Peeve Farm

g r o t t o 1 1

Peeve Farm
Breeding peeves for show, not just to keep as pets

  Blog \Blôg\, n. [Jrg, fr. Jrg. "Web-log".
     See {Blogger, BlogSpot, LiveJournal}.]
     A stream-of-consciousness Web journal, containing
     links, commentary, and pointless drivel.

On My Blog Menu:

InstaPundit
USS Clueless
James Lileks
Little Green Footballs
As the Apple Turns
Entropicana
Cold Fury
Capitalist Lion
Red Letter Day
Eric S. Raymond
Tal G in Jerusalem
Secular Islam
Aziz Poonawalla
Corsair the Rational Pirate
.clue

« ? Blogging Brians # »

Book Plug:

Buy it and I get
money. I think.
BSD Mall

10/6/2003 -  10/8/2003
9/29/2003 -  10/5/2003
9/22/2003 -  9/28/2003
9/15/2003 -  9/21/2003
  9/8/2003 -  9/14/2003
  9/1/2003 -   9/7/2003
8/25/2003 -  8/31/2003
8/18/2003 -  8/24/2003
8/11/2003 -  8/17/2003
  8/4/2003 -  8/10/2003
7/28/2003 -   8/3/2003
7/21/2003 -  7/27/2003
7/14/2003 -  7/20/2003
  7/7/2003 -  7/13/2003
6/30/2003 -   7/6/2003
6/23/2003 -  6/29/2003
6/16/2003 -  6/22/2003
  6/9/2003 -  6/15/2003
  6/2/2003 -   6/8/2003
5/26/2003 -   6/1/2003
5/19/2003 -  5/25/2003
5/12/2003 -  5/18/2003
  5/5/2003 -  5/11/2003
4/28/2003 -   5/4/2003
4/21/2003 -  4/27/2003
4/14/2003 -  4/20/2003
  4/7/2003 -  4/13/2003
3/31/2003 -   4/6/2003
3/24/2003 -  3/30/2003
3/17/2003 -  3/23/2003
3/10/2003 -  3/16/2003
  3/3/2003 -   3/9/2003
2/24/2003 -   3/2/2003
2/17/2003 -  2/23/2003
2/10/2003 -  2/16/2003
  2/3/2003 -   2/9/2003
1/27/2003 -   2/2/2003
1/20/2003 -  1/26/2003
1/13/2003 -  1/19/2003
  1/6/2003 -  1/12/2003
12/30/2002 -   1/5/2003
12/23/2002 - 12/29/2002
12/16/2002 - 12/22/2002
12/9/2002 - 12/15/2002
12/2/2002 -  12/8/2002
11/25/2002 -  12/1/2002
11/18/2002 - 11/24/2002
11/11/2002 - 11/17/2002
11/4/2002 - 11/10/2002
10/28/2002 -  11/3/2002
10/21/2002 - 10/27/2002
10/14/2002 - 10/20/2002
10/7/2002 - 10/13/2002
9/30/2002 -  10/6/2002
9/23/2002 -  9/29/2002
9/16/2002 -  9/22/2002
  9/9/2002 -  9/15/2002
  9/2/2002 -   9/8/2002
8/26/2002 -   9/1/2002
8/19/2002 -  8/25/2002
8/12/2002 -  8/18/2002
  8/5/2002 -  8/11/2002
7/29/2002 -   8/4/2002
7/22/2002 -  7/28/2002
7/15/2002 -  7/21/2002
  7/8/2002 -  7/14/2002
  7/1/2002 -   7/7/2002
6/24/2002 -  6/30/2002
6/17/2002 -  6/23/2002
6/10/2002 -  6/16/2002
  6/3/2002 -   6/9/2002
5/27/2002 -   6/2/2002
5/20/2002 -  5/26/2002
5/13/2002 -  5/19/2002
  5/6/2002 -  5/12/2002
4/29/2002 -   5/5/2002
4/22/2002 -  4/28/2002
4/15/2002 -  4/21/2002
  4/8/2002 -  4/14/2002
  4/1/2002 -   4/7/2002
3/25/2002 -  3/31/2002
3/18/2002 -  3/24/2002
3/11/2002 -  3/17/2002
  3/4/2002 -  3/10/2002
2/25/2002 -   3/3/2002
2/18/2002 -  2/24/2002
2/11/2002 -  2/17/2002
  2/4/2002 -  2/10/2002
1/28/2002 -   2/3/2002
1/21/2002 -  1/27/2002
1/14/2002 -  1/20/2002
  1/7/2002 -  1/13/2002
12/31/2001 -   1/6/2002
12/24/2001 - 12/30/2001
12/17/2001 - 12/23/2001

