Is piracy real threat to Linux/Ubuntu/Open Source?

[mysticmatrix]

I recently came across an article by one member of Tokyo Linux User Group here (http://web.archive.org/web/20071008165925/http://articles.tlug.jp/Windows_Is_Free). It strongly suggested that piracy is cause that most people don't adopt open-source. I realized that Piracy is in fact one of the strongest reason halting adoption of Linux even after its doing much better than other softwares. Atleast this has been true in my observation. Rarely have a found a person running original piece of software, except when it came from an OEM.
What do you think?
a) Piracy is true, and it is actively stopping adoption of Linux/Ubuntu/Opensource near my neighborhood.
b) Piracy is true, but it doesnot contributes significantly to reasons why people don't adopt Linux/Ubuntu/Opensource. Infact it is more ease of use,etc etc
c) I haven't observerd piracy in great deal, and it must be something happening elsewhere
d) Others(Please specify)

[Mazza558]

If (when) FOSS surpasses the pirated proprietary software in pure quality, then there will be no need for people to pirate.

[Lord Illidan]

He definitely has a point. I'm not sure I know anyone who got Vista legally..except by OEMs. Otherwise, they never pay for the software...and even retailers sell OSes at OEM prices here.

So, basically it knocks off one of Linux's greatest advantages, free as in beer. And with that factored out, the playing field shifts dramatically towards Windows, as they are already familiar with it. There is no need to learn a new interface, or learn how to use new software. The same goes for other software, be it Office, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, etc.

I am one of those few guys who made the decision to switch to Linux...however, I confess that I didn't look at the price. Sure, it's cool being free, but I could get XP for a measly amount at government grant prices, being a student. Or I could download it. I wanted to use Linux because of the challenge, and I also liked the philosophy of open source software.

[Lord Illidan]

If (when) FOSS surpasses the pirated proprietary software in pure quality, then there will be no need for people to pirate.

Still, there remains the difficulty of relearning new tools and relearning new software.

[leg]

I think some of it does now but people like to use software they are familiar with don't they. I work in a college and most of the students use cracked/ripped, whatever you want to call it, software. I always say to these people when the discussion arises that "If you want free software use free software".

[Lord Illidan]

I think some of it does now but people like to use software they are familiar with don't they. I work in a college and most of the students use cracked/ripped, whatever you want to call it, software. I always say to these people when the discussion arises that "If you want free software use free software".

But do they care what free software is? For most of them, free = gratis. They don't care if the source is open or not. For them, opensource software = freeware, and most freeware = crap or viruses, ergo opensource = viruses/insecurity.

When you mention that Linux is free, most people say: Is it legal? There must be a catch somewhere.

[Gremlinzzz]

Wouldn't care if a pirate stole my vista.But its to late for that !I threw it overboard .

[Lord Illidan]

Wouldn't care if a pirate stole my vista.But its to late for that !I threw it overboard .
Arr..you got it to walk the plank, did you?

[mysticmatrix]

If (when) FOSS surpasses the pirated proprietary software in pure quality, then there will be no need for people to pirate.

Compiz Fusion surpasses any crap Apple or Microsoft can offer. How many people know about that?
PS: This was just a example

[Lord Illidan]

Compiz Fusion surpasses any crap Apple or Microsoft can offer. How many people know about that?
PS: This was just a example

Few do. However, until recently, it was too hard to get working for most people.
EDIT : Of course, gutsy will probably solve most of these problems, but not enough. Drivers are one of the great problems in Linux....damn Nvidia for not releasing OSS drivers that can be preinstalled with any linux distro. If ATI does this, my next card will def. be ATI..
I remember showing a friend of mine beryl on youtube. He was : Woot! This is great!

He's not bad with computers, so he tried to get it installed. However, he quickly ran into difficulties as he had an ATI card. Eventually, with much trouble he got it installed, but he said : boy, it wasn't worth all the crap I had to go through. What could I say? I had an nvidia card, and, to boot, 4 years of linux experience. He had no experience in Linux, even though through numerous google howtos, he managed to do it. Kudos to him.

Now he just uses Linux for servers, as he is a hardcore gamer.

[p_quarles]

But do they care what free software is? For most of them, free = gratis. They don't care if the source is open or not. For them, opensource software = freeware, and most freeware = crap or viruses, ergo opensource = viruses/insecurity.

When you mention that Linux is free, most people say: Is it legal? There must be a catch somewhere.
The irony there, obviously, is that a pirated copy of Windows is very likely to be spying on you, and Linux is virtually guaranteed not to be (Linux Genuine Advantage notwithstanding).

It's absolutely true, though, that many people prefer to steal expensive software rather than legally use free software. I've heard "you get what you pay for" used (with no ironic intent) as a reason not to use free software. Heck, even Steve Wozniak said something along those lines recently.

[tcoffeep]

I don't see, in my view, how piracy can affect the open-source community, but that's just me.

[Lord Illidan]

The irony there, obviously, is that a pirated copy of Windows is very likely to be spying on you, and Linux is virtually guaranteed not to be (Linux Genuine Advantage notwithstanding).

It's absolutely true, though, that many people prefer to steal expensive software rather than legally use free software. I've heard "you get what you pay for" used (with no ironic intent) as a reason not to use free software. Heck, even Steve Wozniak said something along those lines recently.

Most people don't care that Windows is spying on them. The time when they start complaining is that they can't upgrade due to WGA..Then they start looking around for OSS alternatives, but even then, they never replace the whole OS. Oh, they might use VLC, or Firefox, but it takes a strong guy to get Open Office.

Also, something produced by volunteers and hackers? Must be illegal, man..why wouldn't they want to get paid?

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

I think that Microsoft's fight against piracy has helped Open Source software.

Many people are starting to dislike Microsoft's apparent attitude that they own your computer. They feel like Microsoft is invading their privacy, ie, it's none of their business if I bought a CD or DVD. And, Microsoft does not have any real reason to update software on a PC when the PC owner has explicitly selected no updates to be installed without asking first.

Many people are afraid to make their computer dual boot, thinking they may break something. I think when more people like myself start showing the young folks in their 30s and 40s that it's not that hard, more people will try it.

By the way, my grandchildren don't notice what OS is running when they want to use my computer to play online games.

[Kvark]

No, not in the long run.

Piracy does increase the market share of proprietary software, an application like for example Photoshop would be very rare if it really did cost money. DRM however annoys and tortures their customers until they run away. I'm sure many tried Ubuntu not because they wanted Ubuntu but because they wanted Windows without DRM. Some of those become disappointed that it's not Windows, others become more interested when they find out it's really something else.

Software as a product is going to bleed to death because they can't enforce the artificial scarcity of their products, all they can do is annoy their own customers with DRM. They will have to switch to software related services or at least software as a service to survive. Once they have made that switch they have nothing to lose and everything to win on opening all their source code in the software related services case or client side source code plus APIs to communicate with their servers in the software as a service case.