Just these days, the SOPA law has scrambled, it is even delicate to hurt susceptibilities with the issue of how far the rights of intellectual property and where they initiate the rights of individual privacy or management of collective knowledge.
It is likely that a generation down the 20 years that are most concerned is that Facebook will close their profile, and others may not go or come. But when you hear postures of Internet giants like Facebook, Google, Wikipedia threatening to generate a blackout in protest ... then we get to try to understand what is the hair of the SOPA.
In general, no one doubts that the illegal use of programs or music that it cost someone to produce is a black and white crime. I remember the courage I had when a teacher asked me to authorize him to use a book I wrote as a class text in the subject of writing; I felt very honored that it did not fit when he invited me to give a talk in one of his sessions. But all my excitement fell apart when I saw that all the students had a bundle of photocopied sheets, which the professor had sold them for US $ 1.20, instead of buying one in the bookstore that barely walked for 3 dollars. He did not spend a five on photocopies because the service was at his disposal.
I gave my talk, I explained that writing in print these days is an act of altruism, I encouraged them to put into practice their writing course and I retired wanting to find a razor and cut my veins. Ja, I'm exaggerating, I did not finish the act because at the entrance a student asked me to autograph the XD photocopies. When I did count, among his 25 students the teacher was 30 dollars, of which I did not see a penny because even the copy that I provided with an emotive dedication was given ...
To make matters worse, students were paying for their writing course near 140 dollars. I mean, for that amount they would have easily bought a book that barely reached 3 dollars ...
Ja, the end of this romantic and frustrating story is the same that pursues who produces its own content, in which it invests time, money and above all knowledge. It is unfair that another come, ask for it copied to his colleague and to top it upload it to Megaupload for free download.
I honestly think that who does not have the money to buy ArcGIS, should be bought Manifold GIS which is worth less than 300 dollars and is paid with a first job decently charged, if it still does not have that as there is Quantum GIS o GvSIG they do the same. The business is not in software but in the ability to produce services with the knowledge that has been acquired.
The graph I am showing is much less than fatal. shows how difficult it is to reduce the use of illegal software in developing countries.
See how in Latin America Chile stands out with "just" an 62% of pirated software in 2010, having reduced from 68% in 5 years; Likewise, the progress of Colombia and Brazil is acceptable. I say relatively acceptable although two of each 5 licenses of NOD32 (worth 40 dollars) are illegal.
While Venezuela instead of decreasing it increased from 86% to 88%; which means that for each 10 AutoCAD licenses that exist in that country, only one is legal. Simply terrible for a company that wants to invest in software development, and despite state efforts in the southern cone to migrate from proprietary to free software.
In the case of Western Europe, the worst case scenario is Iceland, where 49% is presented, Spain / Portugal walk by 40%, which is already less, but more surprising cases like Austria with only 24% taking away merits from Luxembourg (20%) for the particularity of its size but returning them bearing in mind that they are the percentages as far as countries like the United States and Japan have arrived.
For those who want to see the complete document published in May of 2011, with figures from all countries, including maps to see it themed by country, you can see it in this link:
BSA is the alliance in which the most important companies in the development of software are associated, among them Bentley Systems, AutoDesk, Solid Works, Apple, Corel and Adobe.
So if the illegal use of software is better, states should force companies and professionals to provide quality services, including respect for the rights of others; just as they expect their rights to be respected for the designs and plans they produce. Report Piracy is to support individual initiatives.
The hair of SOPA
The bad side of the SOPA law is the extreme level of control that can be achieved in terms of individual rights. To give an example:
- A guy puts a blog on Blogger, and he cites a place where you can download illegal programs. The law would empower and obligate Google not only to reveal the data and contacts of that account, but may be closed Google Blogs (formerly Blogger) completely.
- That is in the case of an innocent boy who did it on purpose, but think of forums, where many think, question, suggest, criticize or link. These spaces now play an important role in the democratization of knowledge (GabrielOrtiz.com and Cartesia.org to give examples). Due to lack of capacity in content moderation, the owner of the site could lose the right to his domain, to his own content, to his Paypal account and even to his email if he is under the same domain.
I know, it's a little exaggeration and it would be an abuse ... but the world is full of abuse when it comes to big economic interests. It is also disagreeable the imposition of those who promote this so that countries follow their guidelines under penalty of being affected economically; just as the way in some countries private companies come together to make the state spend thousands of dollars on programs that politicians do not even know to serve ... but those are marital affairs as incredible as the conspiracies of the new order as the boy who sold 20 millions in illegal copies of AutoCAD on BuyUSA.com.
The other problem could be in the onslaught that these companies could do based on this right against collective initiatives like Free Software. While so far they have not gone from boycotting to lack of quality, with a few congressional members (several of the BSA members are from that environment) could demonstrate that the Open Source violates individual entrepreneurship initiatives. Cosillas that the Open Source should care, because in your hands is an intellectual product which is worth millions, but which is not from anyone but everyone, nor could anyone defend if one day they close the source of donations, lodging site or even the source of financing.
While everything happens, we must get accustomed to using our software legally (which is good for everyone); we do business with the capabilities it gives us. If it does not give more, there are low-cost programs or free licensing.
And wait for someone to propose Open Source hardware, so everyone drops a theodolite from the Internet to make their measurements while discharging as a self-employed.