From: tal691@huxley.anu.edu.au (Tonio Loewald)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Why the Piracy? Here's why...
Date: 26 Jan 93 12:05:28 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.2.12

trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) writes:

>tal691@huxley.anu.edu.au (Tonio Loewald) writes:

>>The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the poor as well as the
>>rich to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, to steal bread.

>Forgive my arrogance, but poor under-bridge-dwellers don't have
>computers.  Anyone who can afford to buy a computer can afford
>to buy software.

In our society, it is perfectly possible for a writer, starving
in a garret, or a student starving in a college, to own or have
access to a computer. When I was a student, I -- and all of my
friends -- operated solely with pirated software. I had a
computer, but many of them simply used public access machines.

Anyone who can afford a tape player can afford legal tapes.
I don't pirate music, but I occasionally photocopy bits out of books
written by living writers whose books are available in
libraries or local bookshops. I think that writers are far
worse off, in general, than computer programmers.

>What it boils down to is that you are willing to honor and compensate
>the creators of tangible things (computers) but not the creators of
>intangible things (software that makes the computers useful)

No. What it comes down to is that most people CAN pirate software
but CANNOT pirate computers. If they could, with as little risk
and inconvenience, they would.

>And yet, you paid for your college education.  Why?  Obviously,
>because you couldn't get a copy of someone else's degree on a
>floppy...

Sleeping under bridges ain't doing you much good. (a) Don't
assume everyone lives in the US with US conditions prevailing.
I didn't pay for my college education, because I'm an Australian.
I am paying back some of it through my taxes now, but this law
was passed when I had all but completed my degree.

(b) What's your point?

>Bottom line, the creators have the right to set the price; if you
>think it isn't worth it, don't buy it.  By stealing, all you are
>doing is screwing over the poor suckers who have respect for other
>people's work.

I'm not stealing. I buy my software. The fact that I argue that
piracy is not theft does not mean I practice it. I even pay
licence fees for shareware. (When I was poor, and couldn't
afford these things, I did pirate, as mentioned earlier.)

In any case, as I have argued -- successfully it seems, since
no-one has bothered to argue the point -- piracy is not theft,
it is morally akin to illegal taping, videotaping of movies
off TV, and so forth.

I don't know if anyone remembers an early BMUG newsletter where
there was a licence agreement (joking) to the effect that the
book was licenced for one user only. It was very funny. Very
outrageous. Very close to the bone. If book publishers tried
to get away with the licencing crap that software publishers do,
they'd be laughed out of court. Eg. when I "bought" Modelshop,
I discovered from the licence agreement (only available for my
perusal once I have purchased the package) that I had bought
a licence _only_ and that this would _expire_ in 2020 or somesuch.

Tonio

-- 
Tonio Loewald | tal691@huxley.anu.edu.au

"Yes!! For the hundred and fiftieth time!
 We're burning in hell!!!" (John Callahan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer