Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!cernvax!chx400!ugun2b!ugsc2a!fisher
From: fisher@sc2a.unige.ch (Markus Fischer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Why do people pirate software?
Message-ID: <242@sc2a.unige.ch>
Date: 20 Aug 90 13:04:23 GMT
References: <6207@milton.u.washington.edu> <1990Aug18.205711.1931@herald.usask.ca>
Organization: University of Geneva, Switzerland
Lines: 52

One thing strikes me in the recent discussions about the pirating of software.
Computer programs are always compared to books, why is that so?

Of course, the point is that you *can* copy programs, in a much simpler way
than books.  Maybe that is why the obvious comparaison is made so often.  In
fact, the equivalence can be made for any type of *data* on an electronical
device (help files, documentation, pictures, financial data, etc.), but
shouldn't be made for *programs*, even in source form.

If someone copies a program, he should be treated exactly the same way as if
he had duplicated a *machine* (a watch, a car, a pocket calculator, etc.).
I expect that no one would complain if I made a "copy" of a friends car for my
own usage, because the cost involved are much higher than the price of my
own legitimate "copy".  Of course, the builder of the car has a right to
complain, as he holds the copyright, and I'm sure he *would* use his right
if the duplication of his product was cheaper than it's price.

The fact that a program needs a computer to be run is of no significance.  If
I made "copies" of tape (the tape itself, not it's content), I'd need a
recorder to use it.  Same problem.

There even was a posting transposing the "look-and-feel" problem to books!
Now that is really silly.  If one transposes it to machines, it makes sense:
I can't sell a copy of a famous Swiss watch, even if the mechanics inside
are completly different.  There are billions of ways to display the time, but
that particular way happens to be copyrighted...

About the original question: "Why do people pirate software?", the answer is
simple enough: because it's cheaper! and don't believe anything else.  I was
convinced once by a friend who believes that illegitimate "trial copies"
were ok, because it allowed him to sell software that people didn't think
they'd need.  But even in that case, the legal way (i.e. buy one copy he
can lend to the potential client, without keeping a "backup copy" for himself)
works the same.  That is he should, as a seller, invest first in legal copies
in order to be able to offer that service, much like a car vendor in fact.

It is a fact that the real problem about copyright appear when the duplicate
becomes cheaper than the original (like for japanese duplicates of swiss
watches, many years ago).  This has always been the case for paper money
(watch out for color photocopies of dollar bills!), and when someone uses
the research of somebody else to produce a "clone" (no research costs, so
it can be much cheaper!).

Just a thought

Markus Fischer                -|--|--|--|--|--|--I   Department of Anthropology
                        -|--|--|--|--|--|--|-(#)-I   University of Geneva
      -|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|-(#)-|-(#)(#)(_)-I   CH-1227  Carouge (GE)
   -&-(_)-|--|--|-(#)-&--|-(#)(#)(_)(#)-&-(_)(#)-I   Switzerland
            -|--|--|--|--|-(#)(_)-|-(_)(_)(_)(#)-I
black (#) to kill ! --|--|-(#)(_)(_)(_)(#)(#)(_)(_)  fisher@sc2a.unige.ch
=+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+=(#)=+   fisher@cgeuge52.bitnet