September 10, 2006 11:15 AM PDT

Man gets 7 years for software piracy

The owner of a software piracy Web site has been sentenced to more than seven years in prison--the longest sentence ever handed down for software piracy.

Nathan Peterson, 27, of Los Angeles, sold copyrighted software at a huge discount on his site,, prosecutors said. The FBI began investigating the site in 2003 and shut it down in February 2005.

U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III on Friday ordered Peterson to pay restitution of more than $5.4 million. Peterson pleaded guilty in December in Alexandria, Va., to two counts of copyright infringement for illegally copying and selling more than $20 million in software.

Justice Department and industry officials called the case one of the largest involving Internet software piracy ever prosecuted.

Last month, Ellis sentenced Danny Ferrer, a Florida man who pleaded guilty to copyright charges in connection with multimillion-dollar sales of pirated software, to six years in prison.

Software piracy resulted in a loss of $34 billion worldwide in 2005, a $1.6 billion increase over 2004, according to a study commissioned by the Business Software Alliance.

See more CNET content tagged:
software piracy


Join the conversation!
Add your comment
That's a bunch of silliness. Well, karma is real and they will be sorry
when the alliances fight back. Mark my words. Let's keep prison for
people who should really be there. IE: Murderers, Rapists and
Republicans. This insanity needs to stop.
Posted by Mephux (51 comments )
Reply Link Flag
he sold stolen crap for $. He should be in jail.

He didnt just take it. He took something that didnt belong to him and SOLD IT!!!

That said pirating is pathetic and anyone who does pirating (im simply referring to software not music thats a different story) should be penalized.

Software is a luxery and not something you can steal.

However whats worst is when people steal **** like MS word when there are FREE ALTERNATIVES. I have no respect for that. If you dont want to pay get a free one. It may not be as good or what your used to... but if you absolutely need it... pay full price.
Posted by volterwd (466 comments )
Link Flag
Wow but
I agree but let's not just single out Republicans. There are plenty
of Democrats and non-politico's that should also be placed behind
Posted by georgiarat (254 comments )
Link Flag
I agree!
Posted by BorgInva (9 comments )
Link Flag
ALways whining about the Republicans
Remember it was a Democrat, Slick Willie Clinton, who was offered Osama bin Laden in a box from the government of Yemen, and chose a hummer from Monica instead.

Also, the economy was pretty much gasping on the operating table a year before he left office.

I bet he still wishes 9/11 had happened on his watch so he could have a legacy other than Monica.
Posted by Too Old For IT (351 comments )
Link Flag
Save prison space for politicians and CNUT "editors"
They need to stop wasting time chasing down these
<a class="jive-link-external" href="" target="_newWindow"></a>
nickel and dime operations and go after real offenders like politicians and CNUT editors.
Posted by (156 comments )
Link Flag
Software piracy did not cost $34 billion
The BSA estimate is based on the assumption that, if software "piracy" were made to disappear, that the people who would pay full list price for every program that they illegally copied. But this is an impossibility; in most cases the people don't have the money, and they would do without if forced, or would choose a cheaper alternative (even if the cheaper one is inferior). If "piracy" could magically be made to disappear, the Third World would immediately switch to Linux and put up with any limitations.

Divide the BSA figure by about 20 and you're closer to the truth.
Posted by (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
It's the BSA, an organization funded by member software makers. Of course they'll stretch the truth to benefit the hand that feeds them.

I don't really think there's any excuse for software piracy now-a-days. I'm using an open-source OS, open source office apps. I buy software where I need it, like Quicken which I've grown accustomed to. Once, I bought it through eBay, just to get a broken CD-R in the mail. I was laughing all the way to the negative feedback page after getting my money back. The seller got de-listed soon after that.

Anyways, how many poor third-world country people buy software on eBay or from guys in the continental US? Probably not that many. Sellers like this genius have to be sought out, so that crappy malware-ridden pirated software doesn't get installed and end up creating zombies on the web.

