Is "piracy" stealing?

[Dubslow]

Originally Posted by rogue

I hate to be cynical, but most pirates wouldn't donate, even if they use the software every day and love it. Those that would donate would be angry with those that don't donate, which is no different than today's situation.

Again, have you heard of the Humble Bundle?

[rogue]

Originally Posted by Dubslow

Again, have you heard of the Humble Bundle?

I had not heard of it (until now). I missed your reference to it earlier since your reply was to retina.

[Dubslow]

A similar example is http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...unding-success

Humble Bundle demonstrates that "Pay what you want (or nothing at all)" is still perfectly profitable, and this latter link demonstrates that "Most of it's free, but you can buy the rest" is also a very viable. Seeing the movie/TV industry move into this sort of paradigm would be great. (Even more important though, is speed of release.)

[rogue]

Originally Posted by Dubslow

A similar example is http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...unding-success

Humble Bundle demonstrates that "Pay what you want (or nothing at all)" is still perfectly profitable, and this latter link demonstrates that "Most of it's free, but you can buy the rest" is also a very viable. Seeing the movie/TV industry move into this sort of paradigm would be great. (Even more important though, is speed of release.)

I agree, but would it be profitable enough for Hollywood?

[Dubslow]

Why shouldn't it?

[retina]

Originally Posted by xilman

Why does company A need to make an OS anyway?

They don't need to (and I don't recall saying they did need to). But they saw an opportunity to make money and wanted to make it.

Originally Posted by xilman

If BSD, Linux, etc, is good enough (and present evidence strongly suggests that it is good enough for many things) then use it. If it is not good enough, is its deficiency sufficiently expensive that 10K man-years is a lower cost than working around the deficiency? If so, develop it. If not, choose the cheaper option.

These OSes do not do all that many people want. Blu-ray DVDs for one example, and this is because of DRM of course. And you wouldn't be able to "fix" that because Hollywood won't give you a key for an unprotected player. But mostly people buy OSes because of support by the vendor and availability of programs that it can run. Only tech geeks like ourselves here are prepared to support our own OS. For the more normal usage case things like Windows cannot be replaced by *nix. A paid OS like Windows is far more polished than the atrocity of Linux. Even though I hate Windows, I hate Linux more for being so disjoint and buggy.

So this leads back into the topic, if Hollywood moved to a donate button payment system (and thus presumably make less money) would we end up with worse quality movies? Less polish, more holes, more things to un-suspend your disbelief?

[xilman]

Originally Posted by retina

They don't need to (and I don't recall saying they did need to). But they saw an opportunity to make money and wanted to make it.

It was a rhetorical question.

However this brings me back to an original point: why should we subsidise outfits which want to make money from selling us stuff? Stuff which they wouldn't make without that subsidy.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by retina

They don't need to (and I don't recall saying they did need to). But they saw an opportunity to make money and wanted to make it.These OSes do not do all that many people want. Blu-ray DVDs for one example, and this is because of DRM of course. And you wouldn't be able to "fix" that because Hollywood won't give you a key for an unprotected player. But mostly people buy OSes because of support by the vendor and availability of programs that it can run. Only tech geeks like ourselves here are prepared to support our own OS. For the more normal usage case things like Windows cannot be replaced by *nix. A paid OS like Windows is far more polished than the atrocity of Linux. Even though I hate Windows, I hate Linux more for being so disjoint and buggy.

I have no problem at all with the selling of support services. You're in danger of dashing off a blind-alley because such services are not, AFAIK, restricted by copyright nor affected by piracy.

Ironically, any restraints on trade such as "you may only purchase support from production company authorized personel" are likely to be illegal in many jurisdictions --- the exact opposite of the situation under discussion.

[Christenson]

A little provocation...hopefully to laughter....
http://xkcd.com/546/

[xilman]

Originally Posted by xilman

If I ever produce a novel bamboo, I will quite happily let you clone it. Getting the plant(s) through your jurisdiction's import regulations will be your problem. Actually, it's possible that a novel bamboo might show up. One of my Pleioblastus species flowered last spring and I collected hundreds of seeds. It's now spring planting season and something interesting might arise. A different bamboo species, one belonging to in-laws, is in flower right now and I hope to receive some of that seed so there may be another chance for something novel to arise.

I received some seed at a family get-together this last weekend. I'll let you all know, probably in the hippy bimbo thread, whether anything comes of it.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by xilman

It is remarkably difficult to copy a live music performance. Some manage it very successfully nonetheless. I go to the Oz Pink Floyd concerts everytime they hit Cambridge though probably not this year because it's sold out

I'm very very tempted to go to one of these concerts. The helicopter quartet, which I have on a legally purchased CD, is superb in its own right but the opportunity to hear it in context is almost unmissable.

As SWMBO also expressed a wish to go (and drew my attention to it in the first place) it's rather likely that I'll roll up.

Paul