cracked software

[bigtoe]

ok- this may just be ignored...but what do you guys think of software someone has gotten by other than paying for it?

i mean not in the "stealing is wrong" sense...but say you have a project and someone offers to let the artist and/or you use their computer for mix...but it's all pirated.

i'm running into this more and more. i'm kind of just flabbergasted by it ...but i'm really old.

i'm sure no one is going to come out and say "i'm all for it and i have a ton in my basement" but how do you deal? do the pros on board not use it or do you just ride with it? i'm kind of saying "i don't go that way..." but i wonder if this is kind of shooting myself in the foot or making a big deal out of something so common it should be ignored...but i really do feel it's wrong...so in my usual loud mouth way - i wag the finger.

not trying to ride the high horse either...

Mike

[chetatkinsdiet]

It's everywhere and unavoidable. In the past, when manufacturers have adopted bad security measures whether it was dongles that didn't work or other means that conflicted with other software or hardware, I know guys that did indeed own legit copies of their software, but still loaded and ran cracked versions just b/c it was troublefree.
I work for a HUGE software reseller in my daytime capacity and it's out there all over the place.
Would you not work at IBM if you found out that they were using more copies of antivirus than they'd paid for? It's just in the larger corporations, the numbers are bigger. You could have a corporation that paid for 20,000 copies of photoshop and are actually using 30,000 copies at any given time. It's not a product that is in use every day, so it's hard to keep track of and find in some cases. It's still wrong, but since they've paid large sums for their legal copies, I guess they feel that they can go a bit over. Now, in the case of the small studio, or even large studio owner....they might have one or two copies of Waves, Nuendo, etc.....so, it's out in the open more when they, or if they have a non-legit version.
Sorry for the rant, and it probably really don't apply here, but I was on a roll......
later,
m

[JES]

Great thread, and great point, chetatkinsdiet. As with other forms of theft, the biggest offenders are the big corporations and other large organizations (including some governments) but it's the individuals who feel the moral weight and who are the focus of public discussion.

Today, I use no kracked software whatsoever, but I have the benefit of a) a good paying job and b) affiliation with a university, where I can get my software for work-related stuff free (to me -- though who knows if the situation isn't exactly like IBM!).

I've got to tell you, though. It's not a particularly moral decision on my part. It's a practical one: I want the stuff to work, and I want the technical support from the company. I also like supporting companies who make products I find useful, and I have the money and resources to do it.

The problem with getting people to care about theft of intellectual property is twofold:

a) theft does not deprive others of use. If you went to a studio that had a bunch of stolen instruments, I don't think there are many people here who would feel comfortable using them. On the other hand, a kracked copy of a program theoretically deprives a company of profit, but even there, it's not clear. If the person COULDN'T use the krack, would they have bought it? Maybe yes, maybe they would have found a less-ideal free alternative.

b) lthe idea of intellectual property has become so overinflated, with companies rushing out to see what they CAN own, that people have no respect for the concept. It all seems silly, especially when big companies who regularly rip off their artists claim to be defending them. I work in a university, and it's frankly an insult how much students have to pay for their copy packets. A friend of mine who studies fair use swears that if universities and other public institutions were just more aggressive with fair use law, people would get gouged a lot less often.

To answer your original question, bigtoe, I guess it would depend. The biggest issue for me with kracks is reliability. If you're a pro and getting paid, what happens if THEIR system craps out on you? If it was rock solid, then it's your judgment call. Honestly, I probably would work on the system in question. That's just the truth. As an academic, when someone gives me a photocopied book or article, I never even *think* to ask if it should have been paid for. But of course the book or article always "works."

Best,
--JES

[lanxe]

and like jes mentioned,
cracked software doesnt seem to run as well. but thats on them really.....if their system poops out, its their problem.

ryan

[AGCurry]

Common rationalizations:

1. Everybody does it.

2. Corporations suck, therefore it's okay to rip them off.

3. I can't afford it.

4. I won't get caught.

Folks, it's called stealing. A few months ago I had a long conversation with my 19-year-old nephew about illegal downloads of music. It amazed me that he runs with a bunch of people who think it's okay, so he thought it was okay. I may not have changed his behavior, but I think I did give him another viewpoint.

[kcrusher]

I don't condone it and I definitely frown upon those that do.

There are so many other options for obtaining usable software - the freeware and shareware stuff is great and there are many, many inexpensive options if money is the issue.

If money is not the issue, then you have no excuse.

At the very least, find a friend that's in school and have them buy you an ed. copy.

I guess it all boils down to someones own moral compass. In the end though it's just plain wrong to steal. There's no explanation that justifies it.

