Piracy, simply put.

[JoesshittyOs]

Simply put?

You're a freeloader. If you can't afford it, than it's probably not something you need to be using in the first place. Your who argument is "I'm taking it one way of the other", when you really should be making "adult" decisions and saying "Well, I guess I don't need entertainment seeing how it's not a life essential thing"

 

[Ascarus]

Piracy's not stealing, because nothing is taken. They never had my money. They make the case they'd gotten it without piracy, but since I've probably streamed more movies than my cumulative net worth, that argument is defeated by simple math.

this argument is pure justification and rationalization. simple as that. if you didn't want it, why did you bother to download it? that alone proves you wanted it enough to go and get it. you simply didn't want to pay for it.

piracy is about copyright law. not about your particular excuses used to make you feel better about stealing.

 

[spectrenihlus]

Do I think charging $40 for a re-release of a game over a decade old is too much? I certainly do.

How would this be justification to pirate it instead of just doing without it?

Do I think you are justified to torrent a game if its DRM is holding it back, and a group of modders have removed it from the equation? I certainly do.

Are you at least expecting them to buy a regular copy? DRM isn't justification to get it for free.

What difference is it to the publisher if you pirated something vs not downloading it at all. They don't get payed either way.

And? They'd rather you don't do it and it is their intellectual property.

A lot of publishers Are living in and old model. If they truly wished fight piracy they would stop selling all brand new games at $60.

If you truly wished to be taken seriously you wouldn't make such a stupid statement. They do want to fight it. Saying their methods are ineffective says nothing about motive.

Take for example a game of thrones I literally called up a hbo to find some way just to watch this show without buying all of hbo. I DON'T HAVE THAT OPTION I can only watch a game of thrones if I subscribe to hbo. This is unacceptable, I wish to pay for a product and I am unable to.

It's only unacceptable if you feel that you're entitled to it. But since you're not, it isn't unacceptable.

No I am not entitled to it however, the reason HBO developed the show was to create a profit. I offered to pay just to watch that show as I did not want to watch any of their other shows. Why do you think netflix is so popular, I can choose to watch a show that I want when I want for a VERY low monthly fee compared to satellite and cable. THAT is the future and if the publishers cannt change their system then they die simply put. What pirates are offering is a superior product simply put.

That's nice. So, are you going to tell me the price of tea in China now, or something else that I don't care about? I don't care whether their business model is particularly good. It doesn't need to be for it to be unethical to pirate. A lack of efficiency does not mean that ownership of the copyright should not exist.

They're not offering a superior product, they're giving away someone else's.

If they can't provide a better product than what the pirates have then they fail simply put. Like I said in another thread by going the legalistic route you do not solve the problem you are trying to kill a hydra by chopping off heads. The only way to kill piracy is to offer a better product and until you do so piracy will continue.

 

[Alterego-X]

Simply put?

You're a freeloader. If you can't afford it, than it's probably not something you need to be using in the first place. Your who argument is "I'm taking it one way of the other", when you really should be making "adult" decisions and saying "Well, I guess I don't need entertainment seeing how it's not a life essential thing"

And what's WRONG with freeloading? Why is it less "adult" to enjoy all the available content, than to follow the letter of the law and stay away from it? Does it make anyone's life better? Does it contribute to anything?

Otherwise, you are stating some obvious things. I didn't ever see anyone argue that piracy is an essential "need", and I saw lots of people arguing in favor of piracy. Posting on a forum isn't a need either, yet you are doing it. Is there anything wrong with that?

 

[spectrenihlus]

Piracy's not stealing, because nothing is taken. They never had my money. They make the case they'd gotten it without piracy, but since I've probably streamed more movies than my cumulative net worth, that argument is defeated by simple math.

this argument is pure justification and rationalization. simple as that. if you didn't want it, why did you bother to download it? that alone proves you wanted it enough to go and get it. you simply didn't want to pay for it.

piracy is about copyright law. not about your particular excuses used to make you or the iphonefeel better about stealing.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO, let me tell you a story. About a month ago EA decided to have special one day deal and give away mirror's edge on the iphone for free. The only reason I picked up this game was because it was free. Guess what one day while playing this game in my class someone else saw it and said HEY that game looks like fun and then bought it at full price. This is not an isolated incident. An author decided to release a book for free for about a week and the month after that he witnessed a boom in the amount of sales that his book had. So what might have originally been one pirated copy may have evolved into 5 sales.

