consulting firms... Oh wait. Drat!
I think though, honestly, that slashdot is useful for MSFT to research what people dislike about them, but i doubt they would expend the energy to try to change the opinions found here, because most seem to be way out in right fiend and not even remotely changeable.
my two cents
Pirating has always been a problem for MS (Score:2)
Re:Because it's funny; that's why. (Score:4)
But, ten years ago, would you have felt the need to do it?
The problem is that while computers make things easy to do, once things become easier to do they also become required. The things that are added tend to be nonessentials -- for example, consider all these fancy, pretty internal documents done in word and friends. 10 years ago, they would have mostly been done on a typewriter without the benefit of fancy formatting and that would have been fine.
Even worse, docments are created that would not have been before because it's now easy. Which just proves that most work is busy work.
The false cost of Piracy (Score:5)
Think about that statement for a little bit.
How much money would have been spent on legit software? Now, ask yourself where did that money go instead?
Software has an extremely low cost of production, especially when compared to durable goods.
Yes, I know, there's tech support and all that, but.. think about how much money Microsoft has spent on developing NT in the past four years. My guess would put not greater then 100 to 250 million dollars. How much money has Microsoft made off of NT? Why does it cost $25 dollars a person to connect to NT server? (do that math on that one. My former company had 3,000 seats, that's $75,000 dollars of income that costs Microsoft how much to produce? Hell, you don't even get a piece of paper with a CAL anymore.)
If my company hadn't spent the money on those seats, where would have it gone? To pay someone's salary maybe? Building a better business? I don't know, and I don't care. My point is that the money hasn't been lost to the economy in general, it has just been lost to Microsoft.
I'd bet my ass that for every dollar Microsoft loses to piracy, three more dollars are generated in other sectors of the economy.
I don't mind paying for tools, but when the price of those tools far outweigh the benefits, then those tools become a liability.
This is why free software is a good thing.
Piricy == bad, but useful (Score:2)
Since he doesn't have a choice, MS can charge whatever they want. But wait, they don't! There is some competitive force keeping prices down (not very well, but its there). At some point, Windows would just cost too much, and the fines for piracy, times the risk that they'll get caught is less than the price of Windows. The smart businessman then pirates windows.
Microsoft does have competition. Its the software pirates. Obviously this doesn't make piracy good; I'd prefer that said businessman used free software, but it is certainly something to think about.
Re:Microsoft's boom (Score:2)
The definition of quality is a tricky thing. On one level - ease of use and versatility - Microsoft Windows software, aka Word and Excel, were better than what proceeded it. On another level - reliability - Windows software was far worse than what came before.
Consumers noticed the first part, ignored the second. That's why we're in the pickle we are today.
So I would say my point is still valid - if a company more interested in quality had spearheaded the GUI revolution, we'd have better and more productive computers.
D
----
Re:Justifying piracy. Yes, nice job there. (Score:2)
There's a very big difference between "piracy" of intellectual goods, and stealing physical goods... Comparing the two is apples and oranges, the route you took to "prove" me wrong. There is a fixed cost associated with producing a physical good. If I go steal a candy bar in a store and eat it, it absolutely costs the manufacturer (well, really the store owner probably, but still) whatever amount of money it took to create the candy bar in the first place. For intellectual property, like software or music, if I go and "pirate" a copy of MS office, it costs microsoft *absolutely nothing*. There's a theoretical profit loss, but there's no corresponding fixed cost that's being lost because the original investment money to create MS office is a sunk cost - it has no bearing on the profit/loss of each sale. Hence my points about software piracy not being quite the scourage on society that the software companies make it out to be.
Hijacking a truck with 5000 msoffice boxes in it, then reselling them at a computer swap sale is bad. Period. You're stealing a physical box + cd that cost microsoft $3.50 to make. This is called stealing. Putting up MSOffice on an FTP warez site is not the same thing at all, even if you charged people five bucks to access the site. Every downloaded copy is not a loss to microsoft... it's a *potential* loss, yes, but the whole point of my argument was that the potential is much smaller than the software companies would have you believe.
It's stuff like this that results in slashdotters being called crackpots. Here, let's think about the positive aspects of sneaking in and watching movies for free, or shoplifting magazines - if you like the product, it creates awareness of it and makes you likely to buy more of it! Woo hoo!
