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

[Sayvara]

Yours & Mine, the principle that says: "Ask and get permission first before you use other people's stuff". We learn it as kids and we respect it in all other ways of life. Why shouldn't we do that with software?

Because you give permission to that software not because you think someone deserves it or not because you like that person or even because you think the world needs it--you give access to anyone who will pay.

Assuming a software developer has no pride in what they do; has no sense of public good; and is only in it for the cash is an unfounded opinion at best... and at worst one that deserves as good a smack over the head as I can get you without being imprisoned for assault.

Yes it is true that we charge money for our work. But from own experience, I can tell you that what you said above is dead wrong... especially about me.

That means that you've decided to change your property from something personal to you or a form of charity into an article of commerce. When we learned it as kids we learned it as a reason not to take our playmate's toys without asking. There's a big difference between that kind of property and property that is a commercial product, just like there's a big difference between my property rights over my home as opposed to my office.

This makes no sense what so ever. As kids, we most certainly learned that you don't stand and read the comic magazines without paying for them first. You cannot seriously be saying that we only have to respect personal property and as soon as it is offered for sale, or as a part of a purchase, then we don't have to respect it any more. That is just nonsense.
/S

 

[falcontwin]

There seems to be an overriding theme in this thread that "people who download stuff would not have bought it anyway". Earlier in the month I downloaded Death Magnetic as I'm a big metallica fan. I downloaded it as I could listen to it 1 week before it was released, When it was released I bought the CD and I also bought the DLC for Guitar hero 3 So they got my money twice because I was able to preview their album and loved it. Where as I paid money for the first 2 linkin park albums but didn't bother with minutes to midnight after I downloaded it and found it had like 2 good songs.

Basically the pro developer people are saying "we should be able to sell you whatever shit we want and after you have given us the money to "own" a copy it still belongs to us cause your an untrustworthy ****" If I buy something it's mine If I buy a car I can lend it to my friends to drive around sell it to who ever I want and add new wheels spoilers change the doors paint it a different colour if I want. So too bad if you created something, you sold it to me took my money it's mine.

 

[Sayvara]

Because you give permission to that software not because you think someone deserves it or not because you like that person or even because you think the world needs it--you give access to anyone who will pay.

Assuming a software developer has no pride in what they do; has no sense of public good; and is only in it for the cash is an unfounded opinion at best...

Good thing it's not the opinion I expressed, but only a slanted caricature of it.

Read what you wrote again. You excluded the possibility that I might be doing it both because of the public good and because I want to make a profit in the process. And looking back at one of my latest projects I was involved in, which involved taking part in the development and launch one of the first major DRM free music & software stores, I say your statement is flawed.

Sure there are those that only do it because they want to make a profit and couldn't care less about public good, nor of the customer experience. But I say that those are few and far between. Most developers have a sense of pride and wish to be genuinely deserving of the money they ask for the product.

Just like we learned that it's disrespectful to yell '***** better bake me a pot pie' at both friends cooking for us and restaurant staff, but that it's not disrespectful to expect more from a restaurant staff in terms of service and quality because we're paying for it.

I have never argued against customer rights and that providing a product does not ential certain obligations on the producer's part. Nowhere in my arguments here will you find anything like that so why you are bringing it up I simply don't know.

And if you don't want me to polarize your arguments, perhaps you should be a bit clearer in your way of expressing yourself. And I think you should take a moment to read what I am saying and not make the very same kind of mistakes you say I do.

What I am discussing here is the breaches of principles that most people hold for granted in all other walks of like, i.e. the principle of respecting other people's property. Pirates assume they have some kind of moral right to ignore those principles. In a few cases, they are right, when the software owners are acting like unwashed cheezy pricks and not respecting customer rights. But in most cases the arguments to not carry enough weight to tip the scale back from the unfairness of stepping over other people's rights when it comes to their property.

- So the price was high: doesn't matter because you have no inaliable right to use my stuff.
- So I lanuched it late in your area: doesn't make it right because I'm not obliged to release it globally on teh same day.
- So you'd buy it if I bent over backwards for you: take your money and leave then because I don't want to bend that far right now. You still dont' get to use my stuff unless I give the OK.

Sure, there are things that producers could do better, even when they are within their rights. Sure, piracy will take place no matter what. Sure... things could be better. But that is a separate discussion. In the discussion about piracy being disrespectful to people's rights of ownership, none of those things have any bearing on the matter.

/S

 

[Sayvara]

There seems to be an overriding theme in this thread that "people who download stuff would not have bought it anyway".

Noone here argued that. Link me any of those posts or retract your statement on account of it being a false argument.

Basically the pro developer people are saying "we should be able to sell you whatever shit we want and after you have given us the money to "own" a copy it still belongs to us cause your an untrustworthy ****"

No, we do not say that. I myself have argued specifically that this is not the case. Not even taking into account a possibility of interpreting arguments generously have any of us ever said that producers need not respect customer rigths, or that selling defective products is OK.

Again: link to posts that say any of these things for go stand in a corner and feel ashamed for lying

/S

 

[Dommyboy]

Would software and video games be better if people never pirated though? Go!

Ps. Sayavara can you please stop with the chronic double posting and constant quoting? You have stated every point several times.

 

[falcontwin]

There seems to be an overriding theme in this thread that "people who download stuff would not have bought it anyway".
[you said this]
Noone here argued that. Link me any of those posts or retract your statement on account of it being a false argument.

You're assuming the person would actually buy the product in the first place, which is not true.

Theres one. If I bother to go back through the pages I'll find several more

 

[Sayvara]

Would software and video games be better if people never pirated though? Go!

Ps. Sayavara can you please stop with the chronic double posting and constant quoting? You have stated every point several times.

I have no idea if they would be better, but that is a out of the scope of this discussion. Start a separate thread about it if you like.

Since people seems to not be reading my points properly, I re-iterate the points until they are understood and answered to in a relevant manner.

/S

 

[Sayvara]

There seems to be an overriding theme in this thread that "people who download stuff would not have bought it anyway".
[you said this]
Noone here argued that. Link me any of those posts or retract your statement on account of it being a false argument.

You're assuming the person would actually buy the product in the first place, which is not true.

Theres one. If I bother to go back through the pages I'll find several more

Wrong. What he said was that it is wrong to assume that everyone that downloaded will buy the product later. As is evidenced in this thread this is a fair assumption to make. Some will pay, some will not, which means that not everyone is buying after download.

You on the other hand said that this means that we assume that noone will buy after downloading, which is a false statement since obviously some people do buy and we are well aware of that. There's a huge difference between "not everyone" and "noone".

/S

 

[Dommyboy]

Would software and video games be better if people never pirated though? Go!

Ps. Sayavara can you please stop with the chronic double posting and constant quoting? You have stated every point several times.

I have no idea if they would be better, but that is a out of the scope of this discussion. Start a separate thread about it if you like.

Since people seems to not be reading my points properly, I re-iterate the points until they are understood and answered to in a relevant manner.

/S

I wouldn't say it is out of the scope, you could compare it to that piracy doesn't effect developers but that's basically not true.
Have you been affected much by piracy though?

 

[Sayvara]

Okay I have a question for Sayvara. What is your point of view on piracy in areas that could not have the software anyway ?
Such as someone in australia downloading games that have been banned, or places downloading anime that has no been licenced yet or even when it is licenced is heavily censored.
This is still piracy and thus they are taking the ip without permission however they do not have the option of paying for it anyway.

This one is a tricky area, I admit. So I'm going to do a bit of a cop-out here and say: the product may become available later, which means that the piracy was just as wrong as before.

One could argue that with IP being able to be distributed globally, fair trade means that everyone around the globe should be offered the product on equal terms. However we are not there yet. I have no solution for tha problem since every country still has the sovereign right to decide if something is to be allowed to be sold there.

/S

 

[falcontwin]

So basically sayvara is a serial pedantic troll who should be ignored.

Anyway if developers want to make money they should create products of some value to the consumer, rather than just charging people for useless software .

 

[Dommyboy]

So basically sayvara is a serial pedantic troll who should be ignored.

Anyway if developers want to make money they should create products of some value to the consumer, rather than just charging people for useless software .

Summed it up pretty well there.

 

[TOGSolid]

So basically sayvara is a serial pedantic troll who should be ignored.

Anyway if developers want to make money they should create products of some value to the consumer, rather than just charging people for useless software .

See: Stardock

 

[Sayvara]

So basically sayvara is a serial pedantic troll who should be ignored.

Anyway if developers want to make money they should create products of some value to the consumer, rather than just charging people for useless software .

Summed it up pretty well there.

Oh yeah, I'm a troll because I called you on arguing against something I have never said. That makes me such a troll...

I say that the only one trolling here is you because you don't even respond to what has been said but instead respond to a figment of your imagination.

/S

 

[CanadianWolverine]

Has anyone pointed out this article at all? Anyone seriously interested in the subjects involved in this thread should give it a read:

http://draginol.joeuser.com/article/303512/Piracy_PC_Gaming

Incidentally, I own a copy of Stardock's Galactic Civilization 2 and recently purchased a copy of Sins of a Solar Empire. At some point in the future I plan on checking out Impulse, I believe its called.

I feel I should point out, though its such a distant post now its probably pointless to some degree, where I disagreed with the original post was about ownership of a copy, not ownership of the intellectual property. On the subject of piracy, I actually agree with Sayvara (I think that was the original poster, right?), there is no excuse - which of course stems from my own experience with it from years ago where they damaged their PR with me by discovering the malware and other viral programs contained within their supposedly "free" libraries. I view that not a lot differently then "activation" DRM malware that come with legitimately purchased copies, to be honest.

If you use pirated software, expect to have to format and reinstall everything not pirated or worse, and don't even think of doing anything secure, like private email, banking or other financial purchases online - Welcome to the Zombie Nation as well. Might as well just take your gaming offline then, unplug the cable.