Piracy Helps To Reduce Movie/music/game/software Prices?

[kleong 0]

Given a chance, who would not like to owe a copy of the original software, music, movie etc? The price of having it can be costly at times. Privacy, no matter how bad they are, it will act as a deterant for the owner to set orbitant prices. At the end of the day, I would prefer it be a buyer rather than seller market.

[k_nitin_r 8]

Piracy may be unethical and illegal, but it does help drive costs down. If it were not for piracy, publishers wouldn't stop to think, "Is this priced too much? Will these prices drive fans to piracy?" With pirated software, music, and films becoming so common that there are street vendors who exclusively sell pirated discs, there are products competing against their unlicensed counterparts and the only way to get consumers to buy the genuine product is to create a sense of loyalty. If you want to support us, buy our merchandise from the stores and not from the street vendor who can offer it for so much lower.There are commercial products that are pirated in developing nations because the average user simply cannot afford to buy them. A license for Microsoft Windows or even Microsoft Office alone costs as much as the entire computer hardware for a budget computer in India. Local PC manufacturers are more than happy to bundle Linux with their systems because it helps them compete against other brands that do pay the licensing fee. The Linux based systems end up in the hands of consumers who later have a need to run Windows-based software and eventually they run a boot-legged copy of Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. The OEM versions that Microsoft sells are quite reasonably priced and the difference is pretty negligible for somebody in a developed nation and the added cost for an OEM license is affordable for a computer user even in a developing nation, but the cost of buying the products off the shelf is simply prohibitive for consumers in developing nations.Apple's AppStore, which sells products for about a dollar for most software seems to be the way to go except for the fact that it is an online transaction. If there were a similar model for consumers to walk into a store and pay up to five dollars for software, they would gladly walk into the store and walk away with their installed software. Credit card purchases seem to be a roadblock for most people since it raises uncertainties over charges and is pretty much analogous to handing your car keys to some guy on the streets - you never really know what he or she would do with the car while you aren't looking. Deals with cellular phone carriers to deduct prepaid phone credit or bill the expense to the consumer might work out better but people seem to be more confortable with handing out cash than anything else these days.The sale of blank CDs hasn't really stopped anybody but the folks who buy exclusively from street-vending pirates. People copy stuff off their buddies using USB flash disks, external hard disk drives, over bluetooth or infrared, over a LAN connection, or even through Internet file sharing. We can't really blame CDs without pointing at all of the other media that people use to copy files.

[anwiii 17]

robbing banks will make me less poor and able to enjoy things others do who have more money than me but you don't see me robbing banks. why? it's illegal! not only that, i don't even think about robbing a bank or try to come up with excuses to justify it.i want some FACTS that support claims that piracy helps drop prices. according to that theory, there will be a price where piracy completely stops because the price is low enough to where people will buy the product rather that steal it. my question now is. if the cost of a product was a penny, would there still be piracy? ofcourse there will be. for many reasons. i haven't heard a SHRED of evidence that support lowering prices because of piracy.i have recieved illegal copies of things before but i am not going to justify it by saying i am helping others by driving down prices. a company, especially big corps have a lot of factors that influence price. is piracy one? yea.....one of many but does piracy help drive down prices in the eyes of these companies?people who come up with these threads or people who like to respond in agreement to these threads are are not only justifying piracy, but are saying that companies are charging too much. what a joke! a company has a right to charge as much as they want for all their hard work and effort. now obviously, if there is more demand, they are willing to cut the price down since most of what we are talking about is easily duplicatable. if there was less demand, they have to make up for it somehow just to hit their profit goals. to take it further. just because someone pirates something doesn't mean they would have normally bought the product. so how can one conclude that piracy helps drop prices? competition would help drop prices, and at a surfacy level, one can possibly assume that piracy is a companies competition. but i say it's not because of the fact that just because someone pirates something does NOT mean they would have normally bought the product. in fact, in most cases, this is TRUE because either they couldn't afford it at any cost, or just want to try the product before they consider buying with the exception of music and movies. but my whole point is that the majority of people who pirate wouldn't normally purchase what they were pirating anyway so why on earth would someone assume that piracy brings down prices? i'll tell you why. because they are pirates, theifs, and they want to promote justifications for their own unethical actions to make themselves look good while trying to convince others that they are helping drive down prices. what will this do in the long run? promote more piracy. and believe me. more piracy means INCREASED prices. not lowered prices because if a company cannot meet their profit goals to stay in business, then they go OUT of business.this whole thread is a JOKE!

