Video Editing Software

[ivan]

When you create a product, you can separate the process into roughly three parts: design, production, distribution. Design is something that has to be created once, then based on that you have production and distribution. Each part costs money. If you steal a Rolls Royce, you also steal all the material, all the labour, all the money it took to get the Rolls Royce from the factory to the shop, money from the public, because the police who will go looking for it will also have to be payed...

When you get a pirated copy of the software, no labour has gone into that particular copy. Yes, it did cost money to produce the design, but that particular copy you're using costed nothing. You analogy doesn't stand.

Tell me, GILD. Nowadays, when the copyright laws are getting tighter and tighter, do you agree with all of them? For example, I'm sure that you used to exchange music with your friends. Lend them a CD for a listen, borrow some of theirs... Maybe get a nice book from someone to read at your leisure? Is it stealing as well? What do you say?

[thieum]

Originally Posted by Tomahawk

Hell, David Fincher's Zodiac was actually edited on it.

That's a typical western misconception, it's not the tool that makes good editing, it's the editor.

Besides, if you want to use a piece of software that is used by most film editors, you would rather want to use Avid software... They even offer a version of xpress for free, cheap studient versions, and free trials of their high end products.

Now, then again, FCP is very good, and it's obviously overkill for most unicycle videos, so are avid products for that matter. iMovie is just fine for 99.5% home movies

[feel the light]

Should we lock up all the librarians? They gave me a card for free and then hundreds of us read a book that was only paid for once.

If you agree to close libraries, should we prosecute private gifts of books and recordings ? If I read a book then give it to you, 2 people read what only one has paid for . Who should go to jail for this reading crime, me or you ? If you say both, can we both serve only a half sentence since the book was paid for once in two readings ?

Justice used to mean that if you went to see a play or movie, full price was paid each time. Anything less would be like sneaking into the theater, stealing a DVD from a store, or downloading a movie for free. Have you ever bought a movie or recording and listened to it more than once ? Did you use the old "the morals change with the technology" excuse ? How do you assuage the guilt, knowing that unemployment among theater musicians and actors increased greatly as a result of your crimes ? Or do you resort in your debunked "advertising value to the artist", excuse ? "Here, listen to my record of Louie Armstrong for free !, I bet you will want to go to his concert someday if you do ! " Yeah, what bullshit, like listening to recordings ever helped Armstrong. Next thing we hear, someone will say we should of helped him by stealing his Rolls Royce.

[Into the blue]

Deep down we all know it's stealing, you're just arguing semantics.

[feel the light]

If you have words, use them. I am all ears.

[Into the blue]

Originally Posted by feel the light

I am all ears.

No, you're all asshole.

You know full well the difference between stealing a book from a store and lending a book from a library.

[maestro8]

Originally Posted by Jagster

you can get pro software like Sony Vegas 10 from the internet - you just need to do a little bit of hacking - but its free

Originally Posted by AustinLee

There are ways to get it for free without using torrents, but I wouldn't recommend them *wink*.

I know saying "think before you post" comes across a bit harsh, but let me tell you what you failed to consider before posting:

1) Mentioning the names of popular software packages plus the word "torrent" in the same post creates a popular search term. This will draw people looking for hacked software to our site... not what we want.

2) You're encouraging illegal behavior. If you don't agree with the law, write your congress person. If you can't afford the software, write the publisher and ask for a student or discount version... chances are slim but you might come away with a deal.

Don't break the law simply because you're too lazy to save up for the product you want, or too lazy to look for a shareware / freeware alternative. There's plenty out there.

[Jagster]

Well, I've now got Final Cut Studio - full version, no hacking, cheating, torrenting, downloading, etc - and for some reason it feels different when I use it. not because its a different program but because I got it the proper way
I suppose every person thinks - "its just me getting it for free, everyone else will pay for it and therefore they justify the hacking they've done"
if that makes sense

[maestro8]

Originally Posted by ivan

If you pirate(and not at sea) the only loss for the company is potential profit.

You've no idea what you're talking about, Ivan. Profit is money that is made AFTER costs are covered. Software houses estimate sales when budgeting a production, and when you take a sale away from that house, you may be cutting into revenue that wouldn't end up in the "profit" column. You're taking food out of the mouths of the developer's children.

Originally Posted by ivan

Now comes along a person ...He'll never make enough profit to cover even the tenth of the cost of the software

If you'd follow your logic to the opposite extreme, you'd be arguing that a person should donate x% of his profit to the software maker should he "strike it rich" with one of his videos. At either extreme, your comment is ludicrous and irrelevant. Buying a piece of software is not supposed to guarantee one any amount of profit from the use of that software.

If someone can't afford the software, they shouldn't use it. Are you going to suggest we all steal Lamborghinis simply because we can't afford them?

Immediate gain of reputation for Final Cut Pro. Advertisement! So, in a way, the company is even repaid for the potential losses that it has suffered.

There's a huge difference between an actual advertising campaign and the testimonial of a pirate. There is no repayment in any form here.

The company should be able decide when, where and how its product is advertised. Not a bunch of filthy scumbags who think they're doing the world a favor by raping and pillaging software developers.

