BSA Piracy Study Deeply Flawed 437
zbik writes "Corante reports that The Economist has blown the lid off the BSA's recent report on software piracy (covered by Slashdot), referring to their methods as 'BS'.
'They dubiously presume that each piece of software pirated equals a direct loss of revenue to software firms.' The BSA has complained that the article is offensive but does not dispute their analysis. Score one for common sense."
Of course their methods are BS (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Of course their methods are BS (Score:3, Informative)
And so is their letter to the Economist (Score:4, Insightful)
SIR - Your article on software piracy was extreme, misleading and irresponsible ("BSA or just BS?", May 21st). The headline was particularly offensive. The implication that an industry would purposely inflate the rate of piracy and its impact to suit its political aims is ridiculous. The problem is real and needs no exaggeration.
What an amusing little letter from an organization such as BSA.
extreme, misleading and irresponsible
Fine, enlighten us then- what is so "BS" about it, any proof/evidence?
The headline was particularly offensive.
W00t, let's go after the title, not the actual story itself! Attack the title to create an impression! Yes that's the way to win an arguement.
The implication that an industry would purposely inflate the rate of piracy and its impact to suit its political aims is ridiculous.
I don't see why not. Wow, I am really speechless. Fine, if you want to accuse the E of slendering, provide evidence that would uphold in a court battle.
The problem is real and needs no exaggeration.
So is your logic apparently.
Jesus, I can't believe the government is delegating the enforcement power to these idiots. This stuff looks as if it had been pass thru the random complain letter generator. [pakin.org]
They should just hire me- even I can do better than that.
Re:And so is their letter to the Economist (Score:4, Informative)
Re:And so is their letter to the Economist (Score:4, Funny)
The perect Mix: (Score:4, Insightful)
take 2 easily "convinced" people, one in either party*
take 5 organizations with lots of money and lawyers...
mix and get an endless slew of consumder unfriendly laws.
* Senetors Hatch and Lehey...
Re:Of course their methods are BS (Score:5, Funny)
And the rebuttal [economist.com] they sent was signed by a Beth Scott. It's BS all the way...
OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:5, Funny)
Your Rights Online: Osama Bin Laden Not a Nice Man
Your Rights Online: Some Politicians May Be Influenced By Money
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:5, Funny)
If you've managed to find some that aren't yet, quick - post their names here. There's bound to be a few lobbyists willing to try their luck in virgin territory.
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Insightful)
None of them are as miserable and corrupt individually as all of them are together.
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Insightful)
What, you expected that once the cameras were off that they'd suddenly start being honest?!?
Bullshitting people is their business, and it looks like they made a sale.
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Insightful)
You insulted him twice and went on to regurgitate the stereotypical generalisation that tars all politicians with the same brush. How did you determine that all politicians are corrupt then? Michael Moore books or blogs?
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Interesting)
I share your disappointment with most of our elected officials, but there are exceptions [senate.gov]. Russ Feingold was the only senator to vote against [archipelago.org] the PATRIOT Act in 2001. He's truly an admirable leader.
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Informative)
So close...
He didn't support the war, but he supported the troops after they were sent there.
"Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to uparmor our vehicles?"
# Voted YES on $86.5 billion for military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Oct 2003)
# Voted NO on authorizing use of military force against Iraq. (Oct 2002)
# Voted YES on allowing all necessary forces and other means in Kosovo.
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:5, Funny)
On second thought, forget about the political party and the blackjack!
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Interesting)
I just got a letter from him today about his views on the DMCRA (Digital Millennium Consumers' Rights Act), and it included the choice paragraph
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Funny)
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:5, Funny)
BSA COSTING LINUS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS! (Score:5, Funny)
Their bogus numbers have caused people to be frightened away from Linux, which Linus *could* potentially be selling for $1000. The fact that he is making *no money* from each copy of Linux used is due to the fact that the BSA has damaged the perception of Linux so much. As a product technically superior to Windows, it should have taken over by now. That's $1000 per person. There are ~300 million people in the United States, counting every man, woman, and child. (We all know that GNOME is simple enough for a baby to use, so counting babies is perfectly legitimate.) Since Linux is upgraded so frequently, people would buy a new copy about annually.
