What is your full viewpoint/moral belief on the topic of warez (software, music, etc.)

[LordMaul]

Yes, I download everything that can be downloaded. Music, programs, anything. If I was an artist, I wouldn't mind people downloading my stuff. Same for a programmer. However, I also own hundreds of hundreds of dollars worth of bought, legal games, etc.

 

[Staples]

The only thing I use occationally use that I didn't pay for is Photoshop. Word, Win XP, ect. I paid for. A lot of the stuff I use is freeware that is so developed nowdays that it rivals any commercial software, for my purposes at least.

 

[dexvx]

I dont do it to software because I think software developers are hard working people and its something that I can relate to. I usually "try" stuff out before I buy it. Then theres also fair use. If theres a LAN party, I will copy a game to play it for about 2 hours. However, most of the games at a LAN are games I own anyways, so tahts rather rare.

But it seems Ms. (or is it Mrs.?) Rand did not live in the age of computers. By COPYING a file, you are not depriving the company of any product. They don't actually lose anything. Stealing a boxed CD is one thing, but copying is another. If you have no money and you steal a boxed product, you are depriving the company of something. If you have no money and you COPY some files, you are NOT depriving the company of anything. In fact one could argue that you are helping them, since you're increasing its popularity.

Thats something that will definitely be addressed in the future. It can be interpretted multiple ways right now. But I believe that interpretation is flawed. The company will lose business because instead of you buying from the company, the company gets nothing. You can argue that if you cannot get it freely, then you will not buy it anyways, but statistically, its shown that most poeple will buy it if it is not available freely. It is the fact that you are liable for their UNSEEN LOSSES. Simple example: you are hit by a car. Yet you still get paid for "lost wages / pain suffering" even though theres no garuntee that you actually deserve lost wages/pain compesnation. You could've been fired the next day for all you know or you could've broken your back. In fact you could very well die and for some bizarre twist that accident saved your life (i'll let you imagine some scenarios). Bottom line: its projected loss.

What I think is the simplest explanation for this file-sharing is that since you CAN do it and GET AWAY with it, people WILL do it. People always tend to go for their own selfish benefits. Its proven true in the past and I believe it will prove true until that 1 distant future which I will never live to see.

But my rant is that the RIAA and the MPAA are monopolies. They get what they deserve if they have the right mind to collude on prices ($20 for a CD ... gimme a break).

 

[GrumpyMan]

I only download music that is 10 years or older. It is my belief that music should have a time period like patents do, after so many years people or other record companies other than the one who recorded it should be able to put it out for free or use it as they wish, especially the artist who actually wrote the material. I don't believe that Michael Jackson should own the rights to all Beatles music, it just seems wrong to me that Paul McCartney should ask MJ permission to re-record Yesterday.

 

[Sketcher]

Never done any of that questionable schtuff.

However, for some reason - my computer crashed after trying to install the Windows XP Professional SP-1 patch...

😀

 

[res1bhmg]

I haven't bought a CD in years since I've been on a broadband connection. I download MP3s constantly, and burn them to CD if need be.

All the software on my computer is either warez, cracked shareware, or freeware.

As long as it's free and easy to pirate software and music, it will continue to be done.

DISCLAIMER: The thoughts presented are merely my opinion and I do not condone pirating software or media of any sort.

 

[datalink7]

I never Warez games.

I do so for Music.

I do for programs that are WAY out of my price range (photoshop). Stuff like Norton Antivirus I'll buy.

 

[ViperVin2]

Let just say I use my DSL connection to the max. 😉

 

[AsukaStrikes]

hANSON: mmmmmmm bop, mmmmmmm bop......

the music industry is soo generous, infact they still give tupac a nickel for every CD he sells from the grave

 

[spanky]

warez is wrong. but for most ppl, what they say and what they do is usually a bit different. i will stop there.

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

I cannot deny nor confirm those allegations.

 

[TheOmegaCode]

Originally posted by: ViperVin2
Let just say I use my DSL connection to the max. 😉

Last December I had so much traffic that the good folks at Pacbell had to rip and rebuild me from their router.
As for warez, I don't think it's a moral "estabolishment" but I don't think Microsoft is either... The only things I've been downloading lately are older movies (9th gate, dark crystal, stigmata, etc) and mp3's because I don't have much of a use for MS programs in FreeBSD.

