Are you a thief?

[Chuck U. Farlie]

Every once in awhile we hear about 'the movie industry has lost $XX billions due to piracy', blah blah blah...

Technology companies are continually trying to think of ways of stoping this piracy... through hardware and software means.

I admit... I have used pirated music, dvds, and software. I have lived in Asia - its actually harder to get the real version there than the black-market variety.

How many of you are pirates? I would presume that a lot of people have valid Windows that came with their system at purchase, but how much of your other software has been copied or downloaded and hacked?

I think these industries have a few issues to clear up if they want to combat piracy:

1. Pricing: Throughout South-East Asia the non-pirated versions of music CDs, Dvds, and software are all roughly the same (or more) than here. Yet, in Jakarta for example, the minimum wage is roughly $65USD a month. An office worker typically makes $100 to $150USD a month. A lot of these people do manage to save up $300 to get a computer system, but how are they going to afford $15 for a music CD, $25 for a DVD, and $150 to $500 for software?! You go to almost any mall in Jakarta and you can buy a DVD of the latest movie for $0.60, and Microsoft Office Professional for $1.

2. Their Estimates: Like the estimate listed above, $XX billion has been lost to piracy, but how do they calculate this? 95% of SE Asians with pirated music, movies, or software would not be paying customers if piracy was wiped out. I suspect that the majority of westerners would also not be paying customers -- there is no way I would shell out $300+ for Microsoft Office. I would rather do without.

I know they are trying to curtail this loss by implementing digital media management. I think, however, that no matter what they use to block the distribution, someone will figure out how to beat it.

Musicians, for example, will have to realize that their income needs to come from live shows - not record sales (when was the last time you bought a CD? I haven't bought one in 3 or 4 years!).

What are your thoughts? Do you consider yourself a thief? Should these handful of rich guys producing this crap be getting your hard-earned cash?

[Remiel]

Almost everything I have is completely legit.

If you want to look at piracy and software, you should look for articles pertaining to Galactic Civilizations II and Stardock. There is absolutely no piracy protection on Galactic Civilizations II, sales were beyond their wildest dreams, and the only thing they do is to download updates (which are infintely more than just patches), you have to have the code off of the CD. So theoretically, there is no barrier to pirating the core game. However... their decision to not include copy protection was based on the " outlandish " notion that people despised copy protection and viewed it as a complete hassle... and hot-diggity-damn, they were right!

[Charles Anthony]

What are your thoughts? Do you consider yourself a thief?

No. The reason is very simple: you can only steal something that is physical. It really is as simple as that.

It is more approriate to refer to it as some sort of breach of contract.

Am I a copy-cat? Yes.

Am I a cheat? Yes.

Am I a yellow-bellied copy-cat cheating slimeball? Yes.

Am I an arse? Yes.

Am I a fool to think that I will not suffer consequences? Yes.

However, unless there is a physical medium in question that goes from one person's possession to an other person, calling it "theft" will follow a path of logic that will also disallow you to whistle a popular tune that you heard on the radio.

Reconciling patents, copyright, intellectual property and so forth is an interesting examination and luckily for us the debate is not new. This forum is a goldmine of information. Before anybody thinks they know anything about the concept of piracy, I suggest that they review other older threads and see some of the groundwork has already been laid down. Here is a brilliant start:

I reject the notion of copyright.

and I must apologize to other forum members for waking up The Giant. I could not resist.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

What are your thoughts? Do you consider yourself a thief?

No. The reason is very simple: you can only steal something that is physical. It really is as simple as that.

I don't agree.

You can hack someone's bank account and wire the money to your account. You are stealing and what you stole is not physical - at least not until you pull it out of the ATM.

You can walk out back and hook up your cable TV connection. What you are stealing is a stream of electrons.

You can commit 'theft of services'... you could sneak on the back door of a bus without the driver seeing you.

Theft is taking another person's property without consent.

