matrix563
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2006
- Messages
- 19,136
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Piracy Is O.K. If You Are Poor
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
JUSTJOEL73
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 669
Lets see CS4 is $700 US = $1 in Vietnam. So if they make $150, US$700 x 150. The average person makes $105,000 a month. I think they should be selling pirated CS4 for at least $50.
phildabill
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2007
- Messages
- 154
DINGDINGDING!! We have a WINNAR!!
Why do you think software companies are always giving away student versions of their products for free (or almost free)??
Most of these companies WANT you to learn their software, pirated or not. That way when you get employed you can force your employer to buy licenses, or when you start a business buy their software.
Remember that corporations pay A LOT more than the end-user for software. They pay for licenses and support. This is where they make their money.
This goes for ANY piece of software used in corporations. Some exceptions would be Windows, Office and AVs (and prob a few more), as they are installed on most machines.
I am all-in for piracy for personal use. But you can be certain my companies ONLY run purchased applications.
Every FEA program and CAD program I used for my Mechanical Engineering degree I used in a lab at school. All of those programs are more than photoshop. I don't own any pirated versions of them. I did buy a student copy of Matlab while I was in school.
I see your point, although I think the comparison only fits if it were possible to make a perfect copy of someone's Lambo at no additional cost to the manufacturer.
It is possible to do such a thing. It's just not as cheap as it is to download photoshop. Just steal the design drawings for said lambo, and take it to a third party to make it.
staknhalo
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,924
Don't bother, I'm already on it. What color you want?
You know what's great about this, is that I'm sure not everyone read the article that was actually linked to, so everyone is taking Steve's take on it... which IMO is completely WRONG.
Nowhere in that article did the writer say it was okay. Not once. He was writing about a shop he visited in Vietnam. He also wrote that although it is technically illegal in the country, he has an understanding with the local police, and he knows when to close up shop if an anti-piracy type policeman is scheduled to come by.
But yes, it is a commonly accepted thing there, the article pointed out. But just like someone else already said, in no way was the writer of the article saying it was okay, he did say though that something that may help these programs to be purchased legally in areas like that is to lower the price to something manageable. Obviously not a dollar, but $700 for Photoshop is even rather ridiculous for a normal American.
Take a look at the computer screens they are using. Does that look like a high-tech gadget? Some people making comments seem to think that the guy who is an avid gamer is buying these pirated games and taking them home to his 40" TV and quad-core computer with SLI'd 280GTX's.... You can be very sure he probably doesn't have anything better than a 7-series midrange Nvidia card, if he's lucky.
I can also guarantee that EVERYONE here who is so quick to say how wrong those people are would be doing the EXACT same thing if they were born and raised there and only made $150 a month.
Nowhere in that article did the writer say it was okay. Not once. He was writing about a shop he visited in Vietnam. He also wrote that although it is technically illegal in the country, he has an understanding with the local police, and he knows when to close up shop if an anti-piracy type policeman is scheduled to come by.
But yes, it is a commonly accepted thing there, the article pointed out. But just like someone else already said, in no way was the writer of the article saying it was okay, he did say though that something that may help these programs to be purchased legally in areas like that is to lower the price to something manageable. Obviously not a dollar, but $700 for Photoshop is even rather ridiculous for a normal American.
Take a look at the computer screens they are using. Does that look like a high-tech gadget? Some people making comments seem to think that the guy who is an avid gamer is buying these pirated games and taking them home to his 40" TV and quad-core computer with SLI'd 280GTX's.... You can be very sure he probably doesn't have anything better than a 7-series midrange Nvidia card, if he's lucky.
I can also guarantee that EVERYONE here who is so quick to say how wrong those people are would be doing the EXACT same thing if they were born and raised there and only made $150 a month.
larryBird44
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2003
- Messages
- 5,353
Adobe can charge whatever they want - they make damn good products. We have a choice as consumers whether or not to purchase the software at the price they ask for it. The problem is, no other software comes close. Don't tell me that POS GIMP is like photoshop, cuz it isn't.
Where do I think the line should be drawn? When a company's software is used to make money. It should be free for educational use (such as for schools and self-teaching), but not for profitable companies. When somebody uses I.P. to make money off somebody else, that is morally wrong IMO. Again it's my opinion, and I'm sure others would disagree with it. I couldn't say the same for games though, as I assume the majority of people use them for entertainment and not to earn a living.
A very good example was used, such as AutoCAD. Do you really think they would be anywhere near where they are now if it wasn't taught in schools and 'student' prices weren't offered?
