Why do people care about piracy?

[Epona]

iTunes has made it easier to buy music than it is to pirate it. That is the correct way to fight piracy. The RIAA showing it's greed is NOT the correct way to fight piracy.

BTW, if some kid making min wage downloads a Metallica song and it costs millionaire Lars Ulrich a penny. I won't object. The music industry has robbed us all blind for many years, it was Napster (pirates) that showed us just how badly they were ripping us off. Today, songs are at most $1.29 each. Remember when they would charge you $5 for a cd single? Charge you $20 for a whole cd with ONE good song on it? The gravy train is over for the music industry and you can thank the pirates for the low price of music today.

 

[babinro]

Piracy bothers me because I see it as theft. I would not want to be robbed on a business or personal level, so why is it right that I steal from people I don't know? Just because this crime is widespread and goes almost entirely unpunished does not make it acceptable.

If the artist truly wishes to share their gifts with everyone...they have every means to offer their products or service for free.

 

[SoulSalmon]

As far as music goes?
I've met several bands who ENCOURAGE people to pirate their work if they're having any difficulty buying the tracks.

Pretty much any and every band under a record label makes all it's profit from tours rather then record sales (they're sometimes lucky to see CENTS of the money you payed), going to performances is one of the best ways to support a band you like

 

[Duskflamer]

I might have some sympathy for the RIAA here...if the fine was something resonable, but they're charging amounts so overblown it would be hilarious if it wasn't so damn sad. Worst part is they don't seem to understand how human psychology works, actions of blatant greed like this from an organization that people already loath is just going to lead to more people pirating in defiance (IE: they want a given song but don't want any money going to RIAA).

As far as the artists go, my understanding of the music industry is that artists make very little from CD sales, the CDs and radio play are (from the Artist's end) there to build publicity for live concerts, where the real money is for the Artists themselves.

As far as "stealing" goes, I really detest that argument when it comes to digital media. Stealing is when person X takes something from person Y such that person X now has it and person Y does not. "stealing" a file means that person X copies something from person Y such that both persons X and Y have the thing. It's really not the same as stealing a car or CD player or whatever analogy you want to draw to a physical object.

And as far as "All artists are in it for the money." a) see above, and b) see people who make music in their spare time and, say, upload it to Youtube for all to see for free.

 

[EHKOS]

No I think artists are in their right to go all Richard Halley on people. However, what I don't get (prolly because I'm missing part of it) is how game piracy hurts developers. Aren't we just hurting the merchants? Didn't they already pay wholesale for it? Didn't the devs get their money already? Or do I not understand it?

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Speaking as someone who dreams of eventually producing a film or two, I can say its probably both about the money and the feeling one gets that people out there are stealing the fruit of your labor.

 

[b3nn3tt]

i dont understand why they cant just charge him the price of the song

Because then it wouldn't be a deterrant. If people knew that the only penalty for illegally downloading things was to pay the price if they'd had to buy them anyway, then there's no incentive for people to not pirate and pay on the off-chance they get caught.

OT: Yes, it's ridiculously high. But, as people have said, if it deters even a few people from pirating in future then it's in the record company's interest to keep fining people like this.

 

[TheLaofKazi]

*snip*

Goddamnit, I love you. Thank you.

Here is a fun video that is related to this topic!

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

I'd love to see how people would survive if they did it all purely for arts sake.

Which they actually would.

People created art in terms of music and pictures SEVERAL THOUSAND YEARS before they could even turn a modern sense of "profit" out of it. It didn't help their survival in the slightest (which was a big issue back then since survival was pretty much all there was to do for the man of the stone age), but STILL archeological finds have revealed, primitive man-made musical instruments and cave wall paintings.

And the same thing would happen today. Even if piracy was to make the music industry crash and burn and make it financially impossible to actually turn a profit as an artist from making music, you'd still have these "morons" (quotationmarks intended to display sarcasm) making, recording and distributing music anyway.

"But why?" says the gullible liberal/capitalist robot of modern society. "Why would anyone do something that doesn't earn them some of that allmight dollar!? Does not compute! Syntax Error!"

