Lawyer Destroys Arguments for Game Piracy

[Korten12]

While I don't support things like SOPA or DRM, I see why Piracy can be considered a loss.

Lets say to develop the game and get it out costs 6 million dollars. To effectivly make a profit, the game would need to sell 100,000 (Just using this number, whether or not it's alot depends but it doesn't matter for the sake of the arguement.)

The game goes on sale for $60 and sells around 70,000 copies, meaning the company made no profit in making and selling the game. But the game was pirated, 40,000 times and only a couple of them actually bought the game.

So yes, PIRACY does make it so the developer is losing money because if the game doesn't sell to break even, they're losing money. Which means they can't pay their employes.

(Note: Quality doens't matter, because it has been shown the quality of the game has no impact on amount of times pirated.)

(2nd Note: Neither do I believe either that the gaming industry is being killed by piracy.)

 

[Smackerlacker]

Theft is when you pay $60 for a game, only to find out that it won't run properly on your computer because the publisher shoved it out the door six months early. It's well and good for people to cry foul and say that gamers are stealing from publishers, but publishers steal from gamers all the time and no one is trying to prosecute them.
Equality is the basis of a legal system. If it's illegal for me to steal, it has to be illegal for everyone. Until it is, I'll do what I like, and show my middle finger to anyone who wants to ***** about it.

 

[Sud0_x]

Personally I just buy all my games on Steam. Seriously, I rarely pay more then 10 bucks for a game and I'm happy with that. I also avoid most triple A titles. If a game has annoying DRM, I don't buy it.

Basically the only games I used to pirate was Chronotrigger and Secret of Mana, but as I have the first one on DS now, and hopefully the second will get a similar release.

Heck even some of my favorite sega games can be bought on steam for a 1-2 dollars us, and I own them for all time now.

I'm cool with that, I wouldn't mind another type of Steam service. In fact a company is more likely to allist a purchase for me if I can redownload a digital copy of said product on a new machine at a later date. Kind of like Blizzard's Battle.net system. (I refuse to use Origin because of all the spyware and other crazy shit that is in that)

Ancient Chinese Proverb - "All things come to the man who waits for the steam holiday sales"

Just spit coffee everywhere. Thanks a lot, pal!

 

[ResonanceSD]

While I don't support things like SOPA or DRM, I see why Piracy can be considered a loss.

Lets say to develop the game and get it out costs 6 million dollars. To effectivly make a profit, the game would need to sell 100,000 (Just using this number, whether or not it's alot depends but it doesn't matter for the sake of the arguement.)

The game goes on sale for $60 and sells around 70,000 copies, meaning the company made no profit in making and selling the game. But the game was pirated, 40,000 times and only a couple of them actually bought the game.

So yes, PIRACY does make it so the developer is losing money because if the game doesn't sell to break even, they're losing money. Which means they can't pay their employes.

(Note: Quality doens't matter, because it has been shown the quality of the game has no impact on amount of times pirated.)

(2nd Note: Neither do I believe either that the gaming industry is being killed by piracy.)

I think you're the first person in 10 pages to mention that the industry not getting money that it's entitled to is a loss. Well done, sir.

Until it is, I'll do what I like, and show my middle finger to anyone who wants to ***** about it.

I hear there's this awesome new thing called reading system requirements and doing some research.

 

[Anti Nudist Cupcake]

"I only pirate games because of DRM hurr durr derp"

You do know you can still buy the game and CRACK it, right? Thus supporting the developer and not having to deal with the drm?

 

[Korten12]

I think you're the first person in 10 pages to mention that the industry not getting money that it's entitled to is a loss. Well done, sir.

Wait are you being sarcastic, sorry, when it comes to the Escapist, they're a bit touchy on this subject matter.

 

[Sud0_x]

+0 is not loss. Loss indicates a negative, in other words, cost. They, and publisher apologists, use the word "loss" instead of "less profit than we are entitled to/should have made" because it sounds more dramatic and less scummy.

By the logic of "Not buying = deprived of profit = loss" every single person who didn't buy the game, not just the ones that pirated it, is making them lose money.

And lets not forget, in the eyes of these people, buying used is just as bad as piracy. So if you bought a used game in the past 30 years, you're a pirate in their eyes. But keep defending the same people who'd spit on you in the street given the chance if it helps you sleep at night.