BTW: dividing by 20 percent (0.20) would actually increase the number. Try it in your calculator: 100 / 0.20 = 500.
Posted by sanenazok (3449 comments )
Link Flag
Suppose I paid 10000 USD for a car and 30000 for the school and the driver's license... How does that sound? Now how's about paying 400 for a computer and more than 600 for esential software?! Is this normal? I'm not questioning here the need to pay for what you get! I'm questioning the issue of HOW MUCH you have to pay!
Microsoft's expenditures in developing a certain product (say "Windoze" for instance) are probably only a tiny fraction of what they demand for it! You tell me there's a lot of buyers?! Well... socks manufacturers are in the same situation: everybody uses socks! I don't see any socks manufacturers in Forbes' first 10!
Why's that?
Posted by Kostagh (57 comments )
Link Flag
The BSA is digging their own graves
The problem of getting a cheeper software, some people will allways think the software is bootleg, more offen than not, cheeper software is less chance to be bootleg then their higher cost versions anyway. If the cheeper version is GPL they will win bt default anyway.
Posted by derfgreenrider (2 comments )
Link Flag
Piracy lives because software ridiculously priced..!!
How is an amature graphic artist suppose to dabble in such a
hobby when Adobe Photoshop costs $699.99...?!?! NO WAY is
anyone in their right mind going to shell out that kind of cash just
to play around with such a program. I'm sure if they slashed the
price in half Adobe would see MORE than double the normal sales
and a lot LESS software piracy..!!
Posted by imacpwr (456 comments )
Reply Link Flag
All just guesses
Is there any logic behind the guess that you should divide the 34 billion number by 20? Why try to pin down a number?

The real story is that some guy tried to profit by ignoring the laws and was caught. He was convicted and sent to jail. Now he has to serve time and thousands of people are using unlicensed software.
Posted by Mikeh57 (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Obviously because...
He wants to be able to steal music without losing his moral highground to bash software pirates.

The core issue is.. people are stealing. It doesn't matter whether or not they consider it 'too high priced' to pay for or 'not worthwhile' or that 'the money should go to the artist/creator but instead is funneled into companies and corporations.'

Those are all just justifications for people to say 'it's ok for me to steal this, and I don't take it seriously because.. &lt;insert justification&gt;.

However, it's silly to think that this is something that will change.. there are things that are overpriced, and there are things we'd rather have than not have that fall into said category. People are going to keep pirating, and the corporate response seems to be 'sue them all! throw them in jail! Set a harsh example and maybe it will cow people down!' This is really.. not effective. Partly because piracy will always find a way to run rampant even if it means going back to the old school days when people traded boxes of Commodore 64 disks with games and programs with their friends in person. I know people of all moral and religious backgrounds who will not bat an eyelash at the idea that their software is pirated because society does not take it seriously, and people like sharing and doing favours for each other (including making copies of songs, helping install pirated copies of windows, etc. etc.). Education and criminalization of it by corporation is not going to make people take it seriously.

Do I have an idea to reduce piracy and promote both people and companies to get what they want? Nope... but the problem isn't going to be ever resolved by both sides being hardnosed. Software is obviously still a profitable business otherwise you'd hear of a lot more companies going out of business because of 'piracy'.. which begs the question.. if there's a 34 billion dollar loss (which is probably innacurate) and the global software market can absorb it and still profit enough to make it worthwhile... then there's obviously room for software to fall into a much lower price range.. makes you wonder if piracy isn't pre-factored into the retail price of software these days, which would open a whole other line of interesting questions.
Posted by Mmmhmm (103 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Why piracy? Because software is ridiculously priced..!!
How is an amateur graphic artist suppose to dabble in such a
hobby when Adobe Photoshop costs $699.99...?!?! (CompUSA
price). NO WAY is anyone in their right mind going to shell out that
kind of cash just to play around with such a program so naturally
they are going to search for the alternative, pirated software. I'm
sure if Adobe slashed the price of Photoshop in half they would see
MORE than double the normal sales and a lot LESS people
motivated to buy software piracy..!!
Posted by imacpwr (456 comments )
Reply Link Flag
As true as that is, there are some decent alternatives (GIMP, for instance) that are coming along.
Posted by Tomcat Adam (272 comments )
Link Flag
Buy what you can
One doesn't have to *have* Photoshop. There are quite a number of cheaper options that do just as good a job (ie: Paint Shop Pro, Photoshop Elements, GIMP) for most users. If one can't afford software, that doesn't make it OK to infringe on a copyright.
Posted by ScottMo (71 comments )
Link Flag
There's a point here
Theft is theft  theres no justification for stealing. But I agree that most software is ridiculously priced given what you get for the money. Its up to these companies to produce a better product that lasts longer. For example, Windows ME Edition was crap  everyone knows that. And yet Microsoft was content to sell it and never fixed it. Instead, they released Windows XP and charged everyone to upgrade. Its these types of perpetual upgrades that anger most consumers. Intuit and Symantec for example are companies who frequently release known bad products, opting to fix them later down the road. Too bad software companies werent held to the same standard of integrity that say auto manufacturers are.

