Lawyer Destroys Arguments for Game Piracy

[ResonanceSD]

Copyright infringement.not theft. However, still illegal. Not sure why everyone gets hung up on this point.

I think it's because some of us (myself included) see this as an important step from "how to stop piracy" to "how to exploit it". Basing this on the idea that piracy, while reprehensible in the extreme, is also inevitable.

Theft is directly harmful to whoever you're stealing from. Copyright infringement is, at best, indirectly so. And a creative publisher or developer could hypothetically build in ways to encourage pirates to take the leap of purchasing the game.

Sorry,why should the onus be on a content creator to take steps to prevent IP theft? If you want the experience offered, come up with the cash. Indirect harm to a business, is still harming a business. Your attempts to make the problem seem smaller than it is are getting ridiculous at this stage.

 

[Lyri]

No, it does not, partaking in a media without having bought it is not depriving a developer of profit.

Furthermore, the majority of media in the world, without "piracy" is used without being individually paid for.

Losing profit is something that happens when someone refuses to buy something. This is independent of piracy. Piracy is not the refusal to buy.

Saying something like "Yahztee said Skyward Sword is the worst Zelda game ever! Therefor I'm never buying it!" is depriving the developer of profit. Downloading an .iso off the internet is not.

What backwards world do you live in?
This "defence" of piracy is completely ridiculous and the only reason it's still around is because people are so biased.

First and foremost who said the ISO online has been paid for in the first place? There's no evidence to suggest that is the case, you're also in blatant disregard of copyright with sharing and distribution laws.
Already off to a water tight start here.

One person buying your work and then giving it out to everyone is not earning anybody profit. Take a generic game and say 10,000 people pirate it, only 2000 people purchase the game after downloading.
What then? Do we call that profit?
No. Eight thousand other individuals own that game without having paid a single penny for it.

Saying "Piracy isn't the refusal to buy" isn't a get out of jail free card in this scenario, it's more erroneous than the statement you originally quoted.
When do you buy it?
Do you download it and wait for prices to be slashed on the game or do you pick up a second hand copy?
Truth is you shouldn't be owning the game in the first place, even if your intent is to go and buy it. There are places to rent video games from, this "I was going to buy it, honest" excuse doesn't hold water.

 

[saregos]

Sorry,why should the onus be on a content creator to take steps to prevent IP theft? If you want the experience offered, come up with the cash. Indirect harm to a business, is still harming a business. Your attempts to make the problem seem smaller than it is are getting ridiculous at this stage.

Because, as sucky as it is, the content creators have been driven into a binary* choice -

1) Continue to lock games down, sue pirates, and yet watch piracy numbers continue to blossom.
2) Make an effort to connect with their fans, provide a reason to buy (for example, provide value above and beyond what the pirates do), and see what they can do to turn pirates and those who are exposed to the game through piracy into legitimate customers.

They've been trying #1 for quite a while now. I'd like to see them try #2.

*I lie, it's a trinary choice. 3) Sign onto SOPA, piss off techies (the main group that plays games, I'll point out) and destroy the internet as we know it. That *might* work. I doubt it, though.

Also, for the record, I'm not trying to minimize the problem. To the contrary, I'm quite concerned about the degree of piracy that's endemic currently. I'm just (again) pointing out that the current status quo of treating customers badly is precisely how we arrived at the current piracy numbers. So... why not try something different?

 

[ResonanceSD]

Sorry,why should the onus be on a content creator to take steps to prevent IP theft? If you want the experience offered, come up with the cash. Indirect harm to a business, is still harming a business. Your attempts to make the problem seem smaller than it is are getting ridiculous at this stage.

Because, as sucky as it is, the content creators have been driven into a binary* choice -

1) Continue to lock games down, sue pirates, and yet watch piracy numbers continue to blossom.
2) Make an effort to connect with their fans, provide a reason to buy (for example, provide value above and beyond what the pirates do), and see what they can do to turn pirates and those who are exposed to the game through piracy into legitimate customers.

They've been trying #1 for quite a while now. I'd like to see them try #2.

*I lie, it's a trinary choice. 3) Sign onto SOPA, piss off techies (the main group that plays games, I'll point out) and destroy the internet as we know it. That *might* work. I doubt it, though.

Also, for the record, I'm not trying to minimize the problem. To the contrary, I'm quite concerned about the degree of piracy that's endemic currently. I'm just (again) pointing out that the current status quo of treating customers badly is precisely how we arrived at the current piracy numbers. So... why not try something different?

The most prolific demographic of gamers is not 'techies'. Interesting side note, check out who supports sopa. The company I work for supports it, as we are in a industry directly affected by piracy. Its an excellent way to demonstrate how far people will go to protect their entitlements. You know, income they deserve.

 

[saregos]

The most prolific demographic of gamers is not 'techies'. Interesting side note, check out who supports sopa. The company I work for supports it, as we are in a industry directly affected by piracy. Its an excellent way to demonstrate how far people will go to protect their entitlements. You know, income they deserve.