As you can see, since the BSA is COSTING LINUS TORVALDS OVER $300 BILLION DOLLARS IN THE UNITED STATES THIS YEAR ALONE, we desperately need laws to protect the starving open source software authors that are being victimized by the criminal activity of the BSA. It is crucial that we receive laws to protect these authors -- all companies choosing a non-open-source software product over an open-source software product should be required to annually submit a report with cost estimates and associated usability/compatibility testing as to why they choose not to use open source software.
No, it's just not the same. We need whatever PR people the BSA has.
Boy Scouts of America? (Score:2, Funny)
But I thought "trustworthy" was one of the parts of the scout law! Was I mistaken? Is there some sort of mix-up here?
I'm so disillusioned just now...
Boy Scouts of Hong Kong... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Boy Scouts of Hong Kong... (Score:3, Funny)
I hope your fallout shelter is really deep.
OTOH, maybe we have (briefly) a wonderful new energy source...
Claims (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Claims (Score:2)
Who says they don't? Market share figures are often over-inflated so as to make a company seem more important. If I were you, I wouldn't underestimate the ability of most companies to make the best out of the worst.
Worse yet, look at some "markets" (Score:5, Insightful)
Hello? An average Chinese family's yearly income, last I've checked, is around the $1500 mark. That is, before, food, clothes, rent, etc.
Take your current yearly salary, multiply it by 4, and ask yourself if you would _ever_ pay that much for a piece of software you don't even really need. Would you?
Some of that software waved around by the BSA as big losses even I wouldn't buy on a western european salary, and I could afford it easily. E.g., would I pay some thousands of dollars on 3DS Max just to mod a $40 game like "X2 - The Threat"? Because that's the kind of use those pirate kids see out of that software. Heh. Would you? Right. That's what I thought too.
And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Informative)
The Economist is great. However, they have say many things (That I agree with) that will *never* come to pass.
For example, the Economist staff openly advocates the legalization of Cocaine in the U.S.
Why?
Because this would be a more *effective* policy for reducing drug use in the U.S., let alone reducing the harms of the Cocaine economy.
Can you imagine the U.S. *ever* legalizing Cocaine?
I think not. Look for lawmakers to continue parroting the BSA (BS) line.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's my belief that they've done so because the leadership knows full well that such laws would never apply to them or their families. If they want to have sex with hookers, use cocaine or have abortions, they have the means to safely do so in a way that won't bring them into contact with the authorities. It's only the poor who have to abide by these laws. Hell, a cokehead alcoholic can get pretty far these days with the right connections.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Insightful)
Find out what happened to China with opium, and then consider whether it's a good idea. I myself am worried about a scenario wherein drugs become as widely abused as television. In our extreme consumer society, is that not a possibility?
There are many things that cause people to fail: laziness, mental illness, addiction...
We can do something about the addiction. The laws are not perfect, and will never make drugs disappear. But they make most people avoid them most of the time. At least enough to kee
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/cocaine.asp [snopes.com]
You know, this is waaaay off topic, and it's probably immoral of me to even be laughing at you instead of donating to a charitable organization that might be able to help your condition, but on the off chance that you didn't bother to read any of the article you linked to, here's the sumamry:
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now that I am gainfully employed, I am very vigilant about making sure that my employers always keep me equipped with the very latest versions of them all, even if I don't use them.
I'm not saying that what I did as a teen was right, but I know for a fact that a few pirated copies in 1996-1999 have resulted in thousands of dollars in purchases over the past 6 years or so.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:2, Interesting)
It's funny how this is never included in any industry estimates of "losses" due to piracy. About 90% of my video game library is a direct result of the software piracy I and my friends engaged in. I also noticed this law at work: when I don't pirate games, I don't buy any.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Interesting)
In other words, pirating those early games that I never would have purchased has resulted in actual income for the industry. They should have encouraged it. Some did, by providing good quality demos and shareware.
I purchased UT2004 solely based on my experience with th
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:2)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Informative)
Proof. [oracle.com]
Holy crap. Go Oracle.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Informative)
Not to break your enthusiasm, but when you need an industry strength database engine Sybase [sybase.com] can do better then that.
Their flagship product is available completely free of charge [sybase.com] for the Linux platform.
Free as in beer that is and some restrictions apply:
Else then that you're completely free to use it in a productive environment and for a lot of such environments the restr
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Insightful)
Many companies would do well to learn from their example.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:4, Interesting)
The threshold is found at the high-point of the graph of piracy vs. social benefit.
