Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
News

College Students Are Buying More, Warez-ing Less 557

Keefesis writes: "This story from a researcher at the University of Florida states that software piracy among college students dropped between the 1996-97 school year and the 2000-01 school year. One reason cited is that software makers have found 'creative' ways to entice students to purchase software(rather than the heavy-handed and largely unsuccessful tactics of the RIAA)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

College Students Are Buying More, Warez-ing Less

Comments Filter:
  • Maybe... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jgerman ( 106518 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:22AM (#3118873)
    Maybe because the 96-97 crop of students are industry now, and know what it's like to have to purchase software and what makes the purchase worthwhile to students.
    • ...Maybe not (Score:2, Insightful)

      by crow ( 16139 )
      If the study was comparing the piracy among students in the 96-97 school year and those same people today, you would have a point. However, it is comparing the students in the 96-97 school year and the students now, which in most cases are different people.

      The point is that something has changed on campuses. Obviously, the people are different. But also, either the values or the software that they're using is different, too. Or the study is flawed, which wouldn't surprise me.
      • by Dman33 ( 110217 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @12:08PM (#3119261)
        jgerman wrote: "Maybe because the 96-97 crop of students are industry now, and know what it's like to have to purchase software and what makes the purchase worthwhile to students."

        Your reply: "If the study was comparing the piracy among students in the 96-97 school year and those same people today, you would have a point. However, it is comparing the students in the 96-97 school year and the students now, which in most cases are different people."

        I emphasized the point that jgerman was trying to make. The same ppl that were the pirates are now in the industry, they know why they pirated in the 90's thus they might know what would entice someone to actually buy the software instead of pirate it. There advantages to purchasing software legally, the trick is to make these advantages desireable to your target audience.
    • Re:Maybe... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Chundra ( 189402 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @12:32PM (#3119440)
      I doubt that! Kids still want warez. I think it's just that a lot of these punks were weened on MSN, AOL, webtv, and all the other crap out there. Many of them don't even know about things like irc and usenet. Most have never used a bbs, or ftpsearch (remember archie?). If it isn't on yahoo or google or the p2p du jour they don't know about it.

      Then again, maybe they have jobs and realize it's cheaper to go buy commercial software than spend a day or more locating it and several hours downloading it.

      So yeah, anyways...

      Anyone know where I can leech a registered version of Allegro Common Lisp Enterprise Edition for linux? ;)
      • Re:Maybe... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by earlytime ( 15364 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @01:56PM (#3120031) Homepage
        On the contrary, i think that as the web has made it easier for more people to get the functionality of archie, gopheer, and irc.

        Think about download.com and tucows and freshmeat and napster, and gnutella and kazaa, don't they provide the same functionality as the older tools? Aren't ICQ and AIM and MSIM just like IRC and talk, and chat? Dosent' usenet live on with google groups and mailing list archives?

        To me all these things are evolutionary steps forward. None of them really represent new ideas, just new ways of doing old things.

        BTW, When *you* look for info on the internet, do you use archie or google ;-)

    • by ebyrob ( 165903 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @03:52PM (#3120822)
      The first survey in 96-97 was of 158 students in 3 different colleges by an economics major interested in piracy. Most of these students were probably friends and/or acquaintances.

      The next survey was of 700 students at only 2 universities. This was probably a lot greater spectrum of students many of whom were in less technically oriented majors. ie: Much of the population doesn't know enough or care enough about computers to even begin pirating software.

      Perhaps the piracy rates have changed in the past 4 years, perhaps not, but I don't think these surveys will tell us a thing one way or the other.
  • Book Expenses (Score:5, Informative)

    by C. Mattix ( 32747 ) <cmattix.gmail@com> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:23AM (#3118878) Homepage
    A lot of students that I know consider software perchase just like a book expense. If they are taking a Flash course, they buy the software. If they are taking a design course, they buy Photoshop, both at Educational prices. Other things like Matlab or AutoCad or Pro/E are definitly educational purchases as well.
    • Re:Book Expenses (Score:3, Interesting)

      by havardi ( 122062 )
      exactly

      I see people in my class shelling out 100 bucks for adobe illustrator, which they will use for 5 assignments and then let sit on a shelf. Yeah, I warezd the latest version so I could do my assignments (cartography map making) I'm not going to pay for crap just for one class.

      I'd warez the books if I could :-P I won't get into that, because it's even more of a sham. My 2nd edition geology book has more information in it that the 7th edition that I had to pay 100 bucks for!
      • Re:Book Expenses (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Peyna ( 14792 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:55AM (#3119169) Homepage
        If you want to warez your books, sell them to students instead of your bookstore, everyone wins in that deal. =]
        • Re:Book Expenses (Score:3, Interesting)

          by swordboy ( 472941 )
          If you want to warez your books, sell them to students instead of your bookstore, everyone wins in that deal. =]

          I have found that the instructors do their damned best to change the text as frequently as possible. In this respect, the book becomes useless for anyone at the school so selling to students isn't even an option.

          Do what I did: round everyone's books up, pile them up in a parking lot on campus and set them on fire. I realize that this is a waste but it got lots of press and brought the students' frustration to the public.

          Although it hasn't been dealt with, they are currently investigating instructor "kick backs" from the text manufacturers. This is commonplace. What we need is for the professors who write their own texts to "open source" them for other professors to use and modify freely.