I know several people who would never have dived into the IT industry if it weren't for toying around with software for free. You talk to any tech above desktop support level and I would say most of them learned how to use computers through pirated software. You simply cannot expand your knowledge beyond the basics without playing around with tons of different software. There would be a whole lot less computers in the world (and people who know how to use them) if this weren't the case. It is techs who play with free/pirated software that make recommendations to their companies what software to buy...
A very good example was used, such as AutoCAD. Do you really think they would be anywhere near where they are now if it wasn't taught in schools and 'student' prices weren't offered?
I know several people who would never have dived into the IT industry if it weren't for toying around with software for free. You talk to any tech above desktop support level and I would say most of them learned how to use computers through pirated software. You simply cannot expand your knowledge beyond the basics without playing around with tons of different software. There would be a whole lot less computers in the world (and people who know how to use them) if this weren't the case. It is techs who play with free/pirated software that make recommendations to their companies what software to buy...
At least Adobe gives the option of free use for 30 days, which is nice to give it a test drive.
1. Ever tried Gimp? It is a free, opensource graphics editing program that is pretty close in capability to Photoshop.
2. Photoshop isn't necessarily cutting edge.. see 1
3. "industry standard".. that phrase is a pile of poo to try to trick people into spending more than they have to.
4. Yep.. people are idiots!
Yeah...QFT what's up with [H]ardOCP? They need to take a page from ArsTechnica and start standing up for the little guy instead of trying to force "product" on everyone. The whole IP thing is a farce and it's only because of the big IP owners big payouts to Congressional cronies that this is even becoming an international issue. Adobe needs to understand that only big corporations can afford their product because only they can turn a profit from it. Duplicating software isn't the same as stealing because stealing assumes that the company lost money as a result of an action whereas this can't be proven with regards to copied software.
And the funny thing is you'll *usually* hear the same people complaining about software being stolen are the same people that think that Open Source should die a painful and horrible death. As far as I'm concerned, these people can go back to their crony, corporate masters and rot with the rest of these IP industries that have failed to adapt to new technology. The genie is out of the bottle and they had better just deal with it or become irrelevant.
This is exactly my point...Microsoft took this exact route with it's products in the early years because they knew that if people liked their product, they would recommend it to their company which is exactly what happened. Perhaps companies like Adobe should embrace the concept...
WTF, we were getting ripped off in Iraq then! Movies, games, and other software was $5 each or 3 for $10 in most places.
I never purchased the software (movies, maybe ) but a few friends that did didn't have any trouble getting it to work. They came with key generators ripped to the same disc as the software.
I never purchased the software (movies, maybe
) but a few friends that did didn't have any trouble getting it to work. They came with key generators ripped to the same disc as the software.nathancipher
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2008
- Messages
- 322
Photoshop is not all there is to Adobe. Show me an open source app that even comes close to Indesign or Illustrator.
As for the industry standard, that's because it really is standard in the graphic arts/pre-press/print production worlds.
Hornet
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2005
- Messages
- 6,624
Me thinks those developers are just exaggerating
Well said. I'm sure Adobe is pretty well aware of this themself.
Inkscape. Although it probably comes as close as GIMP does to Photoshop.
Hence why Photoshop is WORTH 700$
1. Yep doesn't even come close.
2. Was there anything innovative in GIMP that wasn't already in Photoshop?
3. Yeah cause people know what .XCF is
4. Only the ones that don't rely on Photoshop on their livelihood.
Monkeypillow
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 880
They're both unacceptable. In fact, if you want to argue that they are different, stealing food is worse, because someone else goes without.
I'm more inclined to believe that. Doesn't hurt to add corporate greed into the equation, too. In light of the fact we've seen so much of it lately. Pirating is a bit of a scapegoat but a factor to consider none the less.
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,810
PS was sold for hundred of $$ long before piracy went rampant my friend.
piracy is an "excuse" to jack up prices, others covered it well enough already, back in the PS 6 days it was still $500 i beleive and before that too.
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,810
Beleive it, and besides, all it takes is one person to make a crack, and they are usually younger, or do it on the side for fun, just cause the person is some high end coder with a good paying job, doesnt mean they may not participate in illegal activites....i would love to learn to make cracks and patches, just so i could go HA! i beat you and your system!
wrong, if the software is $700, or 7 cents, it will still get cracked and leaked out, so many of you have VERY little, if any understanding how "the scene" as it was once called operates and why it operates, the after effect of it is items falling into hands of people lower down the food chain, any group often says the same thing, they hate P2P they hate freeloaders and they NEVER want their work to get to those people, but of course it always leaks out eventually, or other people come along and crack it to get it out to make a name for themselves, usually the chumps who get arrested a few years down the road.
