extreme newbie

[Chinook]

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 14:00:35 -0400, Steven D'Aprano wrote
(in article <pan.2005.06.18.18.00.35.217915 at REMOVETHIScyber.com.au>):

> On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 12:05:59 -0400, Peter Hansen wrote:
> 
>> Furthermore, protecting you from someone else making money off a copy of 
>> your program is basically what licenses are for, and if you have noticed 
>> they don't protect even Microsoft (see, for example, entire governments 
>> like the Indonesian government, which has mass-pirated Microsoft 
>> software for a long time).
> 
> Please call it what it is: copyright infringement, not piracy. Piracy
> takes place in international waters, and involves one or more of theft,
> murder, rape and kidnapping. Making an unauthorized copy of a piece of
> software is not piracy, it is an infringement of a government-granted
> monopoly.
> 
> In any case, there is a powerful argument for wanna-be Microsofts to
> turn a blind eye to copyright infringements. It worked for Microsoft and
> almost every other successful software company.
> 
> The biggest barrier to success for software developers is getting people
> to even know your software exists. The second biggest barrier is
> encouraging them to try your software. The third is getting them to keep
> using your software once they've tried it. Actually collecting money from
> them is at the bottom of the list -- you can't expect people to pay you
> for using your software if they don't even know you exist.
> 
> Apart from the occasional public rant (such as Bill Gates' plea to users
> not to make illegal copies of MS BASIC), in the early days Microsoft
> didn't go out of their way to chase copyright infringers. If they had, the
> users would have simply stopped using the MS software and used something
> else. Instead, people grabbed copies of Word or Excel from their friends,
> taking market share from WordPerfect, WordStar, Lotus etc. Eventually,
> they would need an upgrade, or find it more convenient to buy than to
> copy. Every so-called "pirated copy" had (at least) four benefits to
> Microsoft: it denied a sale to Microsoft's competitors; it increased
> users' familiarity and confidence with Microsoft's products; it built
> Microsoft's brand recognition among software purchasers and IT
> departments; and it was (usually) a future sale to Microsoft.
> 
> It was only as Microsoft approached monopoly status that copyright
> infringement began to hurt them more than it gained them. With few if any
> competitors, the loss of revenue from unauthorized copies of Word or Excel
> or Windows became greater than the benefits.
> 
> 

Steven,

Your weigh-in on semantics is misleading, but your elaboration of the aspect 
is very well put.

As to semantics, piracy is to the originator what freedom fighter is to those 
that perceive themselves as oppressed.  

On the other hand, your elaboration is a very good example of the altered 
consciousness of human nature.  That is, the acceptance of shades of 
complicity divorced from shades of guilt.  Of course, one can see (if they so 
chose) many more obvious examples in business, let alone government and 
religion :~)  

Lee C