purchasing software

[Nastrodamus]

sniff sniff .....hhhmmmm the smell of Rationalisation is in the air

Ok.

Morality : - The ability to decifer between right and wrong, cultured being the social entity that he/she resides in.


hhhhhmmm....

If you are attacked by someone and in protecting your life you kill the person, did you commit a crime?

However....

If you saw someone attempting to kill a woman and you helping her you happen to kill the individual....did you commit a crime?

________
Society dictates that protecting ones life is self-defense, but defending another is manslaughter.

(What the hell is Nastro saying?)

Unlike GodKid's view, I see HEINZ being on the defensive, not for himself, but for his own. The Moral valve that is taught by our social value system is that two wrongs don't make a right. (I am yet to see the enforced) So in society's eyes, unfortunately a crime has been committed.
_________

Lets relate this to Software Purchasing and Piracy.


Like Society's value systems, there has to be some control in the software purchasing field. Such control is dished to us in the form of a License Agreement. Such control is needed else wether we like it or even believe it the software industry would not be what it is today. (Who would invest in the ideas for larger programs? Who would pay large groups of engineers to come together and put an idea together?)

Unfortunately there are those who abuse such control in effort to maximise profits. Numero uno on that list is Microsoft. The requirement of the purchase of Multiple copies of the same software to One person just because the person has more than one computer is hyper foolish and utterly ridiculous.

Society does benefit to a lesser extent by the black market. So does Microsoft and those larger corporations. How?.....

I think I will continue after I hear some comments first

Feel free to say what you must!!!

[Chris]

[quote author=Nastrodamus link=board=5;threadid=780;start=0#msg6319 date=1053793006]The requirement of the purchase of Multiple copies of the same software to One person just because the person has more than one computer is hyper foolish and utterly ridiculous.[/quote]

If the software is not a multi-user version and is not being used by a company, then I fully agree with you. Even though the typical license of a single-user application allows an installation on a desktop and on a notebook, it shouldn't stop there. In a family of let's say three with three PCs, is it reasonable to require them to purchase three licenses of software that they're not using to earn an income?

Bwoy, open-source software looking more attractive by the moment ;D

[pigeonflight]

<h3>setting the record straight - license versus ownership</h3>

Theoretically, once I have paid for a good, it belongs to me and I can do with it as I so please.

As usual Xeno, I can't argue with that premise. Only problem is that the premise of software "belonging" to you cannot be applied to most proprietary software. In the context of software, you hardly ever own it. The typical scenario nowadays is that you are granted a license to use the software.

So you're really exchanging your 'blood sweat and tears' for a license, in the case of a license, you must agree to be bound by the terms of the license.

If we took an example of a car, You own a car when you purchase it, but you still need a road license and a driver's license in order to use it on our roads. In the case of these licenses, they buy you the rights to use your car on public roads, the licenses can expire and there are penalties for improperly licensed cars or drivers.

In the proprietary software world, the license restricts how you can redistribute the software that you use, and often prevents you from accessing the source code. The beauty of an open source license is that there are few restricitions on the redistribution of software. In the future, proprietary software licenses will expire, very similar to the concept of a driver's license.

In summary, very few proprietary software programs can be 'owned' by a user, only licensed. There are those who drive without a driver's license or 'buy' their license. There are those who use illegally licensed software or appropriate their license improperly. Both are in violation of the law, whether such laws (required driver's licenses or software licenses) are reasonable is a completely different issue.

[Xenocrates]

Love the commentaries!!

pigeonflight - You've made some very Good points! However, consider this: Drivers' Licenses don't restrict you to driving one car, or in the case of a general license, one type of vehicle. So while I follow your line of argument, to compare drivers' licenses to software licenses would be the same as comparing apples and oranges.

Also, you didn't give me your point of view on the Heinz issue ???. But I'm glad for your opinions! That is an interesting way to look at the issue. Please feel free to comment again!

Nastro:

Unfortunately there are those who abuse such control in effort to maximise profits. Numero uno on that list is Microsoft. The requirement of the purchase of Multiple copies of the same software to One person just because the person has more than one computer is hyper foolish and utterly ridiculous.

- Exactly my point! (don't get us wrong folks, this does not mean we shouldn't buy it! Good software should be purchased, by all means, once those means are available!)

Society does benefit to a lesser extent by the black market. So does Microsoft and those larger corporations. How?.....

- You need not fear Nastrodamus, nobody is going to kick off your door and arrest you! (not yet anyways...lol...j/k) ;D I will answer your question with a quote from Bill Gates himself. He said, and I quote:

Software piracy is the best form of advertising any corporate software manufacturer could ever hope for.

- He was speaking with regards to the rampant piracy of the Windows operating system. Again! This does not mean you shouldn't buy it! We're not trying to rationalise software theft here. We're debating moral implications versus how those license agreements are constructed.

