Devon,Don't know if Jeroen saw either of your questions in the thread--I would send him a PM. Many are shy about making too much public comment about what they do or what their background is--they become prey to people who either accuse them of boasting or the "you only have a H.S. diploma and you're in IT, uh uh" crowd. But more common is in long threads like this, often these questions are just missed, so going back to square one, send him a PM.Regards,John

>>>we have to teach our children more carefully about right>and wrong<<>>>...of which everyone has his own idea.That IS the problem.>So what does it leave us with? More severe punishment? :-)>Maybe labour camps would help them appreciate the value of>others' work? LOLI wasn't aware that right and wrong were relative, at least when we're discussing stealing. Since one person can start piracy, one person can begin to stop it.

>You have it exactly backwards. It forces prices up so that>software vendors can stay in business with continually>declining returns. Heh, that's funny.In a recent article in the Austrian FlightXPress, they asked FS Addon developers and distributors about piracy.Quite noticeable was Carenado's opinion, that piracy was not a severe problem for them because they were so small, while Aerosoft put that down to it being so large.Then there was one company stating that 70% of all people pirating won't buy the product anyways, while another said 70% of those WOULD buy if they had not pirated it.You see, not even the people directly concerned with this really know how what to think about it/how to deal with it.How anyone here can now claim to know "how it is" is beyond me.Regards,Robert

I know how to deal with it. I could care less what everyone else thinks.IF YOU TAKE SOMETHING THAT IS NOT YOURS, YOU HAVE STOLEN IT!! GOT IT!If I catch them I will slam dunk them! Understand??Also, NONE OF YOU HERE got the definition if piracy correct. Piracy means to steal and then transport it for sale or otherwise.If you take it and use it for your own personal use it is called STEALING!!! Got it???This is pure and simple and in most cases is a crime of opportunity. What you all think of whether or not they would have bought it is not relevant. Got it???Most would buy it if they did not have the opportunity to take it. Understand??Even if just 1 copy was stolen IT IS STILL NOT RIGHT!!! Understand???You all need to get your heads on straight and come back down to earth.

>IF YOU TAKE SOMETHING THAT IS NOT YOURS, YOU HAVE STOLEN IT!! >GOT IT!Sorry to be pedantic but it is only stolen if you have deprived the original owner of it's use.You are, however, correct about the word piracy.>This is pure and simple and in most cases is a crime of opportunity. Don't all crimes need opportunity (in addition to a victim and perpetrator) ?However, you are right on one thing - copyright infringement is indeed a crime - but one that many people feel is less serious than stealing.

The owner is the person selling it until someone buys it. Is that clear enough? It is stealing plain and simple if you don't buy it.Copyright infringment means that someone copied your work and passed it off as their own.That means until you have bought it or it has been given to you by the owner, you do not own it.One thing that we will not do here is start letting people get in the mindset that just because we can't do everything to stop it all the time we aren't going to try. It is not acceptable in any shape or form. It is not the "in" thing to do. Just because everyone might be doing it.It's wrong, you all know it's wrong, and that is that.

Btw, I am correct about the stealing issue also. In case you need a refresher, the victim would be the person selling it and the "perp" would be the one either stealing it or receiving it stolen.Is that clear enough??Thanks.

>Sorry to be pedantic but it is only stolen if you have>deprived the original owner of it's use.Thats a lot of baloney. If you shoplift a diamond you are not depriving anyone of it use. Use has got nothing to do with it. Its ownership. The software has a copyright and its for sale. If you obtain it without buying it you have stolen it.I hate to say it, but the tortured logic you are using here sounds a lot like how bank robbers justify their actions. You seem to think if its for your benefit the rules don't apply to you.Rob MorrisonFS Enthsiast

Piracy CAN be slowed significantly. Maybe we can't eliminate it 100%, but piracy always starts with one person buying or stealing a piece of intellectual property and passing it on to another without proper payment. If we all agree not to do that and to do the right thing, and encourage others to do the same, it can start to make a difference. Maybe I'm naive, but I believe that's true. It's got to be made just as socially unacceptable as robbing a liquor store.And what about using a crack? It's reverse-engineering, yet many use the NoCD "patch" for FS (love the doublespeak). They're in violation of the EULA, are they not? Are they pirates? How about immoral? I mean, you "signed" a contract and broke it. The very same crack could make FS accesible to anyone who installed the sim from his buddy's CD's. Ah, but if I use it to prevent destroying my FS9 CD4 I can break the rules? What's this? It's called selective enforcement of values, and it's (IMO) why piracy occurs. That's why I don't think it can be stopped. Reduced? Sure... Same goes with corruption. :-lolDaniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/supporter.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

