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

A word about analogies.

Analogies are good. Don't despise them.

Human mind works with associations of ideas. They are obviously not sufficient, but they are very useful.

They are not perfect, but it's precisely when trying to see their limits that you can have a better understanding of a concept.

Such as a blind person who wants to get the idea of what a square is. He must grope around, reach the edges, and it's only when he feel the corners that he will really get the difference with a circle.

Analogies are good. Use some.

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

And that is why people should read the small print. What is the saying of the legal system in the US? "Ignorance is not an excuse"?

Mortal! I come offering a deal...

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

The EULA for most of my android software (apart from the paid one) always contains some statement at the end such as "No one reads this anyway - I could say anything here I liked. BIG DOGS DANCING ON MY FACE". Guess how many people caught that particular gem? That however does not negate the fact that they agreed to it - so technically I could have put something in it like - "Anything you post/read using my craigslist software will be sent back to a central server to be perused at my leisure and laughed about" and would have been well within my rights to do so if they hit accept.

Its a buyer beware world with EULA and I for one read them pretty carefully.

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

I know this thread is on 'Off Topic' but what?

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

Well it's just something I wanted to write since several persons on this thread discouraged the use of analogies.

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

IANAL and all that... but I'm quite certain that the behavior would not be held up in a US court.

Even in my example.. (and @Fargus).. the EULA could be written specifically to state that you turn over all your money from any banks you visit while using my browser.. etc.

However, should I actually take your money - I am certain I will lose in court.

I work in the government... every computer we use has a big *** banner on it that says "Guess what, num nuts - WE ARE WATCHING YOU" (not really.. I'm paraphrasing :p)... But guess what?

We still cannot single out or pinpoint individuals to scan or look through their information or data. It's an invasion of privacy.. EVEN THOUGH we tell them they are being monitored.

There is an assumed level of privacy that the courts will hold up... how much and how far and what the specifics are I have no idea... but No - you cannot write whatever you want into a EULA and expect to get away with it.

There is certain freedoms and rights that do come into play when dealing with everything in technology.. including your phones and phone calls.

My argument was people claiming their freedoms and rights to do XYZ even though this says ABC may actually be valid... they just happen to be fighting a battle that has already been determined "No, you don't." in the US and I believe the UK.

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

You guys you think :

« I've worked hard to create this piece of software. So it has some value and it would be unfair if some people could benefit from it for free. »

I understand your frustration but the truth is that things don't work like this in economics. I believe this is something that has be deeply analyzed in theoretical branches such as ''marginalism''.

A very typical example is a bridge. Let's say you're a farmer and there is a little river between your house and your field. Every day you have to do quite a walk to use a bridge a few miles away. One day, you decide that you would like to have your own bridge and you start building one. You make it quite robust so that not only you, but also your cattle can walk through it.

Your bridge is done and you are quite happy with your work.

But soon, you realize that your neighbors are quite happy with that too. Every morning they use it as well. Most of the time it's ok and it doesn't prevent you to use it, but for some reasons, this annoys you.

You might decide to place a gate, and to charge people who want to pass through. But this imply costs, such as hiring a guardian, buying a gate and so on. Then you might finally give up and accept the idea that everyone will benefit from your hard work.

Some goods are, by nature, just difficult to monopolize. A bridge is quite a large and immutable structure where you don't live, contrary to your house. For this reason, it is difficult for you to control access to it. So for this kind of objects, the concept of property is not clear, because you can not physically control the thing you are supposed to own. According to me, it is quite the same for intellectual products. You can define intellectual paternity very well, but as far as property is concerned, it is more difficult. Because after all, data is just a bunch of numbers, and you can not own numbers.

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

Feeling lonely Azorni? (:

seriously though, that analogy doesn't work.

And... if you build the bridge on your own land then you can enforce security to prevent others that want to make use of it. Even the gov't will stand behind you to enforce this.

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

I didn't invent that. This is quite a famous thema in economics.

And when you say "if you build the bridge on your own land", you had an hypothesis. So you try to escape the idea, but still, the idea does exist. Some goods, by nature, are quite incompatible with the concept of ownership.

