The Problem with Piracy...

[Delicious]

Yes... but by your own aeroplane argument.. the labour that went into making the copy (using the machine) was yours... and you dismissed my ownership of the paper aeroplane design...

but still... would you prefer someone copy your car or steal it?

You didn't own the design because you never said you designed it. Had you designed it, you would own it. Niether. You're trying to make me justify copying by saying it's better than stealing, but really, the only difference is that one party suffers less, while the other party still enjoys the unearned benifits.

Argue morality all you want, but trying to charge a universal 60$ price tag for something that can copied infinitely and easily effectively creating a limitless supply and you'll get bitten on your ass. Personally I buy games for convenience, but when I do I still feel like I'm getting screwed, because in the end I shouldn't have to buy unnecessary things just because a collection of publishers and game designers can't come up with a sustainable business model.

If you don't value it at 60$, then don't buy it. You have no right to control the price of something someone else is selling. If you feel that the game is worthless, then you have no reason to pirate it. If it is worth something, then you have no right to get it for free, so either don't buy it, or buy it.

It's kind of like if you invented dirt, then tried to charge people money for using your dirt. When it's everywhere. And you can get it 5 feet from your home. Stupid, right?

If games are dirt, try to get a game without a game developer.

People use the words theft and steal when dealing with piracy to try and make it seem more severe... which is a pity, as piracy is severe... but I don't think taking something that doesn't belong to you is the same as taking away something from someone else.

The only difference is in stealing, the owner and the maker suffers, while in piracy only the maker suffers. It still cripples innovation.

If I can get it for free, then yes, I can control how much it costs. Rights mean nothing if you can't enforce them. My right to pirate games (though it isn't a right I have ever exercised) is only counteracted by someone's ability to to stop me.

If you want to profit of something, you'd better make damn sure that people can't easily get the same product for free. Common sense 101 - don't depend on the morality of others.

 

[Kubanator]

If I can get it for free, then yes, I can control how much it costs. Rights mean nothing if you can't enforce them. My right to pirate games (though it isn't a right I have ever exercised) is only counteracted by someone's ability to to stop me.

Let's say I steal 500$ from a man's wallet. Did I have a right to do that, because he didn't stop me? Let's say I take a gun, and shoot a man on the street. I had the right to do that, because no one could stop me?

If you want to profit of something, you'd better make damn sure that people can't easily get the same product for free. Common sense 101 - don't depend on the morality of others.

You're promoting DRM.

 

[grayjo]

Yes... but by your own aeroplane argument.. the labour that went into making the copy (using the machine) was yours... and you dismissed my ownership of the paper aeroplane design...

but still... would you prefer someone copy your car or steal it?

You didn't own the design because you never said you designed it. Had you designed it, you would own it. Niether. You're trying to make me justify copying by saying it's better than stealing, but really, the only difference is that one party suffers less, while the other party still enjoys the unearned benifits.

Yes. That is my intention. (Skimmed over my piracy is bad bits, eh...)

I don't like that the word theft is being misused. That's all. I do believe not all pirates would have bought the full version if a cracked version was available. Not every pirated game is money lost to the developer. Again, in case you missed it, piracy is wrong! But it's not as bad as if the pirates stole the games from stores. That does NOT justify it.

Here comes another metaphor... Murder isn't as bad as Genocide... Does that justify Murder?

If you can honestly tell me that the same number of people are put out the same amount from theft and piracy I will abdicate my position.

Where in any of my posts did I say you can or should pirate anything?

Or that the terminology used to describe piracy had anything to do with "innovation"

 

[Kubanator]

I don't like that the word theft is being misused. That's all. I do believe not all pirates would have bought the full version if a cracked version was available. Not every pirated game is money lost to the developer. Again, in case you missed it, piracy is wrong! But it's not as bad as if the pirates stole the games from stores. That does NOT justify it.

Here comes another metaphor... Murder isn't as bad as Genocide... Does that justify Murder?

If you can honestly tell me that the same number of people are put out the same amount from theft and piracy I will abdicate my position.

Ok, I misunderstood you. I assumed you would claim that since piracy is better than physical theft, piracy is good. It's true that there are less people put out by piracy, but theft can be intellectual theft, like ideas. Such as books, schematics, video games, etc.

Or that the terminology used to describe piracy had anything to do with "innovation"

Piracy is the theft of information, or data. Without protection from the theft of information, innovation dies.

 

[grayjo]

I don't like that the word theft is being misused. That's all. I do believe not all pirates would have bought the full version if a cracked version was available. Not every pirated game is money lost to the developer. Again, in case you missed it, piracy is wrong! But it's not as bad as if the pirates stole the games from stores. That does NOT justify it.