Wednesday, May 8, 2002
10:53 - Arr, me mateys.	(top)
Let's be theoretical for a moment, shall we? Suppose you come across a car sitting by the side of the road. It's unlocked, and the keys are in it. What do you do? To my mind, there are three possible basic courses of action: A) You don't take the car, because that would be wrong. B) You don't take the car, because you're afraid you'll get caught. C) You get in and drive happily away. Now, take "car" and replace it with "cracked copy of Photoshop". We're still being theoretical here; but my theory, the theory that is mine, that it is, is that those people who chose options A or C above will treat the pirated software exactly the same way that they would a car. If they don't steal things because it's wrong, they won't use pirated software. If they do steal things just because they can, they'll have a raft of bootleg software on their computers. But people who chose option B-- those who don't steal only because they fear getting caught-- those are the ones who make software piracy such a funky gray area. They know theft is wrong-- they just don't care. They're very practical-minded, these people-- they want to maximize the benefits to themselves while minimizing risk, and they'll take whatever they can get away with. The problem is that it's so much easier to get away with stealing software than stealing a car. And so someone who would never dream of stealing a car-- indeed, someone who wouldn't palm a jellybean from the serve-yourself bins at the supermarket-- sees no wrong in using an unlicensed copy of Photoshop or Windows or WinZIP or Maya. Of course, there's another effect at work here: when you steal a car, you're stealing it from somebody. You're sticking it to a particular person-- the hapless shmoe who left his keys in the car. But in stealing software, you're sticking it to the Man-- all you're doing is diluting the value of the software, because a copy can be made effectively for free. It's not a physical good. So the "B" people will frequently rationalize software piracy by claiming that they're not really hurting anybody, they're just thumbing their noses at those greedy software companies who have the gall to charge $600 for Photoshop. "We're just adjusting the fair market price to a more realistic number!" they will cry, puffing themselves up with pride in their understanding of supply-and-demand, smug in their for-the-greater-good freedom-fighter platform, their self-styled moral high ground of knowing what's really better for the world. "Information wants to be free! You can't fence in creativity! Free tools for all! Long Live the glorious Revolution!" But you know, second-guessing the free market is the same thing as theft, no matter how you rationalize it. At best, it's the equivalent of running a black-market underground fence for Rolexes of dubious authenticity. The company sets a price for its products, based on how much return from sales they know they can get at that price. They maximize profits by adjusting the price so as to cover development and to support the exclusivity of the software. Why don't they sell Photoshop for $70? Because they feel that only professionals should be able to afford it. That's customer-targeting. And here's a secret: Adobe has the right to make that decision. Someone who says "You know, I can't afford to buy Photoshop, but I can get it for free by just pulling this little wire out of my ethical center" and who rationalizes it by saying "The company shouldn't be charging that much for it anyway-- they should expect people to pirate it!" should ask himself whether he would treat a car or an NVidia card the same way. Is the only difference the fact that the product's distribution model is different? Is that all that makes it okay to steal it? So when I see an e-mail pass through my box that says something like "So I can understand suing him for copywrites and such, but going after him for pirated software I think is a little much. Yeah sure he does it, but why bother? I myself would rather have a free copy of Adobe photoshop then pay some outragous price of 400$+ for it," ... that's when I have to ask the question about the unlocked car on the side of the road. And if the person answers "B", then I put the testicle-crushing tips on my boots.