Article about some recent activity againt DL sites and “Intellectual Property” Theft.
Peh. A drop in the proverbial bucket and a waste of time and tax payers money. Can pirating really be stopped? Slowed, maybe for a time but stopped? doubtful.
While I admit to downloading all things, games, apps and movies. I don’t burn to dvd any material. I watch the movie…if I like it I will go and see it in the theater. I play the game…if I play it for more than a month I will buy it. If I like the application and find it useful I will buy it. Eventually all things downloaded are deleted…sure I’m still illegal. I just like a try before I buy unfettered by demo constraints. Hell give me a full version of anything for a month if it’s good and useful I’ll fork over the cash.
Now lets see these guys go after microsquishy and all the other huge corporations that have screwed over the little guys and the public.
I agree with Blackrobe here… I am very much the same. I have programs… like professional architecture programs… worth over a thousand US$… use it for a week, then that’s it. If you can afford to pay that much for a week just because of a “I wonder” thing… go ahead~
I regularly play CS… I own it legally. My fave game on ps2 is GT4, which I play regularly… I bought it for 2000NT the day it came out at the shops. etc. etc.
I read some news article about the release of Microsoft Vista.
It said 5% of the purchase price covers the entire cost of development and production. Something like that.
So, one way to look at this is: If 19 out of 20 copies out there are illegal, MS still break even.
Another way I prefer to look at it this. MS have had ample warning that their prices are too high. A few hundred bucks for an OS is too high. A few hundred bucks for a home user to own MS Office is too high.
If they made their pricing more realistic, more people wouldn’t even bother with Pirated versions, and the market would ultimately be flooded with cheap legal versions.
I have original versions of XP on 3 computers at home, and Original MS Office too. Considering what I use it for and how often, it’s stupid money to pay.
I doubt I will ever get a newer version of MS Office, and already I am looking at the free alternatives out there such as google documents which is getting very close to being adequate for what I’d ever need.
It seems to me that by the time MS drop their prices, they will have already lost their market share…but then again, all if that 5% revenue thing is true, they are still way ahead.
How long before the Movie companies realise there is good money to be made selling top notch downloads (or streams)of new releases online, cheaply using ultra fast servers etc?
As far as I’m concerned, Microsoft owes ME money. I’ve been forced to buy Windows a number of time because it came with a computer I bought. But I don’t use it at all. I’m 100% Linux now.
cheers,
DB
Let me play devil’s advocate:
[quote=“Truant”]I read some news article about the release of Microsoft Vista.
It said 5% of the purchase price covers the entire cost of development and production. Something like that.
So, one way to look at this is: If 19 out of 20 copies out there are illegal, MS still break even.[/quote]
Well, companies want to make profit - it’s up to them to set the prices and the consumer can decide, based on his own free will, to buy the product or not buy the product. It cannot be a justification for pirated copies.
If I think Jaguar cars are too expensive, can I go and steal one? Surely if they sell 10 of those one stolen car still allows them to make a good profit. 
What do you think is a fair price for it?
I doubt it. Maybe more legal version will be sold but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are still many users that claim the price is too high, they don’t use it that often, the product is not perfect etc. etc.
What about people that actually use the software often and many (most) of the features - wouldn’t it follow that for them it’s worth it and a fair price to pay?
[quote]I doubt I will ever get a newer version of MS Office, and already I am looking at the free alternatives out there such as google documents which is getting very close to being adequate for what I’d ever need.
It seems to me that by the time MS drop their prices, they will have already lost their market share…but then again, all if that 5% revenue thing is true, they are still way ahead.[/quote]
I can agree with that - if you don’t like their products, for whatever reason, there are alternatives out there and many are free.
And that is the argument that should be rubbed into anyones face that has “good” reasons to use a pirated copy.
Coming one day, but the pessimist in me tells me that even then there are still people that find reasons to justify illegal downloads.
[quote=“Rascal”]Let me play devil’s advocate:
[quote=“Truant”]I read some news article about the release of Microsoft Vista.
It said 5% of the purchase price covers the entire cost of development and production. Something like that.
So, one way to look at this is: If 19 out of 20 copies out there are illegal, MS still break even.[/quote]
Well, companies want to make profit - it’s up to them to set the prices and the consumer can decide, based on his own free will, to buy the product or not buy the product. It cannot be a justification for pirated copies.
If I think Jaguar cars are too expensive, can I go and steal one? Surely if they sell 10 of those one stolen car still allows them to make a good profit.
What do you think is a fair price for it?
I doubt it. Maybe more legal version will be sold but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are still many users that claim the price is too high, they don’t use it that often, the product is not perfect etc. etc.
What about people that actually use the software often and many (most) of the features - wouldn’t it follow that for them it’s worth it and a fair price to pay?
