Operating Systems are Not Free

[Jason Dunn]

This is just some food for thought for those of you who were arguing that it was ok to hack the Dell ROM update to get a free copy of Windows Mobile 2003. I've just confirmed with a contact at Microsoft that Dell does in fact pay a licensing fee for every copy of the upgrade that they sell, so if you hack the ROM update because you think it should be free anyway, give your head a shake.<br /><br />:bangin: <br /><br />And for those of you who ordered a copy of the upgrade and are patiently waiting for it (like I am), good on 'ya! :wink:

[Kevin C. Tofel]

...if you hack the ROM update because you think it should be free anyway, give your head a shake.

:bangin:

And for those of you who ordered a copy of the upgrade and are patiently waiting for it (like I am), good on 'ya! :wink:

Well said and thanks for the confirmation. I have to be honest (full disclosure: I orded the CD upgrade and am waiting patiently): what's the big rush for folks anyway? Why the need to try and upgrade if you've already ordered? If you didn't order and tried to upgrade, what is your justification?

The way I see it: I have a perfectly good Dell Axim with a perfectly good OS (PPC2002). No need to rush and upgrade before the OEM is ready and DEFINITELY no need to try and take it for free...

I think what people fail to realize is that actions like these end up costing all of us more in the long run.....

KCT

[mr_Ray]

This is just some food for thought for those of you who were arguing that it was ok to hack the Dell ROM update to get a free copy of Windows Mobile 2003. I've just confirmed with a contact at Microsoft that Dell does in fact pay a licensing fee for every copy of the upgrade that they sell, so if you hack the ROM update because you think it should be free anyway, give your head a shake.

:bangin:

And for those of you who ordered a copy of the upgrade and are patiently waiting for it (like I am), good on 'ya! :wink:

Hardly suprising, really, it doesn't make sense for MS to charge any other way.

Bad hackers, bad, bad! :)

[KayMan2k]

True true.. and at least Windows Mobile 2003 is cheap. Compare that $29.00 to a copy of Windows XP.. yikes!!! Also.. that upgrade includes Office.. now if that was only the case with Office 2003 (well maybe, its not offically out yet - but I doubt it).

But still, understand some people want the newest and best right now... I surely ordered my iPaq in advance and was very excitied when it came in the brown truck.

[dangerwit]

I used to have this tremendous need to be on the cutting edge. As the years went by, though, that need got less and less. :) Is it age-related?

I remember trying to install OS2.1 many years ago, and damn-near went berserk in the process. Just because it was different. And potentially cool. During college, friends would get betas of OS software that I'd try to use, and in most cases it just caused serious problems, but I had to be on that edge. :)

I still get the urge, but it's nowhere near being large enough to be persuasive. There is a certain zen in waiting for things to develop and evolve naturally.

*Phil

[codesmith]

I am the same way now with all my computing devices, both Laptop and PPC. I USUALLY wait until code is final before making the plunge now. So many reinstalls after test stuff bombed my systems. :?

[sprawlgeek]

I used to have this tremendous need to be on the cutting edge. As the years went by, though, that need got less and less. :) Is it age-related?

I remember trying to install OS2.1 many years ago, and damn-near went berserk in the process. Just because it was different. And potentially cool. During college, friends would get betas of OS software that I'd try to use, and in most cases it just caused serious problems, but I had to be on that edge. :)

I still get the urge, but it's nowhere near being large enough to be persuasive. There is a certain zen in waiting for things to develop and evolve naturally.

*Phil

talk about memory lane.....I started testing 0S/2 2.1 for the company I worked for....i did go crazy....took alot of beer to get over of it...if my memory serves me correctly, our company was running a twisted-pair print sharing net. OS/2 would not support printing without a full 25 pin signal (or something like that) I remember i ended up calling all over IBM land to find that out....only 2 months later,.... not too long after that I ended up being part of the original core beta testers for 95. WHAT A Difference. Now look at our lives!!!

[mbeatle]

Operating Systems are Not Free
Some are ...

[MultiMatt]

I know it's the pot calling the kettle black (since I already have a Windows Mobile 2003 iPAQ - call me a technology masochist!), but it is kinda funny to see people so eager to dive into this new OS, despite the fact that there are numerous reported bug issues as well as a (still) pretty good list of apps that won't cooperate with the new OS!

We're like lemmings, jumping off the cliff! :roll:

But, I'll say it's a shame - given the opportunity to steal (and not get caught), many many people will do it, and the internet is affording all sorts of people to do just that. The ironic thing is, somehow, people do not think that stealing things via the internet is the same as shoplifting in a store. They rationalize that it's okay because everyone else is doing it...
It reveals a dark side to our psyche.... :twisted:

Matt

[sponge]

Jason: While I understand your message, the way you said it didn't exactly add up. Your reasoning to not pirate was because Dell pays a licence each time they sell. By hacking it out of a ROM update like this, one could say your saving Dell the licence fees, thus saving Dell money!

Just say "because it's copyright infringment" and be over with it :P

&lt;/nitpick>

Other than that, they should've learned from Apple's OS X upgrade CDs. Hell, they should only just include updated files in the first place. One of the first rules of security (probably paraphrased and butchered, but it works here, dammit! :P): You can't trust the user.

[chasky]

I'm from outside any country where Dell will send the ROM upgrade. No problem as far as the give the option to buy it and download it from the web.

I agreed... I'm a programmer and I don't like people taking it without my permisition.... but if they want it I shoud give them the option to have it. If I don't (even if I do), for sure someone will find the way to take it.

Just a thought, what about an expensive OS like WinXP wich here in my country cost around 500USD, when the medium people doesn't profit that much.

[lapchinj]

I think that we’ve talked about this many times – that we just cannot go around taking something that is not ours just because we thing that it should be free - or -that since it comes from a company that makes gobs of money - or - they have no right to charge for it - or - that we are underprivileged and we can’t afford it (but we can afford $100/month cell phone plans etc. :boohoo: )

I’m a developer and just came back from VSLive convention in NY. One of the keynote speakers was from MS (Rudder) and he mentioned that they are spending 7.something billion dollars on R&D this year just on development tools (VS, Office etc) :shocked!: . They’re R&D always ran in the billions of dollars. If everybody goes around ripping off software then there will be no dollars to spend on anything and besides it’s just plain stealing! Some people don't learn.

Thanks Jason D. for trying to keep us all on track. :rock on dude!:


"640K of memory should be enough for anybody.'' - Bill Gates, 1981
Yeah I remember that statement I just didn’t realize it was that old. This past week we were talking about multi-processor, multi-gigahertz, multi-gigs of mem, 64bit OS, IDEs that will make coffee with one line of code (2 lines of code if you have to go across the network via remoting!), etc, etc. etc.
– Boy times have changed! :alfdance: :alfdance: :alfdance:

[bluevolume]

I've been watching these threads the last couple days, and it really makes me laugh. There hasn't been even one single thing said here that hasn't been said a million times before. People trying to justify downloading/hacking/using/sharing software that isn't rightly theirs -- OF COURSE IT IS NOT RIGHT. That doesn't mean that people aren't doing it every minute of every day, and it doesn't necessarily mean you are a bad person if you are doing it, but lets call a spade a spade. Consumers have no justifiable right to take something that isn't rightly theirs, be it software or a bag of potato chips. Even if Dell had offered the PPC upgrade at an overbloated price of $500, and made their customers wait two years to get it, it still doesn't make it right to steal.

Do what you do, and if you can live with yourself then more power to you. It certainly isn't the worst kind of crime that someone can commit. But stop trying to justify it, or somehow skew the situation into falling in some kind of vague morality. Until the day when we can each produce, by ourselves, everything we need to live our lives, we are going to have to respect the markets built by our business world.

Blue

[sambeckett]

isnt everything except hardware free?

[gadgetguru]

Microsoft will charge Dell for every AXIM upgraded to 2003. The hacked download will diminish demand for upgrade CDs, wonder how Dell will compensate Microsoft for that? Dell really should have provided just a patch for the broken parts not a whole OS re-flash.

But still, using a hacked upgrade to get Mobile 2003 is plain wrong. Since AXIM with PPC 2002 installed still work wonderfully - those who want the new OS should really pay. It's not like a bugfix that Microsoft or the manufacturer should provide free of charge.

[hollis_f]

I'm getting very frustrated because I need to do a hard reset - followed by a reinstall of all apps - on my device. But I know I'm gonna have to do the same when I get my mitts on the upgrade. And I really don't want to have to go through all that hassle twice in a few months.

So I'm wrestling with my concience (which believes that all priracy is wrong) and my brain (which keeps telling me I'll buy the upgrade anyway). Once I've actually paid for the upgrade I'm gonna fnid it even more difficult to resist.

[aroma]

and it doesn't necessarily mean you are a bad person if you are doing it

So if willingly and purposefully breaking the law and stealing from someone doesn't make you a bad person, then what does?

[gadgetguru]

I'm getting very frustrated because I need to do a hard reset - followed by a reinstall of all apps - on my device. But I know I'm gonna have to do the same when I get my mitts on the upgrade. And I really don't want to have to go through all that hassle twice in a few months.

But the upgrade will not solve any of your problem. Mobile 2003 will make your device faster, a little more secure, and better implementation of some apps like PIE but will not solve your hard reset problem. As stated mobile 2003 is not a bug fix for Pocket Pc 2002. The Dell upgrade was a bug fix for PPC 2003 not 2002.

[mc_03]

and it doesn't necessarily mean you are a bad person if you are doing it

So if willingly and purposefully breaking the law and stealing from someone doesn't make you a bad person, then what does?

So you mean to say the millions of people who use Kazaa every day are all bad people?

[Jacob]

So you mean to say the millions of people who use Kazaa every day are all bad people?

If the RIAA says it then it must be true, no? :lol:

[klinux]

"640K of memory should be enough for anybody."

This is an urban myth. See http://www.nybooks.com/articles/15180 .[/code]

[Jason Dunn]

I'm from outside any country where Dell will send the ROM upgrade. No problem as far as the give the option to buy it and download it from the web.

Ouch - that's not good. How did you get your Axim in the first place? Do you have a friend in another country who might buy it and ship you the upgrade?

[Jason Dunn]

isnt everything except hardware free?

I dunno - can I have your wallet then? :lol:

[aroma]

So you mean to say the millions of people who use Kazaa every day are all bad people?

If they are using it to STEAL music, movies, and other software, then yes, they are. If the shoe fits...

How do you define a bad person?

[k_kirk]

What about cases like the Toshiba or O2 XDA where the manufacturer chooses not to make PPC2003 available due to one commercial reason or another? I am happy to pay MS for the base license when I use a ROM image from here or there. Is there anyway to do this? I want PPC2003 on my XDA but I also want to remain legal. Thanks

[Ed Hansberry]

What about cases like the Toshiba or O2 XDA where the manufacturer chooses not to make PPC2003 available due to one commercial reason or another? I am happy to pay MS for the base license when I use a ROM image from here or there. Is there anyway to do this? I want PPC2003 on my XDA but I also want to remain legal. Thanks
Unfortunately, no. Unlike EUUs which can often be applied across different devices, full OSs cannot. You need the OEM Abstraction Layer, firmware, drivers and other bits to tell the device how to talk to the OS.

Don't assume the O2 XDA won't get upgraded. No 2003 PPC PEs are ready yet. That OS takes a bit longer.

[GoldKey]

So you mean to say the millions of people who use Kazaa every day are all bad people?

If they are using it to STEAL music, movies, and other software, then yes, they are. If the shoe fits...


There could be legal users of Kaza, etc. It is only wrong if you are using it to STEAL as you say.

Example, ripping songs from my own CD's takes at least a few minutes each. With a high speed connection, I could download it much quicker and easier from someone who already did the work. Since I own the CD, isn't it legal? 99% of what I ever downloaded from Napster etc were things I owned (CD, Cassette, Vinyl), so I don't feel I did anything wrong in those cases.

[entropy1980]

isnt everything except hardware free?

I dunno - can I have your wallet then? :lol:
Nope that's hardware! :lol:

[Mark R Penn]

isnt everything except hardware free?

I dunno - can I have your wallet then? :lol:
Nope that's hardware! :lol:

Your credit card number then?

[entropy1980]

isnt everything except hardware free?

I dunno - can I have your wallet then? :lol:
Nope that's hardware! :lol:

Your credit card number then?
Nope it's not IP (intellectual property) try again....

[IpaqMan2]

I do recall seeing a discussion very simular to this thread right around the time Compaq released the PPC 2002 and there was a very well know place to many users of a "pirated copy" floating around.

I don't understand why these discussion are even brought up in threads like this. I wonder.... Is it to get the praise and acceptence of everyone so we can build up our self esteem, or do we really think we are going to change the mind and thought of a pirate? Does anyone actually expect someone to come out here and boldly support piracy? And if they did... How would you think the reast of the people on this thread will react towards that person?

Much like politics and religion, Pirating is just one of those areas that shouldn't be openly debated. Everyone knows there are some ethical wrongs to it (even the pirates know this) and in many place of the world there are serious laws against it. But truth be told, at least pirates know they pirate, where as the reast of us just believe we don't - Funny, we all have our own reasons.. it's just to what level you can believe in your own lies and justifcations that makes it acceptable.

