>I think you are assuming that they have been completely paid for
>the effort put into the application.

They have been. As I say, the people involved in getting the product to the point now where it is truly completed, documented, debugged, ready for shipment, they have either 1) donated their time, or 2) been paid. There is no other choice. And because the product is now complete, the product is done. All someone else is wanting is more money than what they originally were paid (or donated) for the labor.

>More likely, they are spreading the cost over several sales that they
>hope won't be jeopardized by piracy.

Piracy doesn't exist in the digital world. The only way true piracy could exist in the digital world was if there was only one copy of something, and somebody broke in to steal that one copy -- because at that point something real was lost -- the ONLY copy. But if someone makes a copy and you still have yours ... what was really lost? Nothing except POSSIBLE future encumbrances against your invisible monopolistic fortress money making machine.

What people call "piracy" today is just a rough sounding term used to describe when other people derive use from something that another person who had previously built an invisible monopolistic fortress around their wares sees as a violation of that invisible monopolistic fortress. It's a created construct around their wares for the purposes of bilking out as much money as possible from a one-time effort.

There are only two things violated there, 1) the invisible monopolistic fortress the person created (to make sure they get paid for every copy of the work that's released), and 2) the rights of people (through base abilities) to receive a copy of that product for free.

It is only the invisible monopolistic fortress construct, which can be "boiled down" to a person's desire for empire building (to amass as much money as possible from a one-time effort), that makes the giving away illegal. There is nothing mechanically involved in the process which would otherwise prevent it.

And as I've said before, if I could push a button and make an edible digital copy of a sandwich or a clean glass of water, it would be wholly criminal for any human being to ever go to bed hungry again (outside of personal choice -- fasting). Why is it any different with software and use items? It's not ... we just make it that way because people want lots of money, they want an invisible monopolistic fortress around all of their creations, to be paid, in cash, now, today, for everybody who ever uses the thing they've done.

It's a self-defeating system. The more it's described, the more ridiculous it reveals itself to be.

>I don't think they should be lumped in with the software giants who
>put out bug... ahem... new versions annually.

It's the same thing ... just personally, rather than through a large, combined effort.

People should come together because they want to and work on large projects. They should choose to help others, which is also choosing to help themselves.