A potentially original take on piracy? Probably not, but interesting.

[Kopikatsu]

I can't fucking stand the pirates.

I don't think it's healthy, especially in this economy, for gamers to be hating on pirates because they care so much about the bottom line of some company that they don't receive a paycheck from. For example, do you hate Wal Mart shoplifters as much as you hate video game pirates? Why not?

I do, since Walmart has explicitly stated that shoplifting is such a problem for them that they had to raise prices to compensate a while back.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Surely you see the difference between receiving a gift and taking something you haven't paid for. Morally, and arguably in literal terms, they aren't the same thing.

Of course they aren't, that's my freaking point!

Tell that to people who keep going "If you didn't buy it, you shouldn't have it." because, a gift is something you didn't pay for, and those people have the gall to tell you that you don't deserve to have it, cause you didn't pay for it! That "getting stuff for free" is bad is a blanket statement, and a lousy argument.

Clear?

No offense but what he means is made clear by the context of what he's saying, to compare it to giving someone a gift is pedantry on your part.

 

[Realitycrash]

Was the game you purchased the one that was cracked and uploaded as a torrent? No? Then they didn't it steal from you.

This is the sort of analogy you're trying to make: You buy a pair of sunglasses. Right after you pay for your sunglasses, somebody shoplifts a pair. That person didn't steal the sunglasses from you, they stole it from the store. It would have made no difference if you had bought orange juice or a nice sweater instead of the sunglasses. They stole the sunglasses, and the sunglasses belonged to the store. End of story.

I'm sorry..What is your point? That pirating isn't the same as theft, or that pirating is the same as theft, just not from one single consumer, but from a producer?

 

[Vegosiux]

No offense but what he means is made clear by the context of what he's saying, to compare it to giving someone a gift is pedantry on your part.

The "context" is nothing more than being holier than thou. A blanket statement is a blanket statement and no "context" can make it look like anything but a blanket statement. People should just think before they open their mouth (or begin typing), and start generalizing otherwise they come across as overzealous, silly and inconsiderate.

But hey, true. Not like they need me to shoot even more holes into their own misconceptions, that much I concede.

Because I'm still looking for all those shady pirate criminals who want to bring down the hard working men and women (and cheat you out of YOUR MONEY!), and I haven't met a single one yet. And I know a lot of people, some of which actually downloaded something at some time.

 

[Vegosiux]

I'm sorry..What is your point? That pirating isn't the same as theft, or that pirating is the same as theft, just not from one single consumer, but from a producer?

If you steal a game you get a stolen non-pirated game, really. Think about it.

 

[Realitycrash]

I'm sorry..What is your point? That pirating isn't the same as theft, or that pirating is the same as theft, just not from one single consumer, but from a producer?

If you steal a game you get a stolen non-pirated game, really. Think about it.

That's semantics. If you steal a game, physically, from the store (a hard feat nowdays, since most games are locked up behind the counter andthe stuff on the shelves are just empty cases), then you don't have a pirated game, no, but you have committed theft.
If you pirate a game, you have committed piracy, which is basically the same as theft, though not exactly.

 

[Vegosiux]

That's semantics. If you steal a game, physically, from the store (a hard feat nowdays, since most games are locked up behind the counter andthe stuff on the shelves are just empty cases), then you don't have a pirated game, no, but you have committed theft.
If you pirate a game, you have committed piracy, which is basically the same as theft, though not exactly.

..."Basically the same, but not exactly". In other words, "not the same", because the only way for something to be "the same", is to be "exactly the same."

"The same, except for..." is not "the same." Yes, semantics, but pretty freakin' important semantics.

Thank you, that's all we needed to hear.

Get your facts straight already. Piracy is not theft. It's still an offense, but it's a different one. The same way joyride is not grand theft auto.

 

[UnderGlass]

The OP has made a really interesting point here, presenting an angle I had not previously considered. Pirated entertainment as opium for the masses? Sure. The connectivity that the internet allows along with the low barrier of entry surely makes it the main pipeline for entertainment/distraction in many low-income households. That said the internet is a relatively new innovation in the history of everything. People seemed to get along pretty well before it without freaking out so I'm not sure if revolution is on the cards. This isn't the worst financial crisis the world has weathered either.

But those people can't make games and investors won't put money into gaming without paying customers. The money for games development doesn't come out of thin air, It comes from honest gamers. That's the point the OP was trying to make.

Overall I think Neelie Kroes of the European Commission has it right

Spoiler

I've said that we have to safeguard the benefits of an open internet and that Sopa is not the model for Europe. What we need instead is laws that are effective, proportionate and preserve the open internet we cherish.

Or, as I put it on Twitter, speeding is illegal but you don't stop it by putting speed bumps on the motorway.

