Is it ok to charge different prices to black people vs white people? For the sake of argument, assume there is a genuine difference in demand between races (I would imagine it is true, but let's not debate that).
If it is not OK, why is it OK to charge Australians differently to other people, beyond the genuine differences in actual costs to deliver software here?
Racial discrimination is a special case because it has a very long history which is rooted in bigotry and prejudice. Due to this history any current policy of racial discrimination - even one based on a rational profit motive - would foster bigotry in some people and deeply-felt resentment and hostility in many other people. Other forms of discrimination don't have this problem, at least to the same degree.
For this reason all race-based discrimination should be illegal, but other types of profit-based discrimination should be legal: (a) Senior citizens pay less than other people for cinema tickets; (b) Women pay less for car insurance than men; (c) Students pay less for drinks at the bar; (d) US citizens pay less than Australians for software licences.
By the way, it sounds like you want to see both race-based and country-based discrimination banned. If so, do you think that (a), (b) and (c) above should also be banned? If not, by what principal are you allowing businesses to segment their customer base?
I think the root of it all comes from our base expectation that humans should be treated equally. We expect that as a base and small deviations from it, especially favorable ones. But anything else has to be tied to very rational reasoning about why the discrimmination is happening.
So we can say insurance for women vs men is generally OK because it is two large groups and the discrimmination is tied to real justifiable costs in the difference of insuring them. We can say students vs others is OK because everybody has the experience of and choice to be a student. Similarly with seniors - we will all get to be seniors one day, with luck :-) So you're not discrimminating between people - everyone will get to experience these benefits at some stage.
The geographical segmentation is difficult because (just like race), it's something beyond our control - we can't help where we live, and it will never change. Suffering a selective negative consequence for something that is beyond your control violates our basic sense of right and wrong about human equality.
The time honored way to segment a customer base is to offer tiers of product. Identify a few special features and sprinkle them into a "professional" version. Then sell that for a higher price. If Australians on average are more affluent, more of them will buy the higher priced version, and you will still be making (some of) your extra money. But the ones who are equally well off compared to those in other countries will not be disadvantaged.
But:
1. When given a free hand to segment their customers, businesses will generally set a higher price for people who can afford to pay more. This might be less equal but it is more equitable. For example, let's say Paramount Studios releases the latest James Bond film - they will want to charge an Australian cinema more for the right to screen the film than an Indian cinema. My sense of social justice says it is fair for someone whose income is £4/day to be charged less to see a film than someone who earns £100/day. If Paramount was forced to charge the same price then it would mean that Indian cinemas simply cannot afford to buy the rights to screen the film, and Indians would miss out entirely.
The argument is even stronger for medicine. If a pharmaceutical company can be sure there is no arbitrage between two countries, then it will want to sell a medical treatment cheaper in India than in Australia. That is A Good Thing.
2. If you say to a business, "You must offer your product to Person A and Person B for the same price" then you are restricting the total size of the economic pie in a similar way to saying "You must offer your product for $6". Take Paramount Studios again - if they are prevented from charging different prices in different countries then they will earn less revenue. This means they will be pay their scriptwriters less, have less impressive special effects and pay less tax. (Or quite possibly the film is not made at all).
3. You are happy for a car insurance company to discriminate on the basis of sex if there is a real difference in accident rates between men and women. Would you allow a car insurance company to discriminate on the basis of race if there is a real difference in accident rates?
Comparing regional pricing schemes to racial discrimination is quite a leap.
[1]: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...