So yeah, what kinds of things have you stole?
do you feel guilty about it? I feel pretty bad about some of the stuff I steal pretty cheap stuff, and then some other stuff, like super-expensive Adobe Suites, much less so.
I expect some day It'll have to give and I'll just end up either deleting or buying the stuff I have on my hard drive. Annoying how information works now a days. How can they expect people like me to buy this stuff when stealing is so easy? The Chinese have forged a media culture around this kind of piracy! Where is the world going?????
How do we get over it?
Should we?
It's not stealing.
It's not stealing. If it was stealing, you'd have a fancy box that contains manuals and a CD.
Install linux, problem solved.
5get
Copyright infringement. Learn about it. Also I've switch to Linux because unlike the alternatives, the user is encouraged to share Linux software.
Not to mention music movies that Linux users I should think still p2p.
2007-07-15 0day Dolphin.SMASH.v5.9.0.LINUX-Lz0
2007-07-15 0day Intel.XSLT.Accelerator.for.Java.Environments.v1.1.1.LINUX-Lz0
2007-07-13 0day FlexPDE.Professional.3D.v5.0.17.Linux.x64.Incl.Keygen-SSG
2007-07-13 0day FlexPDE.Professional.3D.v5.0.17.Linux.x86.Incl.Keygen-SSG
2007-07-13 0day Window.Builder.Pro.v6.4.0.LiNUX.Incl.Keygen-FALLEN
2007-07-12 0day JSCAPE.Secure.FTP.Server.v3.1.17.LiNUX.Cracked-FALLEN
2007-07-11 0day Super.FinSim.v9.1.12.LINUX-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day Super.FinSim.v9.1.12.LINUX64-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day JClass.Desktop.Views.v6.4.1.LINUX.Cracked-FALLEN
2007-07-11 0day PGI.Workstation.Server.v7.0.6.LINUX.x64-TBE
2007-07-11 0day PGI.Workstation.Server.v7.0.6.LINUX-TBE
2007-07-11 0day Understand.for.Jovial.v1.4.410.LINUX.Incl.Keygen-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day Understand.for.Java.v1.4.410.LINUX.Incl.Keygen-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day Understand.for.Fortran.v1.4.410.LINUX.Incl.Keygen-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day Understand.for.Delphi.v1.4.410.LINUX.Incl.Keygen-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day Understand.for.C.Plus.Plus.v1.4.410.LINUX.Incl.Keygen-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day Understand.for.Ada.v1.4.410.LINUX.Incl.Keygen-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day SourcePublisher.for.C.Plus.Plus.v1.4.410.LINUX.Incl.Keygen-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day SourcePublisher.for.Ada.v1.4.410.LINUX.Incl.Keygen-Lz0
2007-07-11 0day NEXTLIMIT_REALFLOW_V4.3.6_LINUX64-XFORCE
2007-07-11 0day NEXTLIMIT_REALFLOW_V4.3.6_LINUX-XFORCE
2007-07-11 0day THE_FOUNDRY_NUKE_V4.7V2_LINUX-XFORCE
2007-07-09 0day OSS.Open.Sound.System.v4.0-1004.AMD64.Linux.Incl.KeyMaker-DVT
2007-07-09 0day OSS.Open.Sound.System.v4.0-1004.Linux.Incl.KeyMaker-DVT
2007-07-09 0day Acoustica.Spin.It.Again.v2.1.b35.Linux.Incl.Keymaker-NoGGE
2007-07-09 0day Acoustica.Spin.It.Again.v2.1.b35.Linux.Incl.KeyGen-Ner
2007-07-08 0day Jetbrains.TeamCity.v2.1.1.LINUX-SHOCK
2007-07-08 0day Fledermaus.Pro.v6.5.0.45.LINUX-TBE
2007-07-07 0day Maplesoft.Maple.v11.01.UPDATE.ONLY.LINUX-TBE
Linux is hardly free from piracy.
YARRR HARRRR FIDDLE DEE DEE
BEING A PIRATE IS ALRIGHT WITH ME
DO WHAT YOU WANT 'CAUSE A PIRATE IS FREE
YOU ARE A PIRATE
YOU ARE A PIRATE!
Flash MX, Flash MX2004, Flash 8, Flash CS3, Photoshoop, Quake, Quake 2, Quake 3 Arena, and various other softwarez.
I hacked the Gibson.
Crash and Burn
MANY SOULS
Adobe Premiere Pro.
