video game piracy: a question

[Azure-Supernova]

Then that person is shit out of luck. We have rules for a reason. And fuck the person who thinks that their case is special and they're above the law. They don't have money to pay for it? They don't get it, simple as that. Come back when you're less poor. If money is really an issue then they should be worrying about buying food not video games. It is self-entitled to think you should be able to get something for free. A poor person who thinks they deserve to game for free is just entitled as a rich person who games for free.

Yeah those fucking entitled poor people. How dare they get access to the same things us rich folk have. Just let them rot in their small homes and live from paycheck to paycheck, they deserve nothing because they're poor and don't have an amazing high paying job like the rest of us. I bet you're also against paying taxes because that would give poor people a pavement to walk on. Hell, what about that communist socialist medcare they've been talking about? I mean how dare they raise taxes so everyone can have access to free healthcare. It infringes on my rights to discriminate against poor people!

Whoah, whoah there, slow down man. That's just how it is, some people can barely support themselves, but how does that give them the right to claim for free what others work and pay for? They're giving up a luxury, it's not like he's saying they shouldn't have access to government funded/subsidised healthcare or things of that ilk. He's talking about a want not a need. It's a product that you can live without.

You can make the case for entertainment being just as necessary as food. I won't argue for or against it, and even assume that it is. Food being necessary doesn't entitle everyone to 5-star gourmet meals three times per day. A soup kitchen fulfills that need just as well. Much in the same way that entertainment is necessary but does not entitle everyone to AAA games, free games and other forms of entertainment fulfill that need just as well.

Sure, being entitled to food doesn't entitle you to a 5 star gourmet dinner. Then again, you can't buy a 5 star gourmet dinner, make a digital copy of it and download it whenever you feel like eating a fancy dinner. You'd have to actually steal the food whereas with piracy you buy a legitimate copy and make copies of it.

But piracy is Intellectual Property being illegally distributed/downloaded. It might not be stealing a physical item, but it's taking something you aren't entitled to much like taking that 5 star gourmet dinner. If you host a torrent of a game with a keygen/crack/isos then you're distributing something you have no right to distribute.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Whoah, whoah there, slow down man. That's just how it is, some people can barely support themselves, but how does that give them the right to claim for free what others work and pay for?

That depends. Would you willingly deny someone food because they don't have the money to pay for it?

They're giving up a luxury, it's not like he's saying they shouldn't have access to government funded/subsidised healthcare or things of that ilk. He's talking about a want not a need. It's a product that you can live without.

You know, that house/apartment you're living in is a luxury as well. Why not just abandon it and live in a cardboard box for the rest of your life and then tell me how luxuries are not necessary to live like a normal human being in the 21st century.

But piracy is Intellectual Property being illegally distributed/downloaded. It might not be stealing a physical item, but it's taking something you aren't entitled to much like taking that 5 star gourmet dinner.

Nope. Taking the gourmet dinner without paying for it is one thing, buying a gourmet dinner and then making thousands of copies that can be distributed online is another.

If you host a torrent of a game with a keygen/crack/isos then you're distributing something you have no right to distribute.

Why? Because publishers decided that instead of owning the game you purchased, you're simply "licensing it"? That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. If I buy a pizza I'm sure as hell not "licensing the right to eat that pizza" and if I wanted to I could not only share it with whomever but at the same time I could make more pizza and even sell it on the street.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

You know, that house/apartment you're living in is a luxury as well. Why not just abandon it and live in a cardboard box for the rest of your life and then tell me how luxuries are not necessary to live like a normal human being in the 21st century.

Because a house is a luxury I can afford. But a cardboard box is not a safe, secure shelter and no human being should have to live in those conditions. Living without the latest Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto will not have a direct affect on you well being. As another poster has also stated, there are free games readily available to play for people who can't afford new ones. Freeware, browser games and free 2 play games. There's also books, movies, television etc.

Comparing not having videogames to not having a house is such a bad analogy my brain is melting from just thinking that a rational human being would even make it.

Nope. Taking the gourmet dinner without paying for it is one thing, buying a gourmet dinner and then making thousands of copies that can be distributed online is another.

Again with the horrible analogies. You cannot copy a gourmet dinner as if were a piece of software. You can do that with software, but not a physical product (at least not without a matter replicator).

Why? Because publishers decided that instead of owning the game you purchased, you're simply "licensing it"? That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. If I buy a pizza I'm sure as hell not "licensing the right to eat that pizza" and if I wanted to I could not only share it with whomever but at the same time I could make more pizza and even sell it on the street.

Yes, but the pizza you made would be your pizza. You have every right to sell the pizza that you, the creator of the pizza, made. You could also share your original pizza, but you're not creating whole copies of that pizza, you're simply giving away what you didn't eat. Much like you would give away an old game to a friend if you couldn't sell it and didn't want it anymore.

And think about it, when you purchase a game you are purchasing an unlimited license to use the software on the disc. If you sell that game you are passing on the license to someone else, meaning that you no longer have it. Copying that software, circumventing the on-disc protection and then distributing it is analogous to making your own copies of that game and giving them away to friends. It is illegal. You have not been given permission to copy and distribute that software as you only have one license, the one you purchased when you bought the game.

What isn't there to understand? When you buy a copy Windows 7 you are given a serial key to activate you copy, that serial is linked to your copy and yours alone. When you buy Warcraft III you enter the serial key upon installation to validate your copy, that serial key is then linked to your copy of Warcraft III.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Because a house is a luxury I can afford. But a cardboard box is not a safe, secure shelter and no human being should have to live in those conditions

Yes, but a house is still a luxury. What if you couldn't afford a house? Say by some miracle you lost all your money and job and you were forced to live on the street. Would you be content with that? How about losing every piece of entertainment? Would you be OK with that?

Living without the latest Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto will not have a direct affect on you well being.

Having no internet, books, games etc would have no impact on your well being also but can you honestly say you can live without them/ Entertainment isn't a luxury anymore, is it? It's part of who we are as human beings. It's what defines us. We've reached a point in our society where the only thing we crave is entertainment. To deny a person that is similar to denying them food or a house.

Again with the horrible analogies. You cannot copy a gourmet dinner as if were a piece of software. You can do that with software, but not a physical product (at least not without a matter replicator).

No, you can't. But you can do that with a piece of information. The original data is still there, what you're doing is making a copy of it. It's not akin to stealing because it isn't stealing, it's copying.

Yes, but the pizza you made would be your pizza. You have every right to sell the pizza that you, the creator of the pizza, made.

How so? I mean, the pizza I made is an exact copy of the one I bought. I'm using someone else's recipe to create that piece of food. Wouldn't that be stealing? By creating that pizza and selling it/giving it away am I also not depriving that restaurant of potential customers? What if I just bought the pizza and shared it with 3 other people? Am I not taking away 3 potential customers from the restaurant?

What if instead of copying the data "pirates" would create a copy of the game they bought using the exact same methods the developers used to create the game. Would that be OK with you?

And think about it, when you purchase a game you are purchasing an unlimited license to use the software on the disc. If you sell that game you are passing on the license to someone else, meaning that you no longer have it.

And that's just bullshit. What other medium sells licenses to people? When you buy a car, you don't purchase a license to drive the car around, you purchase the goddamn car and you can do whatever you feel like with it. If I wanted, I could build another car exactly like it and give it away or use magic to create thousands of copies of that car and give them to whomever I want. It's the same with piracy.

Copying that software, circumventing the on-disc protection and then distributing it is analogous to making your own copies of that game and giving them away to friends.

And why shouldn't I be able to do that? I bought the game, that piece of data belongs to me. I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want to do with it the same way I can do whatever the hell I want with anything else I bought. Companies should not have the right to dictate what customers can do with their products.

You have not been given permission to copy and distribute that software as you only have one license, the one you purchased when you bought the game.

Guess I should stop making pizza then. I've only licensed one and by making more I'm infringing on the restaurants rights.

What isn't there to understand? When you buy a copy Windows 7 you are given a serial key to activate you copy, that serial is linked to your copy and yours alone. When you buy Warcraft III you enter the serial key upon installation to validate your copy, that serial key is then linked to your copy of Warcraft III.