When measures to prevent piracy are more damaging to us then the allowance of piracy then we stop and accept a level of piracy. I'm thinking of obvious things like DRM, but also less obvious things such as a company getting too powerful and restricting choice.
Where the line is drawn is open to fine dispute, but that is the principle. Someone could discover a universal cure for cancer tomorrow and decide not to sell it at all, or only to their friends. Some people here on
You could also look at setting this threshold according to need. If you regard MS Office as a luxury item, then there is no threshold. But if you regard understanding of how to use it as a need in the modern world, then maybe you would say that those who can't afford it do have a right to pirate it. Losing out on an education because you're poor is not a good statement about society.
Just illustrating ideas about where you would define the threshold.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Insightful)
An enthusiastic amateur photographer, for instance, may benefit enormously from a capable package such as Photoshop even if he's not making any money from it. He can do batch processing, decent conversion between formats, build profiles for his monitor and printer so that his prints come out
Moreover (Score:2)
--LWM
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:4, Insightful)
That is more or less why non-commercial copyright infringement was not a crime up until the 70's. More important in this particular study, however, is that they are just guessing how many pieces of software are on an average computer, multiplying by the number of known computers in operation, subtracting purchases known to the BSA, and claiming that is the amount of pirated software. Then they multiply by the average cost of software.
So where does the copy of FreeBSD I downloaded and installed on a computer without an OS fit in? It's easy, I didn't buy the OS or any of the software so this is counted as one whole computer worth of pirated software. Where does the Windows machine I have sitting here only to run Firefox, IE, and Cygwin fit in? It is probably considered by their study to be half a dozen pirated programs. All freeware, small shareware, or just computers that don't run as much software as the BSA thinks the do (should?) are counted as piracy and lost revenue.
This is nothing more than a blatant attempt to lie to the public and to many governments in order to provide justification for their unjustifiable actions. Sad and sickening.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Insightful)
it's all about elasiticity. anyone who has taken a 100-level course in economics (as have apparently the editors of "the economist". big surprise there) should know. a quick rundown is here:
http://www.quickmba.com/econ/micro/elas/ped.shtml [quickmba.com]
most software is highly elastic to most people. playing with this or that nifty piece of software may be fun for an hour or afternoon but unless it's a killer app, they would, given the choice, opt to not use the program rather than pay.
it's like the classic example of the pay-for park. a hundred people go to the park on a sunday afternoon, so a government beurocrate determines that if the city charges a $10 admission, the profit will be $1000 every sunday. the toll gates go up but, to the surprise of the beurocrat, nobody shows up to buy a ticket.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:2)
That doesn't mean the study isn't stupid and wrong, but I'm just saying your case doesn't count.
Many companies offer some sort of time-locked "try before you buy" for precisely this reason: let the user figure out if they want it. Unlike with, say, a car
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:2)
It may not be that you ever would have purchased PS, but as long as you have it and use it you're not purchasing a cheaper alternative either.
And besides, if you have no use for it, then why do you have it?
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:2)
It's THAT easy to justify copying?? (Score:2)
If everybody thought the way you do, there wouldn't be a software industry.
Why does The Economist hate America? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Why does The Economist hate America? (Score:4, Funny)
No no! The pirates are really a front for terrorists. For every pirated copy of Office/Windows/etc, Osama Bin Laden gets $10.
Re:Why does The Economist hate America? (Score:2)
--grendel drago
Re:Why does The Economist hate America? (Score:3, Funny)
Shit! Add that to all the money Osama is getting from all the weed I buy [mpp.org] and I can understand why the gov cant find him in Iraq.
He's proably got enough cash to buy his own pocket Universe.
Re:Why does The Economist hate America? (Score:4, Funny)
Going to prison for downloading Britney Spears? You make it sound as if that's a bad thing...
indeed bs (Score:2, Funny)
BSA Acronym (Score:2, Funny)
BSA = 'BS' Analysis ?
BSA PSed off (Score:5, Informative)
Boy these people's heads are stuck so far up their asses that they can see through their mouths... you just can't make this stuff up.
Re:BSA PSed off (Score:5, Funny)
The 'BS' in the headline was simply referring to your initials...
No harm done.
