"Pirating" a game that was never released in your country/language

[coolbeans21]

[spoiler ="Hidden for lack of relevance."]

So used games exist, publishers lose money through this venue, its legal and it sucks that the industry suffers because of it.

However the argument that because used games exist, its ok to suck more money out of the industry by pirating them is bollocks.

You paid your ISP for bandwidth to use in a legal manner, ditto with the computer retailer

You could argue that reselling whilst bad for the games industry, is good for the economy in general as cash is circulating.

Pirating a game doesn't even have that benefit.

You kind of missed my point, even if I did make it poorly due to it being late at night for me and I should have been in bed. I was mainly mocking those who say that Piracy is stealing because the developer/publisher doesn't get paid. If you buy used, the developer/publisher also does not get paid, regardless of it being a legal transaction. So from the developer/publisher point of view, piracy is just as bad as buying used.

As for the second part, I'm not even sure what I was trying to say, looking back at my comment. Like I said before, I was tired. And Piracy does have a benefit. For those of us who aren't jerks, it allows people a chance to see if they're getting their money's worth from a game. If I could have pirated the first set of .hack// games for the PS2, I would have. That was the biggest waste of $120 I have ever made. If I pirate something and I like it, I'll actually buy it legally. I'm more likely to buy something if I know it's going to be good.

Would I have known that Iced Earth was an awesome band without downloading a song from them at Random? Most likely not, and I wouldn't legally have almost all of their albums right now.

I dont understand the point you are making, because developers/publishers lose money through a legitimate channel (used sales) We should all accept that piracy is fine and they lose no money from it?

Devs and publishers have to live with used sales, as its legal, they can do things to impinge them (day1dlc for new copies, online passes etc) But the end of the day its something they have to accept.

Piracy they do not have to roll over and take though, as it, unlike used sales, is not permited under law.[/spoiler]

You also missed the point that although used games do not help the industry, they do help the economy. Piracy only benefits the pirate as he thinks he's entitled to things without paying for them.

[spoiler = "other stuff"]
As to the point about piracies benefits, perhaps if all people were like you andbought the game or music, then fine, however they are not and its naive to think that they are, the vast majority of pirates are scum who like to take things for free.

How many people who pirate the game "just to see what its like" delete it straight away when they realise its not great, I imagine the majority think "don't want to pay for it, but might as well play it, i mean i went to the trouble of downloading it after all"

Gaming is a luxury, people don't have a right to demo the entire thing before they decide if its "worth it" in their opinion, if the publisher doesn't offer a demo, then the options are to wait for reviews, take a chance on it or not buy it.[/spoiler]

Right... So the only thing that matters in life is the economy right?
Do you know why copyright terms were originally limited to just 25 years at most?

Do you know why those same laws declared that to benefit from copyright in the first place you had to agree to your work being in the public domain as part of the bargain?

Do you know why the effects of ever-increasing copyright terms are in effect having the complete opposite result from the one copyright laws were intended to accomplish?

Do you even know what those original goals were?

But hey. Endless patent litigation helps the economy too right? Even though frequently the lawsuits cost far more money than the commercial value of the patents...

Or how about that copyright laws are essentially an unfair legally imposed monopoly that while benefiting anyone who holds copyrights, is in effect potentially abusive towards anyone whose income derives from sources without such legally sanctioned monopolistic rights?

But, hey... As long as it helps the economy right?

Did I say say the only thing that matters is the economy? no I didnt, don't put words in my mouth.

I cited the benefit to the economy as its the only benefit of the used games industry, some people insist that because used games exist and games companies lose money this way then, there is no issue with piracy, that they are the same thing, despite the fact one is legal, and has this marginal benefit and the other is illegal and benefits noone but the pirate.

I couldn't care less about the specifics of copyright law, they have never impacted my life in a significant way, possibly because I buy my games.

 

[FalloutJack]

This is the sort of thing the Neil Gaiman Defense was made for. It's practically the reason he spoke about it.

 

[ElPatron]

Actually, you are legally allowed to own cracks, ROMs, and what-not as back-ups, provided you own a legitimate copy of the software.

Just like old-console ROMs. As long as you own a real copy of the game, you can have as many ROMs of the game as you like. Again, provided you don't sell them or give them away as copies to others that don't own the game.

