do you use the piratic software?

[supliang]

do do I ,and nobody around me pays on the software.they all use the priatic software. and you?

[Steven Cedrone]

No! :roll:

Here, we all feel we should support the fine folks who take the time to support this platform.

[surur]

No, for a number of reasons.

1) Its illegal, and I dont want to go to jail.
2) PDA software are comparatively cheap, so I can easily afford it.
3) PPC is still a growing platform, so I want to support developers in creating new apps, and the best way to do this is to throw some money their way.
4) There is often freeware available which does the same job for nothing.
5)I want my PDA as 'clean' as possible. Who knows when hacked software will send my contact list of by e-mail, or my flex-wallet file with all my credit card numbers and password to my bank account. I do actually store valuable information on my PDA.

I do agree however than PDA's can be an expensive hobby, especially to get it setup well initially e.g. pocketinformant, tomtom navigation, wisbar advanced, pocketbreeze to name but a few.

Maybe you want to add a poll to your post, so you do not just get holier than thou people scolding you?

Surur

[jhennig]

No! If you can't afford programs, don't buy a ppc. Pirates disgust me in that they can't respect the knowledge of programmers and the time they spend making programs. Do you steal food at the grocery store just because others might and you don't get caught?

[chees]

Alot of software is really not worth the price. Like 10$ for a program that converts currency.

[jhennig]

then get along without it or find it elseware for free. They make the price. If you think it is too high, that does not give you the right to pirate it.

[phritosan]

i hope this doesnt spiral into another discussion about the merits or sins of piracy!

for my ppc: usually i dont
for my notebook: occasionally
for my desktop: usually

[Don't Panic!]

Nope. To much chance of being disowned by the community. I like our little place the way it is and bringing in pirates is never good for a community. :mrgreen:

[Sven Johannsen]

Alot of software is really not worth the price. Like 10$ for a program that converts currency.

Then write it yourself. Should take you less than an hour, assuming your time is worth $10 an hour.

[yankeejeep]

Voting with our wallets is one of the best ways to encourage quality software. If the software is good enough to load, then support the writer and buy it. If you don't think it's worth the price then it's not worth keeping on your PPC. I don't go around picking pockets and I don't use software for free unless that's the way it has been released.

[cteel2004]

My company was hit by some software piracy last year. And I can tell you from a developer's standpoint that there aren't that many feelings (as a developer) that feel worse than that.

Imagine working on a project 12-18 hours a day for over a year. You've put all this time into it because you feel that your time and your unique idea is worth something, and you believe you are going to get that something when you're done.

And then someone gets the idea of coming in and taking the finished product from you and handing it out to the world for free and in return insults you with the idea that your idea shouldn't be yours (which is idea behind the text message this software pirate included with hacked version of my product).

I don't care what the price is for a product, there is never any good excuse for pirating software. If you have a problem with the price, email the developer. I know that I appreciate such feedback from customers and potential customers, and I'm sure there are many other developers out there who feel the same way.

Just my two cents

[G M Fude]

No, there isn't a single program on my desktop PC or PDA that has not been paid for. Other than freebies; and even some of them, like IrfanView or ExtractNow are so good I've sent the developer money (hmmm, I really should get around to sending some to Picard for TCPMP).

Doesn't matter whether it's intellectual property like software or physical property like a wallet or car or PDA; if it's taken then that would make me a thief.

[jmpmjmpm]

check out sourceforge.net and you will see how developers make their software free! Large companies are to blame with their prices and licensing agreements becoming ever inflated and complex and restrictive. As far as I'm concerned if I have paid for a product i.e. the no1 office suite and have 4 pc's at home then I will put it on those 4 pc's regardless of how it's "licensed" same with satnav and any other program or song or video and I will use whatever means I need to to do that. I have paid for it, it's only me using it, end of story. If you are a person who likes all the licenses and to stay within them then fine. If you are poor and genuinely cannot afford the software and it's relitavely essential then get it! never mind the whingers who tend to have no money worries, if you are a rich whinger then TOUGH! you probably have shares in said companies or at least investments that track the major indexes they are part of. Having said that small developers MUST be supported, as they are the ones with the fresh ideas and innovations. There are some software vendors that sell licenses on a "what it's worth to you" basis, you make an offer and if it's fair you get a license, this is the way to go as not everyone can afford very expensive and very essential software. I wonder how much extra revenue microsoft would make if it had ten dollars or pounds or whatever for every pirated copy of windows, office etc in use today, yet still charged full price to businesses?

