> Pirate proprietary pay-for software.

Beware that in some cases, that's still a net gain for the proprietary vendor: if you weren't able to pay much for, say, Photoshop, better to have you as a Photoshop user who will buy it at some later date, recommend it to your friends, and otherwise participate in the Photoshop using community, rather than, say, learn Gimp on Linux.

This is true, but there are many people who will always pirate no matter what. I know people who pirate everything from Photoshop and Windows to music and movies, not because they /can't/ pay, but because they simply don't want to.

What would they do if pirating was impossible?

Use Gimp or buy Photoshop?

Hypothetically speaking, both. Those that could afford it would buy it and grumble, those that can't would use Gimp.

But this is reality, and the reality is that pirating is easy to do even with all the DRM/anti-piracy stuff that is in place.

For those that would buy, piracy is a net loss for the company.

For those that would use open source, it's a net a loss.

It's like the old saying: "Only thing worse then being talked about.."

Only thing worse then being pirated is not being pirated.

I agree that it's not just about free software. Open source is a great movement for expression and challenges you to grow. But at the same time, aren't you sick of big companies making us pay for crappy software...uh um windows vista?

Last I checked, you're free to _not_ buy Vista. Buy a Mac. Buy a pre-installed Linux box. Buy your roommate's cousins used Pentium 4 w/o an OS and have your way with it.

What is exactly is 'your way?'