RE: vb3 Call To Home

[Brad]

You can never test a patch on every know machine running out there, a good admin knows that when it is time to patch it is time to back up. People and companys that do not do that pay the price in time.

But why is this even of importance in this debate? vB is not sending files to the users as microsoft dose, they are merly doing a version check.

Besides which, what great burden is it for vB staff to deal with a problem that is caused by an obsolete version? All they have to say (and they do say it) is "That problem was fixed in the 3.x.x release. In order to fix it, you'll need to upgrade to the latest version."

That hardly qualifies as a significant burden.

Support staff pays in time, and time is money. I suppose you could argue that new support issues from new versions could take up more time, espescally if new versions fail on many installs. But as a company jelsoft has to have fath in their product and staff, or they will fail anyway.

I have always thought jelsoft has been fair with the issue, imho if you can not spot and remove the php code yourself then I don't think your ready to turn it off. I know that is alot of ask because of the many newbies that come here to learn without any experance, but that is always how I have felt about the subject.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by Brad.loo

You can never test a patch on every know machine running out there, a good admin knows that when it is time to patch it is time to back up. People and companys that do not do that pay the price in time.

But why is this even of importance in this debate? vB is not sending files to the users as microsoft dose, they are merly doing a version check.

Which is one of the points I brought up earlier. We were not talking about disabling the patching mechanism itself - just a notification message.

Originally Posted by Brad.loo

Support staff pays in time, and time is money. I suppose you could argue that new support issues from new versions could take up more time, espescally if new versions fail on many installs. But as a company jelsoft has to have fath in their product and staff, or they will fail anyway.

You are correct in that time is money - however, what I had stated was that this was no significant burden. The fact is that the need to tell people to upgrade doesn't really come about because they didn't see the "Current Version" listed in their AdminCP. It comes about because they don't research what's been fixed in the newer releases. Just because they have 3.0.1 and vB is up to 3.0.3 doesn't mean that their problem has already been fixed by the upgrade, after all.

The problem there is that the users in question don't research their own problem adequately before asking for help. That's not something that the version check helps with. Especially since in order to ask for help in the first place, they already have to visit the vB site - in which case they see what the most recent version is anyway!

Originally Posted by Brad.loo

I have always thought jelsoft has been fair with the issue, imho if you can not spot and remove the php code yourself then I don't think your ready to turn it off. I know that is alot of ask because of the many newbies that come here to learn without any experance, but that is always how I have felt about the subject.

I understand your point, Brad.loo - but I'm afraid I have to disagree with it. A company exec doesn't have to know how to personally implement IT security schema in order to know that it has to be done.

It's possible for someone to knowledgeably make this choice, and yet not have the technical skills to execute it.

To take an extreme example - it's not practical for Stephen Hawking to make this change (given the difficulty he has typing), but are you going to argue that he doesn't have what it takes to make a knowledgeable decision about the subject?

[Dean C]

I have to say Ocean, I disagree entirely with what you said about piracy. As a software developer myself there is nothing more undermining than working for so long, just to literally have people come along and pirate your work. Remember most internet software development companies aren't almight powerful organisations. Most lack the resources to suffice a courtcase against suspected piracy distributers etc. Unlike with MP3's, we don't have some almight organisation fighting our battles, we have to do it ourself. Out of courtesy to the vB developers, for the sake of one minor call-home (which may be used to fight piracy, but mainly for legitimate uses), you could leave it there.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by Dean C

I have to say Ocean, I disagree entirely with what you said about piracy. As a software developer myself there is nothing more undermining than working for so long, just to literally have people come along and pirate your work.

If a person pirates your application - but would not have been able to afford it even if they didn't pirate it - what money have you lost?

And if by doing so, they are able to spread the word that you have an application that's really good - aren't they giving you free advertising?

And if by word of mouth from this user who pirated your software, other users come across it and purchase it from you - isn't that money you gained that you otherwise might not have had (since without the word-of-mouth from the pirater in question, they wouldn't have even known that your software existed)?