Business is where the big money from software comes from, if the little guy get's it dirt cheap then by popularity businesses will adopt it.

I wonder how many of the goody two shoe's here that has donated toward the cost of this forum, oh , gotcha there huh?!

[Lex]

What's a 'whinger'?

There's this thing called 'the law'. Sure some people shoplift, or drive 95mph on the highway and have compelling reasons in their own minds that it's fine for them to do so. "That grocery store makes enough money, I'm taking my share ! Plus their prices are too high anyway so I'm just evening the score."

[cteel2004]

jmpmjmpm,
to use the premis that because a developer is rich, or because a customer is poor is complete stupidity. We have this little thing called a capitalist society. This essentially runs on the idea that businesses can provide a product, and the consumer can decide to buy it or not. The consumer can (and should if they want to avoid debt) decide not to buy something if they can't afford it.

As a result of this the business can either maintain their prices and not get the customers who can't afford the product, or they can lower the price. I ran into that last summer. I decided to switch to a graduated price scale with four different licenses, instead of just one license. The result for me was higher revenue overall. But that isn't always the case depending on any number of other econimical factors (demand, etc.).

Also in regards to installing the same license on multiple computers, this also complete stupidity. The software developer (who is also defined as the actual owner of the software, just as the author of a literary work is the owner of that work) has the right to say how their software can be used and under what circumstances, because...all together now...they're the owner of the software. This has been the case for all intellectual property law in recent history. If you own it then you get to define how it is used, it's as simple as that. When you purchase a movie, a music cd, a book, or a software app the only thing that belongs to you the customer is the license to use it. All the rest belongs to the person who created that work from their own mind.

[jmpmjmpm]

What's a 'whinger'?

There's this thing called 'the law'. Sure some people shoplift, or drive 95mph on the highway and have compelling reasons in their own minds that it's fine for them to do so. "That grocery store makes enough money, I'm taking my share ! Plus their prices are too high anyway so I'm just evening the score."

So the grocery store now sells apples with a license, you bought it and only you may eat it. You may not share it with your child, you may not stew it and make apple pie, because the person who grew the apples and worked 12-18 hours a day cultivating them doesn't wish it. RUBBISH
intellectual rights are simply a way for the greedy to make money, and lots of it, the laws were written by people with a vested interest in this. The majority of laws 99.9% of the I totally agree with, but some civil laws are simply stupid, capitalistic money making drivel. And this is a prime example. If you release a piece of software and I buy it then I will use it as I see fit, and I do. The old premise "if you can't afford it you can't have it" and "I am better than you because I have more money and look what I have" simply doesn't wash. All people are entitled to a certain level of life, starving children should die in the 3rd world because they can't afford food should they? I wholly reject your arguement and the post below yours. It is greed and power driven people that represent all that is bad in the world today. What is the root of all evil? I have absolutely no sympathy for almost any "victim" of piracy. If you don't want to be fair in pricing and licensing then you will have your product "pirated", that's a fact. And no doubt the "pirate" will be still "pirating" long after your bank have foreclosed. After all you are so proud of the capitalist society! Oh, and Lex I notice you are from the USofA, what a joke us civil law is, 5 million dollars for a splinter, and sueing a 10 year old for downloading a nursery rhyme, yeah, great well thought out laws there!

[cteel2004]

jmpmjmpm.
I agree that software developers should price their products appropriately. But this should be determined by the market, similar to the price of apples. They don't charge $50 an apple because they know that no one would pay for that.

