Linux: A Solution to Piracy?

[studiesrule]

I was just thinking about the true freedom that Linux and FOSS gives us. Most of my friends don't use Linux, but I've been using it for the past 3-4 years. Their general opinion is:


Well it's free granted, but what else? What does this 'free as freedom' mean to me. I can use a pirated version of Windows, and that would be cheap, near free. Why should I put up with Linux?


I guess I too had started out that way, but the other day, I had to open a document in Windows, and I needed a word processor. My first thought was Office, but then I thought: I'm not gonna use a pirated version of Office, why should I when I have an option. So I downloaded OpenOffice.org, and used it. But then and there, I understood what this freedom was. Choice.

I fully remember that before Linux became big, I didn't have a choice. If I want to open up a simple word document, or make a simple text file, Wordpad is absolutely inadequete (notepad... *hysterical laughter here*). MS Office costs a bomb. And I'm not ever going to use it to its potential. But I never had a choice.

I'll admit that I used to use pirated software (about 3 years ago), but now, I haven't touched something that wasn't original, and I can because now I have a choice, to use FOSS.

I was wondering if any of you had a similar deep understanding. I feel pretty deeply about this, and I know I'll never use pirated software, because now I have no excuse. I think a lot of people will start to understand this, and stop piracy.

P.S. Just for tabs, I live in India, which is pretty bad as far as piracy is concerned. Many small business and even several medium sized one use and distribute pirated software. I understand that this is a gentle topic though, and if this can be held against me, I won't be offended if a mod dumps this post.

[meng]

The opinion you quote is a complete misunderstanding of the concept of freedom as it applies to software. What is meant is free as in liberty, not money (okay money is another concept of freedom, just not the one I think is more important). Free as in liberty (free-libre, hence the name FLOSS) encompasses ideas such as: that if I purchase a song, I should be able to play that song on any of my electronic devices; that I would like to run a program on any computing platform; that I should be free to enhance a program to make it more functional for me (for which I would require access to the source code).

[Sef]

I was wondering if any of you had a similar deep understanding. I feel pretty deeply about this, and I know I'll never use pirated software, because now I have no excuse. I think a lot of people will start to understand this, and stop piracy.

One of the main reasons that I stick with GNU/Linux is ethics. I don't have a lot of money and can't afford XP and Microsoft Office. So I can either let my ethics slide and run pirated versions of each, stick to my ethics and run GNU/Linux. The former makes me unhappy with myself, and the latter keeps me happy with myself. The choice is easy.

[diepruis]

I was wondering if any of you had a similar deep understanding. I feel pretty deeply about this, and I know I'll never use pirated software, because now I have no excuse. I think a lot of people will start to understand this, and stop piracy.

Well, Linux is inextricably connected to Anarchism in my mind, so that would be my deep understanding. But it is wonderful not having to go through all the trouble pirated software gives you and to be that little bit more free from capitalist society.

[arvster]

I have to agree with this. At home I still have many cd's of pirated stuff from Windows times. All kinds of software and Windows itself on top of that pile. A couple of years ago before I started using Linux it could be hard to find something legal that didn't come as OEM with some hardware on my computer. Right now, even on a laptop that still has Windows you can't find any pirated software on it. Free, open source tools and programs have replaced them. My software piracy went from close to 100% to 0% in about a year :D And the funny thing is that I am not really worried about all those ethical implications that piracy causes, but I just find open source tools much better than some cracked, badly working software. Unfortunately I can't really say that about my music or film collection :(

[diepruis]

Unfortunately I can't really say that about my music or film collection :(

Have a look at this site: http://www.jamendo.com/en/

[arvster]

Thnx, diepruis. I already knew that site. I guess, my ethical side doesn't kick my unethical side's butt :D , so I often find myself just going the easy way and getting the stuff I like from p2p. The lack of services like iTunes here doesn't help either. And paying for allofmp3.com wouldn't help either, as I find it as unethical as getting the stuff from p2p. The money still stays in Russia and I don't believe the artists get much of it or any. That aside, piracy also had some good effects- without it I wouldn't even know 1/10 of the artists I know now and I wouldn't have gone to half of the concerts I have or bought the original albums that I have (from the bands that I really, really like).

[dasunst3r]

I remember the pre-Linux days when I would be surfing through all those VISTA-ridden* sites looking for warez, keygenz, and all the other junk. To add to that, I was about 13 or so, so porn is definitely something that makes me press Ctrl+W real darn quick (I am 20, and I still do that today). I knew this was wrong, but I simply didn't have the financial power to rid myself of the stuff. Well... open-source software stepped in and transformed my computer overnight. So yes, I see free software as being a solution to piracy, so long as people are willing to take the learning curve.

