3 ms·

No, we don't, but maybe we should. Why should somebody who can't afford software not be allowed to have it?

by brl 18y ago

jbjohns 18y ago
Why should someone who can't afford to have a house not be allowed to have it? Oh wait....
- brl 18y ago
  That's an interesting question too, but not really related to what I was asking and probably off-topic for this thread. I'm serious. If somebody has no money and wants to use some expensive commercial software, what is the cost to the copyright owner of letting them use of that software for free? None at all? Maybe even less than that? Now what is the benefit to that person and to society in general?
  - jbjohns 18y ago
    Well, this is the problem. There is the cost and the perceived cost. And, right or wrong, the perceived cost ends up costing a lot of people. Usually the ones who are actually paying for the product (that useless country code thing on DVDs has got to be one of the most asinine wastes of time ever). I don't know what the answer is. Personally if the software does what I need but is more then I can/am willing pay I seek a free alternative. If that didn't exist, I'm not sure what I would do since as far as I remember that situation hasn't happened to me yet.
  - icey 18y ago
    I'm sorry, but the cost of a piece of software has nothing to do with the cost of delivery of that software. The point of selling software is for a company to make money and survive. Just because there is 0 cost involved to deliver a piece of software doesn't mean that there is no value associated with a pirated license. Frankly, the cost to the company should have absolutely nothing to do with the cost the consumer pays, other than the fact that the consumer should pay more than the cost to the company. The idea that people have that just because something costs a company a small amount or nothing to deliver somehow gives them the right to steal it is mind boggling. It doesn't matter how much it costs the company, it's none of your business. What is of import is what the company says the item costs. Taking that for free without paying is stealing, no matter how you attempt to justify it.

No, we don't, but maybe we should. Why should somebody who can't afford software not be allowed to have it?

by brl 18y ago

No, we don't, but maybe we should. Why should somebody who can't afford software not be allowed to have it?

jbjohns 18y ago

Why should someone who can't afford to have a house not be allowed to have it? Oh wait....

brl 18y ago
That's an interesting question too, but not really related to what I was asking and probably off-topic for this thread. I'm serious. If somebody has no money and wants to use some expensive commercial software, what is the cost to the copyright owner of letting them use of that software for free? None at all? Maybe even less than that? Now what is the benefit to that person and to society in general?
- jbjohns 18y ago
  Well, this is the problem. There is the cost and the perceived cost. And, right or wrong, the perceived cost ends up costing a lot of people. Usually the ones who are actually paying for the product (that useless country code thing on DVDs has got to be one of the most asinine wastes of time ever). I don't know what the answer is. Personally if the software does what I need but is more then I can/am willing pay I seek a free alternative. If that didn't exist, I'm not sure what I would do since as far as I remember that situation hasn't happened to me yet.
- icey 18y ago
  I'm sorry, but the cost of a piece of software has nothing to do with the cost of delivery of that software. The point of selling software is for a company to make money and survive. Just because there is 0 cost involved to deliver a piece of software doesn't mean that there is no value associated with a pirated license. Frankly, the cost to the company should have absolutely nothing to do with the cost the consumer pays, other than the fact that the consumer should pay more than the cost to the company. The idea that people have that just because something costs a company a small amount or nothing to deliver somehow gives them the right to steal it is mind boggling. It doesn't matter how much it costs the company, it's none of your business. What is of import is what the company says the item costs. Taking that for free without paying is stealing, no matter how you attempt to justify it.