Well because IT'S HUMAN NATURE! This capitalist, trade-based, globalist society of today has only been a norm for a fraction of mankinds total existence. This concept of "I should try to make MONEY off of my daily activities" is just that: a concept. It's not a defining trait of our nature. Our nature is more in line of being social creatures, but who tend to get bored with just meaningless existence. So we find/invent excuses for keeping ourselves busy in ways we think are aesthetically pleasing in some way (making music and listening to other people making it being one of them). This behaviour existed before freemarket capitalism did.

WHich is why I find it so incredibly stupid when some people on the escapist messageboards (the same messageboards who pretty much declared themselves the last "sane" and "intelligent" place on the internet), rant about how piracy will bring down the videogame industry, along with pretty much every other artistic industry that exists because "those poor, poor artist won't want to make art if they don't get paid for it! boohoo!" while they all happily jump on the corporate bandwagon, defending DRM's and make snide remarks towards innocent people being charged with ridiculous and uncalled for fines by satanic megacorporations who get their kicks out of destroying people's lives.

Fact: neither videogames, music, movies, books or whatever will just "vanish" because piracy is active and flourishing. Someone, somewhere, somehow will ALWAYS spend some of their freetime creating these pieces of art for the sheer sense of self-satisfaction that it brings. The only people who are really threatened by piracy are pretty much money-grubbing middlemen with no real artistic talent at all (record lable companies, publishers etc.) but who REALLY DO spoonge and cling to people with artistic talent with parasitic intentions.

Why the hell would people who claim to LIKE games/movies/music actually defend these parasites who do NOTHING to further the industry or it's creative people what so ever? It's completely beyond my comperhension.

Yet it happens on these messageboards for some reason. Ain't it wierd?

This is all fantastic except for one thing.

Games of QUALITY took money to make.

Youre point is valid and well thought out but in those times you could literally take some boar blood or ochre, add water, and sit down and paint with your hands, no charge, no team of 200 people with families, no insanely good concept art. Just a basic drawing.

Now if you want to see the GAMES and books that you enjoy (arguement is very valid for music still) then you have to accept that in this day and age art isnt a hobby for some, its a job. And these people unsurprisingly need a wage and produce the best quality art. Im more than happy to make a silly pencil sketch and shove it on deviant art for all to see. Having to draw some guys eyes and a billion times in INSANE detail for a game? Thats a full time day job. And i wanna eat dammit! I also want my company to make enough money to fund the next title where i can enjoy showcasing my art even more. I understand that with quality comes dedication and today, in these times, dedication means you have to throw your life into something, a company has to throw all its assets into something to make something truley of quality.

Piracy is spitting in the face of the artists. You are telling these filth drawers to crawl back to their tablets and draw MORE for you, all while insulting what they have done is garbage and needs to be better. Of course this is after you steal their work to begin with. I respect those who produce immense quality of art. I think they deserve to be payed well for throwing their LIVES into a proffession as challenging as it is.

TLDR: If you are right, and i think you are, gaming wont die. It will just become crap. Good games need money to launch and skilled artists to draw, these people will not work for free, no matter HOW much they want to draw just for the fun of drawing. Also middlemen suck as well. Its just piracy thieves have no ground to stand on. You dont punch the artist in the face while he works hard for you. Its just not fair. You wanna see more of something STOP STEALING FROM THE SOURCE.

No I think artists are in their right to go all Richard Halley on people. However, what I don't get (prolly because I'm missing part of it) is how game piracy hurts developers. Aren't we just hurting the merchants? Didn't they already pay wholesale for it? Didn't the devs get their money already? Or do I not understand it?

A game might sell 4000 copies of a new release. You think it gets shipped FOUR THOUSAND BOXES right at launch and then never again? No. It buys more from the publisher as it restocks, the money is gradual. More piracy means less restock. Means less money for the dev.

Piracy is not stealing or theft. Please can people stop saying that it is.

Taking someones hard work without paying for it is theft. Especially if it is the quality of a game. Something with 100000 man hours of work into its design is like a car, and stealing it is equally wrong. You are spitting in the faces of those who put work into it. If you pirate. You. Are. A. Thief.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

Id just like to point out here the people who are really going to suffer from piracy arent the artists or the rich guys in charge of the record companys or the big game developers or whatever. Its the little guys, the nameless guys who work for the big companies.

What does a big business usually do if its not turning a profit? Im no economist but i do believe It downsizes by firing dudes. The economys important because of the people who need to eat.

Piracy is a new problem produced by modern technology that we still need to figure out, those guys who sell pirated dvds are definitly bad guys, but is installing your game on your mates computer just as bad? To me that seems like sharing, but really ive duplicated the item and not paid the creators so i dont know what to think, its hard looking at software the same way we look at things in the 'real world'

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Direct quote from Blackstones Criminal Practice 2011 relating to what is property under s. 4 Theft Act 1986:

'Other intangible property' includes patents (Patents Act 1977, s. 30), copyright (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, s. 1) and design rights (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, s. 213), although a mere breach of copyright is not theft.

I could find more if you think you know the law better than the author of the leading practitioners text on criminal law.

If you take something you're supposed to pay for without paying for it, it is theft. Its not a matter of "law" (LAAAWWW!), its a matter of morality.

But theft is a legal term. One which doesn't apply to piracy and is a lot more complex than your definition.

One last thing for you:

"In York, excluding Sundays, it is perfectly legal to shoot a Scotsman with a bow and arrow."

If i do this, im not a murderer right? Cus the "law" says im not. That makes it perfectly ok doesnt it?

 

[JesterRaiin]

I don't quite understand what the point is.

Fear us. Obey us. We are omnipotent. Fear us. We have skills, lawyers, resources and urge to enslave you. By the way : FEAR US.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Its about money and property that they own and that some steals. Would you work for nothing? Would you write a book or make a movie or music album and be happy that people steal it from you? No different to some one stealing stuff from your home. The property belongs to who owns it and making a copy of that is stealing. We are not talking about make a copy of a cd from a friend, but putting it online for thousands of people to download or selling copies of a movie or cd for profit.

Thing that annoys me is that people that buy pirate stuff dont accept they are thieves and say "im stealing some one elses property without paying, i dont give a shit", no, they come out with all this bullshit like they are only making a copy. Like if i bought a picture, and someone photocopies it, i still have the original picture. You know what every single copy of every movie, music or book is all from an original master copy. So that would mean you are stealing, because by your opinion i can walk into a store a steal a book as thats also a copy of an original.

 

[Signa]

I'd love to see how people would survive if they did it all purely for arts sake.

Which they actually would.

People created art in terms of music and pictures SEVERAL THOUSAND YEARS before they could even turn a modern sense of "profit" out of it. It didn't help their survival in the slightest (which was a big issue back then since survival was pretty much all there was to do for the man of the stone age), but STILL archeological finds have revealed, primitive man-made musical instruments and cave wall paintings.

And the same thing would happen today. Even if piracy was to make the music industry crash and burn and make it financially impossible to actually turn a profit as an artist from making music, you'd still have these "morons" (quotationmarks intended to display sarcasm) making, recording and distributing music anyway.

"But why?" says the gullible liberal/capitalist robot of modern society. "Why would anyone do something that doesn't earn them some of that allmight dollar!? Does not compute! Syntax Error!"

Well because IT'S HUMAN NATURE! This capitalist, trade-based, globalist society of today has only been a norm for a fraction of mankinds total existence. This concept of "I should try to make MONEY off of my daily activities" is just that: a concept. It's not a defining trait of our nature. Our nature is more in line of being social creatures, but who tend to get bored with just meaningless existence. So we find/invent excuses for keeping ourselves busy in ways we think are aesthetically pleasing in some way (making music and listening to other people making it being one of them). This behaviour existed before freemarket capitalism did.