          The internet is a huge resource of mostly free material. There isn't any reason that text books can't go to the wayside.
          • Re:Book Expenses (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Peyna ( 14792 )
            Just because the instructor changed the book, doesn't mean you have to buy the new one. Most of my profs will tell you that if you have the older edition, just keep it, as not much changed. I've actually seen instructors complain just as much as students about the publishers coming out with new versions every year.
      • Re:Book Expenses (Score:2, Interesting)

        by kraf ( 450958 )
        > I'd warez the books if I could

        It's called photocopying. Well, ok, not exactly like warezing, but it still can be many times cheaper than to buy the book.
        • Re:Book Expenses (Score:3, Informative)

          by issachar ( 170323 )
          that is quite common on books in which only a few chapters are used. it's a whole lot cheaper, and if you do that photocopying at the University it's often legal. University Libraries (or at least Canadian ones), generally charge more for photocopying because they have a CanCopy deal that pays publishers part of the revenue from photocopying. Since you are now paying for the copyright, it's now legal to copy.
    • I wish that educational pricing was extended to all students. My son, whose 14, is taking a graphics class in HS and would like to play with Flash at home. But I'm not about to spend $500 to buy software that may not be used after the class ends. $50 would be OK.

      • Re:Book Expenses (Score:3, Informative)

        by C. Mattix ( 32747 )
        Check out Micromaster [micromasteronline.com]. Flash is $99.00. From thier site:


        QUALIFIED EDUCATION USERS
        Educational Institutions: Defined as an accredited school organized and operated exclusively for educational purposes. An accredited school must be: A Public or Private K-12, Vocational School, Correspondence School, Junior College, College, University, Scientific or Technical Institutions accredited by associations recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and/or the State Board of Education and located in the United States.

        Administrative Offices or Boards of Education of Educational Institutions including district, regional, and state administrative offices of the Educational Institutions defined above.

        Full and Part Time Faculty and Staff of Educational Institutions must reside in and work at schools located in the United States.

        Full and Part Time Matriculated Students of Higher Education Institutions. College, Jr. College and Career School Students qualify. A few manufacturers require a minimum course hour enrollment. High School and K-12 Students may purchase most software in our store, with the exception of Microsoft, Corel, and Lotus. Graduating seniors, accepted to college, may order Microsoft products. Students must reside in and attend school located in the United States.

        Training Centers, it's Students, and Teachers, are NOT eligible for academic discounts.

        The academic software program also defines public Museums and Libraries as Educational Institutions, for certain products. Hospitals that are 100% wholly owned and operated by Educational Institutions as defined above are also qualified Academic customers for certain products.


        If you get a Student ID or some other proof of enrollment for you kid, then you can get the prices you want.
    • A lot of students that I know consider software [purchases] just like a book expense. If they are taking a Flash course, they buy the software. If they are taking a design course, they buy Photoshop, both at Educational prices. Other things like Matlab or AutoCad or Pro/E are [definitely] educational purchases as well.


      Yes, exactly.
      When I was in college, I only bought used books, and then I sold them back.
      But if I could, I'd just borrow the books from other students.
      Exactly the same as what I did with the software I used.
      (I never learned to spell either, but I did learn to use a spell checker.)

      -- Spam Wolf, the best spam blocking vaporware yet! [spamwolf.com]
  • by edrugtrader ( 442064 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:24AM (#3118883) Homepage
    but i graduated in 97, with me out of the scene, i wouldn't be surprised at all if the numbers dropped drastically.

    what do i do now? i write commercial software. do i feel guilty about warezing in the past? no. i didn't have the money then, i do now. am i mad at people warezing my software now? no. it is an understanding i guess...
    • Everytime someone claims that they "didn't have the money", I'd love to see an honest analysis of their lifestyle : Almost always there is beer, movies, electronics, new computer hardware, a car with insurance, gas, and upkeep, etc, but people feel fine paying for those, but that new game or image editing app isn't worth $39.

      Piracy has seriously undermined the software industry for years: Something that has such an incredibly ramification on people's lives (i.e. consider the number of hours that people spend using computers these days), yet in a yearly % of consumer income I doubt you'd see it hit 1% per year. Hrmmm, this would be a really interesting foundation for a study actually : What is the net value of software (in entertainment/productivity terms) versus the net payout per year -> I would wager that it is incredibly low, and people pirate not because it is just, or because of their subsistence lifestyle, but rather just because they CAN and they see it as a way of winning at the perceived zero-sum game of life.

      • image editing app isn't worth $39.

        Most major colleges and universities require a specific software for a class. We will take graphics for example. Yes, I would love it if all schools used the Gimp for graphic design classes however the school usually has a contract with a software company instead. So, how much is academic verison of Photoshop? IIRC it is about $300.

        Sure would be nice to see universities dumping these commercial licenses and going with the free (as in beer and speech) software...

        http://www.itd.umich.edu/microsoft/ [umich.edu]
      • by melquiades ( 314628 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @01:28PM (#3119830) Homepage
        When I was a student, I paid (IIRC) $350 for the academic-priced Photoshop. Yes, I paid. And yes, that's a great deal -- Photoshop really is worth twice that.

        But $350 was a fucking lot of money for me back in the days when a $3.50 sandwich seemed expensive.

        Yes, a lot of student pirates out there have money to burn -- but a great many don't. Many students are working one or two jobs to pay their way through school, and struggling to make rent. Sure, games are cheap. But the software that students need for their education really is expensive.

        I'm not necessarily defending rampant piracy, but don't get so cocky about students' spending habits. I think if you saw "an honest analysis of their lifestyle", you'd find out that a lot of them are genuinely broke.
      • Piracy has seriously undermined the software industry for years:

        Blah.. when people make this argument they don't seem to back it up. This is because there's no way to prove how much copying software affects companies' profits. There's no way to prove how much Napster affects the music industry's profits. There's no way to prove how much 'unsecured' computer hardware takes away from Disney's profits.