Property is (from Wikipedia):

In common law, property is divided into:

1. real property (immovable property) - interests in land and improvements thereto

2. personal property - interests in anything other than real property

Personal property in turn is divided into tangible property (such as cars, clothing, animals) and intangible or abstract property (e.g. financial instruments such as stocks and bonds, etc.), which includes intellectual property (patents, copyrights, trademarks).

So... just because its intangible or abstract does not mean its not property, and therefore, can be stolen, and if you steal it, you're a thief.

[Argus]

What are your thoughts? Do you consider yourself a thief? Should these handful of rich guys producing this crap be getting your hard-earned cash?

Here's the way I look at it.

I rarely like more than a couple of songs on an album. So I have very rarely bought albums. When I download music it is by particular songs, and almost all of it is old stuff. For example, I always liked that song that one of the car companies is now using, or was using, in its commercials - Catch the Wind, by Donovan. So I downloaded it. Now did this deprive anyone of profit? Not really. There is no way I would have ever gone out and bought a Donovan record or album just for that song. Most of the stuff I download is similar in nature. I hear a song, I want it, I download it. Were it not for downloading, I wouldn't have them.

I don't download software, however, except from legit dealers. And I don't download DVDs. I buy them from legit dealers - usually during sales, and again, usually older movies.

[Charles Anthony]

Theft is taking another person's property without consent.

Good, now we are going in the right direction.

Property is (from Wikipedia):

In common law, property is divided into:

Bad, now we are going in the wrong direction.

Your argument stops here because you are using "common law" to define theft in a "Moral & Religious Issues" thread. Thus, you are just talking about what is written in a particular law book. If that is all you want to know, go read the law book or the dictionary or the encyclopedia. Your argument is as enlightening as asking "Are you a pirate?

Do you or have you ever robbed at sea or plundered the land from the sea without commission from a sovereign nation?"

So... just because its intangible or abstract does not mean its not property, and therefore, can be stolen, and if you steal it, you're a thief.

Only according to how your law books define theft. That is not a moral argument. Your law books could easily be changed to permit your thievery. Then what???

Are you going to try Sharia law or Murphy's law to define property??

and again, usually older movies.

There is the kicker! Your saving grace! Lucky for you that they are older movies because otherwise I would have found you guilty of robbery!

[BubberMiley]

I don't see the difference between older movies and newer ones: they're all copyright-protected. Often there is new investment into older product, digitally remastering it to make it better than ever. I don't think copying 0s and 1s off a disk fits the exact definition of stealing, but it certainly sabotages the marketing process that got that material to the consumer in the first place, discouraging further investment.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

All right Charles... lets look at it like this:

If you get an illegal copy of windows XP, could you be charged with a crime?

If so, what do you think they'd charge you with? Piracy? Theft under $5000?

It really doesn't matter what you believe constitutes being a theif, but what constitutes being a theif in whatever country you happen to be in can matter (if you get caught).

[geoffrey]

Legal question: Copyright's enter public domain once a person dies plus a set amount of years. How does that apply to corporate copyright's, as corporations can last forever really?

Plus, I never agreed at the time the purchase contract between me and the software company was created not to copy the CD. The terms and conditions you agree to when you install the software are completely meaningless, you can't add to a contract without consideration from the other party. Once I've bought the software, with expectation that I should be able to use it, why can the company impose further unknown restrictions upon me?

You wouldn't be very happy if you bought a new car and week later you take it to fill up at the gas station and you find a sticker affixed to the tank, stating you must apply a large Ford sticker to the side of your car. Nor would that stand up in court. I'd argue that niether should undisclosed terms and conditions at the time of purchase.

This business law class I'm taking is really getting me thinking about such things. What say ye jbg, FTA, am I on track with such a statement, can a company enforce undisclosed terms? I may or may not be planning to write my paper on the topic .

[Charles Anthony]

I don't think copying 0s and 1s off a disk fits the exact definition of stealing, but it certainly sabotages the marketing process that got that material to the consumer in the first place, discouraging further investment.

That is exactly what it is.

If you get an illegal copy of windows XP, could you be charged with a crime?

