How do you feel about old software licenses?

[Dennis Nedry]

If it's impossible to find a piece of software you're looking for, and it's no longer for sale, how do you feel about finding it, or serial numbers, in the underworlds of the net? Do you just do it and not think twice, do you feel bad about it, or do you not do it at all and sometimes miss out?

I know some boards don't like new users starting polls or whatever, but I thought it could be interesting.

 

[equill]

Whatever one may think of the 'licence' system, as opposed to a much more rational patent system (and I admit unashamedly that I think that the licence system should never have been accepted by users and defended by governments), it is a fact that licences exist. No forum owner can afford to be seen to tolerate, let alone encourage, piracy of software.

de

 

[porter]

as opposed to a much more rational patent system

What makes you think we have one of those? Some of the software patents are rediculous. You could get a patent for a "computing device that used base 2 arithmetic" if you tried.

 

[Mike Richardson]

It's not piracy if the company is out of business and nobody bought or took over the old software. Then it becomes public domain.

If the company exists in any way and the software went with it - for example Maxis which is now Electronic Arts - it's technically piracy. You can buy SimCity Classic and stuff off eBay, hell, in sealed boxes even. So in that case you should buy it. But if you can't buy it anywhere within a reasonable distance or online at a reasonable price (at or below the original retail), just acquire it through "special means".

 

[Scott Baret]

Do I agree with the current laws and system in regards to old software? No. I think software copyright terms should be 12 years with the option to renew for another 8.

However, just because I don't agree doesn't mean I can go and do what I want. The law is the law and even if we don't agree with it we must follow it. This means that even ancient software must be acquired legally.

I buy all my software, including that from an out of business company. Yes, some say it's ridiculous to buy three copies of Battle Chess for my trio of Mac Classics but it's the only legal way to do it. And I must admit, it felt very rewarding to be able to hunt down those old Battle Chesses.

Yes, I am the one guy who voted for "never ever" because I obey the laws whether I like them or not.

 

[Quadraman]

We should all attempt to find a legal copy before using a warez site, but sometimes it just isn't possible. Copyrights should be allowed to expire at some point when it is no longer profiting anyone to keep them. An old piece of software that hasn't been sold for 15 years and has no more modern equivalent should be free for all.

 

[ChristTrekker]

If (when!) I am elected to Congress, this is one aspect of US copyright law I intend to work on.

 

[porter]

If (when!) I am elected to Congress, this is one aspect of US copyright law I intend to work on.

But once your family is given free-passes to Disneyland for life you magically forget all about it.

 

[equill]

What makes you think we have one of those? Some of the software patents are rediculous. You could get a patent for a "computing device that used base 2 arithmetic" if you tried.

Perhaps we differ as to the base premise of the patent process. In origin and application a patent is a (time-)limited monopoly. After n years, according to taste and legislation, the content passes into the public domain. It becomes a part of 'the prior art'. Modern (especially US) application of the concept is to try to stretch limited into perpetual, but that doesn't invalidate the utility of the base premise.

de

 

[porter]

Perhaps we differ as to the base premise of the patent process. In origin and application a patent is a (time-)limited monopoly.

It is also remarkably childish, "Hey, that's a good idea" - "No, you can't do that, I thought of it first!".

 

[Unknown_K]

Anything not currently available or supported I download without thinking about it. But I DO, try to get a legit copy of every old utility and app I use when they do come up even for the real old ones.

 

[4seasonphoto]

Beyond a certain point, I think "anything goes".

 

[benjgvps]

If (when!) I am elected to Congress, this is one aspect of US copyright law I intend to work on.

Run for Prime minister of Canada (Or as the recording industry calls us, cam-ada)! I would go door to door for that!

As for my stance on this matter, I don't care. If it is abandoned, who gives a damn! Would EA games really break my door down and tell me to put my hands on my head because I uploaded SimCity Classic to my website for a small group of hobbiests to download? Most likely No.

If they are not making money off of me, why should they care. It isn't like they are making money off of ebay when someone buys a copy. Most of the time it is not cheap to get the original software, so you have to download it. Plus, you don't even know if you like the program you are buying! If you downloaded it and you don't like it, drag and drop it into the trash.

I do download current software sometimes, though most of the time it is because I want to know if I should buy the software without a silly "Trial" version with limted features.

There are some times that you do it that you just think it should be right, like say when I stuck Windows XP on my PC, I had to get a copy from questionable sources, though I should be able to get a copy since the computer came with XP in the first place, somebody paid for a licence and I should be able to use that licence. Or if you have lost a disk, with my SimCity 4, my second disk is gone, so I got a copy of that from questionable sources.

What I think the government should do is just run the current copyright laws through a paper shredder and start fresh from ideas from the taxpayers. The new copyright laws for Canada are just stupid, I USE TORRENTS, COME GET MY MR.ROBOTO...Ahem, Steven Harper.

 

[register]

It is also remarkably childish, "Hey, that's a good idea" - "No, you can't do that, I thought of it first!".

The patent system has been established to aid spreading of technologic progress in the first place. As porter pointed out, the patent system is perverted to something protecting commercial interests, thus being an encumbrance to anyone who needs to make use of new technology. If there was an option for anyone to use the patent system for free, I might agree to a protection of commercial use of intellectual property up to a certain degree. But many individual persons can not afford patent fees, while some huge companies churn patents out as soon somebody got an idea about an idea. So one might dismiss the whole patent system without doing something bad, as mankind could freely use any improvement all over the world.
But I agree that there should be some protection for actually designed and manufactured products. A given piece of software may be protected from piracy, of course. As it comes to obsolete software products, there might be place for a law allowing to expire license restrictions when the product is not supported any more.

 

[iMac600]

I download all my old software. Usually the disc is not available, and even if it were I wouldn't pay for it anyway. It's old, well past its prime and if the developer still exists, they're making money off their newest product. If not, they've given up on it a long time ago.

I'm sure that would infuriate quite a few, but that's my system.

 

[equill]

Again, patents, or more correctly 'letters patent', or 'an open licence to monopoly at the sovereign's pleasure' was intended to sanction a limited monopoly. In our time it can reasonably be interpreted as 'a reward for intellectual innovation, protected from competition for a limited time. Given the life of software, that fits the need. Patents also, at least nominally, reward and encourage innovation. Innovations are a bit long in the tooth 16 years later. Commercial interest has degraded the idea and the practice, especially in the C20, but far more disgusting than patent law is the change to copyright law, which now gives a meal-ticket to 'heirs, assigns and successors' for up to 70 years' after the death of the (original creator of the 'work') copyright owner. We consumers of software could be worse off than we are, in the same boat as lovers of music, literature, graphic art and so on.

de

 

[equill]

And to answer the original question by the OP, I don't claim any special purity of thought or action in the matter, but my preference is always for s/w on original, functional medium. That's what I aim to get, but it doesn't stop me from paying for downloadable shareware, either.

de

 

[porter]

Innovations are a bit long in the tooth 16 years later.

Yeah, that wheel thing, its so passé.

 

[ChristTrekker]

But once your family is given free-passes to Disneyland for life you magically forget all about it.

I can't be bought. If I wanted it easy, I wouldn't belong to a 3rd party.