Topic: Unlicensed Acad from your teacher

[Bob Garner]

The daughter of the owner of one of our favorite restaurants here is studying Architecture at a local university.  She told me her professor gave her and several classmates pirated copies of AutoCAD for their drafting class.  He even told them it was an illegal copy and to keep quiet about it.

I think that is just wrong.

[James Cannon]

I am all for it.

AutoCAD's student copies are incredibly draconian and often inhibited to the use of students.

I used a pirated copy of Autocad 2000 all through college, because of it.  A fellow class mate burned it to a cd for me, to use.

You upload a student-copy-made .dwg to any support forum, here, autodesk DG, or anywhere... yea.. just SEE how much help you get.

You print out some student drawings (not sure if they still do the watermark or border, but they used to) and see how professional it looks when you try to bring work examples to an employer.

Some autodesk software will only render PARTS of a rendering, or leave it 50-75% interlaced, depending on what software. 

That teacher is brave and commendable for putting himself on the line to enable his students to have the tools at their disposal that they need to have the opportunities to work towards the success they deserve.

[Keith™]

AutoCAD's student copies are incredibly draconian and often inhibited to the use of students.

uh, did I read that right? student copies are inhibited to the use of students? ... meaning that student copies are to be used ONLY for student work?

GASP .... how dare they!

You upload a student-copy-made .dwg to any support forum, here, autodesk DG, or anywhere... yea.. just SEE how much help you get.

You print out some student drawings (not sure if they still do the watermark or border, but they used to) and see how professional it looks when you try to bring work examples to an employer.

Yes, the plot stamp is still there ... incidently, how "professional" would it look if you were to walk in and hand them drawings plotted on a pirated version and then told them .. "uh .. incidently, I did these on a pirated version of AutoCAD, cool huh"

Some autodesk software will only render PARTS of a rendering, or leave it 50-75% interlaced, depending on what software. 

This does not affect the student's ability to learn how to use the software, merely the expected output.

That teacher is brave and commendable for putting himself on the line to enable his students to have the tools at their disposal that they need to have the opportunities to work towards the success they deserve.

No, this "teacher" is incredibly stupid and is jeopardizing not only his livelyhood, but also the institution for which he works.

Now all that being said, I do believe that the rules regarding the student versions are poorly thought out. If Autodesk were to offer really low cost or free student versions that perhaps could not plot drawings and would prevent any student version drawings from being plotted in a full version, it would lead to students having a better understanding of the software and ultimately lead to more users and more sales.

One piece of software that Autodesk has made some incredible progess in their licensing is Maya, there may be others, but this is the only one I am aware of currently.

[mjfarrell]

I think the teacher, is teaching them bad habits.

The school likely does have installed "NFR" version of the product for them to learn on in class, that has none of the limitations of the student version.
He should simply avail the lab for the students to use, and not give them the idea that pirating software is the 'right' thing to do.

For that matter they could simply download and install a DEMO version of the real thing to use for their presentation drawings.

[James Cannon]

The school likely does have installed "NFR" version of the product for them to learn on in class, that has none of the limitations of the student version.

That's a really big "IF" right there.

That software still has to be bought, normally at full price, or donated to the institution by a reseller.

Not all institutions are so lucky.  One of mine wasn't.  My instructor told me that the college wouldn't approve the expenditure and the reseller denied him in a very apologetic way.

[James Cannon]

AutoCAD's student copies are incredibly draconian and often inhibited to the use of students.

uh, did I read that right? student copies are inhibited to the use of students? ... meaning that student copies are to be used ONLY for student work?

GASP .... how dare they!

Nice.  I like that.  You take a statement by me... twist the meaning... and then for some icing on the cake you used sarcasm to drive your point home.  That's talent.  Can I write that down?  I might use it later.

I did not mean that the student software is only for use in student work, I meant that the software overall is inhibited... the students are using a very inhibited software package that can not handle all the needs of a student; leaving them wanting.

You upload a student-copy-made .dwg to any support forum, here, autodesk DG, or anywhere... yea.. just SEE how much help you get.

You print out some student drawings (not sure if they still do the watermark or border, but they used to) and see how professional it looks when you try to bring work examples to an employer.

Yes, the plot stamp is still there ... incidently, how "professional" would it look if you were to walk in and hand them drawings plotted on a pirated version and then told them .. "uh .. incidently, I did these on a pirated version of AutoCAD, cool huh"

Then don't volunteer the information that it was done on a pirated version.  How stupid would that be, to do?  Don't ask, don't tell.

The employer is typically more interested in your capabilities in using THEIR software anyways, since you'll be working for them, so your prior tools are no longer of concern.

Some autodesk software will only render PARTS of a rendering, or leave it 50-75% interlaced, depending on what software. 