First, if you want to be insulting, don't post as an AC. Second, we're back to apples and oranges. There is an absolute loss if you steal a magazine, because you're walking away with something physical. If you sneak into a movie, presuming you're not taking up a paying customer's seat, you cost the theatre *absolutely nothing*. Is there a potential benefit to you being there? Absolutely. Does that benefit outweight the theoretical cost of you not paying? Maybe... And that's my point. Maybe. Not absolutely not.
Who cares? (Score:2)
In case you don't realize this guys, 20000 geeks' livelihoods depend directly upon Microsoft. Twenty thousand employees and their families are directly influenced by software piracy. Pirated copies of software cost Microsoft money, and do you think they'll be passing that cost along to BillG? Forget it. It comes straight out of the base employees' salaries.
Hey, I know you guys don't like patents. I know you don't like copyrighted software. I know you don't like Microsoft. I get what you're saying. What some of you don't seem to get, though, is that as long as our industry operates on those principles, ordinary peoples' lives can be harmed by flippant acts of "rebellion" such as piracy.
If you want to change software, advocacy is the best way. Look how much has already been accomplished by those means. Laughing about guerilla tactics like cracking and piracy only reinforce the negative stereotypes of this movement.
-konstant
Re:Because it's funny; that's why. (Score:2)
Tomorrow, MS posts own SW to pirate BBSs in .sg (Score:2)
Of course they will never admit this through official channels. It's the classic double standard.
Re:I disagree (Score:2)
I would love this to happen, but: Photoshop is primarily a photo editing app (hence the name). Who uses that? Photographers and press. What do they use? Macs! Until Linux can duplicate the easy of use and installation of the Mac OS, the Gimp will be used mainly for content creation (like Tux :-). Nothing wrong with that, but that isn't Photoshops main market.
-
Microsoft's boom (Score:4)
Think of all the productivity lost through crashed programs and frequent MS software reboots - that must amount to billions of dollars worldwide.
D
----
Re:Software PIracy (Score:4)
If you need to use their operating system, you certainly should buy a license for it. If you have an overwhelming need not to support them, don't use their products.
The Easy Cure (Score:3)
Software's value is zero (Demand/Supply). The sooner the law realizes that the better. The same with IP. We need some serious restructuring of these laws to allow for an infinite product. Capitalism and an infinitely renewable procucts make for a dangerous mix.
Why not turn this around and take advantage of it (Score:2)
Re:How to compromise Slashdot (Score:2)
D
----
Another Conspiracy theory...but a good point (Score:4)
Criteria for Victory (Score:2)
Justifying piracy. Yes, nice job there. (Score:5)
The rest of it is meaningless. Since an economy is a closed system, you say it may be beneficial to pirate software since your money stays in your wallet for other uses. So by that rationale, even if you stole stuff it is fine, since the $ stay in your wallet and are used productively elsewhere.
*positive* aspects of piracy. Software piracy increases awareness of the software.
It's stuff like this that results in slashdotters being called crackpots. Here, let's think about the positive aspects of sneaking in and watching movies for free, or shoplifting magazines - if you like the product, it creates awareness of it and makes you likely to buy more of it! Woo hoo!
exceeds the value the customer is forced to fork over.
Nobody is forcing you. This so called "forking over" is what is known as a purchase. In a capitalistic society, it involves exchange of money for goods and services, for a price set by the seller, at conditions also set by the seller. The reason the seller sets the price and conditions is because he OWNS the product. If you don't like it, you don't buy it. That's how it works.
No matter how crappy the product is, it doesn't justify pirating it. You could as well justify pirating anything that way - movies, books, CDs, medicines. There are countries that manufacture all of the above without the consent of the original producer, simply because they think it's too expensive. You might claim drug companies are charging exorbitant prices, but the reality is that they also spend millions on product development, just like MS does. If you don't like it, don't buy it. But please don't justify churning out fake copies and selling repackaged copies.
I'm not talking about casually handing a CD to friends. Normally, MS and companies crack down on mass piracy, which I can't find any reason to justify, simply because the pirates make money at the expense of the producer, while leaving the customer stranded with a fake product.