And for those of you who believe in your obsolute innocents in this area, than my toast is for you and welcomes you to the party :twisted:

Hey... freedom of speach is a wonderful thing.

[Mark R Penn]

So you mean to say the millions of people who use Kazaa every day are all bad people?

If they are using it to STEAL music, movies, and other software, then yes, they are. If the shoe fits...

How do you define a bad person?

Well certainly not as someone who did a bad thing on one or a few occasions, as you seem to suggest.

I'll bet even Mother Terresa (and you) did something bad at some time in her (your) life. Did that make her (you) a bad person?

Anyway, no, there is no justification for stealing, but until such time as people feal that they are not being stolen from (eg why does the HP upgrade cost $69 plus shipping if you live in the UK, but only $29 plus shipping if you live in the States? It costs no more to distribute CD's here than anywhere else in the world) some people will think it's there only remidy.

Actually that's a good example - HP want me to pay $69. I could get a mate in the States to buy it for me for $29, leaving HP $40 out of pocket. Did I just steal $40 from them? If I did, I stole nearly twice as much as an American who downloads it from a warez site, so I'm twice as bad, right?

[kfluet]

Once I've actually paid for the upgrade I'm gonna fnid it even more difficult to resist.

This raises an interesting question:

If you have already paid for it (ordered via credit card), is it morally wrong to install a pirated copy until your licence (piece of paper) arrives in the mail?

I say that this isn't piracy and is perfectly okay.

[lurch]

I'll bet even Mother Terresa (and you) did something bad at some time in her (your) life. Did that make her (you) a bad person?
y e s

[aroma]

This raises an interesting question:

If you have already paid for it (ordered via credit card), is it morally wrong to install a pirated copy until your licence (piece of paper) arrives in the mail?

I say that this isn't piracy and is perfectly okay.

If I order a new car from a car dealership, and while this car is being manufactured, the dealer gets in a model just like the one I had ordered. Does that give me the right to sneak down to the dealer and steal that car until mine arrives?

There are a couple of things to consider though. As someone stated previously, if Dell isn't charging your credit card until your CD ships, then technically, you haven't paid for the upgrade yet. Also, the upgrade in question was an upgrade/patch inteded for users of existing WM2003 devices. This was NOT the upgrade inteded for the PPC2002 users. So technically it's two different products.

- Aaron

[aroma]

Actually that's a good example - HP want me to pay $69. I could get a mate in the States to buy it for me for $29, leaving HP $40 out of pocket. Did I just steal $40 from them? If I did, I stole nearly twice as much as an American who downloads it from a warez site, so I'm twice as bad, right?

:treadmill: I think I'm going to call it quits on this discussion now, and I'll just refer back to my original feelings:

If you are willingly and purposefully breaking the law and/or stealing from someone, then yes, that makes you a bad person.

- Aaron

[Sven Johannsen]

Operating Systems are Not Free
Some are ...

Is a free puppy really free?

[Jacob]

I'll bet even Mother Terresa (and you) did something bad at some time in her (your) life. Did that make her (you) a bad person?
y e s

It's a shame there are no good people in the world :cry:

[Mark R Penn]

I'll bet even Mother Terresa (and you) did something bad at some time in her (your) life. Did that make her (you) a bad person?
y e s

It's a shame there are no good people in the world :cry:

I wouldn't worry about it Jacob. There will always be some people with extreme views, most of them bad! :wink:

[Mark R Penn]

If I order a new car from a car dealership, and while this car is being manufactured, the dealer gets in a model just like the one I had ordered. Does that give me the right to sneak down to the dealer and steal that car until mine arrives?

While I agree with your point that stealing is bad, I don't think that example answers the question asked very well. The car you steal cost money to make in it's own right. Even if you return it when yours arrives, the dealer can't sell it as new, so he's lost out.

The "borrowed" OS does not leave the OEM one cent out of pocket provided the user replaces it with a legitimate copy he's paid for. The question was, is that therefore stealing?

Of course it is technically, but I think the question was a bit broader than that.

[Ed Hansberry]

The "borrowed" OS does not leave the OEM one cent out of pocket provided the user replaces it with a legitimate copy he's paid for. The question was, is that therefore stealing?
But is it really an OS before you boot it? It is just there, bits on your hard drive, not operating, one of the two words in its very name.

Are any of us anything until we begin to live up to our potential? If we just lay there, inactive, do we really exist? Does the world care that we are there, dormant? For all practical purposes, no, so from the worlds view, we are simply non-existant.

So can you be accused of stealing something that is dormant, and for all intents and purposes, non-existant?








:rotfl:

[Excalliber]

This raises an interesting question:

If you have already paid for it (ordered via credit card), is it morally wrong to install a pirated copy until your licence (piece of paper) arrives in the mail?

I say that this isn't piracy and is perfectly okay.

If I order a new car from a car dealership, and while this car is being manufactured, the dealer gets in a model just like the one I had ordered. Does that give me the right to sneak down to the dealer and steal that car until mine arrives?

-Snip-

- Aaron

Regarding this portion of your post, it is different for software, as ROMS are completely legal if you own the games. With a physical item (say a car), it costs the dealer to bring it to the dealership.

In addition to this, the car does not come back new. Suppose it smells like cigarettes, or you spill something in it? With a downloadable piece of software, this does not happen, as the source stays unmodified. I believe that if you paid for it, you have every right to copy it and use it in any way you see fit for your personal use.

BTW, physical analogies just don't apply to digital contriversies! These are two completely different issues. For example, I can't click a few buttons and have an exact copy of a car without some sort of physical labor involved, in addition to metal, plastic, and all sorts of other physical recources. With software, you can. just don't even try to compare them, as it usually ends up in arguments that go :treadmill:

[Brad Adrian]

I don't understand why these discussion are even brought up in threads like this...Does anyone actually expect someone to come out here and boldly support piracy?
Yes, people to come to these discussions and openly support piracy. The justification is almost always (IMO) flawed and immature, but it happens.

I think there are several reasons that these issues get brought up here periodically:

1. New situations arise with new details. For example, the idea of hacking a patch to gain access to other parts of the code hasn't come up before.
2. We all like to voice our opinions.
3. We all feel like our opinions can "convert" others.
4. The arguments can give interesting insight into the human condition (and into which people should NEVER be allowed to know my home address).

[beq]

Go Ed go! He's a swanky Buddhist Plato kind of guy...

[MoelBrain]

While everyone talks about people using the patch to upgrade from A03 to A05 what about the people who used it to go from A04 to A05?

[lurch]

It's a shame there are no good people in the world :cry:
That is awful, isn't it?

But there is one (http://www.greatcom.org/resources/whoisjesusorig/)... and that's what makes the difference.
:clap: :werenotworthy:

[takotchi]

Many people (too many) had severe problems using the A05 patch legitimately, MoelBrain.