Chris, you've made some excellent points! I will pick out the best of the lot:

In a family of let's say three with three PCs, is it reasonable to require them to purchase three licenses of software that they're not using to earn an income?

- Excellent point Chris! Now if only open license software became defacto software in the industry! Considering that it is paid-software that is most commonly used, one would hope that all open-source software mimicked the paid-versions succinctly - but that would constitute an intellectual property breach, wouldn't it? Catch 22! Back to square one!

I have the strongest suspicion though that embedded within these licences and agreements is the suggestion that s/ware is intellectual property and that what you're paying for is not the product itself, but rights/permission to use the product

- You're absolutely right, but you should see HOW restrictive that license handling is! It's hyperfoolish as Nastro said, and ridiculous! Furthermore, in case you didn't know, be careful how you install Windows XP. There is a clause in the license agreement that says, and I will summerise briefly:

By installing this software, you give Microsoft the right to collect information on your computer's internet activities from time to time.

- My friends, those license agreements often deceptively cause us to sign away our rights to privacy. This is the case for both Windows XP and Office XP. When you're online, you may notice times of great internet activity, even when you are not doing anything. This is oftentimes just Windows XP reporting usage statistics to Microsoft (othertimes, it could be downloading an ActiveUpdate). According to them, it helps them make the software better. That should be taken with a grain of salt!

Also, Chris, you've answered a question that I've long wondered about re: Singapore. A long time ago, we used to download VCD movies by the gig - just for fun. We'd then watch and delete them. What we noticed was that even for movies we got before the official Premiere or DVD release, they had Asian subtitles. It's fascinating to know that the country has taken so many great risks to ensure their population is computer literate! Very fascinating! Nowadays, I buy all my movies on DVD - I got sick of seeing Chineese at the bottom of the screen - ;D

GodKid - You've made some excellent points! They are practically air-tight. I actually had fun reading your post. Very well articulated man! ;D You seem like a man who does quite a bit of meditation! Very nice!

As promised, I deliberately stayed away from the comments on the Heinz/morality issues. I will make a post on those later, when other people have posted. Let's see what are others' take on it.

Guys, I love the commentaries! please keep 'em coming!

[deakie]

hehehe....this is funny.....
from countries ports, pirates long ago used ships and sailed oceans to rob other ships of their precious wares kept in their holds.
today the new age pirates operate out of computer ports and surf the cyberspace robbing other computers of their precious warez kept in their hard drives.....

they should rename 'port 21' as 'port royal'...hahahhahahahahaha ;D

[pigeonflight]

Drivers' Licenses don't restrict you to driving one car, or in the case of a general license, one type of vehicle. So while I follow your line of argument, to compare drivers' licenses to software licenses would be the same as comparing apples and oranges.

I stand by my comparison. A license is a license is a license. I was not comparing the level of restriction imposed by one license versus another, I just wanted to point out that most software is governed by a license. Not honouring that license is generally a violation. That was the specific purpose of my analogy, nothing more and nothing less.

BTW, there is nothing inherently wrong with comparing apples and oranges, but I won't go there.

[Nastrodamus]

Please read this Microsoft User License Agreement by LINDOWS

http://www.lindows.com/lindows_screenshots_mseula.php

Funny as hell.... just click and drag the magnifying glass over the fine print.

[GodKid]

- Xeno: thanks... and yes, it does sound like we could have some pretty long convos... we should link up

- Chris: I agree with you, with regards to those Eastern countries, HOWEVER I would argue that those are simply manifestations of a deep-seated and matured techno-culture. The realization of the birth a caribbean/jamaican techno-culture is the reason this board can even exist. What I'm saying is this... yes, those society's are 'models' of the impact of a techno-culture BUT any comparison of the symptoms of this underpinning structure would be like comparing the perceptions of the opposite sex in a child, an adolescent and an elder. ;D (can you imagine how you'll look at women when you're sixty ???)

- IT development goes much further than removing barriers like legislation etc.... matter of fact I believe that development in the sector can be seen in the face of even the most restrictive conditions. The real challenge, as hinted to by Chris again, is simply to get people excited about technology and learning ... and that can be done even if people can't OWN the technology they use! The ability to own simply accelerates the process of learning and facilitates joy. Why add this to the mix? As gates rightfully says.. piracy serves as promotion.... a tool... one that can be substituted. So... as long as piracy remains a choice... I'll choose to not to!

[Xenocrates]

I stand by my comparison...there is nothing inherently wrong with comparing apples and oranges, but I won't go there.

- LOL!! PF, you are a dude I have gained a new level of respect for. But please, I would love to hear your comparisons on apples and oranges (perhaps in another post to avoid thread deviation).

My point is this pf: Your opinion is not wrong, it's only different. Always try to remember that I'm merely challenging your opinions as I see it. No harm in that right? 8)

I only have one gripe though...

...you still have not given your thoughts on the Heinz issue!

The ability to own simply accelerates the process of learning and facilitates joy.

- I could not have said this better myself. More comments plz.