And yes, I use linux. And the stunt MS pulled was stupid. but that doesn't mean piracy is a good thing.
Well....... (Score:2)
So, that's bad, but software piracy is ok? Well, software piracy is just about the same thing. So what makes it so diffrent?
I think slashdot has a very close minded approach to Microsoft (though very open minded in other ways). We need to realize that Microsoft is not the `evil empire' and dosen't want to take over the world (sorry).
Just remember how upset we are at companies that burn copies of Linux distro's and sell then for $5 on the corner. We don't like them, however, it's just legal piracy, same concept, diffrent licensing agreement.
That's my $(2^4*3+1/7%3*2/100)
Re:Because it's funny; that's why. (Score:2)
I've seen these Solow statistics, and I don't buy 'em. Maybe its just that Moore's law has made what I do possible on desktop machines. Ten years ago it would have taken desktop machines days if not weeks to do what I can do in a single day. Not that I do that much, but it still wouldn't have been possible without the overlal speed increase of computers, and networking, and now, the Internet.
I don't think this report/study takes into account the tremendous amount of work that is now done by robots. Not the big shiny metal ones, the ones that live and work in our machines. Programs and such. My little army does the work of at least 200 people, every day. I recently started an in-house data entry company, on one machine.
Anyway, I think that report is bunk.
Re:Piracy isn't caused by misinformation (Score:2)
The real watershed for BI was the release of Turbo Pascal 3.?? for $75.00 a pop. The TP 3.x distribution consisted of a shrinkwrapped paperback manual (I still have mine) with a single 360K floppy stuck in the middle. This came at a time when most PC compilers were going for $1,000.00 or so, and required royalty payments if you sold binaries linked against their libs.
I suspect that part of the reason that TPs sales were so high was the "cost of documentation" factor. Many otherwise honest folks, when faced with the decision whether to buy a license for a software package or "borrow" it, assume that they will have to pay at least $40-150 for third-party books if they really want to get any use out of the software. Since one had to spend roughly the same amount of money to get any value from TP no matter how it was acquired, I think a lot of people who would otherwise have copied a friend's diskette, decided to buy the package.
For what it's worth, BI's prices started to rise because PK got into a stupid OOP VaporWar with BG, which took a huge toll on BI. Buying Ashton-Tate and getting sidetracked into other things like an office suite competition didn't help either.
Change the law (Score:2)
Agreed, our current laws only exist the limit the supply of the product and therefore create value through scarcity. This is an unnatural situation given the nature of the product. The laws should be changed accordingly. Or at least the people should be educated about an alternative...
Re: Because it's funny, that's why (Score:2)
> seem to add anything to the productivity
> statistics.
Hmmm, first nobody was using computers in their business, now everyone is. It's a matter of keeping up with everyone else. Try running a business NOW without any computers. Just bring in the typewriters and keep track of all paperwork in huge filing rooms. Type all reports for clients/investors individually.
I bet your productivity wouldn't be very high.
--
grappler
Re:Because it's funny; that's why. (Score:2)
Well, they're supposed to take rising standards into account when they determine all of that and weight productivity statistics accordingly, but as you might guess it's pretty impossible to do that right.
Re:Who cares? (Score:2)
Re:Because it's funny; that's why. (Score:2)
A Different Point of View... (Score:2)
Re:Who cares? (Score:4)
Actually, it's being passed on to the consumer in the form of overpriced software. I don't know anyone who's going to work for less than the going rate because the company is having some of its products stolen.
What some of you don't seem to get, though, is that as long as our industry operates on those principles, ordinary peoples' lives can be harmed by flippant acts of "rebellion" such as piracy.
This is very much the case with smaller software companies who can't afford to have their software stolen, but I don't see Microsoft paying their engineers $8/hr because the pirates are running them out of business.
I'm not advocating that it's okay to steal software from anywhere, but their anti-piracy campaign is more rooted in greed rather than trying to keep their business out of the red.
Missed the point (Score:2)
Can you see it? One $500 copy of office for every PC in the office when you only need it on three at once, can't publish benchmarks, have to actually buy 100 user copy of NT server (insted of pressing UP 95 times)..
If forced to go legit, people would flock to Linux in mass numbers.