        I will guess, and it's only a guess, that by far those who pirate software would not buy that software if it weren't available for free. You'll see a lot of commercial software supporters chanting, "every copy is a lost sale".. but they don't back up the claim! The software industry seems to be doing fine, by the way. Maybe nobody buys shareware, but maybe the reason is that 99% of shareware is crap.

        Do these software guys blame free software as well? "Every copy of gnucash is a lost Quicken sale.." Really, what's the difference between addressing a need with gnucash or with Quicken, when the marginal cost of software is zero?
  • by -douggy ( 316782 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:24AM (#3118885)
    There is no way i could afford to buy visual studio and office 2000 (XP now) but m$ do/did them from £99 so I won both. The same goes for mathematica which i have on student licence again for much less that the retail price of the "pro" versions.



    A lot of companies are no realising that people stick with what they know. Give a student a discount on your software and when they go on to ear big bucks they will buy the retail versions. (Hello calling macromedia)

  • Piracy at uni (Score:5, Informative)

    by cybergibbons ( 554352 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:25AM (#3118892) Homepage
    I can't actually think of a single person I know who has a legal copy of anything above windows 95. No one bothers. Same with application software.

    There isn't a bit of guilt about it either. You don't even contemplate buying it. If it's obscure software, then you have to ask around a little, but it's no hassle.

    Your payment - you copy it and pass it round more.
    • Re:Piracy at uni (Score:4, Interesting)

      by swordboy ( 472941 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @04:13PM (#3120965) Journal
      I can't actually think of a single person I know who has a legal copy of anything above windows 95.

      What MS realizes is that they are running out of "new releases" of Windows. This is why most official licenses come phsyically affixed to the PC in question. Since you can't get the license off of the PC (they are designed to destroy themselves if removed), you can't transfer the license. This should be illegal! Once the license has been purchased, there is no reason that it can't be used on new PCs. This frightens MS since it would effectively eliminate the need to sell an OS, sooner or later. I currently see no need to move from Windows 2k in the next 5-10 years (unless Linux becomes viable for me).

      What the DOJ needs to do is require MS to license individuals instead of PCs. If someone has already purchased an XP license, then they should be able to buy a PC without the MS tax and simply register it under their name. The DOJ should also REQUIRE PC vendors to itemize the cost of the operating system on new PC sales. This would cause consumers to become cost-conscious of the MS-tax of which MS has done a good job to hide. Once this happens, Linux becomes more viable and consumers stop throwing away Windows licenses with their old PC.

      But who is gonna listen?

  • "the number of students who admit to using illegally copied "free" software remains high but dropped noticeably between 1996-97 and the 2000-01 school year."

    The more you steal, the less you admit?

  • Try now buy later (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Evanrude ( 21624 ) <david@nospaM.fattyco.org> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:26AM (#3118901) Homepage Journal
    Up until a year ago I warezed all my software(for Windows). Now, programs and games are becoming so sophisticated that it is useless to pirate something becasue you lose so many of the features that are included on the CD.
    Every once in a while I will warez a program or game to try it out, and then if I like it I'll definitely go pay for it - having the CD and all the material that comes with the app. is worth the money.
    • Up until a year ago I warezed all my software(for Windows). Now, programs and games are becoming so sophisticated that it is useless to pirate something becasue you lose so many of the features that are included on the CD.

      Most people warez an app these days be making ISOs out of the original CDs. What functionality are you losing then?
  • by tssm0n0 ( 200200 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:27AM (#3118908)
    One thing that I noticed while I was in school (1995-2001) was a large increase in the number of people using free software (especially Linux). Also, in 1999 my school started a deal with MS to provide "educational" versions of their software to students. Its much easier to walk over to the computer lab and borrow a legal copy of windows (or VS, etc.) than it is to download a copy, especially with the increase of monitoring on the dorm networks.
  • I mean when you can pick up software at sometimes >75% discount it doesn't take someone majoring in the hard sciences to use a little old deduction there. Tech support and the manual are invaluable in complex progams. Even if I go out and but a learn x in 24 hours book to replace the manual its not the same.

    What the hell does the RIAA and MPAA think kids are made of money? A single software program I might use for a 10 hours a week for a year or more. Can't say that about anything they push. All I listen to are indie bands and noise generators.

  • by Champaign ( 307086 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:27AM (#3118914) Homepage Journal
    It used to be that only the hackers were playing around with computers, and for them pirating presented no significant technical hurdles. Now everyone and his sister is using a computer, and they're far more likely to just go out and buy their OS, office and a couple of games to go with this nice shiny computer mom and dad bought them.

    The computer nerds are probably copying just as much, its just that the nerds with computers are a smaller ratio of the user population every day.
  • by dcocos ( 128532 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:28AM (#3118916)
    ...is to use an OS the encourages the use of Free software. Since I've been using Linux and FreeBSD at home I've never been tempted (or had the need) to find warez.
    • I would have to agree. While in U, I played around with a lot of commercial apps that we worked with at school (like my copy of powerbuilder on 30+ 3.5" floppies). Now however, I spend more time playing on my Linux box and fufilling my need to play with stuff. Its nice when you're looking for a particular way to do things, find someone who's already solved it, and allows everyone to download it.

      Of course I try to give back what I can. I couldn't find a nice way to scan incoming mail on my server (qmail). So, I downloaded f-prot (free) and wrote a perl script to pull out any attachments, scan them, and either dump the message or deliver it, depending on the results of the scan. Once I had it working the way I wanted, I put up a webpage and offered it to anyone who wants to use it!