[k_nitin_r 8]

Hi!@anwiiI sometimes wonder how you manage to write so much in day. You might have voice recognition or something in your computer! :-PI sometimes wonder about what extend open-source software helps in reducing piracy. In terms of selling computer hardware, vendors can claim that they provide Linux with their hardware instead of Windows. They do not really have to pay for the licensing fee of providing the user with an operating system and therefore can put up lower prices. The vendors that do actually provide their customers with Windows would put up a Microsoft Windows logo or something to justify the added cost.I guess the only folks who would pick the Linux box are folks who really do want Linux, the folks who intend to pay for the hardware and illegally install a pirated copy of Windows, or folks who have no idea what the difference between Linux and Windows are or who simply have not looked into what they are getting with the computer. In either of these cases, the hardware vendor does not engage in any illegal activity but that does not really say that open-source and free operating systems reduces software piracy because when the consumers do install a pirated copy of Windows on their computers, it isn't really possible to track the installation and trace it back to the computer that was sold with Linux pre-installed. Also, the store salesman could have promised the customer to install a copy of Windows on the computer if he or she purchased a Linux based system in an attempt to close a deal and make a sale, earning his commission.Lately, we have been seeing a lot of anti-piracy measures being implemented by software vendors. Windows activation and the use of serial keys probably does increase the cost of producing and selling the software. If all they had to do was build something that works, it was no real biggie in that they can just take what they already had before the anti-piracy measures were introduced, slap on a couple of enhancements and then sent it out the door. However, by having to implement and maintain additional source code that has no real purpose other than to check for piracy, it is the consumers that are paying for the additional anti-piracy measures. However, it is hard to tell that the cost actually comes from the software pirates because the software vendor could also be cutting back their profits while charging their customer the same prices as they have been before the anti-piracy measures were implemented, in which case the only people who lose from having to implement the anti-piracy measures are the shareholders due to the reduced profits.There isn't really a competition between operating systems today because Apple fanboys and Mac lovers would get themselves something that runs Mac OS X, Linux would be taken on by those who wouldn't want to pirate software and are not willing to pay the extra cost of software licensing, and the rest of the folks would get themselves a copy of Microsoft Windows. Of the lot, Microsoft Windows holds a huge portion of the pie in terms of market share and therefore there is no real competition. Sure, there are 3 different key players but unless Mac OS X and Linux come close to the market share that Windows has, it can't be called true competition. Perhaps the only competition that Windows faces is with earlier versions, such as vendors with computers running Windows 7 trying to sell more units than computers running Windows Vista, for example, and again that is a matter of preference for a user to run Windows 7 over Windows Vista and they both come from the same software vendor.My point is that there is no concrete way to prove that piracy or competition influences prices among operating system because there are so many factors at work, from activities that cannot be detected (Eg. installation of pirated software when a free operating system has been bundled with the hardware) to consumer preferences and software licensing costs.

[The Simpleton 2]

@anwiii: This thread may be a joke but it appears to be entertaining lots of people ;)I don't think people agree that piracy is good. Yes, they do feel satisfied that they are getting to use something for a very cheap price or for free, but I'm sure everyone might have thought at least once about the consequences of piracy and they must have felt a little bit guilty also. Most of all, they get the fear of getting caught. There are few people who have gotten so used to piracy that they have no guilt at all. But these are few in number. Most of the people would readily give up piracy if they had a better option. As anwiii mentioned, even if the price of something was as low as a penny, there would still be lots of piracy as people would be trying to get it for free - it's natural. But we have to remain optimistic that some sensible solution will come up soon. I'm not saying piracy is the only way to reduce prices, but that we should keep our eyes open for a solution and adopt it in order to remove piracy. The biggest question is when that solution will come along.

