Open Source vs. Pirating - A Win for OSS!

[Shibblet]

I have a friend who uses an illegal/hacked copies of...

Windows XP
Adobe CS3
MS Office 2007
and multiple other little apps found on torrent sites.

He and I had a discussion the other day about being legal... it went something like this. Please note the language has been altered slightly to be more "forum friendly."

Me: Dude, you're a frickin' thief!
Him: What?
Me: You did not buy Adobe Creative Suite. It's over $1000.00
Him: Well, yeah, I downloaded the hacked version.
Me: Why?
Him: I needed Photoshop to edit some photos.
Me: Oh. Ever heard of Gimp?
Him: No.
Me: Let me show you. (I proceed to download Gimp, and in the process realize that his copy of XP isn't "Genuine".)
Me: Did XP come with your computer?
Him: No. I got a hacked version of that too.
Me: What the frick?
Him: What? I'm not supposed to use my computer?
Me: Not if you don't buy your stuff. Why don't you just use Open Source software?
Him: What's that?
Me: Free.
Him: Free how?
Me: Alright Skippy, here's your first lesson. Ever heard of Linux?
Him: Yeah, it's for servers, right?
Me: Sometimes, check this out. (www.ubuntu.com) This is Ubuntu Linux.
Him: What, so that's like XP?
Me: It's an operating system, yes.
Him: Okay, can I run Photoshop on it?
Me: Stay focused sunshine, you're missing the point. You can run Gimp on it.
Him: What about Office?
Me: Frick! You stole that too? You're just a regular cyber criminal, aren't you.
Him: Shut the frick up. Like you've never downloaded illegal software.
Me: Sure I did, but I don't have to anymore.

And that line there, was the clincher.

We loaded Ubuntu on to his computer, downloaded Gimp, Inkscape, and Scribus. Ran through OpenOffice, and showed him how to use the Add/Remove programs feature to find all sorts of apps.

I helped this guy convert, and I'll help him understand Wine once he is comfortable with running Gnome. With any degree of luck, he'll be on the forums in the next few days.

:guitar:

[BAMF1501]

NIce story sam ehere i use to pirate software but then i found ubuntu and no need to anymore ;)

[markp1989]

grilling people for pirating software is out of order, how many people can say they never pirated anything in there life?

and Pirating is not theft

[pwnst*r]

oh boy.

[DeadSuperHero]

You may have sold on the system, but keeping him there is not always so easy.

Several of my friends switched, and then promptly jumped ship for various reasons. (Gaming, hardware issues, multimedia software was not up to par, etc.)

[pwnst*r]

grilling people for pirating software is out of order, how many people can say they never pirated anything in there life?

and Pirating is not theft

can of worms.

[Shibblet]

grilling people for pirating software is out of order, how many people can say they never pirated anything in there life?

and Pirating is not theft

Read my entire post. I admit that I've pirated software before. But now I don't have to.

And I'll give me friend as much flack as I want to. :lolflag:

[markp1989]

Read my entire post. I admit that I've pirated software before. But now I don't have to.

And I'll give me friend as much flack as I want to. :lolflag:

i did read it, i just think calling some one "a frickin' thief!" because the pirate software is out of order.

you might of said it abit more jokingly then it come across over the internet lol.

[starcannon]

I have been in a similar situation; a neighbor of mine had a bunch of stolen software, including WinXP on his computer, he wanted me to fix it. I said I'd fix it if I could make him legal, he asked how much that would cost, and I said nothing if your willing to run Linux. He didn't know what Linux was, but was willing to try it out. That was 3 years ago, he's currently running 8.04, he started on 7.10.

There is no reason to steal software, every thing one would steal has a free as in beer alternative in the OSS world.

By the way, stealing software does not make one a pirate. If one is not forcibly taking control of a ship, one is not a pirate. When one steals software, its just unromantic theft. The "others have done it" argument will not get one a lighter sentence in court; nor will arguing with the judge about philosophy created to justify the theft of software, and certainly calling oneself a "Pirate" will not lighten a sentence.

