Warez: Encyclopedia II - Warez - Motivations and arguments

Warez - Motivations and arguments

Pirates generally exploit the international nature of the copyright issue to avoid law enforcement in specific countries. In Russia, the copying of software was once explicitly permitted by law when such software was not in the Russian language. This is no longer the case, but prosecutions for copyright infringement are still very rare.

The production and/or distribution of warez is illegal in most countries. However, it is typically overlooked in poorer third world countries with weak or non-existent IP protection. Some first world countries have loopholes in legislation that allow the warez scene to operate almost legally as compared to P2P-distribution, since it can be proven that shared material was targeted to a limited group.

Warez - Pro-warez argument

The morality of copyright infringement is also disputed, with members of warez groups often viewing their actions as "socially positive". The following are their justifications:

1. Difficulty of implementing copyright enforcement – Warez groups believe that they are allowed to continue their activities due to the nature of Internet globalization, inconsistent worldwide laws and technical difficulties in tracking warez groups.
2. Difference between copyright infringement and conventional property theft – Cracking software is different from theft or stealing other people's property, namely, it does not deprive the use of the software from the original owner. For example, if A steals B's car, B will no longer be able to use that car; but if A copies B's software, B can still use that software with no trouble.
3. Difference between legally wrong and morally wrong – Although copyright laws state that it is illegal to crack people's software, there is a difference between "legally wrong" and "morally wrong". To them, it is indeed morally right to do so. It is beneficial, at least to the users of warez.
4. Criticism on copyright laws – Some warez groups may regard copyright as harmful to society. For example, it hinders creation and over-protects the rights of copyright holders. Sometimes the protection is even ridiculous or unnecessary. For instance, it is ridiculous to regard "a legitimate backup copy of a purchased CD" or "a format transfer of music (eg. from *.wav to *.mp3)" as illegal in some countries.
5. Criticism of copyright holders – There are various reasons, including: some warez groups may hate copyright holders or their companies. They distribute software as a form of revenge possibly because they have had bad experiences with the software company(s). The copyright holder is unjust or greedy in that it exploits its own staff.
6. Philosophy of freebies – All software should be distributed free of charge. Reasons include: the effect/cost of creating software is just one-off. It is wrong to charge every copy of the software.
7. High price – Since copyright holders sell their products and services at a unacceptably high prices, users should not pay for these companies or holders.
8. Perceived injustice of the poor – This point is simliar to the above reasons. Warez groups feel it is bad not to share products and services with those who could not afford to obtain it otherwise. These groups compare themselves to Robin Hood.
9. Full trial before buy – Some software owners only give function-limited demo or do not give demo at all. Users need to fully trial them before deciding whether to buy it or not.
10. Deprivation of Individual Rights – Laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act may also contribute to the motivations of those involved in warez, as user rights are increasingly threatened in the United States and rights holders attempt to lock out consumers.
11. Increase popularity of some codecs – Codecs such as DivX, XviD, and MP3 might not have become so widespread were it not for warez. This is admittedly quite a moot point, considering that this is the same as saying "decrease the popularity of some other codecs".
12. Increase market share – Companies such as Adobe, Borland, and Microsoft have gained big market shares due to vast numbers of warez users, such as college students and working people who adopted applications as they were readily available. Later when they find out that the software is useful, these people purchase legitimate licenses for future uses. This helps companies with software familarity and dominancy.
13. Victimless crime – If the warez user truly never would have purchased the product, it is argued that the copyright holder does not incur a loss.
14. Monopoly and cartel strategies – Many companies use their position in the market to ensure that they have full control over it, making it impossible for other companies to provide alternatives. That privileged position is then used to inflate the prices.

Warez - Anti-warez arguments

People opposed to warez typically argue that the motivating factors given by cracking groups are not authentic:

1. High price is not an excuse to piracy – They argue that "unreasonable price" or "could not afford the price" is not an excuse to steal other people's property, whether it is intellectual or tangible. An analogy used asks if one should take goods away from shops if that person believes that the prices are too high. For that argument, if one believes that the prices are too high, the person is advised to visit other shops or to not buy the goods in question.
2. Harm is larger than benefits – Although they may agree that there are some positive effects of warez on the world, they argue that its benefits cannot offset its harms. For example, copyright holders need to sell their intellectual property to earn a living. What those in the warez community do is equal to burning money from their pockets. When the business becomes hardly profitable, no one is willing to make any software, games, or music. Consequently, the public will suffer.
3. Law is indisputable – They claim the morality of copyright infringement is not disputed in the legal community or mainstream society. As long as cracking groups are citizens of a society, it is not for them to violate laws at will. They would further argue that cracking and warez have no relation to civil disobedience, which is often considered legitimate. They typically justify enforcing copyright for the same reasons that laws against burglary are enforced.
4. Fallacy of ambiguity – Some people feel that many pro-warez arguments are often just variations of the same "compositional fallacy" theme argumentatively; for example, many warez people in "the scene" see themselves as operating under the "Robin Hood" agenda, where they "take from the rich and give to the poor". However, in reality it is generally irrelevant how "rich or poor" are those whose works are being copied, or what is the economical situation of those who take their works without compensation. Most of the time, almost everything that can be illegally distributed in the scene, will be.
5. Morality – There is a wide range of alternative software available for free. Many people find it easier to use the legal alternatives instead of using illegal copies.
6. Professional pride – Taking the work of others without compensation is almost like stealing from yourself.
7. Logical inconsistencies in pro-warez arguments – Pro-warez arguments are alarmingly often also applicable only to some (clearly predetermined) situations concerning illegal copying, whereas the ideology itself seems to be quite wholesome and absolute in contrast. There are even some deep and serious philosophical problems in some of the pro-warez arguments. For example, in the "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" argument, the truthfulness of the sentence itself presumes a situation where it is taken for granted that the knowledge itself, about the chance of acquiring an illegal copy of the product in question, doesn't in any way change the potential interest of buying it. However, if one already knows beforehand that it is possible to obtain a copy illegally, and decides to do so, there is afterwards no way of really knowing whether or not the person in question would have bought it. This is because the knowledge about the possibility of obtaining an illegal copy for free might turn down the person's interest to buy it, so the potential chance for using warez in the first place might actually effectively sometimes become the reason for not obtaining the legal version. This is especially true in the context of "hardcore" warez users, who basically illegally copy everything they feel like copying, without even any intention of giving a compensation in the first place.)

Adapted from the Wikipedia article "Motivations and arguments", under the G.N U Free Docmentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki