Why I don't like piracy: a software developer's thoughts.

[Slycne]

Me? Give money to EA? I think not.

Why play the game at all then?

One of the main arguments I see in this thread is that X company puts out crap game and if they put out better games then I would buy them. Great! So we are in agreement don't buy the same rehashed story line, one sides character, cheesy game mechanics, etc? No, for some reason you all feel the need to still play said crappy game. There are plenty of great games made by great companies who need your support to continue to produce the games we all love. Used chewing gum is free too, but I certainly wouldn't even try.

My only real gripe I have with piracy is the self entitlement that's given out.

On one hand you state the piracy doesn't matter because they were never going to buy the product in the first place, but then you try to make yourself out as the robin hood for consumers because you are stealing from the dirty coffers of big business. You are contradicting yourself.

They cost to much, maybe if they brought the price down then I would buy them. Well I am sorry, but while I can see some validity to this argument for say a struggling college student who needs Photoshop. As much as you think you couldn't live without them games are a luxury entertainment item. It's not food, you aren't going to die if you don't get it. Even for the Photoshop argument there are other ways to fix it. There are free open source programs that work just as well if not better. You can get some really deep discounts on most of that high end software if you know where to look. I also don't know of any schools that don't offer computer labs with the software you need for your course work available. Sure piracy is easier then these solutions, but they are also not illegal.

I have far more respect for someone that simply says "Yes I know what I am doing is against the law, but I am going to do it anyways and who are you to stop me!" then someone who comes up with some half conceived argument for why they are entitled to their behavior.

Is piracy going to go away, no. What I do want to see happen is more companies begin to approach it in ways beyond consumer detrimental DRM( which despite what they might say has more to do with the second hand market then piracy) and adopt systems like Steam or models similar to MMOs( not the monthly subscription aspect). A valid user is rewarded with continual new content and the company also can verify the validity of the purchase, but not in a way that infringes extremely on the consumer's ownership.

 

[Sayvara]

Is that what you are saying?

What if it is?

Then let me be the first to tell you that I think your attitude and actions are disrespectful and deserving of contempt. Of course you are perfectly free to let this mean absolutely nothing to you... but at least I have said it. ´

And saying I brought nothing to the table when we are now on our seventh page of discussion I think points to you attempting to ignore opinions such as this. You don't want to be told that your actions are questionable. Ignorance is bliss... i.e. if I'm not hearing that people tell me I'm acting like a jerk, then I'm not.

Or maybe you just don't care about that and go on knowingly acting like a jerk. Which is it?

/S

 

[Sayvara]

I'm opposed to the idea that "intellectual property" is a kind of "property" with "property rights" attached rather than a completely-different-thing with completely-different-thing rights attached.

Both morally and legally, equating the two leads to a stupid place because people start making all kinds of bullshit analogies instead of looking at "IP," software, &c. on its own terms.

The right to make money from your work is distinct from property rights. The moral rights of the creator are distinct from property rights.

How are the rights of the creator disctinct from property rights? I think your argument sounds like you're just trying to relabel things here when you are in fact talking about IP rights.

/S

 

[mark_n_b]

I'll "pirate" whatever I can. If Photoshop CS3 is going to cost me £600 to buy lol then fuck that.

By doing that you will never be able to sell or market your photoshop work. I am building a game prototype to market to Publishers, I only have a PS education license, so part of the pick-up would have to include the cost of a full commercial release.

 

[runtheplacered]

Is that what you are saying?

What if it is?

Then let me be the first to tell you that I think your attitude and actions are disrespectful and deserving of contempt. Of course you are perfectly free to let this mean absolutely nothing to you... but at least I have said it. ´

And saying I brought nothing to the table when we are now on our seventh page of discussion I think points to you attempting to ignore opinions such as this. You don't want to be told that your actions are questionable. Ignorance is bliss... i.e. if I'm not hearing that people tell me I'm acting like a jerk, then I'm not.

Or maybe you just don't care about that and go on knowingly acting like a jerk. Which is it?

/S

"Then let me be the first to tell you that I think your attitude and actions are disrespectful and deserving of contempt."

I'm not the person you originally quoted. This has no bearing on me what so ever.

"And saying I brought nothing to the table..."

I was speaking of your first post, in which you didn't bring anything to the table. There could be 50,000,000 pages of stuff here and that doesn't mean your first post had any meaning to it. You could have started a post and just inserted the words, "Pirating is bad, m'kay" and still got this many pages of responses. Does that mean you deserve any credit?

"Or maybe you just don't care about that and go on knowingly acting like a jerk. Which is it? "

I'm hardly a jerk. But, thanks for going off on a whim anyway. Because you (who I find knows nothing about this topic) calls me a jerk, I'm supposed to give a rats ass? Yeah, right.

So, basically all you can say in response to me is, "You're a big meany."? Well then, I guess I've been served, huh?

 

[Another]

quick two bits.

If you are getting a stolen radio from a friend, is that wrong? Yes
If you are shoplifting, is that wrong? Yes

Stealing games is the same thing, just easier. And you can't say, its okay because people are still getting paid. No they are not getting paid, because money comes from sales.

And also...don't argue that you downloaded a game because you didn't want to buy it due to quality issuse/didn't want to play it ect.

Because you downloaded it you are playing it, and the quality is enough that you do indeed play it.

It's stealing, plain and simple. And to me people trying to justify it just sound hollow.

Ever heard of saving money to buy a game?

 

[Alex_P]

I'm opposed to the idea that "intellectual property" is a kind of "property" with "property rights" attached rather than a completely-different-thing with completely-different-thing rights attached.

Both morally and legally, equating the two leads to a stupid place because people start making all kinds of bullshit analogies instead of looking at "IP," software, &c. on its own terms.

The right to make money from your work is distinct from property rights. The moral rights of the creator are distinct from property rights.

How are the rights of the creator disctinct from property rights? I think your argument sounds like you're just trying to relabel things here when you are in fact talking about IP rights.

/S

The whole point of copyright law, patent law, &c. is that ideas themselves have value independent of material objects, and, because they operate differently from material objects, we regulate them differently as well. That's why these are all separate areas of the law in the first place.
 

"Moral rights" or "author's rights" as legal constructs involve stuff that's considered distinct from a creator's economic rights and has no equivalent for non-copyrighted things like plots of land or planks of wood. Examples include having your name on it or guaranteeing that it isn't chopped up or remixed in a way you don't want. This is an IP-law construct that has no basic-property-law equivalent. (Note that the US doesn't have a specific doctrine of "moral rights" and instead relies on libel and defamation law for that kind of thing.)

Now, I was just kinda throwing out "moral rights of the creator" as a term for moral principles distinct from legal ones, though. I think a creator deserves some respect for her work independent of any economic relationships or questions about who should legally control her work and how. However, the basis of that respect is completely different from the reason we respect property rights.

The property rights you keep trying to assert are a mechanism for dealing with so-called "rivalrous goods"(*) like houses and cars and clicky pens and fancy lounge chairs. That's because I can't use a resource if you're already using it, so we need a structure for easily defining who gets to use what resource to prevent conflict. It's a very basic thing we do to reduce the amount of violence in everyday human interactions.

The same kind of problem doesn't exist for "non-rivalrous goods" -- that's when my use of a resource doesn't negatively impact your ability to use the same resource. There'd be no reason for us to fight over it even if we didn't have a concept of ownership. Most modern Western societies also recognize the need to deal with these kind of goods, though, because they're nice to have around but a totally unregulated atmosphere doesn't exactly encourage their production. Copyright and patent law are legal instruments that encourage the creation of these kind of shared resources by giving their creators a limited monopoly on their distribution or use. The basic idea is to let the creator profit for a little while and then turn that resource into a full-on public good so that everyone can benefit. That's why copyright and patent rights expire.

Two different types of resources that are treated differently because they are, actually, different. Concepts of "intellectual property" and vanilla "property" may resemble each other superficially but the forces driving the (perceived?) need for such structures are completely different, almost diametrically opposite.

-- Alex

* - Ugh, basic econ. Still, it gets the point across, I hope.

 

[Slycne]

Can we at least all agree to stop trying to make analogies that don't actually fit? I do agree with Cheese_Pavilion that piracy is not as simple to label it "stealing".

