Probably not completely wrong

Probably not completely wrong

Posted Sep 30, 2004 17:30 UTC (Thu) by AnswerGuy (guest, #1256)
Parent article: Desktop Linux is Windows piracy aide (Silicon.com)

These estimates are at the far edge of plausible. Particularly as we
look at the international scene.

I don't condone piracy.

However, this report is silent on some related issues which are worth noting.

I've purchased a few PCs for personal use of the last 15 years. I've
built many more of them myself (just buy case, power supply, motherboard,
and a few other components and plug them all together). The PCs I've
purchased have each come with a copy of the Microsoft OS of the day
(MS-DOS or MS Windows). Naturally I used to use MS-DOS (13 years ago,
before Linux existed, and concurrently with DOS/DESQview for a couple
years while Linux was maturing and I was learning to live with it).

My point is that the number of machines sold with an unnecessary copy
MS Windows far exceeds the number of machines sold with Linux. Many
Linux users still want the convenience of purchasing a pre-built system
and want a particular model and manufacturer which is simply not
offered without the unwanted software.

This doesn't justify piracy. People who buy a machine with an unwanted
copy of Windows had other choices (build their own or purchase from
among the extremely limited number of vendors who aren't bound by
exclusive contracts to Microsoft).

It's possible that Microsoft's contracts with the majority of PC
vendors still constitute an illegal monopoly. I personally think that
the DoJ was incompetent in its handling of the previous anti-trust
case and that the "remedies" exacted were and still are a mere slap
on the wrist. Some of the "remedies" actually encourage further
entrenchment -- like "giving" Microsoft software to schools and other
public institutions.

However, that point is moot. It still doesn't justify piracy.

One huge problem with the software business today is the discrepancies
between "licensing" practices and traditional first sale and fair use
doctrines of other media (books in particular).

In a free market with "fair" products the situation would be much
less of an issue. Many of the people who received unwanted copies of
software with their systems would simply resell it and many of the
pirates would by an inexpensive and otherwise unwanted copy. The going
rate in the U.S. for such copies would probably be around $10 to $25
(from what I've seen the vendors that will sell systems sans OS will
only give about a $25 discount -- which says something about the
wholesale value of the product).

Of course this is not a free market and the software in question is not
"fair." There are many versions of it that are locked to a given PC
or model and which can't be transferred to other systems.

Anyway, I'm in no position to offer up real suggestions here. My general
suggestion would be that free software advocates condemn piracy,
encourage the use of "the right tool for the job" (recognizing that its
not always going to be free), educate selected parties about the broader
economics of software and other "intellectual property," and solicit
feedback to find out to woo more of the pirates into the fold of free
software users.

JimD

---

(Log in to post comments)