@PolarBear said:

The gambling industry is one of the most and always successful business in and all over the world...

That is only too true. But the analogy holds up, don't you think? Who makes the money most of the time? The gambling addict or the casino?

~Chris

First of all, just because software is available via P2P does not scientifically prove that anyone is using the software illegally. Usage and copyright are two different legal pursuits.

As far as I'm concerned, VSL has done an excellent job thwarting illegal "use". Both via their excellent usage agreement, and via their usage protection mechanisms.

No one can stop copying. In fact copying is legal until you determine the intent of the copying. Under US Law, copying is allowed for educational purposes. There is no exception to that rule. It is what fuels progress according to our constitution. It could never be revoked as it's built-in to how this country exists fundamentally.

So I cannot speak fo rother countries, but here, if you are not profiting from the copied material, or using it illegally, than you are allowed to copy.

However, there is the implication that once you place an original on a P2P network that it will be copied, with the foreseeability of "illegal use". Under that pretext, one can prosecute offenders. Especially the "host". Because P2P has a built-in implication that NOT everyone is using copies for educational purposes.

The most common and rampant form of copying is called BACKUP. The reason it's legal is becuase the intent of use doesn't even exist. It is only there to replace an original should the original become damaged. You NEVER use your backup. There is no intended use, not even for educational purposes.

So as you can see, it's important to differentiate between "copying" and "intended use". You can only prosecute for around 40%-90% of actual copying/usage activity. And even then you need evidence to effecetively prosecute, let alone to get a judge to allow you to even have a trial (you can't just go prosecuting everybody unless you have evidence).

Just thought I'd add that food for thought.

Evan Evans

@max67 said:

...The only reason one would be part of file sharing is to obtain pirated "stuff".
Regards, Max67.

This presumption is wrong Max. There are many uses for P2P other than obtaining pirated "stuff", and in some cases obtaining pirated "stuff" is perfectly acceptable ethically.

Evan Evans

hehe... good reply, PolarBear!

Just to throw in a comment...

First a disclaimer: Yes, piracy is wrong, and yes I own all my VSL. Also, in the case of VSL, the price is totally justified when you consider the enormous financial outlay that this company has made to create such a brilliant product -- from hiring musicians, editors, and programmers, right up to building their own studio!!! (Still makes my head spin...) There is no question, in this case, of an inflated price based on a sort of "secret code" philosophy.

With that out of the way, there's also much to be said for the theory behind open-source development, which strives to significantly lower development costs by "open-sourcing" large parts of the code used in the final program. This way, a great deal of the code can be written (at least in theory) at little or no expense to the company which is proposing the final software package, thus lowering costs to the end user. As an example, I've got my Linux machine running a server perfectly efficiently, and legally, at very little cost to myself (at least in software). Obviously, this is the whole idea with Linux. Mind you, it can be a real pain in the ass to get running, which is, of course, the "down side" to almost all current open-source software.

But the basic idea thrown about by the open-source community is that the philosophy of "we did it first" or "secret code" software is a large contributor to the massive expense of producing many of the commercial products we see today. They feel that piracy will be around forever, so perhaps it is time for developers to start shifting their thinking with regard to the secrecy of their ideas, and start making use of the absolutely massive "work force" available to them in the open-source community. It's not that piracy is justified, but rather that it is, at least partly, a symptom of secrecy.

Now don't burn me alive... This is neither a fact, nor my personal opinion (though I do see the sense in it). it's just a philosophy on the subject that's been around for a while. That is, "I'm just the messenger". And as I said before, this obviously does not apply in the case of VSL or, for that matter, any company releasing professional orchestral samples, for which the production expense it quite transparent.

Also, the first company who builds my Dream Program (choir and Heavenly light) for scoring with samples will definitely see me madly throwing whatever money I can muster their way!


cheers,

J.

@evanevans said:

and in some cases obtaining pirated "stuff" is perfectly acceptable ethically.

Evan Evans

[:D]
Care to elaborate?
[:D]

@evanevans said:

and in some cases obtaining pirated "stuff" is perfectly acceptable ethically.

Evan Evans

[:D]
Care to elaborate?
[:D]

Maybe according to Evan's personal ethics system? [[;)]]

Evan, I'm not picking on you, really. Like I've noted before, I've been guilty of "borrowing" in the past.