[ataraxia]

Stealing is stealing.
Using stolen goods is obviously contributing to it.
If i could afford to pay for software i would, some of it is very creative and useful. Somewhere, sometime some hardworking people made these programs, (corporation or not, someone who probably hated thier job help program these things, missing thier sons tee ball game or a play with thier little pig tailed daughters).
Most "cracked" software is flawed and you really are better off getting a decent paid for version. but then again "artists" (ha this seems funny , all i can think of is oily teens on a computer all day making bad music, but hey i was/am there too) should always create, and in an over inflated market aimed being at hip and tainting all vision, you do what you can.
Musicians/engineers/any creative person that are just trying to survive are bottom feeders in a tank full of sharks. It's a corporate caste system. is Neo our Gandi? haha...
i guess what i meant is, if you don't like it don't do it, sticking to beliefs is far more valuble than a few bucks and some hipster cred. buy the programs yourself and insist on mixing on your system and charge them for it, you should probably be doing this anyways. if you don't care, then screw 'em. ...

[obermorph]

Personaly, heres my deal.
1. I use cracked software! I admit it, but......
2. When I make money off of that specific piece of software, I BUY IT.

so, think of cracks as extended demo apps.
I mean think about it. If I have to crop one image, and only one image....am I going to rush out and pay 600 or more dollars for photoshop? I think not. However, if I made my living in Photoshop, then you'd better believe that I would buy the app.
Same deal with plug's.

Also, and I appologise for this but if a company say, i dunno waves decided to Half their price (or more) on waves gold, do you not think that Twice as many people would buy it? I know that it would become a hell of a lot closer to my ability to purchase.

nuff said.

[yardleyone]

on a related rant, my new "thing" about pirated music is as follows:

If I rip a copy of an album I want from a friend. I just send 3 dollars directly to the band. Granted the record labels do not get their cut, but hey "large coprporations suck and therefore it's okay to steal from them"

Now inthe case of Metallica, I don't send 3 dollars. Instead I send a semen sample. I figure they've worked that much harder to control music piracy than most bands out there, so they deserve a little of my vital essence.

just a thought.

[Silverlode]

You guys are all making up your own rules for how the software industry works. I call bullshit. Cracked software is demo? You pay for it if you make money off it? You bypass the record company and send $3 to the band? (Wait...you only do that for companies with a market cap over $100 mil, right? The "bad" guys.) Artists NEED to create? Audio software isn't your only voice, you know.

There are other BIG, BAD, EVIL corporations that I'm sure you have no problem giving your hard earned cash to. Gibson. Fender. Etc. There's no, "I don't need to pay full price for this Les Paul, 'cause I only know 2 chords."

Face it. Using pirated software is easy and annonymous, like porn. It's still legally and morally wrong.

[yardleyone]

whoa there let's leave porno out of this... without porno I would be unable to send Metaliica those semen samples.

[Greenlander]

Now in the case of Metallica, I don't send 3 dollars. Instead I send a semen sample. I figure they've worked that much harder to control music piracy than most bands out there, so they deserve a little of my vital essence.

It might even end up on their next album cover, working in semen is their thing (in a manner of speaking).

[jakeao]

like porn. It's still legally and morally wrong.

There is nothing Legally, or morally wrong with porn

[Silverlode]

I didn't say, "Like porn, is't still legally and morally wrong." I said, "It's easy and annonymous, like porn."

OK, back to software piracy...

(For the record, though, I will say that porn is a second-order reality and we'd all be a lot better off if we got out of that mindset and interacted with the real world. So, to me, it is a moral issue.)

[A.L.]

Re: gear. Yeah a lot of us are buying 'used' gear, though. The legality of which has already been fought and won for but let's face it: buying used items is morally dubious.

How is buying a used copy of an in-print cd any different than buying a cdr bootleg from some guy on the street? Or downloading the album from paid filesharing shareware? It's not. The label sees no money. Gibson sees no money for the guitar you bought on ebay. Sytek sees no money for the pres you sold on the TO board.

Do you feel wracked with guilt taping a show off TV then passing it to your friend, daughter, whatever? Maybe you should. Do you ever edit or fast forward through the commercials once it's on tape? What about the radio? It's already been decided by the courts but what about indies played on college radio stations with no ASCAP kickbacks? Isn't their music being stolen by being played?

Academic institutions have certain fair use privelages but it it really 'right' to copy all those excerpts into a reader which the authors see no money for? And if this is allowed why not sharing software within the university.

I'm not saying software piracy is either bad or good and I'm not saying any of the above is, my point is that the lines here are indeed fuzzy and not really so cut and dry.