Jump to content

Illegal downloads so sad


Waleed

Recommended Posts

I did a simple search on Google for fs9 products, and sure enough I got more that a handful of products to download at will.

I simply had to enter a name of a product, and a high percentage show up as available.

I could easily populate my sim.

It is indeed sad to see this going on, and I cannot help but feel that it, along with all the negativity on forums these days are contributing factors in eroding interest (personal opinion) in our hobby.

I know and understand that it is hard to stop, but wanted to express my displeasure as it has, and will put off potential development in the future.

So to all those who are busy downloading all these add-ons, thanks a lot for nothing.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I share your feelings, Waleed.

I have discussed this problem many times with different people. What I always say is that it surprises me how many people have a big ease in cheating themselves on that. I mean most of us, no matter what worldview, relligion or type of morality we represent, are agreeably against some acts universally seen as wrong, such as: killing and stealing / robbing. So 99% of simmers would never steal a single apple from the grocery, partially because there might be some means of security, but also simply because they would feel it is not fair. However many of the same people feel all right stealing much more valuable intellectual property by illegal downloading, using and sharing it for free. This seems much easier and no-one knows, so... .

Fortunately many of us understand what the real nature of these acts is and we, of our free will, support professional payware companies like Aerosoft (and many others) with our money. Free will - let's remember that. I hate hearing the point (which I did hear a few times) that someone uses something illegally because it is too expensive for him or her. Does that give us any right to rob others? Not being able to own a luxury car, shall we go to a parking slot and simply steal it? I know that comparison may seem exaggerated, but the way of thinking that stands behind it goes the same way.

I know many people reading these words will feel angry (maybe because some of you do these things sometimes) but I have just used the Internet right of the freedom of speech, so I am ready to get bashing in return. :ph34r:

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to get into this debate in a big way, but I won't.

All I will say is this: At the end of the day it's all relative. I think that term is correct. Take a package like Maldives X or the Lionheart Creations Quest Kodiak, both about £17 ($25). They are so cheap anyone stealing them is pretty desperate.

But then take say the Dodosim 206 which I just bought. Price quoted was a fare price, but the payment goes through a third party and they totally ripped me off. I ended up paying more than it should've been.

And then again there Aerosoft's/Digital Aviations Cheyenne. Not so cheap and on the whole a good product. But because of certain multiplayer issues I don't even have it installed anymore. To me that's money wasted on something that I have no intention of ever using again. I can't "sell it on" and regain some of the cost, it's money lost. There are other planes I've bought that I didn't like and have uninstalled. Again money wasted.

I'm not having a go at Aerosoft, or anyone else in particular. These are just examples of the products I've bought, and my experiences of them. Over the time I've had FSX I've learned what companies I will buy from in the future, and what companies I will never use again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many simmers posting in this thread are running "no cd" executables? wink.gif

Don't know what that means. What's a "no cd" executable? I'm running loads of files I haven't got a CD for. All my planes and Heli's haven't got a CD. In fact the only CD I've got apart from FSX is VFR London X. And the ironic thing is, that ain't installed :D

Don't know if I've understood this right, but there you go, most of my stuff is downloaded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what you get if there is no enforcement of laws against piracy.

Germany is an exception: in Germany there are actions against illegal music uploaders on a LARGE scale (just downloading music is still legal). But both software downloading and uploading is illegal in Germany. Unfortunately this is a very dirty business. German internet service providers are allowed to share the identity of a person behind an IP-address with others. So what many legal companies do is tracking the IP-address of "pirates" and then PAYING the ISP to get their real life addresses. Yes, ISPs are betraying their own customers... Then these legal companies send a letter asking for a large sum of money as compensation for the damage and they threat you with a lawsuit if you don't pay.

In my opinion governments should do something about it and not companies who make money with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats wrong with No-cd patches? As far as I know, they are not illegal, and are used by people who find it onerous to have to dig out a dvd or multiple DVD's every time they want to play a game. http://en.wikipedia....iki/No-CD_crack The original disk is essentially archived away from harm. I recently had to repurchase the acceleration DVD from Best-Buy because it got cracked while out of the box. I really wish I had backed it up.

