Preserved Topic: A show of hands

I just read that topic about the LagunaBiz site taking the design code from TechTV, and it got me thinking. (uhoh)...

Anytime someone steals the graphics from one of our sites, we as a community rally up to harass the individual into submission. I wonder though, because of that thread about peoples' ages: we have a lot of young people here... people just starting in design, etc... how many of us are using legal copies of the programs we design with? I mean, Photoshop is a $600 piece of software... that's a lot of money when you're just starting out, and I wonder how many are using an illegal copy, and trying to make money by doing web design with it? This is just as bad as people who steal the designs we make, yet, while I see people gather to flame and send emails and such to the people who take design.. when it comes to pirating software, I see "don't ask, don't tell."

I mean, stealing the software is the same as stealing the design... someone is taking something you created and using it to make money for themself. Shouldn't we as a community try to stifle this criminal activity as eagerly as we jump on the bandwagon when someone steals graphics and site code? I hope that, if nothing else, this topic will be thought about by those who are using illegal copies of the software they are trying to run a business with. Even if you're not making money off the things you make with an illegal piece of software, wouldn't you want somebody to pay you for your creations? Shouldn't you show the same decency to others?

Of course, all this thinking is not directed at those who have legal copies of all their software, and this is about more than Photoshop... I see topics about questions concerning 3D Studio and Lightwave in the modelling forums, and those are $1000 and $1500-2500 pieces of software respectively...

<EDIT>Fixed yer italics there...</EDIT>



[This message has been edited by Petskull (edited 08-04-2001).]

*runs and hides in a corner*


.:!:..:!:..:!:..:!:..:!:..:!:.
MalFunkShun
(i think it's broken)
.:!:..:!:..:!:..:!:..:!:..:!:.

We're talking apples and oranges here.

If someone steals Doc's imagery, they're taking something that he created through his hard work and skill and posted on the web for all to enjoy free of charge. He does not get paid to create and maintain Ozones or the Asylum, in fact he *pays* to keep them up.

Someone working at Adobe developing software and coding Photoshop gets paid rather handsomely for his work, regardless of whether a bunch of 15 year olds paid for their copy.

The level of 'guilt' to be passed around is extremely varied between those two situations.

It's like stealing food from a soup-kitchen vs stealing food from a large grocery store chain. You can make a blank statement that 'stealing is wrong no matter what' but.....in reality who would be more in the wrong? To me it's pretty clear.

{edit - clarifications}




[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 08-04-2001).]

HS has crossed over to the darkside! knew it wouldnt be too long before his true colors shone through... shame HS. You once showed much promise. Turncoat.

I think maybe HumanShield is worried about next years profit sharing.

Where do all these pirates get their software from? - Someone somewhere is giving away copies of their bought-and-paid-for Photoshop no it wasn't me..

Personally I agree with DL-44 on his point about stealing from individuals or corporations, though sure - theft - whoever loses out - is wrong. HS - I think you are asking us to "rally up to harass the individual" for stealing photoshop. Here is my angle - If someone goes and breaks into Doc O's house and steals his PC, sure, lets get the posse together and kick ass. However, if someone breaks into Compaq HQ and steals a PC - I sure as hell won't be getting out of bed for the action! I'll be busy heaving the PC into the back of a van

I suppose there will be members here with pirated photoshop. If they really can't afford it, I'd rather they borrowed a copy until they can afford their own. Lets be honest HS, their lives are more complete with it! Finally, those of us who can afford it should be careful not to be elitist about it.

my two pence.

Pete.

Maybe we should go communist and give it away. The world would be a better place.

I'll admit, right now my version of photoshop is "pirated" but I don't make money off of it and don't plan on it until after college.

I'm just in the learning process and at the age of 17 I have no means to buy a copy yet but I will when I get into college and begin taking classes.

The first step to living a happy, lifeless life is admitting you have no life.

<EDIT>fixed yer damn italics, too! people, pay attention!</EDIT>



[This message has been edited by Petskull (edited 08-04-2001).]

Was Thinking about PShop and Pirating (arrrrrrgh) the other day... some ruminations:

Most of Adobe's products (maybe all) have very simplistic copy-protection. Just a serial number, right? That's all it takes. Seems if they were all fired-up about not having people pirate their shiznit they would make things more difficult. So why would they _not_ care that much? Because for every 15 year-old highschooler who gets a Serial off a website they gain a Photoshop user for Life. Photoshop is the de-facto standard for graphic professionals but I guarantee that were Adobe to ramp up their copy-protection a brand new market would open up for low-cost high-end graphic programs. Heck, people would start switching to Linux just to use the GIMP.

It's an interesting thought, me thinks. And a thought that I'm sure originated at Adobe.

Speaking of, remember them old copy-protection doo-dads. Mostly for games. My favourites have got to be the ones that were little cardboard wheels and you had to line up the wheels to get the proper info. Good Times. Also: original sim-city - Darkdark red so you couldn't copy it with confusing little boxes that related to cities and their populations.

