Jimquisition: When Piracy Becomes Theft
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
People who pay for Adobe make me so sad.Lono Shrugged said:
I bought that Software years back and it crashes like a mofo. I went to college to use a revision that was 2 full numbers up and it STILL CRASHED LIKE A MOFO.
Worse still they haven't invented any kind of auto save yet.
REALLY?! It's hundreds of dollars for the cheaperst version, how the hell is office surpassing this product?! I got office for free just by working at Best Buy...
I can't stand adobe, they are so lazy and seem to think a few new filters will make up for a level of stability that cannot justify the price tag.
As for the video, I do agree those people are assholes. WoG was quite fun, bought it twice. Since it wasn't cross platform
.
Piracy is theft, simply because you take a game/video/cd without paying for it. You are using the service that they provided and you are not paying for it. I don't care how you spin it, you are pirating.FelixG said:
You are a pedophile burglar, if you pirate games.
Thanks for that term Jim, I am going to be using it a lot.
There isn't a very coherent argument here for why piracy is theft under some circumstances. There's a (good) argument for why piracy of a certain sort is bad, but that doesn't make it theft. It may be as bad as theft, but it's not actually theft.
This isn't just a legalistic point. Having excised the unhelpful terminology of stealing from the piracy debate there's no reason to drag it back in. Sometimes piracy is bad, sometimes it's not; but it's never stealing, and calling it that only serves to confuse the issue.
This isn't just a legalistic point. Having excised the unhelpful terminology of stealing from the piracy debate there's no reason to drag it back in. Sometimes piracy is bad, sometimes it's not; but it's never stealing, and calling it that only serves to confuse the issue.
I use it professionally, paid for it and it has paid for itself many times over. Most (if not all) Adobe programs have a programmable auto-save function going back to at least CS2. So that problem is fixed. Premiere Pro CS 5 has added native support for DSLR cameras which is a fucking godsend if you shoot DSLR and I know Final Cut Pro trainers looking to swap over. I make a living thanks to Adobe's software line and yeah it's not without bugs and problems but it's an amazing program for people in video production and I would be pretty jobless without it.theultimateend said:People who pay for Adobe make me so sad.Lono Shrugged said:
I bought that Software years back and it crashes like a mofo. I went to college to use a revision that was 2 full numbers up and it STILL CRASHED LIKE A MOFO.
Worse still they haven't invented any kind of auto save yet.
REALLY?! It's hundreds of dollars for the cheaperst version, how the hell is office surpassing this product?! I got office for free just by working at Best Buy...
I can't stand adobe, they are so lazy and seem to think a few new filters will make up for a level of stability that cannot justify the price tag.
As for the video, I do agree those people are assholes. WoG was quite fun, bought it twice. Since it wasn't cross platform
Jim, perhaps you should take the Oprah approach; become the most powerful person via your charisma and influence, and not be constrained by government politics.
I agree with the sentiment, but I don't think it's a good idea to draw lines. What makes a game "indie", "cheap", or "consumer-friendly" enough to warrant protection from piracy?
Further, what makes a game "mainstream", "expensive", or "consumer-unfriendly" enough to warrant piracy?
Who defines those boundaries?
I view it like anything else:
If you object to a product for any reason; quality, production source, price, "consumer-friendliness", content, or anything else: don't buy it. The end.
You have no inherent "right" to consume it. There is no justification for consuming it without purchasing it, and it doesn't matter if you call it "Piracy", "Theft", "Copyright Infringement", or "Pedophile Burglary".
I agree with the sentiment, but I don't think it's a good idea to draw lines. What makes a game "indie", "cheap", or "consumer-friendly" enough to warrant protection from piracy?
Further, what makes a game "mainstream", "expensive", or "consumer-unfriendly" enough to warrant piracy?
Who defines those boundaries?
I view it like anything else:
If you object to a product for any reason; quality, production source, price, "consumer-friendliness", content, or anything else: don't buy it. The end.
You have no inherent "right" to consume it. There is no justification for consuming it without purchasing it, and it doesn't matter if you call it "Piracy", "Theft", "Copyright Infringement", or "Pedophile Burglary".
Did anyone else think he would do a video about people selling pirated software for their own profit in other countries?
I'd vote for a jim sterling presidency, if just for the accent alone.
Then again, I voted for cthulu in the last election, so i might not be the best supporter.
Then again, I voted for cthulu in the last election, so i might not be the best supporter.
That's because nobody in those other discussions are trying to say that it literally means a property crime.lord.jeff said:
If I condemned people who 'steal a kiss' as being completely equivalent to someone who smashes into a candy store and runs off with bags of Hershey's Kisses, then I should hope someone would say say 'Technically, that's not theft. It just means to sneak up on your lover and give them a smooch.', because it's important that people realize the distinction.
'Piracy' discussions are the only time that people genuinely equivocate those two meanings, forcing people to have to explain that they're not the same thing.
