Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554138)

So becuase you have bought some then you feel you are entitled to all, even though you may not have contributed anything to the people whi's work you are using? Rather selfish really.

Originally Posted by attila77 (Post 554124)

You also pay for goods or services 'only' because it is required by the seller, not because you like it :) But seriously, software is tricky business, it's very difficult to measure the 'added value', or justification as you put it. I know we established analogies suck, but think about this way.

Imagine public transportation. You have the option of buying a ticket or walk. Instead, you just jump over guardrails, claiming you only want to 'test' the system and that you will buy a ticket at the end destination if you like it, or claim that if could not get in without a ticket, you would have not used the system anyway. The transport company has the same costs regardless if they have 1 or 100 passengers per carriage, so you might think it doesn't matter.

Now, for those that DO buy a ticket, what you are asking is, why is it bad if you buy a ticket and then let in 99 of your buddies in for free ? Because at 1 customer per ride, the system is not profitable. If none of your buddies would have paid anyway, the system is doomed as it's not sustainable at that ticket price. If some would have paid, but didn't, the system is also doomed, as they lost revenue. Only paying customers make THIS particular business model viable. Alternatively, they could turn to subscription, or, the easy way, just tax everybody (not really a win, eh ?).

That's why many systems have complex admission systems and/or people checking passenger tickets occasionally - they are the transport company's equivalent DRM. Does the guy who checks your ticket bother you ? He could penalize you - you might have bought a proper ticket and misplaced it. Paranoid companies might employ hidden X-Ray machines to check on you. Your actions while using the system might be supervised via camers. But the bottom line is the same - whether you are bothered by tickets or not, your choice is to USE or NOT USE the transport system. You can protest in front of the company about terms, prices, but you DO NOT GET TO RIDE WITHOUT A TICKET WHATEVER THE 'REASON'. This also applies to copying - I hope I don't have to explain why copying tickets for your buddies is a problem ?

My suggestion is to get a bicycle. Clean, free and keeps you in shape :D

Originally Posted by Bratag (Post 554110)

I tried the donation route Fatal on an app that had 300,000 downloads. I ended up with about 50 donations. But I received THOUSANDS of emails telling me exactly what they thought was wrong/new features/general *****ing. I tried to support them as best I could but when I started getting death threats against myself and my family when I didn't give them the answer they wanted (no I am not making this up) I made the app paid (still leaving a cut down version for free). At least that way If I was going to have to deal with *******s I would be making a small amount from it.
The whole experience of that and a number of the responses here have left me with very much a feeling of FARK USERS, and an urge to write software purely for myself only.

Originally Posted by azorni (Post 554109)

I doubt it would be the end of the world.

Also, since you mention Nokia, please notice that this firm has made a huge step towards open source.

As far as i'm concerned, I had no smartphone but as soon as I heard about the N900 with a version of debian inside, I immediately went to a store and bought it cash.

So my guess is that Nokia has made quite some money with this open source software.

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554113)

And yet WoW for Blizzard and Eve Online are available to install via a free download.. and you just pay a monthly subscription for services rendered. Which you can cancel at any time.. and in the case of WoW play on a free WoW Server if you want.

Savage II and Planeshift are less well-known MMORPG's because they don't spend as much into advertising but are both free.

*shrug*

Originally Posted by azorni (Post 554153)

But although I don't deny the utility of public transportation, I very much doubt about the utility of commercial software.

And I would follow your suggestion, and use a bicycle, which equivalent in software industry would be open source software, I guess.

Originally Posted by Bratag (Post 554117)

So all paid software should be pay by month based - hell thats fine with me.

Originally Posted by Flandry (Post 554171)

I'm not saying it would end the world; i was (too subtly, i guess) pointing out that in your make-believe world where there is no mechanism to protect, nor respect for, intellectual property, we simply wouldn't be having this conversation because Nokia wouldn't exist, Arm wouldn't exist, and so forth.

It's all fine and dandy to say every idea should be free, but the creation of the ideas is not free, and the implementation isn't, either. Your creators have to eat and their machines have to be bought and their resources have to be obtained. This is the philosophical basis for copyright and patent law: permit intangible products to be given a value by their creators. In the absence of that, there would be very very little technological innovation.

Originally Posted by ysss (Post 554095)

@HumanPenguin: I guess I'm an optimist :P
It also pose the question of how many open source users are here becauses they're 'misguided' or they misunderstood things...

Originally Posted by ColdFusion (Post 554114)

...
It's not about making profits! Never was!

