Well said slava. Unsanity is one of the premier Mac developers because of its dedication to the user and not just the bottom line or security.

This in particular is why I keep coming back to Unsanity:
Reward developers who don't suck, and spread the word to everyone you know who might have a use for those products.

Wow I didn't expect to see such a response.

I mostly do two things to make a living. I build and market adult sites and I do Mac consulting, troubleshooting, set up, etc in print and design shops.

Most of the shops don't mess with pirate numbers, they don't know where to find them, but will buy as few copies of anything that they can. These are all less then 10 computer shops. They have a serial number for each copy of Suitcase, Illustrator, Quark, Photoshop, plus any network aware plug-ins.

Anyway it always bugs me that they all will be using one serial number of all the smaller shareware apps.

To be honest most are still stuck in 9 due to Quark and the fact that they hate learning anything new, but I'm guess by the end of this year we will really start seeing them switch over.

That unless the war monger that we have for a president here completely kills our economy :(

I am sure (though a quick Google gave me nothing) that the Managing Director of Macromedia was quoted saying that piracy (particularly by students) was a great help to his company as it undercut cheaper competitors who can't compete with free and maintained their hegemony.
Obviously, once these students got a job the company they worked for would foot the bill for official copies as they were a bigger target and could targetted by the BSA etc.
I've seen similar analysis talking about MSFT in developing markets and cigarette manufacturers encouraging grey market imports to hook younger smokers.
Obviously with the right conditions piracy can work for you. .

Ha, tell that to the music industry.

But yes it does, I'm buying more music then ever thanks to LimeWire and being able to "sample" all kinds of music that I would never have known about ;)

Nice to see such a honest and clever post. I'm learning all the major apps (Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, dreamweaver, etc...) without having bought them. There is NO WAY I could afford to buy them. And a 30 day trial period is not enough to learn all this... I'm not making money with those apps yet. When I get a job, I'll have to buy them and won't mind... I'm pretty sure big companies know that... Most of them... I just had to stop learning Logic (I also do music...) since they came out with this crazy dongle thing... I didn't spend $900 because I don't have $900... I just stopped using it. Everyone I know who's using it professionally bought it before the dongle and now, they just have one less available USB port on their Mac. Nothing else changed... As far as shareware, I paid for windowshade and Synergy. The rest I use is freeware, besides MaxMenu that I just HAD to crack 'cause their policy towards piracy/users privacy is too annoying...

Lately I've seen some good points about the music industry's parallel problems. I'm sure you have too. Shirky, for example, points out that making music is now a fairly easy, largely digital process (musical talent notwithstanding). And reproduction and distribution of music is largely digital. Those two things make piracy not only easy, but the standard way of doing things. All that's left for the music industry is really finding new bands, and promoting music.

Software's always been in the same position: making it is digital and distributing it is digital. Like music, most software is bad. It takes reviewers with some reputation to really promote good software, or else tons of money like Microsoft has.

Sometimes good software is just insanely expensive. I can never see myself paying for Microsoft's Office Suite, yet I use it daily. I am a poor college student and don't think Microsoft, even for a second, believes that I could pay half a grand for a word processor and email client.

If I ever end up in a company where I use these products, I will have them foot the bill.

I bought your programs because they work . Also the cost is reasonable .There are a lot of simple programs available but they want too much for them. Living in Australia I have to nearly double the price due to the currency exchange rate and this makes them too much to buy.

I've only bought about three programs in my whole life, and I build and use software all day every day.

I bought one, Photoshop, because I needed to learn it as a student, and didn't know any better not to copy it.

I bought two other programs: SoundJam for the Mac and MoveableType (well, I donated for that one).

Every other piece of software I have and use was purchased by an employer. Now, I have software from places that I worked for two months last year, and software that I didn't use at a job but was on the Install server.

Many people I know get their stuff the same way, and buy a tiny tiny fraction of their software "legally."

"I am sure (though a quick Google gave me nothing) that the Managing Director of Macromedia was quoted saying that piracy (particularly by students) was a great help to his company as it undercut cheaper competitors who can't compete with free and maintained their hegemony."

No, I don't think so. Macromedia subsidizes students, but the record is clear about theft of digital work.

(Slava raises the good point that developers (whether or programs, sites, or other services) can choose their own terms for release and reuse of their own work.)

I'll admit I have pirated software but mainly to try it out. I have bought every app I've ever actually used on a regular basis.

The refreshing thing about unsanity software is that A) it is useful and b) it is totally reasonably priced. I bought windowshade immediately... if it had been $30 I probably wouldn't have bought it. I think a reasonable price is the best defense against pirates.