Back to the OP's topic. As a nosey (very nosey) web-crawler I come across sites like the one mentioned all of the time and habitually report them. But the truth is that it often seems like spitting into the ocean, and now I find myself tending to report only the most stupendously egregious examples I come across. In fact there is one now that I am mulling over reporting which is absolutely Ginormous. The question I find myself asking nowadays, is am I doing any good, or just giving myself a cookie and a personal merit badge?

I really really don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add a really funny thing to the discussion: Did you know you can legally rip music that is played on an internet radio, but if you download the same piece of music from a non "life" source, you are considered criminal?

BTW, I got interested in making music by a pirated piece of software I got for my Atari ST. Since then, I have spent more than 30.000 € on software sequencers, software instruments and PC hardware like DSP cards, mixers, monitors etc.

My first flight sim was a pirated version of "Night Flight" for the Sinclair ZX Spectrum (anyone remembers?). Since this interest in Flight Simulation resurfaced in August 2008, I have made 47 orders (some of them consisting of more articles) in the Aerosoft shop alone (not to mention the things I bought at Simmarket, The Flight Sim Store or boxed in a shop).

Do I still use cracked software? Yes, in the way Bruce mentioned, I do (and rest assured that using a no-cd crack can get you in front of a court, it is NOT legal). I am using a no-cd crack for Morrowind and Oblivion. I have aquired some old cracked versions of music software that I bought and that started to use the Syncrosoft dongle in the more recent versions, because if this dongle gets damaged or lost, my licenses on it will be gone forever (and a dongle can't neither be insured, nor back-upped nor will the companies replace lost licenses, even if you register with them). These cracked versions are just a safety backup for me, should I ever come into this situation.

Not everything is black or white, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add a really funny thing to the discussion: Did you know you can legally rip music that is played on an internet radio, but if you download the same piece of music from a non "life" source, you are considered criminal?

BTW, I got interested in making music by a pirated piece of software I got for my Atari ST. Since then, I have spent more than 30.000 € on software sequencers, software instruments and PC hardware like DSP cards, mixers, monitors etc.

My first flight sim was a pirated version of "Night Flight" for the Sinclair ZX Spectrum (anyone remembers?). Since this interest in Flight Simulation resurfaced in August 2008, I have made 47 orders (some of them consisting of more articles) in the Aerosoft shop alone (not to mention the things I bought at Simmarket, The Flight Sim Store or boxed in a shop).

Do I still use cracked software? Yes, in the way Bruce mentioned, I do (and rest assured that using a no-cd crack can get you in front of a court, it is NOT legal). I am using a no-cd crack for Morrowind and Oblivion. I have aquired some old cracked versions of music software that I bought and that started to use the Syncrosoft dongle in the more recent versions, because if this dongle gets damaged or lost, my licenses on it will be gone forever (and a dongle can't neither be insured, nor back-upped nor will the companies replace lost licenses, even if you register with them). These cracked versions are just a safety backup for me, should I ever come into this situation.

Not everything is black or white, I suppose.

It seems you are right. The last time I heard anything about it, it was still deemed a "Grey" area, and even now the laws are so self contradicting that I suspect that legality would be almost completely situational. Case in Point: (and slightly a-topical)

The games developer Ubisoft recently released the latest PC patch for its hit game Rainbow Six Vegas 2 but with the release came problems for all users who had purchased the game via "Direct 2 Drive". The patch works fine for users with a physical copy of the game, but those who downloaded it legally from D2D could not load up the game.

The Ubi forums were hit with thread after thread with gamers asking for a fix for the issue and many threads noted correctly that an illegal No-CD crack created by the scene group RELOADED would fix the problem. Ubisoft moderators however, made sure to warn anyone who posted such suggestions that No-CD cracks/fixed .exe are unofficial and illegal and would not be tolerated in the forums.