This does not affect the student's ability to learn how to use the software, merely the expected output.
[/quote]

Have you USED Autodesk student software lately?  I tried 3dsmax and Maya before, and I couldn't see what the hell I was doing... I couldn't test rendering features at all.  There was no way to mess with materials, lighting, render engine settings, or anything of the sort, because the only way to see the results of such manipulation is via rendered output, which is handicapped more than a one legged man in an ass kicking contest.

That teacher is brave and commendable for putting himself on the line to enable his students to have the tools at their disposal that they need to have the opportunities to work towards the success they deserve.

One piece of software that Autodesk has made some incredible progess in their licensing is Maya, there may be others, but this is the only one I am aware of currently.
[/quote]

Maybe Maya has made progress in the past couple years, I don't know, but I'm not sure what you mean about Maya being better.  It used to have the same restrictions Max did, if my memory serves me right (though it's been a while)

Now all that being said, I do believe that the rules regarding the student versions are poorly thought out. If Autodesk were to offer really low cost or free student versions that perhaps could not plot drawings and would prevent any student version drawings from being plotted in a full version, it would lead to students having a better understanding of the software and ultimately lead to more users and more sales.

I'm really not sure how denying a student the ability to plot or render can really have no effect on a studen't ability to learn the full package. 

The makers of Rhino have an excellent setup if you ask me.  McNeel has the following pricing scheme:

Rhino US$995
 • Students and teachers US$195
 • School lab kit US$975

This is a VERY affordable price for a VERY powerful software package.  What's the difference between the software version and the full version?  NOTHING!  They even let you use the software legally under license, for a full year after your student-status expires.

They require proof of student-hood, and then offer the price.  Method of proof, here: http://www.rhino3d.com/proof.htm

[JohnK]

I dont have time to read this entire thread but i had a related...

I just got my first PC and i had just finished my internship (thats when i started programing and stuff; i didnt even know what the difference between word and notepad were back then). I knew a guy who was in the ...umm... if you did something "wrong" with your computer and the "government" had your computer... He gave me a CD of what he called the "REAL hackers handbook" and told me not to go to any of the websites on my home PC unless he was there. I didnt keep the CD cause i was afraid of it but it taught me a lesson.

I miss him (He's not around anymore). He was UBER scary with a computer.

[Spike Wilbury]

if it is any of the two local architorture schools - those are expensive

here is a link to do something about it:

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=340446

[Tuoni]

I must say, I find myself veering towards James' argument rather than Keith's (though I have the educational version of AutoCAD 2010 for when I pull my finger out to do some more CAD programming...)

In this case, it is actually beneficial for ALL for AutoDesk to have their software "pirated" for dissemination amongst a few students - I just see it as a sad thing that the Professor has had to put not only HIS job on the line, but also the reputation of the institution in order to do it.

Why is it beneficial to the students?  That should be pretty obvious, gimme a full version over a student version every time.

Why is it beneficial to AutoDesk?  Well it certainly isn't a lost sale, is it?  It's either an educational version (free...) or a pirated version (which is the same price to the student, and the same revenue for AutoDesk).  Why else?  Well, it's locking the students into their specific proprietary platform.  When they get out of college they are going to be a lot more likely to be locked into AutoDesk products, they will know the internals better if they have a chance to play with the full version.  It's pretty well known that a lot of the "old school" hackers, sitting in their garages cutting code got locked into certain practices because they had pirated copies of certain stuff.

I don't necessarily advocate piracy, but I think there is an awful lot of BS sprouted through pure ignorance.

[Keith™]

How incredibly silly it must sound to an uninterested party, that someone would steal something (autocad license) in order to gain something (training, job, income) from a legitimate source.

I'll bet if it were their "something" being appropriated without proper payment they would feel differently. How angry and litigious would most people be if suddenly they were hit with this story:

Sorry folks, were just not gonna pay you for your work, we figured you got paid enough already from other people, besides, times are tough and business is slow .. by the way, your work sucks anyway, oh, hurry up with that revision, I need it so I can sell some services to this other company to make me some money ... oh, you? ... don't you worry a bit, if you would just work for a little bit or nothing, everything would be just fine, and I would be willing to pay you something, what I think is appropriate when I think it is appropriate, but as long as I can get you to do it for free, I won't bother. Incidently, when you start those revisions, make damn sure it is exactly like I want them, I'd hate to have to actually pay someone else more than I already don't pay you.

As silly as that sounds, it is EXACTLY the position that software pirates take ... the software costs too much, doesn't do enough, does too much, doesn't fit my needs exactly, I don't use it enough etc.

Well, if that is the case, then use something else, or quit whining about it.

[Spike Wilbury]

now, how about being honest here and tell if we have a license or pirate version, can be a good exercise

i understand the way big software companies let or leave open doors to allow their apps to propagate (and forgot about right or wrong)

i recall, when i wrote gbpoly that someone mention to me, let your arx being spread leave it open, or with less protection, so that way it will be known by everyone.... and i recall when i wrote draftteam that was pirate because back then, i did not any idea of how to do a protection of course not compared with the big software company guys

today, i get all the software that i need licensed and provided by my employer (a software company)

[Tuoni]

How incredibly silly it must sound to an uninterested party, that someone would steal something (autocad license) in order to gain something (training, job, income) from a legitimate source.