Theres always going to be theft, unfortunately you cant stop that. But what can be greatly reduced is those consumers in the middle not quite criminals, but is tempted to load unlicensed software because they simply get sick and tired of perpetual costs for stuff that doesnt work. Thus the birth of SAS  but thats a whole other discussion.

Take music and movies for example. Lets face it, most of its crap. Disposable entertainment. Now I would argue that if DVDs were $4.99, and distributed everywhere, say gas stations, local convenient stores, super markets, etc., theyd sell a heck of a lot more, thus cutting way into the illegal digital distribution market. The greedy movie studio that releases a DVD at 4.99 will triple its sales in the first 6 months.
Posted by gmycyk191 (32 comments )
Link Flag
Hey, you're right!
And as a university student, the idea of a $20,000 vehicle is outrageous! I should be able to just go to a lot and steal one! Heck, I've got a lot of commuting around to do to stay competitive with job hunting and all that day to day stuff! That justifies everything, sweet!

Besides, it's not as if the value of the car doesn't instantly drop as soon as you put the key in the ignition to drive it off the lot, it's obviously bloated in price. It's only hurting some faceless company that's insured for loss anyway, and heck all my friends share stolen cars.. they're such friendly people.

Fact is.. theft is theft. It doesn't matter if you think it's unfair or not... whoever has the rights to something decides what people pay, and not liking it is not a justification.

That being said.. the truth is, people don't care about piracy. I know people from a multiple of moral or religious backgrounds who wouldn't bat an eyelash over someone offering them a copy of some software.. be it music, or a copy of windows. While there's no way to legitimately justify the theft, people do not now, nor will they anytime that I can see, take it seriously.

Slapping lawsuits on people arbitrarily and trying to put some kind of fear into people isn't going to work. No amount of moral or economical outrage is going to work. So either things will continue on merrily as they always have, or companies will find a way to make a compromise to reduce piracy instead of working on the persecution and villification angle (not that they should *have* to, but someday they may get the point that sometimes you do whatever it takes to make something work instead of 'sticking to your guns'.
Posted by Mmmhmm (103 comments )
Link Flag
VALUE, not cost.
Adobe didn't develop Photoshop so amateurs could dabble in a hobby. They built it for professionals who recognize the VALUE of the program to their business, not just the cost.

Poor logic for THEFT ...
Posted by fewcomments (19 comments )
Link Flag
Posted by BorgInva (9 comments )
Link Flag
Horrible Excuse
Who ever said you need Photoshop if you are just going to "play around"? Photoshop is a professional piece of software, so you should expect to pay a good penny for it. As everyone has said ad nauseum, there are a ton of viable alternatives for the amateur. You don't need a Movado watch if you simply need to know what time it is...

"I'm sure if Adobe slashed the price of Photoshop in half they would see MORE than double the normal sales and a lot LESS people motivated to buy software piracy..!!"

You're complaining about software that costs $700, but magically if it dropped to $350 you would rush out and buy it? And 100% more people who would not normally buy the software would go buy it b/c its down to $350? You must be joking us... You wouldn't pay more than $10 for it and you know it. No matter how cheap it is, you would go steal it.