*VISTA = Virus Infection Spyware Trojan Adware

[kevinf311]

Like arvster, shortly after I went to college, my computer software was near 100% pirated. It started out as necessity, when XP Home self destructed and I needed XP Pro to replace it (or rather XP Pro was available in the dorm).

After getting XP Pro on there, it was Photoshop, Adobe Acrobat, AutoCAD, MS Office, and a host of others. I can't say that my computer is 0% pirated now though, as I keep an image backup of my windows programs (again out of necessity :rolleyes: ) making it easier to restore than to install their open counterparts. Of course, most of those applications are now covered by my main (Ubuntu) OS, so they are just taking up space.

The only thing I still use XP for is a couple of games (on occasion) and winscp (my school requires it for connecting, and I haven't been able to set up a counterpart). I think I will keep XP around, it's a good OS (*ducks*), and it will keep me sharp on windows stuff should I need it in future careers.

[matthew]

The idea of being able to use good, quality software at a reasonable or no cost without resorting to piracy and thereby retaining my ethics intact played a great role in my choosing to switch to Linux. The Ubuntu philosophy of "Humanity to others" is what made me choose this particular distro.

[macogw]

A girl in my dorm came to me asking for a pirated copy of Office or where she could get one. I told her if she used OOo she could have it free and not break the law, so now she does. At work (comp store) we install OOo by default when we sell a computer if the person doesn't say they want to buy MS Office, since we can't just give them that.

[K.Mandla]

Add me to the list. I haven't needed pirated software in a year now.

[migla]

I don't see pirating as unethical, only illegal (which of course is a reason not to do it too much). I do enjoy the warm fuzzy feeling I get from using open source, marveling at what wonderful things us humans can create together.

[riven0]

Wow, you guys sound just like me. It's amazing how my need for pirated software went down to about nil after discovering Linux. :mrgreen:

[diepruis]

Seems like the only solution to crime is to make everything free.

Viva la Revolution! :)

[teaker1s]

legally not an issue for me, more I believe that while harder to configure at first, linux doesn't have all the annoying side effects that all windows has. further to this my grandparents now have a ubuntu wireless desktop and it's setup so they can just boot read email write a letter and surf-no more viruses,spyware:mrgreen:

[Xyem]

Before I read this thread I hadn't even realised how much less pirated software I now use since discovering OSS. In fact, it has gone down to merely two things. Windows XP ( out of gaming necessity, I have SLI which isn't supported in 2000 *is severely not happy about that* ) and Windows 2000 ( which is my favourite and preferred of Microsoft's OS's, by far ).


I think I will keep XP around, it's a good OS (*ducks*)

I shall note that you ducked out of the way of that plate I just sent your way :) I disagree entirely with that statement to be honest. I have had nothing but problems with it ( the most recent being it will semi-freeze when I put a DVD in ) but obviously, other peoples mileage varies, so I respect your opinion. The plate is just a reflex reaction.. ;)

There are so many things I love about Linux and OSS in general. Add in the community that surrounds it and, in my opinion, it cannot be equalled. Good job guys and gals 8)

[d3v1ant_0n3]

6-7 months or so ago, I maintained 2 Windows computers- one legal retail XP Pro, one not so legal copy MCE 2k5, both with MS Office, Photoshop PS2, Nero 7 Ultra, etc,etc, etc. Total cost- $160 or so for XP Pro, and Bandwidth. And the Jolly Roger flag flying on the mast.

Since I installed Ubuntu (then various other distros, then back to ub), I've also had to reinstall windows on the kids' box. I have a completely legal OS in Ubuntu, they have a legal, registered Windows XP with legal, free, and where possible Free software alternatives to the yarr versions they had before.

I don't know exactly what made me realise it (I'm blaming Ubuntu:p ), but even in the windows world, more expensive does not equal better software.

[AndyCooll]

In effect it was my own personal decision to find an alternative solution to piracy that brought me to Linux.

I too spent many years using pirated software. However my conscience finally got the better of me. I realised that that I didn't necessarily need the best known software apps for the uses I made of my pc. And that there was in fact plenty of perfectly good free (but less well known) apps. At that stage, the word free meant to me free as in cost. As I started searching around I came across Firefox and Open Office.org. Indeed, I bought a legal copy of XP and put together perfectly good pc where the only cost was the OS licence.

In my search, I also discovered FOSS, and Linux. The whole open-source philosophy soon had me hooked, and it wasn't long before I was dual-booting.

For the last year or so I've only run Linux on my pc's. And I prefer open-source apps where possible, though I use closed-source where necessary.