[quote]I doubt I will ever get a newer version of MS Office, and already I am looking at the free alternatives out there such as google documents which is getting very close to being adequate for what I’d ever need.
It seems to me that by the time MS drop their prices, they will have already lost their market share…but then again, all if that 5% revenue thing is true, they are still way ahead.[/quote]
I can agree with that - if you don’t like their products, for whatever reason, there are alternatives out there and many are free.
And that is the argument that should be rubbed into anyones face that has “good” reasons to use a pirated copy.
Coming one day, but the pessimist in me tells me that even then there are still people that find reasons to justify illegal downloads.[/quote]
I certainly am not trying to justify piracy due to the profit margin. As I mentioned I have original OSs for each of my machines, Original MS office and other original stuff such as Norton Systemworks, many original games etc etc.
Take Norton and most games for example, I believe their prices are fair more realistic.
I belive the OS should be under $100US, and MS office likewise. Hell, there are more copies of geniune copies of XP out there than there are of any given game, so the issue isn’t volume - it’s a monopoly strategy.
With Vista, if it was around $100, it would be a no brainer for me and I’d go out and get a copy. MS would still be making $85 out of me which is fine.
At $300+ I really have to think long and hard about it - especially when there seems to be so many teething problems right now…bearing in mind that I am paying 20x the break even point, and still not getting a reliable product.
How many other industries out there make a 95% margin these days?
There is no way a typical home owner in a developing country can afford to spend $300US on an OS or application suite. We are talking a few months pay for some people. I can completely understand why using pirated versions is so prolific in developing countries, and considering that is the larger proportion of the world, this is where I feel MS has dropped the ball.
I understand what you are saying but the question is why do people still use pirated copies if there are free alternatives? Price can’t be an issue then.
well, for the OS specifically, just about every off the shelf machine comes with either XP/Vista or OS X.
You pay for it whether you want it or not.
If you want Linux, you’d generally have to build your own PC, while easy enough to do for some of us, for a large portion of people it is percieved as complicated. In some parts of the world, it’s just more hassle/more expensive to build your own as opposed to going down to your local dept store and getting a turn key system with 1-2 year warranty out of the box.
If the majority of users are exposed to as OS in this fashion, it is going to be very difficult to change. After all for many people computers are complicated enough as it is without needing to learn another system. (e.g. my Dad still calls me up after over 5 years using XP to get me to talk him thru copy and pasting files around his computer).
I see Dell is about to start shipping some PCs with Linux installed. It’s a good move and I hope it brings down the cost of other OS’s. It will be interesting to see if the systems are appropriately cheaper than the Vista version of the same machine.
[quote=“Truant”]well, for the OS specifically, just about every off the shelf machine comes with either XP/Vista or OS X.
You pay for it whether you want it or not.[/quote]
If you did purchase such a PC (with a legal OS) then a) you are (have been) willing to pay for it and b) there is no need to get an illegal copy anymore.
That specifially applies to the turn-key systems you mentioned, and obviously getting a pre-installed Windows OS is then a benefit to those that are not too computer-literate. And that benefit may be worth paying for.
If you however really don’t want MS as operating system then ask the shop not to sell you one, or find another shop if necessary - it’s possible, though it does perhaps require some effort. But it seems to me that many people think downloading an illegal copy is less effort and opt for that “solution” while giving one or more of the typical justifications (see above).
Sure it’s difficult to change, but I don’t see the need for him to change. He got a legal copy (I presume) that was paid for and which he uses, so why would he now suddenly have a problem with the fact that he paid the full price for it? - If the same OS (or it’s sucessor) became cheaper or free even it would not make it any easier to use.
Agree, interesting move.
A couple of quotes from the Digital Imprimatur by John Walker, written a few years back. fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimatur/
the key here is that in a trusted computing system, all software will carry certificates of validation which when connected to the internet provide a means for the publisher to revoke it and disable the software if it proves to be an illegal copy. IE7 already does this (anyone tried to load IE7 onto a bootlegged version of windows?)
A lot of the holes are being plugged and no doubt a great deal of effort went into Vista to put in place the trusted computing system which we will have to wait and see how other software companies are able to incorporate these ideas into their own software.
I’d guess that a good proportion of global computer uses have no idea what and OS is, and that you can actually change one.
I’d certainly be interested to know if it is possible for Joe Bloggs public to walk into a “Best Buy” or “Wal mart” or similar and point to a PC and say he want’s THAT one, but without an OS. I’m pretty certain that the OS is factory installed and it would be commercially impractical to break open the box to uninstall the OS and remove the CDs, manuals etc…let alone adjust the price accordingly.
