In Switzerland Downloading Copyrighted Materials for personal Use is Legal

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

But Adobe gives (gave) away the reader for free, to encourage PDF's use. It think that was called advertizing....

I wasn't talking about the Acrobat reader; you're right, they intentionally gave the reader away to saturate the market (and beat out a rival product by WordPerfect that came out at the same time... not a lot of people know that).

I was referring to Photoshop, Illustrator and PageMaker, which Adobe sold... but which were easy to circumvent security and share around. That's exactly what people did, and the market became saturated with pirated products. When Adobe locked down the products, everyone was so used to the products that they (grudgingly) paid rather than go without or use competing software like CorelDraw and PhotoPaint.

Anyway, we're straying a bit from the subject of Swipe-zerland allowing its citizens to steal from foreign artists.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

It used to be that MS Windows and Office, Photoshop, Illustrator and a few other programs had such ineffective security that you could swap CDs with these programs and an included key in text form, and install them on as many PCs as you could find. No longer, since security has been upgraded, and each software requires you to verify online (and will disable the SW if it is already registered to a small number of users).

So I suppose Switzerland considers Microsoft and Adobe to be criminal organizations for preventing its citizens to download and use their software without paying.

Steve, I remember software from the early 1990's that had NO copy protection. Anybody remember Windows 3.1? I think Word Perfect 5.2 didn't have any copy protection, either.

Explain to me why, having bought the software (or license, if you prefer) why I can't install it serially from machine A to machine B to machine C, if I scrap the prior machine? Still using the one license...

Nor is there any reason that I have to upgrade my software. I may choose to, to get better features, but I don't have to.

That ineffectual copy protection allows me to do that. The phone home types (requiring activation) don't. I don't buy/use them,except under duress, until I can find an acceptable alternative.

Is that being a pirate? I paid Microsoft, what's the beef. If I prefer to use 15 year old operating system to save money and run old favorite software, that's my choice.

(I'm currently trying to get Windows ME (which I have a fully legitimate Disc and License) to run under Oracle VM. Then I can run it under Linux. Use Linux for modern software needs, and use my old Windows software as needed.)

[Greg Anos]

As far as Switerland goes, I think the a de jure acknowledgement of a de facto situation.

But I said it was a de facto reality in my first post here in Jan 2008. The world hasn't changed...

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Explain to me why, having bought the software (or license, if you prefer) why I can't install it serially from machine A to machine B to machine C, if I scrap the prior machine? Still using the one license...

That's not the kind of use I was referring to. I was referring to the practice of putting a copy of the SW on a CD or on the web, and letting millions of your best buddies download and install them. That's what was happening to MS and Adobe SW, essentially locking in customers to pirated copies.

Neither of them had a problem with your using their SW on the 2-3 PCs around your house; remember, back then it was unlikely that you had more than 1 PC in your house. It was only after better security that the number came down to 2 PCs with Adobe SW, and 1 PC with MS. Yes, that wasn't great... but considering how impossible it would be to allow greater numbers of users and not allow the SW to be shared with other households, I can understand their plan to limit users to 1-2 and severely limit sharing beyond the household.

Can we get back to bashing Filch-zerland now?

[Greg Anos]

Besides, Switerland has made piles and piles and piles of money from services to despots, crooks, and tax cheats. Why should stealing from authors be so strange....

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

Anyway, we're straying a bit from the subject of Swipe-zerland allowing its citizens to steal from foreign artists.

Pretty much sums up all the hyperbole really

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

But Adobe gives (gave) away the reader for free, to encourage PDF's use. It think that was called advertizing....

Me thinks he is talking about Adobe PageMaker (originally Aldus?) that revoultionzed DTP. Adobe Reader has always been free in order to fascilitate the usage of PDF files.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

I was referring to Photoshop, Illustrator and PageMaker, which Adobe sold... but which were easy to circumvent security and share around. That's exactly what people did, and the market became saturated with pirated products. When Adobe locked down the products, everyone was so used to the products that they (grudgingly) paid rather than go without or use competing software like CorelDraw and PhotoPaint.

(emphasis mine)

Everyone? I haven't checked if there are cracked copies out there of the current versions of the software, but I'm sure that at least the older versions should still be available.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Steve, I remember software from the early 1990's that had NO copy protection. Anybody remember Windows 3.1? I think Word Perfect 5.2 didn't have any copy protection, either.