The use of the word 'Madam' in our letter, on the other hand, is deliberate.
Sincerely,
The Economist
Re:BSA PSed off (Score:5, Funny)
> >
> > Beth Scott
> > Business Software Alliance
> > London
>
> Dear Madam:
>
> The 'BS' in the headline was simply referring to your initials...
> No harm done.
> The use of the word 'Madam' in our letter, on the other hand, is deliberate.
>
>Sincerely,
> The Economist
Dear Economist:
Your reply to my earlier letter was extreme, misleading and irresponsible ("Madam", June 14th). The deliberate choice of the word "Madam" was particularly offensive. The implication that an industry would purposely inflate the rate of piracy and its impact to suit its political aims is ridiculous. Whether you refer to unpaid sex acts as "open source", "trying it before you buy", or "blocking the auto-updating daemon with a heavy-ass firewall" the threats posed by individuals slutting around, living together, and the signing of marriage contracts are real and need no exaggeration!
Beth S., Madam
Bunnyranch Sex-worker's Alliance
Nevada
Re:BSA PSed off (Score:3, Funny)
You're right, to propose that they inflate the rate of piracy and its impact to suit political aims is rediculous. We do it to increase profits!
Wow, that is shocking.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Not that I in any way condone piracy
Re:Wow, that is shocking.. (Score:2)
Referer blocked (Score:4, Informative)
Much as we might laugh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Much as we might laugh (Score:2)
Old news. We knew that for ages. (Score:2)
My view (Score:4, Insightful)
2. Most companies who use commercial software do pay the licensing fees, so no loss of income. However, companies that decide to switch to cheaper, possibly opensource solutions are in fact loss of income for the software vendors. Nonetheless, switches like this are completely legal. So again, no loss of income due to illegal actions.
The BSA is full of it.
Those who use pirated software wouldn't have bought it anyways and even if forced (as in bigbrother) to not use a certain piece of software without paying, they would have found alternative applications and still not pay up.
Those who do pay are getting fed up with the EULAs, crappy software and prices then turn to cheaper alternatives.
Piracy is good for business (Score:5, Insightful)
Brazil's Response (Score:5, Informative)
You've just gotta love Brazil's response [technologyreview.com]:
"We're against software piracy. We believe Microsoft's rights should be respected. And the simplest way to respect their rights is for Brazilians everywhere to switch to free software."
Re:Brazil's Response (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Brazil's Response (Score:3, Interesting)
So as a Brit, visiting Brazil is pretty easy (no visa required in fact)
What do you mean Flawed ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Linux and Openoffice are a loss according to BSA (Score:4, Insightful)
They estimate the amount of software on each PC and then subtract sales revenues. What is left is pirated software? Talk about a loophole in their logic! Based on their logic, any piece of freeware that is installed on a computer is revenue that BSA considers lost.
Though if you consider who is partners with the BSA, it's not surprising they'd consider Linux and Openoffice to be "warez"!
Time for a separate "copyright" section (Score:2, Interesting)
It's kind of weird that all copyright/piracy/P2P articles show up in the "patents" section,
How odd... (Score:5, Interesting)
So, if there's 3,000,000 people with an operating system, but our members have only sold 2,000,000, that's 1,000,000 pirated copies of our member's operating systems! Call the police/FBI/attack-squads!!!
Surely that can't be how they work it out. Anyone ever had one of these IDC surveys? How specific are they, would they allow them to filter out software by publisher/developer so that for instance GIMP and Photoshop don't both show up as "Graphics Tools"? If not, that means every copy of GIMP would be a loss to Adobe!
(Note - it wouldn't surprise me if that is exactly how it works, and that it was entirely deliberate, but that's a different matter...)
Re:How odd... (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope, that's exactly how they work it out. Download and read their "study" yourself (the methodology section is toward the back). Their "piracy" estimates are based on nothing more than wild guesses as to how many copies "should" have sold, given the number of computers out there.
Then, just for fun, they turn around and claim to their shareholders that sales exceeded expectations. Well, which is it, Chucko? Either you sold less than you anticipated (inflating the "piracy" figures), or you sold more (inflating your stock price). Either way, your market projections are way off.
Schwab
Re:How odd... (Score:3, Informative)
Once in a while... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not a full or heavy press at the moment, but I believe there will be a day...
