[KLUG Members] Why does "Software Morality" differ from the rest?

[Bryan J. Smith]

If you read /., you've probably seen the topic:
"Do You Pay for Your Shareware?"
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/02/02/1347247

- THE NEW "SOFTWARE MORALITY" STANDARD?

Sure enough, most of the posts moderated upto 5 have titles like:
"the problem is the cost" and
"Shareware, Prices of Commercial Software"

In fact, when someone finally posted this one ...
"I'm honest, but am I in the minority here?"

Someone shot back:
"I'm not trying to justify it in any way, but it's not the same
 as shoplifting, or driving off withoug paying."

All those arguments are trying to change a "choice" that _you_ make into
one the commercial software vendor must make.  LUDICROUS!!!

- STEALING IS STEALING!

I'm sorry people, stealing is stealing.  You may think that commercial
software is overpriced, or that the commercial software world has
"different rules" because reproduction costs are less than $0.50/unit.

RULE:  *NOTHING* EXCUSE IT PEOPLE!

If the software works for you, you must "pay the piper."  This means
either:

  A)  Pay the price
  B)  Use an alternative (possibly free software).

I'm sorry, you've got *NO*EXCUSE*.  You either pay for the product, or
you take your business elsewhere.

Worse yet, some of you say, "well, I don't like how the free version
works, but I don't want to pay for the commercial version" as an excuse
for pirating.  Sorry, no dice!  It doesn't change _your_ two choices.

Even worse than that is the mentality, "oh, it's just a little stupid
app that this free software does anyway."  Well then, you have now
chosen the "free alternative" so _why_ are you still pirating the
commercial version???

- THE "NO ALTERNATIVE" NON-SENSE

If there is 'no alternative," you _still_ have either 2 choices:

  A)  Pay the price, or
  B)  Write one!

In the case of B, I seriously hope you understand why Open Source
exists!

Now weight the costs of B versus A, in the case that there is "no
alternative."  Yeah, commercial software makes more sense now, eh?

Why oh why is it that there is always one guy at every LEAP Meeting and
InstallFest stating either (or usually both!):

  A)  "I don't pay for my Microsoft software"

Or asking:

  B)  "Are you letting people copy this?" in regards to my
       Loki game CD(s).

I know LEAP doesn't condone such statements/questions, but there seems
to be a lot of apathy regarding piracy.  I know /. is not a "prime
example" of today's "technology affluent" (which is why I read
NewsForge.NET much more ;-), but it seems they *DO* exist in the

- THE "SITUATION" IT CREATES

Just gives Microsoft more credibility in its arguments and/or makes the
job of "legitimate" users like myself, who work day in an day out
MS-free, more difficult.  _Especially_ in regards to the whole DOJ-MS
trial where Microsoft has many people believe it's just an "anti-#1"
ordeal.

And you start to wonder why things like the DMCA and UCITA exist.  Are
the arguments behind them really any worse than the "software morality"
arguments?  Think about it!

-- Bryan

-- 
Bryan J. Smith, Engineer        mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org
AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc.     http://www.linux-wlan.org
SmithConcepts, Inc.          http://www.SmithConcepts.com
---------------------------------------------------------
1999 IRS Data:  The top 1% of income earners pay over 36%
of the taxes, but have less than 20% of the total income.