Re: Net piracy?

[jeffr@bmerha2a.bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson)]

In article <3066sc$980@blackice.winternet.com>,
Richard Wifall <rwifall@NMSU.edu> wrote:
>In article <304maa$e23@crl4.crl.com> dkl@crl.com (David K. Leikam) writes:
>>     The "Theft is theft, plain and simple" argument strikes me as moronic. 
>>   (I hope I'm really offending somebody, here.)  I have this friend who 
>>   just bought a futon to replace his sleeper sofa. Problem, how to get rid 
>>   of the sofa he doesn't want anymore, without having to haul it off 
>>   somewhere? Easy. Put it out by the curb, and little elves come to take it 
>>   away overnight.
>>
>>     By his actions, he indicates VERY clearly, he doesn't want the thing, 
>>   he's abandoning it, please somebody come take it away.
>
>	Just because you can't find the owner of the software, and you
>don't _think_ he cares about it does not in anyway reflect whether he
>does care or not.  The author may in fact be using the algorithms, or
>other important features in a program on a different platform.  So
>while it may seem abandoned to you, it may not be abandoned at all.

Hi, me again.

A good example of a software program that the author does not want
distributed is SHRConvert, a shareware that has been replaced by a
commercial product (whose name eludes me).  Thing is, in this case, the
author is very visible, and has been quite clear on the issue.  So this
isn't really an example of abandonment; quite the opposite.  It's a
case of someone formally "retiring" a piece of software.  I believe his
wishes have been pretty well respected, too.

Have any of the game authors out there, who went off to write for Sega
or Nintendo or whoever it is with the 65816 chip, asked people not to
distribute their sharewhare games?  I'd bet they _are_ using the same
algorithms.

Really, though, most of the classic Apple II software is so laughably
out of date, such an argument is foolish.  Music, graphics, overall
complexity (due to memory size) -- forget it.  They only value of the
program is for itself, not for the techniques behind it.

Again, this all comes down to the nature of copyright law.  It's up to
the holder to enforce it.  To use this silly couch analogy, leaving the
couch on the sidewalk is _not_ abandoning it.  Not complaining when it's
stolen _is_.  This differs from the "real world", where police and
insurance companies would look at you funny if you left valuable
possessions in your front yard.

Yes, it's hard for the holder to pursue every little two bit pirate.
Hopefully, such pirates don't hurt too much.  Big pirates, such as
FTP sites or CD ROM distributers, are much easier to find and
prosecute.  That's why I support their use.  They can take the time
to make an effort to find the copyright holder and make an arragement
(if possible).  If they can't find anyone, then they're an easy target
for the holder to complain to.  I genuinely beleive that such a situation
(especially the CD ROM scenario) hurts no one, helps many, and obeys
both the letter and the spirit of the law.

P.S.
>(I won't go into property that is left in storage for an equally good
>example of things that may seem abandoned, but in fact are not.)

Now that's just being silly.  Try to stay serious if you want people
to listen to your points.

>	Maybe all the software authors should start requiring those
>hardware gizmos to make their software run.  (Or figure out some way
>to go back to the "Good Old Days" when people were honest and not
>trying to rip someone off at every chance.)

Well, depending on how you look at it, piracy and/or software protection
killed the Apple II (among others).  The kind of pirating I'm talking
about won't hurt people though.  At any event, a return to copy protection
would be a Bad Thing (tm).
-- 
-------------------------------------+----------------+-----------------
Jeffrey Robertson                    |  jeffr@bnr.ca  |      BNR, Ottawa
"I speak for myself, not BNR" - Me   +----------------+       (Meriline)
"Verbing weirds language" - Calvin                      OC-48 FiberWorld