You can not separate the concepts between morality and legality can you?

Furthermore, anybody who USES a Microsoft (Dos95, 98, XP, SP, Nthdegree, Longhorn, whatever) product of any sort today is asking to be robbed. It is analogous to leaving a front-door open but complaining that a robber came in and stole when you are away.

If so, what do you think they'd charge you with? Piracy? Theft under $5000?

You would be charged whatever they thought was profitable.

It really doesn't matter what you believe constitutes being a theif,

Correct. It does not matter because you are asking for a dry legal discussion and not a moral discussion. Go read a law book.

Your question is analogous to "What is the telephone number of the local pizza place?" Go check the directory.

Once I've bought the software, with expectation that I should be able to use it, why can the company impose further unknown restrictions upon me?

Because you, as a consumer, get suckered into it.

When you buy software (ex. Microsoft!) you also have a reasonable expectation that it works and does not destroy your property. However, when the software DOES NOT work, why do we as consumers accept endless patches and fixes and upgrades and updates and fixes and workarounds and fixes and patches AND continue to pay more for them??!!?? If it was any other product, we would demand a refund for the defective product.

[Argus]

and again, usually older movies.

There is the kicker! Your saving grace! Lucky for you that they are older movies because otherwise I would have found you guilty of robbery!

For buying older movies? Clearly you have an issue with comprehension. What I said was that I did not download movies.

Period.

[Charles Anthony]

Clearly you have an issue with comprehension.

Granted.

I suspect the clarity may have been muffled by the paramount distinction and over-ruling importance of "older" in determining the legitimacy of what is bought or how it is bought.

[Renegade]

Plus, I never agreed at the time the purchase contract between me and the software company was created not to copy the CD.

Yeah, you did. You are accepting agreemnets between two other associated parties besides yourself, the software distributor and the software manufacturer. They may or may not be related, and the software distributor may or may not represent the manufacturer. When you pay for the software you are only agreeing with the distributor. When you install the software and click that you agree to the terms, then you also enter into an agreement with the manufacturer as well. At that point, you agreed to restricted copying for personal use and not for redistribution. If you are not satisified with the terms, at any time prior to your agreement with the manufacturer, you can unwind the transaction and get your money back.

The terms and conditions you agree to when you install the software are completely meaningless, you can't add to a contract without consideration from the other party. Once I've bought the software, with expectation that I should be able to use it, why can the company impose further unknown restrictions upon me?

What unknown restrictions are you talking about? I think I addressed your issue above.

[August1991]

Geoffrey, your example of Ford forcing you to post a sticker on a car is naive. We define property in many different ways and we transfer property in different ways. For example, if you buy land, you may have to respect a right of way across the land.

Legal question: Copyright's enter public domain once a person dies plus a set amount of years. How does that apply to corporate copyright's, as corporations can last forever really?

In the US at present, it's the life of the author (not the current copyright holder) plus 70 years.

The length of the copyright term within the United States was extended by the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act which made the copyright term the life of the author plus 70 years for works created after January 1, 1978. In the case of a work of corporate authorship (also known as "Work for Hire") the term will be 95 years from the date of first publication or 120 years from the date of creation, whichever expires first. This legislation was challenged in court and affirmed by the US Supreme Court in the landmark copyright decision, Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003), in which the Supreme Court agreed that the length of the copyright term (ie, during which the copyright holder has a monopoly on its exploitation) could be extended by Congress after the original act of creation and beginning of the copyright term, as long as the extension itself was limited instead of perpetual. The duration of U.S. copyright for works created before 1978 is a complex matter; however, works published before 1923 are all in the public domain.

Wikipedia

Patents and trademarks are different.

If you are interested, I suggest you read David Friedman's "Clouds and Barbed Wire":

Property rights serve two related functions: They provide both a way of deciding who gets to use what when and an incentive for creating things.

In the case of intellectual property, the first function is not merely unnecessary but perverse. We cannot both drive the same car to different places, but we can both use the same idea to build different machines, or simultaneously read different copies of the same book.

