Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!ames!sun-barr!texsun!texbell!uhnix1!elroy!cosc60i From: COSC60I@elroy.uh.edu (Bandolar) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: No more Cinemaware stuff for Amiga !!!???? Message-ID: <1464@elroy.uh.edu> Date: 29 Jul 89 02:33:53 GMT References: <268@nrcvax.NRC.COM> <30140@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <4929@alvin.mcnc.org> <1989Jul24.163632.23920@ddsw1.MCS.COM> Organization: University of Houston Lines: 52 > That's the problem with software piracy- people look at how well their > program is selling, and then they go and figure that the 10,000 kids > who've illegally copied it would have bought it were it not available > under the Jolly Roger. That, I'm afraid, is utterly absurd. I agree with this point 100%. I, too pirated software when I supported a family of 3 on a just over poverty level income. I would not have bought the software if I couldn't get it pirated. I couldn't have afforded it. I bought the computer in happier times. > Now, people are going to say "But if you can't afford it and it's not > to be had for rent, that's your tough luck! You still can't pirate it." But it is still stealing. It bugged me then. I don't have any pirated software at this particular moment. I *do* pirate software to look at after I paid $50 bucks for a utter piece of junk from an unnamed company and had NO way to return it. If a new car is a total piece of junk, you can return it. I will NOT purchase software without a test drive to this day. However, with the possible exception of ARC (sigh, I keep *meaning* to send in the money but they really are asking a *LOT* for a shareware product. A friend of mine sent in $15 instead. Maybe I will do this) I have no pirated software. > "Gee, I wonder if this person could have spent the fifty grand instead > of cutting into my sales by that much." Chances are, he wouldn't have. Very good point. When these people say "Gosh, piracy is just rampant..." they ignore the fact that the audience only has SO MUCH money to spend. If they continue to turn out products that people want and can have for $1 plus 2 minutes or pay $50 that the folks don't have then they will just pirate. My friends and I take a slightly different approach. We split the cost of a piece of software and then *each* play it to death. The only difference is that if we can copy it we play it to death in a week or three and if not we just pass it down the line when a given person tires of it. *Note* either way the same dollars go to the publisher. The only difference is whether we tire of the game in 3 weeks or in 2 months. > condemning those who are blinded to reality by imaginary profits..... ^^^^^^^^^ Primo choice of words here. A person with "$50,000" worth of software (about $7,000 of actual dollars that make it to the publisher's pocket, the rest go to the two or three layers of middle men, packaging, art, etc...) really only has $300-$600 a year for software. All those extra titles don't really directly impinge on a given author. What we need is a more responsible attitude instead of "mccarthian" anti-piracy. I *always* present the view that piracy is *not* a "good." I try to avoid the "ahoy matey" attitude that fosters blind, meaningless piracy where even good authors are not supported. I think this is a better approach because it is harder to ignore than "all piracy is bad and you will burn in the hell of no software" -- Stephen McLeod, (Native Texican)| Interests: SF/Gaming, Artist, French, Samurai Programmer | Computers, the SCA and friendly people! Vote Spock, The logical choice!| So, whaduya wanna be when you grow up?