it's nothing like stealing a porsche cause i'm not taking away from anyone. for example i downloaded flash mx just to make one intro for my website which gets about 15 hits a day. the program is what, $300? now, i would never pay for that just to do that, but let's say someone has a business site and is getting tons of hits and making money from their site and they put the flash to good use, then yeah they should buy it. same thing for all the other stuff i have which is ridiculously overpriced, but i hardly ever use.

heads down! incoming!!

there's a lot of solutions for any graphics programs: For 3D there's free programs like OpenFX or 3dCanvas and others (including a Terrain Renderer like Terragen!!!!)
For photoretouching there's The GIMP and others
In sharewarte (low pricing), there's thopusands of solutions around the web. I use Swish for creating Flash animations and effects (i don't need to pay lots of money only for making some animations to my web, when Swish are excellent!!
miguellito: wich programs do you use for create this site?

*Sigh*
So rich people should buy their Porshe, but if I don't have a lot of money and I only want to go 5 blocks away, then OK I can steal the Porshe. Gotcha.

As Carlitus said, there are always cheaper solutions when you can't affort the expensive way. Heck, there are even some free solutions too. Go to Flashkit.com and check out the FlashTyper. You can create a Flash text animation with a bunch of different really cool animations for free.

well like i said about three times it's nothing like staeling a porsche cause i aint stealing anything. i wouldn't goto someone's house and still their copy of a program, but if they burnt me a copy then that's fine. people blow warez all out of proportion, like them saying that the gaming industry loses so many billions of dollars a year due to warez, but actually most people who downloaded or copied those games would never have bought them in the first place. if i bought all the games i downloaded i'd be blowing $100s of dollars each month and usually it turns out that either a)my computer sucks too bad to even play the game, or that the game sucks and i just delete it.

and yeah there are freeware or shareware programs that can do some of the stuff that the real expensive programs do, but why should i use crappy software when i can use the good ones? rather you all think it's right or not i don't care, but i think there's no reason why i should pay hundreds of dollars for these programs just to use occasionally for stuff that i don't even profit off of.

Stealing is stealing. Big or small. A little program, a big car. There is no difference. I guess if you can justify it in your mind then you can believe it is OK. I guess you missed out on that class.

ok, so if you didn't intend to BUY the game, it's ok to copy it and still enjoy the work of the people who made the game, and who rely on its sales to make a living? Nice logic there, champ.

Just because you don't physically take a copy of the game from a store shelf doesn't make it any less of a crime. I know it's hard for warez kids to wrap their ant-sized brains around this one, but: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS JUST AS PROTECTED BY LAW AS MATERIAL PROPERTY.

Copying a software program is just as bad as taking the boxed game from a store shelf. Yes, even if you "weren't gonna buy it anyway."

The people who make these games hope that the quality of the game will attract people to buy it, even those who "weren't going to." Making copies of it discourages people from buying, even those who "weren't going to" but who might have eventually decided to buy it.

well i can either not have the program and give them no money or i can have it and give them no money, so either way they aren't losing, but if i have it then i've gained someting so it's not a hard choice...

So is there ever a situation in which you WOULD buy the software rather than just use a warez version of it?

Or let me put it this way. Do you postulate then, in general, that a software company should not be compenstated for the resources they put into creating the software and compensated for its use by people?

"well i can either not have the program and give them no money or i can have it and give them no money, so either way they aren't losing, but if i have it then i've gained someting so it's not a hard choice..."

The product is offered in the hopes that it will sell. Basic economy. If you don't want to buy it, it is hoped that wanting the program will eventually lead to you changing your mind about buying it. That's how developers make a living, know what I mean? That's why copying it is illegal, yes, even if you "weren't going to buy it."

There's no ands, ifs, or buts: You can agree to the sales terms offered by the software publisher, or you can do without the program. What you're NOT allowed to do is make yourself a copy because you "weren't gonna buy it." Nope, it's not legal, or right. Please stop making excuses. The "I wasn't gonna get it anyway" is a popular argument, but it's flawed. You can't say with all certainty that you wouldn't have bought the program at any point in the future if you hadn't copied it.

Guy's, like I've said before: He's justified it in his mind, so nothing is going to change it. This is probably how he goes thru life. I can use this, let me take it, let me borrow it, I wasn't going to buy it anyway. I just need it for a while. I wonder how much he has that he didn't pay for. I guess he paid for his car because thats different.

Vanilla,

Let's just assume for a moment that you code programs for living. Your spouse and children depend on your income to eat and live. Some idiot hacks into your server and downloads your program to "try it out". The next thing you know it's floating all over the internet and now everyone is "trying it out". Sales naturally drop. You lose your job because the company can't afford to pay you. If you don't think it can happen, you've been in a black hole the past few years.

How about this, you hack into a bank's server and transfer a million dollars into a bank account you have set up in the Caymans. You call Martha Stewart's stock broker who has a hot tip for you. You do some serious day trading and make a killing. You then hack back into the bank before the end of the day and transfer the million back in. Does the bank really lose anything, not really. Is this ethicly wrong or illegal? You better start running buddy...

actually i do code programs. not for a living yet as i just made my first program a week or two ago, but now i do know what it's like being on the other end and it still doesn't bother me. that's because i know that anyone who will take the time to search for a crack for my program probably wouldn't have bought it anyways. in fact i've given out a few serials for some people on a warez forum i goto because i know they won't buy it but would like to have it anyways. most software sales goto businesses, not people who have a normal job and just use the software as entertainment or as kind of a hobby, like me for example.

and since you all like making up scenarious how about this one: a new cd comes out that you want to buy, but you also want the new shirt for that artist too. well you've only got enough money for one or the other and they both cost about the same. so do you buy one of them and do without the other or do you download the cd and buy the shirt? well, that's what i did not too long ago cause i figure by buying the shirt instead i am promoting the artist like a walking advertisement and therefore the artist sells more copies of the cd. my name Vanilla Ice is taken from the artist and as most of you probably know he's a has-been joke that nobody likes, and i didn't liked him either... until i actually listened to the music one day. but not thinking i would like it a whole lot i downloaded the cd. now he's one of my favorite artists and i've bought his new cd as well as two shirts, i run a sorta-popular fansite, and i'm a member of the street team. my point is that when i don't buy something and it turns out to be worth it i make up for it. ther have been cds that i've downloaded weeks before they come out in stores and then later i delete the mp3s and buy the cd.

so say i'm wrong or whatever you want, i couldn't care less.

one last thing, you do know that some artist actually support file-sharing services don't you? well, how do you explain that one?