4 ms·

And you wouldn't want to reinforce the behavior of providing a time-saving service for money?

by brianpan 14y ago

zschallz 14y ago
And they wonder why people pirate.
- dchichkov 14y ago
  Yeah. Pirating is almost an ethical choice in these cases :) Unfortunately pirated packages are often filled with malware. Not exactly what you want. So a much better choice is just going with open source. Picasa, instead of iPhoto, etc...
  - runn1ng 14y ago
    I am not sure if pirating something you bought is actually technically illegal or not. You are not buying the disk with the data, you are buying a license to run the software. Even when you pirate it, the license should still apply.
    - icebraining 14y ago
      The copying (distribution) is still illegal, and you're probably guilty of "conspiracy" to do it.
      - runn1ng 14y ago
        Is copying it to your own disk a distribution? I understand than with P2P networks, you are distributing the file while downloading and that's when they get upset.
        icebraining 14y ago
        I think more than one media companies actually tried to pass the "copy from disk to memory" as requiring a license. I'm not sure how the law views it. Re: downloading, the EFF's Fred von Lohmann says it's probably infringement[1], and so do the media companies, of course. [1]: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/09/p2p-downloading-is-it-legal/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/09/p2p-downloading-i...
    - Ntrails 14y ago
      It is much like torrenting a movie you already own the DvD for, because it is easier than ripping your entire collection one by one. Ethically I think it is obvious such a thing would be completely reasonable. Technically almost certainly not.
dchichkov 14y ago
I don't want cloud service providers forcing me to buy an application a SECOND time, by limiting my access to installer. And I'd really prefer not to pay second time. Because that reinforces the behavior of profiting by screwing people up. Maybe it saves my time. But it is unethical.
- ricardobeat 14y ago
  They didn't limit access to the installer, he was trying to bring it back from a Time Machine backup. If he had the original disc it would work fine.
  - dchichkov 14y ago
    Same thing really. He couldn't reinstall application that he owned. Because access to the installer was convoluted.
    - ricardobeat 14y ago
      You bought it on a CD, keep the CD. Before downloading apps was the norm, no company would issue a second copy of something you bought.
      - dchichkov 14y ago
        Well, before advent of app store I NEVER had a case than I couldn't reinstall application that I've purchased. And with the app store, in just a year or so I already had a couple of cases when I lost access to an installer. One was that I lost iPhoto, with OS upgrade on Air. Another, temporarily, for around a week I had no access to XCode installer [because of some screw up in the store].

And you wouldn't want to reinforce the behavior of providing a time-saving service for money?

zschallz 14y ago

And they wonder why people pirate.

dchichkov 14y ago
Yeah. Pirating is almost an ethical choice in these cases :) Unfortunately pirated packages are often filled with malware. Not exactly what you want. So a much better choice is just going with open source. Picasa, instead of iPhoto, etc...
- runn1ng 14y ago
  I am not sure if pirating something you bought is actually technically illegal or not. You are not buying the disk with the data, you are buying a license to run the software. Even when you pirate it, the license should still apply.
  - icebraining 14y ago
    The copying (distribution) is still illegal, and you're probably guilty of "conspiracy" to do it.
    - runn1ng 14y ago
      Is copying it to your own disk a distribution? I understand than with P2P networks, you are distributing the file while downloading and that's when they get upset.
      - icebraining 14y ago
        I think more than one media companies actually tried to pass the "copy from disk to memory" as requiring a license. I'm not sure how the law views it. Re: downloading, the EFF's Fred von Lohmann says it's probably infringement[1], and so do the media companies, of course. [1]: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/09/p2p-downloading-is-it-legal/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/09/p2p-downloading-i...
  - Ntrails 14y ago
    It is much like torrenting a movie you already own the DvD for, because it is easier than ripping your entire collection one by one. Ethically I think it is obvious such a thing would be completely reasonable. Technically almost certainly not.

dchichkov 14y ago

I don't want cloud service providers forcing me to buy an application a SECOND time, by limiting my access to installer. And I'd really prefer not to pay second time. Because that reinforces the behavior of profiting by screwing people up. Maybe it saves my time. But it is unethical.

ricardobeat 14y ago
They didn't limit access to the installer, he was trying to bring it back from a Time Machine backup. If he had the original disc it would work fine.
- dchichkov 14y ago
  Same thing really. He couldn't reinstall application that he owned. Because access to the installer was convoluted.
  - ricardobeat 14y ago
    You bought it on a CD, keep the CD. Before downloading apps was the norm, no company would issue a second copy of something you bought.
    - dchichkov 14y ago
      Well, before advent of app store I NEVER had a case than I couldn't reinstall application that I've purchased. And with the app store, in just a year or so I already had a couple of cases when I lost access to an installer. One was that I lost iPhoto, with OS upgrade on Air. Another, temporarily, for around a week I had no access to XCode installer [because of some screw up in the store].