3TenD

//all the anger and the//
//eloquence are bleeding//
//into fear//

Yeah, HS is all high and might just a week after saying that maybe one day he'd register his Webcam32 software. Nice one.

There was one great point mentioned above...

quote:

---

Because for every 15 year-old highschooler who gets a Serial off a website they gain a Photoshop user for Life

---

Thats exactly why Adobe doesn't give a fuck. They know that somewhere down the road, if that person wants to get serious, odds are high that they will buy a copy somewhere along the line. Whereas, no one is going to rip a graphic and then sometime later decide to send Doc or whoever a couple of bucks.

I currently use a non-purchased version of photoshop to play with. no one benefits(monitarily) from my work. when i start pullin in a lil more money at work, i'm gonna get the educational version. same is true with a few other proggies i use. just can't afford it now.

Spam is yummy
~babamba

Myself having been only 13-14 when my father brought home a copy of Photoshop 3 from his work, was truly addicted the first day I played with it. Since then I had owned pirated copies of PS 4, and 5. Never once did I sell anything I made. But sometime between PS 5.5 and PS 6 , I decided this would be somthing I would like to do to make some money. Having a full time job, (and a nice tax return this year) I purchased my copy of PS 6 and Illustrator 9. The guilt I had when using those downloaded copies was there, but in the end I paid and am very happy.

-Wil



It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats

Hmmm...

A. webcam32 is shareware, and until I register it, it only stays on for an hour and then turns itself off.

B. This isn't about my job. I was just contemplating because of all the hub-bub I see whenever someone takes graphics from a page.

V. In most cases, the educational version comes with an agreement that you will not profit from the use of the software. That is why it is called "educational".

R. I guess I don't see how taking something that's "free" without asking is worse than taking something that's not free.

I. A programmer doesn't get paid if nobody buys the product.

Anyway, like I said... this isn't about my job, I just don't understand why everybody comes together over a few graphics when people amongst them are stealing the software to make those graphics. It's like building a neighborhood, and someone comes and steals the materials to make your house and use them to make their own house... everybody gets in an uproar and attacks that person, but then there's the guy who stole the materials to build his house from some rich carpenter, and nobody cares, because hell, the carpenter's rich, and he's goingf to have other customers anyway. What a groovy analogy... anyway, that's all.

added note - this isn't to make people feel guilty. It's to find out what is the reasoning behind getting angry at a graphics thief while ignoring the software pirate? And what if a person was a known software pirate, and the graphics he/she made with his stolen software were then stolen for another site... would you still get in an uproar?

It's about that time of the month again.. Time for another rant I think...

(psst.. you can skip most of this and just read the bold bit's)


I use the educational version of PS. I have used the real version at various places that I've worked for but If I need to do real work (ie, I get paid) using my PC and my software I use my old ~legal~ copy of Corel Photopaint 7 ~shrugs~ or more recently I've been using GIMP.. eh, it get's the job done and it's all nice and legal.

One day I'll buy the real (non student) version of PS, but if I fluke a spot in comm design (25 places, 4000 applicants!) I'll be using the educational version for another 4 years...

However, back when I was using PS4, I was using a warez version. Hell, many great digital artists that promote Adobe's name first started using a warez verison. This also applies for 3D software. Some of the most famous 3D modelers <-sp? started using warez copies x software. You can't tell me that the people who did Counter Strike ~legaly~ owned 3DS MAX and made the CS Mod then just decided to give it away. Warez has it's uses..

Why did the music piracy industry get stanped on so hard? Because thet's the final end of the $$$ making line. No one wins if music is pirited! But software's different. If the big guns in the software business really wanted to stamp out warez (Adobe etc..) they start coming down hard on the gonvernments and something similar to what happened with the Music Industry would happen..

Fact of the matter is, the warez versions of applications circulating out there sometimes bring a certain ammount of revenu back to the company. I bet the people who made CS have nice and clean legal copies of MAX now. And the truely talanted designers buy a legit copy of PS when they mack their first buck.

If it wasn't for warez there wouldn't be anywhere near as much talent here. Hell, I wouldn't be here that's for sure. The asylum might not even exist if it wasn't for warez.

But don't get me wrong. I don't promote the use of warez but I'm not about to get all high and mighty about it either. As I said, in a very strange way. It has it's place....

However, thankfully the software companies and starting to get the right idea in their heads about this. There's a new version of MAX comming out that will be free for the people who wish to make game Mods ect ect.. And the people making the games pay for the software on a per title basis.

As for the theft of finished artwork/images. Thats just like the music industry. It's the end of the line so to speak and that just wrong IMO. Creating a stunning image with stolen software doesn't mean you stole the image. You just stole the 'paint and brushes' it was made with. You still spend many many hours developing the skill to make that image and then the time to create the image using those skills.