The tools used to create ROMs are illegal. Laws don't make sense and sometimes are conflicting, I'm already used to it.

I like how people try to craft counter-points with analogies that make no sense.

The analogy is yours, and even though I am not a farmer I do know what I am talking about.

If we were to take your analogy at face value, it would apply more to someone making a mod of a game than actually pirating the game.

You say they "take the left-overs and grow their own trees". Sounds just like how most mods, especially full-conversions, are done.

A modification requires the original game. I can eat fruit without owning the original tree or original fruit.

You have cornered yourself into an analogy that we could spend years trying to explore...

And, adhering to this analogy, as long as you aren't reselling the used "seeds" (i.e., the game code) but are instead just giving it away, it's perfectly legal.

What part of "clone" do you not understand? I am trying to explain that humans try to "breed" the perfect tree and then replicate it.

Same genetic code.

That translates into the exact same game, running on it's engine. Not a mod. I don't need prerequisites to enjoy food.

However, if you take the original fruit, in it's entirety (and not the left overs), and then resell or give it away, THAT is illegal.

So...where was your counter-point again?

I bought a game. Does it matter if I played it or not if I want to put a ISO online? If I did not play, it's illegal, if I already played it and decide to post the "left-overs" it's still illegal.

Also, I can't buy fruit in second hand?

Then we are all committing crimes because suppliers buy fruit to farmers and those suppliers sell to grocery stores and supermarkets.

The more we explore this analogy the more it makes sense to pirate it.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

Intellectual property is intellectual property. I'm surprised this is such a tricky concept for you.

A strawman is a strawman. I'm surprised that even a picture wasn't enough to clarify this to you.

Maybe I need to explain, before you do the usual forum response of "omg troll". If we were arguing about piracy as a whole, I'd lend what you say to have credence. Otherwise, what you are doing is a picture perfect definition of attacking a strawman.

No, I'm pointing out that basically everyone in this country violates intellectual property on a pretty regular basis, and implying that perhaps some people (particularly on this site, for some reason) respond to software piracy as if this were not the case.

...I don't get why you don't think you're attacking a strawman. It doesn't matter what everyone in this country does (not that it makes it right), we're talking about whether or not in this instance, concerning a regionally distributed (or undistributed, as it were) game, it's justified/legal.

As clever as you might have thought you were being, that logic isn't required in this thread.

You still appear to be missing the point. And the irony of misinterpreting someone else's argument to accuse them of strawmanning.

Yes, We're talking about the moral and legal qualms of pirating a video game ROM, and you bring in the Happy Birthday song and that's totally related.

Got it.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

And a 5 year old from the 50s would be able to tell you that copying a book from the library is not taking something.

Right, but the 5 year old would know that it's wrong, the part you conveniently chose to ignore because you're among the rest of the sheep who want to sit there bitching about whether or not piracy is stealing rather than whether or not it's wrong.

Copying is not stealing. uselss shit snipped

Funny, I don't remember saying copying is stealing. I'd ask you to show me where I said that, but seeing as you're hopping up and down like a dog that's about to get a treat, utterly excited to spew your "piracy isn't stealing" bullshit at me, I doubt you'd be able to process that.

You mean like yourself?

....no. I understand commerce. You don't understand how to read, seeing as you've ascribed me to the position that piracy is stealing when I never said that. You're too funny!

Oh, right, it's not okay to listen to the radio?

Oh boy, here come the strawmans. Games are played on the radio now?

It's not okay to check out a book from the library?

See, the funny think about a library is that only one person has that book out at a time. Unless you're telling me that pirates "give back" the game after they are done with it?

It's not okay to play at a friend's house?

So pirating a game is the same as playing it at a friend's house? Silly me. I didn't realize that 1 person seeding a pirated release on The Pirate Bay to 10,000 other people was the same as you loaning Max your spare copy for him to try.

We're back to the same old faulty arguments that anti-pirates use all the time. Unsurprising, as the arguments against piracy don't have any logical basis.

No, we're actyually back to the same fucking stupid arguments that pirate apologists use all the time. Unsurprising, as most piracy arguments are full of strawmans and hypocrisy.

If copyright law is outdated and shouldn't apply to digital content, why are we using outdated sharing concepts to describe the sharing of digital content? Oh wait, Pirate Defense Mechanism #1: We get to make up the rules of argument.

Then all the less is piracy depriving anyone of anything. If gaming is so trivial, there's no reason to flip a lid over how creators are having things "taken" from them.

You took that out of context (Good work!). The response was to someone who felt that they shouldn't be denied to such art that is gaming.

If you don't have enough for it, you wait until you do.

Do anti-pirates have any other arguments other than ordering people on what to do with their life?

Telling people what they already know is ordering them around? Well fuck. Here I was thinking that you need to have money to buy something was something everyone learned. I suppose your education must not have been up to par with the rest of ours...

No, people should copy and spread anything and everything that deserves to be copied. Anything that deserves to be copied and spread should be copied and spread. If something is not worth copying and spreading on a massive scale, it is worthless.

Spoken like a true fucking pirate. Good job, sir. Good job.

You don't tell what to do based upon some twist anti-piracy morality. You are WRONG.

Yes, I am wrong for telling you not to bypass the price tag on something. What twisted morality I have, what travesty I commit by doing so.

You don't get to tell people what to do. You don't have any logical basis in your disagreement with piracy.

....what!?! A. There is a price tag. B. You ignored the price tag. C. Is there a C?? YOU don't have any fucking logical basis in your argument other than the emotional speeches of "oh it should ALL be copied" and "you can't tell me what to do NYAH NYAH NYAH".

You don't get to tell people they have to pay for every single thing they use.

No, that's the fucking job of the people who set the price of things. You know, because they're the ones who made it.

If you don't have the money for a video game, you do get to play it. You get to use the many resources available to you in order to play it for free. Some of them legal, some of them not. But they are morally correct.

That was so fucking stupid I don't even know how to get my head around it. A, we're talking about morality here. B, did you really just fucking that illegal ways to play it for free are still morally correct?

Wow. I thought you were just a generic pirate. I now realize you're just in outright denial of any shred of logic.

You don't deserve to have anyone listen to you and your twisted "morality".

Yeah! Fuck my sense of twisted morality. How DARE I suggest it is wrong to circumvent payment for something that is meant to be paid for so blatantly.

What on earth? Are you even attempting to argue there's a difference here? Based upon what? A ridiculous prejudice that video games are better than music or music videos or the like? Video games are not better or more deserving of money than music.

So, by your logic, then nothing is worth anything because you previously said all video game piracy is justified and moral. Got it.

The fact that the Escapist heavily punishes video games piracy of any variety but allows people to link to pirated material via youtube is an irony.

You realize YouTube has tons of privacy agreements in place to combat or adapt to the pirated nature? I once uploaded the final clip of "Religilous" and using digital fingerprinting, they knew what it was/ Lionsgate sent me a YouTube message saying a copyright notice will be posted on my video page and I won't be able to embed it.

That's all that happened.

Youtube has agreements and safe harbor to help it deal with pirated material. The Escapist does not. But since you want to relate everything to everything else, I suppose such a concept is lost upon you.

If people don't buy music, it hurts the industry.

But according to you, its is perfectly justified, acceptable, and morally ok. Got it.

Of course, some record companies are putting their own material onto youtube for free.

Some!?! Ever heard of VEVO?

But the vast majority of music on youtube is piracy.

So many facts and sources to back that up! Just like a typical pirate

The most stupid fucking part about all of this is that I don't have an issue with people who pirate. I have pirated a decent chunk of stuff myself. I will not lie.

But you know what i won't do? I won't drop to your pathetic level. I won't try and convince myself that what I do is alright. I won't try and tell myself that I am "screwing The Man" and "sticking it to the greedy media companies". I won't say "oh, he's made plenty off this, it's ok for me to do this". I won't say "oh, what if I don't like it, I don't want to pay for it if that's the case".

I will say "fuck this shit, I want it for free". Pirates need to grow some fucking balls. I remember back in the day when piracy only happened on the IRC DCC networks. Pirates were just as spineless then as they are now, but at least back then they didn't pretend that every single one of them was a fucking messiah or political crusader leading an attack on "outdated copyright law".

Fucking. Pathetic.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

I don't understand why the fuck people think pirates would stop if their self-justification doesn't hold up. I could tell you it's morally wrong and illegal, but you wouldn't listen.

And I wouldn't blame you one bit. I don't have an issue with people claiming to pirate. As long as you never think what you're doing is in anyway justified, I don't take issue with it (because there's just too many people to combat if I do).

Problem is, I have no way of buying half of the Nintendo DS games that comes out nowadays. Every retail store I've visited (and we have no DS-focused stores in my town, probably in my country there's a handful) has some shit like Nintendogs or puzzle games for children. I think only Pokemon somehow avoided it, but even then it's freshly after release.

I remember when I bought GBA and wanted to buy some Megaman Zero or Battle Network, or one of the older Pokemon games, or Zelda...

Nope. I had a choice between Bomberman and Mario.

You didn't have online retailers to hunt from? Look, I'm not saying I don't sympathize with you, nor am I saying "don't pirate it". I'm just telling you that the above is not justification for piracy. Perhaps it's a reason why you did, no doubt. But it's definitely not justification.

 

[Mettking]

I don't know the exact wording of the law(s) in question, so I can't speek for it. Morally, however, this is one of a very small number of times I would say okay to pirating a game. What I've always believed is that if a game can be legally purchased in your area, then piracy is not allowed. If it cannot be obtained any other way or in a language you don't understand only, like Mother 3 for those who don't speek/read japanesse, then I'm willing to to say okay to that.

 

[Ickorus]

It's still illegal but from what I've heard from many developers in interviews regarding piracy they generally hint that they don't mind so long as you legitimately do not have the means to obtain their game any other way.

Game developers can be some pretty cool dudes.

And no, this isn't me condoning piracy, just repeating what I've read in interviews.

 

[Samurai Silhouette]

Well hell, they obviously didn't want my money in the first place. Not like they're losing profit.

 

[an874]

If the there's no legal way to get a game, I think it's perfectly fine to pirate it. If the developer or publisher didn't do anything to make it available to you, that's money that they didn't care enough to try to make, and so pirating it is not hurting them and at the very least you are trying to appreciate their work which might be more than they deserve. Of course it's illegal, but since when has something being legal automatically made it moral. It used to legal to own slaves in America, the law is not and never has been the last word on what is actually ethical, no matter what country and what laws you are talking about.

 

[Nu-Hir]

I dont understand the point you are making, because developers/publishers lose money through a legitimate channel (used sales) We should all accept that piracy is fine and they lose no money from it?

Not my point at all. People equate piracy to theft because it deprives people of money. Used games sales do the exact same thing, but in a different way, yet it is not considered theft. Piracy is as much like theft as used games sales are theft. Neither are actually theft. One is capitalism, the other is copyright infringement. That was the point I was making. It's like saying ur and you are are the same thing because they sound the same. They're not. One is two letters, the other is two words.

Devs and publishers have to live with used sales, as its legal, they can do things to impinge them (day1dlc for new copies, online passes etc) But the end of the day its something they have to accept.

Piracy they do not have to roll over and take though, as it, unlike used sales, is not permited under law.

But it's not something that they're rolling over and accepting. Instead they've resorted to making DLC that's free day one with software purchased new, but you have to pay for used (and sometimes pushing the price of a used game to more than a new game). Free online passes to new games, but you have to pay for if you get the game used, once again making the used game cost more than the new. They're not accepting the losses, they're trying to break the market that is providing competitive prices.

You also missed the point that although used games do not help the industry, they do help the economy. Piracy only benefits the pirate as he thinks he's entitled to things without paying for them.

As to the point about piracies benefits, perhaps if all people were like you andbought the game or music, then fine, however they are not and its naive to think that they are, the vast majority of pirates are scum who like to take things for free.

Piracy doesn't always benefit the pirate. I'm going to go old school with this one. If I were the unproud owner of Superman 64, I would have wished someone would have pirated it before I bought it so they could tell me that it was a steaming pile of dog shit. On the flip side I've also bought games on the recommendation of a pirate (hello Unreal Tournament).

How many people who pirate the game "just to see what its like" delete it straight away when they realise its not great, I imagine the majority think "don't want to pay for it, but might as well play it, i mean i went to the trouble of downloading it after all"

I could borrow the game from a friend or rent it. I'm still not paying for it, but I'm playing it anyway. Yes, I realize that both of those situations are legal (well, borrowing from a friend is shaky legal ground). Think of piracy as borrowing from a friend you haven't met yet!

Gaming is a luxury, people don't have a right to demo the entire thing before they decide if its "worth it" in their opinion, if the publisher doesn't offer a demo, then the options are to wait for reviews, take a chance on it or not buy it.

I agree, gaming is a luxury. With my financial situation, I can't really take chances on games and hope they're good. I also distrust many publications' employees, and am very cautious about their reviews. I mean, it's hard to make informed purchases of XBox 360 games when the only reviewers I trust work for Nintendo Power. On the flip side, it shouldn't be harder to install/run legally obtained software than it is pirated software (I'm looking at you Portal).

 

[Nu-Hir]

I love the "Piracy is stealing because it deprives people (developers/publishers) of money!" You know what, so does heading down to your local GameStop and buying used, but people don't equate that to stealing. "But that's different, you paid GameStop for the game!" Yes, but I also paid my ISP for my bandwidth, paid a computer retailer for my HDD, possibly even paid that same retailer for optical media to burn it to a CD/DVD/BD.

You know, I really like that comparison.

I payed my ISP to download the game, you payed gamestop to give you the used game. Same thing, but I pay my ISP a monthly charge.

(Note to mods: That is an editorial I, not meaning I personally download games)

I demand royalties!

 

[Nu-Hir]

I cited the benefit to the economy as its the only benefit of the used games industry, some people insist that because used games exist and games companies lose money this way then, there is no issue with piracy, that they are the same thing, despite the fact one is legal, and has this marginal benefit and the other is illegal and benefits noone but the pirate.

I assume by some people you mean me. I'm not saying there's isn't an issue with piracy, nor am I saying used games sales and piracy are the same thing. I'm saying they're both home runs (for the consumer), it just depends on which side of the foul pole you're on.

The used game market gives marginal benefit to the consumer (slight price reduction), zero benefit to publishers (lost sales), and major benefit to the middle man (one copy of a game has the potential to be sold multiple times, profiting each time). Piracy gives major benefit to the consumer (free game), marginal benefit to the publisher (word of mouth for the game), and zero to the middle man.

It's funny that used games sales have the same outcome as piracy, just with the benefits being shifted around. The only reason it isn't demonized as much is due to it's legality. Both are different sides to the same coin. If I had the choice of pirating or buying used, I'll almost always chose pirate, because if I get a game, I want to support its makers. I really only buy used if that's the only way I'll find a copy (Where are you PSO for Gamecube!).

I couldn't care less about the specifics of copyright law, they have never impacted my life in a significant way, possibly because I buy my games.

That's like saying, "I couldn't care less about the specifics of the PATRIOT Act, it has never impacted my life in a significant way, possibly because I'm not a terrorist."

 

[Aardvark Soup]

This specific case is completely justified in my opinion. As far as Nintendo is concerned, you shouldn't even be able to buy this game, therefore pirating it couldn't possibly count as a 'lost sale'. In my opinion this also extends to older games that have left store shelves ages ago and are incredibly hard to find (or play without an emulator, because they got released on a crappy and rare console like the Sega CD or Philips CD-i).

However, if you really liked the game and eventually it somehow does get localized and released in your region, you should buy it in my opinion. I did the same with Chrono Trigger and will also do so if Earthbound or Mother 3 would ever get a release in Europe.

 

[coolbeans21]

I cited the benefit to the economy as its the only benefit of the used games industry, some people insist that because used games exist and games companies lose money this way then, there is no issue with piracy, that they are the same thing, despite the fact one is legal, and has this marginal benefit and the other is illegal and benefits noone but the pirate.

I assume by some people you mean me. I'm not saying there's isn't an issue with piracy, nor am I saying used games sales and piracy are the same thing. I'm saying they're both home runs (for the consumer), it just depends on which side of the foul pole you're on.

The used game market gives marginal benefit to the consumer (slight price reduction), zero benefit to publishers (lost sales), and major benefit to the middle man (one copy of a game has the potential to be sold multiple times, profiting each time). Piracy gives major benefit to the consumer (free game), marginal benefit to the publisher (word of mouth for the game), and zero to the middle man.

I didnt mean to single out just you, its a prevelant attitude among the pro piracy crowd, I guess I come down on the side of the foul pole that doesn't mean breaking the law. THe word of mouth from piracy is very marginal, possibly because it runs something like this

"dude this game is sweet, you should totally pirate it"

It's funny that used games sales have the same outcome as piracy, just with the benefits being shifted around. The only reason it isn't demonized as much is due to it's legality. Both are different sides to the same coin. If I had the choice of pirating or buying used, I'll almost always chose pirate, because if I get a game, I want to support its makers. I really only buy used if that's the only way I'll find a copy (Where are you PSO for Gamecube!).

The reason it isn't demonized as much is because it is legal, the only argument is the ethical one, should you support an industry you love or not.

I couldn't care less about the specifics of copyright law, they have never impacted my life in a significant way, possibly because I buy my games.

That's like saying, "I couldn't care less about the specifics of the PATRIOT Act, it has never impacted my life in a significant way, possibly because I'm not a terrorist."

The patriot act has never impacted my life because Im not an American, I wouldn;t quite put that piece of extremist legislation on a par with copyright law.

Pirates have to stop seeing themselves as crusaders against the big companies and accept that they just want to take stuff for free.

edit (I didn't see you other post)

You can't honestly say lending to a friend or renting a single copy or a game is the same as seeding it to thousands upon thousands thats just mental.

I sympathise with the financial situation, I've been there, but as you agree that gaming is a luxury, it doesn't grant the right to break the law, its not like stealing bread to feed a starving family.

Even if you distrust Proffesional reviews, You're part of a world spanning community with the internet, you should be able to garner a good enough idea of the quality of a game through word of mouth, asking peeps on forums, without having to pirate it.

What if you pirate it and the games only ok in your opinion, nothing special, good enough to pass the hours, you get some enjoyment from it. Would you really go pay money for it? Do those developers deserve nothing, you got a couple of hours fun from it, they got nothing for their work.

 

[IWCAS]

I've never really thought about that. I'd like to play the Higurashi no Naku Koro ni games...

i thought there was a translated download verson over at mangagamer that would work.

I'm not sure man, I didn't look incredibly hard for one. I figured it was hopeless. My computer would probably kill itself anyways; It's like 8 years old and won't even run Minecraft. Maybe when I get a new computer I'll try looking for it or something. Buuuuut, I'll be getting a Mac so I'm not sure if that'll hinder me getting a download of it or not. We'll see I guess.

Also, I found a ps2 translated version, but I still had to import it from Japan which costs like 11 million and a half dollars.

 

[Abedeus]

I don't understand why the fuck people think pirates would stop if their self-justification doesn't hold up. I could tell you it's morally wrong and illegal, but you wouldn't listen.

And I wouldn't blame you one bit. I don't have an issue with people claiming to pirate. As long as you never think what you're doing is in anyway justified, I don't take issue with it (because there's just too many people to combat if I do).

Problem is, I have no way of buying half of the Nintendo DS games that comes out nowadays. Every retail store I've visited (and we have no DS-focused stores in my town, probably in my country there's a handful) has some shit like Nintendogs or puzzle games for children. I think only Pokemon somehow avoided it, but even then it's freshly after release.

I remember when I bought GBA and wanted to buy some Megaman Zero or Battle Network, or one of the older Pokemon games, or Zelda...

Nope. I had a choice between Bomberman and Mario.

You didn't have online retailers to hunt from? Look, I'm not saying I don't sympathize with you, nor am I saying "don't pirate it". I'm just telling you that the above is not justification for piracy. Perhaps it's a reason why you did, no doubt. But it's definitely not justification.

I refuse to pay for a game 150% of the retail price because the publisher didn't bother releasing it in any major store in my country.

Choice here is very easy - pirate or not play at all. There is no "you could buy it". When game costs $30 and shipping is $15+, there's something wrong.

 

[Ekit]

It's kind of pointless to discuss piracy on a forum where you get banned if you admit to pirate games.