Yes
exactly, bottom line is, if say Microsoft wanted to stop piracy on windows, the 2nd you connect to the internet, or say windows update as many people do, they could do a million things to determine if your copyu is pirated or not and right then and there, KILL your copy, format your HD and you done, but of course then you would go crying about it, so MS takes it easy, mainly because of the sucker people who buy pirated software and dont know it... if it wasnt for them, alot of people would be on Linux, WHICH ms does NOT want so they prefer people use their software, like Adobe as opposed to competitors.
2nd WINARRRR for sure, well said and very true.
yup, If you think GIMP is even in the same park as Photoshop, you dont know how to use Photoshop and have NO idea what it is capable of, i have been using photoshop since V6, so about 5 years now and is still barely know how good it is, same with illustrator, anyone who says they are the same... has never really "used" them.
Gimp is great "cheap" alternative, but it isnt in the same league.
+1
I'm with phildabill.
And I'd add that Adobe really isn't losing money on piracy in Vietnam as I doubt Adobe see's Vietnam as a market for their software at this point. Photoshop cost more then many PC's in the US let alone a Vietnamese machine. Maybe some day Vietnam will have a legit technological economy and be dependent on Adobe products.
Also for those GIMP lovers I use it because its free and sure beats paint, but I'd never compare it to Photoshop.
I'm with phildabill.
And I'd add that Adobe really isn't losing money on piracy in Vietnam as I doubt Adobe see's Vietnam as a market for their software at this point. Photoshop cost more then many PC's in the US let alone a Vietnamese machine. Maybe some day Vietnam will have a legit technological economy and be dependent on Adobe products.
Also for those GIMP lovers I use it because its free and sure beats paint, but I'd never compare it to Photoshop.
You are wrong and lack any semblance of logic and reasoning. Do you really think Adobe ever once expected some poor sob to buy their product? No, they didn't. And, for you to think they do, while at the same time coming to some sort of conclusion that is 100% the opposite of how Supply and Demand works, it just goes to show your lack of intelligence and further perpetuates the general aura of stupidity that unfortunately permeates this forum.
Its a good thing that virtual copy of CS3, which was never going to be purchased in the first place, didn't cost hundreds of man hours and tens of thousands of dollars in materials to create.
A poor person pirating a 700 dollar piece of software is infinitely more morally justified than stealing a physical good such as food. The food will result in lost sales and lost revenue for the baker, whereas the software won't.
Hilariously, it seems you are suggesting that people instead go out and purchase overpriced software and then steal food that they now can't afford because you somehow think stealing physical goods is OK, while stealing software is a Cardinal Sin.
Your amazing use of punctuation and capitalization has compelled me to agree with your statement that taking someone's digital IP or real property.
Lets assume for a minute you invent a new engine that gets 100mpg and puts out 1000HP. You believe you shouldn't be able to charge whatever you want for that engine? In fact you should be forced to give it away to people for 1$ if that's what they want to pay you for it? Remind me again, why anyone is going to bother putting any money to develop new technology in this world of yours?
Your analogy is terrible and has nothing to do with the topic. It would be the equivalent of someone studying that engine and building their own copy of the engine for themselves.
As for your other asinine point, people actually using Adobe in a professional manner, as well as those who would be willing and able to pay for it anyways, are going to continue paying for it, regardless of whether some poor people are or not.
Hahaha
Of course it would. Are you not wearing your bullshit-issued blinders, sir?
Because clicking a link and putting no further effort into it is so time consuming and demanding, right?
Going off-topic, but I whole-heartedly disagree with your reasoning.
I'm so sick of people using the stock market as a cop-out for not being able to find a job. Jobs are out there, but there's competition now more than ever. You can't just walk in off the street and get a job ($40K+ annually). You have to know what you're doing and sell your self. Be smart and learn a skill people depend on.
You're supporting pirated software. Any company that develops this software has employees. They must pay these employees competitive wages - even you wouldn't work for free. By you not buying a licensed product, you're stealing revenue from this company. Connect the dots and see how far up the food chain this action goes.
If you talk anything like how you type, that's probably half the reason you're not making more money.
Stealing is stealing.