Later in the day, Ubisoft released its own patch to solve the problem. However, some users ran the patch through a Hex editor and found that Ubisoft's "official" patch was in fact the RELOADED No-CD crack, just renamed.

Now, this would not be so big of an issue if not for Ubisoft's own terms of use. Their licenses state specifically that cracks are illegal in the United States and that users using them will violate their license. That is also not to mention that forum users had been punished just a day before.

There has been no official statement yet from Ubisoft, but a community manager has locked threads on the official Ubi forums and added this statement.

"We're looking into this further as this was not the UK Support team that posted this, however if it is an executable that does not need the disc I doubt it has come from an external source. There'd be very little point doing so when we already own the original unprotected executeable.

As soon as we find out more about this we'll let you know."

Since the Hex editor screenshot surfaced, Ubisoft has taken the patch down and users with a D2D version of the game still cannot play.

Examples of this sort of ridiculousness are not rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

Sorry, but to define a missing trail version as an argument for the situation of illegal up und download is only a "satisfying" argument: All available products with a trail option are in the same way in the "channels" as all the rest, like UK2000, FSDT for example, non of this is "save" and so the person who try to explain there doing with missing trails are the reason for the situation, that nobody will force it: If there is no usable and save protection way for a selled product, the trail will only offer another option for the uploaded to hack it, the invest to make a trail save is much higher the the benefit it ever can give all of us in the actual situation.

When the provider could not trust the registered downloader, that they don't upload the installer (with a crack or RIP), how should you build up a trust to 1000th of unregistered trail user not to provide a crack for the trail?

I agree, that there is much "quick and durty" stuff selled at the moment, but that should be more a request to all the existing reviewer pages, magazines to do there job as good as possible to give the customers the overview, what is good and what he should leave in the shelves.

When you buy a product 5 Minutes after the release, without haveing any references and without any infos (beside the allways nice screens on the product pages), you will allways have the risk, that the product could not fullfil your requests and you make only happy the developers.

If you will wait for the reviews, reactions and you only trust teams you already know, you will reduce the risk very much and I think, that a good developer is more happy about a customer, who is accepting his work and pay for it, then any other version of "buy what I see" customer, who is then stateing in the knowing of his mistake more frustrated then realistic.

You have all option in your hand: to buy everything without any feedback before is wrong as to upload everything, because both will not change the situation as needed to get a clear base. The good stuff will loose, so that developers who invest lot of time to make this possible will think about other things in future and the others will be happy to be in the charts.

And to compare the "Music" Market with FS is as critical as it could be, because in FS we talk in 1.000th of sales, in Music we talk about 1.000.000th, so the effect of illegal upload is much more present, because the base of "self explaining users" in FS is much higher in relation to the base of the market.

But, as long as we have more paying users as the "rest", we can try to discuss this "issue", at the moment we can do, but we never know as long we can do it, and one point is not dicussable: The howl issue is very frustating, because you never can get 100% save situations and with every step you do, we will hit the most of us, who don't even thing about to be part of the "problem". And so I am happy about the first two posts in this thread, because this will show, it is possible to have the "correct" position, what ever the rest of the thread will bring us.

One word to may "German friends": Ihr seid inkonsequent in all eurem Handeln: Hier begründet euer Handeln mit fehlenden Trails, gleichzeigt dankt ihr aber jedem, der selbst solche Produkte zur "Verfügung" stellt. Besser kann man seine eigene Motivation nicht preisgeben, da hilft auch jedes noch so hochtrabendes Gerede nichts. Das euch mittlerweile offensichtlich einige Leute auf die Füße treten, stimmt mich zuversichtlich, dass auch ohne unser Zutun die Zeiten sich bessern werden, wenn es auch nur langsam vorrangehen mag. Ihr mögt euch zwar kurzfristig als "Sieger" fühlen, langfristig wirds euch nichts glücklicher machen, was auch immer die Zukunft bringen wird, denn von euch ist ja kein kreativer und zielführender Beitrag zu erwarten.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a DJ and radio presenter I have to tell you you couldn't be more wrong if your wore a dress and called yourself `Olivia`.

