Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uc!cs.umn.edu!msi-s0.msi.umn.edu!meuer
From: meuer@s1.msi.umn.edu (meuer)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Feedback on Computer Crime - Apology
Message-ID: <1990Aug14.172055.29088@s1.msi.umn.edu>
Date: 14 Aug 90 17:20:55 GMT
References: <1990Aug13.211525.9852@s1.msi.umn.edu> <9008132305.AA03706@world.std.com>
Organization: Minnesota Supercomputer Institute
Lines: 80

bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:


>From: uc!cs.umn.edu!msi-s0.msi.umn.edu!meuer@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu  (meuer)
>>I understand the point you are making, but I think it overlooks a
>>critical issue: For those floppies to have something on them that a
>>person would like to copy, someone has to spend thousands of dollars
>>worth of time and effort writing programs.

>Yes, I covered this (and you deleted it.)

Sorry.  I'll try to be more careful.

>It also costs big bucks to produce and market a music album, yet
>assuming the media costs about the same (a few dollars at most) it's
>interesting how much money they seem to make on only a few multiples
>of the media cost (well under $20 for your typical CD, cassette, LP,
>etc.) Sure, their volume is much higher. Does that mean that $500 for
>a couple of floppies and a manual is a fair mark-up?

>Anyhow, that's somewhat irrelevant and doesn't need to be answered.

>My only point is that with such a huge disparity between media and
>copying costs and the actual price you're kind of asking for
>unauthorized copying, whatever the reasoning behind the disparity.

I agree for the most part.  But do you think that lowering the costs
would cut way back on illegal copying?  Do you think that most people
who now copy a $500 program would buy it if it only cost $20?  It
would still only cost them the price of a floppy to copy it.  Granted,
it might ease the problem a little, but I would guess that it wouldn't
even make a big dent in it.

>We don't disagree, we're talking about two different things. You're
>trying to say that the cost is justified. I'm trying to say that
>justified or not they've set themselves up for problems and are now
>trying to bridge that gap with govt subsidies.

I don't see police enforcing the law as a "government subsidy."
Whether or not the costs of a program are justified, it is not right
for people to steal it if they can't afford it.

Now I recognize that you are not advocating or justifying piracy. You
also mentioned (if I may paraphrase) that even if copying of software
is morally wrong it just may be too expensive and difficult to
prohibit.  But if this turns out to be the case, it will have a very
severe effect on the quality and quantity of software that is produced
in this country.

I don't see any easy way out of this either.  How can software
companies produce high-quality programs and be fairly reimbursed for
their work?

>>The only thing that can't be copied easily is after-sales services.
>>The problem is, if that becomes the major source of income for
>>software vendors, then it would be against their interest to write
>>code that works so well it doesn't need much support.  Will this
>>create lower-quality software?

>I carefully avoided putting any definition on "after-sales services".

>It might take many other forms besides mere "bug fixes". What about
>discounts on education or other "self-help" books and materials to
>bona-fide owners, help hotlines, newsletters, inexpensive upgrades to
>new enhanced releases, discounts on other products from the same
>manufacturer, I dunno, limited only by some marketeer's imagination.

I like these ideas, but the one's you've listed do not seem to me to
be realistic replacements for income from actual sales of software.
Anyone else have more ideas?

This is an interesting thread.  Thanks for bringing it up.

>        -Barry Shein

-mark
-- 
Mark Meuer                         |       1200 Washington Ave. So.
Geometry Supercomputer Project	   |	   Minneapolis, MN  55415  
meuer@geom.umn.edu		   |	   (612) 624-1867