When the developer of a piece of software updates his product, he sometimes messes something up from what was working fine before. There may be several reasons why he choses to fix what wasn't broken, but one of them could be lack of revenue. I wonder how many people who acquire pirated software, might otherwise have bought it had there not been a way of downloading it for free? I wouldn't for the most part, because I don't have a need for most of what is out there. But in being able to download something to play with, I do realise how useful some of them actually are, then want the latest version as soon as it's available, hope the keygen or serial I have holds, or do what I need to ensure it does. I play with many things this way. In the past, the important ones, the expensive ones, had real kudos for me. I got hold of them, learnt to use them, even played with the idea of being a person who earned his living with them. But unlike those who do, who pay because they really need them, because I didn't pay, there was never any real motivation to take their steep learning curve all the way. Again, had I not been able to get them, I would never had played with most of them anyway. So I find it strange, that when a developer, who feels the need to change something because his otherwise excellent product isn't providing him with the income it should, breaks something he did not need to change, I get annoyed, feel put out, as if he's done something to affect my life directly. Surely I only have the right to feel this way if I pay for it? Yet, I still feel affected as if I did. The reason, because I like it, I get benefit from it, and have made it part of my set up, which I wouldn't have bothered even trying had I needed to buy it first. You'd think that should make me the least concerned about something. Instead, I have an attachment because I like it, and the feeling that occurs when something happens to it, comes about, in part, because I acquired it without paying for it and simply take it for granted. It creates an imbalance. This is the price for living like this. If I want to be a legitimate consumer of these apps, I'd have to spend loads of money paying for things I don't need, when I'd only want to pay for the ones I do. Because I don't need all the others, but have them because I can, it just becomes all take take take and no give. I might state in my defense, that after I've bought some of them, as I do from time to time, I find that it doesn't really do what I want it to do, or the developer wants money to update it, and have often regretted paying for it, feeling that at least with the pirating copy, if something doesn't work, I can let it go without being out of pocket. Trouble is, even with the ones I buy, I only do so because I'm unable to get the latest version and reluctantly decide I have to. Not the same as acquiring it in the right way with the right spirit because it is of real use to me. I finally bought something earlier this year after having used it for years, and the moment I did so, it became the final version the developer put out. He'd created one of the most secure apps, even though it was pretty cheap, and wasn't easy for the crackers to break into. This probably made it quite interesting at the beginning, as the developer seemed to feed off this in order to 'win' the battle. Eventually though, instead of the developer using his energy and creativity to make a better product, he spent all his time battling the pirates. It's insidious this kind of battle, slowly eating away at the spirit, until the developer finally gave up. This is not the way to raise consciousness and promote innovation. The temptation to get something for nothing is easy to give in to, because every film, every TV show or documentary I might want I can get. I can pick and choose from what is effectively the world's best creative output, all because I have a lap top, access to the internet, and the will to do it. The TV shows even come with the adverts removed, and if even one slips through by mistake, it gets 'nuked' quickly, and a 'proper' version released in its place. The sharing community takes itself very seriously. Much of the best drama comes from US cable channels like HBO and Showtime. Their shows don't have adverts; the cost of making them is borne through subscription. The money payers get to watch these shows in full HD, on their big screen TVs, and very nice it must be too. I watch things on the laptop or an old CRT, and the smaller SD files take a lot less time to arrive. I take the time to find what I want, but would not be able to do so without people choosing to share them in the first place. Consider Apple and its iPhone/iPad for a moment. How important it is for Apple to control the use of its products. They spend so much time keeping ahead of the 'jail breakers', only to have their fixes broken almost immediately afterwards. The hackers are too good. They're fully committed to freeing everyone from Apple's 'big brother' control. So why not just accept that people want to use their products their own way, open things up, and concentrate resources on making better products? Apple won't fall apart if consumers get to use their iPad the way they want to. Having the ability to play different types of video files isn't the path to ruin. What Apple haven't understood, is that an empire can reach great heights, but all empires will fall eventually. History teaches us this. They do so, because they fear losing the control they become accustomed to, their perceived world domination as it were, and so become more and more afraid of it happening. This sows the seed of its inevitability, as an empire can only live while the spirit is right, the energy enlightening, and it works for the good of everyone. Stopping file sharing, like the war on drugs, is a never-ending fruitless battle that can't be won, and the more resources committed to the fight, the less are available to go into other things. Adobe, who are one of the toughest nuts out there, are also one of the easiest to acquire, not because they don't have good security, but they seem to understand, like Apple do, that as