4 ms·

I'm going to go against the grain here because I'd like a discussion, although I'll fully admit I'm not nearly as experienced in start-ups as many of you are. I

I'm going to go against the grain here because I'd like a discussion, although I'll fully admit I'm not nearly as experienced in start-ups as many of you are. I also know this post and the HN post refers to a fairly large startup doing this, but from the comments here it seems like many of you believe it is /never/ justifiable to use warez software in a startup. Lets say you are an early start-up,less than 5 people, that has no revenue and is still building a product, with money being little or non-existent. Couldn't it be partially justifiable to use warez software to give you the best advantage to achieve success? For example, lets say you only bought Office for your PC (since you did most of the marketing, but not all) and installed Open Office on the other computers. Then after one of your co-founders sends you a document he created in OO(a sales document, I don't know), you find out that it doesn't render at ALL in Office as it did in OO. Now you have to spend time redesigning the document (for however long it takes), and you end up wasting time that you didn't have (and you certainly don't have the money). This is not to mean that this exact problem cannot be solved [Bizspark/MSDN, etc], only that this is one hypothetical out of many that could cause problems. When these start adding up, however, suddenly you are running behind the competition because you wanted to do the ethical thing. I'm not saying you should continue this behavior once you get off the ground and running (and ESPECIALLY after you have broken even/generated profit), nor am I trying to imply that anything is justifiable if you need to catch up to the competition, but I feel like most people here are saying it should never be ok to use warez software in a startup, while I can see scenarios that would make sense to me (That are a lot less morally black than, say, lying to your customers or investors).

Dylanlacey 16y ago
If I don't pay my employees the bonuses I promise, don't pay suppliers and lie to customers, it gives me the "Best advantage" to achieve success (for a certain narrow scope). Is that OK? If I don't follow compliance rules because there's little chance of being found out, is that OK? After all, it helps me achieve success!
- eggbrain 16y ago
  Like I said in my last sentence, there is a difference between not paying suppliers and lying to customers, and using warez in a start-up. It's like saying that since I think downloading music is ok (I don't), I must also think killing people is ok (I also don't), because both of them are bad, and I justified doing one bad thing. There are probably a whole bunch of morally ambiguous situations that aren't patently illegal to the extent your talking about. Would using warez software be illegal? Yes. But would it do any tangible harm to anyone else, as, for example, not paying suppliers for their services and products after you signed the sales contract, or not following compliance rules [which could cause a host of issues]? You might argue for the software companies that distribute the product and their lost profits, but if the choice is either 1)Pirate their software and use it or 2)use an alternative, there is not a hidden option that appears that says "3) Find money that doesn't exist and pay for the software right now!", so the loss of the sale of the products is, in a sense, never materialized to begin with. Again, I am not advocating that "anything is justifiable if you need to catch up to the competition" (as I also said in my last lines of my last post), nor that using warez software is at all 100% permissible, especially in a start-up past the initial stages. I am saying, however, that I see scenarios where the situation could be at least partially justified, and I don't think every start-up that did it should be vilified as it seems like the comments in this whole thread implied. Perhaps not entirely condoned, but not vilified.
run4yourlives 16y ago
Lets say you are an early start-up,less than 5 people, that has no revenue and is still building a product, with money being little or non-existent. Couldn't it be partially justifiable to not pay your rent/employees/electric bill to give you the best advantage to achieve success?
- eggbrain 16y ago
  Like I said in the parent, "[I am not] trying to imply that anything is justifiable if you need to catch up to the competition" It is also worth noting that while not paying your rent/employees has an immediate harm, it is not so quite clear if there is an immediate harm with warez software. If my startup downloads Photoshop, did I deny Adobe products a sale if I would just grumble and use an alternative if I could not? You could argue either way, but there would be no clear answer. If I don't give someone money for rent, did I deny them money? Well, quite obviously, yes.

Dylanlacey 16y ago

If I don't pay my employees the bonuses I promise, don't pay suppliers and lie to customers, it gives me the "Best advantage" to achieve success (for a certain narrow scope). Is that OK? If I don't follow compliance rules because there's little chance of being found out, is that OK? After all, it helps me achieve success!

eggbrain 16y ago
Like I said in my last sentence, there is a difference between not paying suppliers and lying to customers, and using warez in a start-up. It's like saying that since I think downloading music is ok (I don't), I must also think killing people is ok (I also don't), because both of them are bad, and I justified doing one bad thing. There are probably a whole bunch of morally ambiguous situations that aren't patently illegal to the extent your talking about. Would using warez software be illegal? Yes. But would it do any tangible harm to anyone else, as, for example, not paying suppliers for their services and products after you signed the sales contract, or not following compliance rules [which could cause a host of issues]? You might argue for the software companies that distribute the product and their lost profits, but if the choice is either 1)Pirate their software and use it or 2)use an alternative, there is not a hidden option that appears that says "3) Find money that doesn't exist and pay for the software right now!", so the loss of the sale of the products is, in a sense, never materialized to begin with. Again, I am not advocating that "anything is justifiable if you need to catch up to the competition" (as I also said in my last lines of my last post), nor that using warez software is at all 100% permissible, especially in a start-up past the initial stages. I am saying, however, that I see scenarios where the situation could be at least partially justified, and I don't think every start-up that did it should be vilified as it seems like the comments in this whole thread implied. Perhaps not entirely condoned, but not vilified.

run4yourlives 16y ago

Lets say you are an early start-up,less than 5 people, that has no revenue and is still building a product, with money being little or non-existent. Couldn't it be partially justifiable to not pay your rent/employees/electric bill to give you the best advantage to achieve success?

eggbrain 16y ago
Like I said in the parent, "[I am not] trying to imply that anything is justifiable if you need to catch up to the competition" It is also worth noting that while not paying your rent/employees has an immediate harm, it is not so quite clear if there is an immediate harm with warez software. If my startup downloads Photoshop, did I deny Adobe products a sale if I would just grumble and use an alternative if I could not? You could argue either way, but there would be no clear answer. If I don't give someone money for rent, did I deny them money? Well, quite obviously, yes.