WHich is why I find it so incredibly stupid when some people on the escapist messageboards (the same messageboards who pretty much declared themselves the last "sane" and "intelligent" place on the internet), rant about how piracy will bring down the videogame industry, along with pretty much every other artistic industry that exists because "those poor, poor artist won't want to make art if they don't get paid for it! boohoo!" while they all happily jump on the corporate bandwagon, defending DRM's and make snide remarks towards innocent people being charged with ridiculous and uncalled for fines by satanic megacorporations who get their kicks out of destroying people's lives.

Fact: neither videogames, music, movies, books or whatever will just "vanish" because piracy is active and flourishing. Someone, somewhere, somehow will ALWAYS spend some of their freetime creating these pieces of art for the sheer sense of self-satisfaction that it brings. The only people who are really threatened by piracy are pretty much money-grubbing middlemen with no real artistic talent at all (record lable companies, publishers etc.) but who REALLY DO spoonge and cling to people with artistic talent with parasitic intentions.

Why the hell would people who claim to LIKE games/movies/music actually defend these parasites who do NOTHING to further the industry or it's creative people what so ever? It's completely beyond my comperhension.

Yet it happens on these messageboards for some reason. Ain't it wierd?

Holy. Fucking. Shit. This. So fucking this.

And after all that, you forgot to mention how people are still willing to pay some one for their good work. A musician who makes music for the art can then perform in a concert and still make money if they have enough fans. This is the age of the internet. If some one likes something, more than just a few people are going to hear about it. An artist CAN survive through self-promotion and concerts.

I'm too lazy to find it right now, but there was a professional violin player in a subway just performing for the sake of performing, and he was making $20 an hour. That's twice what I get and I have a legitimate 9-5 job. Up until the 20th century, being a multi-millionaire artist was unheard of and probably impossible. There's no reason why things can't return to those days.

 

[AperioContra]

I'd love to see how people would survive if they did it all purely for arts sake.

Which they actually would.

I'm not going to quote the entire thing, because I don't think it's prudent, I'm also going to play the devils advocate here because, well, you're not entirely correct. You see, you notice the ambiguous period of time you labeled as several thousands of years, most art was often religious? That's not because god was so big back then (well... kind of) You see, the only people willing to pay for art were nobles, or more than likely the church. And... well dudes gotta eat. So often times you would spend most of your artistic career trying to paint the right amount of gut on a noble so he doesn't behead you, or painting the same depicted religious scenes over and over again.

My point is, before commercial art, the only money to be gained was often at a sacrifice to the very spirit and creativity of the artist. While this era did create some classics (Jesu, Joy of Man's Desire, The Sistine Chapel) it wasn't until the rennaisance where more people were appreciating and affording art that it most artforms came into it's own, and even then it wasn't until the mid 1800s , when the general man was helping in this matter to buy painting or donate to music halls that was started getting the really good stuff.

I will say you are right, what we aren't facing is an extinction, but, speaking as an artist, we're facing something worse, the very crushing of our artistic spirit, because the only way we can eat is to make something popular enough that more people will buy it instead of stealing it. I will point out what people are guaranteed to like that much is something that is familiar. If you notice in the last couple years the majority of songs often sound the same. You either have the Metal bands that all sound like Nickleback, or pseudogrunge bands that all sound like Nirvana, in Pop everyone has a partytune with an autotuner and in Rap everyone still is talking about ballin and being a gangsta. Why, this sells, and you sell what's safe.

I guess what I'm beating around the bush about like an overzealous landscaper is that when you back the people who sign our checks against the wall so they only buy things that sell, well we're going to make things that sell. Because... Well, dude's got to eat.

a little more on topic, even with this diatribe, I still think 645 thousand is a little excessive.

 

[b3nn3tt]

You know what every single copy of every movie, music or book is all from an original master copy. So that would mean you are stealing, because by your opinion i can walk into a store a steal a book as thats also a copy of an original.

That is one of the best analogies I've ever heard as to why piracy equates to theft. I'd never even thought of that, but it actually makes it make complete sense. Seriously, thank you for that, I may use it in future.

