Shareware the Pirates?

[Li Shenron]

I doubt such an idea would work, but it is definitely interesting.

I'm afraid that a casual downloader (one that didn't pay since the start) will very unlikely pay afterwards. He may like the concept, but may be afraid that sending the money would trigger a sort of trap. Furthermore the people I personally know as heavy-downloaders don't use the downloaded stuff at all typically, so before the time it takes to pay you, they have already forgotten about your book.

But I wouldn't worry about these people, because even if only a few would pay 1$ you'd still make some money from them. I instead worry about people who really wanted to buy your Pdf: how would they feel to know only afterwards that they could have saved some money? Probably they aren't going to pay full-price your NEXT book once they know it's sold for much less.

It's a very complicated matter.

 

[Li Shenron]

1. Those who make unlicensed copies are called "pirates", thus glamorizing them. Calling them software thieves wouldn't give them the same association with action, adventure, and booty on the high seas. Being associated with pirates and eyepatches and such is almost enough to turn me to "piracy".

Do you know the real origin of the term "pirate" as used to indicate this practices? I don't know who introduced the name, but I was wondering if it should be used to indicate people who "steal & re-sell" (like most "historical" pirates probably did) or be more broad for any who just "steal" or anyway take something without the rights to do so. But in that case, why not simply "thief"?

 

[Jacen]

Do you know the real origin of the term "pirate" as used to indicate this practices? I don't know who introduced the name, but I was wondering if it should be used to indicate people who "steal & re-sell" (like most "historical" pirates probably did) or be more broad for any who just "steal" or anyway take something without the rights to do so. But in that case, why not simply "thief"?

If I am not wrong it derives from pirate radiostations that worked on ships. So they were sending readio boardcast without authorization or any permissions, but because they stayed on intenational sea areas officials couldn't do nothing. And from there it was taken to mean products that were made and sold without paying rightowner compensation. Ie levis jeans, CD etc. pirate products. And it meant that someone made and sold them - commercial production without permissions to gain money. Anyway it was ripped away that meaning by record companies to mean anything consumer does without their presmission - even if permission is ont needed acording to law.

If I am wrong correct me, please.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

But in that case, why not simply "thief"?

Please, let's not start that again.

 

[Joshua Randall]

I prefer the term "scumbag", personally.

 

[Mychal]

No. But there are lots of "experts" and "I already did that!" posts on the internet and it's nice to get some details -- especially from someone with one or two posts.

I see that you're new. Welcome!

Thanks, I just poped out of the cloning machine on Monday... I wounldn't say I was an expert, just have some first hand experience with shareware. I still have a copie of my game with the instructions in Japanese, very cool. I made exactly $0.00 for that deal....lol. Not one person in Japan paid me for my game, it was packaged in a set of clearly labeled shareware games..... I guess people thought "why pay twice for it, it's mine now..."

 

[I'm A Banana]

It strikes me that "downloading without use" is not really much of a risk -- if they don't use the product, they shouldn't have to pay for it, right? And if they do use it, they'll see the message kindly asking for help to keep making this stuff, and I'd bet a good chunk of people would pay something.

Is it a sustainable model for professional business to use exclusively? Of course not. But while you make less money with "shareware," the true miraculous occurance is that you make any at all, thus making it a superb way to recoup losses. If even one pirate gives you that $5 who would not have originally, that shows that there is potential here.

It's less than you might get if they were buying it (maybe), but it's more than you would get, since these guys aren't buying it. And if they never use it, well, they're not really gaining anything by having it, are they? So why should they pay for a product they never use?

 

[Mychal]

Is it a sustainable model for professional business to use exclusively? Of course not. But while you make less money with "shareware," the true miraculous occurance is that you make any at all, thus making it a superb way to recoup losses. If even one pirate gives you that $5 who would not have originally, that shows that there is potential here.

The problem is your honest customers will pay you less money, cuz thay can. They won't pay full price, so how much more money are you going to lose to get a Rats $5...???? it is a net loss idea, more people pay you true, but you will make less money. So you don't recoup any loses... you incur new losses.... nothing superb about that unless you don't like making money.