Now... if Dell had *NOT* removed this patch from their servers, would you people be this way? I seriously doubt it. The only reason most people keep posting how pissed they are about this is not because of their high moral standards, but more because now they can't get the patch.

I ordered the CD June 25, and now Dell says I won't get the CD until September 4th, which is a rediculous amount of delay. That's why I modified the file to get the installer to put it on my Axim. That's why everybody I know of did it, if they did it. I don't think what I did was so bad, because I never told anybody else how to do it, because I know they could just get the OS and never pay for it.

It's not a big problem with people who already ordered the CD doing it; the only thing I think is wrong is posting it where anybody could see it and use it to flat-out steal the OS. I think most people would feel that way had Dell NOT pulled the patch.

[tsapiano]

The "borrowed" OS does not leave the OEM one cent out of pocket provided the user replaces it with a legitimate copy he's paid for. The question was, is that therefore stealing?

Of course it is technically, but I think the question was a bit broader than that.

I'm not so sure that it technically is - as long as they've taken your money, it could well be considered fair use. Once money has changed hands, you have effectively purchased the licence to use the software, so it could likely fall under the media-shifting principle. When you buy software the main thing that you are paying for is the licence, not the physical media it happens to come on. Of course, if this pirated version had components that you will not get with the purchased upgrades, then it might be an issue - however it doesn't sound like it. You'd need a lawyer to tell you for sure - however I think the main legal question is whether they've charged you for it yet.

Same as the fellow who mentioned purchasing the CD from the US even though he is in the UK - as long as he declared it when he imported it from his friend, there is really no legal issue with doing that. There is no legal or moral imperitive that you have to use the local distributor to buy your product, you can purchase it from anywhere you want - so long as you don't try to smuggle it in and bypass taxes/duties you've got no problems ;) I'd just call it being a savvy consumer - it really is no different than buying a product at the big-box store for half of the price as a smaller store...

Luckilly I'm using an iPaq 5550, so it came with WM2003 and I don't have to make any decissions like this ;)

[dh]

Many people (too many) had severe problems using the A05 patch legitimately, MoelBrain.

Now... if Dell had *NOT* removed this patch from their servers, would you people be this way? I seriously doubt it. The only reason most people keep posting how pissed they are about this is not because of their high moral standards, but more because now they can't get the patch.

I ordered the CD June 25, and now Dell says I won't get the CD until September 4th, which is a rediculous amount of delay. That's why I modified the file to get the installer to put it on my Axim. That's why everybody I know of did it, if they did it. I don't think what I did was so bad, because I never told anybody else how to do it, because I know they could just get the OS and never pay for it.

It's not a big problem with people who already ordered the CD doing it; the only thing I think is wrong is posting it where anybody could see it and use it to flat-out steal the OS. I think most people would feel that way had Dell NOT pulled the patch.

I agree with your thoughts. I didn't download the file, although I do wish I had.

I don't think I would have installed it for two reasons:

1. There were too many reports of problems

2. I don't know how to hack it.

It would still have been nice to have because if the delay got to be too long, I'm sure I could have found out how to hack it.

Like most people here, I have ordered the upgrade. I have not been charged anything by Dell so I'm not going to use the "I paid so I can do what I want" excuse. I would use the "I downloaded this in case it comes in handy in the future" excuse instead.

I must admit, my 2002 Axim is working really well. I might not even rush to install the new ROM when I do get it from Dell*. The only app I have that is in dire need of improvment is MS Reader. That really sucks since I got the updated version.

* of course that is a total lie. I'll install it right away and mess about all night to get it working if I have to. :lol:

[ctmagnus]

Maybe OEMs should start putting a breakdown of price on their boxes. That way, people will see that they're not paying for the hardware and getting the software for free. Might make some people wake up to the fact that intangible stuff sometimes does cost real money.

[SassKwatch]

Much like politics and religion, Pirating is just one of those areas that shouldn't be openly debated.............Hey... freedom of speach is a wonderful thing.

And I feel the need to exercise my FoS, and say that's just about the *strangest* comment I've read in this whole thread. Not bad, not wrong....just strange.

Personally, I've always thought politics most certainly should be openly debated. In fact, I feel so strongly about that, I'd go so far as to say we have a *duty* to discuss it. Only those who fear exposing their opinions to scrutiny need hide behind that 'should not be debated' claptrap.

For the life of me, I can't begin to imagine why pirating 'should not be openly debated'.

[sambeckett]

Im not sure what will happen when I post this link.

Hope nuthing too bad. (if you dont want it please just edit this message and not delete the whole thing so eveyone will know)

after all this is just a link to another forum and is related to this thread

***The link is dead, so it has been removed***

***Edited by moderator SJC 8/2/03 11:37 EDT

[hollis_f]

I'm getting very frustrated because I need to do a hard reset - followed by a reinstall of all apps - on my device. But I know I'm gonna have to do the same when I get my mitts on the upgrade. And I really don't want to have to go through all that hassle twice in a few months.

But the upgrade will not solve any of your problem. Mobile 2003 will make your device faster, a little more secure, and better implementation of some apps like PIE but will not solve your hard reset problem. As stated mobile 2003 is not a bug fix for Pocket Pc 2002. The Dell upgrade was a bug fix for PPC 2003 not 2002.The upgrade won't solve my problem - a hard reset will solve my problem. I've installed something that screws up any installation I try to do to a Storage Card. A hrd reset fixes it, a restore brings the problem back. So I need to do a hard reset followed by installing each app. That'll take several hours. I don't want to do it twice in a few weeks.

[hollis_f]

Once I've actually paid for the upgrade I'm gonna fnid it even more difficult to resist.

This raises an interesting question:

If you have already paid for it (ordered via credit card), is it morally wrong to install a pirated copy until your licence (piece of paper) arrives in the mail?

I say that this isn't piracy and is perfectly okay.
It depends what I'm actually paying for. I would say (and HP would agree with me, I'm sure) that I'm not paying all that money for a bit of shiny plastic. I'm paying for the code it contains and the right to use that code. So, once I've paid for that code, I should be free to use it - regardless of the route by which I obtain that code.

[Ed Hansberry]

I'm paying for the code it contains and the right to use that code. So, once I've paid for that code, I should be free to use it - regardless of the route by which I obtain that code.
Actually, you are buying a license to use the code. You don't own the code at all. The license dictates is usage. You can rationalize it any way you like, but until your credit card has been charged and you have read and agreed to the EULA on the CD, you don't have a valid license.

[mr_Ray]

I'm paying for the code it contains and the right to use that code. So, once I've paid for that code, I should be free to use it - regardless of the route by which I obtain that code.
Actually, you are buying a license to use the code. You don't own the code at all. The license dictates is usage. You can rationalize it any way you like, but until your credit card has been charged and you have read and agreed to the EULA on the CD, you don't have a valid license.

