Why can't the poor just pirate software?

Read the article that everyone's commenting on.
Subscribe to the RSS Feed for comments on this article.

I suggest that next time your friend goes back to India that he recommends they use Open Source alternatives. While OpenOffice does not have all the functionality of Microsoft Office (especially at an enterprise level) it is excellent to learn the fundamentals on. Take resources to teach them how to program so that they can enhance the tools they use. It gives them the oppertunity to learn new skills not just with a word processor or spreadsheet but as a developer. Open Source software gives you so much more than proprietary in the long run as you can modify it to best suit your needs. All of your data is stored in open formats so you are not held to ransom to access your data. Taking software from Microsoft and Adobe, etc. is just hurting them in the long run.

What about all the stuff MS has stolen from others over the years? I guess thats OK?
Let them have at multibilionair Gates any way they can.

Here is a moral reason, and while based upon biblical principles, states the case against piracy very well; that is, inasmuch as God commands both the rich man and the poor man not to steal---even when it is true that it is far easier for the rich man not to need to steal, He also says to both the loving person and the hateful person to love one another even though it is far easier for the loving person to be more loving. What is being said is that it is far easier for some to master some things and others to master other things, but God has no provision to only master what is easy; we must master both. It is not a question of fairness, but a matter of accepting what is just even when our circumstances and our feelings rebel against it. The simple fact is that the law is in place to prevent people from doing whatever they please---such as pirating software.

Theft under no circumstances justifiable. One aspect those in affluent countries do not undestand is the pourchasing power of money in poorer countries. A good artisan in India earns about $8 a day and that is sufficient for a living. Expecting him to buy a genuine software spending 3 or 4 days wages is too much. What MS can do probably is to allow such people to use old unsupported software free or at a price which these people can afford. They will continue to be with MS than migrating to other sources

My comment is not on the morality of copying software or music. Yes stealing is stealing but in the case of electronic images, the stealing does not remove the item from the owner's possession, only the potential for revenue.

The point I want to make is about the absurd claims both the music industry and the software industry make about the amount of lost revenue. IN reality, most of the "stolen" product would not be purchased at any cost. At the height of my "geek-hood" I used to gather all the software programs that I could, both freeware and illegal copies. But apart from the essential word processing, speadsheet, etc (most of which I purchased anyway), I rarely if ever used those programs seriously, largely because I had no need. I believe that much of the software stolen these days is rarely used, and truly does not represent lost revenue because the "thief" would not have legally acquired the program otherwise.

I believe that the same applies to the stolen music, although to a lesser extent. Music provides entertainment and it doesn't require a functional need for it to be desired. So the pecentage of the stolen music that would otherwise be purchased would be higher; the iPods will devour all that can be fed to it, and likely, the users would purchase more if the stealing was not an option.

Nevertheless, the shrill claims and wailing anguish of the two industries, claiming exorbitant revenue loses is just rubbish and a gross and self-interest exaggeration.

The possession of software is not necessary to sustain life, therefore it is wrong to steal it.
If a person is poor and is in a position where his family is starving, he can take a loaf of bread to prevent starvation. He is doing this because he has no other choice. Preservation of life trumps all.

Generally, what the most expensive packages do is give you all the tools you want under one umbrella. But it's rare that you can't find a combination of free and/or cheap alternatives that give you all the same tools. You just have to swap around a bit more.

When you buy the big expensive programs, you're generally paying for convenience moreso than functionality.

Leo:

Given you cite "totally free alternatives," it would be stand-up for you to follow through and actually provide a list in an upcoming newsletter. It would benefit those who aren't as well informed as you, and might even mitigate software piracy a smidgeon.

While stealing is rarely, if ever, justified, there are some areas where it is very tempting.
XXX (name avoided to protect the guilty) Studios routinely pulls their movies from distibution. The only way for years after to get the movies is from resellers, many of whom are actually selling pirated (bootleg) copies that look very close to the original. In virtually all cases you are a victim of pricing practices that should be illegal. I refer to one movie, un-named here to protect the guilty, that I wanted to get. I searched the internet and found listings for this movie. The original price on the DVD for this was probably $25 or less. The least expensive (listed as out of stock) was a bit over $30, but no problem because they could get you a copy for $60-100 per copy. They had a tutorial to help you recognize pirated copies. Most of listed DVDs (some at $150) were pirated if you were to believe their guide. Worse, one copy that probably was real was priced at $350.
If I knew someone with an original copy of the movies I want, I would be very tempted to have an illegal copy made of each one. All because a well known company that has complained about Piracy actually encourages it by making their movies almost impossible to obtain.
I know this is a bit far afield from that article but I thought it might be worth mentioning and maybe even getting a comment from Leo on this. :-)

Theft is a matter of law, particularly copyright law. I do not know what the position is as to the law in Kashmir, but if it is not against the law to copy computer programmes then it is not theft to copy them.

To post a comment on "Why can't the poor just pirate software?", please return to that article's main page.