~Chris

I prefer to "own" the originals ....and I've paid for VSL, and countless other libraries. I spend more on software than I ever did on hardware!

[H] But I like getting sounds for free!

I doubt there is one musician on this forum who hasn't at some time used sounds he/she hasn't paid for. You can be "hungry for sound".....the sounds are there if you are "poor and need to eat".

And some sound/software developers do not value their customers as highly as (we think) VSl do.....that doesn't encourage loyalty.

Yes, piracy is a handicap....but a bigger issue is fostering mutual respect/support between users and producers. VSL is tops in that respect.

Nigel

There are some poor musicians who have a little bit of integrity and honesty as well as hunger. Anybody who uses pirated samples is willing to screw over other poor and hungry musicians who created those samples. So you can take your justification for criminal behavior to the local police station. I don't buy it.

Nice reply William

I have to say I've given it some more thought - as well as reading an interesting post from the Chicken Systems developer:

http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17972

.....and actually, you're right.

Nigel

@William said:

There are some poor musicians who have a little bit of integrity and honesty as well as hunger. Anybody who uses pirated samples is willing to screw over other poor and hungry musicians who created those samples. So you can take your justification for criminal behavior to the local police station. I don't buy it.

Yes, William, I do agree in principle. However, I think piracy is here to stay. It's not a problem you can completely eliminate. All you can do is try to minimize it.
Which reminds me, I just thought of a kind of sample library piracy that would really get me mad, especially since it's completely undetectable. Composers who use high quality pirated sample libraries to compose for live ensembles. For which, presumably, they are getting paid well enough. I don't know if there really is anything a dev can do about that though. Except raise the prices to try and compensate. Which we see enough of. I don't like it, but I understand why it's done.

~Chris

There are times when it's completely ethical. I could come up with a scenario that even the VSL team might approve of.

Evan Evans

evan, please explain the reflexive *it's* - hopefully i don't have to understand it as i understood (.... you know, my clumsy english ...)
christian

@cm said:

evan, please explain the reflexive *it's* - hopefully i don't have to understand it as i understood (.... you know, my clumsy english ...)
christian

"It's" = "it is" [[;)]]
Take it from a writer. That's what it means. Though I'm not sure which circumstances Evan is refering to. I'm not really proud of the fact that I've borrowed software. I'm certainly trying to do it less and less. It's not that I can't afford to buy. It's that I can't afford to buy and make a mistake on a purchase. So sometimes I try first. I NEVER use a "borrowed" software in a commercial venture. But it's hard for me to give up my extended demos . . . [:O]ops:
But I do not "borrow" samples. I like to support the devs as much as possible.

~Chris

@cm said:

evan, please explain the reflexive *it's* - hopefully i don't have to understand it as i understood (.... you know, my clumsy english ...)
christian

P2P based file sharing.

Evan Evans

An example would be to obtain a piece of software that has since gone bankrupt and disappeared in order to open up and backup and convert your old files.

A company called OPCODE comes to mind.

There are many many more completely ethical uses of P2P.

Evan Evans

A

@Another User said:

Originally posted by evanevans
and in some cases obtaining pirated "stuff" is perfectly acceptable ethically.

Evan Evans

Somehow "A" doesn't tie in with "B" .... [:)]

Evan,

If you have "old" Opcode files, one can imagine you also have a legal copy of the app. Unless of course you pirated it before....
[*-)]

Next example....?

Regards - Colin

Great point! Just because you are downloading an app on a P2P based system doesn't mean you are illegally using the software. That is somethign I said before.

Evan Evans

@evanevans said:

Great point! Just because you are downloading an app on a P2P based system doesn't mean you are illegally using the software. That is somethign I said before.

Evan Evans

Okay, I'm with you on this one. One example. I often dowload utilities to circumvent copy protection and registration hassles for software I already own. I find it easier to make my own reg code with a keygen than to wait send off my computer info and hope the dev gets back to me in a timely fashion.

~Chris

Evan - you're missing my point completely.
I'm saying that if you have Opcode files, you should have the software as well, or at least the installer disk(s). Otherwise, where did the files originate?

So, where's the need to download the app again from somewhere, unless your original copy was pirated as well?

I understand your point, but do NOT agree.

Colin