What the hell is this crap? Really? You're justifying piracy by saying it's just as bad as not buying the game?
It's not a +0. It's a -1. It's a LOST SALE. Not because there's a finite amount of digital copies that can be distributed, but because somebody is using your product, and you're not getting your due. That's income that should have come in, but it hasn't. And now it won't.
It's still a lost sale. It's still theft. And you're still a criminal.

I'm not defending the publishers. No. I'm defending the God damned law. I don't care how mistreated you feel by the big bad corporations. If you really want to suffer to fight back, stop buying their games, and go outside and play. You don't need these games. You WANT them. But you're not prepared to give the bad guys their due, so please tell me one thing.

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.

First off, it doesn't look at all like the guy was trying to justify piracy.

Second, please read the post you quoted again.
He's just arguing semantics, like most people posting in the thread.
He's doing this because, while it may not seem like it, it is an important distinction to make. He even used examples to help you.

The featured article did a good enough job of skirting around the truth, there's really no need to follow suit.
Why are you attacking the guy? Wow, that was rather crass.
Anything to base your accusations on?

 

[ZephrC]

Bleh. I hate these idiotic false dichotomies that make up our feeble attempts at debate.

It's entirely possible to be against piracy while also thinking that most of the things being done in an attempt to fight it are stupid, draconian and perhaps worst of all simply counter-productive.

Frankly, I think the bullshit nonsense being spewed by the likes of Activision and EA is causing more piracy than it is preventing, and we'd simply be better off without it. Not because piracy is a-okay totally cool, but because piracy is bad, and our dysfunctional obsession with trying to make sure nobody gets away with anything ever is actually making the problem worse.

Of course, I honestly don't think that problem is limited to just video games, but nobody wants to hear it. Bleh.

 

[direkiller]

snip

Nice to see you could somehow manage to tie up a phone line long enough to download games in 1999.

little history lesson P2p sites did not pop up till the end of the dial up age. Hard drives were just too tiny most of the information was stored on the disk(i have Empire earth installed on my computer right now the thing takes up a few megabites but needs the disk to play). So it was more copying of physical media then down loading.

 

[ResonanceSD]

I think you're the first person in 10 pages to mention that the industry not getting money that it's entitled to is a loss. Well done, sir.

Wait are you being sarcastic, sorry, when it comes to the Escapist, they're a bit touchy on this subject matter.

Nope, perfectly serious. You were correct.

 

[xvbones]

Please. Don't equate it with actual, physical theft. Piracy is piracy, it doesn't remove the original product.

When you own something through illegal or legally sketchy means for free that has an actual cash value, you have stolen that thing.

Do you seriously think intellectual property cannot be stolen?

Do you have any idea how many lawyers would absolutely love to get paid lots and lots of money to explain to you how incorrect that is?

Piracy is Piracy eh? let's do a simple google search, see if we can't find the definition of piracy:

Definition of PIRACY
1: an act of robbery on the high seas; also : an act resembling such robbery
2: robbery on the high seas
3: the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright

In other words;
THEFT.

And the argument 'there was no physical object to remove' is nothing more than extremely shaky rationalization.

But you know, whatever helps you sleep at night.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Please. Don't equate it with actual, physical theft. Piracy is piracy, it doesn't remove the original product.

When you own something through illegal or legally sketchy means for free that has an actual cash value, you have stolen that thing.

Do you seriously think intellectual property cannot be stolen?

Do you have any idea how many lawyers would absolutely love to get paid lots and lots of money to explain to you how incorrect that is?

Piracy is Piracy eh? let's do a simple google search, see if we can't find the definition of piracy:

Definition of PIRACY
1: an act of robbery on the high seas; also : an act resembling such robbery
2: robbery on the high seas
3: the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright

In other words;
THEFT.

And the argument 'there was no physical object to remove' is nothing more than extremely shaky rationalization.

But you know, whatever helps you sleep at night.

Apologists gonna apologize. Piracy is a crime. Splitting hairs like this helps no one. And hilariously enough, the fine is ENORMOUS for civil cases like these. Rationalising like this still doesn't excuse anything, and the faster people realise this, the faster everyone can move to the next stage of dialogue.


a crime is a crime

 

[MaximumCrux]

I find it disgusting to witness the intellectual gymnastics some people are able to perform to justify what is, if not technically then at least morally, theft. I've known a few pirates but at least they had the honesty to admit what they were doing was morally wrong, rather than casting themselves as some kind of modern day revolutionaries taking it to the big corporations.

Enough of this nonsense please.

Pay for your games people.

 

[thahat]

but in the meantime it means a financial loss for the developer

NO, it does not. That logic is incredibly erroneous.

sorry he's right.
there is a difference on if you pay 60 bucks now or 60 bucks in half a years time.
they effect: liquidity of business, and also, return on investment(specifically, interest )

net effect: lower liquidity means the banks are less likely to borrow you money, or against a higher rate, ( e.g. you'd rather borrow money to people who dont actualy NEED it )

interest: half a year @ say 2.5% times ( 1.000.000*60 //60mil// = 1.500.000 otherwise know as one and a half million bucks. the interest rate saving by higher liquidity will add onother 500k til a mil to this figure.

 

[thahat]

Please. Don't equate it with actual, physical theft. Piracy is piracy, it doesn't remove the original product.

When you own something through illegal or legally sketchy means for free that has an actual cash value, you have stolen that thing.

Do you seriously think intellectual property cannot be stolen?

Do you have any idea how many lawyers would absolutely love to get paid lots and lots of money to explain to you how incorrect that is?

Piracy is Piracy eh? let's do a simple google search, see if we can't find the definition of piracy:

Definition of PIRACY
1: an act of robbery on the high seas; also : an act resembling such robbery
2: robbery on the high seas
3: the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright

In other words;
THEFT.

And the argument 'there was no physical object to remove' is nothing more than extremely shaky rationalization.

But you know, whatever helps you sleep at night.

I think you'll find that lawyers would not agree with you. Piracy is unequivocally not theft, not be reason of the property being intangible, but because there is no deprivation of the property which is an essential element of theft. The law is very clear on this point in the UK and the US.

How do you think that definition helps you? The only relevant branch of that definition is the third one, and that says nothing about theft at all. Also writing THEFT in bold doesn't make you right.

hey someone payed attention in law class ( or is just clever, one of both, good going sir or madam! )

if you want to poke him some more: theft can only apply when there has been a TRANSFER of goods(in abstract from, so real stuff and faerydust//ideas). from a person to a person ( legal or real ) copying, is not as per say a transfer. (unless the publisher itsself copies his own game and you then ctl-x it off his harddrive XD )

 

[TechNoFear]

Stealing, defrauding and embezzlement are different from causing loss in potential revenue.

Loss of potential revenue is still a loss, only how great a loss is up for debate.

A Farmer's crop is only potential income because they do not know the actual yield, quality or market price at harvest time.

Yet if the crop gets destroyed before harvest the farmer still suffers an actual loss.

You cannot compare the theft of intellectual property with the act of stealing a physical good.

Your bank balance is not a pile of actual money in a bank vault (so is not a physical good), but is it any different if it gets stolen?

If your employer does not pay you for your labor, what physical good has he stolen from you?

Clearly in the modern world more things have tangible value than just physical goods.

If you steal "Intellectual Property" nothing of value to the creator of the property has been lost.

Except the time, labor and inspiration that went into creating the IP.

 

[Aeshi]

Arguably, certain pirates aren't even doing that.
Like I said, not every pirated copy is a lost sale.
Do you really think that an obscure game like Witcher 2 would have sold over 2 million copies if piracy didn't exist? Don't be ridiculous.

Care to elaborate?

You say that if I want something, I pay for it. If I genuinely don't want it, there would be no reason to pirate it?
That makes zero sense.
Stop thinking in black and white. It's not either "I want it enough to pay for it" or "I have no intention of playing that game at all"
You might want it, but not enough to dish out 50 dollars on a half-assed game.

That's why little things called "buying used" and "wait till the price goes down/there's a sale" exist.

You cannot compare the theft of intellectual property with the act of stealing a physical good.
How you define stealing is completely fucking irrelevant.
If you steal a physical good, that good is no longer available to the original owner. Thus, there is real monetary loss to the previous owner.
If you steal "Intellectual Property" nothing of value to the creator of the property has been lost.
The only thing that one could argue has been lost, is potential revenue. That idea itself stands on shaky ground.
As I have previously stated, not every pirated copy means a real lost sale.