Movie about this one too? (Score:2)
Deep under cover, the Economist works hard to blow the lid off the scandalous BSA.
But the BSA has a few tricks of their own, and their own army. People around the Economist mysteriously start dying and/or disppearing.
The Economist is determined... to blow the lid off this story.
And then the final scene - it's revealed to the Economist that he's really a warrior from god, and that the BSA has been heavy into the occult and needed the lies of humanity to feed the gate to revive Satan (playe
Firsthand Experience (Score:3, Interesting)
Article (Score:4, Informative)
May 19th 2005
From The Economist print edition
Software theft is bad; so is misstating the evidence
IT SOUNDS too bad to be true; but, then, it might not be true. Up to 35% of all PC software installed in 2004 was pirated, resulting in a staggering $33 billion loss to the industry, according to an annual study released this week by the Business Software Alliance (BSA), a trade association and lobby group.
Such jaw-dropping figures are regularly cited in government documents and used to justify new laws and tough penalties for pirates--this month in Britain, for example, two people convicted of piracy got lengthy prison sentences, even though they had not sought to earn money. The BSA provided its data. The judge chose to describe the effects of piracy as nothing less than "catastrophic".
Intellectual property
But while the losses due to software copyright violations are large and serious, the crime is certainly not as costly as the BSA portrays. The association's figures rely on sample data that may not be representative, assumptions about the average amount of software on PCs and, for some countries, guesses rather than hard data. Moreover, the figures are presented in an exaggerated way by the BSA and International Data Corporation (IDC), a research firm that conducts the study. They dubiously presume that each piece of software pirated equals a direct loss of revenue to software firms.
To derive its piracy rate, IDC estimates the average amount of software that is installed on a PC per country, using data from surveys, interviews and other studies. That figure is then reduced by the known quantity of software sold per country--a calculation in which IDC specialises. The result: a (supposed) amount of piracy per country. Multiplying that figure by the revenue from legitimate sales thus yields the retail value of the unpaid-for software. This, IDC and BSA claim, equals the amount of lost revenue.
The problem is that the economic impact of global software piracy is far harder to calculate. Some academics have shown that some piracy actually increases software sales, by introducing products to people who would not otherwise become customers. Indeed, Bill Gates chirped in the 1990s that piracy in China was useful to Microsoft, because once the nation was hooked, the software giant would eventually figure out a way to monetise the trend. (Lately Microsoft has kept quiet on this issue.)
The BSA's bold claims are surprising, given that last year the group was severely criticised for inflating its figures to suit its political aims. "Absurd on its face" and "patently obscene" is how Gary Shapiro, boss of the Consumer Electronics Association, another lobby group, describes the new ranking.
A funny scene just came to mind (Score:4, Funny)
Gollum Not fair! It isn't fair, my precious, is it, to ask us what it's got in its nassty little PeeCeessssssesss?
Bilbo What have I got in my pocket?
Gollum Sssssss. It must give us three guesseses, my preciouss-three guesseses.
Bilbo Very well! Guess away!
Gollum Photoshop!
Bilbo Wrong! Guess again!
Gollum Sssssss. Autocad!
Bilbo Wrong! Last guess!
Gollum Sssssss
Bilbo Time's up!
Gollum DOOMIII!-or nothing!
BilboBoth wrong!
Standard? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not to say we only need one study. If a study is independently backed up by others, then wouldn't we know the real effects of piracy?
Re:Standard? (Score:3, Insightful)
The only problem here is that certain "independent" analysts are commisioned by an organisation (BSA did IDC for Piracy, Microsoft did... err IDC for Windows v Linux) to do "independent" research that just happens to find the answer that was required.
Business Analysts, as we've seen with the Stock Market pushing on Wall Street are about as independent as Texas, they like to claim they are, but the reality is they're after the big buckets of pork.
Some piracy can lead to direct sales (Score:4, Funny)
One day I was in a computer store near NASA looking for a software package, but they were all sold out. When I asked why, the salesman said that every time any of the local NASA contractors had a software audit, everyone would rush out to buy legal copies of everything on their machines.
Bullshit? (Score:3, Funny)
Somebody alert Penn and Teller!
total BS (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, it's funny that you can hardly find anyone in the SW industry who agrees, who actually know something about SW, like artists and programmers for example. It's only executives who aren't very technical and don't actually understand or use much who claim they're losing vast sums to piracy.