Here comes another metaphor... Murder isn't as bad as Genocide... Does that justify Murder?

If you can honestly tell me that the same number of people are put out the same amount from theft and piracy I will abdicate my position.

Ok, I misunderstood you. I assumed you would claim that since piracy is better than physical theft, piracy is good. It's true that there are less people put out by piracy, but theft can be intellectual theft, like ideas. Such as books, schematics, video games, etc.

I'm pretty sure the theft term has slowly changed to incorporate ideas, but only because everyone used it....

Ownership of ideas is so hard to regulate, because if I have an idea today, it doesn't stop someone else having the same idea tomorrow and if they register it first, all of a sudden I've stolen my own idea.

I am also very sick of that "you wouldn't steal a car" ad

 

[grayjo]

Piracy is the theft of information, or data. Without protection from the theft of information, innovation dies.

The current patent system goes a long way to stifling innovation too...

 

[Kubanator]

I'm pretty sure the theft term has slowly changed to incorporate ideas, but only because everyone used it....

Ownership of ideas is so hard to regulate, because if I have an idea today, it doesn't stop someone else having the same idea tomorrow and if they register it first, all of a sudden I've stolen my own idea.

I am also very sick of that "you wouldn't steal a car" ad

No, but if you went to the government saying "I invented a new electric generator, here are the detailing schematics" then you deserve rights as you were the first one to prove that you made it.

 

[Delicious]

If I can get it for free, then yes, I can control how much it costs. Rights mean nothing if you can't enforce them. My right to pirate games (though it isn't a right I have ever exercised) is only counteracted by someone's ability to to stop me.

Let's say I take a gun, and shoot a man on the street. I had the right to do that, because no one could stop me? Let's say I steal 500$ from a man's wallet. Did I have a right to do that, because he didn't stop me?

If you want to profit of something, you'd better make damn sure that people can't easily get the same product for free. Common sense 101 - don't depend on the morality of others.

You're promoting DRM.

Up until the point where you are caught and tried, yep.

And what's wrong with ensuring people have to buy your product? Sure, the current versions of DRM are completely ineffective, but I don't think a non intrusive Copyright check is impossible. Look at subscription based games, for example. They offer a service that can't be duplicated or copied on readily available CD's and computers, and they are profiting because what they offer actually has value to it. Console games are also doing much better in the value department - they give me a way to play games without having to own a super computer, and it is currently very difficult for me to mod consoles. So I buy them.

Here's my main point: Don't try to sell me something that I can get free, easily and without consequence. I don't support idiots, and if the single-player PC part of the industry goes through - tough. That's how the world works, like it or not.

 

[grayjo]

No, but if you went to the government saying "I invented a new electric generator, here are the detailing schematics" then you deserve rights as you were the first one to prove that you made it.

My grandfather tried to patent an invention... The patent officer didn't understand the concept even though a working prototype was sent in, so he denied it.

In a perfect world, all ideas from everyone would be protected.

But how much would it suck that some random who thought of your idea first has more rights than you. You both thought up the same idea.

As it is, only those with money's ideas are important enough to be protected.

 

[Kubanator]

Up until the point where you are caught and tried, yep.

Nope. I shot a guy at night, no witness, no finger prints, nothing. No accountability. Your metaphor points to pirates getting caught and tried.

And what's wrong with ensuring people have to buy your product? Sure, the current versions of DRM are completely ineffective, but I don't think a non intrusive Copyright check is impossible. Look at subscription based games, for example. They offer a service that can't be duplicated or copied on readily available CD's and computers, and they are profiting because what they offer actually has value to it. Console games are also doing much better in the value department - they give me a way to play games without having to own a super computer, and it is currently very difficult for me to mod consoles. So I buy them.

So basically, you want 10 coders to create a system that 10,000 coders won't be able to crack? Good luck with that. Make an unbreakabe wall while you're at it.

Here's my main point: Don't try to sell me something that I can get free, easily and without consequence. I don't support idiots, and if the single-player PC part of the industry goes through - tough. That's how the world works, like it or not.

You don't care about single player games. Why pirate them?

No, but if you went to the government saying "I invented a new electric generator, here are the detailing schematics" then you deserve rights as you were the first one to prove that you made it.

My grandfather tried to patent an invention... The patent officer didn't understand the concept even though a working prototype was sent in, so he denied it.

In a perfect world, all ideas from everyone would be protected.

But how much would it suck that some random who thought of your idea first has more rights than you. You both thought up the same idea.

As it is, only those with money's ideas are important enough to be protected.

That's why science progresses. Not because anyone can invent and be rewarded, but only rich. The problem with sending in a working prototype is that it only proves that you are capable of creating that effect. It doesn't prove the process.