Under that logic forgery and counterfeiting would both be fine. (see also TechNoFear's post above)

Can you believe that? Holy shit right?
Some pirates actually buy games that they think are worth the money.
They want to support the publishers.
They just can't afford to spend 50 dollars on every game they ever wanted to play.

"Some" people have won the lottery or survived plane crashes, doesn't make them a majority.

And if you can't afford a game then maybe you could just, you know, not buy/pirate it, but I suppose to today's average gamer taking that route would mean letting "THE MAN" win (plus they wouldn't get those free games they feel they're entitled to.)

You also have to understand that the corporations are not saints.
They DO NOT GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE CONSUMER.
They will fuck over their customers any day for an increase in revenue.

And the Consumers will/would do the same if they are/were given even the possibility of a chance. There are "some" people on this very forum who would gladly see game developers/publishers/both starve to death for the "crime" of wanting to stop piracy/make money.

 

[Dastardly]

Jesus, did you even read my post?

See, now you're just yelling the same thing over and over, as though saying it "madder" gives it more weight. You're not reading and responding, you're getting the vague sense of which "side" of the argument a person is on, and then spewing forth every argument you have against what you perceive that "side" to think. And hey, that's fine... unless you're trying to pretend it's a "reply."

 

[kebab4you]

"because the hackers can just mask their IP address"

Haven't we started to use the word hacker just a bit to loosely(seeing how pirating doesn't involve any kind of "hacking")? o_o

 

[Eventidal]

Guess what I'm doing?
Yup, coming out of the woodwork to defend the little piracy I do engage in.

The only reason I do it is because the developers have not given me any other option. Basically, my only other choice aside from downloading the game illegally is to go out, FIND the old system (we're talking N64 (with the POS controllers I can't even arse myself to use when I have access to the actual system), SNES, NES, GBA) and buy it along with the controllers and game(s) I want. Simply not happening, for one, because I'm far too poor to be able to afford such frivolity, and for two, because it's super inconvenient. And I could be wrong, but does Nintendo or game developers even make money off these old junkers anymore? Even if a store had a new SNES in stock, I could buy it and Nintendo wouldn't see a dime of that sale because they already sold the system to the store. Nintendo no longer makes those systems now (AFAIK) so there's nothing for them to lose.

The obvious answer is the Virtual Console. And I agree- that's a great idea. I can't tell you how much I want to support Hudson in bringing Bomberman 64 and Second Attack onto a platform that won't annihilate my left thumb while simultaneously jiggling and being unresponsive. I may not have a lot of money to drop on games anymore, but there are a lot of old games I've owned and played before (and some I never played) that I'd really like to go back to. And nobody is working to bring them back. Thus, the only decently-convenient way for a modern gamer to go back and revisit the 2+ generations ago age is through emulators.

I've heard this one before somewhere and I think it applies oh-so-well here. If you want to stop piracy, the first step is to make your game more available than the pirates do. When it's easier to go torrent a cracked version of a major game release than it is to go to their website, download their terrible, required PC program, set up a new account, enter in all your information, purchase the game, jump through hoops to activate online multiplayer, etc... obviously the developer is doing something wrong. That's not MY case particularly, since I've never downloaded anything but ROMs, usually of games I own/have owned, but it's a real issue that should be seriously looked into.
See, I only have two options. On one hand, there's the horribly inconvenient option which I not only can't afford, but refuse to go through the hassle of either way. On the other, there's the massively convenient method that allows me to play the games I want, where I want. I feel bad doing what I do, but what can I say? I continue to support these developers as much as I can afford in their modern endeavors, and I make it my personal goal not to download a game if I can potentially buy it. Hence, Virtual Console. Hence why I'm so UPSET that Nintendo has basically stopped supporting their own great classic game downloading service. It's a travesty, and they're losing a lot of potential easy sales. IMO, Virtual Console should be one of the biggest selling points of the Wii and 3DS. Nintendo should realize that and step up on making those services bigger and better.

I probably don't make a good case for piracy. I know I'm technically breaking the law. But morally I see no problem with what I personally do. Obviously I don't support piracy that might actually result in a loss of sales.