10 Ways to Fight Piracy
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Its been said, but really the BEST way to fight and potentially eliminate piracy is online gaming. Now, it is typically possible, through great effort on the user and no the original pirate, to play an online game, pirated, with other people, over the internet. Doing this requires a virtual private network, and restricts you to playing ONLY with people who have made the same effort and have entered the same information. MMOs also work, you can play on what is known as a "private server", where you and a few friends or maybe even a forum community play together at the exclusion of the major public, and without some of the official perks.
However, you cannot pirate a game AND play it with the general public, due to the unique, legitimate CD key requirement. The more the average user is made to want to play with the general public, the more likely they are to actually BUY the game. Spore and world of Goo's online features are no where near enough. All game should be designed so that playing single player is nothing more then a bonafide demo. In fact, I believe they should release the single player only version, complete with every single player feature of the full game, as a free demo. Doing this would either almost completely eradicate piracy, as playing a pirated game would be exactly the same as playing the demo, or give rise to huge VPN-playing communities, which might be much easier to target with legal action. In addition, it would provide long-term playability for many more games, which is one of the problems at present.
The article said that pirates gravitate towards flashy action games. I know of two reasons for this. I do not believe it is a matter of preference, the number of pirates is large enough that they should contain roughly the same demographics as non-pirates. It is a matter of the games themselves and what is, and isn't, worth buying.
Most flashy action games have two things in common, they are short, and they are single player centered, which reduces long term playability. The single player centered-ness plays into my original argument as well, as multiplayer games are less pirated. RTS games, such as Sins, are multiplayer centered, as well as many FPS games such as CoD, UT, TF, CS, and many more. Pirateing these games is often pointless. RPG games are probably second most pirated, MMOs aside, again for being single player oriented. However, RPGs tend to be particularly long, so people who would otherwise pirate may instead buy, countering their "too expensive" argument with "more bag for the buck".
For the record, more then half of the games I play I have both bought at some time and currently use some form of "pirated" version for one reason or another. Typically because my CDs (and DVDs) don't work anymore, are half missing, or simply because I hate using them.
However, you cannot pirate a game AND play it with the general public, due to the unique, legitimate CD key requirement. The more the average user is made to want to play with the general public, the more likely they are to actually BUY the game. Spore and world of Goo's online features are no where near enough. All game should be designed so that playing single player is nothing more then a bonafide demo. In fact, I believe they should release the single player only version, complete with every single player feature of the full game, as a free demo. Doing this would either almost completely eradicate piracy, as playing a pirated game would be exactly the same as playing the demo, or give rise to huge VPN-playing communities, which might be much easier to target with legal action. In addition, it would provide long-term playability for many more games, which is one of the problems at present.
The article said that pirates gravitate towards flashy action games. I know of two reasons for this. I do not believe it is a matter of preference, the number of pirates is large enough that they should contain roughly the same demographics as non-pirates. It is a matter of the games themselves and what is, and isn't, worth buying.
Most flashy action games have two things in common, they are short, and they are single player centered, which reduces long term playability. The single player centered-ness plays into my original argument as well, as multiplayer games are less pirated. RTS games, such as Sins, are multiplayer centered, as well as many FPS games such as CoD, UT, TF, CS, and many more. Pirateing these games is often pointless. RPG games are probably second most pirated, MMOs aside, again for being single player oriented. However, RPGs tend to be particularly long, so people who would otherwise pirate may instead buy, countering their "too expensive" argument with "more bag for the buck".
For the record, more then half of the games I play I have both bought at some time and currently use some form of "pirated" version for one reason or another. Typically because my CDs (and DVDs) don't work anymore, are half missing, or simply because I hate using them.
Shamus, nice attempt, but the real reason for piracy is not because the pirates themselves are evil. It's because they can.
Basically why pay for something if you can find it for free? It's a bit like the "buy America" slogans running after the economic crisis. Sure it will help American businesses and secure jobs, but the guy from Shenzhen can get me the same thing at the same quality for half the price. Now replace "American" with Games, "Shenzhen" with Pirates and "half the price" with Free, and you'll see why people would rather torrent things than pay for them.
Maybe the future of gaming could be better securred under a different business model. Right now they are sold in the same way that books were sold 100 years ago- someone prints it, someone distributes it, and we buy it. It's a bit old and will not stand the test of time. There are already plenty of unpiratable games out there- games that are free already, requiring only a small download and uses ingame advertising to generate revenue. Intrusive? Perhaps. A good money spinner? Seems to be, and totally pirate proof.
Basically why pay for something if you can find it for free? It's a bit like the "buy America" slogans running after the economic crisis. Sure it will help American businesses and secure jobs, but the guy from Shenzhen can get me the same thing at the same quality for half the price. Now replace "American" with Games, "Shenzhen" with Pirates and "half the price" with Free, and you'll see why people would rather torrent things than pay for them.
Maybe the future of gaming could be better securred under a different business model. Right now they are sold in the same way that books were sold 100 years ago- someone prints it, someone distributes it, and we buy it. It's a bit old and will not stand the test of time. There are already plenty of unpiratable games out there- games that are free already, requiring only a small download and uses ingame advertising to generate revenue. Intrusive? Perhaps. A good money spinner? Seems to be, and totally pirate proof.
I watched Zero Punctuation concerning Saints Row 2, downloaded it in the belief that I would be disappointed by countless layers of popularist hip-hop nonsense, was pleasantly surprised and loved it, bought it, played it plenty more and finally bought the first game as well, hoping it would be as good. It wasn't quite, but I don't regret it, and I doubt Volition would feel I've done wrong by them, all in all...DeathSnipa1992 said:
Which goes to show, piracy is not just a problem. If the games are good enough and, as you say, if you make sure people see the developers who will eat or starve based on how many people actually pay for them, I believe at least every decent person will shell out as much as they can spare to make sure the industry doesn't lose its best and brightest.
I could start about the indecent persons, but let's face it, there's not a lot anyone can do about those, and making life harder for absolutely everyone just because some folks are jerks is, indeed, not even a remotely reasonable option.
Late to the party, but I had to make two comments:
1. The example given regarding Intel and chip crippling is interesting because essentially it points out how much market power that company has, and how it can choose to effectively price at will. Note that although the company gets "full value" from all its customers, all its customers get minimum surplus value from their purchase. While people need processors, they really don't need games, so the comparative pricing argument doesn't hold so well.
2. Stardock's CEO said that game developers should design games based on the people who buy games, and ignore the pirates. This isn't about flashy action games vs. strategy; he meant that if you make a good game which the paying consumers* like, they'll buy it.
*i.e. those consumers who always/mostly buy their games
1. The example given regarding Intel and chip crippling is interesting because essentially it points out how much market power that company has, and how it can choose to effectively price at will. Note that although the company gets "full value" from all its customers, all its customers get minimum surplus value from their purchase. While people need processors, they really don't need games, so the comparative pricing argument doesn't hold so well.
2. Stardock's CEO said that game developers should design games based on the people who buy games, and ignore the pirates. This isn't about flashy action games vs. strategy; he meant that if you make a good game which the paying consumers* like, they'll buy it.
*i.e. those consumers who always/mostly buy their games
I have to really agree with a couple of points in this article.
One is the 4th point, making meaningful updates. DLC for a games seems to die when the next game begins. Why is that? Why aren't companies supporting their customers more? For example, I own Resistance 1 and Resistance 2. Why is it that they are working on some R2 stuff, and not releasing some stuff for those who bought the first game (you know, to keep people from trading in their games...?) Where's trophy support for Resistance 1? Where is the reason to play that game again once I got the second game (not mentioning the fact that it is a better story...)? Where is the support for the older game, or even the forward support for following a series? When I buy Resistance 2, why is there not a special bonus for having a Resistance 1 savefile completed? When Resistance 3 comes out, why will there not be any correlation to having the other two games? Why do the companies not support those who support them?
