Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
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.
Okay!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.
Okay, now, heres the tricky part.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.
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.
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?
And if adobe no longer allows the transfer of the license, or never did in the first place?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.
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?
Buying a disk from someone is exactly what the OP is about.
Irrelevant.
You claimed the car analogy was perfect. I showed that it was not.
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!
Are you sure that the product key for Adobe CS3 is restricted to a single user and not transferrable?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.
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.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.
There is no proof that John kept the software installed on his computer when he sold it to Bob. Nice try, but no cigar.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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?