Article About 'The Menace Of The Software Pirates' From 1985
from the and-that's-why-there's-no-UK-software-industry dept
ChurchHatesTucker points us to an article from Electronic Games Magazine from 1985, available via Archive.org, entitled Menace of the Software Pirates. You might notice that much of the article sounds familiar.
This kind of article really does demonstrate the old adage, "the more things change, the more they stay the same." Though it's also quite noteworthy that the article highlights some software companies who believe that there are better ways to fight infringement than using DRM. It highlights two alternative strategies: the first is adding additional bells and whistles to the packaging, including various scarcities. The second is by being nice: actively resisting DRM, letting consumers know that, having a really strong replacement policy and keeping prices reasonable. Of course, these are the kinds of strategies that folks are suggesting again today, but which most software firms still seem resistant to embrace. Those who don't understand history may be condemned to repeat it... and without a little copyright infringement to preserve this piece, perhaps we wouldn't even know about that history.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: history, software, software piracy
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"the closer one looks at the situation, the more clearly one group stands out as being culpable: the producers of disk duplication software"
heh, typical asses blaming the hammer manufacturers for their broken window. If they had just never made computers able to copy files and hammers able to break windows, everything would be dandy :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Youtube has demonstrated just how much culture has been locked away in corporate coffers and would never see the light of day without people uploading their old VHS recordings for the world. It demonstrates the whole problem with copyright.
If a company can't make money on it, then they have no incentive to digitize it and make it available to anyone, and the culture suffers, even though there are lots of people out there that would do that work for free if it weren't illegal.
What's the point of copyright if there's no monetary incentive for the copyright holder? Who is benefiting?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This is the real problem, that they exist because of Adam Smith's term 'enlightened self interest' meaning that its assumed that if people join together it is for a common benefit. Unfortunately Smith didn't take into account that short term interest and long term interest would come into conflict here. Now that we know for a fact it does, we need to re-image the corporation to require 10 year goals or something. In that situation, suing customers for a stronger quarter and using financial wizardry to create short term profits out of incredible risk would be unimaginable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If a company can't make money on it, then they have no incentive to digitize it and make it available to anyone, and the culture suffers, even though there are lots of people out there that would do that work for free if it weren't illegal.
It's even worse than that. Not only will the company not release something if they don't think that they can make money on it, they will fight tooth and nail to keep anyone else from having it, even though it's completely worthless to them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
"Oh, you damn kids, with your World of Warfare, and your diddy-bopping music, and your roadsters with the rumble seats, and the YouTube, and the Google..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
I tried playing "The World of Welfare" the other day, but I didn't like it.
It was way to easy get gold and you didn't even have to do anything to earn it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
And if you think DRM is much of a problem for WOW players, google, "world of warcraft private server."
DRM will continue to be used and it may well prevent piracy in some instances, but pissing on a cake so that no one will steal a piece ruins the purpose of baking the cake.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
Here go play some free pool online.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
In EVE Online even cheating and destroying the economies of others factions is A-ok.
Movies all tell the stories of people who don't give a fock about the law or face serious troubles to achieve something that mostly is against the law, music is all about the rebels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
NO IT ISN'T!
It IS adding real scarcities - namely you pay NOT for a copy of the game - but rather for access to WoW servers. Those servers cost money to maintain so it is payment for services rendered - not a monopoly rent.
It is the game equivalent of going to a live concert.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
So it isn't really that different to WoW - although the payment model seems a little more friendly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
A most effective approach, although unfortunately, Arenanet (who makes the Guild Wars games) is still of the belief that copyright is necessary and that they can't create without it. I have often wondered how one would make an MMO without copyright. I do believe it's possible, I'm just uncertain as to the methodology.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
The likes of Dungeon Fighter Online, Dungeons and Dragons, and even Team Fortress 2 now progress without having to pay one fee for anything.
You have to ask yourself, what is it that most game developers want? It's eyeballs and a person's attention. Yes, they want your money, but even WoW has had to give up the fact that people are not willing to pay for the first 20 levels of their game.