I hate to say it, but the tortured logic you are using here sounds a lot like how bank robbers justify their actions. You seem to think if its for your benefit the rules don't apply to you.See, responses like these are why these threads go south. THINK, my friend. He's playing devil's advocate. Just because he's "defending" a point of view, it does not mean he agrees with it. I can argue from the point of view of something I don't agree with.Instead of calling names or implying that someone's a pirate, you should realize that he's trying to create an argument, which IMO is always welcome as long as it remains civilized and respectful, which is has been so far (if you begin implying that people who argue the point given are pirates, then it will go south very quickly).I think an interesting discussion could develop from this, let's try not to take it where it shouldn't go.Daniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/supporter.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

>>Sorry to be pedantic but it is only stolen if you have>>deprived the original owner of it's use.>>Thats a lot of baloney. If you shoplift a diamond you are not>depriving anyone of it use. Use has got nothing to do with>it. Its ownership. The software has a copyright and its for>sale. If you obtain it without buying it you have stolen it.>Straw man fallacy: equating downloading with jewel theft (which is often violent). Anyway, if you shoplift a diamond you are depriving the shop owner (and another buyer) of it's use.If you can't see the difference between shoplifting diamonds and downloading a media file on p2p then you have an interesting world view. But a start would be trying to understand most people do see a difference.>I hate to say it, but the tortured logic you are using here>sounds a lot like how bank robbers justify their actions. Straw man again. This time it's the bank robbers with their masks, guns and swag bag.You can try and ridicule me but there is no tortured logic. I am not justifying "software piracy" in any way, shape or form. It is a crime. >You>seem to think if its for your benefit the rules don't apply to>you.>I think no such thing.

>See, responses like these are why these threads go south.>THINK, my friend. He's playing devil's advocate. Just because>he's "defending" a point of view, it does not mean he agrees>with it. I can argue from the point of view of something I>don't agree with.>>Instead of calling names or implying that someone's a pirate,>you should realize that he's trying to create an argument,>which IMO is always welcome as long as it remains civilized>and respectful, which is has been so far (if you begin>implying that people who argue the point given are pirates,>then it will go south very quickly).Thank you so much for this. Now let's see where it goes...

Well, you can't argue the point either, because it's plain and simple, so that's where "this goes"...ROFL

Unfortunately true if that's the only response you can muster. I accept your surrender to this debate @-@

"If you can't see the difference between shoplifting diamonds and downloading a media file on p2p then you have an interesting world view. But a start would be trying to understand most people do see a difference."Violence doesn't have to be attached to an incident for the incident to be a crime and a crime with a victim. P2P isn't victimless. It deprives people of income for their work. P2P is the same is you walking into my restaurant, asking me to cook you a seven course meal, then walking away. I've spent the time, spent the resources, and you've walked away with product.What unnerves me is many have the gall here to come in and play semantics and mince words in the presence of many of us who develop or support development. We're the victims. People come in and use the cop-out "come on, none of you are without sin." I confess, I recorded "Dark Side of the Moon" onto eight-track when I was a teenager. I should have known better, but I didn't. That doesn't mean I am going to march into a forum and give lip service to those who think P2P, cracks, hacks, and so on are alright or really "not crimes because they don't hurt anybody." Do any of you making this argument understand how much software is developed offshore? We're not talking about people living in mansions. We're talking about people who may have to skip their daughter's medical care because some product they helped put to market failed due to piracy. That escalates P2P to assault in my book. We may pretend there's no victims and look the other way. And many of us here (spooky may be right, maybe all of us) have infringed media rights in some way. But we should at least be united in our public distaste for the practice given this is one of the more widely read forums. But instead, some members march into this forum and rant on about how Jeff and the other developers here don't know what they're talking about? Essentially to give lip service to a group of friggin punks that look for any excuse to freeload media? That stinks, and the folks who would rather argue and mince words vs. offer their support stink. I won't lighten up on this one. End of story.-John