Pirated windows 10

  • Thread starter Thread starter Babinicz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Babinicz

Guest
I have pirated windows 10 on my laptop. First I obtained windows 8.1 license illegally(by using activation programs). Then I upgraded to win 10 by this free update service so this illegal key is linked to my microsoft account and it says that I have windows 10 activated.
And now I want to buy legal license of this windows. I do have some money and I think that I can afford it, although I am a student(18y/o) and I live with my parents.
My questions are:
  1. Is using current version of this system mortally sinful? I stopped pirating programms, games but I still have pirated windows. I know its a sin but mortal?
  2. I have pirated the Pro version of windows. Would it be ok if I just bought Home version(which is cheaper but still a legal license) and activate it on my pc so I no longer have pirated license?
 
Babinicz said:
I have pirated windows 10 on my laptop. First I obtained windows 8.1 license illegally(by using activation programs). Then I upgraded to win 10 by this free update service so this illegal key is linked to my microsoft account and it says that I have windows 10 activated.
And now I want to buy legal license of this windows. I do have some money and I think that I can afford it, although I am a student(18y/o) and I live with my parents.
My questions are:
  1. Is using current version of this system mortally sinful? I stopped pirating programms, games but I still have pirated windows. I know its a sin but mortal?
  2. I have pirated the Pro version of windows. Would it be ok if I just bought Home version(which is cheaper but still a legal license) and activate it on my pc so I no longer have pirated license?
Click to expand...
Theft can be grave sin or not based upon the value of that taken.

Catholic Encyclopedia
There is no doubt but that small pilferings perpetrated at different times, whether to the prejudice of one or of many owners, can eventually coalesce and reach a sum forbidden under pain of mortal sin. The contrary doctrine was condemned by Innocent XI. The reason, of course, is that the damage wrought is serious. This coalescence may be brought about by the specific intention of the thief in his petty stealing to ultimately arrive at a conspicuous amount.
Click to expand...
Delany, J. (1912). Theft. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14564b.htm

One can estimate $400 US dollars nowadays for grave matter. Grand-theft Florida is set at $400.
 
You stole software, and it’s pretty clear that Microsoft does not want you using pirated software. It’s not a “grey area” case like some artist who doesn’t mind their song being up for free on Youtube because they get more fans. Pirated software is definitely theft. Also, Windows is pretty expensive, so it’s not like you stole a penny.

We are not in a position to tell you whether a sin is “mortal” or not. Besides, if we said it’s not mortal, you’d probably just keep doing it. This whole post sounds like you know you did something wrong and are making excuses for yourself.

Get this stuff off your computer, buy a copy of Windows like a normal person, and go confess. The end.
 
Last edited:
Well I’m sure there would be a wide spectrum of opinions on the issue. I don’t want to detract from the OP.

However, I’ve used Windows ever since the inception of the pc. I can’t recall how many times I’ve had to do a fresh reinstall among countless other problems.

I’ve used Macs for 11 years now, never had a software issue and I’ve only replaced a battery on my MacBook once.
 
Last edited:
You know, this is the only thing that concerned me. Because all my games are bought and legal, I dont have any pirated music nor films. But I have had pirated windows and this was the case.
Now I know that I have to pay for something paid to use it. It will “tighten the wallet” but it must hurt.
 
All of this!

Also, if you cannot afford to be legal, go open source.
 
Are you sure that it was pirated? There was a time when you could make this upgrade free, with the blessings of MS.
 
Possession or use of pirated material isn’t illegal in itself, but the process of using Windows almost certainly involves what the law would consider “copying” in your RAM. So it is technically illegal.

I do not believe that this is a mortal sin. You’ve not inflicted damage on Microsoft (as occurs in theft in the ordinary sense of the word).
 
Arkansan said:
Possession or use of pirated material isn’t illegal in itself, but the process of using Windows almost certainly involves what the law would consider “copying” in your RAM. So it is technically illegal.

I do not believe that this is a mortal sin. You’ve not inflicted damage on Microsoft (as occurs in theft in the ordinary sense of the word).
Click to expand...
As was pointed out earlier, the qualification for theft being a mortal sin relates to the value of the thing taken. The issue of whether the theft “harms” the rightful owner is not a factor in the morality of the theft. As for your claim that this does not harm Microsoft as it would in the “ordinary sense of the word,” that is not true. Stealing $200 of software licensing from Microsoft is just as much harm as stealing a $200 printer. In both cases the company is out $200. That is financial harm. The only reason it looks harmless is that Microsoft is so big. But if Microsoft is so big that they would not miss $200 from a software license, they also would not miss the $200 they would have to pay to replace the stolen printer. The character of the sin is not dependent on how rich the company is.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
In both cases the company is out $200. That is financial harm.
Click to expand...
No. An individual downloading pirated Windows leaves Microsoft in the same position as if that individual had done nothing. Stealing a printer leaves the owner out a printer.
 
Arkansan said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
In both cases the company is out $200. That is financial harm.
Click to expand...
No. An individual downloading pirated Windows leaves Microsoft in the same position as if that individual had done nothing. Stealing a printer leaves the owner out a printer.
Click to expand...
If I am a baker and I bake two dozen doughnuts, but nobody comes and buys my doughnuts, I am going to go out of business. If Microsoft spends years developing Windows and nobody buys it, Microsoft is out of business. I would say that is harm, wouldn’t you?

The problem with the way you present the case is that you offer a false dichotomy. You consider the individual either using a pirated copy of Windows, or else doing nothing (that is, not using Windows at all.) In actual fact, the dichotomy is more accurately described as the individual uses a pirated copy of Windows or the individual uses a copy that he pays for. That is the real choice here.

When deciding if some sort of theft is sinful, it is useful to ask the question “What if everybody did it?” If the answer to that question is “fatal for the business” then it is safe to assume that one person doing it is also harmful - just to a lesser extent because it is only one person. But that is no defense, because a store can tolerate a certain amount of shoplifters, but if everyone is a shoplifter, the store goes out of business.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
40.png
Arkansan:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
In both cases the company is out $200. That is financial harm.
Click to expand...
No. An individual downloading pirated Windows leaves Microsoft in the same position as if that individual had done nothing. Stealing a printer leaves the owner out a printer.
Click to expand...
If I am a baker and I bake two dozen doughnuts, but nobody comes and buys my doughnuts, I am going to go out of business. If Microsoft spends years developing Windows and nobody buys it, Microsoft is out of business. I would say that is harm, wouldn’t you?
Click to expand...
No. Inflicting harm on someone means doing something that is harmful to that person (or business). Not buying something isn’t a harmful act. The harm in theft consists in depriving someone of their property.

I am aware of why we have copyright laws, but the fact that those laws are justified doesn’t make a violation of them equivalent to theft.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top