In the digital age, our current copyright system is not succeeding in its objectives. I agree we should fight against piracy. But it's becoming increasingly hard to legally enforce copyright, and enforcement is only one side of the coin.

On top of that virtually all artists are earning under £800 a month from copyright. That's pretty devastating, for the artists themselves and for Europe as a whole.

There are lots of potential ideas out there for new systems of recognition and reward - but too often they are killed stone dead by rigid, pre-digital legislation.

Meanwhile legislation can discriminate against innovative forms of distribution - for example, e-books don't benefit from the same VAT reduced rates as "physical" books.

Overall, I have been clear that we need to go back to basics and put artists back at the centre of copyright law.

We need to ensure internet access is as widespread as possible. And we need to deal with piracy from both angles. Piracy won't be minimised until the amount of legally available content is increased.

Neelie Kroes is the vice president of the European Commission and is responsible for issues relating to the Digital Agenda

(from the BBC website)

That's a fabulous quote xXxJessicaxXx. Now I look forward to seeing Brussels come up with something workable before the sun goes supernova ;P

I agree though, the current model for copyright law and content distribution is broken.

In the past when someone bought a record there was no ambiguity. Let's face it, they were actually paying for that round piece of vinyl. What gave it value was the recording of the artist engraved on it's surface, sure, but copyright law took care of ensuring creators obtained profit from the sale. There was no responsibility on the consumer's part to be morally conscientious to the artist or label. This model has remained relevant through to modern day compact discs et al. Now though, with people having direct access to creative content through data sharing, everything has changed.

Nowadays the owner of the storage media is and always has been the end-user. The actual bits and bytes of data flying through cyberspace don't belong to anyone, leaving copyright law and distribution channels in desperate need to radically evolve to continue rewarding artists for their work. Because the exchange of data is the lifeblood of networking and comes as naturally to any computer user as breathing. The only way they will ever neuter large-scale file-sharing is by burning down the internet. Piracy of content as it is currently distributed is going nowhere fast. In the meantime we as consumers must continue to make a conscious decision to pay what is asked for something we can easily get for free.

Change is scary though. We still have a few more long years as legislators founder and entrenched entertainment industries continue to try and force the square block in the round hole, while collectively hamstringing attempts at innovation in the marketplace. Ultimately I'm seeing a lot of 'entertainment as a service not a product' models in our future. Ironically, considering all the shit gamers alone have to deal with from publishers just to enjoy their hobby, the games industry seems to be making the largest strides in this area.

 

[Realitycrash]

That's semantics. If you steal a game, physically, from the store (a hard feat nowdays, since most games are locked up behind the counter andthe stuff on the shelves are just empty cases), then you don't have a pirated game, no, but you have committed theft.
If you pirate a game, you have committed piracy, which is basically the same as theft, though not exactly.

..."Basically the same, but not exactly".

Thank you, that's all we needed to hear.

No, that really isn't "all we needed to hear". Why? Because all the relevant facts are the same for piracy and theft, i.e you gain access to something that you had no legal right of gaining access too.
Unless of course all you wanted to do was to point out "but with piracy you duplicate something and leave the original", which isn't relevant.

 

[Vegosiux]

No, that really isn't "all we needed to hear". Why? Because all the relevant facts are the same for piracy and theft, i.e you gain access to something that you had no legal right of gaining access too.

You may want to look up the legal definition of "theft" then.

Hint: It's not "gaining access to something you had no legal right of gaining access to". In most jurisdictions, "theft" still means something along the lines "unlawfully taking a physical something and depriving another of it (of the exact same thing that you stole) in the process."

Seriously. Not all offenses are the same. There's a reason we have separate definitions.

 

[Realitycrash]

No, that really isn't "all we needed to hear". Why? Because all the relevant facts are the same for piracy and theft, i.e you gain access to something that you had no legal right of gaining access too.

You may want to look up the legal definition of "theft" then.

Hint: It's not "gaining access to something you had no legal right of gaining access to".

That's not relevant either? Nor is the fact that "theft" is X many years in jail and X dollars in fines, and Piracy is Y. What us relevant? That you are taking something that doesn't belong to you. You are doing it in case Y, and you are doing it in case X. The textbook definition of "theft" and the textbook definition of "piracy" matters little, for what I am aiming at (and you know this as well, you just want to keep trying to score a "win" by saying "it's not the same!") is if you can somehow get away with moral superiority by claiming "it's not theft! It's piracy!". Well, theft and piracy are so closely related that it is basically the same thing.

 

[Xanthious]

I really can't buy the whole "can't afford the product" if those people have the hardware to play this games. If you can afford a TV + console or a PC strong enough to play the games than you can also afford the games.

Really? I routinely give my old PCs/laptops (gaming PCs/laptops mind you) to families with school age children who otherwise couldn't afford one of their own. Most of my friends do the same thing. These families can't afford games period.