[Renegade]

Because you, as a consumer, get suckered into it.

When you buy software (ex. Microsoft!) you also have a reasonable expectation that it works and does not destroy your property. However, when the software DOES NOT work, why do we as consumers accept endless patches and fixes and upgrades and updates and fixes and workarounds and fixes and patches AND continue to pay more for them??!!?? If it was any other product, we would demand a refund for the defective product.

If you read the software license agreement, most software vendors do not warrant their software to be defect free. They only warrant that they will fix known defects for a certain period. Given that it is well know that software has defects, how is it a reasonable expection that it works defect free?

Maybe you can elaborate on what you mean by "destroy your property"? I'd like to understand what kind of software does this, and why you continue to buy such software.

[Charles Anthony]

If you read the software license agreement, most software vendors do not warrant their software to be defect free. They only warrant that they will fix known defects for a certain period. Given that it is well know that software has defects, how is it a reasonable expection that it works defect free?

When something says: "Plug and play" but it does not, I see myself as having been suckered into buying something that does not work. Furthermore, if I must spend countles hours on a telephone between software support and operating system support, each giving excuses that it is not their fault but the other's responsibility, I call that a "rip-off" however little recourse I may have. When a consumer picks up a plastic-wrapped-software-box that clearly states the system requirements, if that software does not work on a system that fulfills that requirement, it is a rip off. I do not care how much fine print must be read to find the loop-holes or excuses.

Maybe you can elaborate on what you mean by "destroy your property"?

- losing data to any form of malware permitted by the operating system

http://www.frsirt.com/english/advisories/2006/1218

- insecure browsers bundled with operating systems permitting security breaches and resulting in computer system non-functionality

http://www.frsirt.com/english/advisories/2006/1218

Maybe you can elaborate on what you mean by "destroy your property"? I'd like to understand what kind of software does this,

Any software that permits or is the conduit of malware does that. Any form of malware permitted by the operating system without your knowledge or consent and leads you to lose data or require service is destroying your property.

and why you continue to buy such software.

I do not. I stopped long ago.

Why would someone else? It may still be easier and cheaper for them to do so compared to the alternatives. It is all relative.

If I buy a car, I understand that I must accept the hassle of a periodic oil change and maybe some rust-proofing. If my periodic oil change becomes a weekly service call and then monthly visit to a body-shop, maybe I should junk it.

The different standard for technology consumerism is bizarre. The time delay between functionality and defunctionality is rapid and muffled by the demand for firewalls and anti-software-ware. The nature of the market is that of "YOU are the fool because YOU did not buy a firewall or a spam filter or an anti-virus or an anit-spyware or a window-washer or browser filter or an anti-rootkit or you listened to a CD from Sony and it buggered your operating system" and we accept it. With other markets, we would see a consumer backlash or a massive product recall, whichever came first. With computers, we keep buying more!

[Renegade]

When something says: "Plug and play" but it does not, I see myself as having been suckered into buying something that does not work.

Marketing slogans are not just confined to software. (ever hear of "Nice'n'Easy" hair colouring?). Frankly I find it hard to believe that someone over 5 years old could not distinguish between a marketing slogan and a product representation.

Furthermore, if I must spend countles hours on a telephone between software support and operating system support, each giving excuses that it is not their fault but the other's responsibility, I call that a "rip-off" however little recourse I may have. Therefore, when a consumer picks up a plastic-wrapped-software-box that clearly states the system requirements, if that software does not work on a system that fulfills that requirement, it is a rip off. I do not care how much fine print must be read to find the loop-holes or excuses.

Again this has nothing uniquely to do with software. Some software companies provide this level of service, some don't. I can say the same about some of the utilities and insurance companies I have dealt with.

Maybe you can elaborate on what you mean by "destroy your property"?

