Injury to Insult? SOS gaffs DP. New monthly REAPER column?

[Shooshie]

Oh... and I have some things to get done around the house tonight so I have to go away, but I'll be back. Seems that a lot of these debates can go on and on because it is impossible to produce hard facts/numbers, so they turn into marathons. Last debater standing…

Don't worry about a thing, James. I already won. (read previous post)

Yep. It's cut and dried. Stretched and tanned. The evidence points to Shooshie having won the entire debate, because he made a mistake in one little thing he said to me.



Shoosh

[FMiguelez]

FMiguelez,

It's too bad you think that language equals reality. "Stealing is stealing" (what a meaningless and useless statement)

I don't see why you think so.
It's true. Or can you think of a case where stealing is NOT stealing?

What I mean by that statement is that the reasons or causes someone has to steal are meaningless.
So are you saying that under certain circumstances stealing is all right or understandable, but not for others? If so, that's a double standard.

I see people trying to take advantage of any system all the time here. We may have different views on this because no matter what you've seen in your country regarding piracy... you haven't seen a nano-fraction of what I see here in Mexico every day. People trying to cheat you at any chance they get, abusing the system, trying to take advantage of you or your family, etc.

I wish I knew just the right thing to say to give you some sort of consciousness-raising experience, but I don't know what to say so I will have to settle for not being overly concerned that my words may sound aggressive or offensive to you. I sincerely wish they were not. I don't want to be antagonizing.

But I don't want any "consciousness-raising experiences"! I just want people to STOP STEALING, to respect others and observe laws. That's all I ask. The bare minimum to have a functional society.
I could have as many "consciousness-raising experiences" as you want, but that wouldn't change a darn thing... pirates would still be stealing, so why would I want to "understand" them? Understanding them makes no difference!

What you say about pirates and killers etc. you really should be saying "sociopaths" or "psychopaths". Those are the people who truly lack the capacity for a conscience and for empathy and justice. Sociopaths may act legally because they realize it is better, i.e. they respond to rewards/punishments. But the vast majority of people, including the majority of pirates and killers, are NOT psycho/sociopaths. They have capacity for conscience, have a sense of honor and may live up to it or fail to do so and to varying degrees.

Again. Who cares if they are sociopaths or psychopaths? Put pirates in any category you wish. That won't help solving the problem.

It's pretty simple: you proclaim broad generalizations about people based on one characteristic. I mention that you are factually wrong, because you are. People are varying from more or less honorable etc. and that's just reality. And you say I'm excusing dishonorable behavior. It's as though you think that it's impossible for a Nazi to have love for his family. Well, you know little about human nature then. My relatives died in Nazi death camps. I completely find Nazis abhorrent, hateful, atrocious, villainous, etc. and I condemn their actions to the highest degree... -etc, etc, etc.

I don't mean to sound disrespectful either, but I don't know what you are talking about anymore. I can't follow you...

What's your point exactly?
Do you have any constructive ideas to defeat piracy, other than researching and trying to understand it? I mean something that could make a difference.

[FMiguelez]

Seems that a lot of these debates can go on and on because it is impossible to produce hard facts/numbers, so they turn into marathons. Last debater standing…

Don't worry about a thing, James. I already won. (read previous post)

Yep. It's cut and dried. Stretched and tanned. The evidence points to Shooshie having won the entire debate, because he made a mistake in one little thing he said to me.

Ok, guys. Lock the topic and let me win

[stickwolf]

You almost discredited my entire argument, everything I said, by catching one tiny mistake about shoplifting science. Except that I didn't make the alleged mistake. You misread it. I guess that means I win and you lose your entire argument, right? Hey, just playin' by your rules, not mine.

Shooshie

Hmm... clever. I guess. I didn't totally follow your point, but ok. Anyway, my understanding from what I have studied in academia is that there are probably tons of studies of detailed behavior and cognitive insights into the psyche of shoplifters and 99.9% has never been published outside of esoteric academic journals. There's probably some weird expert on it somewhere who'd have all sorts of things to say but is boring and incomprehendable to most of us and has never bothered writing for the general public... And he's probably had debates with colleagues and insights probably did come from it, and you and I will just never hear of it. Anyway, that's how it seems in some fields that I actually have followed.