:cool:

[pmj]

There is nothing unethical about piracy, and Linux is only somewhat of a solution to this non-problem when it comes to software. Most that is pirated isn't software, it's music, movies and TV.

[AndyCooll]

There is nothing unethical about piracy, and Linux is only somewhat of a solution to this non-problem when it comes to software. Most that is pirated isn't software, it's music, movies and TV.

Hmmm ...I'd be interested to know how you reach the viewpoint that piracy isn't unethical.

And although music, movies etc may be the most common pirated stuff, software piracy is very common too.

:cool:

[pmj]

Hmmm ...I'd be interested to know how you reach the viewpoint that piracy isn't unethical.

And although music, movies etc may be the most common pirated stuff, software piracy is very common too.

:cool:

Because no one has the right to tell me what I can and can't do with my own time and property, as long as I'm not directly harming someone else. If I want to use my time, my computer hardware, my electricity and my bandwidth to download a song, you have no right to say I can't.

Copyright and other IP laws are monopolies that takes rights away from people in hope that it will stimulate the creation of new creative works. Perhaps it's working, even today. But that still doesn't make them moral, only beneficial to society.

[K.Mandla]

Seems like the only solution to crime is to make everything free.
Henry David Thoreau said if nobody owned anything of value, there wouldn't be any crime. :mrgreen:

[kevinf311]

I shall note that you ducked out of the way of that plate I just sent your way :) I disagree entirely with that statement to be honest. I have had nothing but problems with it ( the most recent being it will semi-freeze when I put a DVD in ) but obviously, other peoples mileage varies, so I respect your opinion. The plate is just a reflex reaction.. ;)

I like to be prepared :D
I was talking to my mom today who is very anti-computer (not illiterate, just really hates computers) about the differences between XP and Ubuntu. My device was the noises I make when using the two OSes ( :-k get your minds out of the gutter [-( ).

With Ubuntu: I'll start to do something and realize that intermediate steps have been expedited and I go "Oh! Cool." (ex: Photo card mounting)

With XP: I'll start to do something and realize that the intermediate steps have been set to do something else and I go "Oh, man *sigh* ." (ex: Photo card mounting opening up wmp ](*,) )

[23meg]

Most that is pirated isn't software, it's music, movies and TV.Depends a lot on what part of the world you're talking about.

[AndyCooll]

Because no one has the right to tell me what I can and can't do with my own time and property, as long as I'm not directly harming someone else. If I want to use my time, my computer hardware, my electricity and my bandwidth to download a song, you have no right to say I can't.

Copyright and other IP laws are monopolies that takes rights away from people in hope that it will stimulate the creation of new creative works. Perhaps it's working, even today. But that still doesn't make them moral, only beneficial to society.

What you do with your time and property isn't anything to do with piracy. I agree that you shouldn't be told how to use your computer.

However I disagree with the viewpoint that you have an automatic right to download a song or software ...you don't. If someone says you should purchase the software or song first, that's ok with me. It's like going into a music store. Audio CD's are for sale, you can't simply pick one up and walk out with it ...you should pay for it first.

However ...once you've bought it, it's yours and you should be able to play it using whatever music system you choose ...and it is here where restrictions under copyright laws, IP laws etc stink. And if you mean piracy in the terms of you've bought an audio CD and don't consider it to be piracy if you rip it to your audio player then I'm in agreement, and am equally in agreement with the fact the view that you shouldn't be restricted on how you listen to that CD.

:cool:

[pmj]

What you do with your time and property isn't anything to do with piracy. I agree that you shouldn't be told how to use your computer.
Apparently you don't.


However I disagree with the viewpoint that you have an automatic right to download a song or software ...you don't. If someone says you should purchase the software or song first, that's ok with me. It's like going into a music store. Audio CD's are for sale, you can't simply pick one up and walk out with it ...you should pay for it first.
The difference is that taking the CD would be theft of actual property, and would cause a direct loss of this property for the store. No matter how you feel about piracy, you must understand that it's an action that is very different from theft. No one loses anything if I copy the information on the CD.

[Dr. C]

I would argue that software piracy is theft but it is very different from stealling a physical item. What is stolen is the opportunity of a legal transfer of the software that righfully belongs to either the copyright holder or to a competitor of the copyright holder.

Lets take Windows XP as an example.

