Legal WAREZ...

Night Runner · Post by **Night Runner** » Sun Jul 06, 2003 11:42 pm

So I got this crazy idea...

Everyone pays $100 a year to get on a legal program trading system. All the files on the system are provided by companies such as Adobe, Microsoft, Apple, etc. You can download whatever you want, but they limit your bandwidth to say 40KBps tops.

Now you say, "Oooowha? This is stupid, and would never ever work and companies would NEVER do this." And I agree, it would never ever work or even be considered by any of these companies, but some real math needs to be done here...

A single copy of Photoshop 7 is like $579... That's a little bit high for most people who just want to chop up an image for a forum, so let's say for every one person who owns Photoshop, 40 people downloaded it for free... (It's actually probably a higher number than that.)

Now, say just 10 of those people subscribe to the legal-warez P2P system, that's $1579 instead of $579. Granted, the $100 for the P2P system isn't going directly to Adobe, and it's split amongst all the other programs that person downloads, so this is where download limiting comes in, so the more people on the system, the more you can download. Get it? This way, the companies will always turn a profit.

When companies come to the realization that there will always be cracks, serials, and piracy, and everytime they knock down one, a new form of trade comes, they may look into something like this... You know, in the year 2040.

Then you say, "Well why would anyone buy it in the store if they could get it for a fraction of the price online?" Well this wouldn't hurt the company because remember it's regulated, so there's always a profit margin. Hell, people would be more apt to getting upgrades if they came as cheap as that and were easily acquired... Only around 1/10th of Adobe customers buy updates in .5 version increments, and a lot of people are still using Photoshop 5.

I'm sure some economics wizard will bash this idea, but the truth is, it would make for better business, and everyone would love it.

A_old · Post by **A_old** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 12:31 am

good in theory...something is wrong.. don't know what as i'm tired. going to sleep. i like the idea.

fastspaz · Post by **fastspaz** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 12:43 am

well, we know warez is lillegal an i don't even like to use the word in my vocabulary, but it is true p2p networks make it so easy to gewt these programs. i use p2p but i never download or share software, just songs, but in reality, the riaa have an impossible task on their hands. so yes you are right. it will never be st\opped, they need to just give in to this form of trading. they
will spend too much money on legal battles, when they can make money with the idea you thought of.

Post by **Philip** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 1:05 am

It all depends on the viewpoint... Consider this:

I don't think the software giants are very sincere in pursuing the kids distributing their products over the Internet... That is about the only way those kids would touch, learn and use their products, and when those kids in turn join the work force companies are forced into using/purchasing those same products that people are used to... So in a way software piracy in a limited sense might even be helping the software industry

Just some food for thought

Jim · Post by **Jim** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 1:24 am

The $.02 that I'd like to add is that people don't "need" Photoshop or "insert application here." There are plenty of freeware and other programs you can buy (for far less money) that'll do the job just as well. For some reason, every little kid wants to own the leetest piece of software, so even if they only use it to resize pictures or something, they'll still try and get a warez version of Photoshop instead of another equally capable program. Another program will probably do what they need, and cost a lot less, or will even be just as free as that hacked up copy (of course, without breaking the law).

Piracy is a bit of a double-edged sword, as it both helps and hurts the industry. But as far as this topic goes, I highly doubt you'll see any alternative distrubtion methods until:
A) Everyone farking stops pirating everything they can get their hands on.
B) They (being the BSA/**AA/IDSA) learn that Nazi tactics of bullying/suing/cheating their customers and member companies won't make the situation any better. The RIAA and BSA have already dug their own graves, and the MPAA isn't too far behind. Unfortunately, the IDSA isn't too far behind them as well, but I'm hoping common sense will eventually win them over.

EDIT (and completely off-topic): ...how big does a gash need to be to require stitches? I think I should probably take a trip to the hospital...so....sorry for the rambling (including this).

zooner · Post by **zooner** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 2:05 am

Originally posted by Philip
It all depends on the viewpoint... Consider this:

I don't think the software giants are very sincere in pursuing the kids distributing their products over the Internet... That is about the only way those kids would touch, learn and use their products, and when those kids in turn join the work force companies are forced into using/purchasing those same products that people are used to... So in a way software piracy in a limited sense might even be helping the software industry

Just some food for thought

I agree 100%.

Of course, since microsoft has the market cornered, they dont need exposure it provides.

I believe that's why most of who you see fighting the p2p problem are movies and music. I also believe something big will happen within the next decade or two, where all of this will merely be a memory.

Randy · Post by **Randy** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 2:33 am

but couldn't i just get it for free?< thats what needs to be cracked... (the mentality) .