Ok, so... you going to address any of my other points? And I'd appreciate evidence for the one point you did address.

As for SOPA: it's not a demonstration of protecting "income they deserve". Income they deserve would be the case if copyright had a reasonable term, and hadn't been retroactively extended in a blatant violation of the bargain copyright is supposed to represent.
Or if the DMCA weren't already so biased in favor of content holders. The only thing in the public's interest about the DMCA has always been the safe harbors - exactly that one part which SOPA is attempting to gut.
Or if every single study commissioned by the industries in support of SOPA weren't blatantly biased and false (to the point, in one case, of claiming that if a DVD costs $10, the distributor gets $7, and the publisher gets $2, that's $19), while there have been numerous studies that demonstrate that exceptions to copyright add far more value to the economy than copyright itself.
Or if the RIAA were actually a representative of the artists and didn't actively work to screw them over.
Or if this weren't simply a case of middle-men being faced with technological obsolescence. Nobody proposed litigation when cars put horse-buggy manufacturers out of work.
Or if it hadn't been shown, repeatedly, by pretty much everyone who understands the technology, that SOPA will cause massive harm to DNSSEC, create massive chilling effects on what's supposed to be free speech, and prevent pretty much any new internet startups.

It's a demonstration of "Income they feel entitled to". Which is amusing coming from people complaining about the entitlement culture of Pirates.

 

[Thyunda]

How can you look down on us 'apologists' when you're playing stolen games? No amount of rhetoric is going to escape that fact. 'Less profit than we are entitled to' is a more serious concern than "Corporations are evil and I am a revolutionary for stealing from them."
You're not a revolutionary.

Those rioters in London this summer? Taking advantage of the chaos to bag a load of free shit? You're no better than they are. Dirty pirates.

I'm not going to debate the merits of your post. Others have done that quite thoroughly, and with minimal effect.

I'd simply like to point out that, unless you have evidence for your assertion that Sylveria is a "dirty pirate" and has been "playing stolen games" (link it, please) the above statements fall under the technical definition of Libel.

Which... is illegal.

So, to clarify, you just broke the law in your post telling us how much you're

defending the God damned law.

Congratulations.

Clearly you didn't pay much attention to my response to the earlier post. I said I wasn't aiming exactly at the poster I was talking to, it was a response aimed at pirates in general.

Doesn't matter. Still libelous, as the initial post was aimed at a specific person. And if you were really aiming at "pirates in general"...

Escapist provides a wonderful edit button. Also, apologies work wonders. Since the fact remains that you DID libel Sylveria.

And now, you're providing excuses for why your illegal actions should be given a pass. Tell me, is your sense of irony going berserk right now? Because mine is...

I libelled nobody. Stop trying to be smart. Pirates are criminals. If Sylveria is a pirate, they are a criminal. If not, they have nothing to be upset over. Go home.

Depends which country you're talking about. If he's from the UK, then no, he's not a criminal even if he does pirate as it's only a civil offence not criminal.

Not if he was pirating racist material. That's a jail sentence that is.

 

[Gindil]

people's civil liberties.

So people have the right to take stuff without paying for it?

Where is the country that believes in these civil liberties, and how do I sign up for it?!

This is the single largest misnomer about piracy that anyone ever makes. You don't have to pay for a copy if it's not better in some way shape or form to what the publisher/developer/creator can offer.

Tell me, how do you explain the success of the Humble Indie Bundle? $1 million dollars and people still torrented it in places.

Louis CK - made money by being an awesome human being.

Just because someone doesn't pay for a product does not mean all won't pay. Oh, let's also remind you of why people might torrent Witcher 2.

On Steam, the 1.1 patch is 9.8 GB. Meanwhile, you can download the same 1.1 patch at 15MB. Which is preferable to download and update the game? Let's not forget that the pirated version of a game can have no DRM, making it superior. CD Projekt was doing well in their fight to piracy by competing against it. Now, all of their issues come off as hypocritical with this push for criminalizing possibly innocent people.

 

[JCBFGD]

My two cents: Piracy is theft (you get a product without buying it. How's that not theft??), and as such, should be a crime. I support non-invasive (i.e., not PIPA or SOPA) legislation to combat it. I also believe that, if you've bought a game but have lost the disc, or something similar, you have the right to pirate it. You already paid for it, now you're just making sure you get your money's worth. I also think it's meh (not okay, but not not okay) to pirate games from publishers/developers that you cannot in good conscience support. I'm that way with UbiSoft...buying their games would be worse than pirating them, in my book, so if I wanted a UbiSoft game, I'd pirate it (or, more likely, wait for them to stop using such unethical practises). And that sort of logic applies everywhere for me...it's okay to do bad things to bad people.