Originally Posted by ColdFusion (Post 554114)

...
The problem until recently was that the only way to ensure innovation was to ensure profits. Nowadays that's no longer true, as one can see the vast amount of FOSS and CreativeCommons stuff being produced.
...

Originally Posted by ColdFusion (Post 554114)

...
So if your interest in copyright lies solely on making profits, then you're doing it wrong! ;)
..

Originally Posted by ColdFusion (Post 554114)

...
Just wait some years until replication technology matures, and there's a RepRap in every home! :)

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554155)

This is exactly the point I was trying to make earlier. I bet that the people moaning the most and requiring most of your time too were the ones that hadn't paid for it.

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554132)

Something like Fallout 3 I admit.. there's no middle ground. You aren't always connected to their servers.. but something as graphically intensive and world-in-depth as that game took 1000's upon 1000's of hours to build. People need compensation.

Personally.. I think the problem is not that they need money but that people don't donate. I don't think requiring pay software, or enforcing DRM are the way to go - I think people that use software should be more giving if they like and actually *use* it.

Unfortunately... the latter isn't happening - forcing people to do the former - forcing people like me to have to make a decision on whether or not I want to support that company or writer.

Originally Posted by Bratag (Post 554126)

/dev/null my *** I forwarded them all to the ecrimes division of my local police. Which resulted in a 12 year old boy begging me to drop the charges - this after he threated to kill me, rape my wife and kill my child. If I had it in my power I wouldnt simply have had him charged I would have beaten the little **** within an inch of his life.

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554132)

...
Something like Fallout 3 I admit.. there's no middle ground. You aren't always connected to their servers.. but something as graphically intensive and world-in-depth as that game took 1000's upon 1000's of hours to build. People need compensation.
...

Originally Posted by Bratag (Post 554191)

<snip email that shouldn't need repeating>

Originally Posted by azorni (Post 554133)

I wrote : « a grammar book is still a book ».

This is metalanguage concept and this should not be ignored by a software engineer. I'm quite surprised.

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554144)

Why is this different? Software on DVD's are a signifanct part of the content too.

I have investment banks amongst my customers too but what tools were you using in your development? If you used the MS stack at any point that is retail software!

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554201)

So commercial software doesn't take that long to build? You obviously have little idea of the metrics at work here!

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554152)

Entitled? No. Nobody's entitled to anything in life.. except maybe life itself.
...

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554152)

Not once.. ever have I had a scratched or broken disc replaced. Never. If you try returning a broken disc to a store they will laugh at you if you tell them you bought it in fine condition.. this is just wear and tear from use. You're being a little ridiculous here. When you buy a DVD you aren't buying a life-long commitment from Hollywood to make sure you can always watch that movie.. otherwise Blu-ray would be a free upgrade.
...

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554152)

This difference has been beaten so badly it's not even worth repeating. I personally don't feel I hurt anybody by doing because the original was not removed from anybody. If someone knocks off a jewelry store then store is out the money of that jewelry. If someone went into a jewelry store and cloned all the diamonds and offered me a free one. I could skirt by on that. I wasn't going to be buying the software in either case. I didn't "take" any money from them.



Love you too honey... Kisses :p

Originally Posted by azorni (Post 554153)

...
And I would follow your suggestion, and use a bicycle, which equivalent in software industry would be open source software, I guess.

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554210)

I'm sorry, I thought you had bothered to answer the original point posted!

The point I was making was that the protocol is a documented standard that can be implimented in several ways but the individual implimentation is unique. In much the same way that several sentences can be used to convey the same meaning but all have to adhere to the protocol in order for that communication to be understood.

Originally Posted by azorni (Post 554182)

Then how do you explain that so many technological innovations came from open source branch ?
...

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554225)

Only if you designed and built the bicycle yourself!

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554222)

Well obviously someone that loves to take but can't be arse to pay their way - still, apparently no one is entitled to anything so maybe his ISP will remove his connection!:)

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554195)

I *really* didn't want to get dragged into this debate... as I said previously.. zealots on both sides are not going to be changing their mind.

I do like the phrase "Do no evil".. as long as I feel I am not harming or hurting anybody.. I'm personally fine with myself. I wouldn't dream of enforcing my opinions on anyone else though.. And you guys can continue to rip each others heads off all day if you want but this argument is *not* new.. and you're not likely to break any new ground that hasn't already been discussed. The open-source followers are not likely to agree paying is a good thing.. and the software companies are not likely to agree to give everything away in the hopes they get something back.

