On Sunday 04 May 2008 10:12:43 pm Gautam John wrote: > http://duartes.org/gustavo/blog/post/why-brazil-loves-linux
> any hope of widespread computer access, then surely we can't expect > people to spend 7.8% of their annual income on Microsoft software <snip> > When I was growing up in Brazil, paying for software licenses was > about as natural as a third arm growing out of your back. Whenever you > needed software, you'd dial up a friendly pirate and buy a > "collection" for, uh, $30. Very interesting article and I have lots to say (as usual) - and I'll restrict the comparison to India. Microsoft software is as expensive as jewellery for the vast majority of Indians. I haven't checked prices recently but the cost of a Vista Home Basic is well over the monthly "average" salary in India. I suspect that corporations like Microsoft have been trying (more or less successfully) to tell people that they are "human" and therefore different from animals, and that they should therefore respect IPR and copyright etc. But in the real world, humans are also animals - they are no different. In case people feel it might be indelicate or racist to say so - let me say it as an Indian (and I have said it before, even on Silk). Indians behave like animals. Only if you imagine that animals are "lowly creatures" would you feel insulted by this neutral biological fact. If you watch a herd of cattle or goats going through a gate and then watch a crowd of Indians going out of a similar gate - you will find no great difference in behavior. There is a huge chaotic (not necessarily unruly) crowd at the gate and the individual who gets through the gate earlier is not necessarily the individual who arrived at the gate first. The idea of "forming queues" is a unique example of putting self secondary to someone else. Paradoxically Indians do not believe in this. But that is not the animal behavior that is relevant to software piracy. I have a garden at home and I have six or seven different types of fruit trees that bear fruit - some all year round. The bats are always getting their fill of fruit from these trees. Birds get them in the daytime, as do squirrels. Wild monkeys come and go and grab fruit as and when they arrive. And humans grab the fruit whenever they feel like it. There is a guy who comes and sweeps the yard. He brings his son along and the boy pockets something. Painters come to paint some part of the house - and they grab some fruit. A lady comes to deliver something - and she grabs some flowers and some fruit. And so it goes. There is no difference between human and animal behavior. The fruit, or flower is there to be taken. If you get it first - you take it. When I threaten the humans who visit my house to change their behavior under pain of some punishment - I am ignoring the fact that I am doing nothing (and am able to do nothing) about all the animals who are behaving like the humans whom I threaten. Software piracy is a function of "grab what is available easily". Jewellery in India is sold in guarded shops. Hey but so are fruit for that matter. When either is available for grabbing, they will be grabbed by someone or the other. Imagining that people feel "guilt" for doing this is a weird form of self-delusion. Microsoft may be artificially trying to create guilt by punishing users directly or indirectly and therefore appears like an oppressor. This only means "don't get caught". People rarely seem to talk about the way vast differences in price versus earning is handled in relatively less well off nations except when it comes to software piracy. A gastroscope costs approximately US $ 8000 in the US. In India, the same gastroscope costs $ 12,000 because of taxes - which is about Rs 500,000. This is a delicate fiber optic instrument that can be destroyed beyond repair by one bite from an uncooperative patient. The average cost to the patient for a procedure (gastroscopy) in India is Rs 1000 (US $ 25) . In the US the patient (or insurance) pays in excess of US $ 1000. In order to recoup the investment on a gastroscope, the physician in India has to perform at least 1000 procedures. In the US 20 procedures would do the trick. CT scans and MRI scans follow similar rules. In a more worrying example, we find that disposable surgical staplers cost US $ 200 in the US and are used in US $ 10,000 surgical procedures. In India the same disposable stapler costs Rs 15,000 (US $ 300 approx) and are used in the same surgical procedures that may cost perhaps Rs 80,000 to 100,000 ( i.e US $ 2000 to 2500). However in India the prices are chopped down by re-using one part of the "disposable stapler" Such re-use is widespread and would not be acceptable in the US. However it has gone on for so long in India (and in a whole lot of other countries) with no ill effects that it begs the question whether US entities (corporations + lawyers) are merely making money in a situation where costs can be cut down. I believe this forms the basis for the AIDS drugs debate. To me - that is at least part of the answer. Many "profitable corporations" are profitable because they are good at making money. Laws often protect the right to make money better than the rights of people to utilize what is available. Making people pay unrealistic amounts for what can be got for smaller prices is often described a hallmark of civilization - but a whole lot of people don't buy that (pun unintended). As always - if you are making your money from the profitable corporation - you are likely to support their viewpoint. If you are making your money despite those corporations trying to squeeze out your profit margins - you are likely to be opposed to them. The corporations try to enforce rules by creating artificial guilt and liability. But the "long arm of US law" in the US reaches only up to the borders of the US. Outside that it is increasingly becoming a "free-for-all" sorry - I just had to get that off my chest. shiv