The main problem with music is - and has always been - distribution. A few - very few - organisations control the mass distribution of music and unless you are part of that cartel, you are a buggered music `producer`. You can produce it but heaven help you if you want radio airplay...

But the interweb has changed this, not only can you `try before buy` - a key markting tool that even the kitchen-table sim industry has learned long since - you also erode the influence - and affluence - of those who control the dissemination of the information. And that is what this is all about, and therefore nothing to do with the flight sim business.

Analogies are simply fruitless.

Music is run by monolithic Corporations that want to control the artist. This is not and NEVER HAS BEEN a fault or failure of the flight sim industry. There has ALWAYS been a distribution policy for the self-described dispossessed.

It's called freeware. And it scares the crap out of the music industry.

...now that musicians have cottoned-on to this approach there is no longer a need to be a `label` artiste to make a living nor to achieve exposure for your sounds. I have featured several artists that have no record deal, or big label PR support, but I fell over the whilst hunting for new music or were exposed to from monitoring music download sites.

What a pity the naive, incompetent flight sim industry can't see the benefit that piracy presents and simply steal back from the pirates the elements that make them successful.

I may not have sympathy for pirates, but their business methodology is sound.

Contentious I know, but utterly, irrefutably true...

Bless your naivety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
Analogies are simply fruitless.

Thanks for confirming my statement, it's not compareble

What a pity the naive, incompetent flight sim industry can't see the benefit that piracy presents and simply steal back from the pirates the elements that make them successful.

Yes, very naive to think that could help, ask those who distribute there work as "donationware", what's there feedback was: Nothing.

It's show, there are many positions and views possible, which is correct, nobody can say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oliver,

I am not quite sure if you answered to my posting or just to the thread. Two observations: As far as I understand the postings, NOBODY here complained about the lack of trial versions or used the lack of them as apology for pirating software. This would be outright silly. In fact, I think that nobody here even stated that pirating software would be ok. At least I certainly didn't. I simply stated that back in the early 90s, when there was Fidonet and no real internet, I used cracked software swapped on floppy discs, and to be honest, I don't know a single person who didn't, be it a student like me or a professor. Swapping software was just like swapping tapes with music.

The intention of my posting was simply to state that while I am against software piracy, I practiced it in my early computer days and in my case, it led me to spend a lot of money. You profited from that as well, I bought two blocks of serials and will certainly aquire more in the coming weeks ;-).

PS: For 99% of all musicians, music isn't a million-copies-sold-business. The best music nowadays isn't found on labels, but distributed under GPL. Go to Jamendo.com, check out what is there. You will be surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you're mis-directing the reply. Donationware - by its very terminology - is freeware for which a financial contribution is asked. BUT NOT DEMANDED.

If it was demanded, then it wouldn't be donationware. If everybody had to pay for it it wouldn't be free, it would be Payware. And users would enjoy all the rights and benefits of a customer...

The fact that donationware invites contributions but rarely receives any is an indictment of the business model of the producer, not the morals of the recipient: As it has long been known that donationware in the Sim business has this `fault` then it is concomitant that a developer using this method is either not willing or not able to establish a business methodology to operate within the strictures of trading standards and, presumably, declare the earnings to the authorities as `earned income`. <_<

Or has no confidence in their product to stand up in the face of scrutiny against its competitors. :blush:

Or is simply a freeware producer who will be happy with the odd beneficial income but who really makes things for the benefit of the communiyy rather than his/their wallet. :wub:

Back at the real topic, what concerns me is that we have such a terribly narrow view of piracy in this hobby:

We seem to want to take an utterly simplistic notion of blaming the end user who bypasses a few pathetic restrictions on a recreational product that does no harm to the world instead of wondering why precious few of the Big Developers who want our cash are actually recognised companies in anything other than name? Calling yourself `XYZ Developers` (apologies if there actually IS a developer call `XYZ Developers` :unsure: ) but not making it into a proper, regimented, incorporated business at whatever level is appropriate for the company IS piracy...