 

[Alterego-X]

The bus is going there anyway, I don't diminish any paying customer's ability use it.
What kind of twisted Christian guilt morality makes one assume it is wrong to just ride the bus until home?

Actually, it's not even very Christian. The same Bible that says "You shall not steal", also says in Deuteronomy 23: 24-25 that

If you enter your neighbor?s vineyard, you may eat all the grapes you want, but do not put any in your basket. If you enter your neighbor?s grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to their standing grain.

Not even the Bible defines stealing as "taking away anything for free", but only as causing harm by taking away a meaningful amount. But otherwise it is just freeloading, and it is OK.

 

[spectrenihlus]

If they can't provide a better product than what the pirates have then they fail simply put. Like I said in another thread by going the legalistic route you do not solve the problem you are trying to kill a hydra by chopping off heads. The only way to kill piracy is to offer a better product and until you do so piracy will continue.

Considering that the value of a product is always some relationship between the utility of that product over the cost of that product, kindly explain to me how you expect companies to be able to offer a better product with a price point of zero.

I agree that legal methods are not enough to stop pirates. We need societal methods as well. First and foremost, we need people to stop blaming piracy on the companies that produce products. If the product isn't satisfactory, the answer is not to pirate the product, but rather is to not access or use the product. And until we as a society make it clear to our friends, families, and each other that piracy is not an acceptable answer, it will continue.

Do you realize how difficult it is sometimes to get a pirated copy to work. Take netflix for example for only 15 dollars a month I get almost infinite entertainment options that I can watch, I can watch these things on my phone, my tv and my computer. I don't have to download anything and wait hours until I can use it. On the other hand you have dvds with UNSKIPPPABLE FUCKING TRAILERS before I even get to the title menu. So let's see I play a movie right now on netflix ad free instantly or load up a dvd that may or may not work due to scratches then wade through about 30 minutes of ads before I can watch the film. Which is the superior system?

 

[Alterego-X]

And what's WRONG with freeloading?

Tragedy of the Commons.
Look it up. Learn something.

You mean that one theory, that is obviously not matching with the observable reality, that even though piracy exists, media is still fine as well?

 

[Khanaris]

When faced with two things you can spend money on and only enough money for one, you have to choose. If you have to decide between going to a concert with friends and buying a part for your bike, only one of them is going to get your money.

However, if you are faced with a choice between going to a concert with friends and buying a video game, you might elect to download the video game for nothing. If the technology for pirating did not exist or your moral hardware was in better repair, you would have to prioritize differently. The fact that you spend all of your disposable income is irrelevant.

If you pirate video games or music, you are a thief. There is no moral justification for what you are doing. You are not protesting elevated music or video game prices. If you really want to do that, you can simply not buy them OR pirate them.

 

[Alterego-X]

if you are faced with a choice between going to a concert with friends and buying a video game, you might elect to download the video game for nothing. If the technology for pirating did not exist or your moral hardware was in better repair, you would have to prioritize differently. The fact that you spend all of your disposable income is irrelevant.

If you pirate video games or music, you are a thief. There is no moral justification for what you are doing.

Why not? What makes the act of spending my money on supporting artists, and then spending my remaining time with staring at a wall, so much more moral, than spending my money on supporting artists, and then also having some more fun with some products (that I might even decide to like so much to buy later whenever I can)?

 

[spectrenihlus]

When faced with two things you can spend money on and only enough money for one, you have to choose. If you have to decide between going to a concert with friends and buying a part for your bike, only one of them is going to get your money.

However, if you are faced with a choice between going to a concert with friends and buying a video game, you might elect to download the video game for nothing. If the technology for pirating did not exist or your moral hardware was in better repair, you would have to prioritize differently. The fact that you spend all of your disposable income is irrelevant.

If you pirate video games or music, you are a thief. There is no moral justification for what you are doing. You are not protesting elevated music or video game prices. If you really want to do that, you can simply not buy them OR pirate them.

And how many sales have been created due to piracy or simply getting the product out there. Whenever businesses look at piracy all they see is lost revenue, they never take into account how many of their sales where caused by one person pirating the product, getting the word out and then due to that one guy pirating you have gained 5 sales. This happens all the time, one person pirates a song, someone else listens to the song a likes it, he then buys the album because he heard his friend listening to that song and liked it. Had their been no way to pirate that song the person would never would have downloaded it and thus the person who ends up buying that album will never hear it and will never buy that album.

 

[The Floating Nose]

"Piracy, simply put"

Oh I see, this debate has been raging for over a decade, but FINALLY someone has broken it all down for us, simple style.

let me put it even simpler-er: pirates are lazy freeloaders and publishers are greedy scum-bags.

done!

Pretty much what i think, thanks a lot sir !

 

[GameMaNiAC]

Well, piracy is very debatable. For example, I have burrowed a game from a friend dozens of times. Technically, I got it for free. He gave me his copy, which he paid for. And I could give it to someone else, so that the third person gets it for free as well, if I wanted to. I'm not really breaking the law, as my friend is technically giving me his copy. And if his copy is already installed on his platform, he can play the same game at the same time I'm playing it.

I suppose piracy is kinda like that. Someone lets you have something for free. And they bought it. Not necessarily, but most likely.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Simply put?

You're a freeloader. If you can't afford it, than it's probably not something you need to be using in the first place. Your who argument is "I'm taking it one way of the other", when you really should be making "adult" decisions and saying "Well, I guess I don't need entertainment seeing how it's not a life essential thing"

And what's WRONG with freeloading? Why is it less "adult" to enjoy all the available content, than to follow the letter of the law and stay away from it? Does it make anyone's life better? Does it contribute to anything?

You're gaining off of someone else's purchase, taking away from the company that is selling the game all for self entertainment. Sure, it's not stealing in the traditional sense of taking someone else's car, but you are stealing a profit from the company that makes the games. You're hurting the company. You're hurting the people that buy the games who now end up getting the blunt end of the draconian DRM stick. You're stealing.

And when more and more people stop paying for it and freeloading, less and less of a profit is made.

Otherwise, you are stating some obvious things. I didn't ever see anyone argue that piracy is an essential "need", and I saw lots of people arguing in favor of piracy.

Well, the OP is pretty much stating that he's somehow "prioritizing" by illegally downloading it rather than buying the videogames he doesn't need and forfeiting the rent on his apartment. He didn't understand the obvious concept, so I reminded him of it.

Posting on a forum isn't a need either, yet you are doing it. Is there anything wrong with that?

Well, seeing how me posting in a forum is completely unrelated to me stealing a game or a movie from off the internet, I'm gonna go ahead and say no, there isn't anything wrong with that. That makes not one ounce of sense.

 

[BrassButtons]

Neither are Straw Man arguments, which is what this is. Piracy isn't theft, it's copyright infringement. You're arguing against an incorrect definition of what piracy is.

Sure, because obviously I stopped writing after the first sentence...

Please point to where you stopped arguing that piracy isn't theft and started arguing that piracy isn't copyright infringement, or that copyright infringement is acceptable.

 

[Dragonclaw]

I said this in one of the other threads but I'll put it here as well...