Two is the 8th point. When was the last time that you went to a car dealership and saw that every car was worth the same amount of money? How about that used cars were only moderately cheaper than the original versions? Right now, every game is priced a t a Ferrarri's level, even though you may only be getting a Pinto. Why do you think that people trade in their games so quickly? It's not that they suck. It's that they suck compared to the amouhnt of money that was spent on them.
Games should be priced in a tiered sort of way, with $50 or (optimally) even lower being the top end for games. Of course, you will always have exceptions, and having a collectors edition actually worth the money they charge would go a long way, although on the flipside they have to make sure that the collector's edition doesn't include stuff in the game that changes the play experience from the original, or give advantages over the non-buyers.
The way the pricing structure is right now, games are being produced to rip off as many customers as they can as quickly as they can for the initial money, and then no one cares about them anymore. If you make the game seem like less of a rip off, more people will buy it. Lower the prices and update fluidly, and you will see people stick with buying your games more often, and retaining them for future playthroughs. Otherwise Game Stop will continue to rule over all with their ridiculous polocies and over-pricedness as people will continue to play and trade.
One is the 4th point, making meaningful updates. DLC for a games seems to die when the next game begins. Why is that? Why aren't companies supporting their customers more? For example, I own Resistance 1 and Resistance 2. Why is it that they are working on some R2 stuff, and not releasing some stuff for those who bought the first game (you know, to keep people from trading in their games...?) Where's trophy support for Resistance 1? Where is the reason to play that game again once I got the second game (not mentioning the fact that it is a better story...)? Where is the support for the older game, or even the forward support for following a series? When I buy Resistance 2, why is there not a special bonus for having a Resistance 1 savefile completed? When Resistance 3 comes out, why will there not be any correlation to having the other two games? Why do the companies not support those who support them?
Two is the 8th point. When was the last time that you went to a car dealership and saw that every car was worth the same amount of money? How about that used cars were only moderately cheaper than the original versions? Right now, every game is priced a t a Ferrarri's level, even though you may only be getting a Pinto. Why do you think that people trade in their games so quickly? It's not that they suck. It's that they suck compared to the amouhnt of money that was spent on them.
Games should be priced in a tiered sort of way, with $50 or (optimally) even lower being the top end for games. Of course, you will always have exceptions, and having a collectors edition actually worth the money they charge would go a long way, although on the flipside they have to make sure that the collector's edition doesn't include stuff in the game that changes the play experience from the original, or give advantages over the non-buyers.
The way the pricing structure is right now, games are being produced to rip off as many customers as they can as quickly as they can for the initial money, and then no one cares about them anymore. If you make the game seem like less of a rip off, more people will buy it. Lower the prices and update fluidly, and you will see people stick with buying your games more often, and retaining them for future playthroughs. Otherwise Game Stop will continue to rule over all with their ridiculous polocies and over-pricedness as people will continue to play and trade.
It might not be, I don't know.Leroy Frederick said:
The point is that apparently pirates are offering a better service, at least in some areas, then the legitimate artists (gamedevs). It's part of the reason why I enjoy buying games over steam: I can download and remove them effectively. I'm a little worried about their longevity and end of service, but I've only gotten multiplayer games & portal from them so far.
Compare that to the DRM of spore, which although very fair and generous in their limitations, still freaks me out because you only need 3 hard disk crashes and it's bye bye spore.
But they are difficult questions that will never be fully solved. Stardock's solutions may not apply to everyone and much of their success, is the free publicity that being a spokesperson for the DRM free world brings with it. It's a smart move. It's also a move from the heart, from the soul, I think. But I doubt that it would work for every company.
