Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!bunyip!janus.usq.edu.au!zeus!s64421
From: s64421@zeus.usq.edu.au (house ron)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Why do people pirate software?
Message-ID: <1184@zeus.usq.edu.au>
Date: 24 Aug 90 14:55:14 GMT
References: <19089016:24:58KRW1@lehigh.bitnet> <2643@anomaly.sbs.com>
Organization: University College of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia
Lines: 45

mpd@anomaly.sbs.com (Michael P. Deignan) writes:

>[Horrendous example deleted.]

>This is why I make it a point from now on to "test drive" any software I'm
>going to purchase. If it means I have to borrow a friend's copy for a few
>weeks, fine. Companies who release legitimate programs that do as they
>claim should feel secure enough to offer a money-back guarentee, or at least
>have no problems with someone "test driving" the software prior to purchase.

>If this brands other people and myself who copy software for test drive
>purposes "criminals", then fine. I'd rather be a criminal than a consumer
>screwed out of several hundred dollars - or even more - by a sleazy
>software company which lies to the consumer.

I couldn't agree more.  I recently received a poster from a mob called
BSAA.  It's some sort of anti-piracy association in Australia with
members like Microsoft, Wordperfect, and so on.  In it, they announce
boldly:  "Copying is stealing."  Well, no.  Stealing is a very specific
offence, and copyright violation is _not_ stealing.  It might not be
ethical (or sometimes it might!) but it certainly aint stealing!  I am
moved to proclaim: LYING ABOUT THE COPYRIGHT LAWS IS STEALING!  Just
about as logical as the tripe BSAA is pedalling, bit I wonder what THEY
would think if I broadcast that in the same way they are speading their
own lies.

They go on to proclaim that illegal copying in Aust. costs [them] $300
million a year.  I am sure extravagant figures like this are floated
all over the world.  WHERE DO THESE FIGURES COME FROM???  I strongly
suspect that they are simply counting illegal copies and then having
rosy fantacies about all those people being forced to cough up payment
for them.  But if software could not be copied, I VERY much doubt
that they would sell even a small fraction of those illegal copies
legitimately.  Students, hackers etc. would simply do without.

Also for reasons like Michael's, most sane people do get a look at
software they plan to buy.  I suspect that if everyone obeyed the
copyright laws scrupulously, people like Michael and I would end
up buying a lot less software!  After all, why pay dearly for
stuff sight-unseen when shareware is available?
-- 
Regards,

Ron House.   (s64421@zeus.usq.edu.au)
(By post: Info Tech, U.C.S.Q. Toowoomba. Australia. 4350)