  • by Dan Crash ( 22904 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:28AM (#3118919) Journal
    ...college students tell administrators they are all going to sleep at 9:30 pm and saying NO to alcohol, too! And that joint on the dresser was their roommate's, they swear.

    • by Wintersmute ( 557244 ) <Isaacwinter@[ ]mail.com ['hot' in gap]> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:48AM (#3119120) Homepage
      Um. Yeah. The quote, for everyone's edification:

      Surveys of undergraduates at several public and private universities reveal the number of students who admit [emphasis my own] to using illegally copied "free" software remains high but dropped noticeably between 1996-97 and the 2000-01 school year.

      Maybe people aren't admitting it because they're afraid that someone might actually start enforcing legislation like the NETA (No Electronic Theft Act) and DMCA against average users. Look at Sklyarov.

      I'd like to think people are starting to buy stuff... but come on - do we really think the piracy norm has gone anywhere?
  • this is crap (Score:5, Insightful)

    by x1l ( 258922 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:29AM (#3118929)
    They had the same academic pricing on software in 1996. Note that students admit less to using warez, does not mean that they are using less warez. I think with the rise of broadband, and wiring dorm room, this has to be wrong. Maybe the students got smarter and are now not admiting to commiting crimes.
  • the mole! (Score:5, Funny)

    by nanojath ( 265940 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:30AM (#3118932) Homepage Journal
    "Assane said it helped to have Chiang, then a master's student at UNLV, involved in the survey because he was familiar with student lingo and culture."


    Outtasight, daddy-o. Me'n the droogs are gonna rumble the 'frames, try to shake down some code. Can you dig it?

  • warez vs. buy. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by garcia ( 6573 )
    If a piece of software is going to be used by me daily I consider buying it. Otherwise I copy it.

    What sense is there in me buying Windows when I only use it on a laptop for my gf and for playing MP3s? What sense is there for me to pay $10 for the Office CD from school and only be able to install it twice (and have to keep that long number on record) when I can use a Warez'd copy that has no license?

    I use Linux solely on my computer and I use only programs that I can get for free (WP, etc) but on computers that require Windows I rarely pay for software.

    Sorry, I just don't have the money to be buying shit. If other college students do, they must have Free Beer.
  • by gandalf_grey ( 93942 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:32AM (#3118949) Homepage
    If software companies focused on selling the service instead of the software, that would be the key I think. RedHat sells a package, and service. I'm glad to shell out $50.00 for the convienience of a CD and docs. Same with Dell. Sure, you can pick up a clone anywhere for much cheaper, but to have it delivered, setup, with support and a really nice well-constructed case... that's everything!

    Companies can succeed by selling service rather than software. It's the extras on the CD, the nifty stuff on the DVD, the nice documentation that makes the difference. And the students know it.

  • Uh oh! (Score:3, Funny)

    by EricKrout.com ( 559698 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:32AM (#3118960) Homepage
    ...software piracy among college students dropped between the 1996-97 school year and the 2000-01 school year. One reason cited is that software makers have found 'creative' ways to entice students to purchase software.

    creative

    1. Setting up bogus honeypot websites like Amazon and CDNow in order to steal credit card numbers.
    2. Hiring cute college girls to seduce rich undergrads into buying tons of software
    3. Sending one new copy of their product to boxes #1-8430 of every college in Pennsylvania on a monthly basis. If they don't stamp the card with "CANCEL" and send it back within 16 hours, send them a bill for the software. If they don't pay the bill for the software within 36 hours, send them more software along with an overdue notice. Repeat.
    4. See SSSCA ;-)

    monolinux.com :: One Website To Rule Them All [monolinux.com]

  • by s20451 ( 410424 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:32AM (#3118961) Journal

    There are only a few software packages that most students would ever contemplate using ... say, the OS, an office suite, and a few specific analysis packages tailored specifically for courses. Since most software companies make most of their money off industrial users, it makes sense to tailor cheap licenses for student software users. Modern packages also tend to be large, in the hundreds of megabytes -- even with university bandwidth that's not trivial, especially if your rez has capacity limits.

    By contrast, there are hundreds of songs that the average student would be interested in downloading, and students are one of the more lucrative demographics for music companies. Most songs are a few megabytes at most, making them incredibly easy to download and share. The "creative solutions" proposed for software probably won't translate well into music piracy ...

  • by nakhla ( 68363 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:33AM (#3118963) Homepage
    Does this report take into account the use of free software among students? Maybe students don't need to pirate XP/Office/Photoshop/etc. because they're using Linux/StarOffice/Gimp/etc.
    • Maybe students don't need to pirate XP/Office/Photoshop/etc. because they're using Linux/StarOffice/Gimp/etc.

      Interesting story about this. My roommate was playing around with a pirated version of Photoshop the other day and was complaining because he couldn't take it to work where it would help him get his job done. So I suggested he try the Gimp. I pointed him to the download page for the windows version and he started playing around with it. He was so happy that it would make his job easier and that it had support for files that Photoshop didn't. I do believe he downloaded it at work. GNU wins over another one.
    • I hate to break it to you, but I doubt most students outside of IT and engineering have even heard of "free software". I don't think my housemates in biology/ecology/geography have ever heard of Linux, and they certainly wouldn't run it (Windoze works _fine_ for them). At any rate, I hope everyone uses GPL software someday (I don't... yet) but I think that students have yet to try it en masse.
      • I hate to break it to you, but I doubt most students outside of IT and engineering have even heard of "free software".

