It’s often been stated by media pundits that piracy is akin to stealing from a store. I beg to differ, or at least in the case of the piracy of productivity software. I write this article because I tallied that my theoretical expenditures for the necessary computer software to even participate in school would exceed $1000. That’s for Microsoft Office 2003 ($240-$550), and Microsoft WindowsXP ($550 for the non half-ass version). I say “theoretical” because in my instance I am fortunate enough to know and make use of OpenOffice and Linux, and therefore avoid these costs equivalent to a little under two month’s pay (25hr/wk student job).
Productivity software is much like a paintbrush. They both are necessary tools in the creation of something else. Now the lobbyists would claim that piracy would be me stealing the paintbrush outright. As such, all the efforts spent by the person collecting the hairs and putting the brush together were lost.
However, that is an innacurate perception of the concept of “copying”. I view that type of piracy as such: someone comes along and needs a paintbrush for school. Problem is, even though the paintbrush cost $5 to make, and maybe $10 for research, the brush itself has a pricetag of $5000. Unable to afford this, the student takes a close look at the paintbrush and makes an identical one on his own. In fact, the student payed for the $1 of materials it took to build it himself (analogy for burning onto CD). The student simply cannot afford the absurdly high price tag imposed by the company who makes the paintbrush.
The company more than made its fair share of profits, for as much as the student cannot afford the fees, the targeted corporations and governmental agencies for whoom the pricetag was set can.
