Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site looking.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!looking!brad From: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) Newsgroups: net.micro.pc Subject: Piracy, books, copy protection Message-ID: <329@looking.UUCP> Date: Sat, 17-Aug-85 00:00:00 EDT Article-I.D.: looking.329 Posted: Sat Aug 17 00:00:00 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 20-Aug-85 06:05:24 EDT References: <250@sesame.UUCP> <10800013@uiucdcsp> Reply-To: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) Organization: Looking Glass Software, Waterloo, Ont Lines: 63 Why do people think that programmers and software companies have some "duty" to write software for them? These companies go in, take risks and fill a need. because of circumstances, they don't fill the need properly - for example they make their software less convenient by copy protecting it. People seem to talk as though they think the world should run their way and no other. If the copy protection truly degrades the value of the product, then it's only the company that loses. All this talk of the consumer losing is garbage. At worst, the consumer breaks even because he or she doesn't buy the software. Remember, the choice is software on terms acceptable to the author, or no software at all. >Many software companies appear to think they have the right to make millions >with only little capital cost and effort (compared to, say, hardware >manufacturers or chip designers). I have heard numerous complaints that the >software industry "cannot survive" without such profits. I do not believe >this. The more appropriate model for the software industry is the >publishing industry. Publishing houses still make a great deal of money, >yet do not speak of "renting books", nor charge ruinous prices for them. > The book industry isn't like the software industry at all. Borland, the low price king of the software industry, sells Turbo Pascal with a paperback book and an inexpensive floppy for $70. Everbody said Kahn couldn't do this but he managed. Cheap books are a few dollars. Do people think this difference exists without a reason? Software needs training, support and massive advertising. Anybody can read a book. Software is used time and time again. Books are usually read once. Software marketing is a tooth-and-nail fight in a new industry with large companies going under at a rate of several per year. The book industry is stable. Software is often written by teams of people using expensive equipment over long periods of time. Books are written by one person with a typewriter, usually involving fewer man-years. There are close to a dozen major computer shows to attend. The ABA is once a year. Software is updated. Books are not. I could go on and on. >I have heard Mr. Learner parrot claims by the organization sponsored by >Lotus (and other like-minded software companies) that some massive fraction >of programs in use are pirated. I also do not belive this. I purchased Piracy may be blown up a bit, but there is a lot of corporate piracy. In any company with any quantity of buraucracy, it's 100 times easier to steal an extra copy of a program than it is to put in a request, get approval, send out a purchase order and get the new copy shipped in. If just for the simple reason that you're up right away with a stolen copy. >Final Word, Wordstar 2000, and Cornerstone voluntarily REMOVE copy >protection from their products, in response to customer complaints? Do >Infocom and Mark of the Unicorn seem like companies that want to go out of >business? Clearly there is some disagreement within the industry about the >necessity for copy protection. This is what the free market is all about. Some companies feel that in the long run, having the easiest to use product will provide the most sales. The market decides. The real answer to all this is to spit on theives when you meet them. When you hear somebody talking about stealing software, confront them and say, "You're a god-damned thief!" Tell them you make your living writing software, and that the theft they perform creates the need for copy protection and makes it worse for everybody. If theft were not socially acceptable because the theif doesn't actually see the victim, things would go a lot better. -- Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473