GL and HF

[DeadSuperHero]

I'd recommend taking a look at an old article I wrote (http://www.linux.com/community/blogs/My-Best-Friend-Now-on-Linux.html) about helping a friend switch over to Linux. If you're going to help them make the switch, go all the way with it. Hold their hand, explain things to them. Install all the codecs and drivers for them, set it up for maximum potential.

[SuperSonic4]

GNU/Linux and FOSS only really minimize software piracy. Multimedia piracy is still high up on the list

[Hwæt]

grilling people for pirating software is out of order, how many people can say they never pirated anything in there life?

and Pirating is not theft

Is stealing a piece of GPL licensed code and putting it into a proprietary program without releasing the source code and making the entire program GPL'd, as per the license terms, theft? If you answered yes, then you sir, are a hypocrite.

If you pirate music, and get on to people for not obeying the GPL, then you are also a hypocrite.

Why should people respect the GPL (which IS a copyright license), if we don't respect their copyrights?


By the way, I have never pirated anything. I buy all my software and music.

[alakazam]

I really don't give a bob if people pirate software.

[pwnst*r]

I really don't give a bob if people pirate software.
:)

[pwnst*r]

Is stealing a piece of GPL licensed code and putting it into a proprietary program without releasing the source code and making the entire program GPL'd, as per the license terms, theft? If you answered yes, then you sir, are a hypocrite.

If you pirate music, and get on to people for not obeying the GPL, then you are also a hypocrite.

Why should people respect the GPL (which IS a copyright license), if we don't respect their copyrights?


By the way, I have never pirated anything. I buy all my software and music.

/thread

[markp1989]

Is stealing a piece of GPL licensed code and putting it into a proprietary program without releasing the source code and making the entire program GPL'd, as per the license terms, theft? If you answered yes, then you sir, are a hypocrite.

no its copyright infringement same as downloading music or other software illegaly.

[alakazam]

http://i.imagehost.org/0426/dont-tase-me-bro-4.jpg

[pwnst*r]

lol

[MarcusW]

Is stealing a piece of GPL licensed code and putting it into a proprietary program without releasing the source code and making the entire program GPL'd, as per the license terms, theft? If you answered yes, then you sir, are a hypocrite.

If you pirate music, and get on to people for not obeying the GPL, then you are also a hypocrite.

Why should people respect the GPL (which IS a copyright license), if we don't respect their copyrights?


By the way, I have never pirated anything. I buy all my software and music.

One does not have to like/dislike every aspect of copyright. For example, I think it's fine to share a copyrighted song on the internet, but I don't think it's fine to share a copyrighted song someone else made and switch out the name for yours.

I respect the part of copyright that enables GPL and such things, but not the part that makes it illegal for me to send a good song to a friend on MSN.

[Hwæt]

no its copyright infringement same as downloading music or other software illegaly.

Copyright infringement = stealing


But do you pirate, and at the same time, do you get onto people for not obeying the GPL?


Here's a definition of the word "theft":



theft (plural thefts)

1. The act of stealing property.


A copyright is also known as a piece of intellectual property. Now, if you download a song or software without paying the requested price, then you are stealing, are you not? What is it called when you take an item for free when it is meant to be paid for? Theft. The song or software is the owner's property, and when he sells it to you he is just letting you use a copy of it once you buy it.

[starcannon]

I'd recommend taking a look at an old article I wrote (http://www.linux.com/community/blogs/My-Best-Friend-Now-on-Linux.html) about helping a friend switch over to Linux. If you're going to help them make the switch, go all the way with it. Hold their hand, explain things to them. Install all the codecs and drivers for them, set it up for maximum potential.
+1
This is very good advice; set things up so that the person your helping can use their computer as easily as they could have with their stolen software, otherwise, whats the point.

[Hwæt]

One does not have to like/dislike every aspect of copyright. For example, I think it's fine to share a copyrighted song on the internet, but I don't think it's fine to share a copyrighted song someone else made and switch out the name for yours.

Copyright law is all or none. You can't go to a zoo that charges $20 for a full trip, and only give them $18 because you don't like elephants.




I respect the part of copyright that enables GPL and such things, but not the part that makes it illegal for me to send a good song to a friend on MSN.

