Is it a sin to use a crack in order to use my software?

[Kylie]

He bought it legally.

He owns it like a car but with a broken key.

He rings a locksmith.

The locksmith 'cracks' his car lock and opens it for use.

No crime has been committed.

He drives away - problem solved.

Perfect analogy.

You are missing the point.

If he buys the car, can the person he bought it from still drive it?

 

[partinobodycular]

I must admit that my view on cracking software goes way back. I've been cracking software ever since there's been software. I see absolutely nothing wrong with it. As far as the OP is concerned he simply took a piece of software that didn't work and he figured out a way to make it work. I say kudos to him. The company shouldn't care. They left it for dead when they stopped supporting it. They're not out anything because they obviously never expected to get paid for it anyway. It's as if the OP found an old copy of it at a Goodwill store, bought it, and then took it home and figured out how to make it work. I don't see anything ethically wrong with that.

 

[Nithavela]

In that case I would say yes, because the original install of the software is lost.

Okay!

So lets say that the person in the hypothetical doesnt want to use that software again, but gets the newest software, but then resells his old CD. Would the buyer of the CD also be moral in cracking the software? After all, there is still only one software copy with that license key running on a PC.

 

[Kylie]

Okay!

So lets say that the person in the hypothetical doesnt want to use that software again, but gets the newest software, but then resells his old CD. Would the buyer of the CD also be moral in cracking the software? After all, there is still only one software copy with that license key running on a PC.

If the person uninstalls the software from their computer. As far as the publisher is concerned, it's the same thing as if he had bought a new computer and was moving the software over to it. Ideally, the software would be deactivated when it is uninstalled, thereby freeing up the same activation code for the next person to use.

 

[Nithavela]

If the person uninstalls the software from their computer. As far as the publisher is concerned, it's the same thing as if he had bought a new computer and was moving the software over to it. Ideally, the software would be deactivated when it is uninstalled, thereby freeing up the same activation code for the next person to use.

Okay, now, heres the tricky part.

Lets say that the reseller of the software SAYS to the buyer that he uninstalled the software on his computer (or never reinstalled it on his new one after losing the old one) before reselling the software, but in fact still kept a running copy on his PC. The buyer, taking the seller by his word, installs the software on his PC and cracks it.

Who is morally wrong in this case?

 

[Carl Emerson]

You are missing the point.

If he buys the car, can the person he bought it from still drive it?

Only if he steals it - and that is not the responsibly of the buyer.

 

[Kylie]

Only if he steals it - and that is not the responsibly of the buyer.

So, no, basically.

Now, if he buys a software installation disk from someone, can the person he bought it from still use the installed software?

 

[Kylie]

Okay, now, heres the tricky part.

Lets say that the reseller of the software SAYS to the buyer that he uninstalled the software on his computer (or never reinstalled it on his new one after losing the old one) before reselling the software, but in fact still kept a running copy on his PC. The buyer, taking the seller by his word, installs the software on his PC and cracks it.

Who is morally wrong in this case?

If the seller gave an assurance that the software is not currently installed anywhere, then the person who is morally wrong would be the seller.

If you just buy it from a second hand store, then there's no way you can get such an assurance.

The proper way to do it would be for the seller to transfer their license to use the software to the buyer, which the seller has to do through Adobe.

 

[Nithavela]

If the seller gave an assurance that the software is not currently installed anywhere, then the person who is morally wrong would be the seller.

If you just buy it from a second hand store, then there's no way you can get such an assurance.

The proper way to do it would be for the seller to transfer their license to use the software to the buyer, which the seller has to do through Adobe.

And if adobe no longer allows the transfer of the license, or never did in the first place?

 

[Carl Emerson]

So, no, basically.

Now, if he buys a software installation disk from someone, can the person he bought it from still use the installed software?

That is a seperate issue from what the OP raised.

 

[Kylie]

That is a seperate issue from what the OP raised.

Buying a disk from someone is exactly what the OP is about.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Buying a disk from someone is exactly what the OP is about.

That is true, but the point you raise was not his concern.

 

[Kylie]

That is true, but the point you raise was not his concern.

Irrelevant.

You claimed the car analogy was perfect. I showed that it was not.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Irrelevant.

You claimed the car analogy was perfect. I showed that it was not.

Thanks for your opinion - I am moving on - let the readers decide.

 

[High Fidelity]

If you bought a house and found that it had no door keys to allow you to get inside, and you went to a locksmith to have a set made, would you call that theft?

There is a world of difference between that and getting a set of keys made for your next door neighbor's house to use them to get in and steal his stuff. Now, that's theft!

No it’s different and you know that.

The real value is in the product key as it’s restricted to a single user. That single user has used it, so anything after that is wrong.

Owning a disc with the software is irrelevant when you’re paying for the right to use it, which is single use and has been used.

It is theft.

It would be like 10 people using the same ticket to gain entry to a football game.
Theft. Sin. Absolutely indefensible and not unnoticed by God.

 

[Nithavela]

No it’s different and you know that.

The real value is in the product key as it’s restricted to a single user. That single user has used it, so anything after that is wrong.

Are you sure that the product key for Adobe CS3 is restricted to a single user and not transferrable?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

No it’s different and you know that.

The real value is in the product key as it’s restricted to a single user. That single user has used it, so anything after that is wrong.

Owning a disc with the software is irrelevant when you’re paying for the right to use it, which is single use and has been used.

It is theft.

It would be like 10 people using the same ticket to gain entry to a football game.
Theft. Sin. Absolutely indefensible and not unnoticed by God.

That would be true if the same DVD was used to set up multiple computers. But this particular software was for a single user - the guy who bought the DVD. You are comparing apples with oranges here.

 

[Kylie]

That would be true if the same DVD was used to set up multiple computers. But this particular software was for a single user - the guy who bought the DVD. You are comparing apples with oranges here.

If John buys the disk from the shop and uses it to install the software, then sells the disk to Bob, who uses it to install the software, then it's apples and apples.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

If John buys the disk from the shop and uses it to install the software, then sells the disk to Bob, who uses it to install the software, then it's apples and apples.

There is no proof that John kept the software installed on his computer when he sold it to Bob. Nice try, but no cigar.

 

[Kylie]

There is no proof that John kept the software installed on his computer when he sold it to Bob. Nice try, but no cigar.

There's no reason to think he uninstalled it either. Given that he almost certainly installed it at some point, it's safer to err on the side of caution and assume it's still installed.