Is this an example of the too good to be true? Lightroom 5

[steveatesh]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Adobe-Photoshop-Lightroo...

Guy selling licence keys for LightRoom 5 for £21.

Legit? if so how comes they are so cheap?

At the time of this post 5 feedbacks saying positive purchase but I can't help feel its too good to be true.

[Mr Will]

It's a simple business model:

1. Buy one copy of Lightroom for £99.
2. Sell the (single) licence key on eBay to 10+ different people (£210+).
3. Get great feedback because it works when they receive it.
4. Adobe eventually cottons on and blocks all the copies using the key.
5. Buyers left out of pocket, but too late to affect feedback.
6. Return to step one.

[steveatesh]

Mr Will said:

It's a simple business model:

1. Buy one copy of Lightroom for £99.
2. Sell the (single) licence key on eBay to 10+ different people (£210+).
3. Get great feedback because it works when they receive it.
4. Adobe eventually cottons on and blocks all the copies using the key.
5. Buyers left out of pocket, but too late to affect feedback.
6. Return to step one.

right! Thanks, theres another one appeared for £19.99, the seller has 1889 positive feedback. I can understand how people get sucked into it!

[Gemm]

But I thought once the serial number is activated, it won't be accepted again? How does that work?

[Gilhooligan]

See I f you can et someone who is a student to buy the student version. I Paid £50 for mine.

[Mr Will]

Gemm said:

But I thought once the serial number is activated, it won't be accepted again? How does that work?

I can't say for certain with Adobe, but most serial numbers will work multiple times (in case you buy a new computer, reinstall, whatever). It's only once it gets past a certain limit that they cut it off.

[The_Jackal]

Offline Lightroom will accept old used codes as long as they are in the valid format.
Along with Photoshop it is one of the most easily and commonly cracked pieces of software.
As above you do run the risk of getting blocked at a later date thinking you are buying your own personal retail copy of the code.
Also he impies you need the code to download the OFFICIAL software from adobe. No you don't, anyone can download the trial (same software), the code just removes the expiry date.

Edited by The_Jackal on Tuesday 9th December 19:04

[ian in lancs]

Hmm, why is stealing software seen as fair game? You can get legit LR and PS for £8pm. Absolute bargain for the latest version best photo software in the world and cheaper than chips, memory card chips that is. I just don't get why people pay £100's/£1000's on camera equipment and then steal software to get the best images they can.

I assume the people who steal software are the same people who think the Chinese Evoke is a brilliant idea, maybe the people who get uptight over image copyright theft or chase unpaid image use and not the people who are desperate to protect their BMW's against those who have found a way to beat the security system and help themselves.

For me theft is theft whether its software serials, intellectual property, unpaid debt, copyright theft or property theft.

[GuyW]

Certain models of Canon are coming bundled with a free copy of LR5, so might well be a few of those knocking about.

[steveatesh]

GuyW said:

Certain models of Canon are coming bundled with a free copy of LR5, so might well be a few of those knocking about.

Yeah I've seen those thanks, often with Elements too.

[Mr Will]

ian in lancs said:

For me theft is theft whether its software serials, intellectual property, unpaid debt, copyright theft or property theft.

Theft is theft but copyright infringement isn't. Despite the big budget ad campaigns trying to convince us otherwise, they are very different things in law. One is a criminal matter, the other is a civil matter.

[Budweiser]

Oh that's ok then!

[Robb F]

Budweiser said:

Oh that's ok then!

I'm glad you quoted the bit where he said it was ok, otherwise I wouldn't have been able to spot it.

[ian in lancs]

Mr Will said:

ian in lancs said:

For me theft is theft whether its software serials, intellectual property, unpaid debt, copyright theft or property theft.

Theft is theft but copyright infringement isn't. Despite the big budget ad campaigns trying to convince us otherwise, they are very different things in law. One is a criminal matter, the other is a civil matter.

Pedant! I work in a corporate legal team so the difference isn't lost on me; no I'm not a lawyer and neither do I want to be one so bear with me.

The point I'm making is taking / befitting from what you've no right to is ethically and morally wrong, whatever the route of legal redress.

[Mr Will]

ian in lancs said:

Mr Will said:

ian in lancs said:

For me theft is theft whether its software serials, intellectual property, unpaid debt, copyright theft or property theft.

Theft is theft but copyright infringement isn't. Despite the big budget ad campaigns trying to convince us otherwise, they are very different things in law. One is a criminal matter, the other is a civil matter.

Pedant! I work in a corporate legal team so the difference isn't lost on me; no I'm not a lawyer and neither do I want to be one so bear with me.

The point I'm making is taking / befitting from what you've no right to is ethically and morally wrong, whatever the route of legal redress.

The big difference is that theft involves permanently depriving someone of something, piracy is at worst depriving them of a potential sale.