Oh good, you're totally cleansed. I help poor families get somewhere in life, I teach children what "hard work" means, and I've ended world hunger. I'm also known to go on murderous rampages, but big deal, right?nomercyrules10 said:
Anyway, good article, as for how I feel, I believe hamster mk 4 [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/profiles/view/hamster+mk+4] summed it up pretty nicely:
EDIT:hamster mk 4 said:
Well, damn it. Next time check for a second EDIT: and third page, SA.Susan Arendt said:I assure you, plenty of developers read The Escapist.hamster mk 4 said:
Agreed and understood. Personally, I wouldn't mind people bought my game to then decide to get a pirate / no-cd version / crack (although, they haven't needed to thus far) because they've already paid for it, in which case I wouldn't call that scenario pirating, I'd call it an alternativeCapo Taco said:
That's why we could do with signatures on (even without the prospect of links / ads etc) or some way to show who's a developer / gamer etc (Although it'd nice to pimp the odd game link here and thereSusan Arendt said:I assure you, plenty of developers read The Escapist.
)If piracy would be stopped, I´d stop caring for newer games, piracy is a way to play a real demo of a new game, you are really seeing what you get for your money, and when I´m happy with what I see I really buy the thing.
Piracy is democracy because you get the freedom of choice who has deserved your money. I think the problem with gaming industry (or entertainment industry in general) is that they really are afraid of innovation, because innovation contains the risk of a financial desaster, and there you have tomb raider 10, six different farcrys with better graphics etc.
So, a solution to that would be to make games who don´t cost that much in production, how? leave the ultrahighend graphics shit out, why they can´t do that? Games are big business, so tightening the screw on hardware requirements artificially is even bigger business. Imagine millions of gamers who buy your expensive graphic card, or even 10% of them buying it for SLI-mode.
I still remember times when there lots of genres, puzzle games, adventures, RPGs, Racing, Action, Shooters, Simulations, Mech-games, Strategy (not only RTS), before that time there was piracy, so how can those games exist? During that time, there was piracy (couldn´t have been easier with diskettes and easy to copy codetables), since 2000 (and earlier) theres piracy, and thats the reason why there are no computer or console games in existence today . . . no wait, that was your fantasy.
audio tapes are there for decades already, and you can record every song thats on the radio, same with videotapes, but I wonder, why didn´t musicians and tv-people became extinct?
the only thing really endangering computer games are companys like EA, who simply buy all other companies to avoid competition, and withouth competition they can bring out whatever shitty games they want, welcome to the real world, what do you want to play today? you´d rather have "sims: happy vacation time" or "sims: hawaii holiday"? you can even buy new hawaii shirts for your sims as DLC, would you like some? only 19,99$ a shirt, because there´s no piracy anymore, you won´t know what you get until you tried and theres only one way to get it, get out your wallet cashcow, EA is getting it´s knifes out.
Piracy is democracy because you get the freedom of choice who has deserved your money. I think the problem with gaming industry (or entertainment industry in general) is that they really are afraid of innovation, because innovation contains the risk of a financial desaster, and there you have tomb raider 10, six different farcrys with better graphics etc.
So, a solution to that would be to make games who don´t cost that much in production, how? leave the ultrahighend graphics shit out, why they can´t do that? Games are big business, so tightening the screw on hardware requirements artificially is even bigger business. Imagine millions of gamers who buy your expensive graphic card, or even 10% of them buying it for SLI-mode.
I still remember times when there lots of genres, puzzle games, adventures, RPGs, Racing, Action, Shooters, Simulations, Mech-games, Strategy (not only RTS), before that time there was piracy, so how can those games exist? During that time, there was piracy (couldn´t have been easier with diskettes and easy to copy codetables), since 2000 (and earlier) theres piracy, and thats the reason why there are no computer or console games in existence today . . . no wait, that was your fantasy.
audio tapes are there for decades already, and you can record every song thats on the radio, same with videotapes, but I wonder, why didn´t musicians and tv-people became extinct?
the only thing really endangering computer games are companys like EA, who simply buy all other companies to avoid competition, and withouth competition they can bring out whatever shitty games they want, welcome to the real world, what do you want to play today? you´d rather have "sims: happy vacation time" or "sims: hawaii holiday"? you can even buy new hawaii shirts for your sims as DLC, would you like some? only 19,99$ a shirt, because there´s no piracy anymore, you won´t know what you get until you tried and theres only one way to get it, get out your wallet cashcow, EA is getting it´s knifes out.
