Reporting Illegal copying/distribution.

[Guest Moonraker]

>But with the pirated/cracked versions of the software so>easily accessible now, unlike it was just a few years ago, I>think a lot of people who would normally buy the software get>tempted into seeing if they can get it for free. That problem is easy to solve: just abolish the internet and all problems are gone! In other words: modern technology produces its own problems. It is the same with CD-writers: first they are advertised so that everybody spends his money to buy these machines and then record companies realize to their big surprise that people really use these writers to copy music! What a surprise! Don

[n4gix 4,947]

>...(and the illegal ones do not cost them any extra money>anyway)...That is a fallacy. If the 'pirates' download the complete package from the software vendor, then use a KeyGen they obtained from some P2P site, the software vendor is "stuck" with the cost of the bandwidth used and receives no income from that download...TANSTAAFL**There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch... Robert Heinlein (1950)Simply put, no matter how you parse it, someone ends up paying for it!

[Murmur 3,941]

>>...(and the illegal ones do not cost them any extra money>>anyway)...>>That is a fallacy. If the 'pirates' download the complete>package from the software vendor, then use a KeyGen they>obtained from some P2P site, the software vendor is "stuck">with the cost of the bandwidth used and receives no income>from that download...And if they download it via p2p (which is a common way)?Marco

[Guest SageWisdom]

Moonraker,>So you admit you dont know the "truth" either...Yeah thats the whole point. But then neither do you, and many of the guys that like to always "pitch in" when a flame thread gets started. But while I really cant say, I am not making accusations at a person or a company hiding behind the rock of anonymity. So I am very skeptical of flame threads.>Statements like "You are assuming that the "paying customers" were>not also poaching software. Or that the "incidents" they are>reporting even happened. That they were falsely accused of>committing piracy." are used by you to make persons incredulous.I am saying would should be obvious. That if you don't know the truth of the situation yourself, anonymous accusations are just that. Nothing more and nothing less. But anyone who has any experience with forums knows that there are people out there who may in fact be in the wrong, but take advantage of the forums and anonymity to trash talk someone. So anything I read in a flame thread I take with a grain of salt. Thats just common sense.Not for a minute would I think you or anyone else in this thread is supporting piracy. I think most people appreciate that it is doing a lot of damage. But when you say "their "safety procedures" do not work correctly" you are again making an assumption based on anonymous accusations. You are doing what you claim the software companies are doing. Leaping to conclusions without hard facts. Just my thoughts.

[Guest]

companies are going out of business and have been for years.It's just not reached critical mass yet, in other words the remaining market is still large enough to support the companies that are left and the occasional newcomer.But I've seen friends and (former) colleagues loose their jobs because their employers were forced to shut down for being unable to survive in a market with the levels of piracy that exist.And for many others it's ballancing on the edge almost constantly, weighing the cost of adding protection against the lost revenue from more piracy if you don't add such protection.The FS addon industry is in a way lucky in that it's a small and reasonably loyal market with a relatively highly educated userbase (on average of course), a market segment where piracy is relatively low.If a company like Flight1 has to take 50% (guess) pirated content into account, a major creator of mass entertainment software like Electronic Arts has to count on 90% in most markets.That's why you're seeing draconian measures by companies to protect themselves as well as can be (knowing full well there will always be someone cracking whatever you can come up with, but you're buying yourself time to recover your investment).

[Guest SageWisdom]

>And if they download it via p2p (which is a common way)?Then its still stealing, which is the main point. What Bill said about the bandwidth is true in a lot of cases Im sure. Its just of question of whether they are ripping somone off once or twice.