However, you are comparing apples to oranges with your grocery store example (sorry, no pun intended). You are talking about physical goods. Software and other intellectual properties are by their nature non-physical. It is also different in that food is required to sustain life. Now many who are addicted to technology (similar to myself) may disagree with my next comment, but software is NOT required for life. It isn't even required for good life.

There is no logical way you can argue that a civil right to software exists. Beleive it or not, I can live without playing solitair on my PDA, I can live without MS Office. It's called pull out a deck of cards, or pull out a typewritter! Or even, God forbid, pull out a pen and paper. 8O

Also, regarding the starving children in the 3rd world, how does playing the latest video game help them? Is this part of some new UN aid package? Medicine, culture neutral food, copy of Doom video game :?: I doubt it.

The idea behind intellectual property law (I've actually studied it) is to insure that someone who comes up with an original idea gets the credit for it. There's nothing in intellectual property that says the owners have to sell it. They can do what OpenNETCF did and offer it for free to the public with the requirement that those who use it give them proper credit. That requirement would have absolutely no teeth if not for the intellectual property law.

Also, you assert that those who beleive in capitalism hold the views "if you can't afford it you can't have it" and "I am better than you because I have more money and look what I have". To assert this is simply stupid, SOCIALISTIC drivel. I will grant you that there are those who hold those views. But there's a problem when you use stereotypes. If you apply them to groups larger than 2, your accuracy drops dramatically. Only a fool would beleive that money or property makes them better than another person. And that fool will live a very hollow life until their last day or until they change themselves. And I say this from the standpoint of someone who has enough to provide for my lifestyle.

[jmpmjmpm]

your absolutely right, I am not talkiing about the small developer here, I am talking about large corporations. Our society has excellent laws as a whole, and they are very similar througout the "western" world. I do not want to see developers loose the right to their intellectual property. I just think that some have gone too far with the licensing of that property. Have you ever tried to read through a ms license. I don't condone blatant piracy either, I actually use genuine software as a whole, as I should. Yes I have downloaded "warez" but only when there are no trials for the product and I want to see if it's any good to me. I realise that the apple story is unrealistic, as you say it's physical, but it makes a point. My gripe is with licensing really, which isn't really a "piracy" issue. I do not want to be restricted to how I use software, where I use software, or when to use it, if I have bought it then I should be able to use it at my pleasure as long as I don't modify or decomplie it. When sony releases a new hifi does it have a license attached? the design and layout of the pcb and in fact whole hifi is intellectual property, it's an original design, it took money and time to develop. So why should software have any protection other than that to protect against the theft of the idea, and the code from being decomplied or modified?
My personal feelings are neither left socialist nor right capitalist, but rather to the left of capitalism and the right of socialism, I also have no problem in providing for my lifestyle.

[cteel2004]

If you look in your docs that came with the hifi I bet you will find a license or disclaimer in there somewhere that says you can't take it apart with the intent to reverse engineer. And it will also say that you agree to those terms by using the product.

Plus there is still a difference between a hifi and software. When you purchase hardware, the sale is primarily focused on the physical goods and the labor it took to put it all together. True, there are still some intellectual property regulations in regards to the design. But those regulations are secondary in the sale. This can be compared to the apple in that the primary focus of the sale is the apple, but the farming and shipping proceedures, though protected by intellection property regulations, is secondary to the sale.

With software, it is the intellectual property that is the focus of the sale. The problem with this that you don't have with physical goods is that if you have a computer you have a means of reproducing the software as needed.

Yes I have read through numerous MS licenses of varying types. And they do get very lengthy. Especially when you look at developer licenses. But the primary reason for this is this simple principle. Being number one in an area also makes you the number one target. What I mean by that is everyone knows that MS is the most successful in the software world, primarily due to the diversity of the software they sell but also because their products (such as Windows and Office) are considered industry standard across the globe. As a result, MS knows that they or their products will be the target of people with less than honorable intensions. So as a result they hire some really great contract lawyers to draft the strongest licenses possible (in their favor which is what is supposed to be done) so that when they do catch someone who is pirating their software with obvious malicious intentent (selling on eBay for example, which has happened) it is very much an open and shut case when they file civil suit and press criminal charges against that person.