An other well known example is a street lamp. Most street lamps, just as most bridges, are state property for some reason. If you have no lamp in front of your house (for instance if you live in a small village), then you might consider buying one. But as soon as you do that, your direct neighbors will more or less benefit from it, for free.

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

Whether or not the government can do something, doesn't tell you whether or not it should do it.

Law is the result of discussion and democratic process. It is not dogma. Its legitimacy can always be debated.

And anyway, government is nothing more than public force organized and financed by community. It is the expression of its will and desires. So in this example, using government to protect and restrict access to the bridge, would mean engage public force to protect rights of one person, against the will of many. This does place public force in a paradoxical, incoherent position.

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

Essentially azorni thinks he is entitled to something for nothing. People who generally create and contribute zero often feel this way. I for one am done arguing with him. Regardless of what we say he will continue to use software he obtained illegally and there is very little we can do about it.

Surprised I don't see more of the moral outrage expressed in the thread calling for the hoopsfrenzy author to be strung up for getting past a QA process that is implicitly flawed. Like I said there. People are only outraged and moral when it suits them.

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

Well. Piracy does have benefits believe it or not. I personally wouldn't care if my little program got tons of free publicity through words of mouth and promotion via so many warez sites. If 5000 people downloaded my app from the warez sites, I'll bet you at least 50 of them will pay for it. Yes. A measly 1%. But those 50 people would never even have known about my little app if it wasn't for being available everywhere. That's not something I could have done. I would never expect to have ALL 5000 people. That just doesn't happen in the real world.

IMO, celebrities and singers gets higher pay due to piracy also. If piracy did not exist, I doubt they will be paid so high. It's all about fame and recognition. Without piracy, they probably won't be as well known all over the world. But they never take this into the picture when they are suing some pirate. All they care about is more money they could have earnt if all those "downloaders" paid for it instead. (which would never have happened even without piracy)

We all know the bad side of piracy. But it's not all bad. Really.

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

I'm very sorry you see things this way.

As I've already mentioned, I'm not in favor of piracy for my not being in favor of conflicts between people. I wouldn't impose my convictions to others that's why I would not illegally copy any software. I'll just don't buy nor use those stuffs.

People who think as I do, tend to always prefer using open-source software, just for the same reasons that some people understand that a bridge, a street lamp or a road is public interest, and that it should therefore be public property.

Would it be OK for you if, walking by night along a street, a policeman would come to you and ask for some payment against the use of lamps that enlighten your path, or would require that you put a blindfold if you don't want to pay ?

As far as my general contribution for society is concerned, as a matter of fact I've already financially donated to open source community several times. No huge amounts, but certainly comparable to what I would have paid if those stuffs were commercial. But once again this is a digression and personal attack. This should be irrelevant in a debate.

But your point is quite interesting, though. It's quite a funny idea that everyone should have some legitimacy to use services provided by society, depending of each individual contribution for society. People who have never work in public construction shouldn't be allowed to use a road, and more generally people who have never paid any tax should not be allowed to use any public service. Children, for instance, should be considered as useless people and should therefore be put in jail. This is absurd.

If you were to evaluate the ratio between lifetime individual contribution to society and what everybody receives from this same society from his birth to his death, you would certainly realize that for an vast majority of people, this ratio is absolutely tiny.

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

So it would seem that apart from one indivudal most people voicing an opinion here seem to believe that piracy itself is not a good thing? The debate on whether software should be closed in the first place seems to be a spin off debate from this, possibly worth it's own thread.

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

As I said my position is that piracy is something that should not be done, because it's a violation of personal commitment regarding non-redistribution policy. So I would personally not pirate.

But since according to me these non-redistribution policies are absurd, I would never throw the first stone at a pirate.

I don't approve non-redistribution policies. I think the world would be a better place without it. To me they are just incompatible with the very concept of selling. When you buy something, you're supposed to own it and to do whatever you want to it.

