Bill Gates may not be entirely dismayed by software thieves. They seed the world market and make Microsoft a standard.
Microsoft Corp. estimates it lost about $14 billion last year to software piracy — and those may prove to be the most lucrative sales never made.
Although the world’s largest software maker spends millions of dollars annually to combat illegal copying and distribution of its products, critics allege — and Microsoft acknowledges — that piracy sometimes helps the company establish itself in emerging markets and fend off threats from free open-source programs.
The gist of the beneficial piracy argument is that the retail price Microsoft charges for signature products such as Windows and Office — as much as $669, depending on the version — can rival the average annual household income in some developing countries. So the vast majority of those users opt for pirated versions.
The proliferation of pirated copies nevertheless establishes Microsoft products — particularly Windows and Office — as the software standard. As economies mature and flourish and people and companies begin buying legitimate versions, they usually buy Microsoft because most others already use it. It’s called the network effect.
“The first dose is free,” said Hal Varian, a professor of information management at UC Berkeley, facetiously comparing Microsoft’s anti-piracy policy to street-corner marketing of illicit drugs. “Once you start using a product, you keep using it.”
Even as the Internet makes global piracy easier than ever, Microsoft’s revenue and profit have risen steadily. It earned $12 billion on $41.4 billion in revenue in calendar ‘05.
Related Posts
- S. Korea to get new versions of Windows
- Microsoft files 26 U.S. piracy lawsuits
- Windows Got Ya Down? Try a Remix
- Software Piracy Remains Widespread
- Software Piracy on the Rise, P2P Blamed
Loading ...
Now why can’t the MPAA and RIAA see things this way? If a person downloads a song or an entire album let’s say someone who’s a noob to P2P etc. they might not get the best quality bit rated mp3 so they could say: Hey I like/Love this song/album but since the downloaded version is not so great I’ll but the CD.
thats how its been looked upon by p2p users for years the riaa doesnt want to agree. ill tell u this i never bought an album because i havnt liked on i usually am into the unrealeased underground mixes
and that bring me back to the whole suing thing. there have been several albums that i have downloaded and then i saw them for sale. i seriously almost bought them but then i just thought about how the owners of the CDs are suing people.
same thing happens w/photoshop and other applications if you have not realized. same thing could probably also be said for Norton and other programs that used to be alot better than they are now that they are popular