Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!uwvax!oddjob!ncar!gatech!uflorida!novavax!proxftl!bill
From: bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Piracy
Summary: confusion over reasonable
Keywords: copy protection piracy
Message-ID: <177@proxftl.UUCP>
Date: 16 May 88 16:36:27 GMT
References: <9160@cisunx.UUCP> <1801@uhccux.UUCP> <807@netxcom.UUCP> <174@proxftl.UUCP>
Organization: Proximity Technology, Ft. Lauderdale
Lines: 50

In article <174@proxftl.UUCP>, rafael@proxftl.UUCP (Rafael Mayer) writes:
> Actually you make a good point.  Profits are good.  I am all in
> favor of profits.  I am not in favor of companies that treat
> their customers unfairly.  I don't expect software companies to
> make prices so low that they run themselves out of business, but
> at the same time I do expect them to make a only a reasonable
> profit (400% is not reasonable).  I don't believe that Lotus's
> production costs are $100 dollars per unit.  They are so busy
> over-paying their executives that they end up screwing their
> customers.  Software piracy is a direct cause of their pricing
> policies.  (Of course there will always be software pirates.  No
> matter what the cost.)

You goofed.  First you say that profits are good.  Next you say
that you expect software companies should only make a reasonable
profit. Ignoring an important point, which I will get to shortly,
you have contradicted yourself.

The point you overlook is this: Lotus (and possibly others, but I
will say `Lotus' to keep things simple) owns the software.  No
one, other than Lotus has any right whatsoever to the software.
If Lotus offers it for $400 and someone agrees to buy it for that
price, whatever profit they make is irrelevant.  In other words,
any profit they make in an uncoerced exchange is a reasonable
profit.

And then, you have confused cause and effect and I do not mean
that you used `cause' where you should have used `effect'.  The
cause of software piracy is software pirates; the pricing
policies of software companies is absolutely irrelevnat to their
existence.

A minor joke here, to make my point:

At a party, a philosopher was talking to a socialite; here is
their conversation:
"If I gave you a million dollars would you go to bed with me?"
"Yes."
"Would you do it for five dollars?"
"What do you think I am, a whore?!"
"I've already determined that, all I am trying to do is find out
your price."

(I seem to remember that this came from _Up the Organization_,
whose author I do not remember.)

A software pirate is a thief; anything he says to justify himself
is a rationalization for doing what HE wants to do.  His being a
thief is a consequence of his morality and has nothing to do with
the price of the goods he steals.