Poll: Piracy is legal

[EtherealBeaver]

Yes I do think piracy is not intrinsically evil and often can have its merits. I like to think its because that - instead of listening to money grubbing old businessmen who just wants more money but doesnt understand how the internet works - I have considered the facts for myself and supported it with an unbias study such as the Swiss study.

Taking advise from studies made by people who think they can make more money with a certain outcome of said study is not, strictly speaking, objective handling of a matter and as such that study should be disregarded on basis of adacemic bias - just like it would be in any real academic environment like a university.

Naturally there are problems with piracy and yes it is often a moral grey-zone but judging based on a grey zone is like giving someone a fine because he "might" cross the street at red lights. The main complaint from the industry is that they lose revenue but according to the swiss study, they would actually gain revenue if piracy was legal so the only objective monetary argument against piracy is, more or less, debunked. What remains is the intrinsic moral questions about filesharing sites.

Personally I make print-and-play board games, I write roleplaying games and scenarios and I make inspirational material for roleplaying games and storytelling and I just torrents for this purpose because it is easily accessable to a large audience - specifically did I use the piratebay until it became illigal. Why it became illigal and why I am not allowed to give away my own work for free in a specific manner, I do not know but it is quite frustrating.

 

[SadisticFire]

Well I don't think piracy is wrong unless you're doing it frequently, when you have the disposable income for it, and can get it without issue. Piracy is a really big grey zone. If you buy a game used, you arn't really making it any better for the publisher/dev that made that game, cause no money goes to them. An argument used frequently by anti pirates. If you bought a game, but don't want to bother with the DRM, would pirating still be wrong? If you want a demo, but there is none, is pirating still wrong?(though that reason is used often, enforced little.) It's just a shame that it seems majority of people have to be complete for, or not.
As for me, I think it's fine for small, non-profiting use. Not constant, or profiting use.
I have a feeling this post wont get read though, seeing it's on the seventh page..but oh well.

 

[Rastrelly]

Liked it - pay. Didn't - screw those losers. It's information. You cannot physically steal it, so unless you've taken a disk from a store without paying, developer loses 0 profit. It is absolutely obvious. If you won't try to resell information you've "pirated" you are absolutely morally clear. And I say it as a wannabe developer, if someone will try to tell me "I'd look at you if you were at developer's place". I always said and will say - if I will ever reach level to make a commercial product, I will neither add any copy protection to it, nor try to awoid it's "pirating".

 

[Twilight_guy]

I'd make me mad. Why would anyone ever play a game when you can download it off a perfectly legal site for free. That'll mean either the game industry would go in the toilet (fuck everyone and all their shit if games become a piddly shell of themselves because there is no money in it anymore), games wouldn't be imported into my country anymore since there is no profit in them there(fuck that noise, I like games), or all games that I could play would use free-to-play or similar method that has micro-transactions to earn money (that would get boring fast).

The same reason free concerts still make a boat load of money, the reason musicians still make obscene amounts of money even though you can find damn near every song ever made from the day its released on youtube.

People like to support things that they enjoy. Just a few posts above we have a person from a nation who allows it, he buys things, when I was poor and pirated, I bought the games I enjoyed when I got a job to pay for them all (part of the reason my steam library has a 45% unplayed list ~.~)

Its a scare tactic that people like to throw out saying "well if everyone can get it for free no one will pay! That is wrong, and bullshit. Just because YOU might not buy a bit of media you were able to get for free doesnt mean other people wont.

If you (editorial you this time) have the money to get the game, have enjoyed what you played of the game (pirate, borrowed from a friend, what not), and the ability to buy the game, but choose not to, that makes you a bad person. But if you didnt enjoy the game (No matter how it was played) theres no problem, as it wasnt a lost sale anyway. If you cant afford the game, no problem as you wouldnt have been able to buy it anyway. If they wont sell it in your country, no problem, they didnt want your business anyway. I dont support piracy naturally, people should be payed for their work, which is why I buy all my games now that I have a job that allows such a luxury, but there is nothing MORALLY wrong with it.

People don't go to concerts to hear songs, they go to concerts to see musicians. CDs are cheaper and easier then going to a concert.

That said, you overestimate how much people with good will would be able to do. The best Kickstarter for a game ever raised what, a few million. Not enough to make a modern AAA game, that's the super popular one. The idea of supporting something because you like it may be a very altruistic notion but ti isn't one shared by everyone and it generally doesn't get you that much money. Lots of people may want to help but fewer will and fewer will donate more then about 20 bucks for a project. Trying to hide behind this notion of people support people out of the goodness of their heart is stupid. There are good people but not enough to fund anything big.

You're right, if people can get it for free, some people will still pay. However it's not going to be enough to be profitable. That still means that no business is going to develop software because it's a losing proposition.

What's more is that if piracy and file sharing becomes legal and its going to become very very easy to do so. Instead of having to search for torrents or files, they'd be put on the front page of websites, they'd be out in the open. That means that average Joe Blow will be far more likely to get a free version that he found with a Google search then to buy the game in the store.

 

[squeekenator]

Legality and morality are completely unrelated, it wouldn't change a thing.

 

[Henkie36]

Spoiler

Well, it is, assuming that you live in one of the countries [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114537-File-sharing-Remains-Legal-In-Switzerland] such as Switzerland or The Netherlands that either already legalized it, or at least decriminalized it.

For the rest of you, the question is this: If piracy (that is, individual, non-commercial sharing of otherwise copyrighted data) would be legal in your country, would that change your feelings in any way about whether or not the people using it are thiefs/assholes/self-entitled freeloaders respectively?

(Vote "other" if you feel that it was always a morally ambigious or acceptable or neutral act to begin with).

I'm asking this because in te usual "morality of piracy" threads, we tend to hit a wall when we get to the point of wheter it is the letter of the law that makes something right or wrong, or it's something that's inherently there. So this time, let's focus on just that.

File sharing maybe legal in The Netherlands, but the government is trying pretty hard to stop piracy, like for instance, forcing the major internet providers into shutting down The Pirate Bay.

OT: Like you said, it's still not legal. I still think it's morally ambigious to simply steal copyrighted data, but on the other hand, I do see where it comes from. With so many shitty stuff being realeased, paying 15 to 60 bucks depending on what you are buying is quite a gamble, with sizeable stakes. I understand it, even if I don't have to like it.

 

[CriticalMiss]

I believe information and knowledge should be shared freely, but that people should be paid for what they produce, create etc. Pirating just isn't what it used to be. Yo ho For the most part, if something isn't worth paying for why would you want it in the first place? (unless it is vastly overpriced)

 

[Gearhead mk2]

I say if you can't get it normally, like if it's really old or was never released in your country, pirate away. If not, buy the product and support it's creators.

 

[Entitled]

What's more is that if piracy and file sharing becomes legal and its going to become very very easy to do so. Instead of having to search for torrents or files, they'd be put on the front page of websites, they'd be out in the open. That means that average Joe Blow will be far more likely to get a free version that he found with a Google search then to buy the game in the store.

Everyone knows how to use youtube, yet we still have a music industry.

In fact, to give a specific example, literally every Internet user in the world has watched the Gangam Style video on youtube, yet it still reached the top of sales chats as well. Piracy is easy. Even using torrents isn't more complicated than using an e-mail client.

By your own logic, you essentially admit that formal legality really is the only difference between whether piracy is right or wrong, or at least most people would see it that way.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

Each individual decides what is morally okay for him and what isn't.

If it was legal, I think most people would also consider it morally okay- same as what's happening with weed currently.

That sounds about right. Personally, I would wait until the day piracy goes legal and finally get my copy of Starfox 2 and, the Taito Superman Arcade game. Otherwise I'll just continue buying carts for old consoles since I'm sure the prices would plummet on everything that isn't CIB and/or SIB. Imagine a world where you can buy a used copy Earthbound, cart only, for less than a hundred dollars!

 

[Twilight_guy]

People don't go to concerts to hear songs, they go to concerts to see musicians. CDs are cheaper and easier then going to a concert.

That said, you overestimate how much people with good will would be able to do. The best Kickstarter for a game ever raised what, a few million. Not enough to make a modern AAA game, that's the super popular one. The idea of supporting something because you like it may be a very altruistic notion but ti isn't one shared by everyone and it generally doesn't get you that much money. Lots of people may want to help but fewer will and fewer will donate more then about 20 bucks for a project. Trying to hide behind this notion of people support people out of the goodness of their heart is stupid. There are good people but not enough to fund anything big.

You're right, if people can get it for free, some people will still pay. However it's not going to be enough to be profitable. That still means that no business is going to develop software because it's a losing proposition.

What's more is that if piracy and file sharing becomes legal and its going to become very very easy to do so. Instead of having to search for torrents or files, they'd be put on the front page of websites, they'd be out in the open. That means that average Joe Blow will be far more likely to get a free version that he found with a Google search then to buy the game in the store.

You can see the musicians in youtube videos, and is cheaper, easier than goign to a concert or going to a concert, granted CDs are on their way out, but iTunes and the like are going strong even though every song is available via youtube. The music industry hasnt imploded now has it?

And kickstarter is a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE example and you damn well know it. Kickstarter is expecting people to put their money forward based on an idea that hasnt hit production yet. What I am talking about is having played a game, liked it, and buying it. A demo has no comparison with Kickstarter, please dont try to muddle the issue like that.

And if Joe Blow wants a free version all he has to do is go to the biggest and one of the oldest torrent sites, and I guarantee you if they are an avid gamer they probably know which one I am talking about as its in the news often enough, and do a search and click download. Google already will throw a multitude of torrent sites up for ya, yet the majority STILL pay for their games.

You vastly over estimate how many folk would pirate, its already nearly an unenforceable crime, Joe Blow still just go to steam and buy the legal version because Joe Blow is a lazy slob who doesnt want to bother with getting the pirated copy to work when he can just click install then play, download the game faster in a lot of cases, and not finagle with cracks, firewall settings and the like. The sky would not fall if suddenly piracy was made legal, unless you can show me how piracy has skyrocketed and content creators have found it impossible to sell media in Switzerland since they made piracy legal.

No, still wrong. People want to see a singer. Youtube doesn't let you see the singer in person. (Even if you're in the nose bleed section people still want to be there. It's kind of stupid that way.)

Maybe Kickstarter was a bad example, i was trying to come up with something separate from game sales which are an unreliable number, to try and give some context to how much people will give/support a company for its games. There isn't any good way of gauging that. Course I still think examine Kickstarter, Indie bundle sales, etc is a good way to get some feel for the issue and just how little people are willing to give if not forced to.

Still think legalizing it would make it more appealing to people, would lead to an increased streamlining of it and would generally make your average citizen more likely to use it. Once again though its really not something that can easily be predict so nobody knows.

(I've generally seen that people are more cheap then lazy.)

 

[Entitled]

For the most part, if something isn't worth paying for why would you want it in the first place? (unless it is vastly overpriced)

That's a false dichotomy. There is a lot of leeway between "thing that I must get at all costs" and "thing that I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole". Sometimes people are just mildly interested in looking into something, sometimes they want to be in the loop about the latest movie's plot, but don't care so much to walk to the cinema for it.

Most people are not rich enough to pay for every piece of content that they feel like watching/playing/reading at the moment, so it stands to reason that as long as they do spend their budget on the things that they want the most, there is no harm caused by also downloading a bunch of other stuff that they couldn't/wouldn't buy.

I'm calling it "couldn't/wouldn't buy" because on one hand it's effectively the same thing as the "too poor to buy digital content" argument, even if it's less sympathetic because it doesn't involve actual poor people, while on the other hand, technically they COULD buy it if they would sacrifice some even more important material for it, but that's just not gonna happen anyways.

 

[Crazie_Guy]

Obviously it's wrong to steal. Of course, piracy isn't stealing, as nothing is lost; it's copying. Except it's not copying either, because it doesn't provide due compensation. So in the end piracy is just piracy. Given the opportunity, I would happily pirate an album and then mail its retail value directly to the band. They deserve it. The archaic industry that peddles it for them deserves nothing.

 

[jackpipsam]

I am against piracy and I will remain against piracy.

I have always brought my product and when I don't have the money to buy a game I really want... I wait until I have the money.

Also I think Piracy as activism is an excuse.

 

[Strazdas]

I'd make me mad. Why would anyone ever play a game when you can download it off a perfectly legal site for free. That'll mean either the game industry would go in the toilet (fuck everyone and all their shit if games become a piddly shell of themselves because there is no money in it anymore), games wouldn't be imported into my country anymore since there is no profit in them there(fuck that noise, I like games), or all games that I could play would use free-to-play or similar method that has micro-transactions to earn money (that would get boring fast).

and currently no donation based service ever works beucase why donate when you cna jsut get it for free right? i mean, like, escapist doesnt exist and your not posting here. oh wait, actually, you are wrong.
Or how about wikipedia, which is completely donation based?

That said, you overestimate how much people with good will would be able to do. The best Kickstarter for a game ever raised what, a few million. Not enough to make a modern AAA game, that's the super popular one. The idea of supporting something because you like it may be a very altruistic notion but ti isn't one shared by everyone and it generally doesn't get you that much money. Lots of people may want to help but fewer will and fewer will donate more then about 20 bucks for a project. Trying to hide behind this notion of people support people out of the goodness of their heart is stupid. There are good people but not enough to fund anything big.

kickstarters have went over 20 million too. and kicstarters are not the way it would be done anyway. sure you wont have 300 million games. and thats good. hardly any game is worth more than 20 bucks nowdays anyway, so thats nto much of a problem. and its all about the waging of risks. a company that invests money into a game will have to, you know, stop acting like EA to make money. wow, actually, we should make piracy legal for the sole thing of EA going down. its worth it even if whole world burns. oh, i just got a bit carried away

You're right, if people can get it for free, some people will still pay. However it's not going to be enough to be profitable. That still means that no business is going to develop software because it's a losing proposition.

What's more is that if piracy and file sharing becomes legal and its going to become very very easy to do so. Instead of having to search for torrents or files, they'd be put on the front page of websites, they'd be out in the open. That means that average Joe Blow will be far more likely to get a free version that he found with a Google search then to buy the game in the store.

Yeah, artists dressing in gold is "not enough to be profitable". you give the best arguments. Software already has this. do you know how many bought photoshop solely because they learnt how to use it by pirating it? Adobe loves people pirating photoshop and they admit it.

It is already very very easy to do. if i wanted i could download half the movies released last year within 3-4 hours and that does not even need any knowledge save for few basics that you can learn in 5 minutes. infact it is HARDER to buy legally now. want spotify? now available in your country. netflix? not available in your country. OnLive? not available in your country. and you call pdownloading hard?
The torrents are already on front page of websites. they are the first thing that comes up on google searches and average joe can download it. hech, my grandma was boasting of how she "downloaded an album of artist she loved when she was young". anyone that WANTS already CAN download EASY.
Of course there are those superstupid people, but they cant do anything anyway.

Joe Blow still just go to steam and buy the legal version because Joe Blow is a lazy slob who doesnt want to bother with getting the pirated copy to work when he can just click install then play, download the game faster in a lot of cases, and not finagle with cracks, firewall settings and the like. The sky would not fall if suddenly piracy was made legal, unless you can show me how piracy has skyrocketed and content creators have found it impossible to sell media in Switzerland since they made piracy legal.

Actually, ever since SecuRom, pirated games are easier to launch then legal ones. Pirated movies dont have advertisements that last for 15 freaking minutes (yes im looking at you matrix) and pirated music is in a format that you can listen to on your pc, phone, ipod, car and whereever you want. pirating is easier, yet many people still buy the stuff.

No, still wrong. People want to see a singer. Youtube doesn't let you see the singer in person. (Even if you're in the nose bleed section people still want to be there. It's kind of stupid that way.)

and piracy hinders this how?

People are not cheap and working. if that were true we would have worked outselves to death now. people are lazy and wasteful and only work as much as needed picking an easiest way out. thats why piracy is so popular now - its easier.

Except it's not copying either, because it doesn't provide due compensation.

wait, what? when does copying meant you have to pay? have you ever wrote same thing twice? have you compensated yourself for it?
wait, so me copying your text now means i must pay you for it?

 

[Spitfire]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but how exactly does one steal a chainmail (a physical piece of work) through a digital medium?

The physical work isn't stolen; the image is (and yes, I realize calling it "stealing" is playing fast and loose with the language, but I think you can understand what I mean). Thing is, you can't really separate the image from the piece in the image--that picture would not exist had the piece not been made, which means that the effort that went into making that piece is also part of what went into making the picture. Additionally, often when people do that (copy an image of someone else's chainmail and put it on their own site without attribution) the effect is to make it seem as though the copycat actually made the piece. When someone puts hours of effort into making something, and then puts additional effort into taking a good photograph of it (my avatar picture is actually a bad example of that part--but really good chainmail photography involves a lot more than just pointing and shooting) it's more than a little aggravating to see other people just copy the image onto their own site without bothering to even say "please". Which, in most cases, is all that would be required.

Isn't the purpose of such pictures to advertise the piece of work that they're depicting? And if that's the case, then aren't the third-parties who are using said pictures providing free advertisement (assuming they don't claim ownership over them)?

Sorry for the late reply.

 

[DonTsetsi]

Never been illegal here and no way it could become. Many people have barely enough money for food and bills and any government that tries to pass such a law would never be reelected.

 

[babinro]

Yes.

If piracy is 100% legal then I don't have a problem with it.
It's no more harsh then the sub-par wages and excessive hours that companies are legally allowed to put us through.

I might not agree with the law, but I would no longer have moral qualms with it.