Quote:
Originally Posted by m127  It should be, and they should take care of the costs of their own security concerns, because that is the decent thing to do. Period.. |
For someone who considers himself so smart and a master of economics, such naivety is borderline is stupidly. You think that any companies support any kind of developing cost themselves? It is all paid by the costumer.They are doing business, they have salaries to pay. The people developing have bills and mortgages to pay. They need money and that comes from their products. And you think you have a good understanding of economics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by m127 Actually, an efficient policy CAN indeed reduce piracy by "converting" the unlawful. |
lol
That's complete BS. Unless it's free, most crack users won't pay, regardless of the price cut. Sell it at 50 dollars and if there is a crack crack users will go for it. The ones that buy the software do so because for some reason they realised that was the right thing to do or because they can't get a crack, it's that simple. Why do you think there are so many users of the H2O version of Cubase SX3? Because there's no crack of C4 or C5. Why do you think things like the novation V-station have cracks online? It costs 25£! There should be no cracks according to your theory, yet, they're all over the net and you think the parasites stealing even consider shelling out the little money they ask? Think again. The only way to prevent piracy is by having a copy protection that works, and syncrosoft has in 99% of the products it was used.