My view is that a HUGE amount of people go to these sorts of places to buy their PC and ALL of the PCs available come with a factory installed OS. I believe it would be far too much hassle to be able to buy a PC without OS at a consumer type store. This is a problem if for example you already have XP on a machine you are replacing, and you wanted to get a new machine without the OS.
What they should do is sell the PC without the OS licence fee included, and when you turn it on you have to have your credit card ready to activate the OS if you want to use it. If you don’t want to use the OS, you can install something else.
[quote=“Dog’s_Breakfast”]As far as I’m concerned, Microsoft owes ME money. I’ve been forced to buy Windows a number of time because it came with a computer I bought. But I don’t use it at all. I’m 100% Linux now.
cheers,
DB[/quote]
I guess it is too late now but you should have read the eula and rejected it.
[quote=“robi666”][quote=“Dog’s_Breakfast”]As far as I’m concerned, Microsoft owes ME money. I’ve been forced to buy Windows a number of time because it came with a computer I bought. But I don’t use it at all. I’m 100% Linux now.
cheers,
DB[/quote]
I guess it is too late now but you should have read the eula and rejected it.[/quote]
How do you get your money back once you’ve rejected the EULA?
[quote=“Truant”]I’d guess that a good proportion of global computer uses have no idea what and OS is, and that you can actually change one.
I’d certainly be interested to know if it is possible for Joe Bloggs public to walk into a “Best Buy” or “Wal mart” or similar and point to a PC and say he want’s THAT one, but without an OS. I’m pretty certain that the OS is factory installed and it would be commercially impractical to break open the box to uninstall the OS and remove the CDs, manuals etc…let alone adjust the price accordingly.
My view is that a HUGE amount of people go to these sorts of places to buy their PC and ALL of the PCs available come with a factory installed OS. I believe it would be far too much hassle to be able to buy a PC without OS at a consumer type store. This is a problem if for example you already have XP on a machine you are replacing, and you wanted to get a new machine without the OS.
What they should do is sell the PC without the OS licence fee included, and when you turn it on you have to have your credit card ready to activate the OS if you want to use it. If you don’t want to use the OS, you can install something else.[/quote]
I mostly agree but people that are able to download and install an illegal copy don’t fall into the above category.
I have seen a couple of new laptops now that don’t even come with a CD. Just an option to reinstall from a “hidden” partition. Serial number on the back and documentation but no CD. Which means if you don’t like the way Acer or Asus or Dell partitioned your system or the useless and often buggy software they install…to bad. I guess the cost of Cd’s cut into that 85% profit margin.
I would love to dump windows but I am stuck with the monopoly. I also run Ubuntu in a dual boot but Ubuntu doesn’t support alot of my imge editing software, nor my video editing nor my games…bla bla bla. I would and will drop windows the day the other companies start to support other O/S’s. The shift is starting to happen and I hope that it will one day dawn upon microsquishy that their golden days have truly ended and they will become a competitive company creating stable systems that just work. Until then I’ll stick with XP and Ubuntu and never buy another micro O/S.
It’s absurd to get all bent out of shape about college students stealing music, or forumosans stealing TV shows, or developing nations selling pirated business software, when such crimes are totally petty and insignificant as compared to the massive problem of patent trolls – companies and individuals that, for the most part, invent nothing, manufacture nothing, contribute nothing to society, and do nothing but extort productive companies out of billions of dollars of hard-earned profits under the threat of outrageously expensive, lengthy and burdensome lawsuits.
Take, for example:
Ronald A Katz, who extorted over a billion dollars in licensing fees in exchange for his patents, or
Jerome Lemelson, who extorted over a billion dollars in licensing fees in exhange for his, or
NTP, who extorted $650 million out of the makers of Blackberry devices, or
The University of California, that extorted $500 million out of Microsoft for one patent, or
The countless other trolls who have hit the jackpot time and again – not because they are right or good, but because the system as setup allows them to do so – forcing hard-working, productive companies, operating on razor-thin profit margins to spend millions of dollars defending and settling baseless claims.
Those are the real IP thieves. That’s who governments should take actions against. :raspberry:
[quote=“Truant”]
How do you get your money back once you’ve rejected the EULA?[/quote]
Did you read it? It basically says if you do not agree with all regulations you should visit your Microsoft dealer return the copy of the software in order to get your money back.
[quote=“robi666”][quote=“Truant”]
How do you get your money back once you’ve rejected the EULA?[/quote]
Did you read it? It basically says if you do not agree with all regulations you should visit your Microsoft dealer return the copy of the software in order to get your money back.[/quote]
Yes I do recall seeing that, just wondering if anyone has actually got the cash out of MS by doing this?
[quote=“Truant”]
Yes I do recall seeing that, just wondering if anyone has actually got the cash out of MS by doing this?[/quote]
I am not sure if Microsoft or the retail shop will actually have to pay you back. But yes, some people got their money back.