-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How do you normally pay for purchases in stores?
South Africans pirate more software
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
killadoob
Honorary Master
Vodacom i agree with your thinking in a sense but software piracy means nobody lost out really, Voda what you have to remember is in life people screw each other everyday and look to make as much money as possible, pirates screw the industry for sure but they screw everyone else as well. So it's a 2 way street in my opinion.
The reason pirating and stealing are very different is obvious, i would pirate not if i knew someone was losing something but in way does anyone get hurt by piracy? only share holders pockets because as someone mention they care F all about jobs they will use that extra money to line their pockets. Remember another thing the whole world is in recession people are not spending money as they would have done in previous years so yes sales will drop off. Look at the car industry and how poor the sales are yet nobody is stealing their cars. It is easy to blame piracy in tough times when sales are low but maybe they should lower their prices when times are tough.
Yes rippedoff that was my point in a previous thread that piracy creates jobs but i was shot down
, not only the people who combat piracy that make money, think about all the sites and news servers who rake in tons of money and create jobs in order to keep piracy going. The amount of jobs in the piracy industry is staggering i think and of course it creates job. Look at hard drive makers, you think they would be selling so many 1tb and upward drives if there was no piracy? Blanks disks would drop off by 80% with about piracy 
. Divx players and the like would not sell. If you go deep into piracy you can see the job creation but that is not something people will come out and admit.
The reason pirating and stealing are very different is obvious, i would pirate not if i knew someone was losing something but in way does anyone get hurt by piracy? only share holders pockets because as someone mention they care F all about jobs they will use that extra money to line their pockets. Remember another thing the whole world is in recession people are not spending money as they would have done in previous years so yes sales will drop off. Look at the car industry and how poor the sales are yet nobody is stealing their cars. It is easy to blame piracy in tough times when sales are low but maybe they should lower their prices when times are tough.
Yes rippedoff that was my point in a previous thread that piracy creates jobs but i was shot down
, not only the people who combat piracy that make money, think about all the sites and news servers who rake in tons of money and create jobs in order to keep piracy going. The amount of jobs in the piracy industry is staggering i think and of course it creates job. Look at hard drive makers, you think they would be selling so many 1tb and upward drives if there was no piracy? Blanks disks would drop off by 80% with about piracy . Divx players and the like would not sell. If you go deep into piracy you can see the job creation but that is not something people will come out and admit.
Last edited:
eltherza
Expert Member
You've just pointed out one of the main reasons for piracy. It's just easier, more convenient and FASTER to pirate a disc (like you did) than to expect actual good service from the product.
The next step in the mentality is "why should I pay R500 for bad service, when the pirate community is FREE and better 'service'"
Personally, I find that open source alternatives are fine for average user use. Need to open office documents - Open Office, pictures - gimp, chat - pidgin, browser - firefox (opera, chrome), music - AIMP2 or <insert your favourite player here>, email - thunderbird or gmail
In today's world, there is no need to pirate anything for personal use. If you NEED professional software [AKA Maya3D, or photoshop etc.] then your company should already own a few licenses or even help you buy a copy.
Money is 'lost' to companies pirating, and gamers pirating. Personally, if it doesn't come bundled , I find open source alternatives (serisouly, only thing I can't get a better open source is neo dvd writing - and neo always comes bundled with the drive) . And for games I can wait till steam has the "75%" sale on the game.
Necuno
Court Jester
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 58,566
- Reaction score
- 3,437
thats bull****
anyways; things are overpriced here because every tom dick and jerry wants to make a ****ing killing of the "joe" who comes to his store and purchase, but then they go quickly wolf when they are not supported via the legal or illigal routes.
i do glady for example buy all my stuff at resionable pricing; one just have to look at how pc hardware gets slapped with extra costs but you can easily import it even up to 50% less from international sellers, not to mention same for movies, games, books and so on.
sure i don't use retial for my ms or pc hardware, its just crazy if not insane how much it costs when it goes past the whole salers into the greedy hands of some retailers.
rather be unproadly south african than be ass raped by our pricing systems here; hec my first imported software was gamewizard pro
Last edited:
Necuno
Court Jester
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 58,566
- Reaction score
- 3,437
...one thing the article writer magically forgot was that over the years population grows and with that obviously the rates of piracy will grow too. One thing to remember though in RSA jobs don't just popup nor will they just appear if piracy goes down, they are driven by the business sector which inturn are choked by goverment- when that loosens, then job rates will increase.
Last edited:
vodacom3g
Vodacom Representative
This argument that software (and music and video) piracy does not constitute a loss to the author is another one of those "justifications" pirates repeats so often, they've come to believe themselves.
If an artist create a sculpture, it was with the intention to sell it once to a buyer. He gets his money and everyone is happy. If it is stolen, everyone agrees it's a 'bad' thing and the thief is breaking the law.
If an artist creates a song, it was with the intention to sell as many copies as possible. This is reflected in the very low price of the song. If the intention was only to ever sell one copy, any album by one of the top artists would cost the recipient a huge amount of money.
So, copying a song, movie or program without paying for it, directly affects the whole value chain, especially the author whose IP and talent is embedded in the product.
But now stealing it is actually 'OK'.
The second argument is "Enough other people are buying it, and I never would have bought it, so its OK to steal it" is equally absurd.
How many (other) people should buy a song before it's OK for you to copy it? Ten? A million? And who are they and who decides that they must buy it but you can steal it? Why can't they rather steal it and you buy it?
Let's say everybody decides to steal the song or program. Nobody buys it. Surely the absurdity of such a business model is obvious?
Rather pirates say:
Incredibly self-centered. Just like any other thief who takes from someone else without a care.
So yes, piracy will not go away and a (very) large % of people on this forum will continue to steal from others because they know they won't get caught. But trying to justify why it is OK with the kind of arguments we see here, is just not going to cut it.
If an artist create a sculpture, it was with the intention to sell it once to a buyer. He gets his money and everyone is happy. If it is stolen, everyone agrees it's a 'bad' thing and the thief is breaking the law.
If an artist creates a song, it was with the intention to sell as many copies as possible. This is reflected in the very low price of the song. If the intention was only to ever sell one copy, any album by one of the top artists would cost the recipient a huge amount of money.
So, copying a song, movie or program without paying for it, directly affects the whole value chain, especially the author whose IP and talent is embedded in the product.
But now stealing it is actually 'OK'.
The second argument is "Enough other people are buying it, and I never would have bought it, so its OK to steal it" is equally absurd.
How many (other) people should buy a song before it's OK for you to copy it? Ten? A million? And who are they and who decides that they must buy it but you can steal it? Why can't they rather steal it and you buy it?
Let's say everybody decides to steal the song or program. Nobody buys it. Surely the absurdity of such a business model is obvious?
Rather pirates say:
Incredibly self-centered. Just like any other thief who takes from someone else without a care.
So yes, piracy will not go away and a (very) large % of people on this forum will continue to steal from others because they know they won't get caught. But trying to justify why it is OK with the kind of arguments we see here, is just not going to cut it.
killadoob
Honorary Master
I don't need to justify anything, i know it is wrong but i also know that i do have millions of dollars and don't make a fortune a month so do i care if someone makes 10 million instead of 15 million?
Nope.
Nope.
vodacom3g
Vodacom Representative
Another one of the 'justifications'
This is the so-called 'have and have not' argument and is the basis of so much crime. They (Robby Williams, Bill Gates, Richard Branson, etc.) have a lot of money and you have not, therefore it's OK to steal from them.
There was a time when they also made no or very little money. But through hard work and determination they got somewhere in life and now earn the big bucks.
So if you feel there are people out there who earn more than you and you also want to earn more, work a bit harder and smarter and increase your income. But don't use it as a justification why you're stealing from them.
Or let me ask you this; Are you OK if someone who earns less than you come to your house today and steal your car, furniture or your CD collection?
After all, they earn less than you so surely it must be OK?
Empiricism Philosopher
Expert Member
If they make a *Copy* of every thing in my house sure.
vodacom3g
Vodacom Representative
Who was the chap that once said "Thieves came into my house last night and stole everything but replaced it all with exact copies." ?
The thing pirates get stuck on is this concept that a 'copy' holds no value. And that's maybe true when you copy the Mona Lisa.
But when you copy a product that was designed to be copied and charged per copy, it suddenly holds no value?
LazyLion
King of de Jungle
agreed! They are quite welcome to make a copy of everything I have!
In fact, they can even have a copy of everything I ever wrote, published, blogged, crafted, made, fixed, etc.