[stickwolf]

FMiguelez,

It's too bad you think that language equals reality. "Stealing is stealing" (what a meaningless and useless statement)

I don't see why you think so.
It's true. Or can you think of a case where stealing is NOT stealing?

No, but I also this: distortion is distortion. Cats are cats. I am me. Blue is blue. Love is love. Money is money. Emotions are emotions. Sailing is sailing. Wow, this is so insightful and clarifying!

What I mean by that statement is that the reasons or causes someone has to steal are meaningless.
So are you saying that under certain circumstances stealing is all right or understandable, but not for others? If so, that's a double standard.

I never, ever said anything even implying that "stealing is all right" but if by "understandable" you mean the behavior can be studied and understood, yes that is true, it can be. If by "understandable" you mean "excusable" I never said that.

I see people trying to take advantage of any system all the time here. We may have different views on this because no matter what you've seen in your country regarding piracy... you haven't seen a nano-fraction of what I see here in Mexico every day. People trying to cheat you at any chance they get, abusing the system, trying to take advantage of you or your family, etc.

Right, it's cultural! In other words, when people work to create a more ethical system, it can make a difference. Or maybe I should just say that when a society is more ethical (whether or not anyone can influence that), then people are more ethical generally. Unless you're going to say some bigoted thing like anyone with Mexican blood is more likely to be dishonest...

But I don't want any "consciousness-raising experiences"! I just want people to STOP STEALING, to respect others and observe laws. That's all I ask. The bare minimum to have a functional society.
I could have as many "consciousness-raising experiences" as you want, but that wouldn't change a darn thing... pirates would still be stealing, so why would I want to "understand" them? Understanding them makes no difference!

I honestly don't know. I really like learning and understanding and it helps me deal with frustration and sometimes feel a little empowered to deal with things. You're completely right that you having deeper understanding of them won't change them. Maybe it'd help you not feel as aggravated? Maybe you'd be more aggravated... I like understanding, that's about all I can say for sure here.

I don't mean to sound disrespectful either, but I don't know what you are talking about anymore. I can't follow you...

What's your point exactly?
Do you have any constructive ideas to defeat piracy, other than researching and trying to understand it? I mean something that could make a difference.

No, I don't have all the answers. But I do think the studies like the daycare one help point in the right direction. The implication is that a POSSIBLE solution MIGHT be to change the nature of fighting piracy from one in which we try to punish pirates into one where we focus more on developing honorable behavior among people who are not yet pirates, young people who are getting into things and just learning. If a young person is presented with REAPER's honor system choice as their first decision, it is up to them to be righteous and honorable, and if parents and teachers help teach them to do the right thing, they will learn an intrinsic value of being honest. Maybe the same kid being told "do this or we'll punish you" will not learn the right lesson and will be dishonorable in the future when he finds he can get away with it. Again, I'm NOT saying this excuses any piracy, I'm just talking about the long-term value of raising more honest people to start with. The implication of these studies is that the best way to teach honorable behavior is to use an honor system, not a punishment/reward system.

Oh, and my real initial point was that maybe this is reason to consider the possibility that REAPER users are ALREADY behaving more honorably, just because the actual GUILT-pressure of violating the open honor system may actually be MORE powerful than the copy-protection or legal ramifications. The point about psychopaths is that they are, by definition, people incapable of feeling such guilt. Some pirates are psychopaths and they only respond to punishment and reward. But the percentage of psychopaths in the world is small so we know that most pirates are not psychopathic. So I think there actually exists a decent portion of folks who have questionable (but again, it isn't black and white) ethics who will pirate copy-protected software, but will feel guilty about pirating REAPER with its honor system. I don't know what the proportion is, but I expect it is much more than negligible. And I brought up the studies as support for this speculation.