I do somewhat agree with the idea that software companies should release more trial or demo versions of their software. This is minor with low cost apps ($40 and below) but on higher cost apps I'm not very likely to drop $100+ on a something I haven't even tried out, unless it was a brand that I trust or if I had seen it in use on someone else's computer. But that is a business practice complaint that I have that can also be applied to companies who sell physical products.

But nevertheless, just because you can't get a trial is not a valid reason to download illegal software. The law is still the law. There are no exceptions in intellectual property law for whether or not it is conveniant to the one comitting the software piracy, or for whether or not the company selling the software is rich. Ownership is still ownership no matter how rich or how poor you are. To say that someone shouldn't have the same rights to their property simply because they are a rich corporation is the socialistic part that I was refering to.

The best way to do things in a capitalistic society is to let them (corporations and the like) be rewarded (in terms of business success) for working their way to the top. But nothing says they can't be knocked back down for starting a poor business practice such as not offering a trial version or issuing convoluted license agreements with their customers. Its up to the consumer to say "no, i won't buy". And when that happens the same thing that happens to small businesses like mine will happen to big corporations in that situation. They will realize that they made a mistake and come up with a new way that will make the customer happy, or they will go out of business.

So if you don't like MS Office because of their cost, the EULA, or because they don't offer a trial, then don't buy it! Go get Word Perfect, or any of the other non-MS office suites. Take your money to the compitition that acts the way you think they should. That's part of your rights as a consumer. And you know what, you won't have to break the law to do any of it.

[ch3n]

you cannot copy and paste an apple or a hifi...

jmp, i sincerely hope you never have an experience where someone else decides that they have less than you do, and takes measures accordingly...

think about that...yes it is unfortunate that some have and some don't, but it doesn't make it right to steal. how would your sharing theory hold up if just 2 or 3 people showed up at your house and decided to share your food and power and just hang out taking turns playing pirated games on your ipaq or whatever

i find it strange that so many that proclaim that the rest of the world should be better at sharing (with them) are also, invariably, the most 'snatchy' with other people's stuff

[pocketpcadmirer]

Some of my college friends say that I'm an idiot that I buy software. But, I dont give a heed to them. The developers need to be supported. Only then, we'll get new and better versions of softwares. This is ultimately benifit us in the long run.

On my magician, I've lots of apps installed. Yesterday, I took my friend's O2s for a while and copied the pocket slides from his sd card on my magician. I didnt tell him that I've copied his app. He had a text file in the folder containg his key. I am using it now and I feel a sence of guilt inside me. :(

But on my magician, all apps are registered legally

Sunny :D

[Guest979]

No, I never use pirated software (or "piratic" or "priatic" software, whatever those are).

[Ward]

Most of my apps are registered, but I agree with jmpmjmpm in principle: I do feel most EULAs to be overly restrictive. I've paid good money for a non-physical product and as far as I'm concerned, I should be able to use it on any machine in my possession. I will install the app on my PC and laptop even if its a single license - I can't use both and the license is for me not my machine. So what if someone else uses the machine? I can't lend? Draconian? Definitely. How about backing up? I have a collection of installation files RARed up and burnt to a DVD which lives in my laptop case. Illegal apparently. :roll:

All applications should have a customer clause that allows for <5 concurrent installations to be made at the same location. That way, multi player games with a LAN, Windows installations, etc, needn't break the bank to remain legal - which few do anyway.

A law routinely broken is a poor law regardless of the intent behind it. A different, more customer centric system is needed - no more retailer biased EULAs.

[friedshrimp]

A law routinely broken is a poor law regardless of the intent behind it.

