>Hi all,
>
>After some heavy discussion with Ed Rauh about piracy and illegal use of licensing I felt the need to discuss this on the whole UT.
>
>First of all, let me say that I really reject software piracy. But like all things not everything is black and white.
>

Walter, I've said my piece previously. Software piracy is nothing more or less than theft, at least from my POV. I make my living designing and writing software; if I've gone to the trouble of selling something, as opposed to releasing it to the public domain, it means that I feel that my work has significant value, and that I expect to be paid according to the sales and licensing terms I've establuished for the product. I've spent money on tools, distribution, establishing intellectual property rights, writing a legal and, at least in my opinion (at that of an attorney who I pay to write and review the agreement) a fair and enforcable licensing agreement, distribution media and packaging, before ever considering my time, which I feel is of fairly high value. I believe that if someone wants to use my software in these cases, i deserve to be compensated in accordance with the terms I establish.

If someone doesn't like the terms I establish, they're entitled to not purchase and use my software. What I can write, someone else could write, perhaps better than I could, and perhaps at a lower cost to the consumer than I establish for my software. If that's the case, then if they're smart, they'll sieze the opportunity to offer a better product at a lower cost to the consumer. That's part of the risk that i take in writing commercial software and setting an arbitrarily high price - people can show me how much better my competitor's product is by giving hoim the money he asks for rather than giving me the money I ask for.

A large software development firm is no less deserving of the compensation that they ask for their products than I would be if I'd written it.

The issue of demonstration or evaluation copies is a marketing decision - it's a measure of the confidence of the vendor in their product's quality to invest in releasing a demo, time-limited or feature-limited version of the product. it's a statement that I'm willing to bet that you'll pay for it if you're given enough of a taste of what it can do for you, just like the cocaine dealer who gives away a few free samples to attract new customers.

I don't have to advertise or offer offer demonstration copies of my product if I don't think that doing so will increase the number of copies I'll ultimately sell. That's my decision to make; as a consumer of software products, you've ursurped my right of ownership if you steal a copy to see if it's worth what I'm asking.

If I advertise a product as having some set of features and don't offer a demo copy, you have several options open to you - decide to believe me and shell out the cash, sight unseen, ask me to demonstrate the capabilities and only pay if I agree to show you the product in at least limited operation, or you can just say bullhockey and go to someone more willing to prove their product to you, or asking for less money for their product.

If I've claimed to have features and can't produce, that's called fraud, and you have some recourse. You improve your chances for recourse by purchasing on plastic, so that you can enlist the aid of the credit card company as well as the legal authorities in making me meet the obligations incurred through my advertising.

If you play poker, you've got to call my bet to see just what cards I'm holding; if you don't call my bet, you don't get to find out if I had a pat hand or if I just pulled off a bluff holding total trash. I'm not obliged to show you what I'm holding if you don't put up the cash to see my cards.

If you believe that my willingness to sell my product at some price gives you the right to free use of my product without compensation, even with the intent at the bottom of your heart to buy it if you like it, you're flat wrong. I own it, and I've established the rules under which you can make use of it. That's my right as the owner of the software product. You have no more right to take my software out for a test drive without my permission than you have to break into the local Lincoln dealership at night and take a Continental out for a spin without their permission. It's my software, just like it's their car.