Stealing artwork and calling it your is a very personal kind of theft. The artwork is a display of that individual's talents and their creativity. Stealing software is different as there are millions of copies of the exact same thing all over the world, but there's only one Doc Ozone, and there's only one Layne Karkruff. Sure, both image/art theft and software theft and both theft and they are both wrong, but the theft of imagery/artwork is so much more wrong it's just not funny!

And that's the main reason why It'd rally behind Doc or anyone else here if there was ever such a cause.


Thus ends my monthly rant...



Drac.


[This message has been edited by Dracusis (edited 08-04-2001).]

Hey Drac where did you hear about the new MAX proggy? I had heard about it a time ago but have heard nothing more.

-Wil


It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats

I think it's Called G-Max. But it won't be released untill a company actualy produces a game title with it. Then it will be released with that game and to be used with that game only. Makes sense really, that way the people who buy the game can use it to mod that game and legaly put their mod's on the net for free, of it their good enough they can negotiate with the the required software companies (The game developers and the makers of G-MAX) to sell it.

But, I could be wrong anout this, it's been a while since I've gone hunting for info about G-MAX. And seeing the last time I checked the software wasn't finished yet and games take a year or two to make so it will be a while....

[This message has been edited by Dracusis (edited 08-04-2001).]

*steps out from his slumber*

HS, the reason your topic is going astray is completely by your own actions.
I say that not to attack you... but to inform you why the reaction to this thread has been like it has.

I'm happy for you and your Adobe job...
I'm happy about the fact that you are happy...
HOWEVER....
you need to realize that you (probably without even noticing it) have been going around here flaunting it.. and in some cases *almost* throwing it in people's faces.
When I read this topic originally I knew what the reaction from this crowd was going to be.
You kind of brought it upon yourself.
Frankly, I could really care less if you do it. I find it annoying, but at the same time, I do things that piss people off too.
Now, don't go getting all defensive... I'm simply pointing out a pretty well known fact that you may not have noticed before.
Take it for what it's worth.

and no, I don't believe you would have started this thread if you didn't hold the job that you presently do.
But that's part of what makes this Asylum so versitile..... we bring our personal views and experiences here...


BACK TO THE TOPIC
---------------------
I'd like to start by saying that the little 'carpenter analogy' is off base.
2nd of all, your comment about taking things that are "free" made me laugh... because apparently copyrighted things are "free" in your book. I'll have to remember to write a letter to a few of my friends at law school about that one.

We have to consider... there is absolutely no way in hell PS would have the clout or exposure it's been given without so many pirated copies running around.
That is an absolute fact.... you can't argue that.

Why is it, that people buy this program?
SO they can make graphics similar to what other people have made... with such a high quality.
(who knows if they were first inspired by a graphic from a pirated or un-pirated version?)
Regaurdless... thousands of people still buy it.

Lemme ask you this... if you had the choice of being robbed of one of the following two things.... what would it be?
... your mind or your money ...???
I value my mind and my thoughts greater than anything else in the world.
I may be robbed of every dime I posses... but dammit, I'd still have my mind.
These creations in PS are of the mind, and the heart, and the soul. People put countless hours into their projects, a truely beautiful thing it is to me.
Maybe I'm more passionate that you or the next person about my work with graphics, or maybe it's jsut something you didn't consider.
We all understand monetary value of tangible items and how money impacts our lives every moment.
We all understand that.... and I'd be willing to bet the large companies that produce these items understand that too.

Though it's something I've never thought of, a good point was made by saying that Adobe would try to make it a bit more difficult to pirate the software if they thought it would actually help them.
In all actuality, it may be to their benefit to allow the large exposure that is produced by all these pirated versions.
I guess it's their way of taking the good with the bad...... just like life.

*comes out of his corner*
*shouts* I knew I wasn't the only one

Why should I pay $600 to learn this program, I can't use it to its potential. By the time I do it's gunna be time for me to buy the newer version anyway. Not to mention that I am broke as a joke. When and if I use this professionally I will purchase a copy. I promise.

Plus I am sure it is in Adobe's marketing strategy to gain from corporation and professional licensing, not the individuals which probably make up 15% of thier sales.



[This message has been edited by MalFunkShun (edited 08-04-2001).]

MalFunkShun
- you buy the student version cheap, learn it, and upgrade to the newest version for under $200 when it comes out. You get Illustrator for $189 because you have a license of PS. In my case you get LightWave really cheap from your buddy who works at NewTek.

I'm happy to say that all the software I regularly use is legal. I have no problem with someone "evaluating" software if they're not sure about buying it, but if you actually make money off a pirated copy...bleah.

Chris


KAIROSinteractive

I'am legal!

Hey, HS has pride in and loyalty to his new employer -- of course he will want to protect Adobe's best interests, and that is a good thing ... but I don't think that the Asylum kids are going to put Adobe out of business.

The Asylum has a policy about talking about/trading warez, and we all know that it is wrong to do it. There are some good deals on student versions of Adobe and (other companies) programs, as well as LE/LT versions, and some of the kids around probably use the $1000+ programs at school.

