like piracy, or not?

[Some_weirdGuy]

what are your thoughts on the following:

buying second-hand games/movies/etc?
second hand means the developer sees no profit. Isn't this just like piracy?

borrowing games/movies/etc from a friend?
again, developer only gets 1 lot of profit when they'd otherwise get two or more sales.

borrowing games/movies/etc from a video store?
they rent out stuff to countless people who'd otherwise have to buy it from the creator.

(any others anyone else can think of)

So, are these like/just as bad as piracy?

 

[ZeZZZZevy]

what are your thoughts on the following:

buying second-hand games/movies/etc?
second hand means the developer sees no profit. Isn't this just like piracy?

borrowing games/movies/etc from a friend?
again, developer only gets 1 lot of profit when they'd otherwise get two or more sales.

borrowing games/movies/etc from a video store?
they rent out stuff to countless people who'd otherwise have to buy it from the creator.

(any others anyone else can think of)

So, are these like/just as bad as piracy?

1. no, because with piracy no one gets any money from it, whereas in this case the seller would

2. only one copy of the game/movie/etc. still exists, so it's still not the same (a lot of games have activation things now anyway, that can only be used once)

3. again, someone still gets the money here, and you eventually have to return the game/movie/etc. after the renting period ends

so, in summary, no

 

[kasperbbs]

Just no. Lets say you rented a car or borrowed a toaster, does that mean that you just stole from the companies that made them?

 

[little.09]

nothing changes for the creator in any of the cases there is still only one person playing one copy. When a game changes hands there is still only one person playing one copy. When a game is pirated that one copy can turn into hundreds of thousands, thats when a company loses alot of money

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

what are your thoughts on the following:

buying second-hand games/movies/etc?
second hand means the developer sees no profit. Isn't this just like piracy?

borrowing games/movies/etc from a friend?
again, developer only gets 1 lot of profit when they'd otherwise get two or more sales.

borrowing games/movies/etc from a video store?
they rent out stuff to countless people who'd otherwise have to buy it from the creator.

(any others anyone else can think of)

So, are these like/just as bad as piracy?

Might I recomend looking up the "First Sale Doctrine"?

No, no it is not as bad. It's safe and legal. So no.

EDIT: We don't give money to developers of couches when we sell them on Ebay, so I fail to see how used sales are "just as bad"

 

[GodofCider]

No.

This is akin to arguing that buying from a yard sale is an act of thievery.

 

[Coffinshaker]

I really don't get the 2nd hand game problem. it's not stealing. it's selling a used item. the company already got their money for it. the person buying it 2nd hand probably wouldn't pay full price, so it's not really money lost.

do movies or music have dlc? want to see the ending of that green lantern movie? well, you better sign in and enter your code! yeah, that won't happen.

thing is, game companies just got greedy and looked for a way to stick it to the little guy. if they really had an issue, they should get with the movie/music industry and make some bill to get passed so retailers would have to pay a small fee per sale of a used item. sadly, this would effect all sectors of retail and cause mass havoc to the economy. it'd give retailers lots of problems and raise the costs of used items. but whatever, no use worrying cause it wont happen.

though, if you want to fight the man a bit, you all should petition that used games (or anything used) should have no taxes on them. that's double taxation right there. not good. but what can ya do? throw all the games into the harbor? >\

 

[Scabadus]

I've borrowed games from friends before and if they're really good ones I've always bought them simply so I could play them after I've given my friend's copy back. If it's a quality game with good replay value, the developer gets my money.

For borrowing games and films from a dedicated service such as Blockbuster or LoveFilm, I assume those services have special licenses worked out with the game/film companies, they're not going to be able to buy ten disks and just rent them out to hundreds of people.

Buy second-hand games, that's the interesting one. Yes, I've done it a lot in the past (not so much right now, curse you Steam!) and while the system sucks, you as the consumer aren't doing anythign wrong. You pay less money and you don't get the shiny new packaging, sometimes the manual's a bit dog-eared, but again, less money. Money that was properly spend in a real game store (or on Amazon, whatever, I'm making a point here), it's not the customer's fault that the developer doesn't see any of that cash.

In fact, you know what? I bet that if one game store, one... what's the word, franchise? One brand of game store gave a small amount of their profit from their used games to that game's developer, I'd bet that a lot of gamers would switch to buying and selling their used games in that store, more than enough people to cancel out the tiny amount of money per sale the store's now loosing. Just because they could help out a little.

 

[Erana]

[quote="The Rules"
Similarly, posts including, advocating, or linking to illegal or adult material are a very quick way to end your time as part of The Escapist community. An example of these are:

Piracy[/quote]
Just thought I'd put this up here as a reminder.

That being said, borrowing or buying used is the transfer of a license.

Pirating games is the duplication of a single license.
The company may not profit from borrowing or second-hand sales, but they did distribute the property in the first place.
The fact that both of these methods deprive the developer of money is coincidence.

 

[Some_weirdGuy]

Just thought I'd put this up here as a reminder.

Lucky no ones promoting or posting links to piracy websites then.

----
ALso, just a note to everyone before they get to zealous, my opinion is they are all not as bad as piracy. I was just reminded of the subject recently and thought i'd make a topic around it.

Though I find second hand games, while not illegal, are still amoral. The business buys the game off someone for a fraction of the price, they then mark up the price (sometimes double or triple what they themselves paid the actual owner) and they're also cutting out the developer.

forget about the customer being in the right or wrong, the re-seller is in the one being dicky there. They're by all intents and purposes stealing from the developer, and scamming the buyers.

Its strange, games and stuff have these giant blocks of copyright text, saying that you're not allowed to profiteer off and/or redistribute their work, but second-hand stores are exempt from this?

(admittedly, I find price hikes on anything to be a scam. Buy something and ship it in, then sell it for double the price that was paid for the shipping and product itself. how is that fair?)

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

ALso, just a note to everyone before they get to zealous, my opinion is they are all not as bad as piracy. I was just reminded of the subject recently and thought i'd make a topic around it.

Though I find second hand games, while not illegal, are still amoral. The business buys the game off someone for a fraction of the price, they then mark up the price (sometimes double or triple what they themselves paid the actual owner) and they're also cutting out the developer.

forget about the customer being in the right or wrong, the re-seller is in the one being dicky there. They're by all intents and purposes stealing from the developer, and scamming the buyers.

Its strange, games and stuff have these giant blocks of copyright text, saying that you're not allowed to profiteer off and/or redistribute their work, but second-hand stores are exempt from this?

(admittedly, I find price hikes on anything to be a scam. Buy something and ship it in, then sell it for double the price that was paid for the shipping and product itself. how is that fair?)

Again, look up "The First Sale Doctrine" on wikipedia. Basically, if I sell you a product, I cannot tell you that you cannot resell it. The same goes for buying it. I cannot sell you, say, a hat, under the pretense that only you will wear it and that if you give it or sell it, you have to send me money. The FSD is a cornerstone of consumer rights, and all Gamestop is doing is making money off of it. I hear people complain about used sales, yet never have they given me a solution that respects this legal doctrine. You cannot force a business to cut someone in meeerly because they made a product that is being resold

I ask you. Did you ever buy a house? Did you make sure to send money to the builders who those greedy real-estate agents made money off of by selling you a USED house? Have you ever bought a used car? Same goes for sending money to them. In fact, have you ever bought anything on Ebay? If so, did you send the creator money? I'm guessing that if you are honest, the answer is no.

You know how devs and publishers could make money? By selling these games themselves. If you could buy used games from the devs or publishers, I would feel more inclined to do so. But they want every sale to be a new one. So they won't budge on this issue and are losing money in the process.

I don't have a problem with things like project $10. Things like that are fine by me. That's a fair trade off. But please, don't call them "amoral" without backing it up.

Also, selling things for a higher price is how stuff works. Would you rather they buy my copy of LA Noire for $25 and sell it for $30 when the game is still $55 new?

My point of the matter is this: Gamestop and the like made money of a legal doctrine. Complaining about FSD will not get you anywhere. Any high court is not going to overturn that, because of what it will mean for other businesses. If the Devs and Publishers want to make money of of used sales, they should try to sell them themselves.

EDIT: Let me also add the fact that there are games you cannot get otherwise without buying used. If you are like my friend and starved for a cheap laugh, the only way you can get Final Fantasy X is by buying it used. I don't even think Square makes it any more. So why should you feel bad about getting a game they have abandoned? So really, no, I don't feel bad about buying used. It's not piracy. I buy new from devs I like. But when they act like what I am doing is wrong and immoral, I will make it a point to not buy or buy the game used.

EDIT EDIT: Also, by your logic, movie lending places are just as bad as film pirates. Again, a legal industry. Publishers and Devs attack GS because it is an easy target.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I'm guessing this is based on the fact that the aggressively anti-piracy and copyright infringement argument has become heavily reliant on "no money for the devs", which I'm guessing is because alot of people don't see it as a heaven-or-hell moral issue and have no qualms with the idea of hurting the middle-man(gamestop etc.) who are themselves usually looking to screw you first.

I doubt he was asking to have the law regurgitated all over him either, which is the norm for these threads. The question isn't about license holding. If we allow the issue to be framed by the devs seeing money for everyone who plays their game, then "used sales" and "piracy" becomes somewhat of a distinction without a difference.

There's a point to be made here, you can't rely on industry insiders, extra credits or the feckin' law to teach you morality. They all have their own bias, so think for yourself.

 

[Some_weirdGuy]

Again, look up "The First Sale Doctrine" on wikipedia. Basically, if I sell you a product, I cannot tell you that you cannot...
-rest of text goes here-
...GS because it is an easy target.

to quote myself:

...I find second hand games, while not illegal, are still amoral. The business buys the game off someone for a fraction of the price, they then mark up the price (sometimes double or triple what they themselves paid the actual owner)...

or, to emphasise:
Forget weather its legal or not.
Is it 'fair'? Is it more 'unfair' than piracy?

This topic is all about personal opinions, not legality. I KNOW they're not illegal, that much is obvious, but on a personal level what is your opinion on them compared to piracy.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Again, look up "The First Sale Doctrine" on wikipedia. Basically, if I sell you a product, I cannot tell you that you cannot...
-rest of text goes here-
...GS because it is an easy target.

to quote myself:

...I find second hand games, while not illegal, are still amoral. The business buys the game off someone for a fraction of the price, they then mark up the price (sometimes double or triple what they themselves paid the actual owner)...

or, to emphasise:
Forget weather its legal or not.
Is it 'fair'? Is it more 'unfair' than piracy?

This topic is all about personal opinions, not legality. I KNOW they're not illegal, that much is obvious, but on a personal level what is your opinion on them compared to piracy.

Again, I think they are fair. You cannot exclude legality in a topic like this.
If you think a law or rule is unfair, the burden of proof falls to you to prove so. I've already pointed out that we don't give money to creators of other products when we sell them second hand, so I see no problem whatsoever with used sales.

With piracy, one purchace can easily equal thousands of players at once. With used sales, only one person can be playing at a time. So it is more fair.

Pirates are scum who can die in a fire for all I care.

 

[Some_weirdGuy]

Again, I think they are fair. You cannot exclude legality in a topic like this.

Why not?

If you think a law or rule is unfair, the burden of proof falls to you to prove so.

We're not talking facts and legalities, we're talking opinions, the beauty of which is opinions don't need 'proof', they can be as reasonable or unfounded as a person wants, and in many cases aren't compatible with 'proving'. You seem to be missing that.

(Also, I never said anything about the law being unfair )

I've already pointed out that we don't give money to creators of other products when we sell them second hand, so I see no problem whatsoever with used sales.

People can't pirate a car or sofa or other such second hand goods.

Though that brings us to an interesting topic, imagine what it would be like if people could pirate anything?

With piracy, one purchace can easily equal thousands of players at once. With used sales, only one person can be playing at a time. So it is more fair.

I don't deny it, and I will say I'm only taking the other side in this to keep the discussion rolling (I mean, all the 'reasons' I gave in my original post were actually arguments from other people that I've seen brought up before, I've actually kept my own opinions fully to myself until I mentioned them in that later post, in which case looking at them it seems i didn't quite answer my own question... i kinda went off topic and spoke about my feelings towards profiteering instead XD)

Pirates are scum who can die in a fire for all I care.

Maybe I spoke to soon about not understanding opinions, as that a whopper of one right there XD

Though this is the perfect time to prove an earlier point. How about we swap places in this now, and i'll say to you:
Prove they're scum who should die in a fire.


See how proof and opinions don't quite mesh?

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Again, I think they are fair. You cannot exclude legality in a topic like this.

Why not?

If you think a law or rule is unfair, the burden of proof falls to you to prove so.

We're not talking facts and legalities, we're talking opinions, the beauty of which is opinions don't need 'proof', they can be as reasonable or unfounded as a person wants, and in many cases aren't compatible with 'proving'. You seem to be missing that.

(Also, I never said anything about the law being unfair )

I've already pointed out that we don't give money to creators of other products when we sell them second hand, so I see no problem whatsoever with used sales.

People can't pirate a car or sofa or other such second hand goods.

Though that brings us to an interesting topic, imagine what it would be like if people could pirate anything?

With piracy, one purchace can easily equal thousands of players at once. With used sales, only one person can be playing at a time. So it is more fair.

I don't deny it, and I will say I'm only taking the other side in this to keep the discussion rolling (I mean, all the 'reasons' I gave in my original post were actually arguments from other people that I've seen brought up before, I've actually kept my own opinions fully to myself until I mentioned them in that later post, in which case looking at them it seems i didn't quite answer my own question... i kinda went off topic and spoke about my feelings towards profiteering instead XD)

Pirates are scum who can die in a fire for all I care.

Maybe I spoke to soon about not understanding opinions, as that a whopper of one right there XD

Though this is the perfect time to prove an earlier point. How about we swap places in this now, and i'll say to you:
Prove they're scum who should die in a fire.


See how proof and opinions don't quite mesh?

In order of your points:
Legality does matter. Asking people to argue this issue without the law is akin to arguement for gun ownership in the states without being able to cite the second amendment or any court cases, or argue againt it without being allowed to cite gun deaths.

I'm giving reasons for my views, which are based in legal jurisprudence. One of the opinions I hear is that Gamestop and their ilk should be FORCED by law to give money to devs and publishers. I am just stating how stupid that is.

The fact that people cannot pirate these things is not really relevent to the topic at hand. Again, I hate pirates

Good for you

Gladly

They take what does not belong to them without paying
They are commiting an illegal act
They are the reason for DRM (Deny it all you like. If there never was piracy, there never would have been DRM)
They give weak reasons for why they do it

I was more so making a joke, I don't really think pirates should die in a fire. I just hate what they do. Again, if I put my opinion out there, I like to come with proof.