ACADEMICS’ PERCEPTIONS OF SOFTWARE PIRACY IN HIGHER EDUCATION: EVIDENCE FROM TÜRKİYE

Öz

This study aims to investigate the perceptions of academics in Turkish higher education regarding software piracy and to identify the demographic factors influencing these perceptions. A survey methodology was employed, collecting data from 401 participants across various universities in Türkiye. The data were analyzed using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Independent Sample T-Tests, and One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). The analysis revealed a four-factor structure explaining academics' perceptions: Personal Justification, Social and Professional Interaction, Software Policies and Access, and Experience and Perceived Necessity. The results indicated that the age variable was the demographic variable most consistently associated with piracy perceptions in this sample. Statistically significant differences emerged across all four dimensions based on age groups, with younger academics generally displaying a greater tendency towards justifying piracy. Significant differences were also identified based on gender for the Software Policies and Access factor and on academic position for the Social and Professional Interaction factor. No significant differences were observed based on the academics' primary field of study. Furthermore, a co-occurrence analysis revealed that despite varying perceptions, academics predominantly acquire software through university licenses and open-source channels, while the use of pirated software remained limited.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Management Information Systems
• Software Piracy
• Higher Education
• Academicians
• Ethical Perceptions

Etik Beyan

The research was found ethically appropriate by the Giresun University Social Sciences, Science and Engineering Research Ethics Committee, with the ethics committee decision dated February 5, 2025, and numbered 02/56.

YÜKSEKÖĞRETİMDEKİ AKADEMİSYENLERİN YAZILIM KORSANLIĞI ALGILARI: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türkiye'deki yükseköğretim kurumlarında görev yapan akademisyenlerin yazılım korsanlığına ilişkin algılarını incelemeyi ve bu algıları etkileyen demografik faktörleri belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmada anket yöntemi kullanılmış ve Türkiye genelindeki çeşitli üniversitelerde görev yapan 401 akademisyenden veri toplanmıştır. Elde edilen veriler Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA), Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA), Bağımsız Örneklem T-Testi ve Tek Yönlü Varyans Analizi (ANOVA) ile analiz edilmiştir. Analiz sonucunda akademisyenlerin algılarını açıklayan dört faktörlü bir yapı ortaya çıkmıştır: Bireysel Meşrulaştırma, Sosyal ve Mesleki Etkileşim, Yazılım Politikaları ve Erişim, Deneyim ve Zorunluluk Algısı. Araştırma bulguları, yaş değişkeninin bu örneklemde korsanlık algılarıyla en tutarlı biçimde ilişkili demografik değişken olduğunu göstermiştir. Belirlenen tüm boyutlarda yaş grupları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılıklar saptanmış; genç akademisyenlerin korsanlığı meşrulaştırmaya yönelik algılarının daha yüksek olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Cinsiyet değişkeni Yazılım Politikaları ve Erişim boyutunda, akademik pozisyon değişkeni ise Sosyal ve Mesleki Etkileşim boyutunda anlamlı farklılıklar yaratmıştır. Akademisyenlerin temel bilim alanlarına göre ise anlamlı bir farklılık bulunamamıştır. Buna ek olarak, yazılım temin kaynakları ve kullanım türleri arasındaki ilişkiyi gösteren analizler, akademisyenlerin algılarından bağımsız olarak pratikte ağırlıklı olarak üniversite lisansları ve açık kaynaklı yazılımları kullandığını, korsan yazılım kullanımının ise sınırlı kaldığını ortaya koymuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri
• Yazılım Korsanlığı
• Yükseköğretim
• Akademisyen
• Etik Algı

Etik Beyan

Bu araştırma, 5 Şubat 2025 tarihli ve 02/56 sayılı etik kurul kararı ile Giresun Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler, Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Araştırmaları Etik Kurulu tarafından etik açıdan uygun bulunmuştur.

