Why Do Pirates Pirate Stuff?

Your link there appears to be broken (404).

The lesson appears to be that software developers, games sellers and, indeed, distributors of all consumed media, should switch focus from preventing people from stealing their content and focus much more on increasing sales.

There is always going to be a (unfortunately, fairly significant) number of people who just won't pay for stuff. And, whilst it may annoy the living crap out of those of us who work hard for a living and DO pay our way, we shouldn't let the task of trying to stop such low-grade scum prevent us focusing on making the best product we can and putting it out there in a way that generates the highest number of sales/greatest income.

We need to stop looking at each pirated copy as a lost sale - there's a good chance that person is just a theif and would not have bought it under any circumstances.

I'm a commercial software developer. I fully support piracy and ThePirateBay etc. The software and media industries need to start realising that maybe, just maybe (i.e. definitely) they are wrong in their attitudes and outlook, and need to get a clue and have the intelligence to realise that this behaviour en masse, with tens of millions of people (possibly hundreds of millions) copying things, is telling them something.

Telling them that they are greedy. Telling them they need to stop putting rubbish onto the market. Telling them their business models are wrong - fundamentally wrong. Telling them people want a pay-as-you-go method for software and media use - why SHOULD I pay full price up front if I only use/watch/listen to something once or twice? Telling them that often people just want to try something out. Telling them they need to charge less, and give producers and artists a larger share of profits and stop lying about costs. Telling them to stop spending so much on stupid old-school marketing techniques and instead take advantage of the beautifully effective distribution and marketing method that file sharing offers.

Of course, it's easier for the industry to threaten, to shout, to scream, to sue the weak and the poor, to label everyone as pirates and criminals, than it is to face facts that they are wrong, and to change for the better.

Still, if industries need to die to realise a new and brighter future where artists and consumers are directly connected, then so be it. They shall die. For "piracy" and file sharing is unstoppable, and growing. It will be interesting to see how much pain the industry decides to put itself through before it grows up and changes.

I'm a commercial software developer. I fully support piracy and ThePirateBay etc.

If you really are a commercial developer, how do you make money if people can easily get your software for free?

I said it before but it's worth repeating, as it stands your argument is the "underpant gnomes" argument:

Stage 1: Encourage people to pirate your software, make piracy as easy as possible, let people download your software for nothing and distribute it to everyone they want to

Stage 2: (blank)

Stage 3: Profit

What's stage 2? Selling T-shirts? Begging for donations?

To be fair, selling official support may be a viable business model for some kinds of free software, especially for business applications.

But for most kinds of software (such as games) there is no way to build a viable business on selling support alone.

Of course not all software has to be commercial, but you were talking specifically about commercial software companies.

Of course, it's easier for the industry to threaten, to shout, to scream, to sue the weak and the poor, to label everyone as pirates and criminals, than it is to face facts that they are wrong, and to change for the better.

It's even easier to complain about a problem and blame other people without suggesting a practical solution yourself.

You keep ranting about change but won't say what that change should be.

What SHOULD they be doing?

If you don't know what they should be doing, how do you even know there is a better alternative?

There may be some kind of exotic new business model out there which no one has tried, but unless someone actually says what it is we have no way of evaluating its merits.

Telling them to stop spending so much on stupid old-school marketing techniques and instead take advantage of the beautifully effective distribution and marketing method that file sharing offers.

Distribution involves getting things into people's hands, and file sharing sites are extremely effective at that.

Marketing involves making money somehow from something at some stage, and file sharing sites are extremeny INEFFECTIVE at that.

Commerce is all about money. If you can't say where the money comes from then commerce can't exist.

For many hacking is a hobby, a challenge, a puzzle. Some publicize the security bugs to improve the product, notify the public of the dangers. Some do it for admiration from or competition with their peers or to do kick back at the world. Only few have financial or more evil interests.

Pirates are nothing without the people who copy and use their cracked software.
Amazingly many people talk about about cracked games as if they are full demos. They go out and buy the ones they played and liked/finished (cash permitted). When I ask them why? They say: "Because they want to see a sequel". Or simply, they want it for their 'collection'. An interesting philosophy, so yes, demo's should be longer. I loved the Battlefield: Bad company demo each time a little more each time I played it. It made buy the full game in the end. That's a proper sales technique. To sell the game to the doubters, the other buyers buy a game even despite its 10-second crappy demo.

I think DRM is the biggest enemy of software developers in general, who think it's their best friend.
See the case of Gameloft and Epocware. Gameloft games (not only the Java ones, but the Symbian versions too) have no DRM at all, and Epocware's DRM is slightly better than being non-existent, but man, their software copies do sell a lot.
DRM only gives a fake feeling to a publisher that his software will sell well, as cracking won't be easy. In the long run, software get cracked though. On the other hand, due to the implementation of DRM, the cost of the software increases, and many potential customers too run away from the product, or use the pirated version. It's time these companies think about saying 'NO' to DRM.

I agree with Cliff Harris's conclusion - as opposed to what most major right holders think DRM is a major piracy incentive. Using DRM basically means that the product you sell your paying customers is inferior to the product the pirates gets for free.

If you really are a commercial developer, how do you make money if people can easily get your software for free?

I strongly believe that there are many people - myself included - that will happily pay for applications to increase the functionality or entertainment value of their smart phones for no other reason than it being fair. Not "everybody", but many will.

I use pirated sortware on a daily basis and the main reason is drm. I have 3 phones and always carry two of them, the other is a backup. I'm not going to purchase 3 copies for each phone, then go to the trouble of contacting the developer 6 months later when I want to transfer a licence to the new one. Software that uses a simple regcode that isnt tied to a particular imei I will purchase, so epocware, dataviz and a few others, because on the whole the apps are worth the asking price and i know once ive purchased it then thats it I can install it on any device I like. Where as the likes of Psiloc...... I'm not even going to go there.