Originally Posted by ivan

When you get a pirated copy of the software, no labour has gone into that particular copy. Yes, it did cost money to produce the design, but that particular copy you're using costed nothing. You analogy doesn't stand.

Comparing physical property to intellectual property is an analogy that "doesn't stand". You don't buy a blank disk when you buy software... you buy a license to the intellectual property produced by a software house.

Take your logic and apply it to every copy a software house produced. The house would make $0 of revenue.

Originally Posted by feel the light

Should we lock up all the librarians? They gave me a card for free and then hundreds of us read a book that was only paid for once.

Software licensing is much different than that of a book or album. You're basing your entire argument on a comparison between apples and oranges.

[feel the light]

Originally Posted by Into the blue

No, you're all asshole.

You know full well the difference between stealing a book from a store and lending a book from a library.

No, you are an asshole, (see, I can match your words with equal eloquence, effortlessly) and you are so ill spoken you won't go near the central argument.

We all know that when a book is stolen from a bookstore, it costs the store owner $. Borrowed from a library, it pleases the publicly funded librarians, ensuring future librarian employment. Did libraries please scribes? Maybe only those who understood how advancing literacy could boost their job prospects ? I know they called the first printers harsher words than asshole. Scribes hated printers with a passion. Just as printers hated libraries that under cut their booksellers. As early stage actors hated movies. As movie studios hated the VHS. And now is the age of the modern hater, who hates Bit Torrent, and the free reproduction of knowledge. Get used to it. It is called increasing the efficiency of sharing our knowledge. Some things will change, but not the essence of that.

You see, once people have knowledge, they don't care what assholes call them. They know better, they have acquired culture. The first and strongest sign of someone who has acquired culture is that they desire to spread it as freely and openly as possible. That will never change, fighting it is beating a dead horse. Oh yeah, carriage makers and horse breeders had a few choice words about Henry Ford. Names worse than "horse thief" , his car was worse than an ass. You had to be a you know what to buy one.

[Into the blue]

Originally Posted by feel the light

No, you are an asshole.

Quite possibly, but I'm not an asshole with a history of stealing stuff.

Originally Posted by feel the light

We all know that when a book is stolen from a bookstore, it costs the store owner $. Borrowed from a library, it pleases the publicly funded librarians, ensuring future librarian employment.

Then I think it's time you proved your point by going into a book store tomorrow and walking out with a heavy tome. Make it a nice big one. Hold it over your head when you do it. Make it clear what you're doing. Then when you get stopped by security, offer the same argument that you posted here. Let us know how that goes.

We'll send you a cake with a file in it.

[DSchmitt]

omgawd.

this thread is now very entertaining

[GILD]

Originally Posted by feel the light

The first and strongest sign of someone who has acquired culture is that they desire to spread it as freely and openly as possible.

If it is theirs to spread.

To make that decision on behalf of someone else, someone who invested money in the production of that knowledge while holding a reasonable expectation of generating a return on that investment, is theft.

I only need one word.

Theft.

[DSchmitt]

srsly tho.

you're in denial if you think it's not stealing, lol

with that being said..yes i have illegally downloaded music before. and the thought is always in the back of my head.. "is the .0000001% chance gonna happen, and i get sued for copyright infringement or something?". whether you think it's not wrong or not, the law can get youuu

i haven't downloaded any programs before though..i've read about it and it seems like a MAJOR hassle... including things like changing the registry on your computer and stuff?? nah...i'll just stick with my 70$ powerdirector. if it was like 2 clicks and i had the newest sony vegas for free i'd do it. but i'd be aware that i'm taking a risk of breaking the law..

[johnfoss]

Originally Posted by ivan

"Dude, what program did you use to make that bangin' movie?!" And the maker will reply Final Cut Pro! Immediate gain of reputation for Final Cut Pro. Advertisement!

Ever been a professional entertainer? It's amazing how many people want to "hire" you to work for free. "Oh but we'll provide lunch, and this event would be great exposure for you."

Exposure, I would tell the person, is something homeless people die from. Entertainers that can't pay the rent because they always work for free become homeless people...

No, advertising your stolen warez is not a "plus" for the copyright owners, any more than it makes a car company feel good to find out that one of their products is the "most popular" stolen car this year.

What we're talking about here is intellectual property. Nothing new there, copyright law goes back a long way, and this is in the same vein. What's new is the ease and convenience of making perfect copies. Your argument seems to be that, because it's easy to make perfect copies, that makes it okay.

Or does it not make it okay? How about we start from there? Is it only okay for you? Or should each person be able to pirate n software titles before being a thief? It's like the old graffiti discussions we used to have. If you think grafitti is okay, let us know your address so we can come over and help decorate the place. But if you don't own the place, it's not up to you either.

How do I feel about music downloads? I did my fair share of downloading from Napster back in the day. I picked up copies of songs I had already purchased; didn't feel guilty there. Stuff I never had a copy of; felt guilty there. But before the digital revolution, most of my music collection was gathered by recording the radio, then editing what I wanted out of the long tapes. And I'm pretty sure that was legal (at least then), as long as I wasn't distributing/selling it.