Actually, the Plazma TV and software and music comparison is utterly wrong. Economic theory would suggest that in the case of goods like music and software where it can be reproduced and distributed basically for free, it should be priced accordingly, for free. Ok, ok, there are the artist and the programmers etc etc. So there should be some cost, but utility is maximized by giving these things away for free still. I know, there are other arguments to encourage innovation, we should want the producers of such material to make a profit. However, the better approach would be to have copyright expire rather quickly, in say 10 years, then allow free distribution. For software, this would have no impact of course. Anyone using 10 year old software is really out of the loop. As for music though, lets be realistic, the current system is quite corrupt. Look at all the one hit wonders out there!!! Throw one 'hit' on an album, with a bunch of trash, and sell it for $20? Who is stealing from who here? They were so used to screwing the consumer, that they assume its their right to continue. It isn't. They should sell them one track at a time, for a fair price. However, they know that means that rather than FORCING the consumer to by 10 songs they don't like in order to get the one they want, the consumer will just pay $1 to get the song they want, leaving the music industry with much lower profit margins. They want to continue to sell worthless inventory, all those 'B-side' songs nobody cares to hear. They don't like it becaue the market has evolved and now its possible to efficently sell to the customer ONLY what he or she wants, rather than forcing garbage on them they don't want. That is what they have done since the beginning, and they would like to continue to do so. WE won't let them, and they don't like it. Even if we all paid for JUST the songs we want, they would still be in the red, and stay in the red. Without selling us shit we don't want, they can't make the money they used to, and they don't like that. This is what it is really about, not just about piracy. They want to continue to steal from the consumer as they have for so long.
As for software in non first world countries. Well, you can forget about paying for it there. I see their point. If I lived there, I would pirate everything too. I build a couple computers while I was living in Central Europe. Windows Me, 98, or 2000 at the time were all over $500. I don't think so!!!! All I need was an OS, and this is the best I could do for a price. I'm sure you can guess what decision I made in choosing where to obtain the copy of windows I needed for those systems
Hell, even universities and businesses pirate software there, and why wouldn't they. GDP per capita was around $5000 a year, and MS wants $500 for a copy of windows. Give me a break!!!
In the states, I think its fine to pay, although I don't deny that its over price, not because of piracy, but rather because of monopoly. Just ask the justice department. Anyway, I too will be moving to Linux. I certainly won't continue paying the MS tax when there is an alternative.