Adobe is not dumb - if they start slashing prices, it would no longer be viewed as a standard, and you would bring it status down to the level of the competitors. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to know if you have the leading piece of software you want to appear to be above your competitors - not at their level
Posted by brodie657 (33 comments )
Link Flag
this goes against business logic
The main thing is to put out as little as possible, and get as much as you can for it. The software you speak of is helping companies make profits of their own in graphic design, and editing. Why shouldn't they charge for it? If YOU wrote it, or owned the company you would do the same, or the company would go under. main issue here is that most onlly see the software companies as the evil corporation, and not what they supply. If you have any stocks, you know that you want the company to make as much profit as possible, thus the price tag.
Posted by bruby2 (6 comments )
Link Flag
Supply and Demand
Just because they make it expensive is no excuse to steal it. If you
think it's too expensive, buy a cheaper, and more importanly, legal,
Posted by Dr. B (91 comments )
Reply Link Flag
"resulted in a loss of $34 billion worldwide"
WRONG! Common mistake.

The loss would only occur if a sale would have been made otherwise.

Take out China (where they wouldn't have bought the software), and suddenly the loss disappears.
Posted by Hardrada (359 comments )
Reply Link Flag
My new BMW was WAY too expensive ... so I just stole it.
"What does BMW expect from an amateur driver like me who can't afford $45,000? Until they make BMW's for at least HALF that price, they should EXPECT people like me to steal their product."

"CEO's, big business, professional athletes, and musicians are all overpaid!!!! They DESERVE to be stolen from!!!"

Really? Or are they merely paid what the market can bear? Same with software. Adobe can sell their software for whatever amount they want TO WHOEVER THEY WANT, and you know why?

A little thing called CAPITALISM (vs. the Marxist Socialism currently being hawked by the left-wing media - "The rich are just too dang rich, and they're all Republicans" - sound familiar?).

Oh, and because we're a DEMOCRACY, if you don't like the rules that have been established BY THE PEOPLE, you have every right to rally your troops and start a revolution. Just don't blame Adobe when you get thrown in the wack-house. And quit making lame excuses to justify your illegal actions.
Posted by fewcomments (19 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Didn't know you got 7 years
in prison for stealing a BMW. Not in even in the States.
Posted by boboengren (7 comments )
Link Flag
its not stealing if you make a copy of the bmw
the chances of you duplicating a BMW in this world won't ever happen.

you can easily copy a program and not harm anyone.
Posted by baswwe (299 comments )
Link Flag
Left wing media?
Oh please!
Posted by ddesy (4336 comments )
Link Flag
I can sell a BMW for $45
Yes, stealing is wrong no matter how you slice it or dice it. However, if bought I BMW for $45000 and turned around and gave it away, then BMW should not be able to charge me with a crime. Why you may ask? Simple because I paid for it, I am the owner. Who the hell is BMW to say I cannot give a way car I paid for? Yes I know when it comes to intangible it different ball game, but how does consumer ownership change. Who owners the computer you have in your home you or the various companies that made hardware and software for it?
Posted by VI Joker (231 comments )
Link Flag
If you don't like the price, switch to the competition : Don't infringe!
This article offers the same confusion that many articles on this topic do. It talks about a man sentenced to 7 years for for-profit commercial copyright infringement, and ends with the questionable statistics from the BSA that relate to the alleged "losses" due to copyright infringement generally. Those losses are not from for-profit copyright infringement, and given how bad their statistical methods are we aren't even sure how much of it is from infringement at all. Their methods don't adequately differentiate between copyright infringement and people switching to competing methods such as Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS).

Whether or not the BSA is being harmed as much as they claim, their statistics are quite powerful. They are being used to lobby governments to change the laws in radical ways, such as to <A HREF="">legislate-away information technology property rights</A>. If you think you are hurting the BSA by infringing their copyright, think again. If you want to "stick it to the man" the right response is to switch to using competing FLOSS, not to grant them more political power by infringing their copyright.
Posted by Russell McOrmond (63 comments )
Reply Link Flag
There may be yet another alternative...
Hmmmm... That gives me an idea! Watch who you're voting for in the next ballot!
Look for someone against the Digital Copyright Act! Freedom to the People!
Posted by Kostagh (57 comments )
Link Flag
One's loss another's gain
The amount "lost" was "saved" by customers.
However, the transactions remained illegal.
Posted by Ngallendou (27 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I don't take anything that doesn't belong to me. Your personnal integrity is a gift you give yourself. It was the way of the First Nations Peoples before the invasion. To learn to walk like a Human Being was a very important part of the culture. My comment is this:

When the poor steals from the rich it is wrong. When the rich steal from the poor it is called 'good business'.