But hey, here is a suggestion, why not make the demos longer? Then the "kids" who "evaluate" will have more time to "evaluate", and possibly be less likely to trade/pirate if they have a full demo for say, 90 days -- they might just play with that and then get bored, or decide they really like it and have time to save their $$ to buy it, while they still "have" their demo. Just a thought.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz i need sleeeeeeeep...............................

Wow what a subject. I haven't posted here but one or twice due to time. I lurk when I have a chance.

There are varying degrees of lying and stealing. Yes, lying is lying and stealing is stealing. We all know about this so I won't get into it.

If I was a carpenter I would much rather someone take my lumber rather than my house that I just spent how many hours and band-aids on. If *I* was to take something it would be the lumber, not the whole friggin house. To me there is a difference.

I do civil engineering work by trade and learned some programs in school. You can only get so good at using these programs in a short time school setting. But I did buy one of the programs thinking I would make money with it. $2400 worth. I never have made a dime. Ouch. I some how have this preconceived notion that this copy is MINE. I can do what I want with it. I can toss it, spit on it or even give it away. I'm sure that the AutoCad folks could care less.

Now I'm sure that if I hadn't gone to school to learn this program I wouldn't have bought it. It would have been a rip off to me if it wasn't what I really wanted or if it wasn't compatible with me. I use other engineering programs for the organization I work for that are top $ items also. I sure wouldn't buy them without having gone thru the compatibility test. I would also really have to believe that I would make $ using it. These programs also came with a physical hardware lock plugged into the port on the back of the CPU. No lock, no use. Period.

As for the student version, I'm not sure I would even pay that price to learn and use a program. It's still a lot of $ if you have a low paying job, married and kids. Not everyone has this kind of money burning a hole in his or her pockets.

The software/hardware business is just a dog chasing its tail. People that are not in business can't afford to keep up with this at all and unless you are using this program 10+ hr. a day to make $ it's just a luxury item. About a year ago I purchased a $1700 (retail) MS product. I paid $179 + tax and shipping. (I have a friend that works there). I'm sure Bill still made a little profit even at this price. But my price also tells me about the greedy money hungry scum behind the products. I believe that every business should make a profit but this is way out of line. Don't you think?

Trial versions? They suck. If you work 5-7 days a week, 10-16 hr a day, by the time you finally get rolling it's expired. It's very hard to learn much about it unless you sit their hr. after hr.

I really think if the programs were more affordable and evaluation copies lasted longer, that folks would be more likely to eventually buy. Especially if they were going to make money. If you're just trying to learn at your own pace or just puttering around then that's a different story.

Also just to let you know, I have no pirated copies, I have not copied any purchased programs and I use PSP. I got sick and tired of the evaluation copy expiring by the next time I wanted to *play* with it and
found it was a very good graphics program for under $100. If I was a pro, good at graphics and used it a good percentage of the time then I might consider trying PS longer and then possibly purchasing.

The software industry has had a campaign for some time that is advertised in magazines, radio and tv in regards to illegal software. They do fight the war and there are heavy fines if caught.

The Guy

PS. Remember if your ligit program is on more than one PC then you are probably breaking the law.

One simple note in reply to HS' last post:

Yes, the programmers do still get paid if a bunch of kids don't pay for their copy.

The graphic design industry is where Adobe makes it's money, not off of a bunch of kids who can't afford to pay for it yet anyway.

What good would it do adobe if noone who couldn't afford Photoshop ever used it?

As was said before, their future business benefits from kids who are now using 'illegal' copies.

I have to say that I am caught somewhere in the middle of this discussion.

On one hand, you have the "kids" or newcomers to PS who *do* deserve to discover if they even like the program before they lay down that kind of cash to purchase.

On the other hand you have a large corporation who needs to sell the software that they make in order to survive.

I think the majority of software companies today make the most money out of other corporations. There is still no way to force software registration on the typical person. It really isn't worth it to any company to chase every pirated software owner. The idea behind educational and evaluation software *is* to give the possible consumer the ability to decide if they would like to purchase the real thing. Most of the time, educational software is about half the price, or less in some cases than the real deal, and a evaluation version is normally free.

Why can't people get an evaluation version, 30 days is more than enough in my opinion. If their opinion of the software is positive they can start saving and eventually purchase the educational version. This is when their understanding and interest will really pick up, and when they have saved enough and have decided that this is something they want to get into professionally, they can purchase the upgrade and register their software. The cost works out to be about the same as the real version, if bought initially.

This is how things would work in a perfect world, but this world is far from perfect. Software piracy is a big problem, but far from the most important problem we face.

I suppose it is something that all software companies will have to deal with until there is a better copy protection product available.

Hmm..

I've counted about 5 large posts (over three paragraphs) so far that have said the exact same thing that someone else already said.

Here's a simple one for you:

If you see a topic and it's huge like this one, you want to add something but you couldn't be bothered reading what everyone else has said then don't bother posting a reply. It's really anoying for the people who do actualy read the entire post, and you'd save looking like an ass in the process. Further more, I've seen many arguments spring up over things that have already been answered and or clarafied all because of this reason.