Although that may be technically correct, I think most people would agree that so long as you're paying for it as soon as they let you, it's acceptable. If I had a copy of Office on order and there was a delay and it wouldn't arrive until next week, I'd have no problem with grabbing a copy from someone else to use until then.

What would you do if Dell had delivered your CD but hadn't charged you yet? Technically you still don't have the license since you haven't paid for it - would you wait for the charge to go through on your card before installing it and just leave the CD in the packaging until that point?
That's essentially the same situation - you have the product and want to pay but the supplier haven't got around to charging you yet.

Just a philosphical question. :)

[Ed Hansberry]

Although that may be tedchnically correct, I think most people would agree that so long as you're payign for it as soon as they let you it's acceptable. If I had a copy of Office on order and there was a delay and it wouldn't arrive until next week I'd have no problem with grabbing a copy from someone else to use until then.
So when it failed to activate because it was already activated on your friends PC, you called up MS and explained the situation to them. You think they are going to go "Oh, sure Mr. Ray. Here is a new activate code."
Where would you stand on if Dell had delivered the CD but hadn't charged you yet? Technically you still don't have the license since you haven't paid for it - would you wait for the charge to go through on your card before installing it and just leave the CD in the packaging until that point?
That isn't the same thing at all. A billing glitch on their end doesn't invalidate the license you have acquired, no more than a technical glitch magically gives you a license.

[mr_Ray]

Although that may be tedchnically correct, I think most people would agree that so long as you're payign for it as soon as they let you it's acceptable. If I had a copy of Office on order and there was a delay and it wouldn't arrive until next week I'd have no problem with grabbing a copy from someone else to use until then.
So when it failed to activate because it was already activated on your friends PC, you called up MS and explained the situation to them. You think they are going to go "Oh, sure Mr. Ray. Here is a new activate code."
Where would you stand on if Dell had delivered the CD but hadn't charged you yet? Technically you still don't have the license since you haven't paid for it - would you wait for the charge to go through on your card before installing it and just leave the CD in the packaging until that point?
That isn't the same thing at all. A billing glitch on their end doesn't invalidate the license you have acquired, no more than a technical glitch magically gives you a license.

So you'd use it despite not having paid for it? In both cases you fully intended to pay for it and it's Dell's fault that you haven't. In both cases it's due to Dell's incompetence. (Leaving the naughty hacker side out of it which I disagree with).

Anyway my Doctor keeps telling me that playing Devil's Advocate is bad for my health so I'll back out of this one now and agree to disagree. :)

[Jonathon Watkins]

Well Dell certainly have charged me for the upgrade. :?

IF I had downloaded it then I would have considered that I was doing nothing wrong. After all - I paid for it & the contract I had with Dell was that it should have been delivered by now.

BUT, I don't want to take any chances messing up my Axim. I too would dearly like to hard reset, do the firmware upgrade & then get my SW house in order. However I need to wait for Dell to ship me a shiny piece of plastic with code that should have been availible for downloading in the first place. :|

[Ed Hansberry]

Well Dell certainly have charged me for the upgrade. :? |
Dell has dinged your credit card already? :?: In the US, they are real good about waiting until they ship.

[IpaqMan2]

For the life of me, I can't begin to imagine why pirating 'should not be openly debated'.

You see SassKwatch, it's much like this...

Certain things shouldn't be discussed openly... Because everyone has their opinion on things and no one is really interested in solving problems.

Every politition is looking for thier own interests not the people they serve. Each of us choose a religion more for the lifestyle we can live, not for what there is to be learned, and last, none of us wants to be a pirate, but all of us has participated in some form of piracy during our life.

So our duty to discuss, should start with us doing first and less talking.

I know my views are a little rough and dark and that I have made blanket statements in my comment above about everyone, but I have never known a person to turn down piracy in it's simpliest form and that is sad. Whether an Mp3, a computer game, a simple application that can be easily beemed or copied to another PDA, an OS, or what have you... we all find our reasons for justification.

As for my comments relating in this thread, I personally thought it was odd that it was ever brought up in the first place. If you own your Dell PPC than I believe what you do to it is your business. If you exchanged money to Dell and you are waiting for your software to arrive, than I also see nothing wrong in hacking your PPC with whatever is floating out there. If you didn't purchase the software and you want to hack your Dell PPC, well than you're gonna make that decision despite what anyone will post here...Hence is why I thought this entire discussion was odd right from the very beginning.

And to shed light to your question as to why I think piracy should not be openly debated here, is because I belive most of the people here tolerates piracy to some level, whether small or great.... You've heard the saying... Let he without sin cast the first stone.....So I am wondering... why is everyone casting??

[Rob Alexander]

Much like politics and religion, Pirating is just one of those areas that shouldn't be openly debated.............Hey... freedom of speach is a wonderful thing.

...Personally, I've always thought politics most certainly should be openly debated. In fact, I feel so strongly about that, I'd go so far as to say we have a *duty* to discuss it. Only those who fear exposing their opinions to scrutiny need hide behind that 'should not be debated' claptrap.

Warning: Pure :soapbox:

You couldn't be more right SassWatch. Politics most certainly should be debated openly. That is one of the founding principles of our (American's) country. If you go back to look at the origins of our intellectual property law, it is all about promoting debate on political issues. The force beyond the development of intellectual property laws was not about the protection of entertainment, but about the protection and promotion of political discourse.

And that is very pertinent to this discussion. Anyone who doesn't see that we are currently in a huge political battle over the future of intellectual property in this country is living with their eyes closed. Over time, the duty of society to the creators (and now their heirs, and corporate IP holders) has steadily increased and the duty of the creators to society has decreased. We are at a crossroads where the last vestiges of the creator's duty to society are threatened, and the amazing thing is how many people here seem to be totally brainwashed by the large corporate stance on IP. You're more worried about how a few individuals may "steal" a few dollars from the big corporates than about how the big corporates are working very hard to "legally steal" lots more dollars from you.

For example, I'm amazed the the number of otherwise well-informed people here who can't grasp the idea that intellectual property and physical property are not the same thing. Stealing a car has nothing to do with pirating software. Anyone who's had a first year class in economics should easily understand why; remember the phrase 'non-rival in consumption'? But don't take my word for it, just look at the laws themselves. If you pirate software, you are not prosecuted under the same set of laws as if you steal a car. There are completely different terms and provisions for that because intellectual property is fundamentally different from physical property. Economists know it, attorneys know it, your lawmakers know it... it's just people in forums like this who can't seem to figure it out.

