The piracy debate isn't worth all the long winded comments its getting. Here's a simple idea: I paid for a game. You did not pay for the game. We both have identical copies of the game. Piracy is wrong.
Investigators Politely Ask Black Ops Pirates to Quit
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
I myself care about the justifications. I know the industry does OK, even with piracy. I also know how to download illegal copies of things and could do so if I wanted to. The thing is, I think it's wrong.Signa said:
If there is something I wouldn't buy for full price in the first place, I won't buy it. That simple. If I find it mildly interesting, I'll wait for price drops. I pay as much money as I find it necessary. If I don't find it necessary to pay, then I guess I don't need the product.
And on the lack of trust: haven't we given them reason not to trust us? I mean the fact that illegal copies exist is proof that not everyone is worth their trust. The easiest way to protect your product is by putting the protection on all the products. The protection may be plain stupid and unfair, but if they feel that they need it, chances are that they do.
I do agree that not all people who download pirated copies (I think pirate refers to someone actually spreading the stuff. Not sure though) are scum. I just sided with that opinion more. I believe that the act itself is not justifiable.
You had a great post but I have one nitpick. You can compete with free. Imagine all the hubbub about filesharing music. This didn't make the demand for music go to zero and artists have learned that with those extra little dollars, they can charge more in ticket sales. Furthermore, the Apple store is still making money in music. It's just that most of the money is going to the independent artists as music has diversified for the first time in US history.Signa said:
Oh, and there's a Video [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4VsTm3TPj4] on how to compete with free.
Hopefully I covered most of my counterpoints in my other response to you, but this part I take issue with still. I'm of the mind that just because it's illegal doesn't make it wrong. It's illegal for gays to be married, but does that make it wrong? It used to be legal to discriminate minorities, but did that make it right? You can't base your moral code around what others decided. They could have had an agenda that would have been forgotten decades after the law was written.DVSAurion said:
In dealing with matters of morality over legality, I look for ways the action harms or inconveniences others. Obviously killing and stealing removes life and valuables from another, speeding is dangerous to yourself and others on the road, and leaving dangerous objects around for others to hurt themselves on is gross negligence. But how can you prove significant damages with piracy? All those hundreds of thousands of downloads for the new game that just came out doesn't mean that those pirates wanted to buy it and then changed their mind when they saw the "free price tag" on it. It's because that free price tag is there that the game is being pirated, not because they really really want it.
If there was some way to prove that even 30% of those downloads are truly lost sales, then I'd side with you in its legality/morality. As I see it now, it's less than 10%, probably closer to 2%. As I said in my other response, I know some pirates who buy the stuff they like and just screw around briefly with the rest they don't. No point in wasting money (or time in the case of the pirated games) if it isn't worth it.
Lastly, I'd like to say I think it should be illegal to download things, just as it is. The problem I have with the law is that it is dictating morality and not actually doing anything else except allowing people with ungodly amounts of money sue people who just want to keep up with pop culture without impacting their wallet.
What I want to see happen is instead of enforcing this law, they just educate people on the importance of purchasing things instead of merely downloading them. That way people who download still do, but if they liked a product, they will still understand why they need to buy it. Content providers can keep doing what they do so that those games and movies that are crap can still be crap, but those few consumers who loved it can still buy it. Nothing will change for anyone, except that 2% will drop to 1%, which means more money for the content providers. Win-win for everyone.
PS: I deleted it because I wasn't going to touch on it, but you said that piracy does matter. You then made a valid point saying that if everyone downloaded, no one would get any new content. I won't challenge that, but has it happened yet, or do you at least see a trend heading that way? I said in another post that content industries have been crying for decades every time a new tech comes out that makes them lose control of distribution, yet they are still here, alive and kicking and making record profits. This says to me that your point is probably moot because apparently this sky has been falling for a long time and we still haven't hit Armageddon. Trust me, piracy doesn't matter while people are still buying the good products that everyone still makes.
