BS. They do this because they don't want to bother with paying a couple of bucks for an app. Plenty of apps are cracked, which actually offer a free version for testing. It's even factually wrong. Refund is possible…
I'd link to the thread on their forums about this new rule, but I'm assuming that most people in here are iOS developers who seem to be against this, so you probably don't have an account on their website and can't view the post.
So... nice of them to say that, but I think it amounts to just lip service.
Similarly, why is Angry Birds available as a cracked download? There is a free version you can try out and decide if you like it. I call bullshit on the "try before you buy" axiom.
Angry Birds is different. Their "rule" and way of thinking applies to fully featured trials. Angry Birds offers not a timed trial, but I believe it instead only allows you to play the first level before paying. Not saying I fully agree with this technicality, but that is the way that the crackers are seeing it.
Hope this clears some things up.
This doesn't mean you have to agree with filesharing, or think it's a good thing, or participate in it, but calling it "theft" is scaremongering.
No, some piracy is not theft. And some is.
Piracy is theft in the sense that it deprives a producer of the income or potential income that they would otherwise make from someone buying a good.
Piracy is like breaking into a warehouse full of unsold toys slated to be destroyed. It's against the law but it's hard to see it impacting a particular person negatively (not that it won't if no one buys toys the following Christmas).
It's conflict between those who believe digital or intellectual property opens up a whole different domain of "property" and those who believe the old rules should apply without change.
I would suggest those arguing for intellectual property not try to equate digital piracy with something like breaking into your neighbor's house and stealing their jewelry. It's a poor analogy. The argument that producers need and deserve to be paid probably carries more weight.
So do successful competitors, boycotts, Internet FUD, and a whole slew of other things, in fairness.
It occurs to me that property (of any sort) is a metaphysical concept.
Also, property is not itself all that metaphysical, at least not if we accept the idea that things actually exist as we perceive them (which seems like the opposite of metaphysics). Some of the trappings we attach to it might be, but property is pretty fundamental to the idea of self. On a very basic level, my property is something I have.
Though it does seem obvious to me that these people are just after a way not to pay for software. This tool will just increase the pirated crap.