@Otto:[[Because copying != stealing.]]First of all, that depends entirely on the license agreement.Secondly, that was obviously not even the point of argument here. Your statement was that if the price for a piece of software is low enough, pirating it is wrong, implying thereby that piracy becomes more acceptable in direct proportion to the increase in the price of the piece of software. The higher the price, then, the more justified the piracy.You have three choices now: 1) retract or clarify your statement, 2) argue in favor of moral relativism, or 3) admit you were wrong.
[[Taking a picture of a painting isn't stealing if the owner of the painting can still turn around and sell the original anyways.]]Why not just steal the original painting? The artist can just make another one.
ok... i just think they would make way more money if the software was 299 and elements was 29.99. I think 1 miillion more people would bite. Also elements should be free to try for 6 months on all hp and dell slackware apps. that way.. adobe would get a much larger customer base... people would get used to it, smarter using adobe products... then many would upgrade to the 299 dollar version. if i was in charge... i bet this strategy would make the company way more money.
Bottom line= It's stealing. If you wouldn't walk into an Apple Store with a trenchcoat and tuck a box of software in and sneak out, then how can you rationalize pirating something over the Internet?
I'm a student saving up to buy a copy- not just that but other Adobe products. I would still be using paint if I never downloaded that copy and Adobe would never have me as a future customer.
But really, what high school/college student has $250?? It is a good point, however, especially if you're studying that specifically in school. It's unfortunately an added cost to books (which is outrageous in and of itself) and food and whathaveyou in college.
No they wouldn't: Your average itunes song is about $0.99 but how many people still pirate songs?Why pay ninety nine cents when you can get it for free?
mahdaengMar 31, 2008
@Otto:[[Because copying != stealing.]]First of all, that depends entirely on the license agreement.Secondly, that was obviously not even the point of argument here. Your statement was that if the price for a piece of software is low enough, pirating it is wrong, implying thereby that piracy becomes more acceptable in direct proportion to the increase in the price of the piece of software. The higher the price, then, the more justified the piracy.You have three choices now: 1) retract or clarify your statement, 2) argue in favor of moral relativism, or 3) admit you were wrong.
mahdaengApr 1, 2008
[[Taking a picture of a painting isn't stealing if the owner of the painting can still turn around and sell the original anyways.]]Why not just steal the original painting? The artist can just make another one.
rofflcopterrApr 4, 2008
Arrr matey.
gak001Apr 15, 2008
Including me!
bestengineApr 17, 2008
Photoshop CS3 extended $999. Why not instead sell it for $200 and offer no support other than basic install -if that. Than <a class="user" href="http://www12.asphost4free.com/foammattresss">http://www12.asphost4free.com/foammattresss</a> sell additional support.10 people buying at $200 <a class="user" href="http://www12.asphost4free.com/foammattressaaa">http://www12.asphost4free.com/foammattressaaa</a> is better than 1 at $999.There has to be a tipping <a class="user" href="http://www12.asphost4free.com/foammattresso">http://www12.asphost4free.com/foammattresso</a> point where a lower <a class="user" href="http://www12.asphost4free.com/foammattressg">http://www12.asphost4free.com/foammattressg</a> cost would bring illegal customers into the legal fold.
cryptokiApr 29, 2008
ok... i just think they would make way more money if the software was 299 and elements was 29.99. I think 1 miillion more people would bite. Also elements should be free to try for 6 months on all hp and dell slackware apps. that way.. adobe would get a much larger customer base... people would get used to it, smarter using adobe products... then many would upgrade to the 299 dollar version. if i was in charge... i bet this strategy would make the company way more money.
will9404Sep 18, 2008
I haven't paid for any software in years, Adobe Photoshop CS4 Stonehenge is pretty cool...
scottrouseOct 3, 2008
Bottom line= It's stealing. If you wouldn't walk into an Apple Store with a trenchcoat and tuck a box of software in and sneak out, then how can you rationalize pirating something over the Internet?
aineenDec 30, 2008
more akin to "illegal downloading"Moot point.
aineenDec 30, 2008
I'm a student saving up to buy a copy- not just that but other Adobe products. I would still be using paint if I never downloaded that copy and Adobe would never have me as a future customer.
aineenDec 30, 2008
But really, what high school/college student has $250?? It is a good point, however, especially if you're studying that specifically in school. It's unfortunately an added cost to books (which is outrageous in and of itself) and food and whathaveyou in college.
aineenDec 30, 2008
No they wouldn't: Your average itunes song is about $0.99 but how many people still pirate songs?Why pay ninety nine cents when you can get it for free?
aineenDec 30, 2008
Before the internet?
aineenDec 30, 2008
Then use a program that costs $50 and pay for it