Piracy is not the problem, it's a symptom of the problem.

Do a google search for "software is a service" and you'll get a bunch of good stories that address the real problem.

The fact that Slava is selling tweaks for $10 a pop shows that he doesn't get it. Not to bust on Unsanity, because I'm sure it's a great company and he's a great guy, it's part of a larger lack of appreciation of economics in the computing field.

Part of it is because people are thinking, "if I sell software as a service I can't make any money in the long run." Well... maybe you're not providing anything of value? Maybe the only reason you're in business is that you've got a few customers trapped with your proprietary "product" and most of your bottom line is met through contract work.

I think that describes a heck of a lot of software firms. 90% of their work is consulting and they kid themselves that they actually put out a product. Then they wail about how piracy is killing them... when in fact they never had a concrete business model!

Could delusion really be this widespread? How else do you explain the .com bust?! People thought this was the next "killer app," the next fictional product that was going to make everyone rich.

I really wanted to go into software development, but I have no illusions that there will ever be another Microsoft or Oracle. And those companies are going to be radically different in 10 years because all the major applications, e.g. operating system, database and office suites, will be worth effectively nothing.

I don't see why this would be a bad thing at all. At least there won't be any piracy...

Mr. X's comments reflect an all too common attitude that is simply a delusion that results from being in denial. "I couldn't learn Photoshop if I had to buy it." And your point is? Where do people get the idea that they have some inherent right to learn or use software, listen to music, and so on? This kind of thinking is just a lame rationalization offered by people to justify their dishonesty. Unethical people have always had justifications for their unethical behavior, but justification never makes unethical behavior ethical.

Mr. X, if you can't afford Photoshop to learn it, then welcome to life. Is the next step to steal photographic equipment you can't afford so you can learn to be a photographer? If I can't afford to buy a car, should I be allowed to "borrow" cars without the permission of the owners so I can learn to drive? I can't believe people will actually go onto a public forum and admit that they steal things because they can't afford everything they want, and then try to make it sound as if that's really okay.

And regarding your comment, "besides MaxMenu that I just HAD to crack 'cause their policy towards piracy/users privacy is too annoying..." No, you chose to crack it because you're arrogant in thinking of yourself as above the rules. You have a whole list of excuses why they don't or shouldn't apply to you. But they're just excuses to cover the fact that you lack integrity. If you don't have integrity now, you won't have it just because you get a job and can afford the stuff you steal now.

When I was growing up, I was taught that if you take something that isn't yours, it's called stealing. There were no exceptions for overpriced items, things you couldn't afford, things you couldn't locate to buy, things the owner would never miss, or things for sale by excessively wealthy people. If you take something that isn't yours, it's called stealing. When did people stop learning this?

Larry

hey larry, i'm glad your world is so cut and dried. it's a great formula for keeping the gooks where you want them, isn't it? raise the prices high enough that only the privileged can get in... fortunately technology is enabling, not disabling. you can charge the corporations - who are in on the same game as you are - but not the individual. your smirking righteousness sickens.

bravo, mr. x.

I have never pirated any Unsanity software. I've bought nearly everything they sell, and I appreciate their service and software very much and more props to 'em! An interesting article, lots of food for thought. And to larry and mr. x, the "rules" are written by culture. The rules do NOT dictate culture, as this is not a police state. One cannot force people to be benevolent (ever read clockwork orange?), and this is why I agree with slava's stance on piracy. Sony Music and a couple other record labels recently released CDs that would not play on computers, which many consumers promptly refused to buy. The moral issues surrounding piracy seem deceptively easy to understand, and it is tempting to apply an oversimplifying "heuristic" to the subject...that cracking software is always piracy is always theft is always illegal and always wrong. While this fabulous mental shortcut soothes a less critical mind, it doesn't really apply to contemporary culture. Too many people do not adhere to that ethical standard. Rather than blasting them with morals and rhetoric, they should be adapted to as members in the community. Certainly, no company should ever make the "job" of a hacker or pirate too easy. Here's what I believe. Software/Media piracy by any business is wrong and should be prosecuted. No one should ever make a profit on something that was not theirs in the first place (Ahem, Microsoft...). Piracy rings that distribute en masse around the world, notably in Thailand, Czech Republic, should be broken up and prosecuted. Such rings do serious damage to companies and the economy. Using a copy of someone else's software and/or serial number should be frowned upon, and one should feel sufficiently guilty for doing so...regardless of whether it is a smaller company like Unsanity or a larger one like Macromedia. There should be sufficient security features in software to give hackers a challenge and keep the rest of us guilty-feeling ones on our toes. I think serious, dedicated and well-meaning hackers are an asset to the internet and computing community as they are among the first to discover security holes in software. Frankly, I'm glad that hackers found most of the holes in unix, windows, IIS, and apache so they could be patched up before any terrorist found them.