" I have often wondered how one would make an MMO without copyright. I do believe it's possible, I'm just uncertain as to the methodology"
Honestly, copyright has little to do with game creation. I've seen the assertion that a game is created with copyright, but it's an automatic clause. You're automatically given copyright.
The only time it's an issue is when it's enforced such as fan sites, fan projects or as a carrot on a stick when you're dealing with the publisher/developer relationship. Some are trying something new, so it should be understood that the endeavor has merits. Copyright won't be an issue and that's a good thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BAH!
But what they wont tell you is; They are making millions and millions on the hammers, but it's never enough.
If they managed to stop file sharing in it's tracks, they would just redirect their fire towards those evil radio stations. Once they got rid of the radio stations, or have them taxed beyond the possibility of making money, they would just go after cloud computing, then they will go after our blank media.... and on and on ......
They have sued stroke victims, people with no computers, people that don't know how to use a computer, dead people... etc etc..
I have no sympathy for these greedy bastards.. none! They have declared war on an entire culture, they get what they fucking deserve.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/riaa-sues-radio-stations-for-giving-away-free-musi,48/
http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2011/05/riaa-goes-after-cloud-computing-boxnet.html
http://torr entfreak.com/where-the-riaa-gets-its-money/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/05/riaa_sues_the _dead/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BAH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: BAH!
http://literallyunbelievable.org/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: BAH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BAH!
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061018/233322.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles /20100314/1739258553.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If a company is bought out by another then it failed?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Penguin Software was confronted by Penguin Books in regard of infringement of their name. Fearing that the legal costs of a lawsuit could have decimated his company, even in the case of an eventual victory, Pelczarski renamed his company Polarware in 1986, ending the "Penguin Software" brand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not to mention that the Shareware Industry (remember Walnut Creek), the GNU project, or the OEM CD-ROM (Yellow book) business method (which I was a part of way back in 1991) would not of been necessary and we would not have the diverse range of publishers and software both Professional and Edutainment that we have today.
In Fact 1This article of 1985 is nothing, way back in 1975 Bill Gates penned a letter [found here] stating that Software Copying was wrong and was hurting him personally (Some people might get the irony of Gates actually saying this when looking at where MS-DOS and Windows 1.0 to 3.0 actually came from)
A quote by Jim Warren, co-editor of Dr Dobbs magazine to Gate's letter [SIGPLAN Notices (ACM) 11 (7): pp. 1–2.] states what is still today the problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This is just my opinion, but without software piracy, I don't think computers would be anywhere near as commonplace as they are today.
I know from personal experience that one of the factors that influenced quite a few people to buy computers was the fact that the software for them could be easily copied. When someone is considering spending several hundred dollars on a computer system, telling them that they'll need to buy all their software at $30-50 a pop isn't too encouraging. But tell them that they can get a whole library of software for just the cost of blank disks and it suddenly looks like a much better deal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"there's no software coming out of the UK, because of the fact that "piracy has flourished unchecked" in the UK"
Great British games companies active in the 80s: Ultimate Play The Game, Psygnosis, Ocean, Sensible Software, Llamasoft, Mastertronic, Core Design, Codemasters, the Bitmap Brothers, Bullfrog (among many others).
If the output of those alone could be considered "no software", then I for one hope for a return to the days of free piracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: why
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It doesn't interfere with anything, the discs are still copyable, and if I wanted to I could copy the manual, but that would probably cost more than the game.
BTW, to date this, I think the game required at least Windows 3.0.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I was an Atari computer enthusiast in the mid 80s, and can say from experience, that everyone I knew pirated the games, and spent less purchasing them than they paid to the San Leandro computer hacker group, which hired professional programmers to crack the games. I met a few games programmers at the time, and they told the same story - that they'd program for other platforms, but never again for Atari. I don't remember the number, but the estimate was that there were 10 or more pirated copies for each purchased copy, and I don't think that was too far out of line. Probably way too low.
I was an Atari pirate, and helped kill the platform. :(
The owners of Atari committed worse damages, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Fuck Atari.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]