 

[B00ne]

I do have games as well as programs that are not free but I dont see a problem with that because that is stuff that I wouldnt have bought anyway and that I am usually not even using. With games its more like I get it check it out usually it sux and gets thrown off my HD I still have the CD then but it not like I am using it. The games I play, I bought - good work needs to be payed for.

As for programs it pretty much the same. I am not gonna buy some $1500 photoshop for using it once a year for things I could also do with free programs. The drawing line is when I see I need it or If I would be using it for work. Besides companies tend to forget the advantage they get from warez ( not valid for games but most professional programs) ppl use it (at home) get aquainted and know the prgram - if these ppl are in a company and the company is to buy software what sogtware will be bought - the one that ppl know and are aquainted with. Companies that present numbers of how much money they "lost" is BS I bet most ppl wouldnt have bought the software anyway as they for real dont have a use for it justifying the cost. And since software companies usually are making incredible profits cant mean the lost all to much money.

So basically I have warez which I hardly ever use and most of it just dusts in in a CD case and never gets used again after burning - I guess its the collectors instinct 🙂

But selling warezed stuff is defiantely a case for the police

 

[tm37]

again this discussion enters up and again people will try feebly to justify their theft.

Of course none of them see the ENTIRE Picture.

The I am a poor college student so i CAN'T AFFORD PHOTOSHOP is a laughable excuse. I wish I was a college student because then I could buy Photoshop elements for about 20 bucks.

The fact is if it weren't availible for free you would either ante up the cash OR find another CHEAPER product to do what it is you want. One could actually make the arguement that by pirating windows you are hurting linux:Q If you truely can't afford windows then you would have to find something cheaper and or/free. (i.e. linux)


I find it hard to beleive that if you can afford a computer you can't AFFORD a product that YOU NEED. you really need to reajust your NEEDS if that is the case.

Also the arguement that you wouldn't buy it if you couldn't pirate it is bugus BECAUSE you would either buy it or a cheaper/ free alternate. The fact is you haven't looked and haven't thought about it. It was there and it was FREE and EASY.

And pirates are the ones who make it hard for me to make legal back-ups of my games, go through activation of my microsoft products, and make CD's Unplayable on my computer.

 

[Red Dawn]

I'm a post Apocalyptic Warrior magically sent back to this time so of course I have a Dog eat dog attitude. Since I have this attitude I say take what you can get , any means you can get it and if someone complains about it just remember that they will soon be incinerated (or their civil rights will be legislated away through actions of the lawyers and Lobbiests of the RIAA and the MPAA).

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I'm a post Apocalyptic Warrior magically sent back to this time so of course I have a Dog eat dog attitude. Since I have this attitude I say take what you can get , any means you can get it and if someone complains about it just remember that they will soon be incinerated (or their civil rights will be legislated away through actions of the lawyers and Lobbiests of the RIAA and the MPAA).

I could not have said it any better RD. Of course I'm an amoral sociopath so I have an excuse, not that I care anyways. 😉

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

One cannot play it on demand on the radio.

You've never called in & requested a song have you?

How many times a day can you do this? How long does it take them to play your song, if ever?

A radio song request is not ownership, it doesn't even come close.

Ah, 'ownership.' Do you think you really own any software or music, even when you've paid for? After you buy a car does the dealer tell you you can't drive it at certain times? Can't let others ride in it? Can't lend it to a friend? Well you get those restrictions when you 'buy' intellectual property, and that's deemed perfectly acceptable. Why? Because physical property and intellectual property are different animals, the same rules don't apply to both. And this goes for folks on both sides of the fence. You steal a car, it's definitely wrong on the grounds that somebody has suffered damages, the owner is out the value and useage of the car. Now, you download a song for personal use only, one that's on a CD where everything else is crap, and you'd never shell out $15 for an album with just one good song, where are the damages? I'll agree that that is an ideal example, and you can argue if the ability to get it for free motivates the intention of never buying it, but in that example, again, where are the damages to the copyright holder?

When you've bought music, you may lend it to anyone you want. You can even copy it for personal use. What you cannot do with a car, and what they don't want you to do with music, is "lend" it to friends while keeping and using a copy of it for yourself.

Anyone who says they never would have bought the CD, yet downloads the music and enjoys it is benefiting from the labor of others without paying for it. It IS immoral, no matter how one may try to justify it. You are NOT entitled to the labor of others, no matter how many excuses you come up with. If you think the rest of the CD is crap, don't buy it and don't listen to any of it.