Want to know who pirates SW the most? People who make SW, and people who ultimately drive purchases of the most expensive SW for business and personal use. I've decided purchases of software selling for up to $16K per seat for entire teams in companies I've worked for, and it all went to staff members who were largely able to use it because they had learned to various degrees on pirated copies.
If it wasn't for SW piracy, far fewer people would be software expert users and the SW industry would be much smaller than it is. As a result, fewer PC computers would be sold, and we'd generally have a less computationally advanced society. That would obviously effect industries like the internet including commerce, movie special FX, and video game development, which are big economic drivers for the national economy.
Take Photoshop for example, that ubiquitous paint program. In my entire career I've never met a single Photoshop user, NOT ONE, that didn't sometimes use, and hadn't learned primarily on a pirated copy before becoming employed at a business that would purchase it to match their skills. Many of those people became interested in the field, and THEN went to school for training, because of the ability to try extensively for free. No trial programs don't suffice and never have. Reality is that every single art student has, and needs, a cracked copy. Later, studios buy software to match the preferences of the users, whose opinions are often based on use of pirated SW.
*** SW "piracy" = free advertising = increased market growth. ***
You can say the same for movie FX, or game development. Try and find people in those industries who don't give a large credit in their education to pirated software, or who would be less likely to be in the industry, and therefore not purchasing SW, if it wasn't for piracy. It's the same for many other industries. Even many secretaries and business software users have had access to pirated software to learn it, give it to friends, etc, which eventually supports a purchase in SW, and is like free advertising for the SW makers.
If it was possible to magically end all piracy in the US today, you'd see SW revenue and computer sales plummet in the short term, and overall national competitiveness drop in the long term.
These BSA bozos really do have their heads DEEP up their asses.
Companies like Adobe for example should be THANKING SW piracy for thier stock price.
This discussion is a BSA wet dream (Score:3, Insightful)
While we're at it, do any of you want to admit to smoking pot, snorting coke, distributing a virus, or murdering a hooker? :-)
Software Piracy (Score:3, Interesting)
When someone downloads a piece of software they didn't pay for using something like bittorrent, there is absolutely no direct cost to the software company. Consider for comparison stealing a tool from a hardware store and driving away from an auto-shop without paying for the repair service. In the first case, the company that made the tool and all the people that formed the transportation bridge to get that tool to the store suffer a direct loss. They had to physically create something and physically transport it, and that requires resources. In the case of the auto repair, you've just cost some poor smuck an hour or so of his time - he was repairing your car. If he doesn't get anything back from his efforts because you cheated him, you've stolen his time.
Now for the software company. They researched and designed something, and in the end engineered a piece of software that acts as a tool on your computer to produce something you want. But when you download the tool from someone illegally over something like bittorrent, what are you taking from the software company? You duplicated the code for a total cost of $0. They didn't expend effort creating a CD and shipping it into a store - you haven't even stolen the transport cost. There's no physical object being stolen - they don't require anything to create more copies of the code. In fact, you could continue pirating the software from them left right and center, and outnumber their actual product sales by 10 to 1, and it wouldn't hurt their product sales at all. It makes no difference to Adobe if I download one illegal copy of PhotoShop or twenty million illegal copies of PhotoShop. Twenty million times zero is still zero. The only argument they can pose for my actions costing them something is that they have a legal right to demand any sum of money they choose from you when you use their software, and because you bypassed their right you cost them the money you would otherwise have been forced to spend.
In a capitalist society we need to reimburse people reasonably for the time and effort it takes to think up new ideas, and for the time the software companies spend creating their software - otherwise one could argue that we wouldn't get any new ideas or software developed. Because of this, we created copyright law. Copyright law is designed to allow people to profit from their ideas by giving them rights over how people use that idea, and the right to take money from people who use their idea.