The only exception I can see would be taking food to feed your family, but there's plenty of government programs and not for profit organizations that help with these things. So, even stealing food is stealing.
Stealing is stealing....that much is true. But if the country's laws don't make it so that it is illegal then for those people, piracy is indeed OK (legally at least) within their laws. Not like the governments in these countries would give a crap about what Adobe might have to say....
And in any case, these countries probably wouldn't even bother with Photoshop had pirated copies not been available (i.e. there wouldn't have been any demand for a product that no one can afford). So it's not like this piracy is cutting into Adobe's revenue in these places. It's not really the same situation as here in the US where people who can technically afford the product choose to get a pirated copy instead. Of course, this is software we're talking about, not food so I think that piracy is wrong. Can't say I haven't pirated stuff myself though, plenty of ripped music from my friends' CD collections.
And in any case, these countries probably wouldn't even bother with Photoshop had pirated copies not been available (i.e. there wouldn't have been any demand for a product that no one can afford). So it's not like this piracy is cutting into Adobe's revenue in these places. It's not really the same situation as here in the US where people who can technically afford the product choose to get a pirated copy instead. Of course, this is software we're talking about, not food so I think that piracy is wrong. Can't say I haven't pirated stuff myself though, plenty of ripped music from my friends' CD collections.
I still find it funny that some of you are saying a person who is so poor that they need to steal food is understandable, but if that person downloads a movie to eat their loaf of bread to they have committed an unforgivable crime.
The irony of that is that stealing the food, which results in an actual loss to the owner is deemed acceptable while copying a virtual good, which results in no lost sale, is unacceptable.
With the way your contorted principles and morals are conveyed, I'm surprised you aren't demanding that they forage berries from the forest and make fishing poles out of sticks, hair, and paper clips instead of stealing food, with how much you're bitching so much about them pirating a professional software suite.
The irony of that is that stealing the food, which results in an actual loss to the owner is deemed acceptable while copying a virtual good, which results in no lost sale, is unacceptable.
With the way your contorted principles and morals are conveyed, I'm surprised you aren't demanding that they forage berries from the forest and make fishing poles out of sticks, hair, and paper clips instead of stealing food, with how much you're bitching so much about them pirating a professional software suite.
SamuraiInBlack
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2003
- Messages
- 5,771
1. Yes. And I hated it.
2. Gimp isn't either.
3. There is a reason why it is called photoshopping, and/or photochopping, and not gimping.
4. More like well aware that if they develop great skills and comprehension in using the software, it can ultimately end up paying for itself.
Someone taking the design and building their own is exactly what we are talking about. And it is illegal and morally wrong.
Not true. The people who paid to buy the software have aquired a skill, the value of that skill is undermined when it is easier to access. Even more so, thier jobs are undermined as more people are able to use it. Fact is, it is only a matter of time till those jobs get outsourced because someone in a third world country can do the same thing for less money.
By that logic there should have only been one model car ever made, only one forum on the internet ever, only a Nintendo because Sega stole the idea and were illegal. Hmm...
Personally I think pirating software would be like surfing but blocking the ads. I use popup blockers cause those are just annoying as hell, and some could argue that, that in a way is stealing. Should I be banned from, even though I've bought stuff from the sponsors because of H?
There's all kinds of other excuses like it makes the page load slow, or it's ugly. Now if those people were absolutely forced to view the site with 100% of the ads, would they still view it? What if they were on a handheld or a really old PC (I guess that would be analagous to being poor, in resources at least). Does that mean they can't look at the site? Maybe once they like a certain site (Like H for example), they will support it in the future.
Do people who make $200 a month need Adobe Photoshop? No, not really. Is Adobe really loosing money because they are pirating it? Probably not.
Oh for the person that said if they can afford the PC they can afford the software: a cheap $200 is all you need to run most of the software that's out, just not at 2560x1600.
There's all kinds of other excuses like it makes the page load slow, or it's ugly. Now if those people were absolutely forced to view the site with 100% of the ads, would they still view it? What if they were on a handheld or a really old PC (I guess that would be analagous to being poor, in resources at least). Does that mean they can't look at the site? Maybe once they like a certain site (Like H for example), they will support it in the future.
Do people who make $200 a month need Adobe Photoshop? No, not really. Is Adobe really loosing money because they are pirating it? Probably not.
Oh for the person that said if they can afford the PC they can afford the software: a cheap $200 is all you need to run most of the software that's out, just not at 2560x1600.