Im not proud to say it but i guess i forced myself to, believe what you wish about me but ive downloaded programs that were obviously high priced for a simple high school student like me...
I dont get any profit for what i do, and i barely even put the stuff i make on the internet, and when i do they only stay up for a month...
If i ever get a job, that requires me to use programs like Macromedia Flash or Adobe Photoshop and gain profit, ill be sure to buy them, if they job is fitting for it, it all depends on the circumstances of what the program is being used for.
Say you want to just do things for a hobby, things that probably not even see the light of day, surely its ok to download programs that cost more than whats in your meagre bank account? The less fortunate, like me cannot account up to what these big corporations believe...
I would say more, but my class is ending..

Larry writes:

"When I was growing up, I was taught that if you take something that isn't yours, it's called stealing."

Actually if you look at the actual legal tradition in the US, violating copyright protection has NEVER been considered 'stealing', and still is not under the law.

If you copy something in violation of copyright protection, you are not even committing a crime. It is a civil infraction that violates the right of the copyright owner, but is not a criminal offense. It never has been and never should be. It doesn't mean it is right, but let's at least try to be accurate in how we describe things. The music author or software publisher does not 'have' one less copy of something if you copy the software. You are violating his right to prevent you from duplicating the material, but this is not 'stealing' and never ever has been according to the law.

I am not saying that copying protected items is right, but at the same time it disgusts me to see the RIAA slimebuckets make grossly incorrect and exaggerated claims about "STEALING" when it simply isn't so. (The RIAA folks may be right about their copyright rights, but at the same time, are just as unethical and immoral as those who copy music, given their disgusting sleazeball tactics to rip off both musicians and the music buying public, and f*** over the civil rights of all americans by lobbying congress to pass draconian legislation to protect their pocketbooks).

Humphries

I agree with Larry. Piracy is stealing. People do not have an intrinsic right to use creations of programmers and artists. If a person is unwilling or unable to buy software or music, then there's always Linux and the radio! I totally disagree with the "culture" argument -- "Hey, everybody's stealing! It's okay!" If students used Gimp instead of Photoshop, maybe video game development and graphic artist companies would eventually be using Gimp, and no students would have any inclination to steal Photoshop again!

I agree that software and music is generally very expensive, and upgrading my version of Windows, Office, Visual Studio, etc, has personally cost me thousands over the past six years, but I refuse to pirate anything -- not because I am a chump, or out of touch with the "culture" of acceptable piracy, but because I know that it is theft, just as if I walked in to Electronics Boutique or Wal*Mart and took a game or application box right off the shelf and walked out of the store with it. Some people can accept piracy because it is so impersonal. Software just appears on Kazaa or Direct Connect...Why not download it? If a person's Kazaa terminal was inside a Wal*Mart location, and the person had to run out of the store after clicking to begin piracy, I bet the "theft" aspect would be a little more obvious.

Sure, I'm against high prices and really unfavorable terms of service, etc, but I would never pirate software or music. Some people may rationalize piracy as a way to cast a vote against high prices. Other insane people use piracy as a vote against anti-piracy measures! If one wants to send a message about a product, just pretend it didn't exist! *That* would really send a message. Instead, pirates send a mixed message: We love your product, but we don't want to pay a lot for it. It is very natural for a company to conclude that if they can somehow prevent you from piracy you might end up buying the product.

I wish piracy weren't possible, because I think the ideal economic dynamic would emerge. Insane high prices would come down *OR* someone else would take the opportunity to COMPETE. Instead piracy destroys the incentive for competition to enter the market. Why lower prices or compete when the average market price is already close to zero (due to piracy)? Plus, potential competitors will be subject to piracy, etc, etc.

Piracy sucks. I am considering selling my own software, at low cost, and most of my thinking is invested in thoughts of how to survive when only one person in a thousand who really likes a low-cost product will bother to pay for it! Contrary to some statements made by confessed pirates here, I don't think any amount of true product value or reasonable, low cost will change anything. Why buy it at all if you are already using Kazaa or Direct Connect and it is far more convenient to click on a cracked version than to enter credit card information, etc, to buy it on some web site? It's a slippery slope.