And that's what I have a problem with. The whole idea of licensing shit rather than being given the actual product is absolutely bullshit. It infringes on the customers rights. When you buy a product it should belong to you, not the company that you bought it from.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

*Entertainment Jazz*

And there's a point when someone becomes addicted to drugs that if they were taken away it would affect their body and mind, possibly driving them to suicide. Should narcotics be so readily available as entertainment? And like a poster before me has said, there are means of free entertainment already, especially if you already own the electronics capable of playing games on in the first place.

If you can afford a PC to run pirated games then what's stopping you from playing freeware or browser based games? Refrain from dragging this to a 'can you live without all luxuries, you can strawman all you like but I never said all. I'm specifying videogames here.

To make an apt analogy, it's the difference between recieving free health care from the state and paying to attend a private practice. It's a choice.

No, you can't. But you can do that with a piece of information. The original data is still there, what you're doing is making a copy of it. It's not akin to stealing because it isn't stealing, it's copying.

But again, you're saying like from the perspective of the uploader. To pirate a game you'd be the one downloading it and that is illegal. Said uploader will have purchased his game, which entitles him to play it and copy the files should he see fit. By downloading it you are gaining a full copy of the game without having purchased it. You are taking intellectual property that was created with the intent of being sold. But more on this later.

*Pizza nonsense*

Just as I am free read the ingredients list on any food item in my house and then create my own version to sell as my own, however if I were to brand it as coming from the original owner but with myself in reciept of the profits then I'd be infringing on their copyright.

What you don't seem to be able to grasp is that Intellectual Property has its own laws seperate from those of physical property. In this case if you could perfectly replicate the recipie, ingredients and method to create an identical copy each time then you'd essentially have the source code to a piece of software. Source code is intellectual property owned by a corporate entity or a person, usually protected by a license to prevent people from messing with it.

What if instead of copying the data "pirates" would create a copy of the game they bought using the exact same methods the developers used to create the game. Would that be OK with you?

Then nothing, they'd have just created a copy of the game using the same method. It still doesn't have the stamp of approval from the owner of the IP and is therefore not official and is bootleg software. You are direly missing the point here: It's not HOW it's created, it's by whom. The items necessary for someone to produce an 'original' copy of the game would all be protected by copyright, using them without the owners consent would be a violation of copyright laws.

*Another broken analogy*

Except each detail of those cars are patented. If you bought a car from a manufacturer, chances are they or the company they purchase their parts from has a patent on everything from the design of the engine to the pedals. For each new car you built you'd have to buy the components to make the cars, so the money owed would be paid in full by the time you'd built the cars. And no, you don't purchase a license because a car is not software. It's a physical product. You can't compare the two, it just doesn't work.

But you certainly can't just up and drive that car. You have to pay road tax, registration fees as well as the cost of your initial permit. Every medium that distributes somethign digitally, be it a DVD or a CD or a videogame is selling you a license for you to legally use the official copies on your CD.

*Opinions and ignorance*

Regardless of your opinion on licensed software, you do not own that data. That data belongs to the company that created it as it is intellectual property and not physical property. Ignorance to the law doesn't give you the right to disregard it. You own a license to use a companies software. You can disagree with it and ignore it all you like, it's a fact and it is the law.

Once again, because you disagree with it doesn't mean you get to disobey it. If you own a piece of land you are not entitled to everything in that land. People may pick freely from wild flora and hunt fauna and there's nothing you can say about that, because you own the land and now what's on it, unless you specifically planted it.

And that's what I have a problem with. The whole idea of licensing shit rather than being given the actual product is absolutely bullshit. It infringes on the customers rights. When you buy a product it should belong to you, not the company that you bought it from.

And it infringes on the companies rights to do anything with their software that they created for the sole purpose of licensing out to individuals such as you and I. Like I said above, feel free to dislike the laws, but that's what they are. Not liking it doesn't make them null and void.

Every one of your points relies on your own ignorance to accept that the law is the law. A piece of software is not a physical product and can be produce infinitely with ease, as such there has to be a method of limiting and preserving the product to maintain value. Otherwise the market would see mass inflation and would eventually collapse under it's own weight.

A developer makes games because they want to get paid for their creativity, on a corporate level. Yes they want to share their vision with the world and make people happy, like all artists, but they can't do that without resources. To strip intellectual property such as video game software of its right to license users will ultimately devalue the software. And like I said, if it's infinite why should anyone pay for it, if no-one pays for it then developers don't get paid, if developers don't get paid then we don't get new games.

It's simple.

 

[ultimateownage]

'I wouldn't buy it' is just an excuse.
'I can't afford it' Well, if you really wanted to play it you would find the money. This is just an excuse for 90% of the time.
'I cannot get it' - This is the only semi-reasonable excuse, if there is literally no legal way of you getting it in your country.

ok so i have to ask two questions first, what if there is a game that is not your type so you have no intention of buying but somone offers it to you for free as they dont want it anymore you just have to get it out of the car (like just clicking a link) would you take it?
second what if you have no money none all gone to bills for things like food and phone payments you have zero cash or simply not enough to buy the game either way the industry wont be getting money from you so you pirate the game, my questions is this: WHAT DO THEY LOSE? you will be giving them no money anyway your not taking an item off a shelf that they could sell to somone else they were never getting your money and now they still wont WHAT DO THEY LOSE?

The first is a terrible example, taking a legally purchased copy from a friend is nothing like the friend giving you a fucking link to Piratebay. As for the second, you won't be penniless forever. You will always get some disposable income eventually, and if you don't then you really need a change of careers. If it's a game you want, you would just pay for it when you could afford it. Downloading it illegally while just repeating to yourself that it's totally okay does not actually MAKE it okay.
If you're looking for excuses that desperately, then there is no way what you're doing is fine. That seems to be the case with you, looking up the page.

By the way, your post was a pain to read with how unstructured it was.

*EDIT*

If I have lost the product then I will pirate it. Because I've already paid for it.

If saaay, a game company... Not mentioning any names Mr. You Beesoft, royally screwed me over with some horrible DRM that has me take an exam before playing a game, I will probably crack the game.

If the game is too old to be making any sort of revenue, or has been scrapped altogether, I will probably pirate that.

But other than these, I will fuel the gaming industry with my hard earned coins.

I wouldn't even consider any of those piracy, as emulating old games does not lose the developers money and downloading a copy of a game you've bought anyway is pretty legal.

 

[Laxman9292]

Then that person is shit out of luck. We have rules for a reason. And fuck the person who thinks that their case is special and they're above the law. They don't have money to pay for it? They don't get it, simple as that. Come back when you're less poor. If money is really an issue then they should be worrying about buying food not video games. It is self-entitled to think you should be able to get something for free. A poor person who thinks they deserve to game for free is just entitled as a rich person who games for free.

Yeah those fucking entitled poor people. How dare they get access to the same things us rich folk have. Just let them rot in their small homes and live from paycheck to paycheck, they deserve nothing because they're poor and don't have an amazing high paying job like the rest of us. I bet you're also against paying taxes because that would give poor people a pavement to walk on. Hell, what about that communist socialist medcare they've been talking about? I mean how dare they raise taxes so everyone can have access to free healthcare. It infringes on my rights to discriminate against poor people!

You can make the case for entertainment being just as necessary as food. I won't argue for or against it, and even assume that it is. Food being necessary doesn't entitle everyone to 5-star gourmet meals three times per day. A soup kitchen fulfills that need just as well. Much in the same way that entertainment is necessary but does not entitle everyone to AAA games, free games and other forms of entertainment fulfill that need just as well.

Sure, being entitled to food doesn't entitle you to a 5 star gourmet dinner. Then again, you can't buy a 5 star gourmet dinner, make a digital copy of it and download it whenever you feel like eating a fancy dinner. You'd have to actually steal the food whereas with piracy you buy a legitimate copy and make copies of it.

Im not showing compassion for people who are the reason I get slapped in the face with DRM

there is NO reason to pirate if you can buy the games....full stop

and even if you cant...boo hoo they are hurting the industry and the legit gamers

You actually think piracy is the reason such restrictive DRM is being introduced? You're quite naive if you do so. Also, how are they hurting the industry and the "legit gamer"? Lost sales could be anything from a person pirating the game to another person just buying a different game.