I don't mind. I'm not in it for the money.
Nemanjas Bullet
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 167
- Reaction score
- 10
I think it is really a question of supply and demand.
Physical objects like cars, are limited in supply because they take time and money and resources to make more of. Therefore people are willing to pay the requisite amount in order to meet their demand.
With non-physical objects like software, once a program or whatever is created, the supply is potentially infinite, but is artificially limited in order to increase the price. Pirates are basically removing that artificial supply limitation.
I don't advocate piracy myself - it provides a disincentive towards the creation of non-physical objects. But I can see why it is done.
And Vodacom - you can't compare physical and non-physical theft, because of the supply issues.
Physical objects like cars, are limited in supply because they take time and money and resources to make more of. Therefore people are willing to pay the requisite amount in order to meet their demand.
With non-physical objects like software, once a program or whatever is created, the supply is potentially infinite, but is artificially limited in order to increase the price. Pirates are basically removing that artificial supply limitation.
I don't advocate piracy myself - it provides a disincentive towards the creation of non-physical objects. But I can see why it is done.
And Vodacom - you can't compare physical and non-physical theft, because of the supply issues.
Piracy reduces the amount of exports into country and thereby helps South Africa financially.
Software vendors like Microsoft would prefer you pirate their product, than use the open source alternative.
Get rid of the EULA become responsible for your product and make it worth its buck.
Saying that, I dont have any pirated applications or games on my PC
Software vendors like Microsoft would prefer you pirate their product, than use the open source alternative.
Get rid of the EULA become responsible for your product and make it worth its buck.
Saying that, I dont have any pirated applications or games on my PC
vatso
Well-Known Member
This argument that software (and music and video) piracy does not constitute a loss to the author is another one of those "justifications" pirates repeats so often, they've come to believe themselves.
What gives the distributor and the developer or artist the right to overcharge for the product in such a way that it is not accessible to the mainstream of the public? In effect they are the cause of this problem in the first place. I pay for my software, games and movies because I am able to do so--but I can see that a lot of people the get sub R3000 p/m (that may even work for such a distribution chain for example) are not able to do so.
Do we talk about the enrichment of only a select few, or the benefit of a whole community which got easy access to entertainment media?
A gross assumption coupled with a self-righteous attitude is also not going to cut it either.
Nemanjas Bullet
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 167
- Reaction score
- 10
I don't think your point holds water. If you are unable to afford something you should go without it. I can't afford a yacht for example so I don't have one.
The problem is that the cost to the company of providing one copy of the product is basically zero once the product has been produced. Which is the basic cost to the piraters as well, which means that the product is only unaffordable due to the makers deeming it so. They may have their reasons for doing it, but it remains an untenable situation.
Companies need to come up with a new business model that works, because they're not going to get rid of piracy with the current, basically obsolete business model.
LazyLion
King of de Jungle
That example does not really work either. We are not talking about yachts or luxury goods. We are talking about everyday software. You would have to compare it to something of comparable value. What he meant was that the pricing level is determined by the general public who would use such a product. I have no use for a yacht, I have no place to keep it and no place to sail it. I can't afford to sail it or drive down to the coast to use it. But I do have a use for Microsoft office occasionally. So I would compare that piece of software to the OS itself. They are both useful daily pieces of software that come on a DVD and offer a certain level of functionality. But one of them retails for around R2000 while the other for R6000. R2000 I can afford. R6000 is ridiculous and inflated. If more members of the public were able to pay the R2000 price then the price would adjust accordingly (and I would venture to say that MS would end up making more money). But once again greed wins the day and the price remains exorbitant.
vodacom3g
Vodacom Representative
Won't you post your calculations showing how you got to this? Who overcharges by how much and what should they have charged? Maybe post one or two examples of how you calculated the actual value a song and a program should have been sold for. Or maybe a console game?
No gross assumption at all. There was a poll on here recently. Check it out. Also nothing 'self-righteous'. The point I'm debating is all about the fact that there is no justification for piracy. If you think a product cost too much, don't buy it. The free market will sort the supplier out.
Rather, I believe there are other factors at play here that are the true reasons why people pirate and not the ones we've seen presented in this and other threads.
The proposed justifications include:
- It costs too much, therefore I can steal it.
- I would not have bought it in any case, therefore I can steal it.
- The author / distributor makes more money than me, therefore I can steal it.