P1: IML/FFX P2: IML/FFX QC: IML/FFX T1: IML
Software ̇Piracy ̇OLE ̇revised WL040/Bidgolio-Vol I WL040-Sample.cls June 20, 2003 13:8 Char Count= 0
298 SOFTWAREPIRACYborrowing the original media, one might obtain an unau-
thorized, or “bootleg,” copy. Bootlegging by sharing of
software over the Internet is also frequent. Before the ad-
vent of the World Wide Web, individuals often posted soft-
ware on Usenet newsgroups or on bulletin boards. Nowa-
days there are thousands of Web sites that post “warez,” or
contraband software, for download. More recently, peer-
to-peer systems have been developed that allow individu-
als to share software with each other directly.
Renting software and not uninstalling it after use was
once a fairly common mode of softlifting. For this rea-
son, the unauthorized renting of software was made ille-
gal in the United States in 1990. Web sites offering soft-
ware rental can be found on the Internet, but it does not
seem that this is a prevalent mode of softlifting nowadays.
The law permits libraries to lend software, provided that
the package contains a clear copyright notice. Quite likely
these loans are often used for softlifting.
Closely related to softlifting is “softloading,” or the in-
stallation of a legitimately purchased program onto more
machines than the software is licensed for. It can also in-
volve the installation of the software onto a server for use
by multiple client machines in a local area network. Soft-
loading usually occurs in a corporate setting, which can
be a business, a nonprofit institution such as a university
or hospital, or a government agency. It can occur inadver-
tently, if the information technology staff does not keep
proper records of licenses and the number of installed
copies of each software application.Commercial Piracy
Industrial piracy can take two very different forms: coun-
terfeiting and cloning. Counterfeiting is the reproduction
of packaged software for sale. Sometimes the counterfeit-
ing is done in such a way as to make it appear to be au-
thentic, so that it can be sold for a price that is comparable
to the normal retail price. These counterfeiters take care
to duplicate the appearance of the media, the packaging,
and even the documentation as closely as possible. The
purchaser may be unaware that the item is not genuine
and will be unpleasantly surprised to find it is not enti-
tled to support such as upgrades from the manufacturer.
There may be telltale indications of piracy, such as poorly
reproduced artwork, misplaced logos, misspellings, or a
missing authenticity hologram. In other cases, the coun-
terfeiters make no attempt to conceal the pirated status
of the product, and it is sold for an extremely low price.
This practice is also called bootlegging. Often a number
of bootleg applications with a market value of hundreds
of dollars are bundled together on a single CD that may
sell for $20 or less.
Cloning is the independent creation of a functional du-
plicate of an existing program, which is typically marketed
as an independent product. An example was the case of
Paperback Software’s VP-Planner, which closely imitated
the functionality and user interface of Lotus Develop-
ment’s popular spreadsheet program 1-2-3. Cloning takes
considerable programming effort, but avoids the labori-
ous prototyping and design effort involved in the creation
of a totally new program.Counterfeiting and cloning are the easiest forms of
piracy for software producers to combat, provided there
is support from the authorities in the host country. This is
because they most closely resemble traditional forms of
copyright or patent infringement, for which legal reme-
dies are well established. Furthermore, the offender is of-
ten readily identified, and a lawsuit is likely to yield a sub-
stantial return in the form of damages and penalties.
Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) produce
personal computers that are typically sold fully loaded
with an operating system and a suite of applications. The
OEMs typically enter into licensing agreements with the
software producers to authorize the installation of this
software. OEMs or hardware dealers sometimes illegally
load software onto more machines than authorized, or
they may load software that was not included in the li-
cense agreement, as a way of making the computers more
attractive for sale. This practice is called “hard-disk load-
ing.” “Unbundling” is the sale of OEM-version software
items separately from the computer system for which they
are authorized. “Mischanneling” is the diversion of spe-
cially discounted software, intended for academic institu-
tions, government agencies, and other high-volume cus-
tomers, for sale to others who do not qualify for these
discounts.MOTIVATIONS FOR SOFTWARE THEFT
Why does an individual choose to steal software? On the
other hand, if obtaining an illicit copy of a software ap-
plication is so easy and cheap, why does anyone purchase
the legitimate article? Probably the reader can think of
several likely motivations on either side, but a number
of studies have been done in an effort to provide well-
founded answers to these questions. (See, for instance,
Cheng, Sims, & Teegen, 1997; Simpson, Banerjee, & Simp-
son, 1994; Taylor & Shim, 1993.) Most of these studies
have been based on surveys of students and business exec-
utives. These studies are not always directly comparable,
because they take different approaches and use different
models of softlifting attitudes and intentions. They also
vary in the way they validate the measures used and con-
trol for various biases. Furthermore, it is possible that
some of the reasons given may be rationalizations rather
than true motives. Despite these limitations, some consis-
tent patterns emerge from these studies.
Probably the most important conclusion is that the pri-
mary reasons for softlifting are economic: the software is
seen as overpriced, or the individuals cannot afford it. An-
other common reason is the desire to try out the software
before buying it, or to use it for only a short time. On the
other hand, individuals are more likely to purchase the
software if they feel that it will be useful for schoolwork
or on the job and if it will be frequently used. Another
motive for purchasing is the availability of user manuals
and technical support. A significant finding of the studies
is that the perception of softlifting as unethical, illegal, or
against school or company policy has little effect on the
decision to softlift. However, a perception that softlifting
is acceptable and prevalent among one’s peers increases
the likelihood of softlifting.