In other words, I think, contrary to James, that the proportion of piracy of REAPER is lower than he thinks and maybe even lower than for copy-protected software! That was the main point of my whole argument here. I acknowledge that it is speculative.

Finally, to clarify that last point: I don't consider as piracy someone downloading REAPER, having it more than 30 days, but not using it really at all (like some person who just didn't get around to deleting it or really trying it yet). In my view, pirating REAPER would mean having it more than 30 days and actually using it without paying the APPROPRIATE license. I'm sure there's tons of downloads of REAPER, way more than licenses. But I'm really skeptical about the claim that a large portion of real users are unlicensed, I actually doubt it. Call it wishful thinking, but none of us know for sure. The general studies that I mentioned are some evidence for my view...

[FMiguelez]

.

[FMiguelez]

No, but I also this: distortion is distortion. Cats are cats. I am me. Blue is blue. Love is love. Money is money. Emotions are emotions. Sailing is sailing. Wow, this is so insightful and clarifying!

I guess what I meant didn't come out right. I meant it in the context of NOT finding justifications for stealing. But it was bad phrasing on my part.

Right, it's cultural! In other words, when people work to create a more ethical system, it can make a difference. Or maybe I should just say that when a society is more ethical (whether or not anyone can influence that), then people are more ethical generally. Unless you're going to say some bigoted thing like anyone with Mexican blood is more likely to be dishonest...

I could tell you with CONFIDENCE that most Norwegians are more honest and much less likely to steal than most Mexicans (per capita), for instance. That is not bigotry. It's called reality. For a variety of reasons, but still reality.
Of course there would be some exceptions, but broadly speaking, this is really so.

I really like learning and understanding and it helps me deal with frustration and sometimes feel a little empowered to deal with things. You're completely right that you having deeper understanding of them won't change them. Maybe it'd help you not feel as aggravated? Maybe you'd be more aggravated... I like understanding, that's about all I can say for sure here.

I totally respect and admire your willingness to understand and learn about things.
I also think "understanding" this would get me even more aggravated... Nicht gut

And I'm glad you agree that "studying and understanding" certain things, such as piracy, won't change things at all. Kind of like shoplifting. Even if someone came up with the ultimate psychological reasons people pirate, it does nothing to stop it.
PUNISHMENT, on the other hand, works. At least it gives us a sense of justice.

No, I don't have all the answers. But I do think the studies like the daycare one help point in the right direction. The implication is that a POSSIBLE solution MIGHT be to change the nature of fighting piracy from one in which we try to punish pirates into one where we focus more on developing honorable behavior ...

Maybe in a world called Utopia...

And by the time we do what I bolded from your text, it will be already too late. How long do you think that may take? Decades? Centuries?

We will all be out-of-business and broke by then. Music as we know it will have been long gone...

...The implication of these studies is that the best way to teach honorable behavior is to use an honor system, not a punishment/reward system.

I REALLY do NOT think so. Honorable behavior is learnt from your family and friends and environment. , by watching and following your family's conducts. Well, most of the time, at least.

That's why I think it's CRUCIAL to teach young children and teens about these things. But not by giving them the option to be honest or dishonest...

Punishment/Reward system is THE BEST. Why? Because the rules are clearly laid out (laws).
If you do not want to be punished, don't do what you are not supposed to do.
If you want to be rewarded, work hard, obey your local laws and conventions, and just do what you are expected to do.
There's no confusion. Nothing ambiguous.
....




....

[stickwolf]

I know that real-world experience has no place in this debate, so I won't say that everywhere I've seen an HONOR system employed without penalties it has been a money loser. As I've tried to draw comparisons and make analogies to the world of retail, etc. what becomes apparent is that intellectual property, like software, doesn't easily compare to other goods and services.

Well, my initial response to you, James, on this particular post of yours didn't go through for some reason. It's late and much as it's a stimulating debate, I won't go much further. But I'll try to clarify quickly.

First, glad you acknowledge that direct analogies between retail / intellectual property are problematic. That's a good starting place for honest discussion.

I see, so it's up to the pirate to decide if he "feels honor" towards one company and not another, based on shifting and arbitrary set of ethics of his own construction that can be molded to rationalize his theft of another person's hard work? Cockos is no more deserving of honorable treatment than MOTU. MOTU doesn't "deserve" to have its product stolen because the pirate is angry that he can't afford it. He has a two choices: buy it or not buy it. But the pirate creates a third choice for himself and that's to STEAL it.

Also if you can't say that's wrong, than there's something wrong with you. Nonetheless, you call this a "hypothesis." An established business obviously can't risk their business on this hypothesis. Otherwise, why not open a department store with no security cameras and allow people to take whatever they want, without giving their name or showing ID, and then promise to add up what they owe when they get home and pay for it online?

I apologize for any implication that MOTU is less honorable. I didn't mean that. And I agree with your sentiments on all of this. I'm not justifying pirates feeling more honorable to some companies than others, just as I agree it is wrong to shoplift from chain stores or mom/pop stores. I'm just acknowledging that it is the case sometimes.

And since when did we start calling this a "good will gesture?" Are you implying malevolent intent on the part of companies that can't/don't follow Cockos' liberal model? You're starting to use this thread to put out the Cockos company line that they're showing "good will" and "we trust you" and that it somehow follows that MOTU and other companies are "bad guys." They don't trust you! Are you saying MOTU is a bad guy.

You're right. That wording wasn't so good. It is more of an expectation of trust or extension of trust or something. Good will is too strong. I don't mean to bash MOTU at all.

As for the $60 for non-pros, that's on the honor system too. So, pay $225 or $60 to get rid of the nag screen (if you don't want to figure out how to reset the clock)... the choice is up to you and nobody will know.

Here's where I'm annoyed my post got lost somehow. I wrote before that I'm shocked at this assertion. The idea that a company would make over $20K a year doing studio recording and not pay the full $225 license is APPALLING. I seriously hope you are wrong that this would happen much. I can totally sympathize with the disgust you would feel about such behavior. Despite the nuance I emphasize in people, I really find the idea that people are truly profiting from using REAPER and not paying the right license... that's really bad. Do you actually know that this is happening?

I must ask you now just whose agenda you're here to push. I was perfectly clear on my statements. Reaper's honor system ABSOLUTELY allows for easy piracy and regardless of what you "expect," I absolutely expect that it results in more Reaper users than you would have if they utilized a key-disk system. So I don't agree that you're right. And they HAVE to pay for SOS. It's printed... which IS its copy-protection. Oh... and you have to pay for a subscription to access SOS's site.

Likewise, I'm appalled that anyone might be serious enough about REAPER to pay for SOS to read about it and not pay for REAPER. Some assholes might do what you're saying, but I'd like to believe that this is rare. I bet most people who pirate REAPER are people who are refusing to pay much money at all for this type of thing.

Bottom line here is I think you're absolutely wrong. You can wish certain things to be true or think them to be, but that won't make them so.

As we just don't know for sure, I still say I'm at least partly right. And I think evidence is available that indicates that people do feel guilty about violating honor systems, at least a good portion of people do, even among pirates.

There was definitely an insinuation that somehow this wasn't justified. That REAPER didn't deserve it... That the product you see as superior (DP) is losing out because of tactical tricks that don't relate to actual honest quality or fair marketing or something... I don't buy it.

I stand by that, and I don't care if YOU buy it or not. Who are YOU? Why should I care what YOU think on the subject?

But you didn't really try REAPER. I think it is good enough that it warrants attention in SOS and is a powerful and serious program, superior in SOME ways to DP. It's definitely unfortunate that the DP column is gone though.

I also have to ask you if you are in anyway associated with Cuckos or personally know any of the couple of people that comprise the company, since you really seem to have a dog in this fight and it's a personal thing for you.

Oh c'mon. That's so suspicious-minded. I have no connections to them whatsoever. I have had more interactions in my life with YOU on Unicornation than with anyone even loosely connected to Cockos.