 

[friedmetroid]

I think you're making too many nasty generalizations about software pirates that simply aren't correct.

Games are expensive. If I'm going to fork over $50+ for a game, I want to know I'm getting a good deal.

Game demos these days are often ridiculously short, or nonexistent.

Maybe if delopers made it easier to try games before you buy them, software piracy wouldn't be so rampant.

 

[Sayvara]

TiVo/ads/not-ads/copying/etc

Ok, I think you've lost me. Your initial comparison involved ads and not watching them being a moral issue. My only issue was that it didn't seem to be a good comparison. Now we're on copying, but not just copying, copying with some sort of use. I'm not sure what the point is anymore, as it seems to have been moved on the way to where we're at. Can you restate what it is you're driving at?

On the one hand people state that piracy is wrong because it's about property rights, but then they try and make themselves out to be the defenders of the ability of software companies to make money.

The problem is that this whole issue is approached too simplistically. It's a combination of a lot of different issues, from individual property rights all the way to the sound public policy of trying to create an environment that fosters innovation.

Oh, there's plenty of generalizations being passed around, and yes, they oversimplify the issues. However, so far the arguments for piracy are not that it fosters innovation, or creates an environment that does. If this is the position you are taking, then I am genuinely interested in hearing that side of the debate.

 

[Slycne]

Because researching a major purchase is obviously out of the realm of reason. That's right everyone here who is advocating against piracy is a millionaire with more money then God, you caught us.

I haven't regretted a video game purchase for years now, and I never had to resort to downloading it to make a decision.


To further the discussion though

However, so far the arguments for piracy are not that it fosters innovation, or creates an environment that does. If this is the position you are taking, then I am genuinely interested in hearing that side of the debate.

 

[Akafrank]

What you're basically saying is you're a fool with money and you'll easily part with it. You'll pay full price to watch bad movies.
I'll set up a paypal account so you can send some of your obscene amounts of excess cash my way.

I wish I could claim otherwise, but yes, I spend too much money on games. I really do. I spend it on games that intrigue me in some way, graphics, story, gameplay or hell if they just look fun. I am fascinated by what game designers do, this "from scratch" creation of substance, movement, interactions, story. I would be happy to send you money. Make a game, get it published, and I'll contribute. What I wont do, and I promise this, is steal your work.

 

[ThePlasmatizer]

People trying to justify piracy all seem to digress into wild rationalizations in order to obfuscate a very simple fact. They believe that wanting something is synonymous with deserving something. At least be straight about it, you want it and you don't want to pay for it. That makes you think stealing it right.

I think game pirates do unfortunately have the luxury of knowing that they will never experience reciprocity, as they will never have an idea worth stealing.

What you're basically saying is you're a fool with money and you'll easily part with it.
You'll pay full price to watch bad movies.
You'll pay the sticker price on a crappy GM car.
You'll pay full price for a game that sucks or you'll pay only once for a few hours.


Really it sounds like you have too much money on your hands. Give me some. I'll set up a paypal account so you can send some of your obscene amounts of excess cash my way. Then my pirating ways will be cured and I'll achieve salvation and you'll feel good about saving people from the evils of piracy.

What you steal cars as well as pirating peoples hard work?

You can't really defend piracy, if you imagine yourself in the same position as software developers you'll understand how lame it is.

It's like back at school if someone plagiarized your work, you worked hard on it and spent a lot of time on it and lent it to someguy to help him get an idea of what you need to do he goes and nicks it, not only is he using it as he sees fit he's distributing it to others as well.

 

[ThePlasmatizer]

Can we at least all agree to stop trying to make analogies that don't actually fit? I do agree with Cheese_Pavilion that piracy is not as simple to label it "stealing".

Saying this is kind of like asking a blind person to "see" what you're talking about...




I'm so funny.

Answers.com

Definition

Stealing is taking another person's property without permission.

 

[Slycne]

Software piracy isn't stealing though it's illegal copying and distribution. It's simply not an analog to taking someones car, and the more we reach for these inane analogies the less we can have an intelligent discussion on the matter.