Everyday Big Pharma has its research scientists travelling around the world to 'discover' new plants to 'treat' diseases. They take from the world's people's centuries of knowledge gleaned from centuries of experience of people's on their own lands. The theft of this knowledge and these plants and some of their active components is referred to as biopiracy. Right now the country called India is taking on Big Pharma for the crime of biopiracy. Big Pharma thinks that it can just use what belongs to someone else and not consult with the owners about it. The plant in this case is Turmeric, a widely used spice with incredible healing properties.

The list of this piracy goes on and on. Unfortunately, when the Big Pharma get hold of these medicines, they often corrupt it, rendering it useless. For instance the active ingredient in Milk Thistle, an incredible liver restorer, is useless unless taken as a whole plant.

My point is this. When is Big Pharma going to jail for its theft of intellectual property owned by First Nations Peoples? When is Big Pharma going to jail for being the charlatan racketeers they are? When is Big Pharma going to jail for selling drugs that kill people, for profit, based on fraudulent research?

For that matter, when is the government going to go to jail for allowing the development of the horrific sex slave trade that is all over the internet?

When is et el going to jail for selling unknowing men, women, and children being assaulted with ......?

Yes, there is big time theft in U.S. and Canada.
I consider the theft of peoples minds and bodies a more unconscionable, violent and horrendous crime than some software. But it is not even mentioned, anywhere, anytime.

That is what I was told. They can use, "Anyone, anywhere, anytime, anyway they want." "We are above prosecution." It must be true. On Google alone these sites have grown several million in the last five years.

Did someone say "land of the free"? Only if you are already rich then you are free to do whatever you want to anyone, anywhere, anytime.

Posted by emeraldgate (53 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I can agree with you 100% that selling someone else's software is wrong, but there are people stealing more than software and are easily getting away with it. The ACLU (bad guys) is stealing our freedoms and history from us, but I see the government doing very little because they are more concerned with money than life. The ACLJ (good guys) are fighting for our rights and freedoms and history. Not the government. So believe me, I think this guy was wrong, yes, but it would be nice to see the government working to restore this country's ethics and morals as much as they want to restore silly revenue.
Posted by BorgInva (9 comments )
Link Flag
You say: "When is et el going to jail for selling unknowing men, women, and children being assaulted with ......?"

Google isn't doing this. Just because their computers are crawling the Internet and happen to discover sites that are related to these horrible problems does not make Google the guilty party. Do you really think they can filter the entire Internet?
Posted by ddesy (4336 comments )
Link Flag
1 Reason
1 reason some people download software for free without paying (not the people who download and sell it, but to use it themselves) is because they need to use something maybe only once. Say you need to convert only 1 MOV on your PC. All the trial softwares will let you convert but with a watermark. So why pay $100 for something you are only going to use once?
If companies sold software for what it is really worth (more than half of the current retail values), most people would not bother anymore with downloading it all. Not everyone can dish out $$$$ for so many programs that are only to be used once or twice.
This guy for selling it to make himself money, yes, that is wrong, but jail??? Make him pay back money sure, but we need these jails for the real bad guys.
For eveyrone else who pirate software for their own use to do something quick, give them a break. People can not dish out $5x for Office everytime they upgrade, or $2xx for the next MS OS. Or $4x for video editing software to only convert a single file. Not everyone can find free alts to do what they need, and trial versions suck. So I can feel for those people a bit.
Posted by BorgInva (9 comments )
Reply Link Flag
1 Reason
1 reason some people download software for free without paying (not the people who download and sell it, but to use it themselves) is because they need to use something maybe only once. Say you need to convert only 1 MOV on your PC. All the trial softwares will let you convert but with a watermark. So why pay $100 for something you are only going to use once?
If companies sold software for what it is really worth (more than half of the current retail values), most people would not bother anymore with downloading it all. Not everyone can dish out $$$$ for so many programs that are only to be used once or twice.
This guy for selling it to make himself money, yes, that is wrong, but jail??? Make him pay back money sure, but we need these jails for the real bad guys.
For eveyrone else who pirate software for their own use to do something quick, give them a break. People can not dish out $5x for Office everytime they upgrade, or $2xx for the next MS OS. Or $4x for video editing software to only convert a single file. Not everyone can find free alts to do what they need, and trial versions suck. So I can feel for those people a bit.
Posted by BorgInva (9 comments )
Reply Link Flag
More of the same ... excuses
"If companies sold software for what it is really worth ..."

