Re: What is "piracy" and is it ever justified
 

I would highly recommend everyone reading this book:

http://www.free-culture.cc/freecontent/

It is a bit long, but worth the read.

Re: Angry Birds Levelpack back in OVI-Store (Edit: and now not, again...)
 

No Piracy is shouting "avast my hearty give me all your booty" from one boat to another.

Copyright theft is using a copy of someone's intellectual property against the wishes of the creator.

While I believe copyright law has gone way out of whack. The term Piracy is still totally invalid.

Re: What is "piracy" and is it ever justified
 

I'm with mrojas. It is indeed worth the read.

Re: What is "piracy" and is it ever justified
 

The level of selfishness in this thread is appalling. Appalling I say! Have any of you considered asking the code how it feels about being pirated? One-sided conversations are boring....seriously.....

Re: Angry Birds Levelpack back in OVI-Store (Edit: and now not, again...)
 

1) copyright is a different concept that I have not discussed here. It has some legitimacy but not as far as the use of public force to impose fees for copying. (see 5).)

2&3) I don't see your point about Coding, Coding Languages and compilers. If you wan't to talk about difference between source code and compiled code, I don't see the issue. Compiled code is still a sequence of data and therefore it can be copied and reused.

4) I'm french and sometimes when I write in english I let mistakes like this drop. This is silly but there's no reason to be that contemptfull.

5) Claiming a poem is yours when it's not, is something that goes far beyond just learning it. This is the real meaning of intellectual ownership : when you claim having made something although you have not, this is identity theft, and this has to be punished by law. But when you copy something without pretending that you made it, I don't see any reason why it should be punished. Please consider this as a very important difference. It's the difference between copying and counterfeiting.

It is just the same as a painter that would made a copy of a master's work. As long as he doesn't imitate the signature and doesn't try to sell the painting pretending it's a real, there is no legal offense, because there is no lie, no deception whatsoever.

Law must protect the sign : but it must protect its integrity, not its commercial value. Only market forces should decide its value.

6) Again : internet is made using many protocols and software that are mostly free and open. When you send an email, you don't pay anything for the people who wrote SMTP.

The reason is that no price would have any real economic justification. Say you want to charge $1 for your piece of code. Why $1 ? Why not $10 ? Why not $.01 ?

Truth is that when you sell one item (a digital copy of your code), it costs you $0, that's why you can sell it at virtually any price. There is no rational justification for any price of a zero marginal cost product.

Re: Angry Birds Levelpack back in OVI-Store (Edit: and now not, again...)
 

A professional programmer doesn't necessary live on selling software. I used to work as a programmer, and I never sold any line of code. I was working for a firm that employed me to develop software mainly for the company, in response for its very specific needs.

Actually I think this is the only rational way to give economic value to a zero marginal cost activity. Since the value of the product initially emerge from the work of the producer, and since this work is time-delimited, it has to be paid as a salary. Which means that, according to me, software industry is much more a service industry than a goods industry.

Re: What is "piracy" and is it ever justified
 

Basically a credit card is a device that is designed to identify you. It is not much more than an electronic signature.

If you clone a credit card and attempt to use it to withdraw some money that you don't own, it is just the same as if you were counterfeiting a signature on a pay cheque. By doing so you pretend to be someone you're not. This is fraud, identity theft, and must be punished by law.

Now if it was possible to clone a credit card that easily, then it would mean that the protection system of the bank has become obsolete, and better ways of electronic identification should be designed. (I guess you don't use PIN protected cards as we do in Europe, but anyway...)

An other way of seeing this is to consider that your card is similar to the keys of your house. It is a device designed for protection against intrusion in your property and theft of your belongings. If someone manages to make a copy of your keys without you being aware of it, then he can enter your house without effraction and take your belongings. Though, It would still be theft. Keys are a protection device, but they doesn't give any property right. The only thing that gives this is a official document which states that you are the owner of the house. It is this document and the sign of public authority written on it, that has to be protected by public force.

As we can see this is a very different issue from the so called "piracy". The law must protect sign, not data. Protection of data has to be mainly a matter of personal responsibility.

Re: What is "piracy" and is it ever justified
 

I have a question:

Say I'm in a position to develop a compatibility layer that enables you to run Android and iPhone apps in a VM sandbox on the N900 at a decent speed. To do this, I will have to license some things from Apple and Google and employ a number of people to code, test, polish and package the thing. There's a reasonable investment of funds, time and effort for this whole thing - but I figure it may be worthwhile if I can get it back from the product sale.

I will sell it for a reasonable $15 per device.

Am I not entitled to charge the $15 and enforce that fee to -everyone- that wants my program?

Re: What is "piracy" and is it ever justified
 

You are entitled to charge the $15, as well as you entitled to keep the code closed.

Or the reverse, you are entitled to give everything away for free.

And no one will have a saying on it, because it is something you developed, you own it, and hence, you have the right of doing with it whatever you want.

It would be wrong for people to distribute your $15 software for free, as well as it would be wrong for people to charge $15 for your software if you were to give it away for free.

I think that is simple and clear enough.

However, the world is very rarely simple and clear. Around here, where I live, piracy flourishes freely, because people want commercial software, but they don't have the money to pay it. The cost of a Windows license is around 3 times the minimum wage!

So it was interesting when, a few years ago, Microsoft began to offer Windows XP and Office Proffesional in universities at $15 as a student bundle. Everyone and their mother found a way into the campuses to get their legal copy. This is also an interesting read about a similar phenomena: Gates in China.

Now, what would happen if someone took your software, reverse-engineer it, improve upon it and release it? Then, there is where I would recommend people to read Free Culture.

Re: What is "piracy" and is it ever justified
 

When you start selling your program, you're the only one who owns it. Some people might want it, and since you are the only one who owns it, they might come to you and accept to buy your program at your price, $15.

Let's say I buy it. In law theory, there is a principle which comes to property right, that's states that when I own something, I have the right to use it, but also to get rid of it or to give it to someone else. When you sold me your program, unless you had me sign a specific clause in the selling contract, you gave me that right to give this program to anyone I want. This is called alienation : the act of selling makes you give up some rights regarding what is sold.

So to answer your question, you have the right to charge $15 to anyone who wants you to give him your program.

But you don't have the right to invoke public force to punish someone who bought it to you and then gave it to someone else.

My opinion is that software editors should not sell their products by individual copies, but instead they should sell publication.

Say your firm developed a software which reached $1M in development costs. You want to sell it and would like to make $100K benefit, i.e. 10% profit.

Instead of trying to sell 100 thousand copies of software to 100 thousand of people at a price of $11 each, you should first publish some advert, some demo or some restricted version of the software in order to create demand and have the public realize its usefulness. Then you sell the publication of the complete program, for a price of $1.1M.

Potential buyers would have no choice but joining their money in order to obtain the software. You might for instance create a money bar on your site and explain that your program will only be published when the money level will reach the desired amount.

According to me this is the only way to sell digital data without threatening your customers of any legal proceeding.