        Hmm, I'd wager a guess that a good many windows users have heard of things like Morphues, Kazaa, and Limewire. Aren't they all based on a "free software" called Gnutella? P2P is probably going to be the killer app that puts free software on the map (as least as far as the general windows user is concerned).

        I'd bet you'd even be surprised how many people have heard of Linux. Now, why they would switch or what it can do for them is a different story. I agree with you there. However, I see more and more people starting to not buy into the upgrade early and upgrade often licenese scheme that software companies are enforcing these days. Some of them are activley exploring alternatives. Some not. Perhaps it's just a matter of time...

  • by dh003i ( 203189 ) <dh003i@@@gmail...com> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:33AM (#3118971) Homepage Journal
    This just proves that piracy is GOOD for consumers.

    Piracy is really just another form of competition -- whine about it being "unfair" or not. Piracy offers the base product at no price.

    Thus, producers are forced to lower their prices in order to compete and offer other benefits or increase the value of other benefits already offered (such as making customer support better). Those producers that arrogantly think the approach to piracy si to raise the price of products eventually find out that such only pushes more people to piracy.
  • by Triv ( 181010 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:33AM (#3118973) Journal
    "In that survey, of about 700 students, Chiang and Assane found the number of students using pirated software dropped to about 40 percent, Chiang said, a 25 percent decline. The dip is all the more significant researchers, pointed out, because it occurred at a time when both the amount of software and students' use of computers increased considerably." Or it's possible that these students are following the recent copyright/piracy debates closely and are worried about getting caught, so more people are lying about what they're ripping off than in 1996. Hell, if someone came up to me and said "Hey, this is for a 'survey' - do you pirate software?" I'd lie. I mean, have you seen the microsoft piracy scare ads?

    Triv
  • Tangible ownership (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Kushana ( 206115 )
    I think the whole issue of ownership of something tangible is given short shrift by just about everyone from the warez-ers to the RIAA. It feels good to own good stuff.

    The problem faced by the software community is that consumers make their own decisions about how much that's worth. For university students, it's not worth much. They won't pay retail for Office, Mathematica, SPSS, or AutoCad. But if you lower the price enough, they'll buy it. That's what this study is showing.

    The other side of the card is that lowering the value of ownership is going to get producers into trouble in a big hurry. Troublesome copy protection on audio CDs that prevents legitimate ripping and OEM OS "restore" CDs instead of full copies are examples. Here they are degrading the ownership value, and that's bad.

    Carrots work better than sticks, and choice works better than either.
  • I am completely baffled by software companies thinking they can accomplish something by trying to impose tougher and tougher copy protection on their software. I think that the approach that some companies have taken nowadays, to offer people free personal editions of a product is better both to the end-user and to the company.

    As an example let me talk a little about Trolltechs [trolltech.com] approach with Qt and Borlands [borland.com] approach with JBuilder In both these cases I as an end-user get access to a good product that I can try out and build my own opinion of, not influenced by marketing hype.

    If I like the products, I'll be more inclined towards using them in a production enviroment, and I'll gladly buy The Product [farb-rausch.com] (pun intended).

    On the other hand, if I don't have a chance to try out a companies products before I buy them, or if I am forced to withstand outrageous license agreements, phone-home "features" or Digital Rights Management then that company can forget to have me as a customer. I'll get something else...

  • These companies are still making far less money from students than they would from a same-sized population of other computer users. The reason students in particular pirate software is because it's stupendously easy to break the "laws" of supply and demand, simply because the supply of any given program is practically infinite. Since I MUST have Matlab in order to complete my degree plan (my work schedule is such that I can not spend hours on end at the school computer labs), if the software is not priced affordably, I WILL pirate it.

    The sooner these software companies stop worrying about how many theoretical sales they "lose" to piracy, and start pricing their packages attractively to EVERYBODY (not just students), the better.
  • I think this is the future of all content. Realize that piracy is a given. Make piracy just hard enough that not everyone can do it, and create a tiered pricing structure with incentives for upgrade. Chances are that current 'student discount' sales are going to lead to future full price sales as a person's income and responsibilities increase.

    The same model can also apply to other digital content. Sell crappy MP3 for cheap on the web, the CD costs more, the DVD audio version even more. Allow people to pay what they can and exchange lower quality/convenience for lower prices, instead of trying to lock your content behind steel bars with one fixed price.

    -josh
  • by Deagol ( 323173 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:36AM (#3119012) Homepage
    The mid-to-late 90's saw several trends not mentioned in the article.

    First the number of software users shot up dramatically. Paritally because of the tech boom, partially because computer use wasn't confined to 'leet CS and engineering geeks. With that, the average ability to locate warez, cracks, or to crack themselves dropped, just like internet users at that time (what year did the "endless September" arrive?). BBS's and USENET, both major warez mediums, while still there, are not used by the common computer user anymore.

    Plus, all the wealth in the late 90's made it easier for Jr. in college to ask Daddy for the several hundred $ for MS Office.

    I'm sure the student discounts help -- a little. But that might be artifically skewing the results. Having been an student and an employee for a university, I know it's not uncommon for both to purchase that $100 copy of Adobe Photoshop for the guy next door, who would otherwise need to pay $700 (or whatever it is now). It does prove that a better price will sell better, though.

  • by MattRog ( 527508 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:38AM (#3119029)
    Here at our college Microsoft has done a ton to get their software into more and more PCs. In the next couple of weeks Windows XP Professional which typically retails for what $199 or $299 will be on sale for under $20. It's not crippled or marked as "Academic" or anything. All you have to show is a valid student ID. Same thing with Visual Studio .NET (although we were one of the launch partners so I picked up a copy of XP Professional and .NET for free anyway).