I grew up poor and was given my first computer by someone that did the same thing. My family at the time would have had no games for our computer if it weren't for my dad knowing the right people and bringing home stacks of copied floppy discs with pirated games on them.

I know many families that save up a good long while just to buy their kids a Wii or a 360 or a DS and the only way those kids will have any games to play is to either rent borrow or pirate them and sometimes the first two aren't an option if they can't afford the price of a rental and don't know someone with games to borrow from.

Now this does nothing to change how right or wrong piracy may be but I can promise you that there are a good many people that have come upon the hardware but are completely unable to afford the software. Just because a family was given a computer or bought an Xbox at tax time for their kids doesn't change the fact that most any other time they are lucky to be able to keep the bills paid never mind afford video games.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

No offense but what he means is made clear by the context of what he's saying, to compare it to giving someone a gift is pedantry on your part.

The "context" is nothing more than being holier than thou. A blanket statement is a blanket statement and no "context" can make it look like anything but a blanket statement. People should just think before they open their mouth (or begin typing), and start generalizing otherwise they come across as overzealous, silly and inconsiderate.

But hey, true. Not like they need me to shoot even more holes into their own misconceptions, that much I concede.

Because I'm still looking for all those shady pirate criminals who want to bring down the hard working men and women (and cheat you out of YOUR MONEY!), and I haven't met a single one yet. And I know a lot of people, some of which actually downloaded something at some time.

How is it a misconception that pirating is copying or taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's exactly what it is.

Again you are yourself using blanket statements, there is no one out there sitting in their volcano lair, steep-ling their fingers and laughing manically about all the games they pirated today. Normal people, like you mentioned, are pirating games and hurting the honest gamers who keep the industry afloat by actually paying for games.

Despite his wording the poster has every right to be 'holier than thou' if he pays for his games. It immediately makes him a better person from a moral standpoint than a pirate.

 

[tjcross]

Was the game you purchased the one that was cracked and uploaded as a torrent? No? Then they didn't it steal from you.

This is the sort of analogy you're trying to make: You buy a pair of sunglasses. Right after you pay for your sunglasses, somebody shoplifts a pair. That person didn't steal the sunglasses from you, they stole it from the store. It would have made no difference if you had bought orange juice or a nice sweater instead of the sunglasses. They stole the sunglasses, and the sunglasses belonged to the store. End of story.

I like how people say 'end of story' like their analogy solves the world's problems. Analogies are almost always flawed. (Hint: This includes yours)

What OP is saying is this: Let's say The Darkness was released. The OP and many others pay for a copy of The Darkness. Enough that there is enough money and demand for a sequel. So they make The Darkness 2. Anyone who pirates The Darkness 2 will technically be stealing from all of the people who bought The Darkness because without them, The Darkness 2 would never have been created in the first place, and The Darkness 3 might not be created, or may not have a long enough dev cycle to be good because of the decreased revenue from piracy. (This is ignoring other market factors, yes, but this is supposed to just be a simple explanation)

or you could look at it this way: companies always want to avoid piracy so if their game is pirated alot they will spend more money on more expensive drm instead of making a better game and were does that money come from? the people who payed for the last game so their next purchase is worse because their money was put into drm instead of the game

 

[Vegosiux]

That's not relevant either? Nor is the fact that "theft" is X many years in jail and X dollars in fines, and Piracy is Y. What us relevant? That you are taking something that doesn't belong to you. You are doing it in case Y, and you are doing it in case X. The textbook definition of "theft" and the textbook definition of "piracy" matters little, for what I am aiming at (and you know this as well, you just want to keep trying to score a "win" by saying "it's not the same!") is if you can somehow get away with moral superiority by claiming "it's not theft! It's piracy!". Well, theft and piracy are so closely related that it is basically the same thing.

Me trying to score a win? Please. All I'm trying to do is make people stop being silly.

And trust me. Definitions and semantics matter once you go "legal". In law TV shows maybe they don't, but then again those shows also use terms "homicide" and "murder" interchangeably so I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

Why did you get this idea that saying "piracy isn't the same as theft" is defending piracy? Cause, news for you, it isn't defending piracy. It's merely stating that someone needs to get their definitions in order.

 

[mellemhund]

ITT OP trying to rationalize his anger towards people who make smarter choices than him in the gaming market.

OP you are like people we have in this country, who by expensive ocean side property. They feel that now they paid for the view, noone else should be able to enjoy it for free. So even though it's perfectly legal to walk along the cost everywhere, they try to hinder it.

Piracy isn't destroying video games. The industry is flourishing. Piracy is to be considdered a calculated cost, just as when you run a shop and expect 5% of your goods to be destroyed or stolen as long as the number is below that, it's not really considered a problem.

