The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Software Piracy: An Analysis of Protection Strategies
Abstract
Software piracy by users is generally believed to harm both software firms (through lower profits) and buying customers (through higher prices). Thus, it is thought that perfect and costless technological protection would benefit both firms and consumers. The model developed here suggests that in some circumstances, even with significant piracy, not protecting can be the best policy, both raising firm profits and lowering selling prices. Key to the analysis is joining the presence of a positive network externality with the fact that piracy increases the total number of program users. The network externality exists because consumers have an incentive to economize on post-purchase learning and customization costs.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Market-Based Assets and Shareholder Value: A Framework for Analysis
Srivastava, R. K., Shervani, T. A., & Fahey, L. (1998) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299806200102 · Cited by 2,357
Di Stefano, G., Gambardella, A., & Verona, G. (2012) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.021 · Cited by 494
Non‐price determinants of intention to purchase counterfeit goods: an exploratory study
Wee, C., Ta, S., & Cheok, K. (1995) · International Marketing Review · doi:10.1108/02651339510102949 · Cited by 400
Modeling IT Ethics: A Study in Situational Ethics1
Banerjee, D., Cronan, T. P., & Jones, T. W. (1998) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249677 · Cited by 314
The emergence of counterfeit trade: a literature review
Staake, T., Thiesse, F., & Fleisch, E. (2009) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/03090560910935451 · Cited by 311
Metadata
- Authors
- Reavis Conner, K., & Rumelt, R. P.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 1991-02
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 125-139
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2078226137
- Cited by
- 645
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Software Piracy: An Analysis of Protection Strategies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.37.2.125
- The paper
- Reavis Conner, K., & Rumelt, R. P. (1991). Software Piracy: An Analysis of Protection Strategies. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.37.2.125
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.