Because the intent is to take money from end users under false pretences. The pretence being that you have a solid, long-lasting, bricks-and-mortar establishment able to provide the legal licensing, sales and satisfactory sales support that such a contract implies, formed under the basis of trading regulations and satisfying the business protocols at whatever level the `company` chooses to operate at. It is these structures that provide security and guarantees for customers, not anything else.

Next, most End User Licence Agreements are such total gibberish they are not worth the paper they are not printed on and would be deemed illegal in a Court of Law. No binding contract, no agreement, NO customer security.`Nuff said.

Next, the use of a crack for software YOU ARE ALREADY LICENSED TO USE, is NOT illegal. Nor is it immoral. Just as I have seatbelts and airbags in my car, anti-lock brakes on my motorcycle and quailfied instructor status to show I have a competency to use them, as a simmer I safeguard MY interests by not just relying on the EULA but also by using cracks and license-beaters for my own safety, as these `Mom & Pop` kitchen table operations cannot provide me with the safety and security of a legally-binding gaurantee of support and future use.

Next, what safeguards are there in place to ensure that the software we use on OUR computers has not itself been created by pirated software? I'd be willing to bet with confidence that if the current developers were subject to a spot-check more than 90% of the computers being used to create the `goods` we use would have illegally-obtained software on them. Are we then guilty of using pirated software because the tools to create them were themselves stolen? :huh:

Why for example, does the developer never ever state on their websites the license numbers of any and all softwares used to create the toys we are about to download and use... <_<

Then there is the more overt piracy of stealing from other developers and attempting to pass it off as your own: Carenado were found guilty of doing this, yet they have never received punishment for the crime (and it is most definitely a crime. Just ask Microsoft who currently are not able to sell copies of MS Office for the same reason...). We still buy from them, we still discuss their products, websites review them and publishers still offer them for sale. Flight Sim Developers had an installer that actually installed a worm into the users Registry as part of the installation protocol, hunting for illegal copies of `their` software and then attacking the users system if it found any that it (erroneously, as it turned out in many cases) considered illegal. That malware was, is and always will be illegal (a criminal offence) yet they have never been brought to book. Oh and the worm they used was pirated...

And as a beta tester for `ABC Products` I was previously, consistently - and illegally - supplied with copies of other developers software for comparison purposes.

Now, who's the pirate again?

The plain and simple fact is that what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander. Piracy IS endemic in the software industry in general, and the flight sim software industry specifically. When I can be sure and certain that I can trust the companies I entering into a contract with (as opposed to the people I send money to) then maybe things will be changing.

Because trust is earned, not owed. And at the moment I don't feel inclined to trust. What the industry needs to ask itself is WHY is that..?

A contentious post no doubt, but it also helps remove any vestige of comparison with the music business.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

Hi darem,

I also only give my point of view here and I read very often the "trial" discussion in forums,where this users try to give themself the arguments for there doings.

The other arguments are,that all the software is "shi.." and so no need to pay for it, but they all request all this "shi..." and are unhappy when they don't have it.

There is no way to explain this doing, but we can only live with it and hope, that it will not kill the market over the time. Everybody must find his position and how he will handle it, the rest we will see over the time. And the view is naturally different between "users" and "providers".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi darem,

I also only give my point of view here and I read very often the "trial" discussion in forums,where this users try to give themself the arguments for there doings.

The other arguments are,that all the software is "shi.." and so no need to pay for it, but they all request all this "shi..." and are unhappy when they don't have it.

There is no way to explain this doing, but we can only live with it and hope, that it will not kill the market over the time. Everybody must find his position and how he will handle it, the rest we will see over the time. And the view is naturally different between "users" and "providers".

Other readers, please excuse that this is in German:

Hallo Oliver,

nein, ich denke, dass unsere Standpunkte so unterschiedlich gar nicht sind. Auch geistiges Eigentum ist Eigentum, und ich selbst habe keinen Respekt vor Leuten, die geistiges Eigentum stehlen - nicht zuletzt deshalb, weil ich selbst von solch immateriellen Gütern lebe.

