Piracy, simply put.

[saruman31]

When you pirate, you steal people's jobs.

I`m pretty awesome then. I`ll continue doing so until everybody is fired. Damn...always wanted to do evil and now finally i get my chance.

 

[saruman31]

1) If I buy, I gain and the other party gains. This is obviously the optimum.
2) If I copy, I gain and the other party doesn't gain.
3) If I abstain, neither of us gains.

How is 3) better than 2), objectively?

Because if you couldn't pirate it (or didn't) you would have had to purchase it to have access to it.

You're using ease of stealing as an excuse.

Classy.

You don`t get it. Pirates are not potential costumers. Pirates still wouldn`t have bought a game if piracy was impossible. They are non existing costumers. And banning piracy is akin to banning information. Just because a person can not afford education, do you think they should be unable to get it?

 

[morrowind_lover]

You don`t get it. Pirates are not potential costumers. Pirates still wouldn`t have bought a game if piracy was impossible. They are non existing costumers. And banning piracy is akin to banning information. Just because a person can not afford education, do you think they should be unable to get it?

Your last statement was completely absurd. Equating piracy to education is just ridiculous. Firstly claiming that pirates never would have bought a game\movie\song if they couldn't get it for free is not a claim you can defend as you have no proof for it. At best all you can say is that you wouldn't have bought the game\movie\song. As for that stupid line about education and information, NOOOO, you cannot equate resticting entertainment, and that is what the majority of games\movies\songs are, from those who want it for free to restricting a basic human right as defined by western civilization.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

And banning piracy is akin to banning information. Just because a person can not afford education, do you think they should be unable to get it?

A) You are trying to tell me pirates can't afford video games or wouldn't buy them if they couldn't pirate. That's a lie. Period. They purchased a gaming console or a computer capable of running the games--they want to play them, they just don't want to pay for them.

The 'I wasn't going to buy it anyway' excuse is obsolete, flat out insulting and, as you will see in point B, irrelevant.

B) A video game is akin to an education in your eyes? No. Just no. Video games are a luxury item that no one gets by default and that no one is entitled to. The inanity of your argument there is beyond words. You tried to sneak it in behind a guise of free information and you failed. Miserably.

Also, education is free in my country.

If you want something someone owns, you pay for it. Our society has operated this way since the dawn of time, from bartering to currency--exchange of goods for equal return is the way the world functions. You can save up for it and you would pay for it if you couldn't pirate. You are simply a criminal and want to excuse your crimes.

 

[MasochisticAvenger]

You don`t get it. Pirates are not potential costumers.

Wrong. If someone pirates something it means they have the desire to own that thing. They have had, at one point, the potential to be customers.

Pirates still wouldn`t have bought a game if piracy was impossible. They are non existing costumers.

Do you have any proof of that? A lot of people pirate simply because it is the only way to get something. Just look at the Tokusatsu community, or people who want games you can no longer legitimately purchase. It's impossible to say no one who pirates a game wouldn't buy it legitimately if piracy wasn't an option. Of course, I'm not saying everyone who pirates games would buy them legitimately either.

And banning piracy is akin to banning information. Just because a person can not afford education, do you think they should be unable to get it?

No, no it's not. Not being able to steal the latest video game is not the same thing as not being able to know what is going on in the world. I really cannot believe I have to point that out. As for education, there are plenty of financial aids to help struggling families put their kids through the basic levels of school.

Also, if you're really comparing owning the latest video game to getting an education, maybe you need to go back and try again. Seriously...

 

[Dr Jones]

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

done!

So, according to you, a pirate that buys more games than someone who doesn't pirate ever, but still pirates a game every month or so is a lazy freeloaders?

There is no way to see this as a black or white topic, it can only be seen as a case by case topic.

Yes. Yes they are. Especially if they buy tons of games and STILL pirate, they are greedy freeloaders, they could manage with the "tons" of games they already bought, right?

Sigh....

Ask yourself this,if you were in the game industry, would you like someone to buy say, 50 games and pirating one, or someone buying only one game,ever?
Ask yourself also what is best for the industry.

This only obvious answer is that this pirate in question is better for you and the industry.
So what if he pirated that one time? He still gave 50 times more to the industry than the non-greedy freeloader.

But what is this I hear coming? "Exocet you smartass, you took an extreme exemple!" Yes, yes I did, the real question is where the boundary on what is ok? Oviously never buying anything is being a greedy prick, but what about half and half? A third and two thirds?

If I were in the industry, I'd sure as hell pick the guy who pirates one in ten games, but buys a lot of games to compensate, rather than the one who buys a game a year.

Perhaps your righteous, stick-up-the-ass view of things isn't really suited for reality.

The problem is there are two places our points of view differ. I have a "no compromise" attitude, whereas you have the opposite attitude. There is no reason for you to get all aggresive at me. If they pirate 1 game, they are freeloaders (considering they have money to buy games), there is nothing more to it, man. Buying 9 cheeseburgers and stealing one doesen't make you a saint, it makes you a thief.

 

[0p3rati0n]

Here's a way to put Piracy simply: People who do it are cunts.
Simples!

As much as I disagree with the use of the "C" word. This is basically my opinion in a nutshell. *fist in the air* You have won this round ninjas!

 

[ScreamingNinja]

I don't think just calling an argument 'absurd' Is really a decent sort of come back now.. Is it?

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!"

"I wouldn't have bought it or can't afford to buy it anyway" is not an excuse.

People don't get critizised for waiting a year until the retail price drops to $10.

I'd hazard a guess that's because they aren't breaking any laws.

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.

I don't think just calling an argument 'absurd' Is really a decent sort of come back now.. Is it?
Absurd.

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.

Absurd and already-refuted argument.

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.

Because while your individual download of something may not hurt anyone, the collective of people doing it can and often does. Depending on how you got your download, it may help others download it and/or encourage further piracy.

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.

And at the next stop there's a group of two-dozen polka dancers waiting. Stupid analogy is stupid.

What kind of twisted Christian guilt morality makes one assume it is wrong to just ride the bus until home?

Not even gonna bite at that flamebait...

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?

Let's stick to the topic shall we?

Spoiler: Also, IN B4....

 

[Old Father Eternity]

While One does not endorse illegal activity, One must say the fallowing. Art does not belong to any one person, company or nation, art belongs to all people. Unless it is considered utter shait by general consensus, in which case feel free to keep it to yourself. Of course recognition to the artist should be given be it by giving money or spreading the word, also in that point a view what would be worse, the art not reaching to the people who might like (resulting in no profit of any kind) it or reaching them and then spreading the word( increasing fame and perhaps getting other people to spend money on it)

 

[morrowind_lover]

An interesting view, however, art is considered intellectual property, usually of the one who created it unless contractually stated otherwise, as such it does belong to someone and thus is not available to everyone. Art in all it's forms, throughout history, has belonged to the creator or contractual owner and only seen by others at the grace of the owner. Just because you have seen something does not mean you own it. If intellectual property didn't exist the plagiarism would not be an issue in academia.

 

[saruman31]

You don`t get it. Pirates are not potential costumers.

Wrong. If someone pirates something it means they have the desire to own that thing. They have had, at one point, the potential to be customers.

Pirates still wouldn`t have bought a game if piracy was impossible. They are non existing costumers.

Do you have any proof of that? A lot of people pirate simply because it is the only way to get something. Just look at the Tokusatsu community, or people who want games you can no longer legitimately purchase. It's impossible to say no one who pirates a game wouldn't buy it legitimately if piracy wasn't an option. Of course, I'm not saying everyone who pirates games would buy them legitimately either.

And banning piracy is akin to banning information. Just because a person can not afford education, do you think they should be unable to get it?

No, no it's not. Not being able to steal the latest video game is not the same thing as not being able to know what is going on in the world. I really cannot believe I have to point that out. As for education, there are plenty of financial aids to help struggling families put their kids through the basic levels of school.

Also, if you're really comparing owning the latest video game to getting an education, maybe you need to go back and try again. Seriously...

Weren`t video games art? If so, don`t you study art and artists in school?

 

[Exocet]

The problem is there are two places our points of view differ. I have a "no compromise" attitude, whereas you have the opposite attitude. There is no reason for you to get all aggresive at me. If they pirate 1 game, they are freeloaders (considering they have money to buy games), there is nothing more to it, man. Buying 9 cheeseburgers and stealing one doesen't make you a saint, it makes you a thief.

I may have over-reacted, but in all honesty, you cannot, CANNOT, have a strict black or white view of the world. Not only is it irresponsible and naive, but it's misinformed.
Hell, I was listenning to South Park's creator's commentaries the otehr day, and they were happy their work was being streamed, simple because it helped get their stuff out there.

As for your badly thought out good analogy, pirating doesn't rob the developpers of a game because it doesn't have a physical copy. Stealing a burger does,because you are taking a burger from it's owner, which will physically lose that burger.

 

[MasochisticAvenger]

Weren`t video games art? If so, don`t you study art and artists in school?

Well, there we have it. This thread has offically gone from mildly amusing to just plain depressing. Therefore, I am claiming this thread in the name of cuteness!

Spoiler

So, what makes you guys just go AWWWWWWWWW?

 

[Old Father Eternity]

If intellectual property didn't exist the plagiarism would not be an issue in academia.

True but that has not stopped it from being one of the driving forces behind everything throughout history, no matter the art form. There is little that is totally new, most things are built upon that which came before it, so some amount of plagiarism is always present. Even in sciences.
To quote from a song by Mr.Lehrer "Plagiarise, let no-ones work evade your eyes. Remember why the good Lord made your eyes, so don't shade your eyes but plagiarise. Only be sure to always call it please 'research'"

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

"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!

Huzzah you get an internet cookie from me

You shall apreciate it

Cause that's what people do

 

[saruman31]

Weren`t video games art? If so, don`t you study art and artists in school?

Well, there we have it. This thread has offically gone from mildly amusing to just plain depressing. Therefore, I am claiming this thread in the name of cuteness!

Spoiler

So, what makes you guys just go AWWWWWWWWW?

Condescending people.

 

[Rheinmetall]

If I download a file that has the name: "Free PC game The Sims 3 + serial code" there are two possibilities: It is a file that contains the pc game The Sims, or it is some kind of spam, a malevolent file, and generally it could be anything but the game. So how do I know in advance what sort of file I'm getting? I don't. Thus I'm no thief, or pirate, I'm just curious that's all.
You know what should be illegal? If I make copies of some IP product and I make profit from it.

 

[Sn0wLeppard]

Piracy's not stealing, because nothing is taken. They never had my money.

Walk up to an artist desperately selling his paintings and take some closeup photos of them. And then tell him these exact words.

Because EA and Activision have been forced to take to streets because they're so "desperate" now?

 

[Dr Jones]

The problem is there are two places our points of view differ. I have a "no compromise" attitude, whereas you have the opposite attitude. There is no reason for you to get all aggresive at me. If they pirate 1 game, they are freeloaders (considering they have money to buy games), there is nothing more to it, man. Buying 9 cheeseburgers and stealing one doesen't make you a saint, it makes you a thief.

I may have over-reacted, but in all honesty, you cannot, CANNOT, have a strict black or white view of the world. Not only is it irresponsible and naive, but it's misinformed.
Hell, I was listenning to South Park's creator's commentaries the otehr day, and they were happy their work was being streamed, simple because it helped get their stuff out there.

As for your badly thought out good analogy, pirating doesn't rob the developpers of a game because it doesn't have a physical copy. Stealing a burger does,because you are taking a burger from it's owner, which will physically lose that burger.

It does not matter if it's a physical copy or not, the developer/publisher has lost money, because you didnt buy it. Their account should say "1250 +50.-", but since you pirated it, their account says "1250". The fact that you didnt pay for it, means a lost sale for the publisher, and that means less money.

 

[Marmooset]

The problem is there are two places our points of view differ. I have a "no compromise" attitude, whereas you have the opposite attitude. There is no reason for you to get all aggresive at me. If they pirate 1 game, they are freeloaders (considering they have money to buy games), there is nothing more to it, man. Buying 9 cheeseburgers and stealing one doesen't make you a saint, it makes you a thief.

I like you. Although I think you should have said Kahuna Burger.

OT - I'm not a saint. I make no claim of innocence. But the whole muddling of the definition of piracy is a big part of rationalization on the part of mild low-grade pirates who don't want to admit that they're the bad guy. Blame is displaced on others, extenuating circumstances, or faulty studies showing that their acts are somehow beneficial. It's reminiscent of serial killers who are only able to say, "this thing happened," instead of "I did it."

I've said it before, but I'd be a lot more inclined to respect someone who says, "fuck it, I'm a pirate. I steal. If you'll excuse me, I have some downloading to do." But those people are either very rare, or don't spend valuable stealing time on message boards.

It makes me wonder how many folks in the old days thought they were modeling themselves after Robin Hood when all they actually did was rob travelers indiscriminately.