[adriantc 0]

we know how much loss piracy is causing to the entertainment/software industry these days. in the days before the internet, there was hardly any piracy, and even the little that was there didn't cause much damage. that was why the prices went up rapidly and that hasn't changed much even today.

 

today the most damaging form of piracy may be the sale of dvds, but the work that goes into the creation of these dvds is still done through the internet. if im not wrong, the "scene" doesn't sell dvds but just circulates them online, right? but the other "scene" which prepares and sells the dvds still uses the internet for getting everything ready. so the main culprit is the internet, without which piracy couldn't have gotten stronger.

 

but on the other hand, thanks to piracy, at least a few people are now having the sense to reduce the prices and make the products more closer to the general law-abiding public. had it not been for piracy, the high prices would have continued and people would have probably found some other form of entertainment (and in case of software - open source). of course there is still scope of much change and much reduction of prices, but atleast its a start.

 

my theory is that piracy should die out soon, but before dying it should give such a shock to everyone that the reduction of prices should become much more speedier. im not sure how this shock should be, but it'll be good if there was a nice shock to remind the industry giants that unless they price the products sensibly, they'll continue to face the wrath of piracy always and it'll just keep on getting worse unless they act soon.

 

so does anyone have an idea of such a shock? don't you think it would be sort of good if such a thing happened? after all, piracy has started the reduction of prices so maybe it can do that a bit more faster with this shock, in whatever form it comes

First of all you can't blame the Internet for the advert (or increase) of piracy. Thanks to piracy and porn the Internet is where it is today... Without them we'd all still have 56kb dial-up connections. And porn is also responsible for the boom of the movie industry. You can't possibly think that 99% of all the data sent thru the Internet is Wikipedia and emails. Yeah the Internet provided a much easier way to share everything, but that made the Internet more attractive and faster and on the long run that generates a lot more money then what damage piracy makes.

 

I am a software developer with a few small open source software. I think your theory is not correct... I think the prices of software today also take in consideration the piracy... If they think they will loose 2 copies every one sold they will add the price (or at least a part of it) of the 2 pirated to the one sold. Also I don't think heavily lowered prices with exterminate piracy. Nothing can do that except making all software open source. And that will never happen. Whatever you do, you can never beat free (which piracy provides) software.

 

What can be done in my opinion is change the habits of people. Donations would change if not eliminate piracy. If developers of open source software receive money on a daily basis it would encourage others to develop software... free software supported by donation. That is the only way to eliminate people. Users should realize that they don't have to pay for software, but they have to show support for a project and future development.

 

That should be the way of the future. But it's very hard to change people's habits!

[k_nitin_r 8]

Hi!@The SimpletonI agree, this thread has seen quite a few posts today. All of what I and the other members have said does not change the fact that software piracy is illegal, unethical, and should be stopped. There are anti-piracy measures in place that do affect the rest of the consumers and increase costs.People, by nature, crave freebies and they get attracted by promotional offers that give you something for free in exchange for a purchase. Software pirates who sell CDs on the streets are aware that they could be deported if they are caught and may have to serve jail time, but they do what they do to feed their families and are forced by circumstances into what they do. The rest of us who have a choice are more fortunate in that we get to decide for ourselves. When working for an organization, we push the management to buying licenses for software that we really do require.

[The Simpleton 2]

People, by nature, crave freebies and they get attracted by promotional offers that give you something for free in exchange for a purchase.

You're right - we've become addicted to freebies. In theory you might say people will stop encouraging piracy when prices come down, but thanks to this addiction they might actually not be able to give up the habit. Old habits die hard, and this is perhaps the most addictive habit of them all

[mandarpowale 0]

People have been stealing stuff ever since humans started walking on two feet. Some people do it because they are kleptomaniacs, a honest buck would probably kill such people. There are no rules in the universe (God's law we may call it) that prevents theft, murder, rape etc. If god really cared about victims of crime he would have made it impossible to commit it. He would not have created things such as loss, pain, humiliation, desire. The only rules are those which are made by society. The law believes in revenge in form of punishment for the crime and religion proposes forgiveness. The law and religion are really polar opposites. Which do you prefer. Empathic people would forgive maybe.The law does not ensure prevention of crime, it just reduces it through fear of prosecution. Does it matter how many security encryption are placed on the software ?. Denying people coveted things makes it challenging for them to steal it. ensuring that theft will continue .