So I don't sign those policies, and I don't want to pay taxes that will finance public force imposing punishment to pirates. I don't want to be part of this.

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

You sir, are an idiot.

The "big" celebrities are *not* affected by piracy. They still make insane amounts of money, and no, there really isn't a massive difference between making 10M a year or 50M; you live fairly well regardless.

I can't believe that in this day and age, people would still use that argument. Yes, those at the top make money, and those at the bottom don't. Live with it. Having them make money doesn't entitle ANYONE to piracy. Also, piracy doesn't make you more popular, piracy doesn't increase your reputation. Concerts do, publicity does, having a famous DJ spin you record during a big gig makes you famous. Being downloaded by a sweaty teenager in his parent's basement doesn't bring anyone fame.

The industry is hurting, badly. I'd like for people to stop focusing on what exactly they are criticising. The majors? Yeah, they're greedy corporations, like any other one, and they're only after making money. It's their job, get over it. Like any other industry, if they see losses, they cut costs, wherever they can.

15 years ago, you had talent hunters who would go around whole countries, listening to small, low-key bands in crappy underground cafes. If there was potential, they'd poney up and send the singer to get lessons, a hairdo, and the whole band goes to a studio for a couple of days to record 4 or 5 tracks. This then became the demo they would send to the decision makers. If it was approved, the band got a free pass to a couple months in a studio, record a whole album, make the clip for the best track, and done.

Now, because the majors make less money, they've cut costs there where the biggest costs were: finding talents. Where 15 years ago you'd have 20 hunters for a small region like Benelux, you now have 1 guy paid to surf Myspace. The demos that go to the decision makers are the MP3 ripped from their website, and if there seems to be potential but the sound is too crap, they get a macbook on loan for 6 months, and are told to make a good tape.

Another thing people don't realise is that from artist to CD there isn't just one step. Sound engineers need to be paid -- their experience makes a CD's quality. No, most artists don't know what loudness is, most bands don't understand that you need to have a very specific balance, and so you need a very good sound engineer to lower the pitch of mic 6 on the drumkit which removes the highlight on the crash hit, as it completely dampens the lead guitar's solo bridge. You may not notice this, but the work that is done on each song is tedious, incredibly hard, and being good at it requires decades of training and extremely expensive equipment. The difference? Well, an audiophile can immediately tell the difference between a correctly mastered album and a crappy one.

These people, the sound engineers, the masterers, and a million people in between are those who get nailed. The industry (and specifically, the majors) will find ways around it, they'll kill off specific jobs, and tell people to do multiple things at once, but as always, when you condense things, you lose things.

We will lose quality, we will lose information, but people don't care, they don't even know about it. Oh yeah, and then you have the "ethical pirates" who say "I'll pay for it when they give me access to an uncompressed version of the song". Y'all be crying when good music doesn't reach anymore, but at that point everything that has been achieved over the past few decades will be lost.

Get a job, and start paying for the things you enjoy. Nothing in life is free.

Source: I'm a drummer with quite a few gigs on record, and my family has authored over 20 albums, and mastered over 1000 albums.

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

This is just not true. Many things in life are free, and you know it.

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

Crash... major /respect to you for such an awesome post.

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

Many things in life are free in the sense you don't pay money for them, but still cost something (effort, blood, toil, etc).

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

Indeed, but here we're talking about price.

Effort and work is not always rationally convertible into price. You might regret it, but its economical reality.

Value is not necessary commercial value. A poem might have great artistic value, but it has absolutely no commercial value. Because you just can't sell it. Same for a song that can be learnt just by listening to it. Great artistic value, but no commercial value.

I know many songs that I've heard on radio or wherever else, and I might enjoy singing them under my shower. And yet, I have never paid anything for this pleasure. Should I go in jail ?

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

Sorry but... LOL

Economics 101: Everything costs something, even if you are not the one paying it.

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

Yes. Nothing in life is free. To pirate electronic media, you need internet access. That isn't free either.

I guess you didn't see my other side of the point I was trying to make. Piracy increases recognition of a song / movie / person / program beyond sales. It's a marketing dream. Free distribution to make even 5-10 year olds who don't have a job nor money to be able to listen to songs and watch movies.