Nice straw man buddy, did you just learn about that in Philosophy 101? No fuck poor people for feeling entitled to get entertainment (an item definitely not essential to survival) for free. I never said anything about health care, public works or living paycheck to paycheck and find it laughable that you can't address my points on an intellectual level and instead try to degrade my points into a shadow of what they were. That way you don't have to address my points anymore!
Anyways If you are too poor to buy a game then your priorities should be buying food, not pirating games. If you live from paycheck to paycheck then you have bigger worries than games. I'm just saying that you can't use poverty as an excuse to break the law. Or at least you can but don't try to say you are justified, especially not for videogames. I hate that the "steal bread to feed your family" moral dilemma is now "steal games because you can't pay for them legally". You are just a weak-willed poor person who isn't above stealing and don't pretend otherwise.

And in your lost sales case at least the person who buys another game gives his money to ensure the production of other games that they would like to buy. Rather than basically saying to the developers that "fuck your hard work, I deserve this shit for free".

Say you want to make a music album to get money. You spend years writing songs, deciding what instruments you want doing what, pay for recording time, record, re-record, master the tracks and put untold hours into it. And then have it show up on the Pirate Bay and all of a sudden your 3-year project only bring in enough money to keep you from breaking even. Now you don't have the money or the will to make quality albums anymore because 1. the money gained isn't enough to sustain your album-making and 2. you know that people will just take it for free and essentially say that your music isn't worth money and I'll only get it for free.

 

[Laxman9292]

If you host a torrent of a game with a keygen/crack/isos then you're distributing something you have no right to distribute.

Why? Because publishers decided that instead of owning the game you purchased, you're simply "licensing it"? That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. If I buy a pizza I'm sure as hell not "licensing the right to eat that pizza" and if I wanted to I could not only share it with whomever but at the same time I could make more pizza and even sell it on the street.

No, you are licensing it. Who owns the property? They do. Who agrees to let you buy the rights to use it? They do. If you have a problem with that on an intellectual basis then don't buy it. But stick to you guns people! Don't cry about how slighted we are and then just use that as a front to rationalize piracy. That just degrades out image as entitled brats. You aren't being smart and sticking it to the man. You're just complaining and then using it to get what you want, essentially a (slightly) less sophomoric temper tantrum.

 

[Laxman9292]

If I have lost the product then I will pirate it. Because I've already paid for it.

If saaay, a game company... Not mentioning any names Mr. You Beesoft, royally screwed me over with some horrible DRM that has me take an exam before playing a game, I will probably crack the game.

If the game is too old to be making any sort of revenue, or has been scrapped altogether, I will probably pirate that.

But other than these, I will fuel the gaming industry with my hard earned coins.

Good for you, these are honestly the only reasons I can think of for where piracy is fine, except the DRM is a slippery slope.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

In that case, you need to take a look at my first post. Piracy is to digital goods as the Star Trek replicator is to physical goods.

Except that a Replicator converts matter from one state to a desired state, there's no input on a human level. Videogames have human developers, programmers, writers, coders, marketers, producers, publishers, artists etc. When a videogame can be produced as easily as a Replicator can materialise me a cup of Earl Grey then you'll have a point.

I'll tell you, locking it down with EULAs and denigrating it as a physical product is the opposite of how they need to do that; nice little things like paper or cloth maps for RPGs, and all the other little feelies that used to come with PC games is more like it.

This I can kind of agree on. Publishers do need to provide incentive for consumers to purchase their product instead of getting it for free. On the other hand they still have to protect against copyright infringement and IP theft, so treating it as a limited, physical product is a valid way of doing that. Treating it as an unlimited product removes (or at least drastically lowers) the value of the product.

What they have to do is make their product a better product than the free one; if they can do that, people will buy it. Right now, however, the free product is significantly better than the paid product, and the only real reason to buy legally is out of the goodness of one's heart, or out of a fear of punishment. Piracy is just the better option for the consumer in far too many cases, and it really doesn't need to be that way.

By definition the product you purchase is infinitely better in that you actually have the rights to it in all its glory. When you purchase your copy of Battleground 3: Modern Combat 12 you have the exclusive rights to use all of the features you paid for, such as multiplayer components and future patches and updates. If you download B3MC12 you first have to wait for a torrent to arrive, to have the DRM and security stamped out of it, for someone to host cracked servers. You might have to use a crack or workaround to patch the game too.