Pirate THIS (Score:2)
Re:Who cares? (Score:2)
1. See big Monty Python foot.
2. Read article.
3. Laugh.
Explaining a joke never tends to go over well, but the point is a company did something irrelevant and the only person who took any notice was someone passing out fliers explaining how Clinton freely committed treason against 12 galaxies. Now that's funny!
Just because no one legitimately showed doesn't mean a victory for pirated software anyway. It could mean that pirated software isn't much of a problem (unlikely), or that vendors are already well-educated about it (very likely) and Microsoft's "public service" wasn't going to teach anyone anything anyway. If that's the case, giving out free legal copies hurts those 20000 geeks no less than piracy.
Re:Who cares? (Score:2)
It's not like most end users can sell the pirated product and convert it back into $150 of cash that's spent elsewhere.
Re:What is the world coming to? (Score:2)
Apparently, in 1982, Inslaw wrote some custom database software for the DOJ. The DOJ bought a copy for testing purposes, then informed Inslaw that they didn't want the software anymore. Then they proceeded to make at least 20 copies of it, for use in other departments. There is even evidence that they may have sold the software to other allied governments.
A lot of lawsuits were thrown around, and a lot of taxpayer dollars rightfully ended up in the pockets of various Inslaw execs. Apparently there is still litigation going on.
Microsoft's real clients (Score:4)
As for users, most of them get M$ for free on their computers. So they don't pay, more than in some very abstract sense. And it's not more than a few bucks per machine.
Re:Piracy isn't caused by misinformation (Score:2)
You can steal intangibles, like space (squatting), as well. And so forth.
There is no basic *right* to use software unless the publisher/author gives you the right to do so, perhaps indirectly (via a transferrable license).
18,000 jobs? (Score:2)
Or for a more mundane explanation: there are three types of lies...
Daniel
Re:Who cares? (Score:2)
When is the next one of these events? Free Linux! (Score:2)
Actually, this is a good thing (Score:3)
If you want to rip off a copy of Windows from Microsoft, that's your decision; but if you're going to pay for it, then you might as well get the real thing. People who sell a counterfeit copy of Office to an unsuspecting user for $200 or more are pretty slimy.
Offering to replace counterfeit stuff with the real thing is pretty generous on MS's part, and as I said, I have no problems with them chasing down the people who make the stuff. These are not innocent home users making an extra copy of Windows for their buddies, they're professional criminals, they know what they're doing, and they're ripping off consumers.
Re:I disagree (Score:2)
But how worthwhile is a good interface for an unworkable product. Thats what I truly appreciate about linux, and is the reason linux is taking absolutly so long in the development of a good GUI. Linux Developers are concerned with getting a product which is rock solid, then we can go back and make it look good. But sad to say, it seems MS works the other way around.
Re:Who cares? (Score:2)
The whole thing's rather strange.
Re:The real question now is... (Score:2)
Re:Well....... (Score:2)
They're not fooling. Why don't you see this?
Re:The false cost of Piracy (Score:2)
And even then, how many pirates are calling technical support? Most people who need technical support are going to pay for the software in order to get that technical support.
If my company hadn't spent the money on those seats, where would have it gone? To pay someone's maybe? Building a better business? I don't know, and I don't care. My point is that the money hasn't been to the economy in general, it has just been lost to Microsoft.
But has it really been lost to Microsoft in the first place? Would someone who has pirated a piece of software have been likely to actually purchase that software? Probably not. The fact that they copied the software means that they are unwilling to pay the piper for the price of admission. Sure they may have wanted the software, but that doesn't mean that they were willing to purchase it.
Look at Red Hat. Red Hat makes money selling Linux distributions despite the fact that it is legal and even encouraged to make as many free copies as possible. People wind up paying for the software because they want to be supported by Red Hat, they want manuals, and they want the convenience of getting a professionally mastered CD-ROM. People who copy the software or buy a Cheap Bytes disk weren't likely to buy the Official Red Hat distribution because they either didn't need the technical support or the manuals.
Seriously, don't pirate commercial software! (Score:2)
Think about it. You lose all rights to hold the company accountable for their faulty and bloated code. You also increase the installation base of the bad software, thereby increasing the market share, thereby eliminating the competition base and further reducing the incentive to provide better software.