As a comic book store owner can actually quantify what piracy costs. When Comixology launched we expected to lose a few customers to digital. We actually didn't, if anything we had a bigger bump in sales from people who bought a digital book and then came in to continue reading However, once a group of my regulars discovered a pirating site that they didn't have to pay for, I lost them. They had been solid customers for YEARS, but they dropped their pull lists because of the lure of free books. Not including the 2 months worth of product that had already been ordered for them I lost $400-$500 per MONTH in sales. I can't take anyone seriously when they say piracy doesn't cost sales and doesn't hurt anybody...these pirate sites have directly lead to it being harder to pay the rent, put food on the table, etc. To me, piracy is much less about how big corporations and millionaire artists get hurt and much more about how the stores that see those sales directly get hurt. Piracy didn't kill record companies...it killed record STORES (remember those kids?) My first job was at a record / CD store. Sure, cassettes helped piracy but still didn't make it nearly as easy as the Internet did, and half the time cassette copies were crappy sounding. Once download sites hit their stride is when stores started to vanish...which BTW sent a lot of good kids out of work...the record store was a first job for lots of kids...not anymore. I had to laugh at a friends son recently who was bemoaning that there were no jobs besides burger flipper available...he has literally terrabytes of pirated music...stacks of hard drives hooked up to his computer, and brags that he's NEVER bought a CD, a concert ticket (he downloads those too) or even bought a band's T-shirt. So much for contributing to anything...hope he enjoys flipping those burgers...IF he can get the job since without places like the record store there's a lot fewer jobs to be had.

 

[Something Amyss]

Is it? This is why Epic and Ubisoft are leaving PC development as an afterthought? Why games such as Skyrim get hobbled "console focused" interfaces? Because media on heavily pirated mediums is doing just fine? You must have a difference definition of "fine" than most.

With rare exceptions, there really hasn't been a lot of money in the PC market for the most part to begin with. Ubisoft and Epic are focusing on consoles, and you're getting "hobbled" interface because consoles are where the money is.

However, in terms of poor performance, I think Valve and other PC focused companies would like a word on that.

"Piracy" has been "killing" PC gaming for about as long as PC gaming has been "dying."

If you pirate video games or music, you are a thief.

See, why couldn't you just stick with "there is no moral justification for what you're doing" and leave it at that? You blow your ostensibly true statement when you taking on an objectively false one like "You are a thief."

People who want to have their arguments against piracy seriously should learn a lesson from the anti-drug campaigns. People see through the transparency of utter drama queening like "piracy is stealing/you are a thief" in the same way they see through that whole "if you smoke pot you will run over a girl at the drive through" or "smoking pot means the terrorists win."

I mean, I'm assuming you are serious.

 

[Alterego-X]

And what's WRONG with freeloading?

Tragedy of the Commons.
Look it up. Learn something.

You mean that one theory, that is obviously not matching with the observable reality, that even though piracy exists, media is still fine as well?

Is it? This is why Epic and Ubisoft are leaving PC development as an afterthought? Why games such as Skyrim get hobbled "console focused" interfaces? Because media on heavily pirated mediums is doing just fine? You must have a difference definition of "fine" than most.

Or maybe because of the recent casual games boom, the demand for traditionally PC genres decreased, and the tranditionally console-centric genres make shitty PC ports. Or maybe it's the laptop and tablet boom killing off the amount of gaming PCs. Or fuck nows.

Pointing out one particular platform's fate is almost as ridiculous, as blaming an individual game's failure or success on it. Some systems rise, and some fail constantly. And once in a blue moon, it might even coincide with piracy rates.

Yes, pirated mediums are doing just fine. Look at the actual incomes of the gaming industry, of Hollywood, or the Music industry. Even compare it with countries where copyrighted filesharing is legal.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114537-File-sharing-Remains-Legal-In-Switzerland

 

[Dangit2019]

Piracy's not stealing, because nothing is taken. They never had my money. They make the case they'd gotten it without piracy, but since I've probably streamed more movies than my cumulative net worth, that argument is defeated by simple math.
My landlord is probably not going to like the idea of me re-prioritizing my expenditures to the purchase of entertainment products.

Some say you shouldn't download stuff you can't or don't want to afford. Why? Who's that helping? Who's getting paid in Karma points?
"Dear EA, last month I didn't buy or download any of your games. You're welcome!"

People don't get critizised for waiting a year until the retail price drops to $10. Well, they might as well download the game right away and mail the dev $10. Personal asketicism during one's time of abstinence isn't helping their employees pay the rent anyway.