Kaynakça

1. Aleassa, H., Pearson, J. M., & McClurg, S. (2011). Investigating Software Piracy in Jordan: An Extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action. Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 663-676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0645-4
2. Andrés, A. R., & Goel, R. K. (2011). Corruption and Software Piracy: A Comparative Perspective. Policy & Internet, 3, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.2202/1944-2866.1088
3. Asongu, S. A. (2021). Global Software Piracy, Technology and Property Rights Institutions. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 12, 1036-1063. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-020-00653-1
4. Asongu, S. A., Singh, P., & Le Roux, S. (2018). Fighting Software Piracy: Some Global Conditional Policy Instruments. Journal of Business Ethics, 152, 175-189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3291-7
5. Aziz, Z., Rajwana, M. A., Tariq, S., Gill, H. B., Rasheed, M. S., Ahmad, N., & Haq, E. U. (2025). Enhancing IoT Software Piracy Detection through Feature Extraction and Deep Learning Optimization. Statistics, Computing and Interdisciplinary Research, 7(2), 465-486. https://doi.org/10.52700/scir.v7i2.230
6. Bramantoro, A., & Al-Horaibi, L. (2015). The Trend of Anti-Software Piracy in Saudi Arabia: An Ethical Point of View. International Conference on Cloud Computing, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/CLOUDCOMP.2015.7149660
7. Calluzzo, V. J., & Cante, C. J. (2004). Ethics in Information Technology and Software Use. Journal of Business Ethics, 51, 301–312. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000032658.12032.4e
8. Chan R. Y. K., Ma, K. H. Y., & Wong, Y. H. (2013). The Software Piracy Decision Making Process of Chinese Computer Users. The Information Society, 29(4), 203-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2013.792302