There are several complications to pirating that sometimes make it less than desireable. Sure there are perfect torrents out there, but they're usually of games that have been out for a month or two.

Just have to ask, how much Star Trek have you watched? Because food was only a small part of what the replicators made. They made physical goods with them all the time -- everything from clothes, to watches, to parts for the ship. Somebody had to design those things, and the cost in doing so would not have been trivial; the comparison stands.

As for having legal rights to a game making that copy better than the pirated version -- no, it just makes it less legally risky. Most games are fully cracked on day one, with a few cracked before release, and the very rare game taking a month or more. There have only been two games in modern history that took that long to fully crack: Arkham Asylum, and Assassin's Creed 2. In AA's case, it was because it wasn't obvious that it wasn't fully cracked until fairly late in the game. In AC2's case, it was because of the always on DRM -- however, that was designed in such a way that, once cracked for one game, it was cracked for all games that used it. Game companies have been sowing tainted seeds for a while now by denigrating games as a physical product and loading them up with DRM; right now they're reaping what they've sown. If they aren't happy about it, they need to make their next crop one that treats the customer right.

Edit: Oh, also, the pirated version often has features the paid version lacks -- like dedicated servers in Modern Warfare 2, and LAN support in Starcraft 2. Like I said, the pirated version is more often than not an outright better product than the paid version.

 

[JoJo]

The "I wouldn't buy it anyway" argument is flawed for one simple reason: People on the internet are notorious liars.

While a few might actually be telling the truth, the vast majority of the people using that excuse would've bought the game if the option to steal it didn't exist. They did before they learned how to get it for free and they would've continued to do so if there hadn't existed an easier way.

And the "Pirates are poor and can't afford games" is the worst of them all. No, they're not. They might be pathetic spoiled children that think they're entitled to everything they want the second they want it but they're NOT poor. If you own a machine that can run these games you are NOT poor.

In the end it's all just pathetic excuses. There is one reason, and one reason only, to not pay for games: You do not want to. Simple as that.

And I'm willing to accept that. I do not expect everyone to share the same code of etchics as me and I don't except everyone to understand that by cheating the game industry we're only making the games we like worse and/or farther between. I respect people's right to make their own choice.

But stop bloody lying to yourself about it. You pirate games because you're spoiled and cheap, not for ANY other reason. And fair game to that! But stop pretending. It's transparent and it's pathetic. Stand by your decision like a bloody man or do something you actually CAN stand by.

Quoted for truth, and for the chance that any pirates who missed it the first time might see this again. I see no reason to respect people who don't respect and support the games industry by buying games but still expect to reap the fruits kept afloat by hard-working consumers like myself.

 

[Ushiromiya Battler]

Except that when the pirate purchased that game he purchased the right to play it for himself. If he then sells that game on or trades it in, he no longer has that game or the right to play it. However if he releases said game as a torrent then he is distributing the right for people to play that game, something he is legally not allowed to do as only the owners of the IP can provide that right.

We understand how piracy works, but you don't understand how Intellectual Property works. See, because videogames are capable of being infinitely produced by the IP owner there has to be a method of policing it like we do physical items. This is where licences come in. When you buy a game you are buying a licence to use that particular copy of the software. What you aren't doing is buying the right to copy and distribute that software.

I never said it wasn't illegal and I know exactly what you are talking about, but still, no one has stolen anything.
What he does, as you said, is distributing the the software illegally, but he never stole it, and the people that downloaded it, didn't steal it either...

And that's why I say people don't understand piracy(which shouldn't be called piracy), as they seem to think people have stolen the software, which they haven't.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

Just have to ask, how much Star Trek have you watched? Because food was only a small part of what the replicators made. They made physical goods with them all the time -- everything from clothes, to watches, to parts for the ship. Somebody had to design those things, and the cost in doing so would not have been trivial; the comparison stands.