Sheesh! If 29 percent of all copies of MS Windows upgrades and MS Office are pirated, no wonder it looks like Microsoft has a monopoly! Does that include all the legal copies that are installed multiple times? What would actually happen if everyone was forced to pay in full? If sales tax is %10 (a high estimate?) then that 244 million turns into almost 2.5 billion dollars not spent in California alone on software! No wonder there is such an incentive to pirate this stuff.I'm afraid that Microsoft is taking the downward spiral out the drain. These numbers just don't make any sense, and it looks like it is only going to get worse. If the average person feels worse about stealing a candy bar, the only operating systems that will survive are ones that are free (that's gratis, not liberty).
As much as I would like to believe in the liberties of open source software, the truth of the matter is that I don't usually open up the hood myself (though it provides peace of mind with that option being open). The primary benefits to the end user are thus reliability and not having to repeatedly shell out for registered license agreements.
I agree with an above comment that one way to slow the high rate of piracy is to reduce the cost to the consumer. Another more frightful way is to fire up the IDs on those PIIIs . . . . =8O
Of course, it won't be the end of the world, will it? There are several free (gratis and liberty) OSes out there. My future as a consultant isn't disappearing anytime soon. In the meantime, though, make your bosses pay for all the MS licenses as required by law, or threaten to turn them in! If nothing else, this should restore some accountability.
Because it's funny; that's why. (Score:5)
Uhh...*you* may not have a sense of humor, but the richest company in the US getting no takers on its offer of licenses for warez is pretty amusing to most people.
In case you don't realize this guys, 20000 geeks' livelihoods depend directly upon Microsoft. Twenty thousand employees and their families are directly influenced by software piracy.
Oh, gee, get out the hankie. Excuse me while I puke.
Did you ever stop to think about how many careers Microsoft *destroyed* with its illegal tactics?
I don't use proprietary software. I don't think people should pirate. But I really don't care what happens to Microsoft, its employees, or the mindless lemmings who have built it into the monstrosity it is.
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page [slappy.org]
Re:Well....... (Score:2)
I don't think the rank and file worker at Redmond is doing anything but what he has to to feed his family.
BUT - I've been in the computer biz since the days of the IBM 1130 and the Link 8, and from my experiences I think that MS is very bad for innovation. The diversity of systems people have to work with has been choked by Microsoft's monopoly. Sure, standards are good, but standards can also be a real impediment.
When Microsoft says 'we want the freedom to innovate' what they really mean is that we want the freedom to copy and crush anyone who has an innovation.
A LOT of people have day jobs where their only computing choice is some sort of Wintel box with MS Office/MS Exchange on it. I've been there and it really sucks to have this sort of thing crammed down your throat.
Re:Windows users - PLEASE PIRATE MORE - here's why (Score:2)
Therefore, rather than simple pirating, we must use other methods to bring the evil empire to it's knees. Support emulation projects along the line of WINE, and ports of third party commercial software, so that windows loses it it's lock on extremely easy to use, mildy versatile software, that runs on all those Intel chips that someone bought for some reason. As this particular AC pointed out, M$ cannot survive without it's profit. Let's take that profit away from them, but let's do in the way that's not only legal, but has the additional effect of grinding the notion that not only do we not need the shoddy M$ OS, we don't want it either. Pirating sends the message that we do want it, but not on M$'s terms.
Simply put, I think we should stop spitting in Billy boy's eye, in order to punch that same eye.
I emailed these comments to the author... (Score:5)
First, the reality is, 90%, if not more, of the people who are "pirating" software wouldn't be using the software in the first place. The gentleman who was listed in your article as giving his copy of chessmaster 3000 out to his friends had every right to do that if each person was using the software consecutively. And how many of those friends would have actually paid $49.95 for their own copy of chessmaster if they didn't have access to it for free? Very, very few. Yet, all of those people are counted as posessing pirated software for the statistics.
Second, even if there is a large theoretical cost from software piracy, why is it an issue? Our economy is a closed system. If all of a sudden all of the supposed pirates went out and bought copies of the software, the money they used to pay for the software had to come from somewhere. The statistics the public sees imply it magically appears, to then be used for the benefit of all concerned. Not true... it comes from private individual's pockets, one way or another. Would there be more benefit if it remained in those pockets? Maybe. Maybe not. It could be positive or negative, but it certainly isn't as clear as we're supposed to believe.