I dont agree with all of these points to be honest, whilst DRM doesnt work entirely it cant be said that removing it is any better either. See world of goo for evidence of this, no DRM (barring its release on steam) and an indy game that gets pirated to hell.
The cost of games? Well, computer games cost next to nothing in my opinion, wait 2 weeks and buy it on an offer, if your smart most of the top games are 25 pounds or under. If thats too much for you then just wait another month and buy it pre-owned?
Whilst releasing meaningful updates would make games much better, i dont see how it would stop piracy? Unless your releasing new forms of DRM inside the update then those who have pirated the game would just download it easy as pie.
I do partially accept the point about how if 1,000,000 people download a 60 dollar game rather than pay for it the company hasnt lost 60,000,000 dollars but it has still lost an awful lot of money. It seems typical for many games to announce 20% piracy figures, even if this is wrong I would consider 5% too much as a developer/publisher. Think about it in terms of anything else, if 5% of the stock in a shop is being stolen what are you going to do? Hire big muscly guys to try deter people or simply do nothing?
*Note* I dont agree with DRM and much of it doesnt work, there are however some companies who do DRM extremely well. See Valve for example.
EDIT: As for the people who says its to 'try before you buy' whatever happened to the receipt? If i get a game i dont like i simply take it back to the store with a receipt and get my money back
The cost of games? Well, computer games cost next to nothing in my opinion, wait 2 weeks and buy it on an offer, if your smart most of the top games are 25 pounds or under. If thats too much for you then just wait another month and buy it pre-owned?
Whilst releasing meaningful updates would make games much better, i dont see how it would stop piracy? Unless your releasing new forms of DRM inside the update then those who have pirated the game would just download it easy as pie.
I do partially accept the point about how if 1,000,000 people download a 60 dollar game rather than pay for it the company hasnt lost 60,000,000 dollars but it has still lost an awful lot of money. It seems typical for many games to announce 20% piracy figures, even if this is wrong I would consider 5% too much as a developer/publisher. Think about it in terms of anything else, if 5% of the stock in a shop is being stolen what are you going to do? Hire big muscly guys to try deter people or simply do nothing?
*Note* I dont agree with DRM and much of it doesnt work, there are however some companies who do DRM extremely well. See Valve for example.
EDIT: As for the people who says its to 'try before you buy' whatever happened to the receipt? If i get a game i dont like i simply take it back to the store with a receipt and get my money back
Good article and I agreed with virtually all of it.
The main reason I don't pirate games very often is simply the amount of time they take to download and muck around with to get them working. I am willing to pay and do pay about $100 (Australian) month on games. And I never rip off indie developers as they need the cash the most and actually offer their games at reasonable prices.
However, when I buy a game like Mass Effect in great anticipation (seems like a game I would love) for the PC and it turns out to be an unplayable bug-ridden mess AND then Bioware (despite thousands of fans understandably complaining about this) point blank refuse to bother putting out a patch to fix all the problems then it makes me so angry that I can't wait to deliberately pirate Bioshock 2 and every other game they ever produce. Hell, I'll try and download some of their games that I don't even want to play just to spite them.
If developers/publishers don't care about their customers (which seems to be the trend these days - see: High prices, little interaction with fans, expensive DLC content that should have been in the game anyway, buggy games, etc) then what do they expect?