[Guest]

not with downloaded content for which key generators are available.For example, someone creating a key generator for UT Europe will host the 100KB key generator on his bittorrent stream, not the 1.5GB product.The users of the key generator will drive F1 to high bandwidth cost by downloading the full product, then not paying for it.That's where companies like FSD and Ariane have a better solution in not handing users a download link until after payment has been processed.And that's exactly the reason they do that too, saves themselves a lot of money (also from repeated downloads by existing customers who don't bother to back up their installers, something everyone recommends).And then there's a the support cost.There's a constant trickle (and occassional flood) of pirates demanding free support and upgrades to their pirated content (sometimes even going so far as to admit it's a pirated copy and can you please tell me how to get it to work, the key generator is faulty).Debunking the fraudulent flames on public forums which are a result of would be pirates taking out their frustration over being unable to crack some protection system also takes up resources (and can cost sales from would be customers who think the flames are true complaints from disgruntled customers rather than fantasies from failed pirates).

[Guest SageWisdom]

Good point. I had not even thought of the consequences of letting people download the file first. I think you are right. Actually, most download software is purchase first, then get a download link. Probably one reason why.

[Guest guyjr]

Or take a more reasonable approach like the guys who created Galactic Civilization 2, a game which surpassed the sales of the first GC game, _in its first two weeks_.The reason for such a dramatic rise in sales - word of mouth, and the complete lack of copy protection in the game. They've been consistently ranked in the top 10 on GameSpot for the last few weeks, no small feat, and people are saying they've clearly found a winning formula for both protecting their property as well as enabling customers to have exactly the experience one expects with software - no obstacles in your way when you go to use, backup, reuse, or reinstall said software.Now, one may ask how in the world do they expect to stop piracy this way? They don't. But they did make a very smart decision that will definitely severely deter it - updates to the game (which they produce often and are usually chock full of new features, fixes, and tweaks) require a valid serial number, which you can only get if you purchase the game. They check the serial number on their server when you go to update the game, so unless you like being stuck with an inferior version 1.00 game for the rest of your life, you'll pony up the $40 for a legit copy.I think FS add-on developers would be wise to think of alternatives to the draconion, inefficient, unreliable and ineffective methods in use today.

[Guest guyjr]

>That problem is easy to solve: just abolish the internet and>all problems are gone! In other words: modern technologyHahaha... ever hear of BBS systems? Piracy was rampant long ago in the dark ages of the 1980s. }(>produces its own problems. It is the same with CD-writers:>first they are advertised so that everybody spends his money>to buy these machines and then record companies realize to>their big surprise that people really use these writers to>copy music! What a surprise! Don

[Guest SageWisdom]

You are talking apples and oranges. A big software release like that can absorb losses due to piracy and still turn a huge profit. The decision to incorporate and administrate a protection system was strictly business, not in the spirit you suggest.A small software house like an FS developer cant absorb these losses. Left unchecked the losses due to piracy would simply make the business model infeasible.

[Guest Matt Johnson]

If you use the AVSIM 'Report Piracy' button from our front page, or go to the link below:http://www.avsim.com/forms/piracy.html...you can send in a report, anonymously if you wish. Many developers are subscribed to receive these reports and act on them.(If you are a payware developer who would like to receive notifications of reports made via us, please email me personally.)Regards,Matt

[Guest Moonraker]

>I am saying would should be obvious. That if you don't know>the truth of the situation yourself, anonymous accusations are>just that. Nothing more and nothing less. But anyone who has>any experience with forums knows that there are people out>there who may in fact be in the wrong, but take advantage of>the forums and anonymity to trash talk someone. So anything I>read in a flame thread I take with a grain of salt. Thats>just common sense.The problem with your argumentation is that, though principally everything you wrote sounds reasonable, it still results in an "ALL those complainers are dishonest people" - feeling you create in the reader

[Guest Moonraker]

>That is a fallacy. If the 'pirates' download the complete>package from the software vendor, then use a KeyGen they>obtained from some P2P site, the software vendor is "stuck">with the cost of the bandwidth used and receives no income>from that download...But that

[Guest SageWisdom]

>The problem with your argumentation is that, though principally>everything you wrote sounds reasonable, it still results in an "ALL>those complainers are dishonest people" - feeling you create in the>reader