Faust · Post by **Faust** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 3:54 am

Originally posted by Philip
It all depends on the viewpoint... Consider this:

I don't think the software giants are very sincere in pursuing the kids distributing their products over the Internet... That is about the only way those kids would touch, learn and use their products, and when those kids in turn join the work force companies are forced into using/purchasing those same products that people are used to... So in a way software piracy in a limited sense might even be helping the software industry

Just some food for thought

i also agree. OK, here's a scenario that pretty much lays out my philosophy on this kind of thing......

i have a friend who owns his own small outsourced IT business. he does/has done IT and webpage work for medium-sized engineering companies, internet-based restaurant delivery services, and the like.

anyways, he is the most conciencious person i have ever met when it comes to purchasing the software he uses. the only time since i have known him (about 12 years) that he has ever dabbled in warez was when he was first starting up his business like 4 or 5 years ago. he needed Dreamweaver to finish a project for his first sizable client. he came to me (i was into newsgroups at the time) and asked if i could get it for him...... i said "sure, gimme like 4 or 5 days", and wound up getting it for him.

when he sold the project to the client, he went out and bought a legitimate copy of Dreamweaver. why? because since it was a tool he had used to generate monies, he felt morally obligated to because it had been used in a profitable way.

i agree with this philosophy 100%.

now, when it comes to games, it;s not about it being a tool used for generating money, but a tool strictly for entertainment. i believe if a person is entertained with a game, they should buy it if they haven't already. the last game i downloaded warez-style was Half-Life.... and since then i have purchased 3 licences. or maybe it was RUNE. either way, me liking the game resulted in at least one purchase of the game. nowadays, i just buy them first. very selectively.

oh, and as far as the thread topic/idea...... as ideal as it sounds, i don't think the large software companies would give the idea any credit.

businesses (especially large corporations) exist for only one goal..... revenue. the business mentality/ethic is like the epitome of the macho philosphy...... driven towards a single goal by whatever means necessary.

Night Runner · Post by **Night Runner** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 4:15 am

Originally posted by Faust
when he sold the project to the client, he went out and bought a legitimate copy of Dreamweaver. why? because since it was a tool he had used to generate monies, he felt morally obligated to because it had been used in a profitable way.

i agree with this philosophy 100%.

Sorry man, but I'm about to own you...

"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

Warez is wrong, and paying for a product after you use it is wrong as well. The system I suggest will not destroy warez, but it will bring those people who just don't have $3000 for software from the warez crowd to the pay-$100-for-legal-p2p crowd.

Faust · Post by **Faust** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 4:29 am

Originally posted by Night Runner
Sorry man, but I'm about to own you...

"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

Warez is wrong, and paying for a product after you use it is wrong as well. The system I suggest will not destroy warez, but it will bring those people who just don't have $3000 for software from the warez crowd to the pay-$100-for-legal-p2p crowd.

owned me?

nah. you'd have to find a bigger lapse of logic to do that.

sort of like "I'll gladly pay you 1/10th of the price of your hamburger today just because i got it in a way that doesn't include your standard marketing scheme".

zooner · Post by **zooner** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:30 am

I have to agree with Faust here, 100%.

The idea would seem good to a simpleton, but even on the accounting side it could never work.

If you were willing to do that, you'd pay for the software in the first place. The people who dont pay, still wouldnt.

Night Runner · Post by **Night Runner** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:53 am

"Steal, then pay later." Why doesn't anyone equate his example to someone stealing a car, and then paying later for it?

Faust · Post by **Faust** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:23 am

it's about realism.

i am not saying that my philosophy is withour error, it's just that the companies are eventually being directly compensated for the asking price of their software. not in the way they would like, but they are within the premise of their software being a money generating tool. titles like Paintshop and Visual Studio are meant to make money for people/businesses. if i download Paintshop Pro and use it to make a pretty desktop wallpaper, chances are they would never have seen my money anyways... so in an indirect way, they haven't lost any revenue. if i download PSP and use it for graphics design for my advertizing firm, then obviously there would be a moral problem if i didn;t pay for it, according to my basic philosophy. bottom line?... if a program is performing the task it was designed to perform for the user, they should be obligated to pay for it.

so, as to your own scenario......... OK, i pay the monthly fee for the P2P sharing subscription (looks like it would have to be a sizable sum to be workable in the least. starting at let;s say..... a monthly car payment?). so, i go and download SAP, SolidWorks and AutoCAD, Solutionware's Geopath as well as RhinoCAM and MasterCAM.... all of which i could easily download within the one month. what you are looking at is, depending on the licencing scheme, no less than $25,000 worth of licences.... and i got that for what? $100 or maybe $200? there is no way on God's green earth any software development company would gamble against those kinds of odds when it comes to profit/loss. absolutely none.