The part of the copyright law that enables the GPL is the exact same part that enables ironclad copyrights, because that part of the copyright law allows the owner of the intellectual property to dictate how his product may be distributed and used.

[markp1989]

Copyright infringement = stealing


But do you pirate, and at the same time, do you get onto people for not obeying the GPL?


Here's a definition of the word "theft":



A copyright is also known as a piece of intellectual property. Now, if you download a song or software without paying the requested price, then you are stealing, are you not? What is it called when you take an item for free when it is meant to be paid for? Theft. The song or software is the owner's property, and when he sells it to you he is just letting you use a copy of it once you buy it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_Act_1968

theft: A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

its not theft, as nothing is being taken, i may be getting an exact copy of it, but i have not stole it because they still own it.

no i dont get on to people for not obeying the GPL

[LeifAndersen]

Wow, for being friends, you sure seem to be fighting a lot...lol

Still, yeah for open source. I wish I could convert one of my friends of this, but he continues to pirate Photoshop, Maya, Max, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc, I think he also pirated windows 7 (which is weird because we're both part of MSDNAA at our university and he can get it for free). But he says that he pirates it because it's 'easier'. Go figure.

[starcannon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_Act_1968

theft: A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

its not theft, as nothing is being taken, i may be getting an exact copy of it, but i have not stole it because they still own it.
Copyright law and the DMCA deal with the issue. Again, arguing philosophy in court will not get your sentence reduced. And since there IS free as in beer alternatives to everything, there is NO excuse for stealing software. Lemme know how a 1968 physical property law holds up in a 2009 copyright case, I think I can already guess.

[LowSky]

I saw the title of this tread and thought
:-k
Then I read the thread and thought
:---) :rolleyes: :-({|= [-o< ](*,)
then I saw the sheep pic and
:lolflag:
for the rest of the day I will be thinking
\\:D/

[lykwydchykyn]

Copyright infringement = stealing

copyright infringement is not the same as theft. For example, stealing deprives the victim of something. You lose nothing in the case of copyright infringement.

That doesn't make it right or acceptable. It doesn't need to be equivalent to stealing to be wrong. It does, however, demand that we understand it differently.



A copyright is also known as a piece of intellectual property. Now, if you download a song or software without paying the requested price, then you are stealing, are you not?

Calling it intellectual property does not make it instantly subject to natural property rights any more than calling myself rich gives me money.

For the record, I am not anti-copyright. I actually make a tidy sum of money every year from my copyrights. I do think some aspects of the law are too far-reaching and unreasonable given our current state of technology, and needs to be re-examined.

Also want to add, I started getting into open source software for many of the same reasons -- not wanting to infringe copyright any more (especially since my primary use of a computer was to create copyrighted works). I'm glad to hear this guy was willing to make a switch. Hope it sticks.

[Hwæt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_Act_1968

theft: A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

its not theft, as nothing is being taken, i may be getting an exact copy of it, but i have not stole it because they still own it.

I do not live in Britain, so your laws do not apply to me. Plus, I'm sorry bud, but the law has no effect on slang, or colloquialisms. Theft is theft, if copyright infringement wasn't theft, then the RIAA's and PRS's arguments about taking music being like stealing someone's car wouldn't work in court.

Case closed.

[SmittyJensen]

Oh for ***** sake.

Please, STOP posting this. it seems in every thread i see it and it's really annoying. i'm gonna start reporting people for it

[MarcusW]

Copyright law is all or none. You can't go to a zoo that charges $20 for a full trip, and only give them $18 because you don't like elephants.
You're missing the point. The whole point of Copyright is not your right to make money off your work, though some of it is. VERY few people are against copyright, though many want to modify it.



The part of the copyright law that enables the GPL is the exact same part that enables ironclad copyrights, because that part of the copyright law allows the owner of the intellectual property to dictate how his product may be distributed and used.

Allright, I don't know enough about US copyright to argue that. I'm not sure I would oppose the possibility of being able to break such licenses "for private use".

[SuperSonic4]

I do not live in Britain, so your laws do not apply to me. Plus, I'm sorry bud, but the law has no effect on slang, or colloquialisms. Theft is theft, if copyright infringement wasn't theft, then the RIAA's and PRS's arguments about taking music being like stealing someone's car wouldn't work in court.

