True of course.The irony of this is copy protection exists because of piracy, not the other way around.
And, like your reply, all those arguments were just excuses and rationalizations. Here's an idea...
Rather than try to move the goalposts and argue that piracy is OK, how about you supporters just acknowledge that it's wrong, but you don't care and are going to do it anyway? It would take a bit more courage to say that, but it would take less energy than trying to gaslight the whole forum.
Fair enough. Although copy protection is often used as a rationale for piracy (as it has been in this thread).How about i say this hopefully clearly enough:
I think it is wrong to use any software, samples etc without a legit license, either purchased or given away by the dev / company in question.
If you really think my response to you was in favor of piracy (though i dont see why that would be) i kindly refer you to the sentence above and ask that you at least accept that i mean what i write.
It's definitely way easier than it used to be, but it would be great to have a single desktop app that would manage the downloads/updates/refunds/payment/demos.Yep. As long as you have a PayPal account, decent internet speeds, and the money, then the modern buying experience for software and sound libraries is so quick-n-easy-n-painless that piracy is waaayyy more hassle, and I'd bet that cracked software is a big vector for malware, miner-ware, etc.
Even though we don't have the equivalent of Steam for music software and sound libraries, it's still easy and fast to buy stuff legitimately.
There’s a few sites that bring a lot of devs under one roof and give you loyalty points that you can spend. They are really bad for us small devs though as they all take a 40-50% commission. If you want to support small devs, always buy directly from them. It’s a few more mouse clicks yes, but costs you the same and it makes a HUGE difference to us.It's definitely way easier than it used to be, but it would be great to have a single desktop app that would manage the downloads/updates/refunds/payment/demos.
I know it won't happen as big companies like NI, EastWest, etc, have invested a lot in their own solutions, but one can dream.
And we are all grateful to you for that subreddit!Piracy is one of the main reasons I started my subreddit. The reality is that piracy has existed long before the internet and it will not stop any time soon. What we can collectively do though is to educate people on why it's a bad thing, how it really affects many companies and their families and make people realise that these companies are not massive mega-million dollar companies and that 95% of them are trying to pay their bills like everyone else and that making their products available for free actually does indeed hurt their bottom line.
One example I like to use of this is when Daniel James put out Chaos and how his sales were pretty much steady until the day it hit torrent sites and, in his words, his sales fell off a cliff at the same exact time.
My way of combating this while being able to help my developer friends was to provide people with a place they could find sales and find that it can indeed be more affordable than they think. Of course this won't work for everyone, especially people who are flat broke, but it's something and has had a great turnout the past going on 6 years.
Ad blocking is also a more complex subject because too many discussions intermingle two very different things: Ad blocking and cross-site tracking.I wonder how many people here use adblockers which are depriving publishers/content creators/authors etc of revenue. You are effectively taking something (the content) while circumventing the method of payment (the ads). Is this not theft also?
Some don't consider it wrong, so there's nothing to acknowledge. I'm not saying that is or isn't a valid viewpoint, just an observation. Again there's this "my opinion and the wrong one" attitude.And, like your reply, all those arguments were just excuses and rationalizations. Here's an idea...
Rather than try to move the goalposts and argue that piracy is OK, how about you supporters just acknowledge that it's wrong, but you don't care and are going to do it anyway?
And again. I'm not "counterattacking," just offering my points of view. I haven't attacked anyone...which frankly is more than you can say.He is great at counterattacking and debating others but I don't recall him offering his own argument. Some people just like to stir the pot.
Speaking of pots, pot meet kettle. You're the one attacking people and making snarky remarks, not me.Some people just like to stir the pot.
I will never have common ground with someone who thinks like this. I think stealing software is 'wrong'. If that's 'my opinion and the wrong one', so be it.What's "wrong" or "right" is subjective.
And again. I'm not "counterattacking," just offering my points of view. I haven't attacked anyone...which frankly is more than you can say.
I have no idea what "offering my own argument" even means. If you mean a solution, I think companies are already on the right track with online registrations, watermarking software, etc etc.
You are effective at dismantling other people's arguments and pointing out their logical fallacies. You are also effective at offering 'what ifs'... without taking a concrete position of your own. That's what I meant by not offering an argument and 'stirring the pot'.And I wasn't aware simply stating one's opinion or daring to disagree with others was "stirring the pot."
Full circle!Fair enough. Although copy protection is often used as a rationale for piracy (as it has been in this thread).
Key words: "I think" and "opinion." How is that not subjective? I'm not saying your opinion is right OR wrong per se...and as others have pointed out, it's not so cut and dry. Moral issues rarely are...I will never have common ground with someone who thinks like this. I think stealing software is 'wrong'. If that's 'my opinion and the wrong one', so be it.
Thanks, I think. Whether or not they're fallacies depends on the specifics and again, subjective. God knows I don't have a lock on the truth.You are effective at dismantling other people's arguments and pointing out their logical fallacies.
Not sure what kind of "what ifs" you're referring to, but regardless, allow me to clarify: I don't promote piracy or think it's "OK" but I also don't condemn such people as the work of Satan. And how bad such things are I think is also nuanced depending on the specifics.You are also effective at offering 'what ifs'... without taking a concrete position of your own. That's what I meant by not offering an argument and 'stirring the pot'.