I'm sorry, but that just happens to be how I feel about it...what do you think? (Free cookies and internets for those who get the reference)

 

[Gindil]

My two cents: Piracy is theft (you get a product without buying it. How's that not theft??), and as such, should be a crime. I support non-invasive (i.e., not PIPA or SOPA) legislation to combat it. I also believe that, if you've bought a game but have lost the disc, or something similar, you have the right to pirate it. You already paid for it, now you're just making sure you get your money's worth. I also think it's meh (not okay, but not not okay) to pirate games from publishers/developers that you cannot in good conscience support. I'm that way with UbiSoft...buying their games would be worse than pirating them, in my book, so if I wanted a UbiSoft game, I'd pirate it (or, more likely, wait for them to stop using such unethical practises). And that sort of logic applies everywhere for me...it's okay to do bad things to bad people.

I'm sorry, but that just happens to be how I feel about it...what do you think? (Free cookies and internets for those who get the reference)

Like I asked above...

How can downloading a game that has the option of being given away for free be theft? If the Humble Indie Bundle shows anything, piracy gives a chance to make money even if some people don't buy the game.

 

[Grant Hobba]

[/quote]

Never heard of Steam, GOG.com, Gamers Gate, Direct2Drive and what not, have you?[/quote]


buying through downloading is not piracy. the argument is piracy; not buying ....

 

[ResonanceSD]

It's a demonstration of "Income they feel entitled to". Which is amusing coming from people complaining about the entitlement culture of Pirates.

Content creators and distributors are legally entitled to the money made from content. All of it.

Some twerp illegally obtaining said content without paying for it is not entitled to anything at all. Either you're being disingenuous or you seriously don't understand the position that content providers and creators are coming from.

 

[Grant Hobba]

[/quote]
Ha. As if developers need big publishers and distributors to stay in business. The industry is so clogged with identical big-budget titles, an obsession with graphics engines that need ungodly amounts of man-hours to program, and huge studios frothing with an absence of creative control, that it needs some cleaning out. Piracy is a refusal to pay for a game that's not worth the money. I'm sure there are people who only pirate their games, but they are in a minority, and are in no position to influence the market. Pirates are people who want to have their cake and eat it too; it's a bit greedy to pirate games you normally wouldn't buy, but it's also essentially a form of boycott against overpriced games. I would see it as beneficial if it ruined the current market.[/quote]

so stealing from a grocery store isn't stealing if you refuse to pay because the oranges aren't ripe enough?

and believe it or not... they do need distributors to sell their games otherwise how will they get sold? are you really that ridiculously stupid?

it is the same in any area of the retail industry.

Big suppliers like Nike and Adidas sell their products to businesses like Rebel Sport.

Without Rebel Sport buying those products. The Developers and makers of the aforementioned product; can not make money because they can't sell wholesale.

and if you actually didn't know that... wow.

 

[Skratt]

And now we are treated to the sounds of:

"It's not a lost sale, because they were never going to buy it anyway." (unverifiable ex-post-facto justification)

"OMFG, we are losing millions!" (unverifiable ex-post-facto justification for adding expensive DRM that does little if anything to preventing piracy)

People who steal software are thieves true enough, but there is no way to determine if a person who steals a game was going to buy it. The argument is complete conjecture either way. You can certainly postulate with some confidence that some may have purchased it eventually if they couldn't steal it so easily, but to count every download as a lost sale is disingenuous at best.

 

[Lunar Templar]

The notion that piracy does not equate to lost sales is just as erroneous. "Piracy might result in an eventual purchase of a game, but in the meantime it means a financial loss for the developer," Purewal said. "Sadly developers are not gamer banks, willing to effectively loan gamers money until we decide we like them enough to pay them."

how is it a loss if they buy it? I'm not getting where he's coming from here. they still got money for the game.

 

[Jingle Fett]

Fun fact: If it wasn't for piracy, there wouldn't be any gamers left in Latin America almost at all.

Just an observation.

Sadly....This is so true it's not even funny

 

[ResonanceSD]

My two cents: Piracy is theft (you get a product without buying it. How's that not theft??), and as such, should be a crime. I support non-invasive (i.e., not PIPA or SOPA) legislation to combat it. I also believe that, if you've bought a game but have lost the disc, or something similar, you have the right to pirate it. You already paid for it, now you're just making sure you get your money's worth. I also think it's meh (not okay, but not not okay) to pirate games from publishers/developers that you cannot in good conscience support. I'm that way with UbiSoft...buying their games would be worse than pirating them, in my book, so if I wanted a UbiSoft game, I'd pirate it (or, more likely, wait for them to stop using such unethical practises). And that sort of logic applies everywhere for me...it's okay to do bad things to bad people.

I'm sorry, but that just happens to be how I feel about it...what do you think? (Free cookies and internets for those who get the reference)

Like I asked above...

How can downloading a game that has the option of being given away for free be theft? If the Humble Indie Bundle shows anything, piracy gives a chance to make money even if some people don't buy the game.

All your example proves is that some people are beyond any sort of respect. Pirating a free game? Pirating, of all things, THE HUMBLE INDIE BUNDLE? They can't even make the excuse of "it was a big corporation naaaah". Indie developers this time. You know, the ones we like.