Ethical Question

[bob.bernstein 0]

The whole thing continues to make me wonder why folks talk about piracy so much in this market, when black market has always existed throughout time, companies can be very successful in spite of black market, attempts to end black market have never succeeded, and so spending time being upset about the presence of black market essentially acheives nothing.The key is a good marketplace. Good products, priced at or below the customer's willingness to pay, good service..In this environment there will be significant participation between companies and honest people. If you provide these basic elements, black market will not be a major factor for you. If the customer's willingness to pay is below your revenue desire, you need to find a different market.Software companies tend to demonstrate higher growth expectations than standard companies, and either boom or bust...success makes billionaires out of 26 year olds. Bust is bust. The boom probably sets expectations for the industry that is tantemount to a golden invitation to smugglers. If pricing was modest, success was more common to manufacturing success, gains were ordinary, then I suspect piracy would be a subject of no interest.Almost like software companies are gambling on the big payoff. Thus stress is high, and frustrations boil over easily? I'm really trying to understand how anyone could justify so much fussing about piracy, a concept as old as history. Best,Bob

[Guest zzmikezz]

Bob.Bernstein,You wrote "I'm really trying to understand how anyone could justify so much fussing about piracy, a concept as old as history."It's partly business but partly morality, Bob. Murder and rape have also been around a long time, and shoplifting is just another cost of doing business, and all of these and similar problems will be with us forever.Yet we pass laws against certain behaviors that will always be with us, and we try to enforce those laws, and those of us who "get it" will always be willing to speak out against those who don't get it.There seem to be two kinds of people ... Those who cite situational ethics as an excuse for all kinds of immoral behavior, versus those who cite the Ten Commandments, which exist in only slightly different form and number in every human society.They are what make us humans rather than animals. It is true that some of the 5% of us who lack consciences will always be successful wolves among the 95% of us who are peaceable lambs, but others of the 5% will discover that the collective power of the lambs is capable of reducing their world to a 6x9 cell with only bologna and cheese sandwiches for cuisine.

[bob.bernstein 0]

Lol...Mike...when I said "realized" I meant in the eyes of the customers. You can't define your product as realized if its not been made available to people.And "telling you how to run your business?"...nah...you're taking this wrong.This is basic business 101. And you CERTAINLY don't have to pay attention to a conventional manufacturing businessman like myself. But you can't deny basic business concepts, and its not a nervy thing to remind you of them.Bottom line: Begging with pirates to behave is silly.Using the power of the marketplace is smart. You think it takes nerve to say that? Seems it would be foolish not to say that.Lets not take ourselves that seriously.Best,Bob

[bob.bernstein 0]

Cheers! Keep a smile on, life's short. My idea is to live as I wish others to...moralizing has been a "cover" through history for political power grabbing. Many people are instantly suspicious with moralizers begin to preach. I'm one of them. The news is bringing us ever fresh ironic displays of public moralizers who were undercover liers, and guilty of the sins they preached against. Whether its televangelists having affairs, or Catholic priests abusing children, or athletic hero figures lying under oath about cheating, or Governors who fight prostitution publically and patronize prostitution privately. Certainly, I have no reason to doubt your sincerity in your mission, but mixing a desire to moralize with a business discussion can get confusing.Best to you,Bob

[Guest zzmikezz]

Cheers to you too, Bob.BernsteinYou wrote "Certainly, I have no reason to doubt your sincerity in your mission, but mixing a desire to moralize with a business discussion can get confusing."I'm not sure why, but in spite of reading your entire post above I have this sneaking suspicion that you in fact doubt my sincerity. And of course you're confused. Trust me, I completely understand.Now continuing in the same vein as you, I'm not saying that the following is true of you, but it is typical of people who lack consciences that they assume that other people are just as morally bankrupt as they are. This is because, being unable to feel guilt, they can't imagine why others would choose to be law-abiding citizens. What's in it for the suckers?, the people who lack consciences ask.Regrettably, people like these tend to do very well in politics, where the key to success is to hold mirrors up to the various constituencies in order to have the people in question see what they want to see.They often do well in business too, for the same reasons. However, they don't start businesses, they are simply adept at exploiting existing systems for their own benefit.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSo when I choose not to put my product out there, it is not because of a desire to avoid being in business, it is instead because I have identified a different way to make money in this hobby, one that will not require me to have contact with the kind of people I would never choose to eat lunch with.

[mgh 89]

I don't believe that there can be any debate on morality/ethics versus legality in the matter of Intellectual Property rights. IP rights are determined by law not morality.Individual jurisdictions aim to strike a balance between IP owners' rights and the public interest. For example in the UK (and by implication the EU) it is legal to make backup copies regardless of what a EULA may say. Similarly, it is legal under certain specified conditions to decompile a program, again regardless of what the EULA may say. In UK law the wording is clear - " Where an act is permitted under this section, it is irrelevant whether or not there exists any term or condition in an agreement which purports to prohibit or restrict the act (such terms being, by virtue of section 296A, void). "In a wider context it is generally regarded as being against the public interest to use a patent to suppress an invention. The public interest requires that inventions should be used, while fairly rewarding the inventer. In many jurisdictions, the Patent Courts can compel a patent owner to grant a licence to 3rd parties to use the patent on fair and reasonable terms if the patent owner doesn't use it.In summary, IP law puts limits on the IP owners rights in order to benefit the wider public interest. Therefore, the only question here is "is it legal?"

[bob.bernstein 0]

well, as I've always known..its interesting to debate with you Mike, and we generally do reach a point of disagreement. I sincerely hope you enjoy happiness in your life. Don't strain your back now.Bob

[N400QW 205]

So true Bob. The latest news items prove once again that anyone in a leadership position is subject to failure as it relates to "practiceing what they preach":-)Back to the business item for a moment. It is true that begging thieves to behave is an exercise in futility and that true enforcement of law against such activity is in many cases too expensive to pursue.It is also true that IP piracy does effect the bottom line of any retail business and that is not acceptable to some.While some may use piracy losses as an excuse to close their doors still others may elect to simply close business without explanation.It is not difficult to imagine a situation where a succesful enterprise might find itself on the losing end of the "losses due to theft" vs revenue equation and simply elect to close business rather than continue.Any arguement we have made is to attempt to clarify the ethical arguement and assist the "casual thieves" to recognize the consequence of their actions on their fellow flight simmers and developers alike:-)

[DadJokeCinema 145]

This is a general statement to the thread.I'm real close to making any replacement of letters with symbols (specifically $ for S) a ban-worthy offense. It makes you sound like a 12 year old and destroys any merit of what you're trying to say.This thread had gotten all the major points in by page 4, so I'm going to lock it so it doesn't turn into another airplane on a treadmill thing.