If a pirated version of Windows XP is replaced with legal software there three possibilites.

a) The computer is not used at all, and not replaced with anything else - Possible but rare. If this is actually true then this is the case where "nobody looses"
b) The pirated version of XP is replaced by a legal version of a Microsoft OS. Then there is a financial loss to Microsoft and the theft was from Microsoft
c) The pirated version of XP is replaced with an OS from a competitor. In this case there is also theft, but it is not from Microsoft it is from the competitors of Microsoft, and yes this includes Ubuntu and this community. So the next time this or that hardware or software product is not supported in GNU / Linux I would place part of the blame on those who pirate Microsoft software. They actually did steal from us by pirating Windows.

[pmj]

I would argue that software piracy is theft but it is very different from stealling a physical item.
Sure, the word theft is very flexible (you can steal a heart, for example), but to redefine theft in order to get it to kind of describe piracy makes it meaningless. Legally speaking, piracy is NOT theft, and there's a reason for that.

Piracy is to ignore the government granted and artificial monopoly that is copyright. Nothing else.

[riven0]

Sure, the word theft is very flexible (you can steal a heart, for example), but to redefine theft in order to get it to kind of describe piracy makes it meaningless. Legally speaking, piracy is NOT theft, and there's a reason for that.

Piracy is to ignore the government granted and artificial monopoly that is copyright. Nothing else.

You got some revolutionary ideas there... I like it. :lol:

[Phatfiddler]

I would have to say, that no, Linux does not prevent the illegal use of software. If anything, I would say it makes it easier. No DRM to manage music or video files, VMware to run Windows on top of Linux, BitTorrent programs provided in distros, and text-based configuration files.

By not having the registry, keys, encrypted files all over the place, it seems easier to gain access to programs using Linux. I'm not speaking of FOSS software either - talking about $$ software for Linux. I was determined to "try" out several pieces of software that required a purchase, so I downloaded the software, and simply edited the license files. Not bragging by any means, but just explaining the simplicity behind such measures.

[pmj]

I would have to say, that no, Linux does not prevent the illegal use of software. If anything, I would say it makes it easier. No DRM to manage music or video files, VMware to run Windows on top of Linux, BitTorrent programs provided in distros, and text-based configuration files.

By not having the registry, keys, encrypted files all over the place, it seems easier to gain access to programs using Linux. I'm not speaking of FOSS software either - talking about $$ software for Linux. I was determined to "try" out several pieces of software that required a purchase, so I downloaded the software, and simply edited the license files. Not bragging by any means, but just explaining the simplicity behind such measures.

The point, though, is that using Linux makes software piracy a less attractive option. Not because you can't do it, but because you don't need to do it. I'm sure it also helps that there is so little commercial software even available for Linux. ;)

[Phatfiddler]

The point, though, is that using Linux makes software piracy a less attractive option. Not because you can't do it, but because you don't need to do it. I'm sure it also helps that there is so little commercial software even available for Linux. ;)
In this since, then I can understand how Linux may provide an alternative to piracy. I've yet to find a decent replacement for AutoCAD though;) But i know that argument all too well: if I want it, start a project for it:)

With OpenOffice, GIMP etc it is true that I don't have to resort to pirated versions* of PhotoSHop, Office etc, since the software is provided free of charge. The only software I truly defeated was Diskeeper and Norton, since I did, and still believe, that paying for maintenance of a broken OS was completely absurd.

*I wouldnt consider any of my Windows software to be "pirated" though. I bought all my software through the University near me using student discounts, since they never checked for a student ID, and I never distributed it.

[Soarer]

I think the problem with copyright (and patents) is not so much that they establish a monopoly, but that they establish an unregulated monopoly.

Consider someone who invents a car that will run on water. They COULD exploit it themselves, but they probably don't have the money. So they can sell it to an oil company who COULD just bury it. Now the world has no cars that run on water, and global warming continues.

(Please note:this is just an example, I don't believe this has or would happen).

So, patents should be granted only on condition that they will be exploited for the benefit of society. If they are not, in a reasonable time, they lapse.

In the same way, copyright licences should be available to anyone who wants to pay the licence fee. So no more 'you can only download from iTunes at a reduced quality and high cost' nonsense. And the price charged for a licence should be controlled (as, for example, pricing in telephone calls was here in the UK for as long as BT was considered to have a monopoly).

With a few other tweaks (IANAL) the two systems could once again have the respect and observance of the majority, and prices for things covered by them could be reasonable rather than extortionate (why did a CD of an album cost more than the cassette, when the latter was more expensive to manufacture?). At the moment, these laws are (INHO rightly) held in contempt by many people because they don't do what they are designed to do.

[slimdog360]

Ever since Ive started using Linux Ive pretty much stopped using pirated software. Though Ive had trouble getting any of my family to see things my way. My father seems to be under the impression that if you dont pay $1000 for something, that it must be crap. Im sure if I stopped assisting his pirating of software and music he would see things my way pretty quickly.