It's not stealing, it's copying.  Stealing would deprive the original holder of their item.

I'll bet if it were their "something" being appropriated without proper payment they would feel differently. How angry and litigious would most people be if suddenly they were hit with this story:

Sorry folks, were just not gonna pay you for your work, we figured you got paid enough already from other people, besides, times are tough and business is slow .. by the way, your work sucks anyway, oh, hurry up with that revision, I need it so I can sell some services to this other company to make me some money ... oh, you? ... don't you worry a bit, if you would just work for a little bit or nothing, everything would be just fine, and I would be willing to pay you something, what I think is appropriate when I think it is appropriate, but as long as I can get you to do it for free, I won't bother. Incidently, when you start those revisions, make damn sure it is exactly like I want them, I'd hate to have to actually pay someone else more than I already don't pay you.

That's not what we're talking about here, is it?  You're arguing a different case. Also, anybody who "pirates" software to then make money is badly in the wrong.  Piracy for learning is one thing, piracy in order to make money is not what we're talking about here.

As silly as that sounds, it is EXACTLY the position that software pirates take ... the software costs too much, doesn't do enough, does too much, doesn't fit my needs exactly, I don't use it enough etc.

Well, if that is the case, then use something else, or quit whining about it.

You can't make generalised statement like that, I'm sorry.  I neither accept nor agree with that blind, sweeping statement.  What you're talking about are leeches who are despised by the "pirates" and the sharing community.

[Keith™]

How incredibly silly it must sound to an uninterested party, that someone would steal something (autocad license) in order to gain something (training, job, income) from a legitimate source.

It's not stealing, it's copying.  Stealing would deprive the original holder of their item.

So you won't have a problem with me copying your homework or code or whatever, after all, you would still be the original owner, and I wouldn't be depriving you of anything.

I'll bet if it were their "something" being appropriated without proper payment they would feel differently. How angry and litigious would most people be if suddenly they were hit with this story:

Sorry folks, were just not gonna pay you for your work, we figured you got paid enough already from other people, besides, times are tough and business is slow .. by the way, your work sucks anyway, oh, hurry up with that revision, I need it so I can sell some services to this other company to make me some money ... oh, you? ... don't you worry a bit, if you would just work for a little bit or nothing, everything would be just fine, and I would be willing to pay you something, what I think is appropriate when I think it is appropriate, but as long as I can get you to do it for free, I won't bother. Incidently, when you start those revisions, make damn sure it is exactly like I want them, I'd hate to have to actually pay someone else more than I already don't pay you.

That's not what we're talking about here, is it?  You're arguing a different case. Also, anybody who "pirates" software to then make money is badly in the wrong.  Piracy for learning is one thing, piracy in order to make money is not what we're talking about here.

It certainly is what we are talking about ... in offices across the world, thens of thousands of people have spent countless hours writing code, rewriting code, developing additional tools and keeping abreast of industry requirements. This costs millions of dollars, dollars that the software developers must recouperate from somewhere. Now, I don't buy the whole "piracy costs a bajillion dollars a year" argument because I think it is inflated to justify their charging what they do otherwise. Now, if it were a matter of merely learning, as opposed to learning a particular program, I would agree with you that the software company would suffer no loss, however, the student is gaining a valuable lesson, and that is worth something, for without it, they would not be able to be employed in that field.

As silly as that sounds, it is EXACTLY the position that software pirates take ... the software costs too much, doesn't do enough, does too much, doesn't fit my needs exactly, I don't use it enough etc.

Well, if that is the case, then use something else, or quit whining about it.

You can't make generalised statement like that, I'm sorry.  I neither accept nor agree with that blind, sweeping statement.  What you're talking about are leeches who are despised by the "pirates" and the sharing community.

Well, lets see ... someone who gains (education is a gain, no matter how you slice it) by using the work of others without compensating them in some form, is the purest definition of a leech. Using that definition, the "pirates" are nothing more than self-indulgent leaches.

*edited to fix quote tags*

[Willie]

Pirate Software?  There is nothing to discuss. Its wrong.  It called theft.

If you don't like the licence agreement, use something like Double cad, which is freeware, or buy a cheap alternative.

[James Cannon]

You know, the actual name has the action in it.. "COPY"right.  It's not theft.  It's illegal copying.

If I steal a cd from a store, they now have one less copy to sell.  If I copy the cd, that cd is still there to sell, but I now have an illegal copy.

Similarities.. sure.. but I do, like Tuoni, apparently, often have the urge to pick that nit, that they are not the same, despite what mainstream media will try to convince you of.