Ich kann Dich also sehr gut verstehen.

Liebe Grüße,

Bernhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

Other readers, please excuse that this is in German:

Hallo Oliver,

nein, ich denke, dass unsere Standpunkte so unterschiedlich gar nicht sind. Auch geistiges Eigentum ist Eigentum, und ich selbst habe keinen Respekt vor Leuten, die geistiges Eigentum stehlen - nicht zuletzt deshalb, weil ich selbst von solch immateriellen Gütern lebe.

Ich kann Dich also sehr gut verstehen.

Liebe Grüße,

Bernhard

Yes Bernhard,

and all our customers see it the same, because that why they called customer. And as there are still many of them having this policy, we are still in this business.

I have no problem with people who not using my work, because they don't like it, because they say it's to expensive or they don't like the sales policy. Then it's my problem and I must think about to change something to get more acceptance.

But when I see, that there are "users" be happy with my work, asking for more, asking for support and so on, but are not willing to give there part, then I could not accepted this and I could not agree to anybody how means to find any apology for that, but I must live with it, as long as the "customer base" will be big enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There I totally agree with you. But where in your `contract` is the implied level of support? Who is deciding when your `users`are asking for too much? You? How is the user to know when that margin is reached save for being informed - or engaged to a level of contract?

What your contract does is place you on the defensive, and the clingy customer in the wrong. That is a mistake.

Define what level of support you will provide for a given level of support from your customer and you will solve this problem. Just because you are not charging for a service doesn't detract one iota from defining what that service IS so that everyone will know the limits.

In my business life I offer various Service Level agreements to customers, phasing their technical support to the level of their contract terms, parts, labour AND warranty agreements:

If a customer pays only for parts they get parts. Parts are guaranteed and, as they come from OEM, supported in turn by us and them.

After that, if customers engineers contact and ask for guidance for those parts enquiries will be charged at a set rate...

Customers on a Service Level agreement get parts and helpline, or parts, helpline and engineer support at the factory, or parts, helpline, and engineer support on-site anywhere in the World. Depending on the Service Level subscribed to. The customer knows what level they are buying into, because they sign a contract to that effect. A legally enforceable contract on BOTH parties (which is what a contract is, something which binds all parties not just the supplier or vendor).

Yours seemingly do not. That too, is a mistake.

Now while I don't ever expect to see the flight sim biz enjoy the rigid structures, legal contracts and ISO-certified quality standards for sales, service and support that I work to, I can and DO expect to have confidence in the ability of those I purchase from to be around to support the product for its lifespan, and to do so in strict performance of contract enforceable by law if need be, or at least capable of being independently verified.

NONE of this exists in the hobby, and therefore it cannot qualify as a `business` - no matter how many people currently earn an exclusive living from it. As a result, meandering conversations about the nature of piracy actually are a moot point, as I rather doubt many developers will stand even tertiary fiscal investigation, much less certified standards of business propriety.

All this is not saying that stealing is acceptable. Just that there's fruitless hours wasted talking about products that only exist ephemerally, from companies that don't exist legally in the business world, that has no set parameters and does not conform to the legal requirements of ANY country. One doesn't have to look hard to find the fault even with most stable of `players` in the business. A quick search reveals only a handful of operators who are constantly `in the news` are actually companies in the legal sense. And it has nothing to do with size, either.

And while companies like Aerosoft are genuine, exist under business incorporation rules that satisfy their country of formation strict requirements (I know, I checked... well done Mathijs et al <_<), they in turn publish peripatetic self-claimed `companies` that actually don't meet those rules, don't compile and produce in a clear and verifiably honest way (nb: that's not to imply dishonesty except for those expressly stated above) and which exist in name only, with no enforceable standard of conduct and no contract worthy of the name.

Until THAT problem is addressed, frankly piracy is more a problem for users than it ever can be for developers.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use