I couldn't have said it better myself.

karma's a bitch, ain't it?

A company illegally using computer office programs? What else is new.

Well I guess this is kinda new. Usually it's small companys that do it to my knowledge.

I'd guess that MOST office software is pirated honestly. Cracking down on piracy might just lead to free options being developed, and further enhanced until they are the equals of software that costs money.

I think that's why Microsoft never goes after the number of buisnesses that use illegal copies of Windows and Microsoft Office. They'd rather people use that then Linux and Open Office.

Music piracy? This was something that's worse and more pervasive then music piracy. It's buisness software piracy.

Unlike most music piracy which is mostly used for just enjoyment.   Business Software piracy more often then not is used for personal monetary gain. (well company monetary gain.)

Additionally I don't see why everyone compares copyright infringement to stealing.

Software Piracy is wrong... but that's like comparing taking a picture of Michalangelo's David and stealing it.

Or say... taking a postcard with Michelangelo's David... scanning it, and printing a copy for a friend.

That's the thing about software piracy. It needs to be a law because of how easy it can be copied. However put in in practice with any other product and it makes no sense.

It's like Kellogs sueing people for making Rice Crispy Treats when people could be buying them in the stores.

The only difference is the ease of copying it.

Of course the counter free narjet argument is that if people won't pay for it, people should just stop developing it for profit.

Which likely would come to fruition if such laws continued to exist. Would this be bad? Maybe. Maybe not. They would likely find other ways to exist such as advertising in product.

Piracy laws may just be a artificial way to let people keep archaic economic models for products that just don't fit the mold. Still while it's the law, it's the law... and that's the way most of them get paid at the moment.

Perhaps we'll see a shift occur though. EA is already trying it. 

@Kazz216 Let´s hope that the shift keeps the power in the hand of the consumer just as the downloadings have, now you can actually see if said product is worth your money and not waste most of your earned money in products that are mediocre

I wouldn't put it that way. The vast majority of products people pirate don't use the "try before you buy" model.

Most would seem to use the "It's not worth my money, but I want it anyway" model.

People are brought up wanting to buy products most people don't want to pirate... if it's something they are guranteed to like people are going to want to go through the official means to get them assuming they think the price is fair. Even if they have to pay more that way.

However once they already have the product there is very little incentive for the pirate to purchase the original. Granted this may lead to the raised perceived value of said persons work and future works will be purchased in stores, but these cases are likely at least as rare as the person who only downloads stuff because it's free.

I was just more thinking on paper about how copyright laws and similar laws are interesting contradictions.

Keep in mind a switch in revenue generating for software and other like things would create a drastic drop in the quality of new media since there would be no profit in it. Of course eventually said drop would be made up... but it would take a while.

On the one hand we'd have a less hypocritical set of laws and profit model... but on the other hand, we'd have to bite the bullet on quality and advancement for a while.

At the end of the day the government will err on the side of stability, qualty and advancement over taking a hit and having less hypocricy in laws.

It'd take a LONG time till we saw for example any videogames that cost 40-50 million to make. They'd still happen eventually. But like I said. Long time. Hardly seems worth it.

Also blah blah lobbiests etc. Since big companies would stop having such a big hand in such products since companies like EA and Ubisoft would be outdated... and instead the small developers who are doing it because they like it and are good at it would be king... as companies came to them with funding to make their games with advertisements and other things in them. Big companies just wouldn't be as effective in such a situation. They'd be more like agents then actual owners in my opinion. Finding work for up and coming development teams and taking a cut of their products.

As for office products... I imagine things like Open Office or whatever it's called would just become big.  People would tweak the programs for their own needs... post it up, people would download the new versions and it'd be like the standard microsoft office programs, but more varied, and to the savy person more variable. 

Sony is a dirty bitch :)