    Makes a ton of sense; there's also Photoshop, OS X, etc. all at great prices. Personally, if I can purchase the software for a wallet-friendly price I'm going to do so. It's awesome software that I don't mind shelling out $15 to help out in their efforts. $15 is greater than zero! :)
  • My Ass They Are ... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rlowe69 ( 74867 ) <ryanlowe_AThotmailDOTcom> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:39AM (#3119039) Homepage
    College students will always have a dangerous amount of two things, at least to folks like the RIAA and the MPAA:

    1. Lack of spending money
    2. Time

    These two compounding factors are why students "pirate". Not that I'm advocating it, but if you could spend the afternoon downloading 3 albums (instead of watching TV) and then you're able to go out and drink that night because of the 50 bucks you just "saved" not buying those CDs, the fomer option looks pretty attractive to you compared to the latter.
  • by qurob ( 543434 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:39AM (#3119044) Homepage

    If I could get Visual Studio for $25 or whatever insane pricing they get, I'd buy too!

    Might be worth going back to school just for the discount
  • Piracy really hasn't been reduced at all and has probably increased. Just look at the huge difference in the samples they're comparing.

    The 1996-97 survey was of 148 undergraduates at three public universities and one private liberal arts college.

    The 2000-2001 survey was of 700 students at two large public universities.

    I bet there wasn't any actual decline. The first survey covered ~37 undergrads at each of four schools. The 37 undergrads surveyed were probably more computer inclined than the rest of the school's population. The second survey covered 350 students at each of two schools. 350 students is a bit more representative of the school at large.

    I don't see how one can make any comparisons between the two surveys. The populations sampled are different, the sample size is grossly disportionate. Frankly, given how it was setup, I'm surprised the piracy rate didn't "decline" even more.

    And they ignore another equally plausible explanation: students are simply more saavy about lyinh about these sorts of things. After how Napster got taken down, who would be dumb enough to admit to pirating anything?
  • Bandwidth Lockdown (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Sinjun ( 176671 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:41AM (#3119053)
    I'd venture to guess that this is because of bandwidth lockdown and most institutions. At the small, private college [berry.edu] where I work our 6mbps guaranteed bandwidth was showing spikes up to 33mbps at peak times before they finally blocked all P2P file sharing. When your means of pirating are taken away, what else can you do but buy what you need?
  • by mjh ( 57755 ) <mark AT hornclan DOT com> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @11:53AM (#3119154) Homepage Journal
    This part scares me:

    Chiang said several anti-piracy strategies by software makers have panned out. For one thing, software makers now commonly make agreements with computer manufacturers to "bundle" software with new computers

    Which of our favorite monopolies do you think will use this study to say that bundling provides customer benefit?

    Am I off my rocker? Is there another way to interpret this that doesn't say that bundling provides customer benefit? Is this an endorsement of Microsoft's biz practices?

  • by mcrbids ( 148650 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @12:02PM (#3119226) Journal
    Is it any wonder?

    A few years ago, I owned a computer store, in my college town. I was routinely asked by many of my student Clientelle how much a copy of WinXX was. when I replied with my near $100 price (dictated by the $70-something OEM price wholesale) I heard snickers and exclamations about price gouging...

    I never understood this, as I'd called local retailers and found that my prices were on the cheap side, until I found out what the College was doing.

    You could walk in with $20, and a student ID, and " borrow " a copy of Windows, or Office, or whatever! Complete with License sheet and CD. Everything you get in the "OEM" release! They didn't even write down your student ID #!

    And, if you didn't return it, you were out only $20...

    This, of course, made me FURIOUS, and I made sure that Microsoft knew about it. That's when I started getting Cease and Desist letters alleging that I was commiting software piracy!

    That's when the tide turned, and I began to see the light of GNU....

    I'm never going back!

  • A few notes... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hendridm ( 302246 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @12:03PM (#3119230) Homepage
    > In a 1996-97 survey of 148 undergraduates at three public universities and one private liberal arts college

    Hardly a representative sample, in my opinion.

    > Assane said it helped to have Chiang, then a master's student at UNLV, involved in the survey because he was familiar with student lingo and culture.

    So basically this economics major asked a bunch of people he knew whether they pirate software or not? Does his sample include geeks vs. non-geeks, or only the econ-savvy?

    > For one thing, software makers now commonly make agreements with computer manufacturers to "bundle" software

    Oh yeah, bundled software really makes me want to pirate less. I love the incompatible copy of MS Works and bloated image loads of Windows that come with new computers (which don't include the original CD anyway, requiring me to obtain a copy in order to load it my way).

    > Equally important, software vendors increasingly offer licenses to colleges and universities allowing students to use expensive software cheaply

    THIS fact alone is why I feel piracy has decreased (if it really has), although I question the validity of the study without seeing more details.

    > Software is simply cheaper now than it was in 1996, reducing the incentive to steal, Chiang said.

    Says who? I don't remember exact numbers, but after adjusting for inflation, do the most commonly pirated titles (Windows, Office, Games) cost any less than they did then? I don't think so. Where is their source for this factoid?

    > These might include creating a market for "subscriptions" to libraries music and movies or a more efficient approach to the pay-per-download market, he said

    Well, at least they got this right, even though it's missing a word.
  • by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @12:11PM (#3119285) Homepage Journal
    Well, it's true, isn't it? Content companies in general (game companies, movie companies, television networks, music, etc..) can't price their products and then expect people to pay that forever. Each of these companies have a serious problem looming over them, and that is too much content.

