Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile


Software piracy under students in SOC

Posted by Mac 
Announcements Last Post
Announcement SoC Curricula 09/30/2017 01:08PM
Announcement Demarcation or scoping of examinations and assessment 02/13/2017 07:59AM
Announcement School of Computing Short Learning Programmes 11/24/2014 08:37AM
Announcement Unisa contact information 07/28/2011 01:28PM
Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
June 15, 2006 11:15AM
I agree with Valkeye on that point. It may seem ridiculous for yourself and your boyfriend, but I suppose they have to make it that way to stop internet cafes, for example, just buying one copy and loading it on all of their computers.

Speaking of Age of Empires, I once killed Joan of Arc by mistake... Ooops... smile
avatar Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
June 15, 2006 11:19AM
LOL!! As long as it was funny... smiling smiley

avatar Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
June 17, 2006 03:13AM
I think the reason there hasn't been a big outcry over piracy in SA is twofold. (opinion only)

Firstly, we were under a cultural and economic boycott so we weren't supposed to be getting anything at all. The government took the attitude that if you want or need to get something from overseas, you could do it by whatever means necessary (we got oil from Singapore because we weren't allowed to get it from OPEC). Also, it was the case that if other countries wouldn't allow you to have something, f**k them, we'll have it anyway.

Secondly, the computer industry has never been such an economic force as in the last 10 years. You can no longer do anything without a computer and remain competitive. As such, software companies have a new sense of status and are no longer willing to lie down and take it anymore.

It's strange that AOE3 requires two copies to run a LAN game. Usually games like that have a "SPAWN" option which you can use to install a reduced functionality copy on as many computers as you like. The spawned copies can only play multiplayer games and can only link to created games, they can't create new games themselves. The person with the original copy is responsible for creating and hosting the game and usually requires the game CD to be in the drive when playing the game. Oh, spawned games can only play on LAN or IPX/SPX connections. Internet gaming is only allowed on the original installation.
Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
June 18, 2006 09:58AM
Hmm I'll have to agree with that thought about people not reallly thinking that they're breaking the law when copying.

Sometimes in anyway.

As for music, I remember that last year I thought that there is a huge loophole in the copyright law, we did something on it in one of the modules, and it said something about that you are allowed to make a copy if you own the original, for backup or ipod etc, but you are jus tnot allowed to give it to anyone.
smiling smiley
Guesss the downloading falls under a different category.
Interestingly enough, I recently spoke to a friend of mine in the Netherlands and he mentioned that there it is only illegal to upload music, not to download it.
Maybe the theory goes that if uoloading is illegal and no-one does it, there won't be anything to download! grinning smiley

Anyways, games...
At home we run a lan of 3 computers, my favourite game is Freelancer, now becaue I love gaming I'll never pirate a game and neve allow anyone to pirate a game from me.
But having to buy 3 copies of a game so a family can play a lan game?
I have issues with that.
It seems to be a bit of a grey area in copyright law, but then again as soon asyou say only need one copy, people will start to applyig it to thing like Windows etc...
difficult spot I'd say.
Ah well at least that prob solved itself...one pc refuses to see the server and ihave 2 copies of FL smiling smiley
avatar Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
June 26, 2006 08:04PM
Don't know how credible this source is.. But wouldn't it be quite ironic.

Let's find out just how seriously good ol Bill Gates views piracy.


Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
June 27, 2006 05:19PM
Microsoft apparently refers to pirated copies of their software as "Special Editions" (so says Bob Joliffe, senior lecturer in the SOC).

There is a lot to read into this choice of labelling - e.g. they acknowledge it, knowing it helps to spread the MS gospel....
Anonymous User
Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
June 27, 2006 06:15PM
wow.. microsoft must have more special editions than normal copies of their stuff.....
Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
July 01, 2006 11:05AM
and that despite the fact that many claim to despise MS
and its almost only those that have copies...
Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
July 06, 2006 05:51PM
And there's something I dont understand about MS products: i.e. Office and Windows.
Earlier this year, I managed to completely screw up my OS and had to reinstall it - twice! Now for all I know, it could have been on two different computers. Both times the activation worked perfectly. I'm a bit curious as to why they didn't pick up that this was the very same copy of Win XP that I had registered? They could've tried to verify that. How about some sort of code in their OS that can identify whether the current PC you're trying to install to is in fact the one you've already installed on? I.e. You're REINSTALLING and not installing the same copy on a different pc? In which case it would refuse to install. I've never bought the right to use Windows on more than 1 pc, so don't quite know how this works. But surely something similar to this could curb the problem? But then if the person bought a new computer... ah, never mind!
avatar Re: Software piracy under students in SOC
July 12, 2006 12:03PM
Okay I can't resist any longer I have to put my 2 cents worth in tongue sticking out smiley