I admit i once pirated indie but I felt bad and bought them cause they were so damn good and was on steam so cost sweet FA, now I don't waste the bandwidth pirating as indie games are of such high caliber I skip any chance for the guilt and just buy them (currently loving Trine 2). Ubisoft though can go die in a hole for always online DRM and EA for its obsession with online passes. What annoys me most is dedicated multiplayer games though where I have to buy a copy for each member of my family, when they cost $40+ this quickly becomes very expensive and unaffordable.
Sweet new intro!
I agree with you, but taking the word Pedophile out of context like that is not cool.
Seriously, think of a small child that has been sexually abused and is scarred for life. Is that equivalent to you to a financial matter? If yes, that's a sad materialist sentiment you have... If so think again, and think hard.
I agree with you, but taking the word Pedophile out of context like that is not cool.
Seriously, think of a small child that has been sexually abused and is scarred for life. Is that equivalent to you to a financial matter? If yes, that's a sad materialist sentiment you have... If so think again, and think hard.
I both disagree and agree with Jim this time. I agree with the idea that it might be legally considered copyright infringement, but calling it theft isn't really wrong because that's basically what's going on. Terminology doesn't really matter. In this case it really just makes it sound more complex then it is; a large percentage of the group just downloads the cracks to play games for free instead of paying for them.
What I disagree is that it only applies to indie games without DRM. Even just indie games in general. DRM isn't an excuse to pirate to me. Yes, indie games are cheaper and normally have small development teams that need to get money to, you know, eat. People pirating the Humble Bundles are especially guilty of taking advantage of situations.
But how is that different then AAA games? The cost of the games is higher, but the number of people working on it and time is takes normally is too. That just means there are more people who's financial future rely on the game selling well. There are exceptions of course. The big picture is what I'm talking about though. Larger games need to sell just as much as smaller ones to keep the people making them employed. It's not like the money for more games just appears.
And not liking the publisher isn't an excuse either. I don't like EA. I think they only make game companies worse overall. But that doesn't mean pirating Mass Effect 3, which has multiple teams working on it and represents a lot of money, is suddenly alright. Mass Effect 3 will still sell like hotcakes. Mainly because it's a series a lot of people know and it's being released on every major console that could possibly handle it. But that isn't the case for some games.
I don't know. I just felt like saying something because I'm bored. It's pointless in the end because people who do it will continue thinking what they're doing isn't wrong and people who are adamant it is won't change their mind. So meh.
What I disagree is that it only applies to indie games without DRM. Even just indie games in general. DRM isn't an excuse to pirate to me. Yes, indie games are cheaper and normally have small development teams that need to get money to, you know, eat. People pirating the Humble Bundles are especially guilty of taking advantage of situations.
But how is that different then AAA games? The cost of the games is higher, but the number of people working on it and time is takes normally is too. That just means there are more people who's financial future rely on the game selling well. There are exceptions of course. The big picture is what I'm talking about though. Larger games need to sell just as much as smaller ones to keep the people making them employed. It's not like the money for more games just appears.
And not liking the publisher isn't an excuse either. I don't like EA. I think they only make game companies worse overall. But that doesn't mean pirating Mass Effect 3, which has multiple teams working on it and represents a lot of money, is suddenly alright. Mass Effect 3 will still sell like hotcakes. Mainly because it's a series a lot of people know and it's being released on every major console that could possibly handle it. But that isn't the case for some games.
I don't know. I just felt like saying something because I'm bored. It's pointless in the end because people who do it will continue thinking what they're doing isn't wrong and people who are adamant it is won't change their mind. So meh.
All these people saying that "piracy isn't theft" because it's not actually stealing anything just come across as ignorant pedophile burglars to me. If you do a runner on a taxi, or if you don't pay for a trip to the doctor, you aren't really stealing anything either, just their time. But that time is still worth something- these people need to be paid for providing a service.
These indi developers are people who are giving up their time, usually hundreds if not thousands of manhours to create games. You can steal services just as much as you can steal an object.
These indi developers are people who are giving up their time, usually hundreds if not thousands of manhours to create games. You can steal services just as much as you can steal an object.
Here's an opinion sandwich. Idiots are the breadrankfx said:
The actual debate is the meat and cheese there in the middle #1: Copying is not theft, therefore copying is fine! <-- Wrong. The way you define 'theft' doesn't change whether something is right or wrong.
#2: Copying is or is not theft but the semantics don't affect the morality of copying. Copying is still wrong even if it's not theft. <-- Tasty debate goodness
#3: Copying is or is not theft but the semantics don't affect the morality of copying. Copying is still fine even if people choose to use the word 'theft' to describe it. <-- Tasty debate goodness
#4: Copying is theft, therefore copying is evil! <-- Wrong. The way you define 'theft' doesn't change whether something is right or wrong.
People who say, "I can just pirate it" have no fucking clue how much of an asshole they are being.