    Let's look at the game industry, for example. There are at least 6 systems furiously competing today. (DC, PS2, XBOX, GC, GBA, PC) Each of these systems are releasing games like crazy. The problem is, my paycheck in the last few years hasn't risen high enough to buy that many more games, not to mention that the number of hours in the day hasn't increased enough for me to play them. If the number of games released is greater than the amount of disposable money people have to spend, how can they expect everybody to pay the same price for games?

    Lowering the price of games for college students, for example, was a great approach! It'd be cool if one day your student ID could get you a discount on games.

    I hope the RIAA pays attention to this study. The harder it is to copy music, for example, the more demand there is for somebody to do it. Where there's demand, there's fame. Where there's fame, there's somebody saying "Yes, I'm willing to invest hours into acquiring fame." But if the RIAA were to open up and say "We've lowered the price of CD's, and you're free to copy them and do what you want with them!", they will likely find that going to the store to buy CD's is preferable to waiting to download them.

    One idea the RIAA should consider is releasing individual songs on those 2" CD's. Price them low, and then allow people to make their own mixes. Reward the customer for buying these little CD's by letting them create their own single CD that has the songs they want on it. Don't punish the customer for having other desires with music. That's what the economics game is all about. You'll make profit if you give the customer incentive to buy your product. But if you take features away, you're punishing them, and customers don't like that.

    I know I don't like being told I'm a thief because I have an MP3 player.
  • Used to pirate... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by sjankly ( 564604 )
    Before I started college as a CS major (this is my second year now), I was into the warez scene. Since my parents would never pay for any software that I needed, piracy was the only way I could get the apps that I needed (or just wanted). It was hard to break old habits, but I could afford the software now. Of course since I used to get everything for free, I look for the best deals. I purchased an oem edition of WinXP Pro for $130, and I'm soon going to recieve VS .NET Pro for $85 (academic discount). I also paid for all the shareware I use. Additionally, I don't even download mp3s I don't own anymore! I just get cds from cheap-cds.com or used cds and encode them to mp3s. That goes for movies, too. You might call me silly for doing all this, but I feel the software writers deserve it. Of course I can't afford another copy of Windows for my other computer, but I use Linux on it anyway. I use my Windows box for Windows development, and my Linux box for Linux development, so I am well-rounded when it comes to writing on different platforms.
  • I definately see the logic in the following.

    1. Offer Software to students @ 4% of list. This translates to less than most text books, and less than a pack of CD's :)

    2. Corner a software market and saturate it to an entire generation before they hit the job market. *ahem Unix, AT&T*

    3. Reap rewards when they make future recommendations to employers.

    By Allowing students to pay a ridiculously small amount for software initially, they do infact purchase it for full price later on with corporations money....something they can justify :)

    Now, the report says a decline in piracy? Nah, just a slight increase in "legitimate for school" software purchases. They still pirate Music and games, but at least we get the revenue of what they can afford for some APPZ!

    - 50% of all taglines are, or are not.
  • by Petrox ( 525639 )
    Their statistics here are just not convincing. Without supporting evidence, they conclude that: "if they could get a handle on the scale of the problem among college students, it likely would represent the worst it gets among the general population." There is no reason to assume that this would be true, either: college students pirate in different ways than do people who 'borrow' software from work. Adults and teens are warez'ing types as well. So, there's no way to conclude that what they learn about college students is necessarily going to be of any value.

    In 1996/7, they surveyed only 148 undergraduates, finding that about 78 of them (53 percent) admitted to pirating software. This is really too low of a number in too specialized a location (University of Florida students, who may or may not be like students at other universities) to be of much use, even as compared to data on University of Florida students nearly five years later. As if the low sample size and scant other mention about survey design didn't cast enough doubt about the accuracy of their conclusions, the surveyors admit that this number is inaccurate! From the article: " the researchers found 53 percent of the students admitted to pirating software - meaning the true number likely was considerably higher, Chiang said." The purpose of survey design is to create a survey that by its design reduces these built-in biases. If you know that people will lie to you if asked, it's good practice to double-check somehow by, say, auditing their computers for stolen software (you'd probably have to bribe them, and you'd definitely have to assure them that their names would remain anonymous, but still: if they were interested in good survey design, they needed to do better than this)

    Even the most recent survey is pathetic. With 700 students surveyed, they now conclude that only 40% pirate (though did they ask the same questions this time? Were students more or less likely to lie this time? What? We need more information than this). But since the original survey was so small, with such a high margin of error, how can they then say with any degree of certitude that there has been a reduction in piracy? There really isn't a big difference between 50% piracy and 40% piracy if the margin of error is +-5% (which it must at least be).

    So yeah, while their conclusion that people can be legitimately enticed to buy software (or music) by increasing quality and usefulness, take this survey with a chunk of NaCl.

  • and sometimes the companies, i reason, like it that way. Consider for example, Pro-Engineer, a computer aided design program. The student edition sells for $300, which isn't a bad price considering it's about $40K per seat in industry- but it's still more than any of us Mech-E students would like to give up.

    So we band together, buy one copy, and burn copies enough for everyone. Incidentally, I read the license, and it was pretty liberal- the only thing i saw anywhere restricting copying was somewhere along these lines- "There is no limit on the number of computers this software may be installed on, however, the cd must be in the drive for the program to run"

    That's it.

    I reason they probably want as many students to use Pro-Engineer as possible- so they're accustomed to it- and good with it- so when they start working for engineering firms, the firms are more likely to pay $20 - 40K per seat for an actual license, to make their engineers more productive.