9. Chang, B-H., Nam, S-H., Kwon, S-H., & Chan-Olmsted, S. M. (2017). Toward an integrated model of software piracy determinants: A cross-national longitudinal study. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1113-1124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.05.002
10. Chavarria, J. A., Andoh-Baidoo, F., Midha, V., & Hughes, J. (2016). Software Piracy Research: A Cross-disciplinary Systematic Review. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 38, 624-669. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03831
11. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
12. Day, M. J. (2025). Digital Piracy in Higher Education: Exploring Social Media Users and Chinese Postgraduate Students Motivations for Supporting ‘Academic Cybercrime’ by Shelving eBooks from Z-Library. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 22(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.53761/90p10x24
13. Domon, K. (2025). Externalities of Piracy in Emerging Industries. Economic Analysis of Emerging Markets in Asia, 39.
14. Douglas, D. E., Cronan, T. P., & Behel, J. D. (2007). Equity perceptions as a deterrent to software piracy behavior. Information & Management, 44, 503-512.
15. Eisend, M. (2019). Explaining Digital Piracy: A Meta-Analysis. Information Systems Research, 30(2), 636-664. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0821
16. Fang, X., & Lee, S. (2014). Empirical Analysis of Software Piracy in Asia (Japan VS. Vietnam): An Exploratory Study. International Journal of Information Security and Privacy, 8(2), 33-54. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJISP.2014040103
17. Fesya, A. A. A., NST, A. M., Rayfades, A., Rafsanjany, M. A., & Diwangga, A. (2026). The Challenges of Copyright Protection in the Digital Age: Between Innovation and Piracy. Jurnal Sahabat ISNU SU, 3(1), 89-93. https://doi.org/10.70826/jsisnu.v3i1.1256
18. Field, A. (2000). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS For Windows. London, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
19. Gautam, M. (2025). Consumers Buying Behavior Towards Piracy Products in Kathmandu Valley. Nepalese Journal of Business, 12(4), 122-133. https://doi.org/10.3126/njb.v12i4.92352
20. Geçer, A. K., & Topal, A. D. (2019). Academic and postgraduate student awareness of digital product copyright issues. Information Development, 37(1), 90-104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666919895550
21. Goel, R. K., & Nelson, M. A. (2009). Determinants of software piracy: economics, institutions, and technology. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 637-658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9119-1
22. Gupta, P. B., Gould, S. J., & Pola, B. (2004). To pirate or not to pirate: A Comparative study of the ethical versus other influences on the consumer’s software acquisition mode decision. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(3), 255-274.
23. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2013). Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson Education Limited.
24. Holsapple, C. W., Iyengar, D., Jin, H., & Rao, S. (2008). Parameters for Software Piracy Research. The Information Society, 24(4), 199-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240802189468
25. Hong, B. (2011). Software Piracy: A Hard Nut to Crack—A Problem of Information Security. In Advances in Computer Science, Environment, Ecoinformatics, and Education: International Conference. August 21-22, 2011, Wuhan, China, Part I (324-329). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
26. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
27. Husted, B. W. (2000). The Impact of National Culture on Software Piracy. Journal of Business Ethics, 26, 197-211. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006250203828
28. Im, J. H., & Van Epps, P. D. (1991). Software piracy and software security in business schools: an ethical perspective. ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, 22(3), 15-22.
29. Ishihara, M., & Muller, E. (2020). Software piracy and outsourcing in two-sided markets. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 18, 61-124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11129-019-09221-7
30. King, B., & Thatcher, A. (2012). Attitudes towards software piracy in South Africa: Knowledge of Intellectual
31. Kini, R. B., Ramakrishna, H. V., & Vijayaraman, B. S. (2004). Shaping of moral intensity regarding software piracy: A comparison between Thailand and US students. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(1), 91-104. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000013863.82522.98
32. Kini, R. B., Rominger, A., & Vijayaraman, B. S. (2000). An empirical study of software piracy and moral intensity among university students. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 40(3), 62-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2000.11647456
33. Kin‐wai Lau, E. (2006). Factors motivating people toward pirated software. Qualitative Market Research, 9(4), 404-419. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750610689113
34. Koen, C. M., & Im, J. H. (1997). Software piracy and its legal implications. Information & Management, 31(5), 265-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(96)01090-7
35. Konstantakis, N. I., Palaigeorgiou, G. E., Siozos, P. D., & Tsoukalas, I. A. (2009). What do computer science students think about software piracy?. Behaviour & Information Technology, 29(3), 277-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290902765076
36. Lee, Y., Kim, J., Jennings, W., & Wu, E. Y. C. (2024). Trajectories of Software Piracy and Multi-Domain Predictors. Crime & Delinquency, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/00111287241231750
37. Limayem, M., Khalifa, M., & Chin, W. W. (2004). Factors motivating software piracy: a longitudinal study. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51(4), 414-425.
38. Lotito, G., Maffioletti, A., Migheli, M., & Ramello, G. B. (2025). Women in Piracy. Experimental Perspectives on Copyright Infringement. Review of Law & Economics, 21(2), 199-220. https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2025-0004
39. Marron, D. B., & Steel, D. G. (2000). Which Countries Protect Intellectual Property? The Case of Software Piracy. Economic Inquiry, 38(2), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2000.tb00011.x
40. Mâță, L., & Ghiațău, R. M. (2019). Ethical Aspects Of The Use Of Information Technology In Higher Education. In E. Soare, & C. Langa (Eds.), Education Facing Contemporary World Issues, 67. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (2184-2192). https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.08.03.271