But no, you feel entitled to it. As if the artists and the record companies owe you something. They do not. And if you don't like the way they do business, don't support them.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
If the person has money, then its wrong.

If the person has no money (poor or broke, not cheap), then it doesn't matter: its inconsequential to the owner of the IP. If I have no money to buy photoshop, will Adobe be hurt if I download it? No, of course not. Whether I download it or not, it makes no difference to them, since they will never see money from me.

So if you have money, buy it, if you don't...its all right.

If you don't have the money (more like are not willing to sacrifice for it), you are not entitled to it. Period.

"If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor.
Any alleged "right" of one man, which necessitates the violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right.

No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as "the right to enslave.""

"Poverty is not a mortgage on the labor of others - misfortune is not a mortgage on achievement - failure is not a mortgage on success - suffering is not a claim check, and its relief is not the goal of existence - man is not a sacrificial animal on anyone's altar nor for anyone's cause - life is not one huge hospital."

I would have said this myself, But I think Ayn says it so much better.

Some people simply don't have it, it's not a matter of sacrificing.

But it seems Ms. (or is it Mrs.?) Rand did not live in the age of computers. By COPYING a file, you are not depriving the company of any product. They don't actually lose anything. Stealing a boxed CD is one thing, but copying is another. If you have no money and you steal a boxed product, you are depriving the company of something. If you have no money and you COPY some files, you are NOT depriving the company of anything. In fact one could argue that you are helping them, since you're increasing its popularity.

By copying a file, and using it, you are depriving the owner of the IP his rightful payment for services rendered. You are benefitting from his labor without paying for it. He has, in effect, become a slave to your "poverty" and excuses.

And I don't care how "poor" a person claims to be. If they can afford a computer, they can afford the basic software they need to run it. If they can afford audio equipment, they can afford to buy a few CDs. If they feel they really "need" them, they can work harder to "afford" them.

Your poverty makes you no more, or less entitled to anything than anyone else.

 

[Red Dawn]

Anyone who says they never would have bought the CD, yet downloads the music and enjoys it is benefiting from the labor of others without paying for it. It IS immoral

According to you. However, what you consider moral and immoral is of no concern to anyone but yourself. Add the phrase"According to God" and you would sound just like Jerry Falwell.

 

[UltraQuiet]

It is always so funny to read how people rationalize being thieves. " the record companies are crooks, they treat artists like sh!t", " I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so their not losing money.", "I can't afford it." or my favorite, " It's not illegal." (people actually believe that). Here's a clue-- If you didn't buy it, you stole it. Rationalize it in your little pea brains all you want but theft is theft.

 

[Red Dawn]

Rationalize it in your little pea brains all you want but theft is theft.

Yeah but is stealing from thieves really immoral?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Anyone who says they never would have bought the CD, yet downloads the music and enjoys it is benefiting from the labor of others without paying for it. It IS immoral

According to you. However, what you consider moral and immoral is of no concern to anyone but yourself. Add the phrase"According to God" and you would sound just like Jerry Falwell.

Bite me you amoral moron 😛 This thread ASKED me for my opinion. If you don't want to know, don't ASK.

Have I ever come here to AT and started my own threads about IP theft? Have I gone out of my way to express my opinion on this matter? NO. I have only offered my opinion in threads that ASKED us what those opinions were.

This has nothing to do with nebulous morals and BS promises of an afterlife to control people, Red. This has to do with depriving creators of IP their rightfull payment for services rendered. In other words, it has to do with one person's sense of entitlement infringing on the rights of another.

You can compare me to religious nuts all you want if it makes you feel better about your theft, Red. It's no skin off my back.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Rationalize it in your little pea brains all you want but theft is theft.

Yeah but is stealing from thieves really immoral?

How are they theives, Red? Have they taken something from you without your permission or by force or threat of force?

You act as if you are entitled to music and software at terms you desire. Why? They don't owe you a damn thing.

 

[Red Dawn]

You can compare me to religious nuts all you want if it makes you feel better about your theft, Red. It's no skin off my back.

Hahaha.. I knew comparing you to that hypocrite JF would send you over the edge. I apologize for that uncalled for insult but the Devil made me do iT

 

[Red Dawn]

ow are they theives, Red? Have they taken something from you without your permission or by force or threat of force?

No they coerce artists into signing away the rights to their music so they (the RIAA) can reap the profit.