Third, even if all of those pirates went out and bought software, and it wouldn't be more useful in their hands, why would it be beneficial to give it to the software companies? They have zero obligation or interest to use it for anything resembling the public good, and the directors of those companies would and should be fired if they used it for anything but the benefit of their company. Microsoft, the biggest crier of wolf, has over (if I remember correctly) 10 BILLION dollars sitting in banks earning interest. How does this provide jobs? Does an extra 500 million mean an extra 10 thousand jobs? Or does it mean a big bonus for the directors and a 2 cents per share dividend? How, then, is software piracy a *problem* for the public?
Finally, none of the statistics or articles I read deal at all with the *positive* aspects of piracy. Software piracy increases awareness of the software. Period. Going back to the chessmaster 3000 example above, is it likely that the ten other individuals who "pirated" chessmaster 3000 will go out and buy a full version? Not really. However, is it *more* likely than if they had never used it? Depends on the quality of the software, doesn't it? If someone "pirates" a piece of software, and then finds it to be the best, most highly-crafted, most stable, etc. etc., piece of software they've ever used, odds are they'll go out and buy a copy of the software, for the documentation, or for the next upgrade, or even out of a sense of thanks for the great value they got. Who will software piracy absolutely not benefit? Companys who make critical (people have to have it), but crappy (people have a low, if not negative perception of it's value) software. Ring a bell? Microsoft's operating system, perhaps? And surprise, microsoft is one of the biggest fighters of software piracy.
Software piracy is not an issue if the software's percieved value matches or exceeds the value the customer is forced to fork over. The negative aspects of software piracy are overinflated, and the fight is entirely one-sided. It really makes you wonder what the "cost" of all that copy-protecting and lawsuits is...
Re:What bothers me... (Score:2)
Hmmm. (Score:3)
She said a similar event in San Diego drew about 40 computer sellers who wanted to see if their software was legit, and ``the vast majority was counterfeit.'
Honesty compels me to admit skepticism. But I'll set it aside for long enough to ask the obvious questions:
Where are commputer sellers getting MS software, under circumstances that they wouldn't be sure it was legit? Surely not from MS. From middleman distributors? If so, and if "the vast majority" of what they're selling is counterfeit, and if they're selling it openly enough that 40 computer sellers in one town can get hooked up for a steady supply... then why isn't the FBI all over the racket?
I'm dubious about the claims, but perhaps I merely don't have all the facts to judge them by. (For example, is the FBI making frequent busts that don't make the news?)
Any clarification would be appreciated.
--
It's October 6th. Where's W2K? Over the horizon again, eh?
I disagree (Score:2)
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page [slappy.org]
Re:Through the Looking Glass (Score:2)
Educate yourself and then step back into the ring when you have something valid to say
What you say is true, but it's not like what he says is not true. No need to be mean about it. Think: How many normal computer purchasers actually notice the price of Windows? With Dell, Gateway, Compaq, etc., I seriously doubt they do. So that leaves someone shopping at a place like yours, where it is specifically itemized on the bill. His point was not that the cost of Windows is not actually substantial or is not passed onto consumers, but that in almost every case they don't notice, at least not to the point where they would buy a pirated copy, even if they had the technical knowledge to install it.
Re:Because it's funny; that's why. (Score:3)
The other thing I've learned is that the main way that computers affect the economy at large is because businesses spend so much on them, and because of Moore's law. The price of computers deflates (as opposed to inflation, though I have some problems with how they measure this deflation). Companies are spending more and more on computers and they keep dropping in price faster. This results in a lower natural rate of inflation (sort of), which is one of the reasons we're seeing low inflation and low unemployment at the same time, something which is very rare. But MS hasn't contributed anything to lower prices for computers. In fact, they go against it. Computers have gone from ~$2000 to ~$1000 recently, and the price of Windows stays the same, making it an ever-increasing part of the total cost.
Disclaimer: IANAE (Economist)
Re:What is the world coming to? (Score:2)
It really says it all when they have to order government employees not to break the law. I shudder to think of all the things there is no executive order covering if this is required.