And even if this person couldn't afford it him/herself - but they were able to recommend your software to the company they work for, and you gain sales that way - isn't that also money in the bank that you also would not have had were it not for this one pirate?



These are not some ambiguous hypothetical scenario. I see it happen every week. It's happened to me. I have made a huge amount of money for companies that would never have made those sales were it not for a pirated copy of their software that I ran across.

How does this harm them? (This scenario specifically) It doesn't. It's done them good and put money in their bank.


Remember, I didn't say that *all* piracy was good. I just said that good things can come about as well as bad.

[j_86]

Originally Posted by Ocean

If a person pirates your application - but would not have been able to afford it even if they didn't pirate it - what money have you lost?

This is a point i've been trying to put accross to the staff for ages now.

They believe that all pirates would part with the $80 or the $180 for the software if it wasnt available to them for free.

First, this is about as wrong as you can get. Second, they would just use phpBB or Invision even before *considering* having to pay, which i'm sure i'm right in saying less than of pirates 1% would end up paying for VB if they couldn't have it for free (priated).

It's like the RIAA / Record industry. "Napster and the like cost us $XX.X Billion a year". No, they don't cost them ANYTHING, as a tiny tiny fraction of those people would pay for what they would have pirated.

[Dean C]

Originally Posted by JimpsEd

It's like the RIAA / Record industry. "Napster and the like cost us $XX.X Billion a year". No, they don't cost them ANYTHING, as a tiny tiny fraction of those people would pay for what they would have pirated.

Again this is unjustifiable. They shouldn't be downloading the music illegally in the first place.

[j_86]

Exactly.

But once *again* you don't explain the arguements put accross by VBorg or VBcom staff that piracy is costing them SO much money they may have to put prices up for us!

If anything, it would increase piracy too

[Erwin]

Originally Posted by Ocean

If a person pirates your application - but would not have been able to afford it even if they didn't pirate it - what money have you lost?

Most people who copy software or download illegal music files can afford to pay for the software. Just because they don't want to pay for it and probably will not pay for it, doesn't mean that they cannot afford it. They just prefer to save money and spend it on something else.

Pirating software or music is stealing and is against the law. It's also morally wrong. You can justify it however you want.

And if by doing so, they are able to spread the word that you have an application that's really good - aren't they giving you free advertising?

I think most programmers and musicians prefer to get paid for their work rather than get free advertising. As would a baker, doctor, truck driver etc. Just because the work of a programmer or a musician is easily copied does not make it right to steal their work.

And if by word of mouth from this user who pirated your software, other users come across it and purchase it from you - isn't that money you gained that you otherwise might not have had (since without the word-of-mouth from the pirater in question, they wouldn't have even known that your software existed)?

Again, your logic is flawed since you are trying to justify the theft of intellectual property by saying that it advertises the original product. Why would anyone pay for the original product if they can get it for free? For example, if I can buy a fake Rolex watch for less price and it's just as good, why pay for a real one? Let alone if I can get if for free.

How does this harm them? (This scenario specifically) It doesn't. It's done them good and put money in their bank.

No, you are stealing money from them by stealing their product/ intellectual property. You are stealing their money by stealing the time and effort they put into the product. You are using their product without their permission and consent.

Try to justify it however you want.

Remember, I didn't say that *all* piracy was good. I just said that good things can come about as well as bad.

Just because good things can come out of a bad thing does not justify the bad thing. Most bad things have good things in them - so what?

Most people who promote piracy are the end-users - most software developers, musicians and holders of intellectual property do not support the theft of intellectual property and breaches of copyright because they are the ones who suffer - not the end-users.

Anyway, we all choose to live our lives the way we want. You choose how to live yours, and I will mine. I'm just putting forth the argument that piracy is not as "great" as you make it out to be.