- losing data to any form of malware permitted by the operating system

http://www.frsirt.com/english/advisories/2006/1218

- insecure browsers bundled with operating systems permitting security breaches and resulting in computer system non-functionality

http://www.frsirt.com/english/advisories/2006/1218

Any software that permits or is the conduit of malware does that. Any form of malware permitted by the operating system without your knowledge or consent and leads you to lose data or require service is destroying your property.

I see. First, it is interesting that you think of data on your drive as "property" that you own. (That's probably a whole discussion on its own).

Second, would you blame Toyota if someone stole your car and crashed it? You might have reason if Toyota didn't put in a door lock, or ignition lock. If despite having those things in place, a thief, still used sophisticated tools and exploited vunerabilities and still broke in, would you still blame the car manufacturer?

Do you know any car which is unbreakable? If there were such a thing, would you be willing to pay the cost?

Why would someone else? It may still be easier and cheaper for them to do so compared to the alternatives. It is all relative.

Exactly! If, despite the bugs, it didn't still offer them value over what they were doing before, they would revert to their previous method. The fact that no one is using typewriters illustrates that, while yes, sometimes your software can hang, it is still a damm ways better than the old way.

If I buy a car, I understand that I must accept the hassle of a periodic oil change and maybe some rust-proofing. If my periodic oil change becomes a weekly service call and then monthly visit to a body-shop, maybe I should junk it.

The different standard for technology consumerism is bizarre. The time delay between functionality and defunctionality is rapid and muffled by the demand for firewalls and anti-software-ware. The nature of the market is that of "You are the fool because YOU did not buy a firewall or a spam filter or an anti-virus or an anit-spyware or a window-washer or browser filter or an anti-rootkit or you bought from a CD from Sony and it buggered your operating system." and we accept it. Whereas with other markets, we would see a consumer backlash or a massive product recall, whichever came first. With computers, we keep buying more!

There was a day when the use of software was solely the realm of computer professionals who were intimately familiar with its internals. The commoditzation of software has meant that an increasingly complex product must be maintained by an untrained user. Unlike a car, software operates in an environment which is constantly changing. It must co-exist with software from multiple other vendors with which it was never tested. In addition when problems occur it is rarely obvious who the culprit is.

Your use of a computer and the internet to post here demonstrates that despite your complaints, you still value the use of software over the alternative.

I'm not out to defend all software practicies. I abhor Sony's decision to embed rootkits in their CDs. I believe it is something they now regret as well.

[Rue]

Every once in awhile we hear about 'the movie industry has lost $XX billions due to piracy', blah blah blah...

Technology companies are continually trying to think of ways of stoping this piracy... through hardware and software means.

I admit... I have used pirated music, dvds, and software. I have lived in Asia - its actually harder to get the real version there than the black-market variety.

How many of you are pirates? I would presume that a lot of people have valid Windows that came with their system at purchase, but how much of your other software has been copied or downloaded and hacked?

I think these industries have a few issues to clear up if they want to combat piracy:

1. Pricing: Throughout South-East Asia the non-pirated versions of music CDs, Dvds, and software are all roughly the same (or more) than here. Yet, in Jakarta for example, the minimum wage is roughly $65USD a month. An office worker typically makes $100 to $150USD a month. A lot of these people do manage to save up $300 to get a computer system, but how are they going to afford $15 for a music CD, $25 for a DVD, and $150 to $500 for software?! You go to almost any mall in Jakarta and you can buy a DVD of the latest movie for $0.60, and Microsoft Office Professional for $1.

2. Their Estimates: Like the estimate listed above, $XX billion has been lost to piracy, but how do they calculate this? 95% of SE Asians with pirated music, movies, or software would not be paying customers if piracy was wiped out. I suspect that the majority of westerners would also not be paying customers -- there is no way I would shell out $300+ for Microsoft Office. I would rather do without.

I know they are trying to curtail this loss by implementing digital media management. I think, however, that no matter what they use to block the distribution, someone will figure out how to beat it.

Musicians, for example, will have to realize that their income needs to come from live shows - not record sales (when was the last time you bought a CD? I haven't bought one in 3 or 4 years!).