We agree there. I have nothing personal against me either. No, I don't want to see anyone, creative or not, here or not, get screwed over or robbed.Look, I have nothing personal against you or even the poor guy I railed on for defending piracy earlier in the thread. I just don't like to see creative people get screwed over or robbed and that's what piracy does - to people on this forum. To people on this thread even.
Why?I don't want to see anyone, creative or not, here or not, get screwed over or robbed.
I own a license for Cubase. I have it installed on two DAWs... one at home, and one at my studio which is 15 minutes away. I am the only person with access to the DAWs. I have one dongle for my license, and many times I forget to bring it with me. When I do that, I have to make a very unpleasant 30-minute round trip. I would gladly pay someone to clone my dongle. Yes, it would be a violation of the EULA, but my only reason for doing it would be to make using MY software license easier. I'm not engaged in unauthorized distribution. I just don't like having to make those round trips.But again, they or you or I have no right to apply our own personal interpretation of the EULA and do whatever WE consider to be "harmless." A pirate could say the same thing: I just made a copy I wouldn't have bought anyway, so it's harmless. If someone contacted the owner and got permission to do something, OK, but regardless, either one respects the EULA or not. Saying it's OK to blow it off one way but not another is applying a double standard.
The reason pirates use that excuse is because they're idiots. Seriously. It doesn't matter if they say they never would have paid for the software. If they chose to install and use the software without paying for it, then they have willingly engaged in unauthorized distribution. They have acquired the intellectual property of the developer without paying the developer for the permission to use it. This is the main thing EULAs aim to deter.A pirate could say the same thing: I just made a copy I wouldn't have bought anyway, so it's harmless.
Dude share your dongle over the internet.I own a license for Cubase. I have it installed on two DAWs... one at home, and one at my studio which is 15 minutes away. I am the only person with access to the DAWs. I have one dongle for my license, and many times I forget to bring it with me. When I do that, I have to make a very unpleasant 30-minute round trip. I would gladly pay someone to clone my dongle. Yes, it would be a violation of the EULA, but my only reason for doing it would be to make using MY software license easier. I'm not engaged in unauthorized distribution. I just don't like having to make those round trips.
Someone with poor eyesight buys a legit copy of Kontakt, then cracks it to make the fonts larger. He is the only one who will use it. He's not going to distribute anything. He just wants to improve his version of Kontakt to make his life easier.
These are two examples of ways in which a broken EULA harms no one, but no developer is going to open a can of worms by writing a EULA that says, "If you want to do some reverse engineering of your legally-purchased, licensed copy of our software in the privacy of your own home to aid you in your legitimate use of the software, well, as long as you're not unlocking unpaid content, stealing our code, or distributing or sharing anything, and as long as you purchase any upgrades we release that contain any modifications you've made, and as long as you understand you wave your right to service and upgrades, we don't see any harm in it. But for everyone else, reverse engineering is strictly prohibited."
It's a hell of a lot easier to say, "YOU MAY NOT MODIFY OUR SOFTWARE". This blanket statement is not written to needlessly stifle how a legitimate owner uses his legitimate license in the privacy of his own home. It's written to aid in the prosecution of those who crack and distribute software.
Allowing an American flag to touch the floor is against the law. Let's say there's an old flag on the floor in the corner of your dusty attic, and no one but you knows its there. You're breaking the law, but what entity are you harming by doing so?
If you adhere to the letter of every EULA, that's great. I officially recommend everyone do that. There's no harm in driving exactly 55 MPH in a 55 MPH zone. But when you've been in the game for a long time, you come to understand that EULAs are written the way they are in order to deter widespread unauthorized distribution/piracy, just like speed limits are posted to deter only the fastest speeders.
The reason pirates use that excuse is because they're idiots. Seriously. It doesn't matter if they say they never would have paid for the software. If they chose to install and use the software without paying for it, then they have willingly engaged in unauthorized distribution. They have acquired the intellectual property of the developer without paying the developer for the permission to use it. This is the main thing EULAs aim to deter.
Judging and Perceiving
Judging and Perceiving preferences, within the context of personality types, refers to our attitude towards the external world, and how we live our lives on a day-to-day basis. People with the Judging preference want things to be neat, orderly and established. The Perceiving preference wants things to be flexible and spontaneous. Judgers want things settled, Perceivers want thing open-ended.
We are using Judging when we:
We are using Perceiving when we:
- Make a list of things to do
- Schedule things in advance
- Form and express judgments
- Bring closure to an issue so that we can move on
We all use both Judging and Perceiving as we live our day-to-day life. Within the context of personality type, the important distinction is which way of life do we lean towards, and are more comfortable with.
- Postpone decisions to see what other options are available
- Act spontaneously
- Decide what to do as we do it, rather than forming a plan ahead of time
- Do things at the last minute
The differences between Judging and Perceiving are probably the most marked differences of all the four preferences. People with strong Judging preferences might have a hard time accepting people with strong Perceiving preferences, and vice-versa. On the other hand, a "mixed" couple (one Perceiving and one Judging) can complement each other very well, if they have developed themselves enough to be able to accept each other's differences.
I agree, which is why I disable my ad blocker on sites I use frequently such VIC, Reddit, etc.I wonder how many people here use adblockers which are depriving publishers/content creators/authors etc of revenue. You are effectively taking something (the content) while circumventing the method of payment (the ads). Is this not theft also?