[James Steele]

I don't think you can have any workable solution so long as there are no consequences for theft and with software piracy the chances of someone stealing software getting caught and having any sort of consequences are almost nil.

Also, I think it's pretty weak to try and play the race card and suggest that FMiguelez is racist, because he states a rather well-known fact that different parts of the world have more lax attitudes toward using software without paying for it. That's about "culture"-- not "race." And since he lives in Mexico and observes it first hand, I'm inclined to give his word some credence in that area.

What bothers me is allowing law breakers to drive the agenda. First, we have to accept the premise that enforcement will never work. My problem with that, is we haven't really TRIED enforcement. Pirates openly and notoriously steal software and go so far as to put ads on craigslist selling stolen software, giving their phone numbers and contact information publicly. Do any of these folks get arrested or prosecuted? Nope. Yet, if a few of these folks who advertise in craigslist had FBI agents on their doorstep and were cuffed and arrested and very publicly jailed, I imagine it would be much less brazen.

But if we allow pirates to drive the agenda and say that in the "new world" as created by the pirates' sense of what a just price for software is or isn't, developers must only be small entities with two or three employees that do all the coding, marketing, sales etc., I'm not sure that will bode well for the future of the industry. It's certainly a question mark. What sorts of products can be developed and brought to market solely by companies like this.

Then consider companies like Avid or UA. They have products that require hardware in order to run. Seems like UA and Avid have got the best copy protection in the business. How many people do you suppose are running bootleg Pro Tools HD systems, or bootleg UAD-1/UAD-2 plug-ins? From what I can tell those companies appear to be rather healthy financially. I have to wonder how much of it is due to the fact that you cannot pirate a PT HD system or a UAD-1/UAD-2 card.

Any way, I don't believe that market prices should be determined by figuring out at what price someone is less likely to steal-- especially when the reality is there are virtually no consequences to theft.

I just shrink from the concept that despite it being legally and morally wrong to steal, we are trying to figure out how to cajole and entice thieves who have already demonstrated a willingness to steal into not stealing, by trying to find a price agreeable to them, thus "bribing them into honesty."

[stickwolf]

I could tell you with CONFIDENCE that most Norwegians are more honest and much less likely to steal than most Mexicans (per capita), for instance. That is not bigotry. It's called reality. For a variety of reasons, but still reality.
Of course there would be some exceptions, but broadly speaking, this is really so.

I fully accept that! I just hope you acknowledge that this is a nurture issue. I.e. a Mexican baby raised by Norwegians in Norway will be as honest as other Norwegians.

...The implication of these studies is that the best way to teach honorable behavior is to use an honor system, not a punishment/reward system.

I REALLY do NOT think so. Honorable behavior is learnt from your family and friends and environment. By watching and following your families conducts. Well, most of the time, at least.

That's why I think it's CRUCIAL to teach young children and teens about these things. But not by giving them the option to be honest or dishonest...

Punishment/Reward system is THE BEST. Why? Because the rules are clearly laid out (laws).
If you do not want to be punished, don't do what you are not supposed to do.
If you want to be rewarded, work hard, obey your local laws and conventions, and just do what you are expected to do.
There's no confusion. Nothing ambiguous.

I understand you believe this. It was the overriding common sense of the 20th century. But it fails to explain honorable behavior in Wikipedia, for instance, where people work hard to do the right thing (while SOME people are vandals, granted) even with no reward, no punishment, no credit.
We are in the process of developing deeper understanding of human behavior and I'm optimistic that we will really learn some things. Initial studies are indicating that the old accepted punishment/reward model can be much less effective than guilt and intrinsic feelings of being just and honorable. More important, studies are showing that when punishment/reward is used it actually DAMAGES people's learning of intrinsic honor. If you do something for reward or to avoid punishment then you learn that THAT is the reason to act a certain way. There is OVERWHELMING and CONSISTENT evidence that rewarding people leads to a reduction in appreciation for intrinsic value. This is not even something vague and debated, it is about as certain as anything we know about human nature. You tell kids they get "extra credit" grade-wise for doing certain things and you'll almost never again get them to do it without giving them credit. You teach them to value hard work and learning for its own merit and they will work hard for its own value and/or to just seem like good honorable people. This is not wishful thinking, this is the reality. Of course, when you're dealing with people already spoiled by rewards... well, getting them to then learn to value intrinsic honesty is harder for anyone even in a new situation.