The other thing that amazes me is the black & white view that some people here profess. Like Ed obessessing over exactly when someone's credit card was charged. Please! Like Ed always sticks exactly to the letter of every law. Do any of us really believe that Ed lives in a world where he wouldn't go a few mph over the speed limit to get away from a dangerous driver, or that he wouldn't cross a double-yellow line to avoid an accident, or that he wouldn't stop for an accident on an Interstate because the minimum speed is 40mph? (Not picking on you personally, Ed, but yours were just some of the later posts that stuck in my mind) I can't count the number of times that I've needed a piece of software, ordered it online, then installed it from a CD at work. Or at work, installed a needed piece of software on someone's computer, then sent in the purchase order to computing services that afternoon. You can't seriously think that anyone at any software developer cares when, to the minute, the actual transaction takes place so long as you actually do pay for the license.

That's the part of what IpaqMan2 said in his second message that makes sense. It's not that we shouldn't debate the larger issues of intellectual property--it's our duty to--it's that it would be more useful if people would get past the oversimplified "stealing-is-stealing" mantra programmed into them by the SBA, RIAA and others and discuss the real issues. What should the level and length of copyright protection be? What duty do copyright holders owe to society? What should fair use be? These aren't academic discussions... they will affect your bank account in the decades to come. Get off the bandwagon people and stop being pawns of the corporate giants who want nothing but to take more of your money. Pay for what you use, but spend this energy discussing the real issues... and writing your congresspeople, trying to convince them to bring some sense back to IP laws.

[IpaqMan2]

For example, I'm amazed the the number of otherwise well-informed people here who can't grasp the idea that intellectual property and physical property are not the same thing.... it's just people in forums like this who can't seem to figure it out.

it's that it would be more useful if people would get past the oversimplified "stealing-is-stealing" mantra programmed into them by the SBA, RIAA and others and discuss the real issues. What should the level and length of copyright protection be? What duty do copyright holders owe to society? What should fair use be? These aren't academic discussions... they will affect your bank account in the decades to come.

Nicely put Rob.
The heart of this discussion should be the issues you brought up in your comment. "What should the level and length of copyright protection be?"

"What duty do copyright holders owe to society?"
This question alone can be the reasons for true debate. Does anyone belive that anyone who is a copyright holder has any type of duty towards society? Think about it... It's deep. I use to Work for Cisco Systems supoorting their Cisco works software. The software cost like 10k and ran on the Win2000 platform. When MS released the SP1 for Win2000 many people called to Cisco complaining that their Cisco Works software no longer worked, our official answer was to uninstall the SP1 or buy the upgrade to Cisco Works so it would work at a price of $7,500.00 So this means the people who just bought the Cisco Works software 2 months earlier now were forced to pay another 7.5k... This is an example of what I think copyright holders have a duty to treat their customers with fairness and to release a "worthy" product.

And Last..."What should fair use be?" This is the mother of all debates..
How would anyone feel if they purchased a music CD that had rules as to how and when you could listen to the music on the CD? Or a car that could only be driven on certin days for specific reasons? Or some other product that you payed alot for and when you no longer had a use for it you couldn't sell it at a yardsale or something like that to recap your costs, or a software that would expire after a certain date, even though you purchased just because the vendor has decided that the software was no longer supported, even though you still had lots of use for it?

I would think these are the issues we should be discussing. These are the people who do pay for their software. These are the topics the RIAA and the SBA would have us not address at all.

[Ed Hansberry]

The other thing that amazes me is the black & white view that some people here profess. Like Ed obessessing over exactly when someone's credit card was charged.
People are hiding behind "well, I've already paid for it!" as if that were a defense. The truth is, they haven't paid for it. Dell is holding their payment info until they ship the product.

If someone tells me that they have been charged, their check has cleared, or some other way, then I would tend ot agree that they have paid for it and would be able to go ahead and install.
Like Ed always sticks exactly to the letter of every law. Do any of us really believe that Ed lives in a world where he wouldn't go a few mph over the speed limit to get away from a dangerous driver, or that he wouldn't cross a double-yellow line to avoid an accident, or that he wouldn't stop for an accident on an Interstate because the minimum speed is 40mph?
You are being intellectually dishonest if you are really trying to equate safety or helping someone in need with theft. Yes, theft. Sorry you don't like that word.

[Kati Compton]

Hmmm. But if someone provides their credit card information to Dell, and does not cancel the order, then they have promised to pay for it. Isn't writing a check for something also a promise of payment, rather than the payment itself?

[Ed Hansberry]

Hmmm. But if someone provides their credit card information to Dell, and does not cancel the order, then they have promised to pay for it. Isn't writing a check for something also a promise of payment, rather than the payment itself?
No. A check is the payment once cashed. If Dell delays for another 90 days for whatever reason, no one will be charged. You have in essence said "When you ship the product, I'll pay." You just gave them the payment info up front so you'd be at the top of the list when shipments started going out.

What if you gave HP your CC# because you wanted to buy the as yet unrelased 1930. HP ships them to all users and also to stores. Because of some glitch somewhere, your shipment is sent to the wrong state and it takes UPS 3 days to find it and get it to you. Is it ok to steal the 1930 from CompUSA? You can claim "I've already paid for it!" just like people are doing here.

Edit: Let's make this even more clear cut. You order your 2002-2003 upgrade CD for your Axim. Dell messes the shipment up or UPS loses it. It takes 10 days to get you a replacement. On day 3, you are walking around the mall and notice that the Dell kiosk has the CDs for sale right there - same price you paid at Dell. Is it ok to steal that CD and do your upgrade now instead of waiting?

[jeff]

What if you gave HP your CC# because you wanted to buy the as yet unrelased 1930. HP ships them to all users and also to stores. Because of some glitch somewhere, your shipment is sent to the wrong state and it takes UPS 3 days to find it and get it to you. Is it ok to steal the 1930 from CompUSA? You can claim "I've already paid for it!" just like people are doing here.

Edit: Let's make this even more clear cut. You order your 2002-2003 upgrade CD for your Axim. Dell messes the shipment up or UPS loses it. It takes 10 days to get you a replacement. On day 3, you are walking around the mall and notice that the Dell kiosk has the CDs for sale right there - same price you paid at Dell. Is it ok to steal that CD and do your upgrade now instead of waiting?

You're still comparing physical property (an iPAQ, a CD) to a copy of something. The CD or iPAQ would be missing from the inventory of those stores and you'd be prohibiting someone else from purchasing them. Downloading a copy of something you're waiting on does not stop anyone else from buying it. Those analogies do not work, and I can't understand why you don't see the difference.