No, recreating a physical item for personal use is not illegal or morally wrong. It is only illegal if you try to sell it and make money off of others work. Do you think if you find out Heineken's recipe and brew the beer for yourself, that you're going to be in trouble?
Hahahaha. Hahahahahahaha. HAHAhAHAhAHahahaaaa. Wowwww.... So you're saying that if some poor foreigners people learn to use Adobe photoshop, that all our American Adobe Photoshop jobs are going to be outsourced? Hahahahaha. Millions and millions of people all around can already do magic with Photoshop. How old are you? Please stop listening to your redneck father.
People and companies aren't going to stop buying Photoshop because some sweatshop in China knows how to use the clone tool.... Lmao!
I'm with you on this one, really... and I was even trying to imagine a 15th century middle eastern (Aladin-esque) scenario, but like you said, that's more of an impact to the farmer/whatever than stealing software from Adobe.
Society is just fucked up. I can't say it any more simple. I work hard for my money, and I'm always trying to learn something new to make my self more valuable. But, I just don't understand these people that don't want to get up and go to work, earn a living, and spend the rest of their time with positive personalities (with out sounding too gh3y here).
...one of those things you just have to shake your head at...
First of all, the title of the news item on Hardocp is extremely leading. Are you sharing some news or telling us what you think about it? Seems more like click hunting to me.
Secondly, what is actually revealed in this article that wasn't known before? Anyone who has ever visited Asia would be well aware of this. Maybe you should all step off your collective moral high-horses and spend a moment thinking rather than judging.
I think the more interesting thing that should be taken away from this is that it illustrates perfectly the value of software. Look at the list of software on the first page of the article where it lists Vista and Ubuntu right next to each other, both available for the same price.
Do you think that software companies don't look at this kind of situation and wish they could get at least some money? Of course they do! The problem is that should they offer their software at a drastically reduced price, enabling them to get some money where previously they would have gotten none, what is to stop those paying the ridiculously high prices purchasing the cheaper alternative?
Therein lies one of the problems.
Microsoft have tried solving this by offering a cheap limited version of their OS (Windows Vista Starter), but it has been mostly unsuccessful as no-one wants the limited version when they can still get the full version for cheaper than the genuine limited version.
So we have a struggle between a strong desire to make bucket loads of money (ie keeping the status quo) or tapping into new markets which will have the side affect of eventually forcing prices down in existing markets (good for us, but bad for the companies).
When a company is convinced that the money they can make by offering their software at a reduced price is greater than continuing to do business as they are now the change will occur, until then enjoy being royally reamed.
I'm off to Pantip Plaza to buy all the latest apps and games for 100 baht - just because I can. I know what you're thinking, 100 baht is such a rip off compared to 15000 dong (~30 baht). Perspective is great isn't it?
Secondly, what is actually revealed in this article that wasn't known before? Anyone who has ever visited Asia would be well aware of this. Maybe you should all step off your collective moral high-horses and spend a moment thinking rather than judging.
I think the more interesting thing that should be taken away from this is that it illustrates perfectly the value of software. Look at the list of software on the first page of the article where it lists Vista and Ubuntu right next to each other, both available for the same price.
Do you think that software companies don't look at this kind of situation and wish they could get at least some money? Of course they do! The problem is that should they offer their software at a drastically reduced price, enabling them to get some money where previously they would have gotten none, what is to stop those paying the ridiculously high prices purchasing the cheaper alternative?
Therein lies one of the problems.
Microsoft have tried solving this by offering a cheap limited version of their OS (Windows Vista Starter), but it has been mostly unsuccessful as no-one wants the limited version when they can still get the full version for cheaper than the genuine limited version.
So we have a struggle between a strong desire to make bucket loads of money (ie keeping the status quo) or tapping into new markets which will have the side affect of eventually forcing prices down in existing markets (good for us, but bad for the companies).
When a company is convinced that the money they can make by offering their software at a reduced price is greater than continuing to do business as they are now the change will occur, until then enjoy being royally reamed.
I'm off to Pantip Plaza to buy all the latest apps and games for 100 baht - just because I can. I know what you're thinking, 100 baht is such a rip off compared to 15000 dong (~30 baht). Perspective is great isn't it?
I just realized, these asian countries are getting most of their high end software for under $5 or free while most reasonable people here can't afford them. They are then learning how to use all of these high end commercial products and our U.S. companies are outsourcing our jobs to their larger and more educated(in computer software at least) population. Capitalism works in funny ways, lol.