I didn't cover all grounds so yes, you are right that many also get burnt badly by it. What I meant by celebrities are the BIG ones. The "rich enough" category. Not the underground or indie bands.

If you want fame, piracy actually helps. If you want money, probably not. But fame can bring you money. Not by the product you sell. But by the fame alone. Again, I guess I'm talking about the BIG guns here. Who benefits from fame alone. (advertising etc)

I'm not pro about piracy. Just trying to show some othersides which people don't see or ignore. If I offended you, I apologise. You can never cover all sides in such a short post.

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

You just don't get it, do you ?

When you created something, indeed you paid with your efforts, reflexion or time passed improving your artistic skills.

But once you've finished, what you have done can be given and duplicated with no additional cost. Therefore it can not be sold, and what you paid can not be turned into price, from any commercial and monetary point of view.

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

It is not free indeed, and as mentioned earlier, it's the pirate who pays this, not the initial publisher. Therefore it's pirate's business, and it shouldn't be invoked by publisher to justify its price.

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

:rolleyes:

OK

For starters, unless you somehow find the way to magically create matter from the void, then there is a cost, there is always a cost. The cost of the storage involved in the media, the cost of distributing it (even if it is electronically), etc There is always a cost, even if it is too small to notice at first glance.

Then, and here it is the part that is hard for you to understand (that, or either you are rationalizing theft... which wouldn't surprise me either, people rarely admit they are doing something wrong, even while committing the most heinous crimes ever), there is a cost directly related to the loss of income for the value creator.

It can be said that piracy operates in a void: its the way that people that would never pay for content anyway, gets their content. So there is people that rationalize it thinking there is no problem, because the pirates wouldn't buy it anyway.

However, often people do not buy, not because they are evil, but because what they want it is not priced accordingly.

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

Generally you try not to distribute the end products for free during marketing.

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

Well, it's funny you're talking about « creating matter from void », since we are precisely talking about non material property (intellectual products).

And indeed, there are some material costs, related to storage and data transmission for instance, but once again, those costs are not supported by the initial publisher of intellectual products, but by the pirate himself or by the end user. That's why the cost can not be converted into price. Or more precisely, this price tend to get close to zero as soon as someone decide not to sell the object, but to give it.

The loss of income does exist only if you assume that this income should exist. This is absurd circular reasoning.

Loss of income is a fact due to a change in economic environment. It is just the same that what append for copyists after Gutenberg. You might regret it, but you can't avoid it.

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

What's all this material and marginal costs gotta do with the item value anyway?

As long as someone thinks they can get enjoyment or benefit from your service or product, then it's worth something to them and worth paying for.

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

Generally, yes. But if I was a new singer, I would be giving away my CDs or songs off the internet for free to as many as I could in hope that they listen to it and give me feedback or just gain some recognition. Once I have some people's attention, then I would think about selling my other stuff to them or maybe they are just willing to pay to support me.

I've been around the internet long enough to realise that people are willing to pay as long as they feel it's worth it. If it's good, they will pay you even if they got it for free initially. It definitely has improved over the years imo.

Right now, I can go to a fully legit major online music store, and pay for a mp3 file and download it with no DRM. This is the kind of service which will tone down piracy. Make it as simple even for the actual buyers.

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

Sure.

As far as I'm concerned, many times I've paid for some intellectual product.

But for the same reason that someone might think that something has some value that worths paying for, he might also consider that this thing deserves to be known and owned by others.

That's where zero marginal cost intervenes.

Since it doesn't cost anything to duplicate and distribute what he's just bought, he might very well decide to just do it, for free.

Marginal cost is something that tend to influence price in time. This is dynamic process. Eventually, the price of a zero marginal cost product tends to zero.

There is no such thing as intrinsic value for a product. It always depend from local situation and global economic environnement.

This is what marginalism has illustrated with the water and diamond paradox.

A man in a desert would give any diamond for a glass of water. But he wouldn't give that much for a second one, even less for a third, and so on.

