3 ms·

If you sell a program which works now, you're not making any claims it will continue to work in the future, that's the model software sales ran for years. There

If you sell a program which works now, you're not making any claims it will continue to work in the future, that's the model software sales ran for years. There's no reason, legal or ethical, for you to continue to give free updates to people that bought something from you in the past, just like if you sell a bike to someone you don't need to continue to maintain it. For your software you could sell a support contract with it, you could even bundle it in up front, and then sure you are expected to provide that support. None of this is of any relevance to someone . If I copy your software it doesn't hurt you, it doesn't cost you, it doesn't deny you the use of that software. It's wrong, sure, but not because of theft, just like it's wrong to sneak into an empty cinema, or download something from the internet. If I steal your computer, it does hurt you, it denies you the use of that computer. That is theft, that is wrong, and I'd argue more wrong than copying your software.

alin23 5y ago
About 700 people received a free Pro license for Lunar for donating in the past (a much smaller amount than the current price, usually $3). After their free update period ended, some of those people began using the cracked version. I know that because they reported issues without knowing that the tnt@team.ru email would show up on the report. I don’t know how many people are doing that, but I can say for sure that there are people that could pay for the software, but don’t because using the crack is easier for them. Paddle also offers a dashboard and I can clearly see the monthly revenue dropping by $500-$1k on months when a crack is released for the latest version. When I launch an update with a new anti-piracy measure that stalls the crackers for another month or two, the monthly revenue goes back up. “It doesn’t hurt the dev, I wouldn’t have paid anyway” is just something people tell themselves to justify their action.
- iso1210 5y ago
  > but don’t because using the crack is easier for them. That's a whole separate problem. In my experience 'anti piracy' measures cause problems for people who pay for the software, it's just another reason not to pay. If it's easier to use a cracked product, you are doing something wrong. > “It doesn’t hurt the dev, I wouldn’t have paid anyway” is just something people tell themselves to justify their action. Nobody is trying to justify people not respecting your intellectual property rights, just call it what it is - copyright infringement. It is not theft, just like someone using an ad blocker isn't theft, or someone ripping a DVD they bought so they can watch it on their phone isn't theft.
  - alin23 5y ago
    The anti piracy measures I use are completely transparent for the end user. They are just checks for the integrity of the app. If a cracker tampered in any way (e.g. added their own dylib at RPATH) I can detect it. The crack isn’t easier to use than the app. I meant that it’s easy enough to download the crack so the users don’t have any incentive to purchase.

alin23 5y ago

About 700 people received a free Pro license for Lunar for donating in the past (a much smaller amount than the current price, usually $3). After their free update period ended, some of those people began using the cracked version. I know that because they reported issues without knowing that the tnt@team.ru email would show up on the report. I don’t know how many people are doing that, but I can say for sure that there are people that could pay for the software, but don’t because using the crack is easier for them. Paddle also offers a dashboard and I can clearly see the monthly revenue dropping by $500-$1k on months when a crack is released for the latest version. When I launch an update with a new anti-piracy measure that stalls the crackers for another month or two, the monthly revenue goes back up. “It doesn’t hurt the dev, I wouldn’t have paid anyway” is just something people tell themselves to justify their action.

iso1210 5y ago
> but don’t because using the crack is easier for them. That's a whole separate problem. In my experience 'anti piracy' measures cause problems for people who pay for the software, it's just another reason not to pay. If it's easier to use a cracked product, you are doing something wrong. > “It doesn’t hurt the dev, I wouldn’t have paid anyway” is just something people tell themselves to justify their action. Nobody is trying to justify people not respecting your intellectual property rights, just call it what it is - copyright infringement. It is not theft, just like someone using an ad blocker isn't theft, or someone ripping a DVD they bought so they can watch it on their phone isn't theft.
- alin23 5y ago
  The anti piracy measures I use are completely transparent for the end user. They are just checks for the integrity of the app. If a cracker tampered in any way (e.g. added their own dylib at RPATH) I can detect it. The crack isn’t easier to use than the app. I meant that it’s easy enough to download the crack so the users don’t have any incentive to purchase.