I have been burned so many times with pre-orders and releases, that I for one never buy a game I haven't tried before. Sham on all the gamers that support the lousy cash-cows. You are the ones destroying the industry if anyone is.

 

[incal11]

1. Games don't exist without someone paying for them.
2. I pay for games.
3. You don't.
4. My honest business provides free games for you.

I'll have a go.
1. what about free games, and people who just like to make games ? Even if the current industry was to crash down it would not be the death of culture, for this points that what matters.
2. Me too, very few actually never pay for anything.
3.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qkyt1wXNlI&feature=player_embedded (but I have more if that's not enough).
4. Thank you.

 

[Realitycrash]

That's not relevant either? Nor is the fact that "theft" is X many years in jail and X dollars in fines, and Piracy is Y. What us relevant? That you are taking something that doesn't belong to you. You are doing it in case Y, and you are doing it in case X. The textbook definition of "theft" and the textbook definition of "piracy" matters little, for what I am aiming at (and you know this as well, you just want to keep trying to score a "win" by saying "it's not the same!") is if you can somehow get away with moral superiority by claiming "it's not theft! It's piracy!". Well, theft and piracy are so closely related that it is basically the same thing.

Me trying to score a win? Please. All I'm trying to do is make people stop being silly.

And trust me. Definitons and semantics matter once you go "legal". In law TV shows maybe they don't, but then again those shows also use terms "homicide" and "murder" interchangeably so I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

Why did you get this idea that saying "piracy isn't the same as theft" is defending piracy? Cause, news for you, it isn't defending piracy. It's merely stating that someone needs to get their definitions in order.

You keep going, bro, you keep trying to score that win. -Chuckles- You are so off the point now that I can't help but to shake my head.
So let's get back on it, shall we?

I never claimed anyone defended piracy. Theft is taking something that doesn't belong to you, piracy is similar. They have different textbook-definitions, different definitions in law, and do not have the exact same effect on people, industry, society, etc, but all this is irrelevant, for it wasn't my point.
My point is that both are morally wrong, on equal grounds.

 

[Vegosiux]

How is it a misconception that pirating is copying or taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's exactly what it is.

Copying "or taking"? No. Piracy isn't copying "or taking". It's copying. It's unlawfully making a copy of something that already exists. You "take" nothing, because if you "took" something, "someone" would no longer have that thing.

Is piracy a bad thing to do? Why, yes, it is, have I ever claimed otherwise?

Again you are yourself using blanket statements, there is no one out there sitting in their volcano lair, steep-ling their fingers and laughing manically about all the games they pirated today. Normal people, like you mentioned, are pirating games and hurting the honest gamers who keep the industry afloat by actually paying for games.

True, but they are not taking the games away from those honest gamers, so I don't see what you're trying to say. I'm not losing the games I paid for to pirates, am I?

Despite his wording the poster has every right to be 'holier than thou' if he pays for his games. It immediately makes him a better person from a moral standpoint than a pirate.

Being holier than thou actually doesn't make you much of a person, it's a negative character trait.

 

[tjcross]

No offense but what he means is made clear by the context of what he's saying, to compare it to giving someone a gift is pedantry on your part.

The "context" is nothing more than being holier than thou. A blanket statement is a blanket statement and no "context" can make it look like anything but a blanket statement. People should just think before they open their mouth (or begin typing), and start generalizing otherwise they come across as overzealous, silly and inconsiderate.

But hey, true. Not like they need me to shoot even more holes into their own misconceptions, that much I concede.

Because I'm still looking for all those shady pirate criminals who want to bring down the hard working men and women (and cheat you out of YOUR MONEY!), and I haven't met a single one yet. And I know a lot of people, some of which actually downloaded something at some time.

How is it a misconception that pirating is copying or taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's exactly what it is.

Again you are yourself using blanket statements, there is no one out there sitting in their volcano lair, steep-ling their fingers and laughing manically about all the games they pirated today. Normal people, like you mentioned, are pirating games and hurting the honest gamers who keep the industry afloat by actually paying for games.

Despite his wording the poster has every right to be 'holier than thou' if he pays for his games. It immediately makes him a better person from a moral standpoint than a pirate.

so because of ONE minor factor in his life he is better than all who chose differently for all you know this person is an abusive spouse or a white supremacist without all the facts of a person you can't really tell how "good" or "evil" they are. listen no matter how good you are a holier than thou attitude is a bad one because it causes a negative reaction from people negative is bad and bad is "evil" so a holier than thou attitude is an evil attitude.
and what of people like me who pirate games as demos before purchase so far i've pirated about 15 games for a weekend and i bought 3 of them the others i deleted and never repirated again because they were not games i enjoyed playing am i "evil" or "immoral" for making sure i get my moneys worth (i will admit i am probably in the minority of pirates but hey i am what i am and i'm not the only one).