Now I leave you with Mr Satoru Iwata of Nintendo [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-10-08-nintendo-piracy-not-behind-poor-sales]. I think I'm done with this conversation. Thank you because it's been stimulating, but I'm sick of sitting and typing this much. Until next time
I just said I was done with a long conversation and yet here I am again, so I'll keep it short. While I agree with what you said here, it starting to look to me that all the devs are starting to become like Moop in Southpark. "Why make music if people are going to steal it?" It certainly is easier to not make something than it is to make it.theantioch said:
I'll be fair and only comment on one thing, since I myself am getting sick of this too.Signa said:
That statement I made earlier wasn't meant to be realistic. It was an argument for my opinion on the subject. Have you heard of Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative? Basic stuff in moral philosophy:
"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
So if I were to download shit, I would have to ask myself, should everyone download shit? I think the obvious answer is no.
Thanks. I'm quite passionate about how my content is handled from all steps from production to my living room (which is my bedroom since I'm a live-at-home loserGindil said:
). This article that spawned all this pleases me because it shows respect that I didn't think Activision had in them. So much respect that I question how much Activision had to do with it, since it probably was just the investigators they hired being far more compassionate and awesome than Acti realized they would be.
GAR! I can't stop touching this! (that's what she said)DVSAurion said:
But what if you changed that to "If I download shit, but bought the stuff I loved, should everyone else do the same?" That's what I was getting at with the "education" bit of my other post. If people conduct themselves fairly, then no harm will come to anyone. It just would be hard to make a law saying you need to buy the things you liked, because the moment some one is charged with not buying something they liked, all they'd have to say is "meh, it wasn't that good."
That's why I discount the illegal downloading law because it can't be written fairly, and is only used to punish those... GAH! we're comming around full circle! Make it stoooooop!
Once again, I'm thankful for our conversation. I'm putting down my laptop now. See you later.
Gene Simmons also has enough money to get him anything he wants. I don't condemn piracy simply due to what all the businesses do. They abuse copyright laws and if they have an excuse they'll take you for everything you got. And of course I'm always fed this bull shit on how two wrongs don't make a right. Boy, that logic is fucking stupid. It's through that logic that we continue to get screwed over.
And on topic to Gene Simmons considering pirates the greatest scum of the world -
Dude, the music fucking business is far worse! Why, I recall the time John Fogherty had a lawsuit set up against him for 'plagiarizing him self.'
So basically, these fuckers let a musician - someone with talent unlike them selves - make them money and then they try and get even more money from the said musician, now that's pathetic.
So in a technical sense I guess John Fogherty is a pirate. . . weird.
Piracy, if the businesses ain't gonna play fair then the consumers shouldn't either. It's just that simple. That aside, I'm feeling incredibly mixed feelings with this article.
Up until about a week ago I found blizzard awesome until they pulled that 88 million bull shit and up until today I hated activision.
As opposed to punishing the pirates activision is more focused on deterring them, and I can respect that 100%. Meanwhile my perception of blizzard as of now is a greedy corporation that is trying to exploit all that they can from a guy who simply doesn't have that money.
It's especially odd because activision is involved with blizzard, I guess it all depends on the branch of the corporation and how they deal with it.
And on topic to Gene Simmons considering pirates the greatest scum of the world -
Dude, the music fucking business is far worse! Why, I recall the time John Fogherty had a lawsuit set up against him for 'plagiarizing him self.'
So basically, these fuckers let a musician - someone with talent unlike them selves - make them money and then they try and get even more money from the said musician, now that's pathetic.
So in a technical sense I guess John Fogherty is a pirate. . . weird.
Piracy, if the businesses ain't gonna play fair then the consumers shouldn't either. It's just that simple. That aside, I'm feeling incredibly mixed feelings with this article.
Up until about a week ago I found blizzard awesome until they pulled that 88 million bull shit and up until today I hated activision.
As opposed to punishing the pirates activision is more focused on deterring them, and I can respect that 100%. Meanwhile my perception of blizzard as of now is a greedy corporation that is trying to exploit all that they can from a guy who simply doesn't have that money.
It's especially odd because activision is involved with blizzard, I guess it all depends on the branch of the corporation and how they deal with it.
well then, I suppose it's okay for me to walk into walMart and take a copy of New Vegas without paying for it because WalMart is gonna make money anyway.Gindil said:
Don't try and justify piracy, there is no moral highground. If you're that broke and need entertainment, go to a library. They share books all day for free.
Actually, you don't. [http://xkcd.com/357/]
OT: It's nice to see people taking a softer approach to this sort of things though.
No! They will tell Mom, and Mom will tell Dad, and Dad will say "Not now, I just got home from work!"Puddle Jumper said:
