Pirated vistas wont be able to have sexy 'aero' looks

[oxygenuk]

well this hasnt made me very happy :mad: :laugh: :mad:

read the story here
http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-6060700.html?part=rss&tag=6060700&subj=news

[mjn]

What do you expect when you use pirate versions of software?

[oxygenuk]

most people expect not to pay for it ;).

but if they are doing this, its a good move to get alot more people to use legit vista's at the least, because i certainly want all them goodies, but *puke* at the price

[mjn]

I get my M$ stuff from a friend who works at M$, and everything is €25 :)

[_gray_]

as if it wont be hacked before its even released.

are they that ignorant?

[Slinkoff]

you can get aero style now on XP if you want it, transparencies and all. Just get hold of WindowsBlinds. Same difference with Vista, if you want it that much you can just get a customizer like that.

[Westindieman]

I get my M$ stuff from a friend who works at M$, and everything is €25 :)

Thats prolly why you dont use pirated stuff.

[baldrick]

Don't start salivating about Vista too soon....

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5308_05.asp

[pjclark1]

It will be a huge bit of bloatware that uses
all your processor power just to run the
operating system.

[shezzy2k]

It will be a huge bit of bloatware that uses
all your porcessor power just to run the
operating system.
Totally agreed! It seems to me that this is just another excuse for Bill & his buddies to get us all to dip into our pockets and beta test their latest software & hardware.

I won't be upgrading anytime soon, and as for the anti piracy measure. I reckon it will be cracked by some hacker within about 12 hours.

[Slinkoff]

their current incarnation of the WGA protection has resisted hacking for some time now so maybe the anti-piracy measures will last this time.

It's the same with every new OS, people have an initial luddite reaction to it, then they learn to like it and it gets better with each service pack. The reviewer in the article has obviously followed the release of Vista from its conception so knows what's been changed, left out, bodged and all the rest but the typical end user will know none of that. If Vista is mainly a lot of cosmetic changes rather than functional ones it will be a bit of a disappointment, but having said that, come 2008 most of us will be running it.

[Bilbob]

The whole 'anti-piracy' measures are a bit of a joke. If MS were actually serious about piracy, if they can enable this 'protection' then they could disable the whole thing.. they WANT people to use pirated versions, to retain the market dominance. If people absolutely COULDN'T use windows, then yes, some people would buy it, but many others would go to alternate OS's.

[pjclark1]

their current incarnation of the WGA protection has resisted hacking for some time now.

Are you sure?
Some hacks are very trixie!

[arfster]

their current incarnation of the WGA protection has resisted hacking for some time now so maybe the anti-piracy measures will last this time.

That was cracked ages ago :-)

[mjn]

their current incarnation of the WGA protection has resisted hacking for some time now so maybe the anti-piracy measures will last this time.


It was hacked within 24 hours! And by a simple one line of code.

[Slinkoff]

I think you'll find it currently isn't. Try downloading Windows Defender on a cracked copy of Windows. You won't be able to. Even with your modified legitcheckcontrol.dll or your greasmonkey firefox script. You can get your updeates and patches as MS have always allowed you to get those but try getting a free piece of software from MS Update and you'll be disappointed. It hasn't been been bypassable since February 2006, they changed it.

[james.miller]

i dont know if it works, but there is more than one place to download defender beta2. Its availble as a standalone .msi package and is found for very easily "microsoft defender download"

[shezzy2k]

I think you'll find it currently isn't. Try downloading Windows Defender on a cracked copy of Windows. You won't be able to. Even with your modified legitcheckcontrol.dll or your greasmonkey firefox script. You can get your updeates and patches as MS have always allowed you to get those but try getting a free piece of software from MS Update and you'll be disappointed. It hasn't been been bypassable since February 2006, they changed it.
Even the February update has been cracked...it's only software so anything is reversible. It may be more difficult to circumvent when DRM etc is hardware enabled.

[mjn]

Even the February update has been cracked...it's only software so anything is reversible. It may be more difficult to circumvent when DRM etc is hardware enabled.

Yep, its cracked.

[oxygenuk]

I think you'll find it currently isn't. Try downloading Windows Defender on a cracked copy of Windows. You won't be able to. Even with your modified legitcheckcontrol.dll or your greasmonkey firefox script. You can get your updeates and patches as MS have always allowed you to get those but try getting a free piece of software from MS Update and you'll be disappointed. It hasn't been been bypassable since February 2006, they changed it.

i have windows defender and it works fine ;) , i must say though, it was a hacked version i got hold of, its basically no diffrent, all that was removed was WGA protection

ive said it before ill say it again, pirates wont be dying any time soon or probably never for that matter ;)

[Slinkoff]

The best they've managed so far is an 4 step patching sequence that requires you to go offline and has to be repeated every time you want to download something. Circumvented maybe but not exactly cracked. It may not even be that, it doesn't work for everyone.

It's not really an issue, as pointed out Defender and the like are all available from torrent sites but it illustrates that they're getting a lot better at it and they may well be able to make it so hard or inconvenient to circumvent that people give up and either buy a legitimate copy or go to another OS, although I think that's a move few will make.

[Uridium]

Fortunately working in the Corporate IT world I've always had an Employer whose happy to let me have a copy of the latest OS's FOC.

Although I still think that Microsoft tolerate Piracy to a certain degree as it helps them keep their market share nice an high, just think if XP had never been pirated how much small their OS foot print on the planet would be.

[Noggin1980]

Don't start salivating about Vista too soon....

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5308_05.asp

Why? If you read all his views on that site hes very complimentary about Vista. Even on that article he's given it 5 stars. That article just express's disapointment that many parts of it havn't lived up to the original annoucement. It's going to be a huge improvement to xp and thus is worth buying. Unfortunatly its not going to be as good as it could have been.

You should read the entire site and not simply 1 part of 1 article to get a balanced view.

[WheresMyArtisan]

Personally, I've now accepted that I have to pay for Windows.

But Microsoft are probably shooting themselves in the foot long-term. In the past, many home users have used pirated Windows. A lot of these users will be pushed towards Linux instead. This means that loads of people will be familiar with it, so companies will start using it. The beginning of the end for M$ (hopefully).

[Slinkoff]

Long term it's more likely that OS's as we know them will phase out and PCs will be little more than a thin client with a browser and everything will be server side via the web or streamed.

And in between now and then there's plenty of people, by far the majority, that wouldn't know where to start with a Unix based operating system (other than OSX) nor have the inclination and perhaps ability to find out. They'd be forced to go with Apple if they wanted to switch, which would mean just as much expense so they might as well stump up the cash and stick with what they know. I don't think we'll see the demise of MS just yet, the corporate sector is their main business and they'll always pay, they;re just trying to get more out of the home market, a significant area largely untapped due to piracy.

[Uridium]

Not condoning piracy but until MS sort out a better delivery method for Corporate licensing then they will never stamp OS piracy out.

The single key policy Corporate clients use is just open to abuse.

Any copy of an MS OS installed using a Corporate key will pass any of their validation checks

[Cable Monkey]

Linux cannot possibly catch on at corporate level. I work for a company that would never commit customer data to Linux operating systems as they are now, and if you add the support and SLA's they require to have sufficient confidence it would probably not be any cheaper than Windows. Microsoft allowing security updates to pirated material (at present) is more of a 'social responsibilty' move. To allow unsecured platforms to proliferate would make the internet just as unuseable for legitimate users as the pirates (and yes, that is what you are. Pirates.) I heard the same comments made at the birth of XP, indeed I was a dissenting voice. People will be won over and eventually it will be the os of choice.

[james.miller]

Personally, I've now accepted that I have to pay for Windows.

But Microsoft are probably shooting themselves in the foot long-term. In the past, many home users have used pirated Windows. A lot of these users will be pushed towards Linux instead. This means that loads of people will be familiar with it, so companies will start using it. The beginning of the end for M$ (hopefully).


how many people actually build pc's rather than buy them at a store with windows installed? i'll give you a hint, its bugger all. What us enthusiasts choose will make no difference to microsoft.

[satinder]

Personally, I've now accepted that I have to pay for Windows.

So nobodys heard of bittorent? And all the comments about wga, it has been cracked and newer versions of it have also been hacked. In fact everything Microsoft has made has been hacked (including hardware :grin: ) which is good for people like me who never pay for software of any kind.

Sat

[Cable Monkey]

So nobodys heard of bittorent? And all the comments about wga, it has been cracked and newer versions of it have also been hacked. In fact everything Microsoft has made has been hacked (including hardware :grin: ) which is good for people like me who never pay for software of any kind.

Sat

I did an experiment where I put together a machine using XP but everything else was open source/freeware. It is certainly possible to do most things without paying but it is also possible legally. For those of you that glibly post your willingness to obtain and use pirate software, take care. You most certainly are not anonymous.

[StephenR]

I must say I'm quite shocked by the number of people on here who are openly condoning piracy. I would have thought quite a few people on here are software developers or at least work in IT - how would you feel if your software that you put a lot of time and effort into was pirated?

[dejongj]

I can't believe that either! And also wouldn't those that use pirated copies of essentials like defender or antivirus or cracked OS's be scared that those who cracked it for you have left some other presents in your 'security' software to steal from you......

Thiefs stealing from thiefs...now that would be ironic....Considering all the free alternatives that are available, why get a pirated version to safe a measily 80-120 pounds....I think there is a real morality or attitude problem....

[arfster]

I'm curious, what exactly does Vista have new? Fancy graphics don't interest me in the slightest, you can do all that with themes and third party stuff already should you want.

[WelshBluebird]

I'm curious, what exactly does Vista have new? Fancy graphics don't interest me in the slightest, you can do all that with themes and third party stuff already should you want.

quite a bit has changed

code has been rewritten (they've actual done 3 code resets) and it is based on server 2003 rather than xp. Because of these 2 factors it should be more stable and secure.

support for DX10 (it is possible than dx10 will not be released for xp)

support for x86 / x64 in one version

user account control which is sometimes annoying, but brings it closer to linux / unix in terms of asking the users permission to do things which could serverally effect the system

superfetch which can use flash memory (usb sticks etc) as RAM.

a lot more aswell, just go to wikipedia.

although a number of things have been dropped, which will probably either make a Vista Service pack, or Fiji or vienna

[arfster]

"Because of these 2 factors it should be more stable and secure."

They've said that in every version of windows, yet we're still saying basic security errors every week, and it's as prone to viruses as ever.

None of the other stuff interests me, although no doubt we'll be forced to upgrade as new vista-only stuff comes (like directx 10).

[dejongj]

"Because of these 2 factors it should be more stable and secure."

They've said that in every version of windows, yet we're still saying basic security errors every week, and it's as prone to viruses as ever.

None of the other stuff interests me, although no doubt we'll be forced to upgrade as new vista-only stuff comes (like directx 10).

The most used OS will always be the most targeted, unless you disconnect from the rest of the world no OS will ever be totally safe.....

[WelshBluebird]

"Because of these 2 factors it should be more stable and secure."

They've said that in every version of windows, yet we're still saying basic security errors every week, and it's as prone to viruses as ever.

None of the other stuff interests me, although no doubt we'll be forced to upgrade as new vista-only stuff comes (like directx 10).

the only real reason windows is so bad with security, is because its the most used OS.
IMHO, if mac OSX was used on 85-90% of all home computers (I think its about that for Windows) then there would be as many bugs etc in OSX as in windows. Hackers, virus writers etc target windows most because it is the most used OS, so they could affect the most people.

The only reason i'm getting vista close to its launch is because I plan to upgrade my PC around that time, inlcuding the mobo. And since I have an OEM system, my current XP install wouldn't work with a new mobo, and IMHO, there'd be no point buying XP when vista is out.

[bibamus]

Don't start salivating about Vista too soon....

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5308_05.asp

I`ll just stick to my Mac then and upgrade to Leopard next year! Vista, I think, will be rather a disappointment....

Allan

[CrispyXUK]

I wont be buying Vista anyways, Leapard is out in august. :)

[Slinkoff]

the net is closing...

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/04/microsoft_expands_antipiracy_p.html

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2006/apr06/04-24GenuineSoftware.mspx

[satinder]

For those of you that glibly post your willingness to obtain and use pirate software, take care. You most certainly are not anonymous.

Thanks for the warning but i kind of realised that everything is being logged :thumbsdow.

I must say I'm quite shocked by the number of people on here who are openly condoning piracy. I would have thought quite a few people on here are software developers or at least work in IT - how would you feel if your software that you put a lot of time and effort into was pirated?

I work within the I.T. industry and i have found that most people of my age at least find that piracy is the norm and is totally acceptable and even expected. What we also expect is that there are people who dont want to pay for software, to actually get money from people you must provide a service :eek:. I think that Microsoft have figured this out recently as they are going to release a "computer protection" service that you will have to subscribe to to acccess.

Now getting back to the subject i for one dont want or use fancy themes on any of my computers so i will not buy Vista because of that. Maybe if the security of the o.s. is of a exceptionally high standard i will consider buying it otherwise i will wait for hacked copies.

Sat

[dejongj]

I work within the I.T. industry and i have found that most people of my age at least find that piracy is the norm and is totally acceptable and even expected. What we also expect is that there are people who dont want to pay for software, to actually get money from people you must provide a service :eek:. I think that Microsoft have figured this out recently as they are going to release a "computer protection" service that you will have to subscribe to to acccess.

I think you are missing the point and highlighting a serious attitude problem that is everywhere.....Sure you could argue that not enough of a service is being provided for the PRODUCTS for sales...But as a consumer you have choice, and those that pirate software aren't exercising their choice to go to a competitor or free alternative...No instead they don't like the product so much that they decide to keep on using it but without paying for it.....Surely you can see that that is an indefendable stance....Put your money where you mouth is and go to the competition if you really don't like the products....

[StephenR]

Maybe if the security of the o.s. is of a exceptionally high standard i will consider buying it otherwise i will wait for hacked copies.
This is what I don't understand - you say that if you do not think it is worth buying you will get a hacked version. Then why use it at all? If you don't think it is worth the money, use something else that's cheaper or free!

I get frustrated by people who constantly bash Microsoft and their products - you do actually have a choice whether to buy their software or not! Okay, at work you might be "forced" into using what you are given, but at home there is no excuse. As dejongj said, you have a CHOICE. Run Linux, OpenOffice etc. if you don't want to buy Windows, MS Office etc. :mad:

Rant over.

[TiSwAs]

I get my M$ stuff from a friend who works at M$, and everything is €25 :)

Yeah i buy all my software cheap too, i get regular emails for puchases... Adobe Photoshop $49 here in the Uk it's over £600!!!! what a saving..... LOL


The whole 'anti-piracy' measures are a bit of a joke. If MS were actually serious about piracy, if they can enable this 'protection' then they could disable the whole thing.. they WANT people to use pirated versions, to retain the market dominance. If people absolutely COULDN'T use windows, then yes, some people would buy it, but many others would go to alternate OS's.

Couldn't agree more, greedy greedy MS now they have placed there domination on the market it's time to start slowly cracking down...


This business of piracy - i bet that the majority of people on here who support anti-piracy have a piece of software that is probably shareware but exceeded the trail period or some form of software.
I don't know anyone who has a PC without 1 piece of dodgy software - winzip or anything, let alone DVD library whether downloaded or bought.... oh apart from me i have a legit PC and all my DVD's are bought

[Cable Monkey]

Thanks for the warning but i kind of realised that everything is being logged :thumbsdow.

Sat

Who needs to log anything? You are posting openly on the internet!!!
Not that long ago it was considered absolutely normal by most to download music. Now, after a few high profile threats backed by legal letters people are much more cautious. Continue to post if you wish, but given a choice between the Forums being sued and you, it's you every time. Your choice!;)

[Slinkoff]

My reasons for using pirated software are purely financial. I want to be able to use the software I like, I haven't anything against Microsoft, I want to use XP, MCE, MS Office, Nero, Photoshop, Cubase and the various other bits and pieces of software I use but there's upwards of £1000 of software right there. I can't afford that so I find another way. It's stealing, there's no denying it but I don't see it in the same way as if I thought "well i can't afford a Ferrari but I want to drive one so I'll go and steal it". I wouldn't do that and deprive the owner of their car but I don't see using pirated software in the same way, ie., depriving someone of something.

Maybe I'm morally reprehensible but I justify it to myself with the thought that most software companies make their money from the corporate sector who simply can't afford to use pirated software and risk prosecution and who use software in vast quantitites. Piracy is so rife in the home market you can hardly even aargue that pirates are depriving companies of their revenue because it's as if the market was never there to deprive in the first place. I'd like to see software free for personal use and be done with all this piracy lark.

Occasionally I might donate to an individual or small group who've spent time and effort developing a small app, I don't have a problem with that, but even then without donations you often get cut down versions of software and trial periods and I think why not just make it freeware like so many other people do? Know that you've helped people out with your program and just put it on your CV to show companies and get a job developing major software and get paid properly for it.

If I was wealthy enough to be able to pay the several hundred pounds for genuine copies of all the software I use I'd do it, if only to save myself the hassle of getting it via the alternative methods, but I'm not, so I'll just have to live with my moral reprehensibility.

[murphyweb]

Those of you who are saying that you think users of pirated software are wrong and you do not understand how they can rip off programmers etc.. etc.. do not have a clue how the software business works.

Take Macromedia Dreamweaver, a web page design package. It is the defacto and most used design package available and costs hundreds of pounds to buy. And yet is very easy to crack, why would a company with such a valuable product not make it harder to crack?

The answer is in the price! Macromedia know damn well that young would be designers cannot afford to spend money on that kind of software, and i am sure that they do not expect them to. But the last thing they want is for these kids to go and learn on another package, once you have learned to use one platform you are very unlikely to change, ever. Call it pay as you earn, use the software for free, learn how to use it, become good with it, start earning money using it and then buy a licence. Off course they would never admit it but i am sure this is part of their business plan, it makes perfect sense as a business plan and am sure any business people on this forum will agree with me.

This is a pricing model that i can see all the vendors moving to in the future, pay as you go, when applications are not bought as they are now but hosted on a server. If you use for home use then you do not pay, or maybe pay a nominal fee. If you use for business then you pay more, the more you use the software then the more you pay. I think this is the future of Microsoft.

[dejongj]

Those of you who are saying that you think users of pirated software are wrong and you do not understand how they can rip off programmers etc.. etc.. do not have a clue how the software business works.


Oh that's how it works....I always wondered about that during my 15 years of working in that Industry...Well thank you very much for the education....

Now let me tell you how the law works and about copyright theft...Oops we don't really have to do we....It is against the law, it is being pursued, people are getting hefty fines and locked up....But it is still ok? Dream on mate....And the ASP pricing models you are talking about have been around for many decades in all sorts of different formats.....Nothing new either....It is still unlawful use and possesion, yes even when the file is only in ASCII format for those usenet users....

[Cable Monkey]

Slinkoff and murphyweb.
A judge will not accept your financial reasons or explanations as justification for breaking the law, and you have to fully accept that is the choice you are making. And not only are you making that choice, you are advertising it openly on the internet. Hmmmm!:confused:

[murphyweb]

No not really, not once in my post have i said i have ever used pirated software or even condoned it.