You must consider value, not just price. Take fancy tennis shoes &#38; name brand clothes, for example. It's not how much they COST TO MAKE that sets the price, it's the MARKET that sets the price based on the VALUE they bring ... some people call it CAPITALISM. For example, what VALUE has Adobe PS brought to the graphics industry? Well, ask a professional (which, by the way, is who Adobe had in mind when they developed the program) how much time, energy, and money PS has saved them over a year's time. I'm guessing well over $600.


"Not everyone can dish out $$$$ for so many programs that are only to be used once or twice. "

So should I get a discount on my iPod because I use mine less than my neighbor does his? Horrible, horrible logic.


"yes, that is wrong, but jail??? Make him pay back money sure, but we need these jails for the real bad guys ..."

You're probably right. I mean, come on, he just stole like $5-20 million dollars worth of intellectual property right out from under Adobe executives, employees, and developers only to resell it for his own gain. It's not like he's Ken Lay or something ... right?
Posted by fewcomments (19 comments )
Link Flag
I saved a bunch of money on my car Insurance
By fleeing the scene of an accident.
Posted by difusi (57 comments )
Reply Link Flag
That has nothing to do with the topic at all.
Posted by ddesy (4336 comments )
Link Flag
OK, the software was not his to sell, but the only damage done was possibly but not demonstrably to the profits of a few corporations.

A large fine, criminal record, and some community service should have been the punishment - never prison - we do not need protection from this man.

Think about this - I am sure most if not all his customers were perfectly well aware that you cannot buy software in this fashion. Every day I am bombarded by similar spam - at least the man was honest enough to supply the software - I wonder how often that is true.

The sentence that was handed down was most certainly simply to discourage others, but I personally think it is very, very wrong to make a scapegoat out of anybody and would have that written into the constitution!

What he did was wrong, but not sufficiently wrong to allow a judge to ruin his life. We need to put a stop to 'scapegoat' sentencing.
Posted by Jerry Dawson (125 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Mind if I steal your car, and then sell it for a 10th of the actual cost? I'll take the community service. How about I steal your house, identity ddo the same? This guy made MILLIONS off of the sale of illegally obtained property. That is how this needs to be seen. He is getting off pretty easy if you ask me. If you read the laws, it states that a person can be fined up to $250K PER INCIDENT/COPY, plus jail time.
Posted by bruby2 (6 comments )
Link Flag
You sound like a criminal
White collar crime may not involve stabbing or shooting someone, but it has many more victims than that sort of thing. Hundreds. Thousands. Milllions. Enron harmed more people than a hundred second story men breaking into homes combined. Consumers lose billions of dollars so that someone else can get rich by illicit means. The claim that these perps don't deserve significant punishment is ludicrous.
Posted by J.G. (837 comments )
Link Flag
This all goes back to Enron, Etc.
Everyone went nuts when Enron, Worldcom, and all the others got busted for false reporting etc. Now that it's one person, and not a corporation, everyone thinks it's OK? That makes no sense what-so-ever. Piracy is illegal, it's theft. Best deterent is if you get caught, you get shot. Make the punishment so impalletable that people won't want to do it. That and it keeps the prisons empty :)
Posted by bruby2 (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Don't shoot them
Bring back slavery. Make them work cleaning toilets until the debt is repaid. That's the only way to teach thieves about the true cost of their crime.
Posted by dmm (336 comments )
Link Flag
All of the comments....
Go back to one thing. This is all brought on by the "Dell, Walmart, I'm not going to pay a lot for this muffler" Attitude that "Joe Public" has. When people went down to the the corner hardware store, they didn't pay the lowest cost out there, but they bought it there anyway, why? because they were supporting John the hardware guy. He has to make a profit to pay for Little Johnny's braces, etc. You don't see the people behind the business anymore, you see that they make more money than you, and that makes you jealous, so why shouldn't you download that song, Movie, or pirate that software. In order for everyone to be able to live, they need to make a profit. If it's a lot, that usually means there was a lot of risk incurred beforehand. The problem is that the web has made it so any tom, dick, or Harry with a computer can go out, and sell something whether it's legal or not. Buy from someone you trust, and most likely they are in your town. That way you kill two birds with one stone. One: you help a friend/neighbor out most likely. Two: you will probably spend the money close to home, where the taxes are paid, helping keep your taxes down (OK that might be a stretch :)
Posted by bruby2 (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Risk involved!?
Since when has software design become "risky business"?! It's probably as hazardous as working on an oil rig or digging in a mine... "lot of risk involved"... Not even in investment: computer, programming software and BRAINS!
Cut that out...
Posted by Kostagh (57 comments )
Link Flag
You say "If it's a lot, that usually means there was a lot of risk incurred beforehand."