[Shahrukh 0]

Piracy helps people who can't afford the actual software and aren't really going to use it much anyway.Some of them may like the software so much that they may buy the actual software (very rarely though).If prices are lower, then people would definitely prefer original software. However, its always a matter of net revenue. For example:10 copies sold * 350 per copy = 350070 copies sold * 50 per copy = 3500I doubt that lower prices will have that much increase in sales.So if 10 people buy the software and the 60 other use a pirated copy, then even if 1 of those are moved to buy the original, the net revenue is higher.Note: I still do not like piracy. Its unethical.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

The piracy will forever go on because of the thoughts out there that say "information should be free to the world." A direct representation of this is in the movie Antitrust.Another much less powerful reason for it is that people are just too used to it now. Think about the programs people need that they can't afford. To break down a personal one, it was Microsoft Office. We had to pay $650 for a normal copy (not even Professional) around 6 years ago (before the student pricing and all). For most people that would be a ridiculous amount -- and it was, but we had to have it and didn't want to have the piracy on our conscience.But for the most part, people don't view it as being wrong, or they just flat out don't care.Now as to whether or not it drops prices, I doubt that, but it *does* increase sales. When Napster and Morpheus came out (both were very popular song sharing platforms, P2P) record sales increased dramatically. People often download things because it allows them to see what they are missing out on; not solely because they want to steal. Another example is movies -- a lot of people will download a cam version of a movie in theaters and then buy the real DvD or BlueRay (as BR discs are 60 GB's pirating really isn't an option).The problem is the RIAA and whatnot would rather make everyone think it's purely negative instead of realize it's a two-sided coin.

[anwiii 17]

The piracy will forever go on because of the thoughts out there that say "information should be free to the world." A direct representation of this is in the movie Antitrust.
But for the most part, people don't view it as being wrong, or they just flat out don't care.

"?" you are basing a movie on real life? i don't think the majority of people will agree. we are talking about games, movies, software, etc. those things aren't just information bud.

you say for the most part that people don't view piracy as wrong. again, i think most people will disagree with you there too. i think everyone knows it's wrong under the law and moral code. they just don't care. that's basically what it boils down to. not caring about right from wrong or thinking it's such a little wrong it doesn't matter. i mean....what is one guy. how can one guy hurt a company? they can't. but millions can and millions do. so it's really not so little after all.

i do think most people actually care but i think they consider themselves 1 star in the galaxy. when everyone has the same mindset, it really will put a hurt on businesses. maybe not so much the big companies, but the smaller ones DEFINATELY when they don't have that diversity of products to target consumers with.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

"?" you are basing a movie on real life? i don't think the majority of people will agree. we are talking about games, movies, software, etc. those things aren't just information bud.
you say for the most part that people don't view piracy as wrong. again, i think most people will disagree with you there too. i think everyone knows it's wrong under the law and moral code. they just don't care.

I based the movie on Real Life because if you were part of the Open Source scene you'd understand the view behind it. It's the same one every piracy group has. You should read up on both -- you'd find out a lot.

As for the "piracy is wrong," thing. I'm pretty sure I stated that "or," meaning inclusive (in other words, their view is either one or the other -- I didn't state one takes more prominence over the other). Re-reading, I did state that.

[The Simpleton 2]

i do think most people actually care but i think they consider themselves 1 star in the galaxy. when everyone has the same mindset, it really will put a hurt on businesses. maybe not so much the big companies, but the smaller ones DEFINATELY when they don't have that diversity of products to target consumers with.

That is indeed the sort of attitude people have these days and sadly, this builds up to be a chain and everyone ends up doing it with the thought that one person can't make any difference. This "one-person" theory can be seen not only in the case of piracy but also in many other situations in life, where everyone keeps thinking that just one person can't make any difference. The day when they realise that they can indeed make a difference, on that day perhaps the chain will be broken and people will start waking up to the effects of piracy.