> but don’t because using the crack is easier for them.
That's a whole separate problem. In my experience 'anti piracy' measures cause problems for people who pay for the software, it's just another reason not to pay. If it's easier to use a cracked product, you are doing something wrong.
> “It doesn’t hurt the dev, I wouldn’t have paid anyway” is just something people tell themselves to justify their action.
Nobody is trying to justify people not respecting your intellectual property rights, just call it what it is - copyright infringement. It is not theft, just like someone using an ad blocker isn't theft, or someone ripping a DVD they bought so they can watch it on their phone isn't theft.
The anti piracy measures I use are completely transparent for the end user. They are just checks for the integrity of the app. If a cracker tampered in any way (e.g. added their own dylib at RPATH) I can detect it.
The crack isn’t easier to use than the app. I meant that it’s easy enough to download the crack so the users don’t have any incentive to purchase.
That's a whole separate problem. In my experience 'anti piracy' measures cause problems for people who pay for the software, it's just another reason not to pay. If it's easier to use a cracked product, you are doing something wrong.
> “It doesn’t hurt the dev, I wouldn’t have paid anyway” is just something people tell themselves to justify their action.
Nobody is trying to justify people not respecting your intellectual property rights, just call it what it is - copyright infringement. It is not theft, just like someone using an ad blocker isn't theft, or someone ripping a DVD they bought so they can watch it on their phone isn't theft.