Case closed.

No doubt to the chagrin of the White House US Law =/= International Law. Other countries have their own laws

I do agree that the theft act won't stand up in court even here in England, best hope would be on fair use

[markp1989]

I do not live in Britain, so your laws do not apply to me. Plus, I'm sorry bud, but the law has no effect on slang, or colloquialisms. Theft is theft, if copyright infringement wasn't theft, then the RIAA's and PRS's arguments about taking music being like stealing someone's car wouldn't work in court.

Case closed.

stealing a car and copying a song are not any where near the same.

i wouldnt steal a car, but if i could download an exact copy of someone elses then i would lol. [/scarcasum]

edit: sorry to the op for having this thread derailed. nice to know that your friend is using ubuntu right now, i hope he keeps up with it :)

:guitar:

[Hwæt]

stealing a car and copying a song are not any where near the same.

Tell that to the juries who keep awarding the RIAA all that money.



edit: sorry to the op for having this thread derailed. nice to know that your friend is using ubuntu right now, i hope he keeps up with it :)

Indeed.

[phrostbyte]

Is stealing a piece of GPL licensed code and putting it into a proprietary program without releasing the source code and making the entire program GPL'd, as per the license terms, theft? If you answered yes, then you sir, are a hypocrite.

If you pirate music, and get on to people for not obeying the GPL, then you are also a hypocrite.

Why should people respect the GPL (which IS a copyright license), if we don't respect their copyrights?


By the way, I have never pirated anything. I buy all my software and music.

I hardly believe you have never violated copyright law. I see things you've done in this thread that could be constructed as copyright violations (copying other people's posts).


Copyright law is all or none. You can't go to a zoo that charges $20 for a full trip, and only give them $18 because you don't like elephants.

You should be careful with reasoning like this. Copyright is very broad.

Do you visit YouTube? You should be careful next time, because not everything on that site is authorized by the copyright holders, in fact, very little is. You could be liable for the things you download or view online, even if you didn't know it was illegal to do so.

[Shibblet]

Wow, for being friends, you sure seem to be fighting a lot...lol

Nah. That's just standard banter between me and that douchebag. LOL.

I think he's a great friend, because I can speak freely to him, and he can speak freely to me without either of us getting upset. This was never a "professional" conversation.

[Shibblet]

i wouldnt steal a car, but if i could download an exact copy of someone elses then i would lol. [/scarcasum]

True, one is a felony, the other a misdemeanor. For crying out loud. Taking anything that you have no right to take without compensation is stealing.

Download a song that normally costs $0.99, then you "stole" it.
Download a movie that normally costs $14.95, then you "stole" it.
Download a copy of 3D Studio Max that normally costs $3500.00, then you "stole" it.

But true, you aren't "depriving" someone of their purchase, but you are "depriving" someone of their costs.

[Keyper7]

Is stealing a piece of GPL licensed code and putting it into a proprietary program without releasing the source code and making the entire program GPL'd, as per the license terms, theft? If you answered yes, then you sir, are a hypocrite.

If you pirate music, and get on to people for not obeying the GPL, then you are also a hypocrite.

Why should people respect the GPL (which IS a copyright license), if we don't respect their copyrights?

I do not condone piracy of any kind, but calling him an hypocrite is a logical fallacy because the concept of copyright is too broad to be generalized this way. It is like saying "You are a hypocrite because you support arresting people for theft in a country but you disagree with killing women because of adultery in another country. You either support laws or disagree with them, you can't do both".

Furthermore, you are stopping at "using copyright" and not looking any further than that. When you consider the following interpretation:

1) support pirating music = wanting music to be freely shared among everyone

2) enforcing GPL = wanting code to be freely shared among everyone

there is no hypocrisy at all.

[xuCGC002]

This story can be summed up in one word.









"Frick".

[phrostbyte]

I do not condone piracy of any kind, but calling him an hypocrite is a logical fallacy because the concept of copyright is too broad to be generalized this way. It is like saying "You are a hypocrite because you support arresting people for theft in a country but you disagree with killing women because of adultery in another country. You either support laws or disagree with them, you can't do both".