41. Mazzei, J., Martinelli, A., Nuvolari, A., & Poort, J. (2025). Digital piracy in times of Covid-19. Journal of Cultural Economics, 49, 717-745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-025-09538-0
42. Miraja, B. A., Persada, S. F., Prasetyo, Y. T., Belgiawan, P. F., & Redi, A. P. (2019). Applying Protection Motivation Theory To Understand Generation Z Students Intention To Comply With Educational Software Anti Piracy Law. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(18), 39-52. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i18.10973
43. Mishra, A., Akman, I., & Yazici, A. (2006). Software piracy among IT professionals in organizations. International Journal of Information Management, 26(5), 401-413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2006.01.004
44. Nazir, S., Shahzad, S., Wirza, R., Amin, R., Ahsan, M., Mukhtar, N., García-Magariño, I., & Lloret, J. (2019). Birthmark based identification of software piracy using Haar wavelet. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 166, 144-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2019.04.010
45. Özen, Ü. (2002). Research on Academics’ Attitudes Towards Software Piracy. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 16(3-4), 245-266.
46. Palacios-Hernandez, O., Lopez-Fernandez, R., & Viveros, A. P. (2026). Mapping Software Piracy: A Global Typology of Development, Institutions, and Innovation. Development and Sustainability in Economics and Finance, 100137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsef.2026.100137
47. Petrescu, M., Gironda, J. T., & Korgaonkar, P. K. (2018). Online piracy in the context of routine activities and subjective norms. Journal of Marketing Management, 34(3-4), 314-346. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2018.1452278
48. Rabiu, A. A., Merican, A. M. M. N., & Al Murshid, G. (2025). Ethics in the digital age: Exploring the ethical challenges of technology. Journal of Information Systems and Digital Technologies, 7(1), 29-50. https://doi.org/10.31436/jisdt.v7i1.555
49. Rahim, M. M., Rahaman, M. N., & Seyal, A. H. (2000). Software piracy among academics: An empirical study in Brunei Darussalam. Information Management & Computer Security, 8(1), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.1108/09685220010312326
50. Rasch, A., & Wenzel, T. (2015). The impact of piracy on prominent and non-prominent software developers. Telecommunications Policy, 39(8), 735-744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2014.11.003
51. Reinig, B. A., & Plice, R. K. (2013). Toward an Understanding of Software Piracy in Developed and Emerging Economies. In B. Medlin (Ed.), Integrations of Technology Utilization and Social Dynamics in Organizations (214-225). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-1948-7.ch013
52. Alfageme, B. M. R. (2025). Intellectual property challenges in the 21st century: A study of digital piracy in the European Union. Intangible Capital, 21(2), 335-358. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.3040
53. Saleemi, M., Nasir, S., & Farooq, M. K. (2009). How Piracy Affects the e-Government?. International Conference on Web Information Systems and Mining, Shanghai, China, 600-604. https://doi.org/10.1109/WISM.2009.126
54. Sarmento, R. P., & Costa, V. (2019). Confirmatory Factor Analysis -- A Case study. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.05598. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.05598
55. Schmuhl, M. A., & Na, C. (2019). Globalization and software piracy within and across 103 countries. Crime, Law and Social Change, 72, 249-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-018-9805-8
56. Seale, D. A., Polakowsski, M., & Schneider, S. (1998). It’s not really theft! Personal and workplace ethics that enable software piracy. Behaviour & Information Technology, 17(1), 27-40.
57. Sikolia, D., Bahr, G., & Biros, D. (2025). Software Piracy: The Effects of Neutralization and Religiosity. The Journal of the Southern Association for Information Systems, 12(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.17705/3JSIS.00038
58. Simpson, P. M., Banerjee, D., & Simpson, C. L. (1994). Softlifting: a model of motivating factors. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 431-438.
59. Siponen, M., Vance, A., & Willison, R. (2010). New Insights for an Old Problem: Explaining Software Piracy through Neutralization Theory. In Proceedings of the 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE Computer Society, USA, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2010.287
60. Siponen, M., Vance, A., & Willison, R. (2012). New insights into the problem of software piracy: The effects of neutralization, shame, and moral beliefs. Information & Management, 49(7-8), 334-341.
61. Surekha, V. C. L., Chakravarthy, C., Rishitha, R. S., Siddina, U., & Harsha, P. A. (2025). Decentralizing Copyright Protection: A Blockchain Approach to Combat Digital Piracy. Grenze International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 11(2).
62. Taylor, G. S., & Shim, J. P. (1993). A Comparative Examination of Attitudes Toward Software Piracy Among Business Professors and Executives. Human Relations, 46(4), 419-433. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679304600401
63. Wang, W., Yang, X., Hua, Z., Zhong, X., Hu, D., & Liao, S. S. (2013). Software piracy governance and tariff policy in emerging markets. In Vision 2020: Innovation, Development Sustainability, and Economic Growth - Proceedings of the 21st International Business Information Management Association Conference (2, 513-518). International Business Information Management Association, IBIMA.
64. Wickham, M., Plotnicki, J., & Athey, S. (1992). A survey of faculty attitudes toward personal computer software copying. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 47-52.
65. Wong, K. (1985). Computer crime - risk management and computer security. Computer and Security, 4, 287-295.
66. Xue, J., Gao, P., He, Y., Li, Z., & Xu, H. (2026). Research on the mechanism how consumer expected regret affects market access for pirated information products. PLoS One, 21(2), e0343031. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0343031
67. Yadav, V. N. (2025). The Growing Threat of Digital Piracy: Legal Responses and Policy Gaps. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights Law, 8(2), 10-18.
68. Yang, D. (2007). The impact of business environments on software piracy. Technology in Society, 29(1), 121-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2006.10.006