Previous page
Next page

4.2.4.2 Software Piracy

A decade or more ago when programs were routinely distributed on easy to copy floppy disks, software companies took active measures to copy protect their products against illegal copying. This quickly escalated into a game of hackers versus software companies: where the hackers would break copy protection schemes almost as quickly as software producers could implement them. When software distribution shifted to CD-ROM in the mid 1990’s, the problem improved for a while because CDs were harder to copy than disks. By the late 1990’s, the proliferation of the Internet, combined with inexpensive CD-ROM burners, lead to an explosion of software copyright infringement.

Software piracy is the unauthorized duplication of copyrighted programs and data. In developed nations, the concept of intellectual property rights has been widely accepted for hundreds of years. This principle, which was originally applied to books recognizes that these products require time, effort, and talent to produce, and therefore should be protected against unlicensed copying. Computer software is now considered to be protected as well.

Two decades ago when personal computers were first being developed, most people held the opinion that making copies of computer programs, such as games, wasn’t really stealing, since copying did not deprive the owner of the benefits of the product. As the PC software industry began to grow, software producers countered that flooding the market with unlicensed copies of software deprived the people who wrote the programs of the royalties they deserved. They warned that if the practice continued, progress in software development would halt, since companies would have no incentive to devote the resources necessary to produce software if their products could not be protected by law.

The courts, and many people, quickly accepted this argument. Many other people have not yet been convinced. A substantial fraction of the user population – people who would never consider shoplifting or most other forms of theft – make illegal copies of programs without any hesitation.

Why? They have no fear of getting caught? Perhaps. But, to me at least, it seems more likely that they don’t really believe they have done anything “wrong”.

Some groups, such as the GNU Free Software Foundation[9] argue that the concept of “ownership” should not apply to software, since it is “the intellectual heritage of all”. GNU, rather than using their philosophy simply as an excuse for copyright infringement, have instead developed a large number of very popular applications, such as databases, compilers, and text editors that they make available for free. Even those who disagree with GNU’s philosophy respect their willingness to “put their money where their mouth is” and frequently use their products.

In addition to GNU’s philosophy, there are many other, somewhat more mundane, reasons people give for making illegal copies of programs and data. The arguments that tend to be popular with undergraduate computer science students include:

The “software piracy is not stealing” argument conveniently ignores the fact that the result of distributing unlicensed copies of a product is to rob the software producer of potential customers. True, not everyone who makes or accepts an illegal copy of a program would have bought it, but unarguably some percentage of those people would have been customers. While persons of good faith can disagree as to what this percentage would be, there can be no doubt that sales are lost to illegal copying.

The “I’m trial testing the software” argument seems somewhat more reasonable, but its major flaw is that people rarely follow through on the “if I like it, then I’ll buy it” part. Not because they intentionally mean to deprive the producer of coinage. On the contrary, many intend to “eventually” buy the product. They just never get around to it. Six months or a year go by and an even better program comes along. The user moves on to this new product and quickly forgets about paying for the old product. (After all, they’re not using it anymore, so why should they pay for it now?)

A perfect example of the problem with this argument is the “shareware” phenomenon. Shareware is “for sale” software that anyone may freely download over the Internet. The authors of the software encourage people to try out the program – usually for 30 days free. If the person who downloaded the program likes and uses it, then he or she is instructed to send a small fee to the author. Shareware programs generally continue to work after the “30 day free trial”, but when launched display a reminder to send in the shareware fee. Many shareware programs (e.g., WinZip) are very popular, yet, as a percentage of total users, very few people actually take the time to send in their shareware fee.

The “I’m a poor student” argument is more a rationalization for committing theft, than an argument that illegally copying software is somehow morally justifiable. In response, I would simply point out that most students find money for the things that are important to them – like textbooks, pizza, and beer. They buy those things instead of stealing them. As far as the “software is overpriced” comment goes, the economic reality is that in order for a software company to hold profits steady, when fewer people buy a program the per copy price must be higher. The few who actually buy a product end up paying for the many who illegally copy it.

The last argument – “It’s too buggy to buy” – attempts to imply that the software is worthless. If such were the case, then why would people waste their time copying it? Obviously, those who want the product must see some value in it.

One perceived difference between software copyright and other forms of copyright, that might help explain some people’s unwillingness to respect this law, is where the profits go. Royalties from most creative works, such as music, books, even films go (at least in part) to the authors of the work. Software, on the other hand, is predominately written by employees of large companies who work on salary. Hence, profits are generally seen as going to a faceless corporation rather than to an individual or small group who are identified with authorship.

Even if this is the case, I must admit that one aspect of the software piracy situation leaves me completely baffled. Why is it that a disproportionate number of students who study computing (in the hopes of getting high paying jobs developing software upon graduation), tend to be among the most actively engaged in piracy? If there were ever a group who had something to gain by seeing that software copyright laws were respected it would be them.

Regardless of one’s philosophical view on the question of software piracy, everyone needs to realize that violating software copyright is a crime and that there are real penalties for doing so. Individuals who engage in such actions must be prepared to face the consequences – regardless of how unlikely they think those consequences are to occur. It is also worth noting that the excuse “everyone else is doing it” does not hold up well in a court of law.

Footnotes

[9] Located on the web at http://www.gnu.org/

Return to top