I guess the only moral justification I can find for it is that it's inevitable. The media companies have failed to protect their stuff, information technology has opened up a new era and data will be shared and transmitted in ways that make its monopolization difficult. This is not my problem, it's the problem of those who try to profit off of this.
But this is a pretty "fuck you, fuck the world" type justification. dunno.
> moral justification
Piracy is well outside the bounds of morality, and it only barely falls under ethics. It's largely legal/economic
Well I just bought the Lucky Star ED CD from importCDs because I couldn't bear to download it. So I guess I'm contributing somewhat to the industry. But I wonder why anyone would chose to buy a CD these days, except out of guilt/respect for the makers? It's like buying media these days is a voluntary donation. That can't be a good thing, don't you think?
>Piracy is well outside the bounds of morality, and it only barely falls under ethics. It's largely legal/economic
What no.
The author of a work has certain moral rights as well as property rights.
> moral rights
This is not morality why did you say it
>>21
don't fall for "intellectual property" doublethink. information is not property.
Questionable.
For one thing, information, like food, is not free.
It takes effort/money to produce it.
In a way, that's sillier than saying "land is not property". Land doesn't require any special effort to "claim" yet we protect it's private possession sometimes violently in most parts of the world.
>>24
Information is not a scarce resource and should not have the same protection as property. If you told me a piece of knowledge that I was unaware of, you don't suddenly lose that knowledge; that knowledge doesn't disappear from your brain. In fact, knowledge becomes more available when it is shared.
If I take your sandwich and eat it, you will no longer have a sandwich and you will go hungry. If I take over your land, you will no longer have a place to live. Real property is a scarce resource and it is acceptable for it to have protections.
> It takes effort/money to produce it.
The service of collecting, sorting, creating and interpreting information is a truly scarce resource as there are only a limited number of people that are able to provide these services. After the information has been created, it is usually trivial to reproduce. Information being easily copied does not mean that information becomes worthless, it just means that nobody is deprived of that particular resource when it is shared.
I wonder if "information" then, will be a government-subsidized service, paid in taxes. Might work, might not work. There's something nice about marketable, commercial art.
The only time I could really see pirating as ok personally is if the material isn't available in your country, or if its out of print.
I've never had any guilt before. It just seems so commonplace now.
I don't have the money to buy the shit I download anyway, so no one is losing out.
Too bad that's still illegal under Draconian copyright law.
No not really.
what goes around comes arouund though.
The PC broke down. -_-
Music and videos.
I don't have the least bit of regret.
>>31
protip: 13yololita.jpg.exe is not a pic
Maybe it is. You can't judge a file from its extension anyway.
Hollywood and RIAA steals from Artists. Why shouldn't you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
Porn, J-dorama, music, games, movies, e-books, photobooks
If I had 900 bucks to by my own version of photohsop I wouldn't be living in this shithole.
If adobe didn't have to hire so many people to make a good program, they wouldn't be in business.
>>32
They came into my house bearing sledgehammers.
>>38
I think there are better excuses if you can already afford a computer capable of running it.
>>41
Not really. It doesn't take too much to run Photoshop. My old shitty PC that has 256MB of RAM could run it.
I use the "poor student"'s justification.
In some more civilized countries, the government is good enough to finance my education, so I figure the least I can do if I'm paying this much shit for schooling, is free software.
I download because I don't care about morals.
If I can get a movie for free just as easily as paying for it, you're damned right I'll get it for free.
It is rather strange to demand money for a hard-copy of something that can so easily and inexpensively be acquired digitally.
I mean in terms of free trade, it just doesn't make sense, why should anyone be expected to pay for this stuff?
Guilt? HA HA HA.
I'd feel more guilty about paying for information and thus encouraging the belief that it's something you can own.
>>46
Because if artists don't get paid, there will be no more art.
I have trouble believing that. If people think it's worth paying artists them, the government will step in.
If any art requires payment to be created, then it's not art, it's just a commodity.
People will always create art, some just do it for money. And people buy a hard copy because it's just that and you save HD space.
Downloading music, movies, or programs is not stealing. When someone downloads a song the owner isnt "loosing" anything, the song is duplicated and shared. No money is "lost" either, when you download somthing illegaly you are not taking money from whoever made it.
So no, I dont feel guilty.
>>54 "Losing", dammit, not "loosing".