Furthermore, you are stopping at "using copyright" and not looking any further than that. When you consider the following interpretation:

1) support pirating music = wanting music to be freely shared among everyone

2) enforcing GPL = wanting code to be freely shared among everyone

there is no hypocrisy at all.

You bring up a good point. That's why licenses like the GPL are often called "Copyleft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft)", "all rights reversed". I've heard copyleft being called "copyright turned on it's head", or "using copyright to undermine itself". I can agree with both.

You can see the relation to copyleft in the Share-Alike symbol of Creative Commons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Share-alike

:)

[madnessjack]

Reminds me of my new favourite facebook group

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=195702748044

[Hwæt]

I hardly believe you have never violated copyright law. I see things you've done in this thread that could be constructed as copyright violations (copying other people's posts).


If you read the CoC that you agreed to when you registered on these forums, you would see that all public forum data is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Posts are public forum data.




Do you visit YouTube? You should be careful next time, because not everything on that site is authorized by the copyright holders, in fact, very little is. You could be liable for the things you download or view online, even if you didn't know it was illegal to do so.

I do not visit YouTube, it's nothing but trash. Plus, I don't even have Flash Player installed. :P


It is like saying "You are a hypocrite because you support arresting people for theft in a country but you disagree with killing women because of adultery in another country.

That makes absolutely no sense. Those laws have nothing in common, whereas Theft and Copyright Infringement possibly overlap.



Furthermore, you are stopping at "using copyright" and not looking any further than that. When you consider the following interpretation:

1) support pirating music = wanting music to be freely shared among everyone

2) enforcing GPL = wanting code to be freely shared among everyone

there is no hypocrisy at all.

There is indeed hypocrisy. If you're pirating music, then you're disobeying the author's wishes and violating the music's copyright. If you enforce the GPL, then you are enforcing another author's wishes, and in turn, his copyright. If the music's author doesn't obey the GPL, then the code cannot be free. But why should they respect your wishes? You didn't respect theirs.

Call it copyleft if you want, but any competent court of law would call the GPL a copyright license.

[Danny Dubya]

Personally, I believe that if you can make money with a particular commercial product and intend to, then there exists a social responsibility to buy it, or else you are messing up the economy by deciding for yourself that you can break the law, but your customers cannot. So, I have zero sympathy for businesses that get caught pirating software.

In any other circumstance, just download it if you don't feel like supporting the developer. Especially if they're a big, faceless entity not in any danger of disappearing any time soon and that nobody thinks well of, like Microsoft. ;)

[Cam42]

grilling people for pirating software is out of order, how many people can say they never pirated anything in there life?

and Pirating is not theft

Here's one heck of a can of worms.

[Dark Aspect]

Me: What the frick?


lol

Anyway, so if I am to understand what your saying. Its moral to pirate software you don't need but immoral to pirate something you need?

Wow great point, have a cookie

[Keyper7]

That makes absolutely no sense. Those laws have nothing in common, whereas Theft and Copyright Infringement possibly overlap.

You tied yourself too much to the specific example I used to illustrate my point and completely ignored the point itself. Forget about the example, then. My point was simply: the concept of "copyright" is as broad as the concept of "law". Too broad to offer only "respect all" or "respect none" as choices.


There is indeed hypocrisy. If you're pirating music, then you're disobeying the author's wishes and violating the music's copyright. If you enforce the GPL, then you are enforcing another author's wishes, and in turn, his copyright. If the music's author doesn't obey the GPL, then the code cannot be free. But why should they respect your wishes? You didn't respect theirs.

Except that "respecting the authors' wishes" is not what was being defended in the interpretation I offered. What was being defended is "freely sharing". The authors' wishes are irrelevant. You are not an hypocrite when you violate something you've never defended in the first place.

[lisati]

copyright infringement is not the same as theft. For example, stealing deprives the victim of something. You lose nothing in the case of copyright infringement.


For crying out loud! The author of the work is being deprived of income!

'nuff said.

[KiwiNZ]

Any topic or discussion that causes problems or drama will be closed. This area is intended for fun and community building, not arguments.