In some sense, reality is "right". Piracy is a fact. Natural law has spoken. I just think it sucks because it destroys a mechanism for the creative people in society to survive based on the process of creation. Creation as a career is not viable. It's pushing us back in to the era of durable goods and manual labor. Of course this defies our destiny, so draconian measures that even legitimate users hate must be implemented -- which is why applications are migrating to subscription-based services and the concept of "rental" instead of owning. Furthermore, "calling home", hidden cores in CPUs, encryption, data mining, etc, are all going to be used in a "Big Brother" fashion to change the "culture of piracy". What pirate can complain? Corporations are just stepping up to address the theft of pirates, and some of us are becoming crazy by the "Big Brother" world that is forming around us.

There's only difference I can see between software piracy and stealing "real things" (shoplifting, say): Stealing an object requires a tiny amount of courage, whereas any ignorant asshole can pirate a piece of software.

I feel that i should put my point acress to this one, first of all the copyright rules have been twisted and changed since the internet came into being, originally it was to stop the illegal showing/broadcasting/replication of and selling other peoples work in another name, you will find today there are 2 kinds of pirates, the first kind is the jack the lad bastard that will break into your house and steal your dog just to make a buck, which all in all counts for a very small percentage, the other type is the general person on the net who is just taking advantage of what he has got,(remember this has been going for years from taping movies and music from the radio) These people would never have thought about buying the song/software in the first place not just cause of the cost but that quite often plays a part in it, The fact is that theft is either depriving someone of property or money, in most cases neither is happening as the person has not lost any property and not selling it on and therefore depriving of money. Think of it this way, you are sitting at home strumming your guitar and singing say one of robbie williams songs, you could hardly call that piracy and yet it has the same connatations, Also companies like microsoft deliver a product to both the general public and the business world as if they where the same thing, People cannot afford to buy pieces of software such as ms office and continually have to upgrade them every year or 2, if you have got 2 computers and a laptop you have to buy 3 copies of it i mean come on, besides they are paying for the busines's license through the businesses that they finance in every day life such as supermarkets and petrol stations and how do the supermarkets and petrol stations accomodate the extra price of the software, they add to the price the end consumer must pay for their product. Also you havce no comeback on a software manufacturer if the software doesnt work in the way it is supposed to, i mean look at microsoft office, it gives you microsoft access bundled in there(only on the more expensive versions like pro mind you) now i work for a private bank/shares trading company and we have quite a few access databases that have been developed for several accounting porposes, now in the last 3 months several of the access databases have become corrupt and we have had to restore them losing the data since the last backup, why does this happen? i have found its because of a fault in access which corrupts the tables when a silly sequence of events happens, what can you do? u sure as hell cant sue microsoft for loss of money time and data, because they have several lines making up a disclaimer saying its all your responsability, and there are literally thousands of other examples like this in microsoft alone let alone other manufacturers.

Colin Wrote
"In some sense, reality is "right". Piracy is a fact. Natural law has spoken. I just think it sucks because it destroys a mechanism for the creative people in society to survive based on the process of creation. Creation as a career is not viable. It's pushing us back in to the era of durable goods and manual labor"

The process of creation is kept alive in essence by piracy, The more things you see and use the more idea's/ spinoffs that are created, its not really pushing us back into the era of manual labour because companies still require to buy the legal software, and the truth is the software industry makes a lot more money from selling software to business than it does from the general public.
i think their only intelligent way out is to offer a public license at a price that makes sense and a business license for the business(u have to remember that businesses pay less atm for software as they don't have to pay the tax)
and for those of you who say that it would be too difficult to make sure that the business's are buying business licences and not public, look at the current situation, its a lot easier to do a company than individuals

uncle john wrote
"There's only difference I can see between software piracy and stealing "real things" (shoplifting, say): Stealing an object requires a tiny amount of courage, whereas any ignorant asshole can pirate a piece of software."

not entirely true, you ask 100 people how to get a pirate piece of software from the internet and you will find that around 90% of them know it can be done and even which apps can be used to get it, but wont be able to get it or install it, Its a hard thing to believe when you work in IT because everyone you really know knows how, but think of it this way how many people have you helped that actually still think the cd rom drive is the coffee cup holder god know i have to help several people a week because their computer is not working and it turns out they didnt turn it on.

I would just like to say that i believe that as long as your using the software for your own hobbie and not making any profit out of it it seems justified to use a serial or crack. i recently downloaded macromedia mx 2004 studio, there is no way that i would have been able to afford the 100s of pounds on the price tag. i only use it to update my photographic website and now that i know what a usefull programme it is i would be more likely to purchase it if i ever go into proffessional web design.

Software protection is not an easy job, but no doubt you will benefit from using it.

Regards,
Randy Li

http://www.sdprotector.com

What about the people who take the program and re-sell it!

A para-legal called me today.
She tells me that her attorney (her boss) buys my program and then re-sells if for a quarter of the originial price!

So, I'm looking for a good dongle solution today!