long as they get a decent return, and they're big enough to do so, piracy provides market penetration. The value of having loads more people using the latest version of their product is enormous, and the loss of some potential revenue from those who can't afford to buy it anyway, is more than covered by the people who pay the full price. But I digress. Why have I said all this? What should I take from it, if my life is not the way it needs to be? I live in a world where I have everything. EVERYTHING I WANT. Not everything there is to have - you won't find cars, boats or yachts parked outside my house. You won't find me wearing jewellery, fancy clothes, or expensive shoes. I simply have what I need/want, which amounts to the same thing. I could have other things, and while some do pull at me from time to time (I've always liked a gadget) their acquisition rarely occurs. I live in a world where I have everything, so is it right to live the way I do? I have access to a plant that we know opens things up, raises frequency, especially when I've been experiencing depression. If our state of mind is affected by what we do, surely we must do nothing that makes us vibrate any other way. So if doing things like this helps keep me at a lower frequency. Making me forget who I am, lowering my state of mind, stopping me from being who I need to be, then things won't change until I do. They say the love of money is the root of all evil. Acquiring things I don't need. Making sure I get them for free. Reveals a desire to hold onto it. To keep it. To have it as a means of creating a feeling of security by always having it. To give it a power it has no right to have. This is the result of living like this. I see how things can be different were I to change, but the temptation to stay with what is familiar is very strong. I am blessed with the ability to see, but cursed by not feeling able to let go of things that hold me back. I never thought I'd get so corrupted by it, and even though I am not really corrupted compared to the way others live their lives, it is not through their eyes that I see myself. Do you now or have you ever done similar things? How do you feel about doing this? Can we ever really justify it morally or philosophically?
Very good points. Obviously, the main motive behind these companies is profit, rather than a quality product. Relevant to this topic is the sharing of music. Record companies think they own the work of musicians,and have a right to profit from their work. Sharing of music is highly illegal; because once again, a cut in profit is the scariest thing in the world for these people.
True. And yet, before the digital age came in, we all did this. I was always making tapes for someone, even if it was just to play in the car or on a walkman. It was just as illegal then, but had no real impact, and was completely unenforceable anyway. Now, one copy can be shared everywhere, and because the internet has opened everything up, people can share on a forum with anyone. Many do this because they love the music and want others to love it too. The idea of copyright doesn't exist for them. The record companies don't like it. Thing is, I have a feeling it encourages musicians to play live, tour, more, which is something that can't be shared easily, makes the artist lots of money, but the record companies even less. Another reason why they don't like it.
Having said that, I accept that some of my writings might get copied, but see that as an honour in a way. That an idea would have an effect on someone else means it's being read and passed on, rather than me just being concerned about making money from them. In a way, something that makes a difference to someone else must help balance things up as far as using other people's creations are concerned, even if it's not a direct this for that action.
Of course. I'll continue with the music topic since it is relevant to me. It's a really strange feeling, really. The desire for attachment makes me feel guilty. I see all the songs from an album I like on YouTube. It's not that difficult to listen to it on there, but I will often end up downloading all the songs from YouTube if I can. I need that comfort of knowing I can listen to it when I want, and I can listen to it often. This kind of ruins it in the long run since I over-listen and get tired of something really great. It's that natural consumerism mindset. On the other hand, I know where most of the money is going. Also, I know artists need money enough to get by, but I don't think art should be created with the idea of getting money for it. To me, the ultimate is going to concerts. I like how bands like the Grateful Dead, Wide Spread Panic, etc. will let you recored their concerts, but I would rather just experience the concert and then experience the memory of it. It's much more permanent that way. lol I don't know, I struggle with it. Side note: Have you posted this/something like it before? I got the strangest sense of deja vu when I read this.
But that might happen regardless of the method you use to acquire the music. If you love something you tend to listen to it a lot. We get used to things really quickly. Two sides. The art and the business. Are there any reports of the top artists not making enough money? Seems to me they're earning just as much as they've always been. Perhaps that's just a perception though. It's funny you should say that. When I went to post it, the title filled itself in as I typed it, as if I'd written it down before. I did a quick search but nothing came up. I don't mind repeating myself though.
Yeah, I think I was meshing ideas together but yes. Taking action to possess something holds me back. I do it all the time. Then I get used to it, then I need the next thing. I get albums for free that I wouldn't get if I had to buy them. So judging by the previous paragraph I wrote and by the quote just below of yours, it is affecting me more negatively than the artist. However, some albums I get free have real benefit for me. I tend to buy these later. Does this justify it? Not really but I think it can be justified in other ways. It kinda freaked me out lol