Piracy

[tzimize]

Watching it [a movie] at a friend's place, he/she has paid for it in advance. I agree with you that the line is getting blurred when it comes to borrowing intellectual property licenses, and that technically you don't have to pay yourself for the experience. However, someone has paid for the license and the way it works is that it is fine as long as no one makes an additional copy except for archival purposes. This makes it very different from pirating.

How exactly is it different? Someone has often paid for the pirated game too, he just shares it with a million instead of one person. The principle is the same. You dont pay for the experience. If I borrow a movie from a friend, and watch it, the developers havent made a cent from me. The fact that my friend cant watch the movie while I borrow it is irrelevant. I will have enjoyed a product for free.

You may not be convinced still and that is fine. In that case, though, I'd say you have incredibly exacting standards, and that's coming from someone who only has the time to enjoy the very best as it is.

Snipped almost everything :>

No, I am still not convinced. The shades of gray are so plentiful in the piracy debate that it will take a whole lot to even come close to swaying my opinion. In addition to this I am not a supporter of the law on the basis that it is a law, I am a supporter of the law if it makes sense, so my moral compass might be a bit...skewed? In dnd terms I am Chaotic Good at best I guess

Also, just because there exist a certain legal or moral standard doesnt mean that it is the "correct" one or that we should accept it automatically. So, your friend bought that laptop. Wouldnt it be awesome if he could try it out first without anyone actually losing money from it? He finds out it is shit and doesnt buy it. The developer might go bankrupt, but they made a shit product anyway so who cares? Your friend could then try another laptop that he was satisfied with and buy that one, giving his hard earned cash to someone that makes a GOOD product. This is what piracy is to me, and you will NEVER convince me that this isnt fair.

And yes, I DO have incredibly exacting standards. My time is the most valuable thing in the world (to me personally of course), and I will give my money only to those that entertain me properly. To me this is a good way of supporting products I want more of. And not supporting what I judge to be garbage/simply not good enough.

 

[Red Scharlach]

How exactly is it different? Someone has often paid for the pirated game too, he just shares it with a million instead of one person. The principle is the same. You dont pay for the experience. If I borrow a movie from a friend, and watch it, the developers havent made a cent from me. The fact that my friend cant watch the movie while I borrow it is irrelevant. I will have enjoyed a product for free.

No, I am still not convinced. The shades of gray are so plentiful in the piracy debate that it will take a whole lot to even come close to swaying my opinion. In addition to this I am not a supporter of the law on the basis that it is a law, I am a supporter of the law if it makes sense, so my moral compass might be a bit...skewed? In dnd terms I am Chaotic Good at best I guess

Also, just because there exist a certain legal or moral standard doesnt mean that it is the "correct" one or that we should accept it automatically. So, your friend bought that laptop. Wouldnt it be awesome if he could try it out first without anyone actually losing money from it? He finds out it is shit and doesnt buy it. The developer might go bankrupt, but they made a shit product anyway so who cares? Your friend could then try another laptop that he was satisfied with and buy that one, giving his hard earned cash to someone that makes a GOOD product. This is what piracy is to me, and you will NEVER convince me that this isnt fair.

And yes, I DO have incredibly exacting standards. My time is the most valuable thing in the world (to me personally of course), and I will give my money only to those that entertain me properly. To me this is a good way of supporting products I want more of. And not supporting what I judge to be garbage/simply not good enough.

It is different because of the scale, even though the principle is similar. Buying the license for a film specifically allows you to show it to small groups of people or to lend it out but you are the same time not allowed to show it in a public place or to large groups. The fact that you are not allowed to make copies means only one person can access the material at any time, which effectively limits how many people has access to one license. This is dramatically different from allowing millions of people to copy the material and use it at the same time. Sure, exactly where the line is drawn is not altogether clear but that does not mean there is no difference between lending a cd to a friend and making it available on tpb.

I can sympathise with not obeying the law for its own sake or blindly following the current moral in fashion. Most people have the same outlook. When it comes to piracy, what I think we are both saying is that it is morally permissible (i.e. fair) to try a pirated game to decide whether to buy it or not. Unfortunately, for practical reasons it still has to be illegal and thus even if you are behaving morally correct you can be deemed a criminal. A lot of pirates speak about the unfairness here whereas a lot of non-pirates accept the small nuisance of using legitimate means to decide whether to buy or not. I call it a small nuisance because I think it is fairly easy to determine what games are interesting using only reviews or by knowing who made the game. Perhaps other people have different experiences.

So, while I can sympathise with people who restrict their piracy for 'good' purposes, I also think that they only have themselves to blame if they are punished for it. This is because everyone knows what rules apply and there are reasonable alternatives to piracy. That piracy needs to be illegal is fairly evident and regardless of whether piracy in fact did any harm to the IP industries, they have a right to market their property on conditions of their own choosing.

I know you don't think that the alternatives to piracy (in terms of judging whether games are good or not) are very reasonable. By definition, piracy certainly allows you to make a better judgement and it would be great if we could have that perfect information. It is also clear that piracy is to some (unknown) extent detrimental to the industry. I think it is easy to forsake that perfect information in support of the industry on which I rely for entertainment. To me, it is after all a very small sacrifice.

My friend doubtlessly agrees with you regarding the laptop. It would have been fair. We could have stolen the laptop, tried it out and then returned to pay for it. That still would have been fair, but it would also have been illegal and we would have been arrested for it. Yet I can not feel any indignation that the market treats potential customers unfairly. It has to be that way because we have nothing better.

Having high standards is of course not a bad thing. I already confessed to cherry picking myself, because I have the same view about my free time. I suppose the difference is that I can still enjoy, say, a not equally good book or film without feeling bitter about wasting my time when I could have had an even better experience. What was lacking in one work makes me appreciate the better one that much more. Maybe I am the one losing out this way but it works for me just as seeking out only the absolutely finest works for you.