[Ed Hansberry]

You're still comparing physical property (an iPAQ, a CD) to a copy of something. The CD or iPAQ would be missing from the inventory of those stores and you'd be prohibiting someone else from purchasing them. Downloading a copy of something you're waiting on does not stop anyone else from buying it. Those analogies do not work, and I can't understand why you don't see the difference.
You pretty much just defined and defended Warez. :way to go:

[Janak Parekh]

You pretty much just defined and defended Warez. :way to go:
I think the point that others are making is that the marginal cost of a digital theft is much less than the marginal cost of physical theft. However, given licensing and other properties of how these things work, this is not always true, as you point out.

I think it's perfectly legitimate to say that one dislikes Microsoft's licensing terms that force Dell to come up with such cost and distribution structures. In fact, some people will buy non-Windows solutions for this very reason. However, that isn't really Dell's fault (unless you feel the Axim should run Linux. ;))

--janak

[Ed Hansberry]

I think the point that others are making is that the marginal cost of a digital theft is much less than the marginal cost of physical theft.
No argument there.

I still see the word "theft" on both the physical and non-physical side.

Can someone honestly say they don't think it is theft? i just keep hearing rationalizations that is is just teeny tiny theft and that makes it ok.

[Janak Parekh]

Can someone honestly say they don't think it is theft?
Ooh, that's an interesting question. Once again technology has passed the language by, and the language has to catch up. Dictionary.com has an interesting legal definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=theft) for the word.

Note: To constitute theft there must be a taking without the owner's consent, and it must be unlawful or felonious; every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position; and it must be, at least momentarily, in the complete possession of the thief.
(I wish I had access to a full legal dictionary handy.)

By that definition, digital theft isn't "theft". It begs higher-level questions as to what it should be called in that case. However, it doesn't beg the question of Dell's responsibilities when distributing software given by Microsoft to them under a contract. Given Microsoft's status in the software industry, they can indeed require Dell to account for every license distributed and to make sure they're paid up. I was once working for a company who had to sign an OEM license agreement with Microsoft just so that we could install Win95 on workstations. Having read that, I can easily see why Dell did what they did.

--janak

[Ed Hansberry]

Can someone honestly say they don't think it is theft?
Ooh, that's an interesting question. Once again technology has passed the language by, and the language has to catch up. Dictionary.com has an interesting take (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=theft) on this:

Note: To constitute theft there must be a taking without the owner's consent, and it must be unlawful or felonious; every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position; and it must be, at least momentarily, in the complete possession of the thief.
(I wish I had a link to the MW legal dictionary handy.)

By that definition, digital theft isn't "theft".
I'm not going to get in to a legal tit-for-tat arguement on what constitutes "theft" which is defined as "a criminal taking of the property or services of another without consent."

If you and others think that you can only steal physical property, then we can throw out all of the copyright, trademark and patent laws world wide. Go ahead and post Micky Mouse on your home page, set up a file share to distribute Windows XP via FTP download and publish a few books from alt.binaries.ebooks then whip out the Dictionary.com definition of theft as your legal defense.

[Rob Alexander]

The other thing that amazes me is the black & white view that some people here profess. Like Ed obessessing over exactly when someone's credit card was charged.
People are hiding behind "well, I've already paid for it!" as if that were a defense. The truth is, they haven't paid for it. Dell is holding their payment info until they ship the product.

If someone tells me that they have been charged, their check has cleared, or some other way, then I would tend ot agree that they have paid for it and would be able to go ahead and install.

In the case being discussed here, they have paid for it. In our society, a promise to pay constitutes legal consideration and the establishment of a contract. When you write a check at the grocery, your check hasn't cleared when you take the groceries from the store. That check is your promise to pay, it is not payment in and of itself. By your standard above of requiring a check to have actually cleared, you are committing theft every time you buy groceries with a check.

Similarly, someone's authorization to charge their credit card is a promise to pay. Look on your bill sometime... many companies don't actually put through the charge for some days after you have authorized the charge. You haven't stolen the goods, because your promise to pay is legal consideration. If someone has authorized the payment, then their duty is discharged, both morally and legally. Now there may be terms in the license agreement that could bring his actions into question, but that would be a contract dispute, not theft.

Like Ed always sticks exactly to the letter of every law. Do any of us really believe that Ed lives in a world where he wouldn't go a few mph over the speed limit to get away from a dangerous driver, or that he wouldn't cross a double-yellow line to avoid an accident, or that he wouldn't stop for an accident on an Interstate because the minimum speed is 40mph?
You are being intellectually dishonest if you are really trying to equate safety or helping someone in need with theft. Yes, theft. Sorry you don't like that word.

It's an analogy; I'm sure you've heard of them. And I like the word 'theft' just fine. It's a perfectly good word, even if you have no idea what it means. 'Theft' is "the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving that person of it". That basic definition applies in almost every jurisdiction derived from British common law. Clearly, this case does not contain the basic elements of theft since there was no intent to permanently deprive anyone of anything.

In fact, this is why the dishonest appropriation of intellectual property is covered under its own statutes. It's simply not theft because the fundamental nature of intellectual property makes it impossible for the owner to be deprived of it, even when it's dishonestly appropriated. It may be morally bad, and it may be illegal (and I agree that taking, disributing and/or using software or music or TV shows without paying is both), but it's not 'theft'; it's simply a different crime. And this person finding another source for the product that they have already bought (and they *have* already bought it once they authorized the charge) is not a crime at all.

[Rob Alexander]

No. A check is the payment once cashed. If Dell delays for another 90 days for whatever reason, no one will be charged. You have in essence said "When you ship the product, I'll pay." You just gave them the payment info up front so you'd be at the top of the list when shipments started going out.

Well at least keep your own argument straight. Is it only payment after being cashed or is it payment up front? It can't be both.

What if you gave HP your CC# because you wanted to buy the as yet unrelased 1930. HP ships them to all users and also to stores. Because of some glitch somewhere, your shipment is sent to the wrong state and it takes UPS 3 days to find it and get it to you. Is it ok to steal the 1930 from CompUSA? You can claim "I've already paid for it!" just like people are doing here.

Ed, I know you understand this because you've demonstrated a strong understanding of economics in other topics over the years. And not just intuitively; you've obviously had training. So why is this so hard for you to grasp?

A Pocket PC is physical property and it has certain characteristics that affect it's production, distribution and use. One of those characteristics is that it is inherently rival in consumption. If I consume the product, then no one else can (at the same time). If I take the property then I am depriving the owner of the property. They no longer have it to use.

Intellectual property is fundamentally different in that it is non-rival in consumption. My consumption of it does nothing to affect your ability to also consume it. This changes everything from the economics of development and production, to the implications of the dishonest appropriation of it. When someone makes a copy of something they have paid for, they are not depriving anyone of anything. The intellectual property owner has their money (or the promise of it) and the consumer has their copy of the intellectual property. There is nothing amiss.