Dejongj, without knowing what you actually do i would say that just because you work in an industry it does not mean you understand how that business works. I have never worked in a Marks and Spencers before but i bet you i know a lot more about that business than the girl who served me my sandwich there today!

The whole point of what i said is that the manufacturers are happy for it to happen as they can ensure they get the customers of the future. Like Microsoft letting people using pirated Windows XP but just not letting them have support.

[dejongj]

Dejongj, without knowing what you actually do i would say that just because you work in an industry it does not mean you understand how that business works. I have never worked in a Marks and Spencers before but i bet you i know a lot more about that business than the girl who served me my sandwich there today!

Nope that is fair enough, you wouldn't know and I've been driven by those jokers advocating piracy to justify what I do...Something I really hate because as you rightfuly point out it bears no meaning on the points made.....

But I still don't agree with your regarding piracy.....

[applevenus]

My reasons for using pirated software are purely financial. I want to be able to use the software I like, I haven't anything against Microsoft, I want to use XP, MCE, MS Office, Nero, Photoshop, Cubase and the various other bits and pieces of software I use but there's upwards of £1000 of software right there. I can't afford that so I find another way. It's stealing, there's no denying it but I don't see it in the same way as if I thought "well i can't afford a Ferrari but I want to drive one so I'll go and steal it". I wouldn't do that and deprive the owner of their car but I don't see using pirated software in the same way, ie., depriving someone of something.

Maybe I'm morally reprehensible but I justify it to myself with the thought that most software companies make their money from the corporate sector who simply can't afford to use pirated software and risk prosecution and who use software in vast quantitites. Piracy is so rife in the home market you can hardly even aargue that pirates are depriving companies of their revenue because it's as if the market was never there to deprive in the first place. I'd like to see software free for personal use and be done with all this piracy lark.

Occasionally I might donate to an individual or small group who've spent time and effort developing a small app, I don't have a problem with that, but even then without donations you often get cut down versions of software and trial periods and I think why not just make it freeware like so many other people do? Know that you've helped people out with your program and just put it on your CV to show companies and get a job developing major software and get paid properly for it.

If I was wealthy enough to be able to pay the several hundred pounds for genuine copies of all the software I use I'd do it, if only to save myself the hassle of getting it via the alternative methods, but I'm not, so I'll just have to live with my moral reprehensibility.


This is a troll right ? You're a thief and you're threatening my livelihood.

[dejongj]

If I was wealthy enough to be able to pay the several hundred pounds for genuine copies of all the software I use I'd do it, if only to save myself the hassle of getting it via the alternative methods, but I'm not, so I'll just have to live with my moral reprehensibility.

You may call it "moral reprehensibility", but to me that is like putting lipstick on a pig...Nothing immoral about it, it is just plain ordinary theft....

Hiding behind the fact that you can't afford it with so many free alternatives or cheaper alternatives available, unbelievable....Next you probably just want that 7 bedroom detached house next to me as well for nothing....

[stlic]

This is a troll right ? You're a thief and you're threatening my livelihood.

I wouldn't call him a troll rather it seems that he's being honest.

Also I'd like to take this opportunity to say that Cable Monkey I find you moral stance a little disingenuous when threads which cover how to pirate HD media, in quite some detail, are allowed to go unchallenged. Am I to take it that pirating software is somehow different or worse than pirating media?

You say that the forum takes priority if your sued but how would these companies feel about all the information that pretty much step by step outlines how to carry out such piracy freely available on your pages? This goes beyond a recent thread I've noticed but pretty much the MO of certain forums. I would consider even discussion of people watching clearly illegal material without mention of where it came from as questionable.

[Cable Monkey]

Also I'd like to take this opportunity to say that Cable Monkey I find you moral stance a little disingenuous when threads which cover how to pirate HD media, in quite some detail, are allowed to go unchallenged. Am I to take it that pirating software is somehow different or worse than pirating media?

