Poll: What's wrong with piracy

[John Mandrake]

depends:
ive bought a lot of games ive regretted completely, so what i do is take an extended trial (you know...) but dont finish it, and if i really do like it, then i go back and buy it. the only time i buy something flat out is if i know it will be good.
also: if you count downloading because you lost/broke yours: i find nothing wrong with that. if their stupid antivirus won't let me play my game, you bet im gonna crack it and/or download a copy. but seriously, every game i ended up loving i have gone back and bought

 

[Arrzarr]

snip.

snip

well in the case of any recent FPS, copyright infringement can't apply because for copyright protection you need a "minimum amount of creativity" ^^

closer to the topic, it is copyright infringement. In Simpler and broader terms, it is closely approximated by stealing, effectively is stealing, just has no physical presence. It's the code you're stealing. Not the box/disk

 

[Arrzarr]

I just went to wikipedia. I concede and gg.

 

[Tiamattt]

Easiest way to solve this: Is it illegal to do wherever you live? If yes then you willingly broke the law therefore it's wrong.

Stealing, theft, copyright infringement, whatever people want to call it, it doesn't really matter. A crime is still being committed and last time I checked committing crimes would be considered immoral. So people can call it whatever they please, can debate about how much or little harm it does, about how much of a douchebag the companies are, in the end none of that matters. If they're doing something they're not willing to tell the cops about then they really can't claim to be in the side of righteousness.

 

[orangeban]

Forget the actual effects of piracy, just focus on the fact that some people (often hundreds of people) have put a lot of work (often years) and money (often millions) into a product, and you steal that work. I find it totally morally objectionable for those reasons alone.

 

[Twilight_guy]

I believe in copyright laws and I want to get a job in the games industry. Piracy violates copyright and also hurts the game industry. (no, shut the fuck up it does, don't even try to argue that one).

I pirated Skyrim and S.T.A.L.K.E.R Shadow of Chernobyl. I am now the proud owner of physical copies of the entire S.T.A.l.K.E.R series, and Skyrim. I don't have super duper blazing internet, and wanted to try the games before I spent my fucking money on them.

"B-but piracy is always b-bad!!!"

It's taking all my will not to reach through your monitor and strangle you for being so condescending with that line. Piracy hurts the games industry because there are people who pirate games and do not buy a physical copy pay for a digital copy, or in any other way provide any revue for the people who make the game. If you think this isn't a problem and losing money is not something to be worried over, even if you don't see it as a significant problem, then you should never run a business... ever. It's an issue for a reason and even if you don't think piracy is bad then at least acknowledge that its something that games are concern about and thus something you should be concerned about. Now stop trying to paint me as an extremist over piracy or I'm going to paint you as a condescending jerk trolling this forum. Things can be bad without being black and white and too many people don't get it.

 

[Captain Pirate]

Sorry but I'm finding it hard to find any moral high ground for selfish piracy.

It's up to the developers/publishers to decide how much they want for it.
You can say it's overpriced, or disagree with the cost all you want, but it's totally their right to charge that much money, even if it is unreasonable.
Therefore, if you want the game, pay the required cost.
You can always wait for it to go down in price or something, but still, if you want something, but aren't prepared to pay for it, that is simply you being selfish.

Note that this being the case where you simply don't want to give money for it, not buying it to see if you would like to pay for it or whatever, this scenario I'm talking about is just flat out 'I want it for free'.

 

[SFMB]

Piracy is wrong when you get caught.

 

[sinterklaas]

Piracy is not inherently bad, it depends on why you pirate.

I voted no.

If yes then you willingly broke the law therefore it's wrong.

Because the law is always right, no?

 

[AngloDoom]

If you intend to play the game, you should purchase it.

Now this is clearly wrong. What if I haven't enough money? Now i'm not suggesting that I should pirate it (it seems everyone likes to put words in peoples mouths ITT), but just pointing out that determining whether someone "intends" to do something isn't as simple as you make it out to be. If we're going to have a useful discussion, we can't keep making absurd leaps of logic.

I don't think it's an absurd leap of logic to suggest that by owning something you want it, and that if you want something someone else is legally trying to sell you should purchase it off of them.

I think you may have misinterpreted my words - I did not suggest that if you pirate something you had the intention of paying for it initially. I only said that if you want something you should have to pay for it, and should not expect to receive that 'something' unless you do.

I would have thought the difference is clear - before the concept of intellectual property existed, we could not treat piracy as interfering with another's property rights, because of that lack of physical form. The idea of theft needs to be confined to physical goods to keep the objective of the law focused on the property holder - who is, after all, the one who suffers. If we're considering taking intangibles to be 'theft' to focus shifts to the 'thief', so the law loses all of its context and serves no one. And we all end up totally confused.


All I'm saying is that the concept of piracy is different from the concept of theft, and so must be treated in a different way from theft if we want to tackle the problem seriously. Making widespread assertions like "piracy is theft" helps no one, and solves nothing.

Okay, either I've totally lost you or you've read someone else's reply and gotten confused along the lines somewhere.

I've not actually referred to piracy as theft, but only as a potential lost sale. I acknowledge that not all piracy is from the people who are well-off enough to afford the game (and, indeed, I have said multiple times that those who pirate a game and then pay for the game are not in the wrong in my eyes) but at the same time it is safe to assume that not all people who pirate return the money. Therefore, it is a lost sale, the digital information was copied without consent onto your device. No, it's not theft, but it is taking something that is not yours without the permission of the creator and you are depriving them of the money they should have received in the first place. No matter the word you use to describe it, it's harmful (even if it's only the tiniest, most minute amount) to the creator by depriving them of something they rightfully deserve.

Are we on the same page now, or is the misunderstanding mine?

 

[starkiller212]

1) The law requires you to pay for such content. Merely breaking the law is not a valid form of protest against it, and that is reason enough to be against piracy IMO. (If you actually want to get these laws changed, try coming up with a rational argument for starters)

2) The developers and publishers who made the game available to you expect and deserve compensation for their efforts. By denying them this, you not only do them a disservice, but you make yourself an exception to a system that you are still reaping the benefits from (playing games supported by paying customers).
2a) You have no right to judge how much they "need" the money based on how relatively successful they are. Otherwise, we'd all be living on about $20,000 a year and no one would go hungry. Again, you can't make yourself an exception and still claim to be acting morally.

3) As a whole, piracy absolutely hurts the industry and plenty of individual games. Many pirated copies do represent lost purchases. Plenty of data has demonstrated this, and anyone still denying this is as unreasonable as someone who denies evolution.


All that being said, I understand that downloading games can be convenient or even "necessary" (as something as trivial as playing a game can be, at least), and that it's possible to purchase the game legitimately afterward. I've done it myself a couple times, and I know too many people who regularly do so to think that all pirates are terrible people, but nevertheless it IS unethical and nothing to be proud of.

 

[Eventidal]

I know that a lot of people only pirate games they know they would not actually put down the money for, or may not be able to get at all without pirating.

Additionally, some use it for convenience, as they own the game in physical form but want to have all their games in a single SD card or HDD or something.

Others use it to test a game they are on the edge about buying. This is, in practice, no worse than borrowing a friend's game. If they like it, they buy it. If not, too bad.

In the three above cases, there's no actual loss. Some pirate and buy. Others wouldn't have bought even if pirating weren't an option. There's still a problem with pirating as not everyone does the above things, but I think it's an overinflated issue.

 

[Juk3n]

Nothing wrong with Piracy, sometimes. Example; panzer dragoon saga (arguably the greatest rpg of the 32bit era, definetley the most under the radar one) is no longer sold by sega, it's available only by ebay and sells for $200+.

I could however go and torrent it for free, and no one here - NOT A SINGLE GODDAMN ONE OF YOU - can point to anything about the situation that is harming the games industry. Buying it from someone on ebay doesn't give Sega any royalties either.

So..im FOR some piracy i guess.

 

[Tiamattt]

Piracy is not inherently bad, it depends on why you pirate.

I voted no.

If yes then you willingly broke the law therefore it's wrong.

Because the law is always right, no?

There are a FEW exceptions where breaking the law can be seen as a good thing, but breaking it just so someone doesn't have to pay for a luxury they don't need? I don't think so.

 

[dessertmonkeyjk]

1. You literally stole a copy of the full game.
2. Just because you can buy a copy doesn't mean the one you stole should of been on your computer in the first place.
3. What's going to stop you from just running off with that stolen copy anyway? It's the full game and you don't need to do anything else.
4. Um... don't do it?

First thing: that's not what 'literally' means, and secondly: you assume that pirates don't have a conscience.

How many other industries have a 'try before you buy' or a '30 day money back' policy? Not unheard of, not considered immoral, so.... why is it considered immoral to try before you buy with video games? Demos still exist, but not for all games. Why do demos exist in the first place? Try before you buy.

What's more, not all piracy occurs before the sale because of horrible and hard to use DRM that takes away from the gaming experience.

Yeah, I overlooked my grammar there. I'm aware human beings have a conscience but the problem is that going unpunished by their actions may encourage repeated action. I wouldn't underestimate this.

I'm talking about a fully priced retail game being taken outside retail services. Buying or renting it from them is fine in which the policy then applies. Getting around this is technically taking it without permission.

 

[Harlief]

Snip

Yeah, I overlooked my grammar there. I'm aware human beings have a conscience but the problem is that going unpunished by their actions may encourage repeated action. I wouldn't underestimate this.

I'm talking about a fully priced retail game being taken outside retail services. Buying or renting it from them is fine in which the policy then applies. Getting around this is technically taking it without permission.

My point is, that in most cases piracy actually leads to a sale and the sharing of pirated games serves as word-of-mouth advertising amongst a pirates friends. When companies actually listen to the people who pirate games, they realise that pirates are potential customers who don't agree with the old-fashioned business models that some of the big games publishers are so desperately clinging to. The companies who've let go of the old models and are being innovative are making a killing.

I choose to spend my money on the companies who are rolling with the times, and I have spent soooo much money on these companies. Valve listened to the voice of internet pirates and created a system whereby what they paid for was better than free, now they are worth billions of dollars. Piracy isn't destroying the games industry; the demonisation and refusal to listen to millions of internet pirates (who are all potential customers) is just plain retarded.

 

[dessertmonkeyjk]

Truth be told... that's a very good point.