Eh, I've just been kinda stressed lately and it get's on my nerves at times... no biggie..

cool, ok....

Drac.

The problem in this world, and hence this discussion, is this: Private Property. Well, maybe. But the argument against P.P. certainly has much to gain from the software piracy debate. Caring so much about who owns what is a weird thing to begin with, manufactured by Disney 'n' Uncle Sam ... when you start applying that to software which doesn't really exist in the first place, and can be replicated a million times with no degradation in quality ... weird.

okay, so I don't really neccessarily belive that, but it's fun to write, isnnit?

3Ten D

//you'll never know//
//the hurt I suffer//
//nor the pain I rise above//
//and I'll never know//
//the same about you//
//your holiness//
//or your kind of love//

//and it makes me feel so sorry//

So how does this scenario fit in the overall topic?

I have a friend who doesn't believe in buying 'upgrades.' He'll wait till a completely new edition comes out...and buy that. He then gives away the old version. That's how I got Win98... he's up to 2000 or ME or whatever it is. He's my main source of software. Is this stealing from billy boy?

nj

k help me out here

I applied to several of the top universities in the states for computer science. I got into Princeton and Carnegie Mellon, but I am going to Georgia Tech for one reason and one reason only - it's the cheapest of all the universities I got into. Sure I could go to a community college but if I am flying halfway across the world to attend college, I might as well go with the best I can afford. My dad works here in the Middle East and is currently supporting all four of my grandparents singlehandedly - two of whom are on expensive life support systems in India. When I was in high school, I used to stick around for a few hours because the bus rate after 6.00 PM is half of what it is during the day. I am really interested in computers and graphics and have been dabbling in both since I was in the fourth grade. Do you honestly expect me to ask my dad to shell out 600 $ so I can see if this expensive piece of code I've been dying to try out is worth it? And another 1500 $ for 3Dsmax? I am currently using both of a pirated CD that cost me the equivalent of THREE dollars. Places in the Middle East don't offer 'Educational Versions' like they do in the States. It's a whole different system here.

You say I oughta wait till I can afford it to try it out? Well, BECAUSE I have been using Photoshop since version 2.0 and other software WITHOUT unbalancing the family's financial standing, I am majoring in Computer Science and specializing in Graphics Designing. If I hadn't shown such an interest in graphics, my father would have probably had me enrolled in some medical college to become a doctor like most undecided Indians. What good is learning Photoshop and realising that this is what I like doing, once im 40 odd years old?

Sorry I just can't agree with you there HS.

But I can see where you're coming from. Maybe the software industry should try something similar to what the book industry did. In India, where each dollar can buy enough vegetables to feed a family for a week, nobody was really interested in buying books that cost 90-120 $ each. It wasn't uncommon to see everyone in a university splitting up the cost (even though it was still steep), and then making cheap photocopies of the whole book for everyone. Even school libraries invariably had photocopied versions. They came up with a very efficient compromise. The publishers printed special versions for India and other third world countries that weren't as good quality. The print was cheaper, the paper was thinner and the books weren't hardcover. They didn't come with companion CD's and everything was done locally. That brought down the costs drastically and they in turn passed the savings to the customer. End of the day - people had individual copies, people bought more books coz now they could afford them, publisher's made more profit, albeit with a lesser margin of profit. If companies like Adobe are willing to sell software that doesn't come with the manual, doesn't have all the extra's, doesn't have to be in a nice big box or shrinkwrapped or even in a jewel cd case, no tech support or tutorials and what not, they would probably save quite a bit of money. In addition to that, if they made a little compromise on their own part in the interest of the common good, or not even that, if they merely sacrificed a fraction of their profit, it would result in prices everyone could afford. I wouldn't mind paying something reasonable and that I could save up for in a month or two for a copy of the software, even if I had to make do without the manual and the online updates and the tutorials and everything else, if it meant I wouldn't have to feel guilty every time I load my copy. For people who could afford it, they could still go for the regular version. But those who use pirated software because the price difference between the pirated and legit version is too significant, wouldn't have no other option. They can just use the low quality version until they can afford the full one. Everyone compromises. Everyone is happy. Of course, they would still be pirated software floating around, but it wouldn't be predominant if there was a legit version for half the price.

Although, since they aren't using this system, I'm bound to have forgotten something somewhere which makes it all invalid.

Oh well. Such is life.



.. One Tequila, Two Tequila, Three Tequila, Floor ..