Why do you think that people who advertise the fact that they steal, wether it be software or copyrighted film need to be challenged? If you read the threads I have contributed to on the matter I have told them about the risks they run. Some insist on their right to do it just the same. I have not deleted their threads or done any mass editing because personally I am not their moral guardian and if they choose to make such admissions in open fora then should a request come to supply i.p. details from official/legal sources then I would advocate doing so quite happily. If they want to admit to theft, then fine. If they want to discuss/share how to do it then you would find me intervening. That is the way I moderate and I will make no apology for it.

[stlic]

If they want to discuss/share how to do it then you would find me intervening.

Well fair do's then. So let me get this straight, discussion about pirated material is fine so long as you don't say where you got it from. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. What about requests for pirated material, over the line or okay? How about threads that simply skirt round the issue but make it pretty obvious what's being discussed. I honestly don't want to come across as a spoilt sport but am simply interested in what is considered acceptable on what I would consider a public forum (registration not required to view).

The reason I brought it up is because it does seem to me that software piracy is considered more socially reprehensible compared to media piracy. Hence the reason many decided to challenge the OP in this thread for his views and leave other indivduals on the forum with free passes.

I'm just questioning people beliefs when they feel so strongly about software piracy but give a pass to other types of piracy. Sorry if I'm off point and am more than happy to be corrected.

PS: Despite my wording, I really didn't intend for my comment to be a personal attack Cable Monkey so I hope you didn't take it as such. I sincerely respect the work of the moderators on a large forum such as this.

[MattTheBeanster]

Interesting thread.

For what it's worth i'm a programmer and any software i have written, that wasn't for my employer, i have given free, because i can afford to and i made it because i wanted to not to make money.

I can't believe that murphyweb honestly thinks that programmers pruposely don't write in protection because they are happy for it to be pirated. Building in protection bloats the software making it slower and not as user friendly. It also takes time and money and TBH anything you write can be hacked by someone pretty quickly.

We all know the risks of piracy, its wierd that it's become so socially acceptable. For example i have around 500 dvd's all of which are original, yet i don't personally know of another household for which this is true. I am the minority! :eek:

At the end of the day live by your own morallity. My personal line is anyone who sells pirated software, is making a profit out of someone elses work and IMO makes them complete scum. Likewise i don't condon buying pirated material.

[stlic]

Interesting thread.

For what it's worth i'm a programmer and any software i have written, that wasn't for my employer, i have given free, because i can afford to and i made it because i wanted to not to make money.

I can't believe that murphyweb honestly thinks that programmers pruposely don't write in protection because they are happy for it to be pirated. Building in protection bloats the software making it slower and not as user friendly. It also takes time and money and TBH anything you write can be hacked by someone pretty quickly.

We all know the risks of piracy, its wierd that it's become so socially acceptable. For example i have around 500 dvd's all of which are original, yet i don't personally know of another household for which this is true. I am the minority! :eek:

At the end of the day live by your own morallity. My personal line is anyone who sells pirated software, is making a profit out of someone elses work and IMO makes them complete scum. Likewise i don't condon buying pirated material.

Good post and I agree with you pretty much completely. One thing I would question was whether piracy has recently become so socially acceptable or only more widespread. This hold particularly true for media piracy. In the past swapping and dubbing tapes from your friends (I'm thinking pre CD generation here) was pretty common. I remember when I was at school, swapping copies of Amstrad CPC and C64 game tapes was all the rage and was never really challenged. Recently, with the rise of the internet, piracy has simply spread exponentially but I don't think that individuals view of piracy has changed.

There are some exceptions, I personally know of a chap who I would consider an anti-pirate vigilante and yet even he was caught up in Napster when it was all the rage. I honestly don't think people saw sharing their personal collections as wrong, or perhaps even illegal. Now a days what's legal and what's morally wrong are not always synonymous. Take bypassing Macrovision to back up your DVDs on PC for Media Center use as an example.