My opinion on the matter is that there are cases when piracy is okay and possibly even a good thing and cases when it is not. The Line between the two however is very blurry and in general not as simple as everyone makes it out to be.

Firstly piracy is not directly equivalent to theft (I congratulate the RIAA etc. on brain washing the general public to believe otherwise however with there extensive campaigns).
Like it or not when something is pirated the other person does not directly lose anything, they might indirectly lose a sale but this is not always the case either as often the pirated software would never have been bought by the user anyway.
In real theft however the other person is directly harmed. There is a clear difference between the two.

Piracy however is not an entirely new thing, Of course it is a lot easier to do digitally then it was historically in other industries but otherwise it is no different, let me try explain with an example.

Say i like tshirts with ticks on them, however the company who makes these is charging an exorbitant rate, However I really feel like I need one (or people treat me like an outcast if I don't have one, or whatever the situation is). So I pay someone else less money for a copy of this tshirt it costs me a lot less. Should I go to jail for this? What if I print the shirt myself, should I go to jail for it then?

Another example would be say prohibition, alcohol is illegal I decide I want some, I buy some cheap locally manufactured whiskey and drink it. At the time I might have gone to jail for it, a few hundred years in the future I might be considered a hero who fought for free rights or whatever.

Anyway the point of the first example is as follows:
In any industry there is potential for a 'piracy' type effect, the causes can be many different things one of the more common ones would probably be the people controlling the industry overcharging for there service.(or putting some other ridiculous limiting factor on customers - like requiring them to sign over there souls or something)
The natural response from the customer is of course to get the service elsewhere (often they could probably do without the service - but this is against human nature).
In most balanced industries the amount of people doing this however is usually insignificant enough that it can be ignored. When the amount increases it is probably a sign that they are overcharging, there are of course two (possibly others exist) possible responses to this. One would be to lower the cost of the product the other would be to try and get the law on your side and get the people arrested.

This is where the problem (and example two) comes:
What is 'right' is not a constant thing it is a permanently changing equilibrium what is legal today might not be legal tomorrow and likewise what is illegal today might not be illegal tomorrow.
So while I may feel that prices should be dropped, the industries feel that laws should be enforced. Neither of us can ever really be proved 100% right, its a moral issue.

The industry is therefore fighting to win people over to there way of thinking and artificially try to find ways to stop piracy by force(cd keys etc).
As they tighten the grip however they are making things harder for there real customers (the ones who pay them money), It is a sad fact that pirated software these days is actually easier to install then non pirated software.
The net result they are creating even more reasons (ones other then price) for people to switch to pirating the goods. (Contrary to popular belief people do not like software that takes there rights away and phones home etc. either, DMA etc. it's all reasons to avoid legit software in some peoples minds).

In the end one of two things will happen:
a) prices will become more reasonable, piracy will drop (hardly anyone will be harmed).
b) Laws will be forced we will all lose rights and privileges and lots of people will go to jail.

I personally would rather see the first happen.

I would like to mention that I personally no longer use any pirated products, everything I use is now open source. I have however pirated stuff in the past at stages, I also pirate music, if i like the music however I reimburse the people who make the music through merchandise or by going to there concerts. I Refuse to give the fatcat publishers any more money for installing DMA on my pc and abusing there artists however...

Id like to end my horribly long rant with one final question.
Say I develop some linux software, it becomes popular, people demand a windows version. So I load a copy of windows and compile one to sell.
Now here's the question, Should I have to buy a copy of windows in order to do this? (Note I am never going to actually use windows - just compile this one thing. Also note that by making my product also work on windows I am in a way helping microsoft keep customers as well as make there offering richer).

NB/ All of the stuff above is just my opinion, I welcome any comment though smiling smiley
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login