PDA

View Full Version : I think this article is interesting



darkghost
November 8th, 2006, 11:08 AM
from http://australianit.news.com.au (http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,20713160%5E15306%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html)

Well, really I asked this myself too.... how can BSA calculate the loss from piracy ?
1 - how do they know how many copies circulate ?
2 - do they really think that if a kid cant find it in amule , he will promptly take his (daddY) credit card and pay whatever for that soft, music, dvd etc?

Uhm.... They really use big numbers for making pressure on (illiterate) governments and so on I think...

megamania
November 8th, 2006, 11:56 AM
Well, really I asked this myself too.... how can BSA calculate the loss from piracy ?

They simply say what's better for their own interest. That's common behaviour, so I really don't feel like blaming BSA specifically - they're in good company.

mips
November 8th, 2006, 12:24 PM
from http://australianit.news.com.au (http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,20713160%5E15306%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html)

Well, really I asked this myself too.... how can BSA calculate the loss from piracy ?


They can't. Not every pirate copy would have been a potential sale. Lot's of people just copy stuff for the sake of copying it and checking it out.

MaximB
November 8th, 2006, 01:59 PM
yeah...like me copying about 50 Linux legal distro's just to check them out (the live cd/dvd) but not to actually use them.

but before Linux entered my life I used to pirate a LOT.
Linux changed it all for me.

darkghost
November 8th, 2006, 02:17 PM
yeah...like me copying about 50 Linux legal distro's just to check them out (the live cd/dvd) but not to actually use them.

but before Linux entered my life I used to pirate a LOT.
Linux changed it all for me.

Another point to the argument that most people WILL NOT buy soft, dvds etc. they pirate...I tried variuous professional apps on win, but I'll never buy them...'cause I dont need them!! I did it just because I was curious (and no 30 days aren't enough, sometimes I install and check after months...)

Of course it's different for shops/offices running illegal soft for working...

prizrak
November 8th, 2006, 03:19 PM
They estimate the numbers according to what the percentage of pirated material. So say your country has a 50% piracy rate for MS Office. If 100 copies of MS Office were sold then in reality there are 200 copies around. It's all estimation of course. So when they figure out how many copies are pirated they just multiply it by price per copy.

In reality it is nothing but PR, they come up with huge numbers to show that they are losing a crazy amount of money. They know damn well that out of the people who pirate at least half wouldn't even bother as the software is not necessary for them. Like someone who uses Photoshop to edit family pictures when they could easily use Picasa or something like that. Another like 30% of people would just switch to an alternative say Open Office instead of MS Office, so maybe like 20% of those who pirated would end up buying the actual software.

The same goes for companies that pirate, there are enough alternatives in most cases to not have to buy the specific software.

halfvolle melk
November 8th, 2006, 03:25 PM
I'm sure by the time blue-ray will be affordable and everyone wants to replace their DVD collection, revenues will once again go up and everybody will be happy. Or maybe not.

edit: except that this is about software. Nevermind.

darkghost
November 9th, 2006, 05:13 PM
Yes, it's about soft, but ...do you really think when Blueray will be available people will begin buying again the same movies etc, in blueray ??

Either I'm poor, or I don't want to spend money, but I think I'll just buy new ones in blue ray...

sloggerkhan
November 9th, 2006, 05:23 PM
I don't think people should have to buy movies again. If I own a movie on DVD, I won't feel the least bit guilty about torrenting down a high-def version. As far as I'm concerned,screw "license agreements." Once I "OWN" (remember, ownership is really something illegal these days,so much for "american" capitalism and an "ownership society..." lol) a copy of a movie in any format, i feel that I have the right (or should if I "don't") to shift it into a new format or get it in any format I please so long as I am not distributing it to others who don't own a copy.

I should be able to buy the movie, not it's formatting.

hkgonra
November 9th, 2006, 05:29 PM
I am trying to figure out how that is relevant to anything.
If people were stealing drinks out a coke machine the someone else had busted open would we really be worried about whether or not those people would have bought the cokes out of the machine had it not been busted open ?
The fact is they still stole it.
The person that busted it open should have a worse penalty than the others but all should be punished.

DoctorMO
November 9th, 2006, 06:05 PM
Theft is the idea of taking something from someone else and there by depriving them of that thing.

Copy right infringment is bad, but it's not theft, your not depriving the 'owner' of anything.

shining
November 9th, 2006, 06:17 PM
I am trying to figure out how that is relevant to anything.
If people were stealing drinks out a coke machine the someone else had busted open would we really be worried about whether or not those people would have bought the cokes out of the machine had it not been busted open ?
The fact is they still stole it.
The person that busted it open should have a worse penalty than the others but all should be punished.

That is totally relevant if you are trying to evaluate how much money could be saved if you protected the coke machine for being busted.
And evaluating the cost is relevant to justify the measures taken for protecting the machines.

Also, there isn't a full analogy here, because duplicating cokes (or anything else for that matter) isn't the same as duplicating softwares.

hkgonra
November 9th, 2006, 06:44 PM
That is totally relevant if you are trying to evaluate how much money could be saved if you protected the coke machine for being busted.
And evaluating the cost is relevant to justify the measures taken for protecting the machines.

Also, there isn't a full analogy here, because duplicating cokes (or anything else for that matter) isn't the same as duplicating softwares.

I guess I just see it as theft is theft and it should be stopped.

shining
November 9th, 2006, 06:57 PM
I guess I just see it as theft is theft and it should be stopped.

Did you see what DoctorMO just said?
"Theft" may not be the right word in this case.

hkgonra
November 9th, 2006, 07:14 PM
Did you see what DoctorMO just said?
"Theft" may not be the right word in this case.

Yes I saw that, but lets look at it this way.
Say you are an architect and you spent 3 months designing a building in order to sell the blueprints to a builder thus making your money, suppose when you take the blueprints to that builder to look at he just copies them , gives them back to you saying he doesn't need them and then uses them to build the buidling.
Would you call that theft ?
I would say he stole those blueprints.
He deprived the owner of money.
Lets take it further lets say the builder posts the copies on the internet and hundreds of buildings get built using those blueprints.
Would all of those builders have used those blueprints if they would have had to purchase them ? Probably not but the fact is they stole them.