When did they start to implement copy protection?

[karunaji]

Software licences are controlled by BSA at the place of business. Even in Latvia the control is very strict, probably even more strict than in the US, and even for a small businesses and self-employed it is very hard to use unlicensed software because the penalties are very high. It has nothing to do how hard or easy is to crack the validation. But it is not true that the new protection is uncrackable. It is harder but it is still done all around. Mostly it is used by individuals who want to learn this software to get better jobs.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

When did they start to implement copy protection?

Copy protection in computers has gone in and out of vogue during it's history. (And yes, they've been around long enough to have a history.)

The very earliest software had not copy protection (circa 1975). The hardware was so flaky that anything that couldn't be back up 3 or 4 times you might lose.

But with piracy of software, the first wave of copy protection came into existence to prevent the copying of floppy disks. This started around 1977, and became prevalent, particularly for games. Some big packages were copy-protected, some weren't (Visicalc was, DBase II wasn't, for example).

This was not popular with users and people started cracking the copy protection. Many complaints were made by users and they also started buying non-copy protected software instead of copy-protected software. Around the mid 1980's, hard drives started to become available. People wanted to load their software onto thier hard drive and forget about it, instead of always having to stick a floppy disk in to use the software. This caused a trend away from copy protection. By the early 1990's copy protect was at a low ebb.

At that time, software was being bundled with the computer, installed on the hard drive, with a CD copy (for larger capacity) added for restoring should you lose the hard drive. Please note, circa 1991, CD burners were $2000, blanks were $20 each and communication webs were at 1200-2400 baud (ultra slow). The software producers felt that piracy of the unencrypted software would be limited due to technical limitations.

However, as prices dropped for CD writing, and speeds kept increasing for communication, copy protection came back. And it kept getting more and more intrusive. Of course, just like the late 1980's, non-copy protect alternatives popped up, but they don't have the heavy marketing of software nowadays. (Think Linux, Open Office, ect.)

The old non-protected software from the late 1980's and early 1990's will still work, if you can run an operating system they can use. That's why you see things like Dosbox and virtual machines. (Most of it was 16 bit, which Microsoft has been trying to kill with their 64 bit operating systems...)

Today is a high water mark for copy protection, but it looks to be receding again. Shrug. Only the Shadow knows...

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Explain to me why, having bought the software (or license, if you prefer) why I can't install it serially from machine A to machine B to machine C, if I scrap the prior machine? Still using the one license...

That is usually allowed. The only time it is really not allowed is if you are doing it with OEM software. Check the licenses, though.

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

But with piracy of software, the first wave of copy protection came into existence to prevent the copying of floppy disks. This started around 1977, and became prevalent, particularly for games. Some big packages were copy-protected, some weren't (Visicalc was, DBase II wasn't, for example).

This was not popular with users and people started cracking the copy protection. Many complaints were made by users and they also started buying non-copy protected software instead of copy-protected software. Around the mid 1980's, hard drives started to become available. People wanted to load their software onto thier hard drive and forget about it, instead of always having to stick a floppy disk in to use the software. This caused a trend away from copy protection. By the early 1990's copy protect was at a low ebb.

Early disks, they'd do stuff like hole punch in strategic spots, where if it was in the wrong spot, the program wouldn't run due to errors, and if it was missing, the program knew and wouldn't run.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Belfaborac

Maybe not off topic, but certainly off the track and onto a path into the realm of metaphysics and wishful thinking.

How is the world created if not by thinking?

Originally Posted by karunaji

Actually it is a good point about money. As we all know, money is not real. It is only a mutually agreed system controlled by few entities. And that system doesn't resemble anything fair or honest as we might commonly think about it.

If one can understand how money works then why is it not possible to accept that intellectual property may require new set of rules that are different from physical goods.

Intellectual property does not exist. Property requires something physical, or at least something that can only exist in once place at one time. The digital can exist everywhere at all times, therefore it can never be owned by anyone. Those who try and tell you that they own a piece of the digital (our shared collected knowledge) are trying to sell you something, namely that piece of knowledge...

[Quexos]

What's Switerland ?
I guess you guys won't get over it.

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Besides, Switerland has made piles and piles and piles of money from services to despots, crooks, and tax cheats. Why should stealing from authors be so strange....

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Quexos

What's Switerland ?
I guess you guys won't get over it.

Just humoring Steve....