 

[SoulSalmon]

Words

It's dangerous to go alone, take this:

Spoiler: Image

There's an old ad I think most people are familiar with "You wouldn't steal a car, you wouldn't steal a handbag" etc.
There's a GOOD reason people poked fun at that ad.
Lets face it people, if I stole your car, you'd be pissed off, if I made a copy of your car and drove THAT, you're far less likely to be mad, there IS a difference, stop calling piracy theft.

Edit:

You know what every single copy of every movie, music or book is all from an original master copy. So that would mean you are stealing, because by your opinion i can walk into a store a steal a book as thats also a copy of an original.

That is one of the best analogies I've ever heard as to why piracy equates to theft. I'd never even thought of that, but it actually makes it make complete sense. Seriously, thank you for that, I may use it in future.

That's a TERRIBLE analogy o.0
When a book is printed, there are (for example) 1000 copies made and given to a store.
If someone STOLE a book, there would only be 999 left in the store.
Piracy would be if someone bought a book, then scanned it, printed ANOTHER COPY off and gave it away, in the end the store still sold all 1000, rather the only selling 999 because one was stolen.


The above is STILL a pretty bad explanation because I myself suck at explaining things, the fact of the matter is simple that piracy in ABSOLUTELY NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM takes anything tangible or irreplacable, it is something that has been copied. Copied illegally mind you, but copied none-the-less.

 

[vxicepickxv]

You mean this little add thing that doesn't work.

I've realized a few things in life.
1. People WILL pirate your stuff, no matter how much you think you crack down on it
2. You cannot stop them. They will find a way around anything
3. Make it worth their time to buy it, and more of them will.

 

[Klepa]

Piracy is not stealing or theft. Please can people stop saying that it is.

Anything to prove that, 'side from "Stop expressing an idea I don't like"?

I think the point here is that it's literally not "theft". He's not saying "Piracy isn't wrong", atleast not in that post, but stating that a more correct analogy would be getting a free ride on a bus, instead of stealing the cash register.

There's a slight difference, how big that difference is, is arguable. An argument I'm not getting into.

 

[The Code]

Direct quote from Blackstones Criminal Practice 2011 relating to what is property under s. 4 Theft Act 1986:

'Other intangible property' includes patents (Patents Act 1977, s. 30), copyright (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, s. 1) and design rights (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, s. 213), although a mere breach of copyright is not theft.

I could find more if you think you know the law better than the author of the leading practitioners text on criminal law.

If you take something you're supposed to pay for without paying for it, it is theft. Its not a matter of "law" (LAAAWWW!), its a matter of morality.

Despite the fact that it says that taking 'intangible properties' doesn't qualify as theft?

I'm in an odd boat here. While I can see why people get up in arms over what piracy is and does, one also has to look at what piracy has done. Some products have been struck with bolstered sales because of pirated copies. The people downloading the games have friends. The friends might say "Hey, that's a cool game. I want to play that too." Now, said friend will go and buy a fresh copy from the store. This is a good thing. It also helps point out things that people don't like, such as the infamous DRM issues that Spore had. It was a good game, but the DRM was horrible. People downloaded copies of the game with the DRM stripped, and the company that put the DRM in place learned something from that.

In all honesty, I pirate games. Specifically, I pirate older games, the likes of which you may find hosted at Good Ol' Games. I enjoy the older games like Deus Ex, Morrowind, Metal Fatigue, and Warzone 2100. The problem I face is that the games I prefer aren't made anymore and the fact that local retailers don't carry the copies already made. Granted, I could use the grand invention known as the Internet and purchase a copy on Ebay, but I don't have a credit card. I hate them, and that's an argument for another day. The point I'm trying to make is one that Extra Credits touched on once. If it's an older game that can't normally be found anywhere else, why not? Many of the companies that made them in the first place aren't around anymore and won't see a lick of pain or profit anyway, so there's really no one to piss off if you download it. In fact, someone might look at the stats of the downloaded file and think "Wow, people still like this game. I'll keep that in mind for something later on." Like I said: If it's an old game, go for it. If you DO manage to find a hard copy of an older game,buy it, keep it safe and clean, and cherish that piece of gaming history as you play to your heart's content.

tl;dr - The morality of piracy depends on what you're pirating, I think.