|
People Steal From Artists, Artists Steal From Programmers (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| derail |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
@derail
Moral of software development story? Don't put so much effort into something if you care that people will "undermine" it. |
You actually want companies to put less effort into giving us great products? You'd be fine if a lot of companies simply disappeared, if the next major improvements in software come in 10, 20 years?
If you truly believe that programmers shouldn't get paid, and that open source software is fine, then use only software that you can legally use for free. If you really believe your own story, then follow it. Don't say "open source software is excellent, it's coming along a lot faster than commercial products, you essentially don't need anything else", then continue to use the cracked versions of commercial products. Otherwise you don't believe your own argument.
Also, your claim that open source/free software is progressing faster - of course it's progressing faster! They're putting in features that the commercial companies took the time and money to develop - once a technology/ feature has been developed and introduced, it's a lot easier to copy it, than to push the technology to the next level. If the free software at some point overtakes the best commercial products then yes, we'll be in a different situation to the one we have currently. And then we can talk in your terms. But currently the situation isn't like that. |
|
|
| cronodevir |
Well, there are plenty of proprietary programs that cost money but don't lead.
Insert 1 out of a million software vsts at KVR, and you have an example of something people charge for, but doesn't lead.
Also, many companies that lead, do so because they have a tangible product or they use a special system to distribute software.
@derail
I still use commercial software because I have to, you find a way to port a couple hundred .flp files, and I will be glad to use Open Source. Other than FLStudio, There really is nothing else I need that Open Source can't cover.
I never said a developer shouldn't get paid, I said they shouldn't try to get paid in a system that is obviously going to be against them every step of the way. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Well, there are plenty of proprietary programs that cost money but don't lead.
Insert 1 out of a million software vsts at KVR, and you have an example of something people charge for, but doesn't lead. |
Yeah, but the prices for these products would not be the same as the leading products. (most often) Or they specialize on certain things.
And also, some developers might be a bit more generous that others as well.
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Also, many companies that lead, do so because they have a tangible product or they use a special system to distribute software. |
Steam is a good example of this. |
|
|
| derail |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
I'm still waiting for someone to justify copyright in the first place to be honest, much less "copyright infringement" |
It gives people incentive to spend years and years of their lives working on new, better ways of doing things. They may fail in their effort, they may not get a cent for those years of their lives. But if they do succeed and find a better way, then copyright ensures that they get paid for their sacrifice, that their neighbour who has been lazing around unemployed for all those years can't simply steal their idea and sell it for the same price and make the same amount of money.
Yes, some people are altruistic and offer up their lives for free, for the "greater good". Cronodevir, it sounds like you are one of these people - you make sure your boss only gives you just enough money to survive, and you spend all your time helping your community. It's good that the world has people like you, who believe that hard-working people, such as programmers, should be like you and work for free.
However, most people are not martyrs. They don't offer up their time for free. If you remove copyright, you remove a massive chunk of incentive for people to invest their time in improving things, in creating better ways. There has to be some incentive for people - Cronodevir - what incentive is there for people, if copyright didn't exist? |
|
|
| RichieV |
| quote: | [i][b]
I never said a developer shouldn't get paid, I said they shouldn't try to get paid in a system that is obviously going to be against them every step of the way. |
that is the same logic as telling a girl to expect to get raped if she wears a dress.
come on man. |
|
|
| cronodevir |
Steam is a good example, steam is also cracked and has private servers, interesting. but the real thing with steam is most of the games have some sort of multilayer. And multilayer on non official steam servers is just poo.
But with music software, there is no such thing really as "multiplayer" [well you have collab and stuff, but lets be real]. So even if a system like steam was brought in, because there is no benefit ulterior to actually having the program with the service, the service will become a product of the issues we have discussed anyways.
The best way a DAW could for instance could thrive with virtually 0% piracy, is if it was hardware only. imagine Cubase in the form of a hardware box.
@richiev
If a woman wears skimpy outfit, of course she better pay attention.
This is the same logic as "don't walk around in a mine field". Don't do things that you know will fail and or cause trouble to yourself. Duh.
@derail
Open Source is full of people who's incentive is to make good software. Its not about being a martyr. Most people there don't believe someone should profit off a product that isn't tangible, so they aren't sacrificing or "loosing" anything. And for others, doing code simply isn't work at all. I don't consider music work. I don't consider it a sacrifice to make music for no gain.
But its just like any market, if you sell a real product, say a car, and the guy next to you is giving cars away for free,how on earth do you expect to be able to survive as a car salesman where you are?
Or how about when you have a 4 way intersection, with a gas station on each corner. Every one of them is trying to undermine the other guy by lowering his price just by a cent.
Just correlate that to the software world where the guy in the gas station next to you not only doesn't have a limit to the amount of his product, but also doesn't care about getting paid? Its like trying to open a gas station up next to a guy who gives it away for free. |
|
|
| RichieV |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
I'm still waiting for someone to justify copyright in the first place to be honest, much less "copyright infringement" |
you seemed to be keen on the idea. I mean these are your words. Do you not remember them ? IT was maybe 2 days ago.
You copyright to stop other people from claiming it as their own then suing you. Even if you have proof the thing is yours, because you didn't take the time out to copyright it, it still becomes valid for the one who did to have ownership of it. You copyright music to save yourself. You copyright anything for this reason
you ever feel like that guy in memento? |
|
|
| cronodevir |
| quote: | Originally posted by RichieV
you seemed to be keen on the idea. I mean these are your words. Do you not remember them ? IT was maybe 2 days ago.
You copyright to stop other people from claiming it as their own then suing you. Even if you have proof the thing is yours, because you didn't take the time out to copyright it, it still becomes valid for the one who did to have ownership of it. You copyright music to save yourself. You copyright anything for this reason
you ever feel like that guy in memento? |
If copyright didn't exist, no one would be able to claim my work and sue me for it, thus I would have no need to copyright it to protect myself. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Steam is a good example, steam is also cracked and has private servers, interesting. but the real thing with steam is most of the games have some sort of multilayer. And multilayer on non official steam servers is just poo.
But with music software, there is no such thing really as "multiplayer" [well you have collab and stuff, but lets be real]. So even if a system like steam was brought in, because there is no benefit ulterior to actually having the program with the service, the service will become a product of the issues we have discussed anyways.
The best way a DAW could for instance could thrive with virtually 0% piracy, is if it was hardware only. imagine Cubase in the form of a hardware box. |
Yes Steam would not have helped in this case.
It is worth mentioning that Steam lowered the price on one of their games Left 4 Dead by 50% which then led to an astounding sales increase of 3000%
This is something for software developers to think about too. |
|
|
| RichieV |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
If copyright didn't exist, no one would be able to claim my work and sue me for it, thus I would have no need to copyright it to protect myself. |
no , they would just take your idea you spent 20 years developping say it was theirs and make money from it. And of course you wouldn't be able to sue them either. |
|
|
| Beatflux |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
No, i would not.
And i hardly think i could get away with it if i did, besides it is not the same thing.
If you could copy your neighbors Ferrari without him knowing would you do it ? |
If it is not the same thing, then I don't understand you're original point.
I don't see how the metaphor with a ferrari, a physical object, relates to the discussion. |
|
|
| cronodevir |
| quote: | Originally posted by RichieV
no , they would just take your idea you spent 20 years developping say it was theirs and make money from it. And of course you wouldn't be able to sue them either. |
So? Someone else making money off work I already gave to people for free doesn't concern me.
When I gave it out, its implied that one can do what ever he wants with it. He doesn't even have to credit me. But at the same time he shouldn't be allowed to prevent me from doing what I am doing. |
|
|
|
|