>>20 said, "It's like buying media these days is a voluntary donation." I have been saying this for some time and I think it's a great thing, I mean it proves that people WILL voluntarily donate. All we need to do is get rid of the medium -- honestly, do you really listen to your CD directly or does it sit on a shelf? -- and we can be free of this copyright bullshit.
>>25 said, "The service of collecting, sorting, creating and interpreting information is a truly scarce resource as there are only a limited number of people that are able to provide these services. After the information has been created, it is usually trivial to reproduce." Hell yeah. This is why we should pay people for the former (the service), but bury the dumb idea of buying trivially made copies.
This is a more serious discussion than I anticipated having on /iaa/.
I'm poor. Downloading keeps my cost of living low, as I get the media and software without paying for them.
I'm not cheating anyone because if I had to buy it, I simply could not have it so nobody would've been able to sell it to me to begin with.
So, I'm not harming anyone, and it sure enhances the quality of my life. No guilt here.
I'm poor. Downloading keeps my cost of living low, as I get the media and software without paying for them.
I'm not cheating anyone because if I had to buy it, I simply could not have it so nobody would've been able to sell it to me to begin with.
So, I'm not harming anyone, and it sure enhances the quality of my life. No guilt here.
>>56-57 do you feel guilty about making a double post?
>>52
Agreed. Information should be shared to better the world, not for benefit to individuals.
Well it's true that if your otaku shit is important enough, It's worth going a few days without food for it.
>>60
DVDs and figures are not worth going hungry for.
>>60
You need to take another look at your priorities
>>60-62
laffo
The only things I pirate and feel bad about are musics. I've been slowly trying to buy the albums I have on my computer.
Though it's also kinda because I like having the physical object. And sometimes CDs come with fun kitsch! ( ･∀･)
Flash, Photoshop, Window Washer, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Quake, Quake 2, Quake 3a
>>63
I'm the opposite way from you. I hate having a physical object cluttering my place.
Besides, it's destructible. Data, properly backed up, is not.
In an ideal world, I would wish for two things:
But given that this is not a perfect world, pirating will remain.
Good article about how efficient a distribution method P2P is, how society benefits (spurred on by OiNK's takedown):
http://www.demonbaby.com/blog/2007/10/when-pigs-fly-death-of-oink-birth-of.html
I don't think I've met anyone who hasn't stolen/download something at some point.
I personally like this justification for (some of) it (applies to more expensive software, eg: photoshop, CAD stuff, high-end music stuff, etc)...
Case 1 (Windows)
I'm going to be logically terrible here and make an assumption to support... The people who download pirated copies of Windows are, most likely, the ones with enough tech knowledge to use a different OS. If forced to choose between paying for Windows or using Linux for free, they'd prolly go for free. Thus, any user downloading a copy of Windows is, most likely, someone who'd be using a diff. OS otherwise. Ugh. It's late and I'm rambling. Point is: pirate copies of Windows don't really hurt MS, so much as they help... more copies of Windows, more marketshare, more marketshare, the greater the possibility that someone on a pirated OS eventually buys an MS product, whereas they wouldnt have otherwise...
Case 2 (CAD software, 3dsmax)
In this case, the programs pirated would either increase eventual sales of a given product, as things like CAD and animation software are probably going to be used in a commercial context; and when you design/create something you're planning on selling, it would be extremely unwise to put yourself in a legally dangerous position by using pirated software. No real downside for the developer; people who wouldn't have a chance to use the software at all instead get to learn it (and usually, to a certain extent, dev. a liking for a particular package...)
Music... I can't really justify; best path is to go into denial and keep saying, "one day I'll buy the CD's for the bands I really like"...
Games... If it's really worth playing, I'd actually buy it
TV shows... They give it away for free on TV. Yeah, technically that's supported by ads, but if I have cable, I count as a subscriber, which justifies ad space being traded about...blah blah blah...doesnt make any difference. I just dont have to mute it and walk around the house everytime ads come on.
OMG. I just realized I'm posting a long reply to a 3 month old thread. slaps forehead
There are enough asses in the world without making illegal copies.
damn :(((
The idea that photoshop should only be bought if you are making money off of it is pretty great but unfortunately it is not a very constructive business model. I've got a legit (aka purchased with real people money) copy of CS2 Premium though so I'm happy now. :)
If it wasn't purchased with your very own money then there is no difference. In one scenario you're "stealing" from Adobe. In another scenario you're "stealing" from your employer or whoever you scammed the copy from. Same net result IMO.