Good Point


Who needs tech support and manuals. When you have Photoshopcafe, Asylum, and every other place on the net that is willing to help anyone out. Just give me a photoshop CD and lemme do the rest for myself. No box & No Crap. I've got a Pirated CD and that's it and I feel I am learning sufficiently.

human shield is naughty! none of this warez talk :P

*looks guilty*

OK, this is an important copy, and one I feel I must weigh in on. Back in 1992-93 (date?) I got my hands on a copy of Phosohop 2.0, a complete pirated version, fit on a floppy disk! I thought it was a cool little app, and played with it. At my work (a commercial printing outfit) I found an opportunity to use this app to make some money, which we did. My boss was excited enough about the rate we were able to charge that we bought our own copy. When we got our upgrade to 3.0 (a major update, one of the best; layers!) I copied it and brought it home and learned more. Some months after I got my first commercial job doing webdesign, and I used the oney to buy my own copy of 3.0. When I did my first commercial job for New Riders Press I made them buy me a new coy of 4.0, they didn't argue. Since then I've forced 4 companies I worked for/with to buy multiple copies of this app, and the other Adobe products, maybe $10k worth at least. I have a special section in my email archives where I save mail from folks who say "I just bought Photoshop finally, based on what you taught me". I have over 600 notes like this, and I figure there was probably more people who did this without writing. Net revenue from my original pirated version of v2.0? Perhaps $370,000 or more for Adobe. Scary, huh?

I truly do think there is a concious decision on the Adobe management to make this software protected, but not *that* protected. If there was a 0% toleration of pirated copies then it would come with a hardware "dongle" to assure that it would be used on one machine, and one only. The message is clear, if you're using a pirated version, you *should* feel guilty, that guilt will make you a better paying customer in the long run. If you're using a pirated version and making money on it, you're scum, plain and simple. I've worked for places before that had the same copy running on dozens of machines, and based on my own high and mighty attitude (I paid, dammit!) I forced them to buy multiple copies for all of us, made a big stink about it.

Now, why did HS bring this up, has he "turned" on us? No! What I can see happening is he's now around people who gotta be talking about this all the time, so *of course* he brings it up here! Where else should this be discussed?

As for the two circumstaces of theft, I see definite differences, as any reasonable person would. On the Software side, I see (arguable, of course) financial rationale for them to "turn a blind eye" on low-level personal piracy. Short-term loss (that they would probably never gain anyway! Too many of the software piracy costs assume that every pirated copy would have been paid for if not pirated, instead of never have been used at all), anyways, the short-term loss can be argued to have a long-term gain for the manufacturers. Stealing the unique creations created using that software is a much more personal thing, akin to stealing the actual name and identity of "Adobe" as opposed to stealing a copy of the software. On the one hand, the entire organization is harmed at every level, on the other, an illusory percentage of profit is beld away.

Analogies: (as I think of them)

On the one hand, I go into the basement and "piggy back" off of your cable connection, getting free cable. On the other, I steal your TV set.

On the one hand, I return to the states and pretend to be swedish to pick up chicks. On the other, I steal my neighbors passport and pretend to be him.

On the one hand, I like apples. On the other, I like oranges.

Your pal, -doc-

couple of question doc.

• What does the Law say about stealing images? I know bitdamaged said techtv had a legal team force LagunaBiz to take down the site.
• If anyone did..say copy this whole site/forum and all how would you force it down and using what law or standard?
• I agree with finding where they live and killing all there cows and chickens, then burning them at the stake.

[This message has been edited by Dark (edited 08-05-2001).]

It's great to see all the responses... obviously, this is a topic with varying degrees of concern for people.

Taxon : When somebody here gets a job, don't they tell everybody? That's all I've done. I have shared information as I've discovered it with people I thought might be interested. If somebody asks about products, and I think Adobe has one they would like, I mention it. To me, that's sharing information... maybe to you, that's flaunting. If I went around saying, "I work for Adobe and you don't! Nyah nyah nyah!", that is what I consider flauting, but I don't do that. Of course, one's opinion on the matter may depend on who has and who has not.

Also, you said you laughed at my mention of something that is "free", but I was simply quoting DL-44, who said that the images were put up "free of charge". I never said copyrighted material was free.

The analogy of "which would I rather have stolen, my money or my mind?" doesn't really work in this case because it isn't your mind that is stolen, it's your ideas. Personally, I don't mind if someone steals an idea of mine, as long as they don't make money off it. Imitation is the highest form of flattery.

A lot of people are saying that if you let a person "steal" a design product early on, you can have them addicted later and become a paying customer. Doesn't the same hold true for someone who "steals" your graphics or your code? If someone uses your graphics on a site for years, won't they eventually feel obligated to pay for it? Where do you draw the line? Does it matter whether the thing you're "stealing" was made by one person, or by a large company? If so, WHY does it matter?

Norally, I don't check the forums on weekends, but I was curious.

didnt realize Adobe Systems had lowered their standards so much.. ... always has been a case of supply versus demand.

edit: Flame on!

[This message has been edited by Soc-X (edited 08-06-2001).]

<<A lot of people are saying that if you let a person "steal" a design product early on, you can have them addicted later and become a paying customer. Doesn't the same hold true for someone who "steals" your graphics or your code? If someone uses your graphics on a site for years, won't they eventually feel obligated to pay for it? Where do you draw the line?>>

Actually no. If a person steals a graphic they are being lazy and not wanting to do something for themselves. If they steal the tool they are in some way wanting to learn to do it for themselves. Its almost like the, "Give a man a fish and he will eat today, Teach him to fish and he will eat forever" kinda thing.