So how does Apple sell applications worth $1 million per day from the App Store? They are DRMed but seemingly nobody cares.

DRM is as bad as the implementation. DRM becomes a pain only when it gets in the way. That will be at different points for different people of course.

Yes have no DRM means it can't get in the way, but clearly there are arguments (whether you agree with them or not) in favour of DRM...

So assuming it does exist then it's not fair to throw a blanket cry of horror over all implementations. That said most ones I've seen are horrible!

Rafe

I strongly believe that there are many people - myself included - that will happily pay for applications to increase the functionality or entertainment value of their smart phones for no other reason than it being fair. Not "everybody", but many will.

I do agree that SOME people genuinely will pay for software even when they know how to pirate it. There are honest people who realise the need to pay the people who write the software, and to encourage the production of more software by the same people.

In fact if you'll forgive a bit of nostalgia:

Back in the glory days of shareware I used to send a fiver now and then to authors of my favourite games, even when the official free version of a game was also the full one (that system was called "donationware" I think, and it relied entirely on good will as the purchaser got absolutely nothing in return except perhaps a thank you letter).

The software authors were often touchingly honest: one shareware author in America (I think he did "Shooting Gallery" and "EGATrek"? Nils something) said he received lots of donations in foreign currency which he could not cash, but he still sent out the registered versions of the games in return, purely because he could see these people had given up some money for his sake. It didn't make business sense, but it showed what a nice guy he was.

However, this was all in the days before the internet and mass storage, before people could download a stupidly huge amount of free pirated content onto their computers unbelievably easily and at no significant cost. Good will is (I'm afraid) likely to diminish as the culture of filling your PC with torrented goodies spreads. Good apps and games are no longer seen as individual gems but just tiny fish in a huge trawler net of tens of thousands.

I know some people who regard paying for content as stupid if they can get it pirated, and don't even consider sending any authors any kind of support, no matter how small the company or how low the price. If games cost 1 euro each and had no DRM, these particular people would carry on pirating them simply because that's somehow the "cooler" thing to do. A few go beyond that and actively spread the pirated content because that's cool too.

Some people are making out piracy to be some kind of romantic stand against the system, but that's not why most people do it. Most people do it because it costs nothing.

So how does Apple sell applications worth $1 million per day from the App Store? They are DRMed but seemingly nobody cares.

...and the Wii Virtual Console, and the Xbox Live Arcade, and the PS3 Store etc. And indeed almost all console games, PC games and DVDs too. DRM is not really the issue here, people are okay with DRM if it's implemented with the average consumer's needs in mind (which it generally is on the above systems).

As Rafe says, if DRM doesn't get in the way then people won't care about it one way or the other. For example, DRM on a DVD generally doesn't get in the way because most people only play films on their television sets, and a DVD is equally suited to that task whether it has DRM or not.

If you can make commercial content much easier to obtain than pirated content, that's probably the most effective way to fight piracy.

However, piracy is becoming increasingly easy (imagine if YouTube did games and audio too), so that approach to tackling piracy is going to get more and more difficult.

I agree with the evil genius: the problem is that there is a high cost up front, which is uncomfortable to pay. If a game was 1p per play, and payment was easy (through the network operator for phone games), I would download and play masses of games. If they were good games, I would play them 10 or 20 times a week, for months! This would net the author the revenue he wants, probably a lot more. It would also be fairer, as the revenue would be linked to the usage. Piracy would not be worthwhile, as the payment is comfortably small and painless. Hey, most people enjoy spending money when they think they are getting good value!

This approach requires the cooperation of the networks and the OS/phone manufacturers, but since they are already cooperating for subsidies and branding/crippling of the OS I don't see why they can't do it.

I'll second (third?) about DRM only being a problem when it gets in the way.

Satnav software, one of the most pirated because of the high cost (generally �50+ ), I bet if that was unprotected then there would be far more lost sales than gains.

However, a good example of it getting in the way is having it locked to memory card. This is liked by no-one, because it means you have to cart another microsd card about which is very easy to lose, or stick with a few MB left on a 2GB card filled with maps.

And N95 8GB users cannot even use it at all due to no card slot.

So, they pirate it. And are they going to buy a copy just to remain legal and/or be moral? Not likely.

bartmanekul wrote:I'll second (third?) about DRM only being a problem when it gets in the way.

I third/fourth that. DRM is a mayor pain in my mobile devices. In fact I don't buy any IMEI locked software unless absolutely required (which is never, heh heh). It is economical uninteresting to buy a new license for each time I switch to a new mobile device. I use as much as possible GPL, freeware as possible and regret Nokia not having platform independent software for syncing my phone (yet?). It is currently the only reason I own and run a (legal) copy of Windows. Though I'd rather sponsor a different company.

bartmanekul wrote: Satnav software, one of the most pirated because of the high cost (generally �50+ ), I bet if that was unprotected then there would be far more lost sales than gains.

I really like Nokia Maps approach on this, though I'd like to see the licenses periods changed. one, two, 5 and 10 weeks, 1 year and 3 years. I really liked the 3 years prices ;^)

bartmanekul wrote: So, they pirate it. And are they going to buy a copy just to remain legal and/or be moral? Not likely.

Nothing better and satisfactory to buy a license and then hack it to make it work on your designated device ;^)

There's one option left out, that is - sometimes the legal version isn't available. It could be because the s/w is only meant for certain territories, or has been discontinued and has vanished from legal vendors websites.

pintofale wrote:If a game was 1p per play, and payment was easy (through the network operator for phone games)