What are your thoughts? Do you consider yourself a thief? Should these handful of rich guys producing this crap be getting your hard-earned cash?

O.k. I admit buying some pirated movies in Chinatown in Toronto. I knew it was wrong but I wanted a break. 99% of the time I buy them or rent them properly and I never copy them. I couldn't resist the difference in price. The quality on some of the movies was o.k. and on others pretty bad.

I admit I am a thief and its wrong.

[Renegade]

In my view there is nothing morally wrong with Intellectual Property violations. The violation is a legal transgression not a moral one. A moral trangression, would be one which deprived the owner of the use or posession of that which was taken. That is not the case with IP violations.

It is also hugely amusing to me that the same government which writes IP laws, and strongly criticizes violaters , is itself one of the biggest violaters. Let me give an example. During the cold war (and still today), the US (and Russia, China, etc) commonly used spies to steal each other's technology and equipment. They used the IP gained to improve their own weaponary. Is that IP violation any different than copying a song, except for the scale?

[Charles Anthony]

When something says: "Plug and play" but it does not, I see myself as having been suckered into buying something that does not work.

Marketing slogans are not just confined to software.

No. I call it fraud.

Excusing it as a marketing slogan is not fair.

(ever hear of "Nice'n'Easy" hair colouring?).

No, I have not. Nevertheless, did the hair coloring perform as they said it would in their marketing campaign?

Since we are looking at things in a moral context (as opposed to a bland legal one), a marketing slogan should not be brushed off. If I was blind or illiterate would there be a different marketing morality for me? If I heard the advertizement on television and ran to the store to buy NiceAndEasy hair products, it would be unreasonable to say that I must read the fine print connected to the asterisk on the bottom of the back side of the label. The marketing slogan, if proved false, makes the marketing an act of fraud. To me, that is immoral.

Again this has nothing uniquely to do with software. Some software companies provide this level of service, some don't. I can say the same about some of the utilities and insurance companies I have dealt with.

I would be just as harsh and critical with them too.

First, it is interesting that you think of data on your drive as "property" that you own. (That's probably a whole discussion on its own).

I do not believe it is a different discussion. It examines the difference between copying and original sources.

Of course it is my property because I put it there and I own the hardware upon which it lies. I do not care about somebody else making copies but rather I am concerned about my original copy.

Second, would you blame Toyota if someone stole your car and crashed it?

No, your analogy is mistaken.

Toyota would be blamed if they made copies of my car key and made security codes available to crooks and told them where I parked my car every night.

Exactly! If, despite the bugs, it didn't still offer them value over what they were doing before, they would revert to their previous method. The fact that no one is using typewriters illustrates that, while yes, sometimes your software can hang, it is still a damm ways better than the old way.

I agree. We accept our own dupery in the same way as we accept bad service in a restaurant without complaining. We walk out saying "Yeah, everything was great." and still leaving a tip because we do not want to raise a fuss.

The commoditzation of software has meant that an increasingly complex product must be maintained by an untrained user. Unlike a car, software operates in an environment which is constantly changing.

I think that is the salient feature of why the dynamics of the software market is so unique to others.

It must co-exist with software from multiple other vendors with which it was never tested. In addition when problems occur it is rarely obvious who the culprit is.

If the "recommended system requirements" are fulfilled by the consumer, the technical culprit does not matter. The vendor is responsible for the product.

Your use of a computer and the internet to post here demonstrates that despite your complaints, you still value the use of software over the alternative.

Interesting assumption. Forgive me but where have you been? Surely you have heard of Linux?

All of my software is legit and free. I have not spent a red cent on firewalls nor on anti-virus software nor on anti-this nor on anti-that in nearly ten years. The only thing I pay is PC hardware and ISP service.

I'm not out to defend all software practicies. I abhor Sony's decision to embed rootkits in their CDs. I believe it is something they now regret as well.

Those CDs damaged people's computers without their consent.

buying some pirated movies in Chinatown

Well, since they were bought in Chinatown, that might make a difference.... you may have a case there.....