Oh yay.... a pissing contest.

Look, I'm just here making a few statements HS... if you don't seem to like them, or think they're true, that's fine with me, but know this... I'm not the only one who holds these thoughts of flaunting.... therefore, before you get all comfortable in your chair thinking you're somehow correct in your last post..... perhaps you should re-evaluate yourself as opposed to evaluating me.
I gave you a little "heads up" to something..... kinda like gesturing that you've got a little booger hangin when you're about to ask a nice woman out for dinner. Now, at least have a look in the mirror before saying "no i don't"

If you still don't think so..... that's ok... I'm dropping the whole thing right here, not another word about it.... we have no need to argue with each other, we're both adults.


In refrence to your comment about the mind and ideas being two different things....
I'll just have to stick to my guns and say, I guess I'm just very passionate in what I create..... passionate enough to consider anything I create, an extention of my mind.

I don't think imitation is the highest form of flattery...
I think adaptation is.

[This message has been edited by taxon (edited 08-06-2001).]

My view on the moral aspect of warez vs design theft:

#1 Having a pirated PS to make gfx is not as bad as stealing someones design and calling it your own!

#2 Having a a pirated PS and saying _you programmed it_ is as bad.

See the difference.

And for those who don't, I'll add another explanation:

#1. I "steal" the tools I need to learn the trade. I however create something of my own with them.
#2. I "steal" the tools (or creations) and claim that I'm the one who made them.

I doubt that most of the people who have a pirated PS was ever planning on programming a version of their own. But I bet that most design thieves is planning on sometime making their own gfx.

Thats my 20 öre!
<edit> Just for the sake of it, I'd like to add that all my present SW is legit. Apart fro maybe a unregged shareware at home </edit>

-nimraw
If you can't convince, confuse!

[This message has been edited by Nimraw (edited 08-06-2001).]

*sigh*

Taxon, I wasn't getting into a pissing contest with you, I was simply replying with my own thoughts to things you said. I didn't even put any sort of emotional negativity into my statements, I just typed out my response without sarcasm or insult. The first few items in my last post were directed to you because you were the one who said the things I was responding to, and I didn't want to confuse others because it appeared to be some time since you had posted that. After that, I was generalizing and talking to everybody. Please don't feel like I was personally attacking you, because I was not. I don't want this thread to end with a whole bunch of people getting uptight because they start taking things personally. I'm trying to make it clear that my original intention with the topic was not about me and Adobe, or any one person and a company, but rather about everyone and software piracy in general. Some of the things said in this thread I agree with, but I am playing Devil's advocate because I want to see what others' thoughts about it are, and I wonder if some think about it at all.

Back to the topic: I understand what people are saying about stealing a tool vs stealing a piece of art and calling it their own, but most design theft I have seen, they don't claim to have made the artwork. They simply steal the images and use them. Sometimes they put up copyrights on their sites, and that's wrong certainly. Worse times they DO claim that they made the artwork, and that's when you can really get angry at them. Now, if they put up a copyright notice, why not just ask them to take the copyright off, or give you credit for the design on their page? If they did so, wouldn't that possibly lead to more traffic for your design company?

Also, I can understand saying there is a difference between art and software, but software designers also put their heart and soul into their work sometimes. They may not be the only person involved with the end product, but to be fair, neither is an artist, for example a painter, unless he/she carves and bristles her/his own brushes out of wood, makes his/her own canvas from scratch and mixes her/his own paints... That's silly, of course, but what I'm trying to say is, most things in life are a team effort, even if you don't realize it. Er, well, that's not the point of this paragraph though... the point I tried to make in the beginning was that programmers put just as much effort into programming as artists put into art.

Anyway, back to work for me. TTYL!

~this is Drac in a not so nice mood~

fuck it! just use GIMP! and lets get back to making cool image in the PS forum already. Enough of this tripe!

~this is Drac in a slightly nicer mood~

~leaves the room~

Fuck Adobe. Do what you want with them - make them your bitch for all I care. I'd rather not be associated with such a dispicable company, but for now at least, I don't have a choice. They are part of an evil empire created by the DMCA, though they might want to you to think they "didn't mean to put anyone in prison" because of their products.
http://www.freesklyarov.org/

And if you think that it's "ok" for a software pirate/hacker to be put in prison, then I don't want to hear your opinion - you're demented. We can start a topic in Philosophy/Silliness if you want to diverge the topic/expound on this subject.



[This message has been edited by Metahedron (edited 08-06-2001).]

??? It seems like things are getting a little heated. Perhaps this topic has touched a nerve some people would rather ignore?

HS - obviously this is *not* something people want to ignore - that's why we're all here talking about it.

You have a big tendency to try and take the high road after the fact and cop out of things by talking about *other* people's instigation......