How it relates to software piracy... there I'm more speculative. Pirates who are already spoiled may continue to be assholes in the case of an honor system. But the honor system is an overall better approach to encouraging people to stay honest in the first place, despite the fact that this contradicts your common sense.

[stickwolf]

Any way, I don't believe that market prices should be determined by figuring out at what price someone is less likely to steal-- especially when the reality is there are virtually no consequences to theft.

I'm with you. Prices should be based on what is fair and what is workable. I like the $60/$225 thing partly because it is simply true that delivering the product to more people doesn't necessarily cost Cockos more, so it simply makes sense to give this discount. It's sorta like a student discount. I also think the honor system is good. I don't at all think that the goal is to bow to pirates and do whatever they ask, that would definitely not be just.

[James Steele]

As for the $60 for non-pros, that's on the honor system too. So, pay $225 or $60 to get rid of the nag screen (if you don't want to figure out how to reset the clock)... the choice is up to you and nobody will know.

Here's where I'm annoyed my post got lost somehow. I wrote before that I'm shocked at this assertion. The idea that a company would make over $20K a year doing studio recording and not pay the full $225 license is APPALLING. I seriously hope you are wrong that this would happen much. I can totally sympathize with the disgust you would feel about such behavior. Despite the nuance I emphasize in people, I really find the idea that people are truly profiting from using REAPER and not paying the right license... that's really bad. Do you actually know that this is happening?

It is statistically impossible for it NOT to be happening. The question is to what degree. But I can no more PROVE it true than you can PROVE it false. All I can base it on are the numerous accounts I've heard from others about going to pro studios and finding cracked software on their machines. I believe Waves actually sued one or two large studios for this. The "out" is to say that a client came in and installed it without the studio's knowledge.

I find ripping off a software developer is bad whether you're making a profit or not. I don't look at it as wrong in varying degrees.

I must ask you now just whose agenda you're here to push. I was perfectly clear on my statements. Reaper's honor system ABSOLUTELY allows for easy piracy and regardless of what you "expect," I absolutely expect that it results in more Reaper users than you would have if they utilized a key-disk system. So I don't agree that you're right. And they HAVE to pay for SOS. It's printed... which IS its copy-protection. Oh... and you have to pay for a subscription to access SOS's site.

Likewise, I'm appalled that anyone might be serious enough about REAPER to pay for SOS to read about it and not pay for REAPER. Some assholes might do what you're saying, but I'd like to believe that this is rare. I bet most people who pirate REAPER are people who are refusing to pay much money at all for this type of thing.

Then I think you're being naive about it. I've seen guys over the years running bootleg copies of [then] Cakewalk running on their computers, but still pay for magazine subscriptions. Piracy is a crime of opportunity. If they need something, they'll try to steal it. If they can't steal it, they'll grudgingly pay for it. I mean consider that although the DAW software may be stolen, mostly likely the computer running it HAD to be purchased.

Bottom line here is I think you're absolutely wrong. You can wish certain things to be true or think them to be, but that won't make them so.

As we just don't know for sure, I still say I'm at least partly right. And I think evidence is available that indicates that people do feel guilty about violating honor systems, at least a good portion of people do, even among pirates.

We have an disagreement here. I don't think a pirate feels bad about it. I think people start feeling guilty, or at least "sorry" for theft right about the same time as they get caught and realize they may face consequences for their actions.

I stand by that, and I don't care if YOU buy it or not. Who are YOU? Why should I care what YOU think on the subject?

But you didn't really try REAPER. I think it is good enough that it warrants attention in SOS and is a powerful and serious program, superior in SOME ways to DP. It's definitely unfortunate that the DP column is gone though.

