Linked by henderson101 on Tue 24th Jul 2012 23:42 UTC
Google "I read earlier this week about a developer who made their Android version free after the $1 game was extensively pirated. Stories like this come as no surprise, but the industry press rarely deals with the core problem - and nor does Google. [...] Whilst the aforementioned story about the Android game didn't surprise me, it did horrify me. Android is designed to be difficult to make money from, and the core issue is that it's open - with the corrosive mentality that surrounds such openness."
Permalink for comment 528087
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by Gullible Jones on Wed 25th Jul 2012 06:07 UTC
Gullible Jones
Member since:

So many things wrong with the article I don't know where to start.

- I don't see him criticizing Microsoft for having an "open" model, but they definitely do by his definition. You could call Microsoft out for enabling piracy as much as you could call Google out, IMO (i.e. not at all, unless you're Matt Gemmell).

- His argument that openness is bad because it enables piracy is BS; it's like saying that the internet is bad because it enables black markets. Aside from throwing out the baby with the bathwater, it implies that the best way to prevent moral transgressions is to render people incapable of them. The potential here for reductio ad absurdem should be obvious.

- A minor point: he says "Closed is good for business." And we know that "good for business" == "good for the world," right? I'm sure millions of people in Congo could testify to that.

- "But freedom is bad, when you get too much of it." This statement gives me heartburn - because it's true, but Gemmell is abusing it horribly. IMO he is forgetting the operating principle of the statement, which is something like "Your freedom to swing your arm ends at my nose." If breaking people's noses becomes a problem, you don't put everyone in handcuffs so they can't swing their arms; you tell people that breaking noses is not tolerated, and enforce consequences for it.

Obviously part of the problem with piracy is a) consequences are hard to enforce and b) nobody seems capable of agreeing on what they should be. But turning the whole software world into a walled garden because idiots can't be bothered to pay one lousy dollar for a game... That is just stupid.

If I didn't know better, I'd say Gemmell was a troll. As it is, I find myself seriously wondering if he is a shill. And mind, I am not a FOSS fanboy - I do not use that word lightly.

Reply Score: 15