Oh of course, they ranged from convenient domestic sized models to industrial sized models. But a replicator works in a similar way to transporters, they dematerialise the matter they require based on a pre-programmed pattern. Given that another major feature of the replicator is also reverse-engineering, the major work with replicators would have been a matter of cataloguing item's patterns for quick use. In Voyager Harry programs a hideous Flotter doll for Naomi in minutes and though I imagine designing a new engine would be slightly more complicated, there's no labour costs and it can be done by one man with relative ease.

The comparison doesn't hold up well at all. Other than that I'll concede my second point on the basis of my StarCraft II rage. I did mention the dedicated servers when I brought up cracked servers.

I still can't say that it justifies downloaded a pirated game. It's still getting something for free that you should have to pay for and that doesn't sit right with my conscience. Even a horrible piece of software deserves a penny and a thought for the developer's effort, no matter how small.

By definition the product you purchase is infinitely better in that you actually have the rights to it in all its glory. When you purchase your copy of Battleground 3: Modern Combat 12 you have the exclusive rights to use all of the features you paid for, such as multiplayer components and future patches and updates. If you download B3MC12 you first have to wait for a torrent to arrive, to have the DRM and security stamped out of it, for someone to host cracked servers. You might have to use a crack or workaround to patch the game too.

There are several complications to pirating that sometimes make it less than desireable. Sure there are perfect torrents out there, but they're usually of games that have been out for a month or two.

Many games will actually have a 100% working crack the same day the game comes out and often before you even wake up in the morning. People also dont have to host cracked servers as most cracked games also cracked the multiplayer so you can simply use the same ones as everybody who bought the game legally. I guess the only thing that is worse about a pirated copy is that you generally have to wait an additional four or five hours to patch your copy.

I've yet to see a torrent that's circumvented the whole multiplayer thing though. Hell I bought Battlefield 1942 and I still struggled to log into the bloody multiplayer.

I never said it wasn't illegal and I know exactly what you are talking about, but still, no one has stolen anything.
What he does, as you said, is distributing the the software illegally, but he never stole it, and the people that downloaded it, didn't steal it either...

And that's why I say people don't understand piracy(which shouldn't be called piracy), as they seem to think people have stolen the software, which they haven't.

When it comes to stealing, it depends how your legislation puts it. The Theft Act of 1968 claims this to be the definition of theft:

A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and "thief" and "steal" shall be construed accordingly.

Now "Property" includes intellectual property:

"Property" includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.

And the final statement of the act explains this:

A person appropriating property belonging to another without meaning the other permanently to lose the thing itself is nevertheless to be regarded as having the intention of permanently depriving the other of it if his intention is to treat the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the other?s rights; and a borrowing or lending of it may amount to so treating it if, but only if, the borrowing or lending is for a period and in circumstances making it equivalent to an outright taking or disposal.

Which clearly states that even if you have no intention of permenantly relieving someone of their property, which in piracy of IP you do not, that by law it is still considered to the same as if it had been permenantly relieved. And to be quite frank, this law is so outdated it's no wonder it barely covers it, which it does by just a hair.

Because laws are old and need to be updated doesn't mean that theft cannot extend to Intellectual Property.

 

[ElNeroDiablo]

Pre Warning: DON'T CALL ME A DAMN-DIRTY PIRATE IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH MY VIEWPOINT FURTHER DOWN THIS POST. I DO NOT COPYRIGHT INFRINGE PROGRAMS AS LONG AS I CAN LEGALLY GET A HOLD OF IT.


Re: Star Trek Replicators - A Replicator uses software to convert matter (such as something basic like Carbon) into energy then using that energy to recreate atom-by-atom (effectively) any data pattern (more software) stored in the data banks (be it a cheeseburger, a Core2Duo CPU or a top hat).
Effectively, once someone has made a physical item and has it scanned and stored as a piece of data, then ANYBODY with access to that piece of data can order it up on their personal Replicator at any time they wish, and if they don't want/like it they can feed it back into the Replicator which converts the matter back into energy for the next item someone may want.

It's part of why the United Federation Of Planets (and other galactic powers such as the Klingon Empire, Romulan Empire and Cardassian Union) no longer use things like Gold, Diamonds, Platinum or even paper currency any more, people buy and are paid in Credits which are effectively electronic chips that are used in lieu of old-school money.
Hell, only the Ferengi use a physical material for currency (Latinum) and that's because it's practically impossible to replicate it due to its nature (normally a liquid stored in measured amounts within pieces/bars of Gold), so even if one could scan and store the molecular make-up of some Latinum, there'd be no way to accurately and safely recreate it along the line.