Just because a several people break a law, doesn't mean the law is bad. It just means there are a lot of people who just don't give a hoot or think it shouldn't apply to them. No #1 example is speeding. I see people passing me everyday (some at a very high rate of speed) on I-95, but that doesn't make the law bad, just a whole lot of bad people. And they really aren't bad people, they just have something more important to take care of (so they think). And while I agree piracy is bad, I do believe if I bought the software, I can use it on ANY of my computers. I mean, the computer didn't buy the software, I did! So in that perspective, I guess I'm not an angel either. :devilboy:

[Mirrebex]

yes.. all of them.. :P

[geosta]

So as a result they hire some really great contract lawyers to draft the strongest licenses possible (in their favor which is what is supposed to be done) so that when they do catch someone who is pirating their software with obvious malicious intentent (selling on eBay for example, which has happened) it is very much an open and shut case when they file civil suit and press criminal charges against that person.


It is actually quite interesting (for a nerd lawyer like me anyway) to go through some of the EULA's and see what these 'really great contract lawyers' draft into the agreements.

I had a couple of paralegals working for me a few years ago, and I gave them the task of going through some of these 'agreements' and find clauses that were unenforceable. In every 'agreement' (I use inverted comma's because there is still a debate as to whether EULA's in software are actually binding) that they examined, at least one clause was completely unenforceable in our jurisdiction. Whilst this isn't suprising given the international nature of the software market, and it wasn't a shock to find a small development shop using a single generic license relying on basic internationally-recognised copyright law. What was interesting was that organisations which had a decent sized legal team in the jurisdiction had not updated it to be vaild. After speaking to a couple of friends who work inside these departments, what came out of it was that it cost too much to reprint packaging materials and recode software to include jurisdiction-specific licenses. One particular instance stood out for a large company that provides anti-virus and security software, whose EULA for its firewall product never once referred to the firewall product, and instead only referred to its anti-virus software :)

It was interesting to note that Microsoft were one of the worst. I found it particularly reprehensible that they had not taken the time to change the wording when shipping the software into markets other than the US, and were attempting to impute US law in those other jurisdictions. My particular favourite was the 'patents' that it held over the code. But that's a whole other story.

I know that MS and a few of the other large companies have since started making more of an effort, simply for the fact that they are spending more money on enforcement of their intellectual property, which is kinda pointless if the 'agreements' upon which you are relying are invalid.

Oh, and to answer the original question:

On PPC: No pirated software - I love supporting the small developers.

On Laptop: Still to be established. I am using a copy of Win 2000 which was purchased with my old desktop at work. The desktop has been replaced with a new one for which I have license for Win XP, and the old desktop's HDD has been wiped. By Microsoft's logic, the Win2K license is for the desktop because it was an OEM copy, and therefore not transferable to my laptop. But the validity of those agreements remains untested, and I am not taking the advice of lawyers who I lectured whilst they were studying their undergrads :twisted:

G

[myuser]

Personally, I usually start off with a trial version, and if the trial restrictions are too limiting I'll grab an illegal version, then if I find the s/w is something I'm likely to use often, I'll pay for it as PPC apps tend to have reasonable pricetags. I'm all for supporting the folks that bring great s/w to our PPCs, but find that trial versions are often too limited to properly appraise a product.

[Constant Caffeine]

No. Personally, I feel that it is wrong to use pirated software. If one chooses to do something illegal repeatedly, it will be hard for them to ever see the harm that is caused by it. May people discard the impact that stealing software has on a business. Regardless of the business size or your feelings towards that company, one should think if this is how they would want their business treated.

Some people buy only one copy of an application and feel it should apply to every piece of equipment they own. Others will steal the software and never compensate the developers. The EULA applies to everyone. If you do not agree to it, do not use the software. We all know right from wrong; it really boils down to the type of person you are. If you are stealing software today, what will it be tomorrow?

[bigbob]

basically you might get caught one day.
there is no effective law enforcement right now, but it might appear.
bad publicity doesn't worth couple of bucks that software might cost.

[marathon332]

I like what I'm hearing from the posts against piracy.

Just want to add my own thoughts...

Not all companies making quality pocket pc software are big companies with big budgets.

Many are just one/two developer shops operating on a shoestring. Often they are pocket pc enthusiasts who have made their hobby their work.

If you pirate their stuff you're stealing the bread right of of their mouths and removing some of the joy of their profession.

If you like a program, buy it and support further development.

--Steve

Games and more...
http://the-web-lab.com