 

[grayjo]

That's why science progresses. Not because anyone can invent and be rewarded, but only rich.

I hope you're being sarcastic...

Science progresses because the rich find some way to cheat those ignorant of the system out of their ideas... In essence, stealing them

The rich become richer... and if the underdog's lucky and knows the system... the poor become rich.


The prototype was sent in along with schematics.

I saw the invention years later on "The New Inventors"

Now that's annoying.

 

[Delicious]

Up until the point where you are caught and tried, yep.

Nope. I shot a guy at night, no witness, no finger prints, nothing. No accountability. Your metaphor points to pirates getting caught and tried.

And what's wrong with ensuring people have to buy your product? Sure, the current versions of DRM are completely ineffective, but I don't think a non intrusive Copyright check is impossible. Look at subscription based games, for example. They offer a service that can't be duplicated or copied on readily available CD's and computers, and they are profiting because what they offer actually has value to it. Console games are also doing much better in the value department - they give me a way to play games without having to own a super computer, and it is currently very difficult for me to mod consoles. So I buy them.

So basically, you want 10 coders to create a system that 10,000 coders won't be able to crack? Good luck with that. Make an unbreakabe wall while you're at it.

Here's my main point: Don't try to sell me something that I can get free, easily and without consequence. I don't support idiots, and if the single-player PC part of the industry goes through - tough. That's how the world works, like it or not.

You don't care about single player games. Why pirate them?

No, but if you went to the government saying "I invented a new electric generator, here are the detailing schematics" then you deserve rights as you were the first one to prove that you made it.

My grandfather tried to patent an invention... The patent officer didn't understand the concept even though a working prototype was sent in, so he denied it.

In a perfect world, all ideas from everyone would be protected.

But how much would it suck that some random who thought of your idea first has more rights than you. You both thought up the same idea.

As it is, only those with money's ideas are important enough to be protected.

That's why science progresses. Not because anyone can invent and be rewarded, but only rich. The problem with sending in a working prototype is that it only proves that you are capable of creating that effect. It doesn't prove the process.

Well if you never get caught or tried, you still retained that right now didn't you? You don't seem to be reading thoroughly, or you are just too thick to understand my points.

Here's the first point that you missed: There is DRM that does work. It just doesn't work for Single Player games. The longer we support this stupid honor system, the longer it takes for a good idea to surface.

The second point: I don't pirate single player PC games because my computer can't run them. And if I don't care for single player games, why not pirate them? Because someone on the internet might give me a virtual slap on the wrist?

 

[Captain Pancake]

And it is, but so many people do it, why should you be the one chump who has to pay, especially when money is so tight now?

Because by buying it, you are supporting the people who created the games. By pirating it, no money goes towards the game developers, and you may find in the future that genuinely great games will no longer be made, as more people appearing to be buying "Generic Shooty Guy #178".

That's it in a nutshell. You pay them for a game, they can take that money and put it into developing future projects. simple.

 

[WlknCntrdiction]

Even though Batman: AA is out and I have the money to buy it, I just don't have the time to play it, I'm ever increasingly hovering my mouse button over the "download Batman: AA" torrent button because it would just be easier for me to do that because I have the means(uTorrent and a functioning internet connection)but morally I don't want to because I know RockSteady made an awesome game, I've played it round my mates and want to actually own it for myself which is stopping me from pirating it.
This coming from a guy who wouldn't bat an eyelash when downloading any other game or movie, or album of music, but I just feel that RockSteady deserve my money more than the other developers who have churned out tripe.
I won't download it, I'll buy it, once I have the time to lol.

 

[AxelMiller]

Indeed. Why is it called piracy anyway? You dont steal it, you steal a copy.

Edit: Whoops. I just relised other people said this too.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Legality does not equal morality.

That was for all you who think it does.

And with that, I have nothing more to add to this discussion, except that certain tossers need to have a little perspective and stay off those horses which are of exceptional height. Not everybody has your exact experiences or even lives in a place where legit copies of something can be easily purchased.

Morality =/= anything as morality is relative.

However, lets say we have an writer. He writes a phenomenal novel. Now you say: "I want that novel, but I don't want to pay for it". As luck would have it, it's on piratesbay. So you download it. What have you done? You've taken work that someone else did, claiming it has no value to you, even though it does, as you want it. You've taken the money that the author deserved for the work he did because of your own hypocrisy. To say that you should be able to take what isn't yours isn't moral in my opinion.

Nice way to avoid my point about living somewhere where you can't GET a legit copy, like Hong Kong or an Arab nation. There are entire countries who make bank off of piracy. Shouldn't we go after them instead of Johnny Pirate Normalguy?

It's like how when the police declare a war on crime, they usually just mean the little guys who can't get out on bail, rather than corrupt national infrastructures or politicians who have affairs with underage interns.

Society is all about taking what isn't yours. You know what's "yours" by right? Nothing. Everything you have is because somebody else suffered for it or was deprived of it. Especially if you live in America or one of the richer parts of Europe that do a lot of trade with China and third-world companies.

I'm just saying the issue isn't as cut and dried as all that, especially with video games and the intrusive, constitution-violating crap they're calling DRM. Not to mention the escalating prices of games in an economy where many people can't afford the luxury. Or the fact that the person who made the game isn't seeing a dime of the money from it if the game isn't sold new anymore. Is pirating old GBA games that the devs don't make a penny off of morally "wrong?" What, is Batman going to swoop into my window and yell "WHERE ARE THEY?!? TELL ME WHERE TO FIND PIRATEBAY!?!" If I pirate an old NES, GB or Genesis game? What if I have a hard copy of the game? Am I allowed to have a backup in case the battery save dies? Where are the lines? What defines when piracy is selfish and wrong, and when it's a necessity in order to play that game?

 

[Dys]

I do not really consider stealing to be the "sane man's option."

I don't really consider copying protected information to be stealing, stealing implies a victim losing something (something more measurable than a possible sale). Illegaly copying games is a far more accurate description of what the industry dubs 'piracy'.

I'd also like to point out something that's been irritating me of late, in Australia, copying of games is a much easier to justify because publishers charge outragous amounts for games ($110 here when it's $60 in the US, given the $AU are worth over 0.86 $US). Is it even the game devs who lose out the most? I have some crazy notion that they are not given the extra $32US, so where does this money even go? Is it even fair that we are expect to throw more than 50% of the games marketable value into the abyss everytime we buy a game when we could just as easily circumnavigate the entire (flawed) system?

How about those of us with unstable hardware (for PC gamers who need to illegaly circumnavigate DRM), or who want to play games from other regions...is it still wrong for us to pirate? In Australia, it is illegal to buy games that have not been classified by the Australian rating system, if we are being forced to break the law anyway, what difference does it make? We are still (arguably) comitting a morally detestable act. If we are being forced to break a law (both equally punishable, however one saving money) in order to play a game, I think it's more than reasonable that we opt for the one that costs less.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

Ok. An architect draws the blueprints for a house. He sells them for individual use for 10$. You decide to make a photocopy of your friends blueprints. You have now taken the work that the architect took into making the blueprints and decided it's value was 0$. Meaning the plans are valueless. So you don't want them. But you do. So you would say they have value, but you take them for free anyways. The contradiction is written right there.

http://leasticoulddo.com/comics/20090925.gif

It's an archietect. It deserves it.

 

[curty129]

Piracy has helped me out a bit, and cured my boredom often. It's too difficult to bother stopping everyone.

Ok. An architect draws the blueprints for a house. He sells them for individual use for 10$. You decide to make a photocopy of your friends blueprints. You have now taken the work that the architect took into making the blueprints and decided it's value was 0$. Meaning the plans are valueless. So you don't want them. But you do. So you would say they have value, but you take them for free anyways. The contradiction is written right there.

http://leasticoulddo.com/comics/20090925.gif

It's an archietect. It deserves it.

Utters lulz! xD For both of ya's :3

 

[Kilo24]

There are a few takes on piracy, two of which I'll summarize.
One is that it directly hurts no-one beyond the negligible transfer costs unless it replaces somebody buying a copy of the game. Therefore, piracy's only wrong if it cheats the developers out of money.

Another is that it's use of a product deliberately against the developers' wishes (and called theft for propaganda's sake.) The product is for entertainment purposes and could hardly be considered deserved in any respect of the word, so going against copyright law and the developers' expectations is legally and morally indefensible.

Beyond one person paying for each copy of the game he wants to install, it's basically the free rider problem and gets fairly murky. The development system can support an abstractly high number of pirates but it requires a certain number of people buying the game to be profitable. If games aren't as profitable, then the sponsor for the development won't be too quick to sponsor another game, and both the pirates and paying customers get screwed out of a potential next game.

The fact is, one purchase of a preceding game is very unlikely to make a difference in the development of another game by the same developers. It's also true that it's nice to have $50 more than you otherwise would have. So, why doesn't everyone take that line of reasoning and thereby destroy the whole industry?

It's because there's a stigma associated with being a pirate, resulting from the very fact that too many pirates will destroy the industry. If people stop maligning pirates for moral reasons, then it will start to look like the situation in China (check out some of the articles on the Escapist.)

It's wrong to be a pirate simply because people are trying to make you pay more than $50 for that pirated game. It's a tax on your dignity rather than on your wallet, basically. Without it, the industry would die because there really would be no cost to being a pirate.