Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 26th Aug 2011 22:06 UTC, submitted by Morgan
Permalink for comment 487235
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/15/13 23:03 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-18
That would be crazy. Suppose I have virtually no income, and distribute Photoshop with license keys on my server. It would suddenly be very interesting for people to put copies of photoshop on their servers.
I agree there is something wrong in how the system treats individuals and small parties. But I am not sure that this is the solution.
It would, maybe, be more interesting to look at the actual loss. What is the loss if a million people download Photoshop, who could not afford to buy it in the first place?
What is the loss when somebody downloads twenty albums per month, when he only has the budget to buy five (and does so)?