And even with the abundance of Replicators (and nearly unlimited amount of processable energy from Matter-Antimatter Reactors) people still make a living growing crops or running coffee houses, making fresh/naturally-made items instead of having the Replicator makes something from its database of (probably) trillions (that's <million*million>*<million*million>, not <million*thousand>*thousand) items, which people spent time and effort into making and programming for the system to work.

~~~~

Anyways, now I've got that out of my system, back to the topic on hand.

"Piracy" as blathered on about by corporations and companies when in reference to software is simply Copyright Infringement.
My problem is that software companies (looking at YOU, Microsoft, Blizzard, Sony) try to use the EULA (which is technical legalese mumbo-jumbo to try and strip the consumer of any possible rights and legal retorts they might have, and is actually invalid in many places. At least once you get outside of the US) to bullshit their way though screwing over the customer in a way that if taken to court they can deny about it and make it seem that the consumer is in the wrong there.

When I buy a piece of software, I expect that particular copy to be mine until I sell it on, and that the company who made it keeps the IP of the software to not screw me out of BOTH my money and the software I legally purchased. This is how things worked once upon a time, namely back in the 80's and early-mid 90's.
I should NOT be forced into a "binding contract" (HA!) that I have no knowledge of before I break the shrinkwrap and place the disc in my drive, yet this is exactly what happens with a EULA, be it when you're installing Microsoft Windows or installing City of Heroes.

You want a fun fact? Microsoft try to claim in the EULA that the computer build you install Windows onto can be the ONLY hardware configuration you may install the OS to, if you want to wipe clean the system and sell the disc and key to a friend then you're shit outta luck. Even changing more than a few components of the system once it's built (either due to upgrades or replacing parts due to failure/age) can/will cause Windows to bug out on you.
Basically, Microsoft want to try and "legally" tie down one particular CD key with one particular system, and even try (in their OEM license) to tie the OEM key of Windows you bought to the one piece of hardware (be it a CPU or a chassis fan) you had to buy in order for the retailer to "legally" sell you that copy.

However, under Consumer Laws in various countries (such as Australia) such binding of hardware and software from 2 (or more) different makers isn't legal (Apple can get away with binding a copy of Snow Leopard to a particular MacBook Pro as they are the ones who make the system and OS and put them together, but a Dell Latitude D620 with Microsoft Windows Vista can't have the software bound to the hardware as Dell doesn't make Windows and Microsoft doesn't make the D620), and as such those sections of the EULA are technically illegal to try and enforce.
----
How does this have anything to do with my view of Copyright Infringement?
Simple; The more a bunch of idiots (not always the ones working on the program itself, but more middle and upper management who care about profits first, shareholders second and consumers ninth) tries to screw-over the end-user with legal-sounding crap and crippled software, then the more folks who are the technically-savvy end-users will try to under-screw the end-user by uncrippling the software (first-day cracks) and make their own versions of the software without the "Screw You User!" aspect to it then spread it out online using mainly word-of-mouth to get it spread.

This in turn leads to cracked but otherwise complete versions of software that has some form or another of rather draconian BS (aka: Digital RESTRICTIONS Management) being released without said BS included, which in turn leads to the companies over-reacting (instead of, oh I don't now, maybe listening to their consumers and end-users instead of their greedy idiots) and adding MORE draconian BS and thus continuing the cycle.

Yes the crackers and 'copyright infringers' COULD stop their part of the scenario, but that does NOTHING to stop the companies from enforcing more and more BS then trying to get the courts to agree with them and make it legal for the BS to be used, all the while screwing over the LEGITIMATE CONSUMERS instead of the ones the company is trying to affect with said BS.

~~~~

Hmmmmm.... I think that's all I have to say on this matter. If you made it this far and understand what the hell I said without wanting to throw virtual sticks and stones at me whilst condemning me to a probably non-existent afterlife simply because my viewpoint differs from yours, then maybe we can have a rather reasonable talk.