[Ocean]

Originally Posted by Erwin

Most people who copy software or download illegal music files can afford to pay for the software. Just because they don't want to pay for it and probably will not pay for it, doesn't mean that they cannot afford it. They just prefer to save money and spend it on something else.

Pirating software or music is stealing and is against the law. It's also morally wrong. You can justify it however you want.

Erwin, you missed the point. I never argued the morals or ethics of pirating. I was responding to the claims that pirating is responsible for huge financial losses, and does nothing but harm to developers.

I was simply arguing that that statement was untrue. Not whether pirating was justifiable by itself.

Originally Posted by Erwin

I think most programmers and musicians prefer to get paid for their work rather than get free advertising. As would a baker, doctor, truck driver etc. Just because the work of a programmer or a musician is easily copied does not make it right to steal their work.

I never said it was.

Originally Posted by Erwin

Again, your logic is flawed since you are trying to justify the theft of intellectual property by saying that it advertises the original product. Why would anyone pay for the original product if they can get it for free? For example, if I can buy a fake Rolex watch for less price and it's just as good, why pay for a real one? Let alone if I can get if for free.

My logic is solid, because I'm not trying to justify anything. I'm saying that in many cases, developers earn more money as a result of piracy than their hypothetical losses. This isn't theory, I see it happen all the time.

I've bought software based on the recommendation of someone else who had a pirated version - and this was software that I did not know previously existed. The money I paid that developer was a direct result of a pirated copy that that person would not have bought in the first place. Ergo, the developer made money from that pirated copy, and lost nothing.

In addition, I have recommended it to other companies, and so the developer has continued to rake in more money as a result of that single pirated copy. I'm not claiming that this justifies anything - all I'm saying is that it's not the "piracy does nothing but ruin companies" attitude that developers love to claim.

Originally Posted by Erwin

No, you are stealing money from them by stealing their product/ intellectual property. You are stealing their money by stealing the time and effort they put into the product. You are using their product without their permission and consent.

Try to justify it however you want.

As to your first point - if you wouldn't have bought it anyway, than the developer loses nothing. I'm not arguing ethics - just financial loss and gain.

As to your second point, read my post more carefully, please.

Originally Posted by Erwin

Just because good things can come out of a bad thing does not justify the bad thing. Most bad things have good things in them - so what?

Most people who promote piracy are the end-users - most software developers, musicians and holders of intellectual property do not support the theft of intellectual property and breaches of copyright because they are the ones who suffer - not the end-users.

Ironically enough, I once visited a software developer's website where he gave his own opinion on piracy - and it almost exactly mirrored mine. He did feel that it was okay under certain circumstances, and he said that he had no problems with users using his software in that manner.

This was a year or two ago, unfortunately, and I can't remember what the site was - but if I can find it again, I'll post it.

Originally Posted by Erwin

Anyway, we all choose to live our lives the way we want. You choose how to live yours, and I will mine. I'm just putting forth the argument that piracy is not as "great" as you make it out to be.

Erwin, please read the posts carefully. As I specified above, I wasn't trying to justify anything - just countering the popular claims by developers against piracy.

And as I also stated, I did agree that piracy can do bad things for developers. I just disagreed that it couldn't also do good things.

[Wayne Luke]

Actually we spend tens of thousands of dollars because of Piracy on a monthly basis. There are lost support hours as they try to get support from us. There are lawsuits because the software is being used in an illegal manner and "we gave it to them". There is a full time lawyer on retainer. In the past, we have even caught one competitor using a pirated copy simply to copy features out of the software. However, the most widespread use of piracy is customers who purchase a single license and then power half a dozen or more forums on different sites with it.

The truth is that many actually purchase a copy when they are confronted with the fact that we know they have been running a pirated copy, usually within 24 hours of notification. However this is because they risk losing their data because we will have their providers pull the plug.

So we have had to come to some sort of compromise in making the software available. Either it can be visual source and we can track where it is running or we can encode it with Zend Encoder, which while lowering our potential marketshare lowers the risk of Piracy as well.