I have tried Reaper. And for the record the DP column is not GONE. It was demoted to once every couple of months. And yes, Reaper is getting some attention. It's getting a monthly column now. I'm not sure of the ways in which it is SUPERIOR. I have tried Reaper but didn't really care for it. That's a matter of personal taste.

I'm waiting for SOS to run an article about all the major motion picture and television scores that are created on Reaper. I'll be waiting for some time I imagine. But then again, that's probably not Reaper's focus.

I also have to ask you if you are in anyway associated with Cuckos or personally know any of the couple of people that comprise the company, since you really seem to have a dog in this fight and it's a personal thing for you.

Oh c'mon. That's so suspicious-minded. I have no connections to them whatsoever. I have had more interactions in my life with YOU on Unicornation than with anyone even loosely connected to Cockos.

You should know by now, given my cynicism toward piracy that I'm suspicious. You seem to be a pretty staunch Reaper advocate. Do you use DP at all?

[James Steele]

Any way, I don't believe that market prices should be determined by figuring out at what price someone is less likely to steal-- especially when the reality is there are virtually no consequences to theft.

I'm with you. Prices should be based on what is fair and what is workable. I like the $60/$225 thing partly because it is simply true that delivering the product to more people doesn't necessarily cost Cockos more, so it simply makes sense to give this discount. It's sorta like a student discount. I also think the honor system is good. I don't at all think that the goal is to bow to pirates and do whatever they ask, that would definitely not be just.

"Fair" to whom? Prices should be based on what it costs to bring the particular goods or services to market and then a profit that is to be determined by the provider of those goods or services. If the provider is "out of line" they won't sell enough of the product to make it worthwhile. When there is widespread theft and redistribution of someone's goods or services, it subverts market principles. Having to price one's goods or services at a certain level because someone will simply steal if you don't is blackmail.

[stickwolf]

It is statistically impossible for it NOT to be happening. The question is to what degree. But I can no more PROVE it true than you can PROVE it false. All I can base it on are the numerous accounts I've heard from others about going to pro studios and finding cracked software on their machines. I believe Waves actually sued one or two large studios for this. The "out" is to say that a client came in and installed it without the studio's knowledge.

I find ripping off a software developer is bad whether you're making a profit or not. I don't look at it as wrong in varying degrees.

Well, I think things do have degrees. There's manslaughter and 3rd degree, 2nd degree, 1st degree murder, etc. They aren't all the same. Pro studios pirating is really bad because they are actually LIVING, going on vacation, etc on the backs of the developers they steal from.

You should know by now, given my cynicism toward piracy that I'm suspicious. You seem to be a pretty staunch Reaper advocate. Do you use DP at all?

If I used it a lot more you'd know me more and I'd be more active here on the forum. Honestly, I don't. I did lots of recording over the years, but I've been much busier teaching and studying other things lately. I still use DP, but just haven't had time to really go back to serious studio recording. A part of my goals relate to doing work with my microtonal keyboard from h-pi.com, and I recently found that REAPER worked better with that (a little easier to set-up, and MIDI tracks can show all channels as one, which works much better for this quirky set-up), so that's why I was enthusiastic. Also, the $60 price makes it easier to recommend to my students and so I kinda want to learn REAPER more because I'll be using it with my students who aren't in a position to buy DP unless they get much more serious about recording. I definitely still like a lot about DP though and am glad I own it (though I am still on v.6)

[stickwolf]

"Fair" to whom? Prices should be based on what it costs to bring the particular goods or services to market and then a profit that is to be determined by the provider of those goods or services. If the provider is "out of line" they won't sell enough of the product to make it worthwhile. When there is widespread theft and redistribution of someone's goods or services, it subverts market principles. Having to price one's goods or services at a certain level because someone will simply steal if you don't is blackmail.

But how in the heck do you judge the cost of bringing software to market against the number of buyers?? It's so extremely speculative and unclear. If every person on the planet bought a $1 piece of software, the maker would be rich even if it cost $millions to develop. Prices are already screwy and impossible to judge in software regardless of piracy issues.