galanter wrote:If you don't understand why what you've said reveals a poor understanding of ethics ask just about anyone nearby. Someone in third grade for example.

You fail to make a distinction between idealism and pragmatism. You're hilariously glib/condescending response shows you are very focused on your idealism (want a crown?). Meanwhile you have completely failed to recognize the comic absurdity of some conspiracy theorist slapping wrists for stealing intellectual property from a massive (fucking massive) mega corp.

Even if you want to break it down to Platonic concepts of justice you're still squealing at someone for clipping a hair off a giants toe. Kind of a waste of time eh?

If you think that individual acts of piracy cannot aggregate and significantly impact a company or market sector, you haven't been paying attention.

Look at it this way. A single vote in an election may not seem to matter. But I don't think it's a waste of time to advocate that voting is important, or better yet, to actively protect that right.

Software is real property because it requires real people to expend real labor to create it. And it's real theft to use it without paying.

Again, I'd suggest you consult a third-grader about the following proposition. "It's OK for me to steal a candy bar from the store because they are sooo big and rich."

(And by the way, if people would stop stealing software, it would cost less for everyone. So this isn't purely "idealism" on my part. Among other things, I want you to stop picking my pocket.)

Third graders like Disney movies.

Zing!

galanter wrote:Software is real property because it requires real people to expend real labor to create it. And it's real theft to use it without paying.

(And by the way, if people would stop stealing software, it would cost less for everyone. So this isn't purely "idealism" on my part. Among other things, I want you to stop picking my pocket.)

But the software has been paid for - it is just being used in a manner against the terms of the license. Your pocket has not been picked, you're just chosing to see a problem where there is none in order to boost your ego.

This thread is not about software piracy or theft - at least not under any reasonable definitions of those words. To reductio ad absurdism for a second, according to your logic, if the EULA were to ban using the software disk as coffee coaster then breaking that condition would also be piracy.

To equate breaking the EULA of a *purchased* piece software to a kid stealing a candy bar is retarded. It's about as analogous as comparing a digital 1 to a 0.

Galanter, there's really no need to be so smug, you will get your chance to laugh when the rapture comes. Your impeccable moral standards truly place you above the rest of us.

Well, it's common knowledge that Mac-Quaeda members would prefer you took the license as the word of Mohammed (PBUH).

I don't think there's any ethical difference between using a paid-for copy of OSX on a hand-built "Hac" and using a paid-for copy on a used/older Mac.

In my opinion neither use is ethically problematic as long as the OS image has been paid for.

For one thing, I don't think Apple even sells OS discs alone at all, do they? Once upon a time anyway, they did not.

While looking at this question it's worth noticing that Windows has for years now basically prevented the transference of a pre-installed OS image onto another box by not allowing OEMs to ship install CDs with boxes. Users get bullshit "recovery disks" instead.

Surely brother Fareed al-Galanter is not arguing that Apple, the oh-so-forward-thinking computer-company-for-firebrands should have adopted the same stupid practices as Microsoft re: OS images. That would be...apostasy.

And also: if Apple's praiseworthy no-handcuffs-no-bullshit policy re: providing a full OS image with a new machine isn't part of the stiff premium paid to become an Apple user, what the hell is, then? iPhoto? Fancy styrofoam packing material? Safari?

On the other hand, he is right about piracy being lame. I'm saying that everybody should know the difference between violating the spirit and letter of a license to avoid paying money and violating a dumb term of a license to avoid having a non-booting computer. Act accordingly.

-r

warmowski wrote:For one thing, I don't think Apple even sells OS discs alone at all, do they? Once upon a time anyway, they did not.

On the other hand, he is right about piracy being lame. I'm saying that everybody should know the difference between violating the spirit and letter of a license to avoid paying money and violating a dumb term of a license to avoid having a non-booting computer. Act accordingly.

-r

OS X has always been available standalone, not sure about earlier versions.

Piracy is lame, but this thread is not about piracy... Except of course for Galanter, who has chosen to define piracy in such a way so as to show off his vastly superior morals.

A new Dell I purchased this summer came with an XP OEM install disk. It also came with all the drivers on a separate CD. My work just purchased 10 copies of Leopard. We got one copy of the media. Shit Best Buy machines will probably come with an emergency recovery CD installers.

Violating the EULA of software you purchased doesn't equate to piracy, at all. It's a violation of an end user agreement, not a crime. They could probably "take away" your license or something though.

I'm going to ignore all the name calling. As much as others would like it to be, this isn't about me. (Except, perhaps, to the extent that I'm tired of paying for other people's software use.)

Using OS X in ways not covered by the EULA is indeed theft. The fact that there is a EULA violation does not immunize pirates against charges of software theft. It just means there is an additional charge. The person in question is both in violation of the EULA *and* guilty of software theft.

Assuming it's a purchased copy, you are not buying out Apple's IP rights. You can't buy one copy and install it on 10,000 machines. And you can't buy one copy and install it on non-Apple hardware. That's not what Apple has agreed to, and they have the legal property right to sell their property under the terms they agree to, not those forced upon them.

So that's why it's theft in principle. It's theft as a practical matter because the pricing of the product is not based on a 3rd party software developer model. The price is based, in part, on the further support of their hardware products...and the income streams those imply.

Do you really think that if they sold an OS for other peoples hardware they would sell it for $129?

So there is a legal way of calling on apple an orange - it doesn't mean there is no longer a real-world difference between an apple and an orange, just that one particularly narrow-minded intepretation of the law is blind to it.

Once again, there is precisely zero financial loss incurred from a hobbyist installing a purchased version of OS X on a PC. Apple's intended business model is a moot point - if they start selling a PC version at an increased price in the future, then people will buy it. As it stands at the moment and probably forever, it doesn't exist, so in fact Apple have benefitted from sales that would otherwise not have existed if they had not made the move to Intel processors.

It really amazes me that you're so upset about what is in reality a tiny group of people doing this. Their actions are not affecting you or Apple. Their actions are not responsible for raising the price of your latest Mac a single cent. I don't get why you persist in being so unpleasant and condescending on this issue.

This thread is not about piracy or theft in any *reasonable* sense of those words. If you want to talk about software piracy (in real-world terms), it might make sense to start a software piracy thread and post there instead.

Here you go:

http://www.electrical.com/phpBB2/viewto ... 255#549255