Reasonably, however, if a mathematician designs a new formula that revolutionizes computers and allows circuits built using his idea to operate 500 times faster than they do today, it seems a little unreasonable for the mathematician to demand that every single computer made using his idea pay him a royalty of US $5,000,000. In a similar way, is it reasonable to permit software companies to charge whatever sum they feel for a piece of code that in the end is nothing more than an idea? The code is well thought out, and complicated, and took time to make. Yes, society should compensate them for that. Yes, people who spend their time working this way should be well compensated for their efforts and be made wealthy. But there should be a limit as to what they can demand, and that limit is set by unspoken public consensus if not in our legal system. That unspoken limit being surpassed is what results in software piracy. When the average person who w
BSA? We don't need no stinkin' BSA! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:BSA? We don't need no stinkin' BSA! (Score:4, Informative)
Most certainly.
They basically threaten you, and if you don't "comply" they show up at your company and interrupt your business for a few days, causing lots of lost productivity. In the end, you get fined for stupid things like having unregistered winzip and having a few extra copies of windows that you shouldn't be running. Your cost is several days of zero productivity, a hefty fine, and maybe jailtime. Their cost is the price of a few faxes, the lawyer costs for filing, and very little time helping with the raid.
It's more like extortion. The old "give me money or I talk" game. They don't really have to have any hard evidence of piracy to get a court order and a few federal officers to raid your business.
The best thing to do is to just be in compliance. If you don't have the money to spend on the software, find free alternatives.
Re:BSA? We don't need no stinkin' BSA! (Score:4, Interesting)
That's why I have to wonder where the real value of an organization like the BSA comes from, if any. Seems to me it's more like the RIAA lawsuit game
They don't really have to have any hard evidence of piracy to get a court order and a few federal officers to raid your business.
And that, I think, is the crux of the matter. I have a problem with private organizations being able to take punitive measures against companies and individuals without hard evidence, or for that matter without any real due process. In effect, this gives them the power of a private police force. So what happens when they screw up your business for a few days and find out that, gee, their disgruntled-employee "informant" was lying and the target is in full compliance with the law. Do they reimburse you for all the lost productivity? Ask your forgiveness? Buy you a chocolate sundae? What?
Corporate vigilantism, I guess you could call it. If it's not already illegal it most certainly should be.
Always been the case... (Score:3)
Also, as a special case, for free the pack rat mentality kicks in. If you got a cd full of mp3s, would you keep it even if it wasn't really anything you need? Many people would, just a few hundred MB on their HDD. Instead of asking "Why should I pay for this?" the question becomes "Why not? It's free, might come in handy some day."
Kjella
Re:Piracy until something better comes along... (Score:2)
Re:Does not dispute?!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Wha? (Score:5, Insightful)
1)"I wouldn't have paid for it anyway, so it's not a lost sale"
OK, so let's say I go in to get my car's wheels rebalanced (or some other service). When they're done.. I just drive off without paying. Have I done anything wrong? Well, what if "I wouldn't have paid for it anyway"? So it's not a lost sale!
Umm, what the hell? That made zero, and by zero I mean none, sense. The analogy is too terrible to even examine.
2) "The software is too expensive"
So perhaps you wouldn't buy product A which is overpriced for your needs. But by pirating A, you rob product B and C - competing products that are much cheaper with limited functionality compared to A that still meet your needs - of market share.
Now here I can only conlude it should be illegal to buy any software at all, for everytime you do so you are depriving any computer of companies of revenue. I suggest you write your senator right away and demand that all software sales be outlawed on these grounds.
The fact is, if you don't pay for the software (unless a license is given for free), then you have no right to use the software. Period.
Now that part I agree with. You have no right. What is in question is how much harm it does, which depends entirely on the circumstances of the pirating and cannot be assigned a simple number. If a baby is given a pirated copy of Photoshop for teething is that really a loss to Adobe of $600? Please justify a yes response. The BSA would say yes.
Re:Too bad.. (Score:3, Insightful)
1)"I wouldn't have paid for it anyway, so it's not a lost sale"
OK, so let's say I go in to get my car's wheels rebalanced (or some other service). When they're done.. I just drive off without paying. Have I done anything wrong? Well, what if "I wouldn't have paid for it anyway"? So it's not a lost sale!
Yes it is. In the time they spent balancing your wheels, they were unable to do other revenue-earning work. The time and effort involved here is a finite resource. This is in contrast to software, where
Re:and the solution is??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:BSA Lies, Film at 11 (Score:3, Interesting)
Really it has little to do with software piracy. It has more to do with getting the power of LAW to help raise the cost of software, or atleast maintain it.
I'm still a firm beleiver that if Microsoft sold O