    It's really marketing. Of course, I may just be rationalizing my sins, but I've bought my fair share of windows software- and helped myself to the yearly upgrades. Do I feel sorry? no, cause I'm a piss poor college student. I'll pay for proper licenses when I'm a financially secure engineer.
  • by passion ( 84900 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @01:10PM (#3119727)

    Let's think about who is using the software.

    In 96-97, it was compuer enthusiasts. People who really felt that having a computer was necessary, because it was a tool that they could use to get great things accomplished. These people (due to their interest) were more interested in running software that was beyond their means, and trying out new things, and were savvy enough to accomplish it. These students tended to be more oriented towards sciences, or digital arts.

    Fast forward to today, enter the AOL generation where school registration, bill paying, and even homework assignments are being done online. Every average joe needs to have a computer at school (or at least feels this need), and has little comprehension as to what's really going on when they swap their mp3s on napster. Oh sure, there are still scientific users, but the majority of today's computing users study other topics, like english, philosophy, dance, etc.

  • by The Cat ( 19816 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @01:29PM (#3119834)
    How about some realistic pricing?

    Macromedia Authorware 6: $3,084
    Adobe Photoshop 6: $700
    Adobe Premiere 6: $620
    Adobe Illustrator 10: $470
    MS Office XP: $580
    MS VS.NET Professional: $570
    Macromedia Director 8.5: $1,199

    Now, I don't support warezzzzzzzzzzzzing
    programs.

    But the average student, developer, even small business cannot afford this. Period. When the
    average cost of development tools, operating systems, graphics programs, etc. are $500 - $3000 EACH, and the market cannot support that kind of pricing, then potential customers will find another way: either they'll find a less expensive program that has much of the same capability, buy it second-hand, or do without.

    This is one reason I think the market for second-hand software is increasing, as much as the publishers would like to have it otherwise.

    One thing these publishers should realize is that not every potential customer is a cell-phone-flipping, white shirt and tie "IT Executive" with steel-rimmed glasses and access to a six-figure expense budget.

  • Where I come from... (Score:3, Informative)

    by rosewood ( 99925 ) <.rosewood. .at. .chat.ru.> on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @02:23PM (#3120215) Homepage Journal
    I got to Wichita State University, www.wichita.edu . The bookstore offers NO DISCOUNTED SOFTWARE. All of the windows stuff, etc. is supra expensive! My friends go to IaState and they gave me the lowdown that MS is trying to offer them cheap software if and only if the campus switches over to MS software for 'everything'. And then, rumor has it (aka prolly just forget about this sentance) that they will only get subscription based products that the fee of $10 a year goes up to full price when they graduate.

    I know WSU run Unix/Linux for all of their systems. All the laptops that they use for freshman initiaition/enrollment all run Red Hat Linux. Remote campuses PCs are owned buy whoever is working there at the time, one guy owns a mac, the other guy has a windows box, and the other is running FreeBSD -- all use an SSH connection over the WSU WAN to get to the student information.

    If wichita state switched to MS, offered me cheap software and the rest of our campus but then had to dump their current well working setup - I doubt it would ever happen. Would it decrease piracy? Hell yes it would. IMHO I would pay $10 a pop for WinXp - but not $200. Same goes for Office, Dev apps, Photoshop, etc.
  • Specious arguments (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jhylkema ( 545853 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @02:45PM (#3120363)

    In a 1996-97 survey of 148 undergraduates at three public universities and one private liberal arts college, the researchers found 53 percent of the students admitted to pirating software - meaning the true number likely was considerably higher.

    Before I went back to school, I graduated from the police reserve academy. During the academy, I faintly recall a phrase along the lines of "anything you say can and will be used against you . . . " For some reason, if someone called me up asking me if I have committed a federal crime, I don't think most college students would 'fess up. Then again, there are the jocks and the education/sociology/psychology majors, many of whom are still using "that there new Internet thing."

    When I took "sadistics" class, I remember something about a "valid" sample. 148 surveyed out of how many millions of undergrad students? Even at that, better than half still admitted to warezing! And he admits that most of the ones who said they didn't probably lied. In sum, you have an invalid sample reaching an admitted unreliable conclusion that, in itself, contradicts the article's "conclusion." Typical of the "news" you see on ./

    Still a third issue affecting the decline in piracy is price. Software is simply cheaper now than it was in 1996, reducing the incentive to steal, Chiang said.

    Not true for the largest company in the industry. Make no mistake about it, prices for M$ products have gone up, not down, especially for their latest monstrosity, XP. When you're a monopoly, you can raise prices, even when the market is in the toilet. But I digress. Anyway, many of those academic licenses provide cheap or free (just got a fully working copy of Win2K) software with the proviso that it is to be deleted upon leaving school. And of course, every single student does so immediately after graduation. Riiiiight. That, to me, comes perilously close to the dictionary definition of "piracy", further invalidating the "conclusion" of the "study."

  • Demographics. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by saintlupus ( 227599 ) on Wednesday March 06, 2002 @02:52PM (#3120417)
    Probably it's because the majority of the students on college campuses right now that have computers can't figure out where to get warez from.

    In '97 or so, there was a significantly smaller percentage of students with their own machines. There wasn't even PPP connection to the dialup pool at my college in '96, let alone ethernet in the dorms. Now there's ethernet drops everywhere, wireless APs in a couple of buildings, and 80%+ of the students brought computers with them to college.

    It's a completely different demographic, so naturally it's a different result. Computer geeks who know where and how to get warez are a smaller percentage of the whole now.

    --saint

Put your Nose to the Grindstone! -- Amalgamated Plastic Surgeons and Toolmakers, Ltd.

Working...