Both are wrong, but one of them is much more wrong than the other (hence the different categorisation and punishment in law). Everybody has a different threshold of what level of wrong is acceptable and for many people, creating their own copy of something is below that threshold.

How would you feel about making a mix-tape for a friend, or copying a DVD you bought so that you can watch it on your iPad? Both are illegal and are examples of copyright infringement.

[ian in lancs]

Mr Will said:

ian in lancs said:

Mr Will said:

ian in lancs said:

For me theft is theft whether its software serials, intellectual property, unpaid debt, copyright theft or property theft.

Theft is theft but copyright infringement isn't. Despite the big budget ad campaigns trying to convince us otherwise, they are very different things in law. One is a criminal matter, the other is a civil matter.

Pedant! I work in a corporate legal team so the difference isn't lost on me; no I'm not a lawyer and neither do I want to be one so bear with me.

The point I'm making is taking / befitting from what you've no right to is ethically and morally wrong, whatever the route of legal redress.

The big difference is that theft involves permanently depriving someone of something, piracy is at worst depriving them of a potential sale.

Both are wrong, but one of them is much more wrong than the other (hence the different categorisation and punishment in law). Everybody has a different threshold of what level of wrong is acceptable and for many people, creating their own copy of something is below that threshold.

How would you feel about making a mix-tape for a friend, or copying a DVD you bought so that you can watch it on your iPad? Both are illegal and are examples of copyright infringement.

Are you for real? "piracy is at worst depriving them of a potential sale" "Everybody has a different threshold of what level of wrong is acceptable and for many people, creating their own copy of something is below that threshold." Many people speed on the motorway but that doesn't make it right - just tolerated by the authorities. "How would you feel about making a mix-tape for a friend, or copying a DVD you bought so that you can watch it on your iPad? Both are illegal and are examples of copyright infringement." Haven't done either so irrelevant.

Seems to me you are using norms of errant behaviour to legitimise that behaviour. What a ludicrous argument and why we need law and a judicial system.

[Berz]

ian in lancs said:

You can get legit LR and PS for £8pm. Absolute bargain...

Internet £30
LR & PS £8
O365 £8
Spotify £10
Netflix £?
Lovefilm (because you can't get everything on netflix) £?
Games (when Steam goes subcription) £?

It's not a bargain when you add up all the little monthly costs that make up legitimate web use. I don't want the latest and greatest features that are touted as the main benefit of subscription models, so I want either a non-extortionate one-off fee to use the product forever (whether or not it's supported forever is a different argument) or a VERY low monthly subscription, and IMO subscription fees are still too high.

[RobbieKB]

I used Adobe CC for £8p/m and it is my best option by far. I need Lightroom and Photoshop and I don't have hundreds of pounds to drop on them. You need to have the subscription running for a pretty long time before you start losing money and the fact you haven't had to spend a huge chunk in one go and that you get the newest versions of each forever offset that for me anyway.

[Mr Will]

ian in lancs said:

Are you for real? "piracy is at worst depriving them of a potential sale" "Everybody has a different threshold of what level of wrong is acceptable and for many people, creating their own copy of something is below that threshold." Many people speed on the motorway but that doesn't make it right - just tolerated by the authorities. "How would you feel about making a mix-tape for a friend, or copying a DVD you bought so that you can watch it on your iPad? Both are illegal and are examples of copyright infringement." Haven't done either so irrelevant.

Seems to me you are using norms of errant behaviour to legitimise that behaviour. What a ludicrous argument and why we need law and a judicial system.

So you never break the speed limit then? Rather odd for someone on PistonHeads.

Or is that something which is not immoral to you, despite the fact it is illegal?

[_dobbo_]

Berz said:

ian in lancs said:

You can get legit LR and PS for £8pm. Absolute bargain...

Internet £30
LR & PS £8
O365 £8
Spotify £10
Netflix £?
Lovefilm (because you can't get everything on netflix) £?
Games (when Steam goes subcription) £?

It's not a bargain when you add up all the little monthly costs that make up legitimate web use. I don't want the latest and greatest features that are touted as the main benefit of subscription models, so I want either a non-extortionate one-off fee to use the product forever (whether or not it's supported forever is a different argument) or a VERY low monthly subscription, and IMO subscription fees are still too high.

Is this a serious post? Prices of nice things add up to the point you can't afford them?

You've listed a whole selection of luxuries, many of which can be had in equivalent form for free (Gimp, Rawtherapee, Libre office, hell even Spotify has a free version).

The market sets the price, you pay and have it or you don't pay and don't have it. Compared to the purchase price of office and PS/LR, the subs are very good value. But if you can't afford those combined costs, you can't have those things you want. Rationalising theft because all the little numbers add up doesn't cut it - unless I can just help myself to the things in shops I can't afford, because, all the prices of things add up?