[studiesrule]

Meng:


The opinion you quote is a complete misunderstanding of the concept of freedom as it applies to software. What is meant is free as in liberty, not money (okay money is another concept of freedom, just not the one I think is more important). Free as in liberty (free-libre, hence the name FLOSS) encompasses ideas such as: that if I purchase a song, I should be able to play that song on any of my electronic devices; that I would like to run a program on any computing platform; that I should be free to enhance a program to make it more functional for me (for which I would require access to the source code).


The misunderstanding was what I had in the beginning. As I progressed, I realised exactly what you said, that with my computer, I should be able to use it. I feel infuriated everytime something like a printer or something says that it will work only on Windows. Of course, Linux supports it anyway, but the way they put it forward like you don't have an option...

Thanks to whoever for the jamendo link though, I'm checking it out now. As for downloading music from the net (illegally). I totally don't support it, but can't say that I don't use such music. But I do try and by their albums whenever I can.

The main point of piracy according to me is this: I've worked my bottom off on creating something, and suddenly somebody copies it without giving me my due. I'm sure everyone has had this happen to them, not nessecarily with music/software. You work on a project, and your mates don't do anything, but steal the credit. All of these are part of the same picture. You as a musician/dev, have done something, and you wand some appreciation/recognition from it. You also need money from it to sustain your livelihood. There is nothing wrong in copyrights, to an extent.
Recently, I was checking out the OpenTTD (http://www.openttd.com/) project. Chris Sawyer made this awesome game (I loved it as a kid), but that was over 12 years ago. I can't believe he is still holding on to its rights. I don't think he can extract much more money from it. I like the iD software model. They make an awesome game (quake), and after extracting their dues, they open the code. That is the kind of copyright I like. I read up about this in the Ubuntu philosophy.

I have a question to the greater dev community. As far as I've understood, behind a FOSS, like linux, the idea is the community. The dev enjoys making this awesome stuff, and being part of the community is another thrill. Have I got the picture right? I'm still surprised and impressed at how far a community project that doesn't run of anything but friendship can make the amazing things like wxWidgets, SDL, the linux kernel. I have to greatest respect for you, and I hope to be able to contribute when I become good enough to code that way.

[pmj]

The main point of piracy according to me is this: I've worked my bottom off on creating something, and suddenly somebody copies it without giving me my due. I'm sure everyone has had this happen to them, not nessecarily with music/software. You work on a project, and your mates don't do anything, but steal the credit.
And you think the way to solve this problem, assuming for a moment that it even is a problem, is to impose restrictions on what other people can do with their own time, energy and property? That is unacceptable.

But, I don't think it's a problem at all. You have no right to be able to make a living doing anything you want. You just don't. No one is under any moral obligation to pay anyone for work that was performed without a contract or other agreement that covers the work and payment. I don't think it would work very well if I one day decided to mow my neighbor's lawn and then demand payment, without talking to him first. And I certainly have no right to demand payment for this single day of work for the rest of my life, which is the way copyright works.

[AndyCooll]

But, I don't think it's a problem at all. You have no right to be able to make a living doing anything you want. You just don't. No one is under any moral obligation to pay anyone for work that was performed without a contract or other agreement that covers the work and payment. I don't think it would work very well if I one day decided to mow my neighbor's lawn and then demand payment, without talking to him first. And I certainly have no right to demand payment for this single day of work for the rest of my life, which is the way copyright works.

However, there are two parts to your argument. I totally agree with your viewpoint that you shouldn't be restricted with how you use your product. I'm not in agreement that you have an automatic right to obtain that product in the first place without paying any dues.

In your mowing scenario, you need to purchase a mower first. What you do with it, is up to you. To a certain point a software product is similar. Purchase it first, what you do with it after that should be up to you (including improving it if you so wish).

:cool:

[pmj]

I totally agree with your viewpoint that you shouldn't be restricted with how you use your product.
No, this is not what you think at all. If you did, you wouldn't find anything wrong with making copies of it for everyone you know. You want restrictions. And with copyright, which you defend, you would never actually own the information you pay for.


I'm not in agreement that you have an automatic right to obtain that product in the first place without paying any dues.
And why is that?


In your mowing scenario, you need to purchase a mower first. What you do with it, is up to you. To a certain point a software product is similar. Purchase it first, what you do with it after that should be up to you (including improving it if you so wish).
That wasn't the point of my mowing scenario at all. It was that if I didn't have an agreement with my neighbor that said that I would mow his grass in exchange for money, I couldn't mow his grass anyway and then demand payment. I could ask for it, sure, but I couldn't call the cops on him if he refused.