So your analogy simply doesn't apply because the two situations are fundamentally different. You accused me of intellectual dishonesty in a previous post, but this is much more intellectually dishonest because everyone understood that I was using an analogy, but you are trying to convince people that the two are literally the same. They aren't and I believe that you understand that. That is intellectually dishonest.

P.S. Let's be very clear on one point here. I am not in any way promoting anyone taking software without paying for it. I can honestly say that there is not one byte of software on my computer or PPC that hasn't been legally licensed for my use. There are many very good reasons why we should all pay for our software, but that does not mean that we should fail to recognize that the large software and entertainment producers are out to screw us all blind. They are working hard to convince Congress to take away the rest of our battered fair use rights, while we sit around here and squabble about the meaning of the word 'theft' and debating when a contract for sale comes into force.

If you want to do something constructive, spend the time you would otherwise use on replying to this thread on writing your Congressperson to express your dislike for the DMCA and tell them that you want fair use rights protected, not eroded away.

[jeff]

You're still comparing physical property (an iPAQ, a CD) to a copy of something. The CD or iPAQ would be missing from the inventory of those stores and you'd be prohibiting someone else from purchasing them. Downloading a copy of something you're waiting on does not stop anyone else from buying it. Those analogies do not work, and I can't understand why you don't see the difference.
You pretty much just defined and defended Warez. :way to go:

Where did I defend anything? Nowhere. I was pointing out your idiotic analogy and you, seemingly oblivious to the difference between physical and intellectual property, tried to put words in my mouth. We're talking about this specific instance of someone having paid for something (whether the actual charge has gone through or not) and obtaining a copy of that software early without depriving anyone else of it. But if ignoring the subject helps your ranting... :way to go:

[Rob Alexander]

If you and others think that you can only steal physical property, then we can throw out all of the copyright, trademark and patent laws world wide. Go ahead and post Micky Mouse on your home page, set up a file share to distribute Windows XP via FTP download and publish a few books from alt.binaries.ebooks then whip out the Dictionary.com definition of theft as your legal defense.

:bangin: You wouldn't use that as your defense because you wouldn't be charged with theft; you'd be charged with copyright violation. Look, there are lots of things that are bad to do that aren't theft. Killing someone is bad, but it's not theft. Cheating on your spouse is bad, but it's not theft. Driving drunk is bad, but it's not theft. Distributing XP from your Micky Mouse web site is bad, but it's not theft either. And that's why we have laws to cover all of these other things. If copyright violation were theft, we wouldn't have a separate law for it; we'd just use the laws on theft. So of course you don't throw out those laws; you use them to prosecute copyright violators.

[Rob Alexander]

If you and others think that you can only steal physical property, then we can throw out all of the copyright, trademark and patent laws world wide.
Ed, I didn't say that, and you know it. ;) My point is that in this new day and age, we really need a new word and/or new definition. A lot of laws on the books need to be updated to better serve digital markets/products/IP/whatever.

--janak

We already have books full of laws convering intellectual property. What has changed is that technology has removed the last bit of control IP owners had over their property. If you'll excuse a short economics lesson here, I think you'll find this useful. I've already mentioned that IP is non-rival in comsumption, but that's only half the story.

One of the fundamental characteristics necessary for the operation of a market is the ability to exclude people from the use of property that they do not pay for. But there is a class of goods, called 'public goods' that do not allow for a market to develop because of two things. First, like IP, they are non-rival so you don't use them up. Second, you cannot exclude anyone from using them. Common examples of public goods are lighthouses, national defense and police protection. You can see how you could not say, for example, that only those who pay for it will be protected against foreign invasion. Either the whole country is safe or not.

Because you cannot exclude anyone from the benefits of a public good, there will always be people who will not pay for them (but will still consume them) and so they will never be totally paid for in a free market. So the government taxes you and buys them on your behalf.

Now get back to IP. IP has always been non-rival, but until recently the publishers of it could exclude those who didn't pay because there was still a physical component to its consumption. You had to buy the book or record or whatever. You could make some copies, but the quality of copies was so poor that you would still buy the originals. But now technology has made it so that we can make and distribute unlimited copies of IP that are just as good as the original.

Suddenly, IP has become a public good and that is really bad news for the producers of it. It costs a tremendous amount to produce the first copy and next to nothing to produce the rest, but now a single copy can be distributed worldwide in a matter of hours, leaving the producer of the property hanging in the wind. If this ever gets completely out of hand, the producers will simply go out of business and we won't have these goods to purchase at any cost. These guys have a legitimate concern.

But at the same time, the IP community has always fought against fair use and what they see as violations of their property. They fought vehemently against the establishment of public libraries as well as against the existence of VCRs. So make no mistake. The industries involved are not only interested in protecting themselves from us; they also see this as an opportunity to gain back ground that they've lost in the past. And that's why we all need to provide vigorous input into the debates in Congress.

Somehow, society needs a new system of balancing protection of intellectual property with the rights of consumers. The solution will have to be social/political as technology alone simply cannot prevent the abuse of IP. A solution will also have to have the implicit consent of consumers as they are the ultimate decisionmakers in this.

[qmrq]

UNIX (http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/binaries/get.html) (Solaris)
UNIX (http://www.freebsd.org/) (BSD)
Linux (http://www.gentoo.org/) (Gentoo)

Damn. Seems that operating systems are free. :wink:

[PetiteFlower]

The reason why a "promise to pay" isn't the same as ACTUALLY paying in this case is as follows:

Dell does not charge your card until it ships out your product. At ANY TIME prior to the shipping of your order, you can CANCEL your order and remove their authorization to charge you. Now regardless of whether you actually intend to do this, the fact remains that you COULD download the patch, upgrade your Axim, and then cancel your order of the CD, pay nothing, and DELL WOULD HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING! They can't just take your word that you're not going to cancel your order, because they have no way of telling whether someone who cancels their order has downloaded the patch or not. And they have no way of knowing whether someone who downloads the patch has ordered or received the CD or not.

The other reason that downloading the patch before receiving your CD is because all of the idiots who thought it was "harmless" and something they were "entitled to" because their order had already been placed, caused the people who WERE legitimately entitled to the patch(had received and installed their CD) to no longer have access to it. Enough with the BS about downloads not depriving anyone of anything, Dell pulled the patch because of the massive numbers of illegal downloads, so people who REALLY need it because they installed PPC 2003 and their Axims are not functioning correctly, can't get it anymore. Thank you very much, you selfish creeps.

I'm not going to get into whether it's theft or not. But whether it's harmless, whether it's WRONG, I will say that clearly, it was NOT harmless, and it WAS wrong, and it made theft of the upgrade POSSIBLE so Dell had to make sure they corrected that. Perhaps if you could think beyond YOUR device and YOUR own little world, you'd understand the impact downloading the patch if you're not entitled to it has on the rest of the community.