Therefore.. people like me.. I pick and choose who and what to support based on whats available, their practices, and any alternatives there may be.

Originally Posted by mrojas (Post 554205)

In the many pages this thread has grown after I left it yesterday, I see a lot of post-rationalization (Gimme, Gimme!!), and very little empathy.

Originally Posted by azorni (Post 554217)

I was working a lot under MS indeed, but I'm pretty much sure that everything I did, could have been done using free software.

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554218)

Note what I've said: I'll find free alternatives, write it myself, or won't use it.

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554218)

Note what I've said: I'll find free alternatives, write it myself, or won't use it.

There are usually decent quality free alternatives to commercial software (openoffice). There are not a large amount of decent free games like Savage II.

So therefore I have to scale my philosophical opinions with practical application. Just like with the movie industry.

I may hate the way the way they do it.. but that's the only "legal" way it's done.. and since I won't go without my movies I am forced to abide by their silly rules (to an extent. You won't find me sharing or distributing **** online.. but damnit - I *will* get a copy to watch on my computer! (meaning ripped from the dvd I bought.))

So with Games I had to raise my bar if I wanted to game at all: I'll pay for the software itself if it supports Linux natively. WoW does not, therefore I wouldn't re-buy the game discs. WoW however works perfectly in Wine, and the installer is free, and they've fixed their game in the past to maintain Wine compatibility when an update broke it and users complained - they offered me a loop hole through my own logic. They don't "officially" support it.. but they do tend to make sure it'll work for me.

Fallout 3 I don't play.. they don't support Linux, and there's no free download. So I go without Fallout 3 and Left 4 Dead.. two very great games: Both will work in Wine - but I won't support the game until it's either made officially to work with Linux (or at least show they'll try retain wine-compatibility) - or they make it free.

Originally Posted by azorni (Post 554228)

And I still don't get your point.

A protocol is an intellectual construction that is as much useful as its implementation. From the point of view of the defense of intellectual rights, they are both as important, and i don't see why one should be more "protected" than the other. This was my initial point.

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554244)

So if it was possible to do under free software then why didn't you?

the point you were making earlier was that you didn't use retail software - you just stated that you were using retail software. QED

Originally Posted by mrojas (Post 554205)

In the many pages this thread has grown after I left it yesterday, I see a lot of post-rationalization (Gimme, Gimme!!), and very little empathy.

Originally Posted by azorni (Post 554232)

Apart from Turing or maybe Pascal, nobody as ever designed a piece of software all by oneself.

Same as for the bicycle, if I must design one, i hope I won't have to pay fees for the license for wheels.

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554252)

Commercial software takes a similar amount of time and effort to develop - surely that means that developers deserve compensation too or is it only eye candy that deserves to be paid for?

Originally Posted by fatalsaint (Post 554235)

So we moved the definition of entitled to stuff I didn't pay for.. to removing something I do pay for?

You are not guaranteed or entitled to anything but the right to live. I am against federal-funded schools, welfare, healthcare, and every other item people claim they are "entitled" to simply by living or being in some place or state or position. I know many disagree with me and that's fine. (states may be different.. even better communities or cities can opt to pay for schools.)

However, if I pay for my internet connection, and my ISP doesn't provide: That's a separate issue.

I decided, because I'm bored, to google define entitled and got this:



The bold is what I'm referring to. I do think if you pay for something.. you are "entitled" to certain things you would otherwise not be. This is why I hang my head in shame at Bratag's emails from people who received free software - and act like that. At least if they paid for it.. there's something to complain about. If it's free.. you aren't "entitled" to **** from it.. including and not limited to the software even working at all.

Originally Posted by Fargus (Post 554255)

The point is that one is freely given to the community by the originator, the other isn't!

Originally Posted by Bratag (Post 554254)

Yes and who do you think writes that opensource/free alternatives? In almost every case its a developer or group of developers who have other jobs which support them and an amount of free time. If they were to lose that job that supported them don't you think it would be acceptable for them to get something out of the project they so diligently supported for free for so long?

Open office was StarOffice before it became open office (sun purchased and open sourced it) and was in fact a paid product. The ONLY reason it exists in its current form is that Sun provided the source and a dedicated group of people maintain it. That could all change in a second if their circumstances changed.

I would quite happily produce every single line of code I write for free if someone will come up with a system where I am provided with the necessities required for living and maintaining my current lifestyle. Until that happens my time and my experience and valuable commodities, no different than a doctors or carpenters or any other service profession.