Buy a game second hand - you might as well pirate it. "But people have always sold off things and bought used things." Yes. This truth still doesn't help the devs pay the rent.
A clean conscience isn't valid currency in the free market economy.

I don't hoard money. Can't. I spend all my income. Every month. I'm doing my part. Why should I not get stuff free when it doesn't hurt no-one? Me downloading a CD doesn't diminish the record company's ability to sell it to somebody else.

Let's say I need to ride the bus home. I only have five dollars on me. I can't pay more. But five dollars is only gonna get me within four blocks. The bus is empty, or at least empty enough, so I don't take nobody's seat. Who is helped by me getting off the bus to walk the rest? (apart from my health)
The bus is going there anyway, I don't diminish any paying customer's ability use it.
What kind of twisted Christian guilt morality makes one assume it is wrong to just ride the bus until home?

What does that conscience say when you proudly buy a video game full price like a good patriot, and then play it on the X-Box that is only so cheap because some legal slave in China assembled it for 2 bucks a day, while you're wearing the T-Shirt that some Indonesian kid sowed instead of going to school?

Aren't we accustomed to screwing people over by now?

O.K., I pirate music, and I find arguments like these incredibly stupid.

It's stealing. Not "taking something for free".

Also, I love how you think stealing it is better than not buying it because you wouldn't have handed over the money beforehand; and instead you're not handing over the money but you're still taking a game that hundreds of developers put thousands of manhours into making it. But at least in some twisted way your doing them a favor.

I do it because I don't have money, not because I believe it isn't stealing.

 

[spectrenihlus]

If they can't provide a better product than what the pirates have then they fail simply put. Like I said in another thread by going the legalistic route you do not solve the problem you are trying to kill a hydra by chopping off heads. The only way to kill piracy is to offer a better product and until you do so piracy will continue.

Considering that the value of a product is always some relationship between the utility of that product over the cost of that product, kindly explain to me how you expect companies to be able to offer a better product with a price point of zero.

I agree that legal methods are not enough to stop pirates. We need societal methods as well. First and foremost, we need people to stop blaming piracy on the companies that produce products. If the product isn't satisfactory, the answer is not to pirate the product, but rather is to not access or use the product. And until we as a society make it clear to our friends, families, and each other that piracy is not an acceptable answer, it will continue.

Do you realize how difficult it is sometimes to get a pirated copy to work. Take netflix for example for only 15 dollars a month I get almost infinite entertainment options that I can watch, I can watch these things on my phone, my tv and my computer. I don't have to download anything and wait hours until I can use it. On the other hand you have dvds with UNSKIPPPABLE FUCKING TRAILERS before I even get to the title menu. So let's see I play a movie right now on netflix ad free instantly or load up a dvd that may or may not work due to scratches then wade through about 30 minutes of ads before I can watch the film. Which is the superior system?

Considering I don't pirate, no, I don't know how difficult it is to get a pirated copy to work. Why you might I'm not going to question.

However, I fail to see how your little story answers my question. How does a company compete with a price point of zero in the long term? Your answer seems to be right now that pirate copies are difficult to get working. OR in otherwords, that there's a marketspace for legit firms so long as pirates are incompetent.

Well that's just great. And once they get competent?

Convenience, many times if I want to watch a specific movie I check if it is on netflix first. If it isn't i then go the arduous task of tracking down a working file of the film on the internet. Many links don't work and some sites link to virus laden crap that a layman would not want to deal with. However I still find it way easier then getting into a car spending gas to go to a dvd store in the hope that the product I want is even there at all. Then spend more gas traveling home putting after what might have been a fruitless attempt. If I do succeed in finding the right movie I then run the rare risk of the dvd being faulty and not working at all. Then after you have watched the dvd you put the dvd away and forget about it. YEars later you end up with a situation many have had with vhs tapes. You end up with a lot of vhs tapes and no way to play them because who the hell owns a vhs player anymore. So in that regard piracy is WAAAAAAAAAAY superior. Bussiness loved this model however because you end up paying multiple times for the same product over a lifetime. For you the consumer it sucks and until now there was no other way around it.