Really? So because the oil prices in the US are increasing the level of risk must be going up.

Because the record companies are making so much they must be taking real risks by supporting nearly identical artists over and over again.

Making a large profit usually comes at the expense of the people who do the legwork. It's not so much risk in many cases as it is taking the profits at the top and trying to have some left over for the others.

Let's get profit levels back in check. Then people won't feel like they're being taken advantage of. I know that I, for one, would be more willing to spend more for something made by better compensated people.
Posted by ddesy (4336 comments )
Link Flag
Yes, I really do. They did it for China. No Pornography of any kind. Some other things as well, on human rights issues.

That always makes me laugh. U.S. and Canada setting themselves up as the big supports of 'human rights'. Canada and U.S. is where the majority of this crap is produced. The victims don't even know what has been done to them. The police say, "If you don't know about it, it isn't a crime." So secretly rob a bank and if they don't figure it out it is not a crime. So, secretly, download other people's stuff, and it shouldn't be a crime either. According to the logic of about 8 different police forces in Canada.

In Canada, if a woman thinks she may have been drugged and raped and goes to the hospital the doctors commit her to a Psych ward for assessment.
If she goes to the police, they take her to the Psych ward for assessment. No drug test, no rape kit, no interview, no police report. The Hospitals say they can't do the test for benzodiazipine. What crap is that? So the land of the free, is free for the criminals, everyone else is 'delusional'.

Keep your mind about you.
Posted by emeraldgate (53 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I doubt it...
I doubt that Google has managed to actually censor all pornography from China. Odds are you can still find it. The Chinese government is part of the censorship too, not just Google.

And what does Canada's rape handling problem have to do with filtering? I admit that if what you say is true that it is a bad thing, but it's a separate issue.
Posted by ddesy (4336 comments )
Link Flag
costs of products
The cost of products are not high because of 'developement' like is so often touted. Costs are high so the producer can make MAXIM PROFIT IN THE SHORTEST PERIOD OF TIME. Some pharmaceuticals cost 500,000 times what they cost to produce. The U.S. government will spend 2 Billion dollars of the American people's money for a flu vaccine that will make the White House et al very, very rich. You think they don't have stocks in these companies. The illnesses the people have mean money in the pockets of a very select few. Rumsfeld was on the Board of Directors of Gilead, the pharmaceutical company that developed the vaccine for the 'bird flu'. 10 years ago they gave marketing rights to Roche. Anyone with stock in Gilead is going to be very, very rich. They even passed a law that you can't sue the Pharmaceutical company if you die or get sick from the vaccine. Doesn't THAT just make you wonder? What would it have taken for Rumsfeld, the Secretary for Defense, to call up his subordinates in the Bioweaponery division of the U.S. military, and say, "Hey, cook us up a little air born virus that will make people sick and distribute it to a few places." Then after a few planted cases come to light, what would it take for his buddies in the Media, and the propaganda machine, to start hyping it up and a few years later some well invested scientists start backing up what the 'boss' says. All of a sudden you have a 'pandemic' on the horizon more dangerous than the Black Plague. Really. Really?
We are all nothing but commodities. We are born with nothing and we will die with nothing of note because we are just commodities circulating money. We are bought and sold, over and over again. We are poisoned with poisonous food which makes us sick, so we give money for a bunch of useless Pharmaceuticals whose pawns the FDA approved the poisons to begin with. Is anybody out there concerned?
Posted by emeraldgate (53 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Yeah, profit is soo
EVIL!! I think all software should be made to make the world a nicer place. Too bad it's corporations that make software and they must make a profit, otherwise there's no reason for them to exist.