Pricing is a complex and dynamical process. This should not be ignored.

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

Intentionally giving out free tracks for publicity is not the same as having people copy and redistribute your work without your consent.

The bottom line is: if you respect the content creator's wishes, then you just don't pirate their products.

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

I'm gonna way in on this conversation, after now having read the first 15 pages, browsed the next 5 pages, and skimmed the rest.

I think I understand where azorni is going, and I can see clearly that none of you are grasping the concept he's trying to put forward.

What is a program? Its just one giant number thats n bits long in base 2 (n being the total number of bits that represents the program in question). Theres no cost at all except a negligible electricity cost in duplicating this long number. That cost isn't even necessarily passed along to the original developer!

So what gives this really long number value? Well, in certain contexts, the program it represents may offer some functionality that is desirable. The other contexts being on unsupported platforms. On those platforms, that long number doesn't mean ****.

Bridges provide a desirable function that reduces time or effort in crossing a natural obstacle.

Cars are tangible products that reduce time and effort in transporting things. If you sell a car, you deprive its previous user of the use of that functionality.

Certainly a developer's time and knowledge is worth good money. Also, the fruits of his labor is worth money. However, the real question is whether the fruit of his labor is the code, or the functionality. Granted they are inseparably tied together. That doesn't satisfy the philospher in me though. Maybe somebody can build off this.

By the way, the problem isn't necessarily limited to Software. Consider this post, and the future of recipe makers. With the ability to arbitrarily create any food we want, where will that leave professional chefs and their creations?

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

Well, it is quite pleasant to be understood, at last. I particularly like what you said about a software being nothing more after all than a huge number.

According to this point of view, a software is not much of a creation. Rather, it is a discovery. And this has philosophical and economical implications.

This reminds me a debate I had once about mathematics being invented or discovered by human kind. I was supporting the idea that mathematics were discovered. Now that I think about it, to me this explains why I don't have to pay when I use some maths theorem or formula.

I'll try to have a look at your link some day.

Thanks.

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

Probably right where they are. Even with fancy food printers, people would still want something hand-cooked. Even Star Trek had restaurants despite replicators being everywhere ;)

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

Granted, but you're still not embracing the problem, only escaping the heavy thinking by taking tangents away from the problem.

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

Are we evaluating product values by their material costs now?

That a painting is nothing more than a canvas and some tubes of paints?

How about a TV show? Just the cost of the reel or recording medium that it's on?

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

A painting is indeed nothing more than a canvas and some paint on it. But with a very precise arrangement of the painting.

A random arrangement has very high entropy and worths therefore not much more than the sum of its components.

But a master piece has very low entropy and this is what you pay.

same answer.

Nobody said that marginal cost IS the price of a product. What it does is influencing the dynamic of its evolution.

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

I'm asking you.

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

Entropy?

Take a guess of how much this painting goes for:

http://stylecrave.frsucrave.netdna-c...40mil_msp1.jpg

$10k? more
$100k? more
$1M? more
$10M? more
$100M??

more.

You can stop fabricating theories as you go along now.

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

Selling information is a tricky business. Journalists, for instance, know very well about that.

If you're a journalist and you have a scoop, you must absolutely keep it secret until it is printed and published by the journal you work for.

A scoop is something that might have a colossal value. But as soon as it is unleashed, its value immediately vanishes until it reaches zero. Of course, you might try to create some laws that forbid to give your journal to someone else, or to tell anyone about what you've read in it. But this would be a silly waste of public force resource, and society should not do that. I guess you would agree that a « non redistribution clause » on a paper journal would be absurd.

Information does have value, but only its publication can be converted into price, not its diffusion. Diffusion may still be commercialized, as long as it requires a physical media with non zero marginal cost. This is more or less still the case for journalism, for paper still being better lecture media than electronic screens. But when information can be reduced to its pure form, such as a scoop that basically is an information which stands in one sentence and can therefore be learned by heart and passed orally, only its publication can be monetized.

Nor software, nor any digital entertainment, are much different.