During the cold war (and still today), the US (and Russia, China, etc) commonly used spies to steal each other's technology and equipment. They used the IP gained to improve their own weaponary. Is that IP violation any different than copying a song, except for the scale?

Actually, I believe a comparison is impossible by the very nature of intellectual property. It is possible to construct scenarios whereby copying somebody's song creates more harm and an other whereby copying the weapon technology does more harm. That is the nature of intellectual property: it does not exist but for how we apply it.

[BubberMiley]

What if you copy a song and delete it before you listen to it?

What if my Tivo records everything I watch on TV automatically. Am I the pirate or is it?

[Charles Anthony]

What if you copy a song and delete it before

You wasted bandwidth and electricity.

[geoffrey]

Geoffrey, your example of Ford forcing you to post a sticker on a car is naive. We define property in many different ways and we transfer property in different ways. For example, if you buy land, you may have to respect a right of way across the land.

Your land example is less applicable then my Ford example. I can tell if there is a right of way on the land I wish to purchase in advance of the sale. I don't know the terms and conditions contained within a software box. I honestly can't comprend any other arrangement then software where you are bound by terms you cannot know before the deal.

What consideration (in the legal sense of the word) do I give when I accept those terms by clicking the little box, in other words, what do I get back that I didn't already purchase? My purchase was for the working software, not another agreement that I don't know the terms of.

Thanks for the clarification on the corporate copyrights.

[Riverwind]

Furthermore, if I must spend countles hours on a telephone between software support and operating system support, each giving excuses that it is not their fault but the other's responsibility.

Getting two pieces of software written by two different companies to play nice together is technically difficult to do. In many cases it is only one side's fault so it is unreasonable to expect the other party to help you with problems that they did not create.

Any software that permits or is the conduit of malware does that. Any form of malware permitted by the operating system without your knowledge or consent and leads you to lose data or require service is destroying your property.

It is virtually impossible to write any software that could not be exploited by a determined hacker - much like it is impossible to create a lock that could not be broken by a determined robber. Microsoft only looks bad because so many hackers try to exploit it. Other OSes on the market would fare much worse if they had to deal with the same level of attacks.

Furthermore, Microsoft has its hands tied because everyone expects that every piece of software that worked on an older version of an OS must work on the new version. This means that certain holes cannot be fixed. The malware on the Sony CD is a perfect example - it relied on special operating system 'hooks' that only exist to ensure that applications built originally for DOS/Windows 95 could still work. Microsoft has closed these holes in the 64-bit version of the Windows XP operating system but many existing applications will not run on this version of the OS. So what do you want: an OS that is 99.999% secure or an OS that will still allow you to keep using applications you bought 3 years ago? Choosing both is not an option.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

Another issue is the wide variety of hardware that is available.

I am sure, Charles, especially when you first started with Linux you were extremely frustrated in trying to get all of your peripherals to work. Linux, up until very recently, wasn't plug and play what-so-ever.

How can you expect any piece of software to cover any potential operating scenerio out there?

Anyway... I am heading the wrong way here. I originally posted this because I am AGAINST how things are going with digital media. I think that these companies should do less to alienate customers (i.e. differing media management methods, hardware locks, etc), and should think of better ways of still making profit while distributing this media.

Case in point... I have an ASUS laptop - and to me the purpose of a laptop is to have a computer while travelling. However, if I play any 5 DVDs of one specific region (North America being region 1, I believe), then my laptop becomes locked to being able to play only DVDs from region 1. What the hell is the point of this? I should be able to play any damn DVD I want anywhere in the world... that is the purpose of having a portable computer! Its ironic that if I only play bootleg DVDs in my laptop, which have been 'fixed', then I don't have to worry about my count going up - so why would I bother to buy a legit DVD when it will only limit my system's capabilities?

Accepting that you are a theif is your moral (or legal) acceptance or not. I am a theif, and I am not ashamed of it.

http://www.weblogimages.com/v.p?uid=gonzo&...;sid=pJT58NZat2