Software piracy is nothing like what the pharmaceutical companies are doing. You can live without software, there are plenty of open source GPL equivalents that work as well or better than copyrighted stuff. Pharmaceutical companies are wasting money on prime time advertising and marketing rather than research and any research they do is financed in part by the government. What percentage of Microsoft Word came from research under a government grant? Most likely very little or nothing.

Really, really nice rant, though.
Posted by sanenazok (3449 comments )
Link Flag
There are other product options
An amateur generally doesn't need the level of power that Photoshop provides. An amateur, can get by with a less feature rich product such as Paint Shop Pro. I have friends who work in this industry and several of them use Paint Shop Pro personally (as oppossed to buying Photoshop for home use).

With software, there is generally another option, one simply has to look for it.
Posted by stayontarget (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
nice start but tamiflu gets made by roche in switzerland and they don't sell stocks. they are a privatly held company through its shareholders. They will let you know of all owners when you buy one too. I can't recall reading any names related with the u.s government. They make their money in a different way. By saying they bought vaccines for 20mill when they only bought 10mills worth.
By building a bridge which was supposed to be 150k is now more than a mill etc.
Posted by tdallendoerfer (26 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Tami flu
Roche is holding the patent of tamiflu and therefore not connected to the amer. company anymore. At least not moneywise. And the birdflu (if manmade or just changed or not) is a real threat nowadays. People in asia and now even africa are getting into trouble due their living together with their bird stock. But i still think u are quite right with your accusations.

Ever heard about the rumsfeld disease. He was the guy who pushed aspartarme into our food chain although he knew of test on rats, which gave them brain cancer. It is just a matter of time to get us there. Why do you think do machines like the rife machine (supposedly working against any cancer - case studies available as well - from the 20's i think) get put away in the media or their research stopped? When their would be a cure where we where relying on pills, a machine never will come out. Pills you have to take ur whole life, a machine or surgeon u only gotta visit mostly once. In this world no one gives a f* about you, just how to get your last cent out of your wallet as well. And when u think u are free, u are wrong. Moeny is power and power is money. If u got one it is no problem to achieve the other part.
Posted by tdallendoerfer (26 comments )
Reply Link Flag
What is a copyright violation?
When i download music i own already just to archive it?

When i download a free trial and crack it myself or when i find a crack for it?

When i just keep downloading free trial again and again?

When I rent a video and copy it?

When i buy a video and copy it?

What happens when i archived one of my cd's and lent the originall to some1 and never got it back?

What happens when u have a tivo and record a dvd or movie on it?

What happens when u record radio?
What happens when u record internet radio (mp'3 files directly streamed)

it never was illegal to record anything and to keep a tape of it for peersonal use. When a tivo is legal so gotta be everything else mentioned in here. Cause it is legal to make a personal copy of anything so far you bought.

Even when u bought all your mp3 files. How can u proof it?

It is right to shut someone down like him, cause he was running a business with it. And when u use a software for professional purposes you have to own it as well. When u just play around on a programm (p.e dreamwaver) no one cares and i think that any company wouldn't care either.

And we all know it will always be a race between the copyright makers and hackers.

But as long as it is not really defined we will not know what a copyright violation is.
Posted by tdallendoerfer (26 comments )
Reply Link Flag
if some1 just downloads my music without paying i am fine. at least he listens to it.
Posted by tdallendoerfer (26 comments )
Reply Link Flag

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot



RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.