A lot of issues have been raised, and many of us simply don't agree with you. You've stated your opinions, many others have stated theirs. end of story.

deal with it and move on.


{{edit - spelling}}

{{{eidt2: oh yeah, please proceed to do exactly what I just described again in response to *this* message. ahh, yup...there it is.....I can see it coming....}}}




[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 08-06-2001).]

I said "some" people, DL. It was an attempt to politely say, "if you don't want to talk about it or read it, you don't have to" to the people who were getting upset.

Please don't try to turn this into another one of your "grudge matches"... I'm really just curious to what people think. They make points, so I bring up counter points. Other people bring up counter points too, and I try to respond to those as well. This isn't an argument, it's a discussion.

[This message has been edited by Human Shield (edited 08-06-2001).]

After scanning through the above topic, it seems that many people here see the 'creation' (images, code, etc) as being of higher value than the program. To use somebody else's analogy, Images are the completed house and PS is just the lumber.
I would encourage somebody to ask the programmers if they think PS is just lumber. (I assume) They work really hard to create such a wonderful program. It seems that many of the above analogies discredit, or devalue the 'creative' works of the programmers who made PS.
I work for a company that makes software. Granted, it's boring, business software, nothing near as exciting as PS...but our team of programmers here most definately take pride in what they do. To them, the finished product IS the house, not just the lumber to be used by some business.
I'm not saying that all warez is bad, there are some very valid reasons (though still illegal) to obtain illegal software. And Adobe most definately benefits from at least a few instances of stolen software. That doesn't make it any less illegal and it certainly doesn't devalue the very creative work of the programmers who built the software.

Again, I am not making a judgement on whether people should use warez copies of software...that is for each person to decide for him/herself. All I'm saying is that the creativity and hard-work that went into making PS should not be forgotten.
Give thanks everyday to the creators of Photoshop. They have created a masterpiece without which many of our lives would not be complete.

mobrul

Yes, but mobrul, there is a HUGE point here that some of you seem to be missing:

'fred' makes a website. he does it for free, he does it for the benefit of the 'web community'. It is somehting that is unique, it's smoething that is his. Money does not exchange hands anywhere, excpet for him paying his hosting charges.

Someone steals his design, and opens up another site that is identical.

'fred' got ripped off.


'yoyo software' writes a program. It's a great program, used throughout the graphic design industry by proffesionals around the world. it costs lots of money. Millions of people/companies pay lots of money for the program.

A small percentage of people get a hold of an 'illegal' copy, and use the software without paying for it.

Down the road, the vast majority of those people either

a) stop using it, because they have no graphics skills anyway

b)become a loyal customer to the company and buy many things from them.

'yoyo software' didn't get ripped off.

that's the important part. Adobe is not losing money, nor are they in any danger from piracy.

I guess I don't see how 'Fred' got ripped off. He wasn't expecting to make any money off his work to begin with, so if somebody else uses his design, the only thing he loses is the originality of his site, but he doesn't even lose that really, because anyone who knew his site before would just laugh at the copy of it, and any who didn't know of his site before would most likely be told of it by others if they bring up the copied site. If the copier tried to make a businees by claiming he made the graphics, well, he wouldn't get very far having to make his own design later, unless he actually did have some talent. Certainly, 'Fred' could request that the copier pays him for using his material, but that's only if 'Fred' cares about money, which you said he doesn't. Basically, the copier is giving 'Fred' a wider coverage... more people will see 'Fred''s work and appreciate it for its beauty.

Unless there are some other facts about which I do not know....I agree completely.

yoyo software did not get ripped off.
fred did get ripped off.

I play and coach rugby.
(I know this seems off topic, but I am going somewhere relevant...really.)
In the game of rugby there is a law (rugby has laws, not rules) called the 'advantage' law. The idea is this.
If team A commits a penalty, but in the course of that penalty team B gains an advantage that is above and beyond the advantage it would have gained through the normal course of the penalty (referee stopping the match and awarding a penalty kick) the referee may let play continue as if the penalty never happened.
I think this analogy is very applicable.
Team A is warez users.
Team B is adobe.
The penalty is still a penalty (that is, against the laws) regardless of whether the advantage law is being played or not. And simply because Team B got an advantage this time (and Team A was not called on it) does not mean that Team A will not get called next time the infraction occurs...it is situational, to a degree.

And, really, the most important part of this is that the skills of Team B should not be diminished or looked down upon simply because Team A is helping them out by commiting penalties.

I didn't really intend to write on the ethics of warez...as I said, that is up to the individual. My only point is that some of those analogies earlier were a bit flawed. PS is as much a 'creation' as anything Doc or any of the rest of us do.

mobrul

Soccer/football has the same rule btw silly sports

Taxon

quote:

---

we have no need to argue with each other, we're both adults

---

I didnt know 15 year olds were considered adults...but you don't remeber your post do you?



[This message has been edited by Dark (edited 08-07-2001).]

Age doesn't make you an adult, maturity makes you an adult. Let's try to stay mature here, please.