what i am saying is that if there was a choice between my scenario and yours, mine would be chosen. i never said warez was moral or legal. but if the developers still get paid, it would be a much more attractive option than getting $0.0005 per title on average.

zooner · Post by **zooner** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:32 am

exactly how I feel.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 8:24 am

Originally posted by Faust
it's about realism.

i am not saying that my philosophy is withour error, it's just that the companies are eventually being directly compensated for the asking price of their software. not in the way they would like, but they are within the premise of their software being a money generating tool. titles like Paintshop and Visual Studio are meant to make money for people/businesses. if i download Paintshop Pro and use it to make a pretty desktop wallpaper, chances are they would never have seen my money anyways... so in an indirect way, they haven't lost any revenue. if i download PSP and use it for graphics design for my advertizing firm, then obviously there would be a moral problem if i didn;t pay for it, according to my basic philosophy. bottom line?... if a program is performing the task it was designed to perform for the user, they should be obligated to pay for it.

so, as to your own scenario......... OK, i pay the monthly fee for the P2P sharing subscription (looks like it would have to be a sizable sum to be workable in the least. starting at let;s say..... a monthly car payment?). so, i go and download SAP, SolidWorks and AutoCAD, Solutionware's Geopath as well as RhinoCAM and MasterCAM.... all of which i could easily download within the one month. what you are looking at is, depending on the licencing scheme, no less than $25,000 worth of licences.... and i got that for what? $100 or maybe $200? there is no way on God's green earth any software development company would gamble against those kinds of odds when it comes to profit/loss. absolutely none.

what i am saying is that if there was a choice between my scenario and yours, mine would be chosen. i never said warez was moral or legal. but if the developers still get paid, it would be a much more attractive option than getting $0.0005 per title on average.

I definitely agree with you Faust.

mountainman · Post by **mountainman** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 8:32 am

That was a good one. Well put, Faust.

The ownER is now the ownEE.

Interesting.

Night Runner · Post by **Night Runner** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 12:09 pm

Nah, I don't think so. He's suggesting 100% warez, where I'm suggesting something that will turn a profit. I don't lose when I argue economics.

Zilog B · Post by **Zilog B** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 12:11 pm

Originally posted by Night Runner
I don't lose when I argue economics.

Uh oh

mountainman · Post by **mountainman** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 2:07 pm

Originally posted by Night Runner
I don't lose when I argue economics.

You sound like the LEFT saying that Al Gore didn't lose the election. LOL

The only way your idea would have a chance in hell is if the software companies limited which software titles were available. Because if those very high priced titles were there, they would lose so much money.

Oh well... you're mind is made up. Have fun debating this one.

I'm gonna go pop some corn.

porkchop · Post by **porkchop** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 2:07 pm

If it's legal, it's not technically warez anymore...

TonyT · Post by **TonyT** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 2:12 pm

I don't think the software giants are very sincere in pursuing the kids distributing their products over the Internet... That is about the only way those kids would touch, learn and use their products, and when those kids in turn join the work force companies are forced into using/purchasing those same products that people are used to... So in a way software piracy in a limited sense might even be helping the software industry

Not really. Remember, the major vendors make MORE money traing people to use their products than they do by selling their products. That's where the real money is. Plus they make money getting their products implementd to begin with.

For instance, the Veterans Administration buys a package from Micron or GTSI. (auth govt resellers) The package may cost 30 mil and include 400 pcs, 400 monitors, keyboards, mice and software. The software bundle may include McAffee AntiVirus Corp Edition. The cost includes the network installation, config & training of govt employees. The actual hardware may cost 10 mil, and 20 mil is actua;lly for software implementation & training. The price will not change because 15% of the workers are familiar with the software already.

All major software companies realize the number of warex copies that are being downloaded. Most ignore it completely, except where large quantities are being distributed in business environments. The KEY is that those people that download warex versions of a product will never buy the product anyway! They are not the vendors' target market audience.

More food for thought:

Most computer users have no real clue what it costs to produce a good software product. An app like NAV may have 30,000 man hours in coding alone to date, yet alone promo & marketing costs, distribution costs of approx 5-30%, support costs, etc etc etc. Then there's the cost of a web site, database, updates, definitions, and all the management functions of a business, plus taxes. That $39.00 av app holds about 4-5 bucks profit for Symantec when all is added up., and ONLY after x number of licenses are sold.