What I think is that media piracy is still seen as somehow more accetable than software piracy, case in point being this forum. I completely agree with your last point though. Giving someone monetary gain from piracy or using it to make money yourself is pretty low by anyones standards.

[applevenus]

on "software piracy" vs. "media piracy" there is quite a difference between stealing software and buying a DVD and transferring the bits to a different player while still retaining ownership of the original DVD. Taking your CD and putting a copy of the bits onto your MP3 player is fair use. Taking your CD, copying it to an MP3 player and then selling (or giving away) the original CD is not.

Just because an individual doesn't sell illegally copied software but "merely" uses it without ever having paid for it doesn't lessen the crime. You're still a thief and you're still putting my livelihood at risk.

Software theft is not socially acceptable. Just as urinating in public is not socially acceptable but (some) people still do it : just because it happens doesn't mean it's 'acceptable'.

On Macrovision: I don't agree that bypassing Macrovision falls into the same discussion as software theft. I want to bypass Macrovision so that I can view the DVD/VHS I have purchased with the equipment I have got. It's a huge assumption to make that bypassing a technology intended for copy protection is being done in order to steal the content of the DVD/VHS.

[londonj]

It is wrong to assume that software piracy necessarily leads to lower revenues for software companies.

There is an interesting story related to this here (http://www.theregister.com/2006/03/12/stardock_digg_copy_protection/).

I wouldn't pretend to have the answers, but I have helped start a successful software company, and I've often reflected on the degree to which pirated content - and the ability to use pirated content - has helped platforms (e.g. Windows, Playstation, etc.) to grow.

Morally, theft is theft. From a business perspective, it may be bad, neutral or even good for the originator of the content.

[MattTheBeanster]

I was using the term "socially acceptable" to represent that IMO, to the majority of the population the distribution of software or media that is not original is a common unexceptional occurence.

While copying of media in the UK is kind of a grey area, UK copright law states that we cannot transfer media from one format to another. So copying a cd i bought to my mp3 player and copying a dvd i own to a psp are both a violation of the copyright in this country. I don't morally agree with this so do it anyway, knowing the risks that it implies (though i like to think they aren't likely to enforce them :grin: ).

I can't agree with you that people who "merely" use software are at the same level as people who sell/buy it. People that pay for copies think "wow i can get the full version for £5 instead of £30" as they don't have the technical knowledge of how to get it for themselves and line a pirates pockets (who only paid for the cd and the ink to make a crappy insert) instead of the developers. These are the people who more than likely would have bought the original if the alternative wasn't there (probably at a car boot :grin: , or from a friend....what kind of friend charges????? *sorry personal rant* :grin: ). But like i said it's just my opinion and i have the feeling we'll have to agree to differ.

But please remember that the "mere" users who own pirated copies do sometimes buy the original because they appreciate the product. It's not such a black and white case, not everyone views or uses pirated software with the same intentions, some use it like trial versions. It's a "huge assumption" that they have no intention of ever buying the software. People who don't have any intention of buying the software can't "put your livelihood at risk" as they weren't going to pay anyway. ;)

[applevenus]

Fair points. Well made.

[MattTheBeanster]

sorry edited while you posted. hope it hasn't altered your answer :oops:

[Cable Monkey]

stilc, not many people would accept being called morally disingenuous without throwing their teddy, but I have been called worse!:)

To clarify my position on this topic: I think people who steal deserve any punishment they get. If they try to discuss their methods I will delete the references and if neccesary the thread, however I do not think someone who chooses to admit theft requires deletion. I am happy to let them take their chances with the powers that be. Absolutely no one talks about stealing music nowadays and we all know why. Prosecutions for sharing film and software will come as well, the means are there and proven to work.

This discussion has pretty much been done to death, and I have given folks enough time to edit their admissions. However I think it is time to close this down as it seems some think the discussion is misplaced. Maybe they are right, I will refer this to the other mods and see if I need to change my stance on this matter.