I particularly agreed that people will care more if they like and respect the developer (EARNED respect!) and also that they can't expect everyone to pick up all the games they want to play at huge expense. Australia is a fine example of the customers being really screwed by uncaring corporations - when gaming truly boomed in the early 90s onwards the Aussie dollar was worth about 50c USD. As such they charged about $100 which was reasonable. But as the Aussie dollar has recently been equal to the US dollar in the exchange rate (although it's changed recently due to the credit crunch fallout) it simply means that customers in Australia are being ripped off by greedy companies.
A similar issue is happening right now in Europe where the Euro's climb has meant that the prices charged in Euro-zone countries for games are now simply unfair as there have been no subsequent price drops. If you want your customers to respect you then stop treating them like gullible idiots!
The music industry has mainly failed to tackle piracy because nobody sees it as a bad thing to do. I enjoy screwing the music companies! Everyone knows that the majority of music companies are a bunch of manipulative rip off merchants and realise that they are being massively overcharged for CDs. I no longer pay for music. I go to watch bands I like and/or buy their merchandise (at considerable expense I might add) as I know the artists themselves then get nearly all of that money. I refuse to put cash towards companies I despise by buying over-priced CDs or mp3s.
It would be a shame if the games industry followed suit.... a great shame...
The main reason I don't pirate games very often is simply the amount of time they take to download and muck around with to get them working. I am willing to pay and do pay about $100 (Australian) month on games. And I never rip off indie developers as they need the cash the most and actually offer their games at reasonable prices.
However, when I buy a game like Mass Effect in great anticipation (seems like a game I would love) for the PC and it turns out to be an unplayable bug-ridden mess AND then Bioware (despite thousands of fans understandably complaining about this) point blank refuse to bother putting out a patch to fix all the problems then it makes me so angry that I can't wait to deliberately pirate Bioshock 2 and every other game they ever produce. Hell, I'll try and download some of their games that I don't even want to play just to spite them.
If developers/publishers don't care about their customers (which seems to be the trend these days - see: High prices, little interaction with fans, expensive DLC content that should have been in the game anyway, buggy games, etc) then what do they expect?
I particularly agreed that people will care more if they like and respect the developer (EARNED respect!) and also that they can't expect everyone to pick up all the games they want to play at huge expense. Australia is a fine example of the customers being really screwed by uncaring corporations - when gaming truly boomed in the early 90s onwards the Aussie dollar was worth about 50c USD. As such they charged about $100 which was reasonable. But as the Aussie dollar has recently been equal to the US dollar in the exchange rate (although it's changed recently due to the credit crunch fallout) it simply means that customers in Australia are being ripped off by greedy companies.
A similar issue is happening right now in Europe where the Euro's climb has meant that the prices charged in Euro-zone countries for games are now simply unfair as there have been no subsequent price drops. If you want your customers to respect you then stop treating them like gullible idiots!
The music industry has mainly failed to tackle piracy because nobody sees it as a bad thing to do. I enjoy screwing the music companies! Everyone knows that the majority of music companies are a bunch of manipulative rip off merchants and realise that they are being massively overcharged for CDs. I no longer pay for music. I go to watch bands I like and/or buy their merchandise (at considerable expense I might add) as I know the artists themselves then get nearly all of that money. I refuse to put cash towards companies I despise by buying over-priced CDs or mp3s.
It would be a shame if the games industry followed suit.... a great shame...
So, Stardock's Demigod, available for $39.95, has a piracy rate of 85% [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/91001-Demigod-Piracy-Running-High] (18 legit users plus 120k pirate players trying to get in). The pirated copies of the game are pounding the servers so hard that it is impacting on the experience of paying players.
It doesn't have onerous DRM - this is Stardock.
The dev team and CEO are quite public and well respected.
Stardock is well known for its updates of its games.
Also Stardock is well known for commenting about piracy and not exaggerating the figures.
I can think of few dev studios with as good a reputation among players as Stardock.
I don't believe there were any leaked copies (although some street dates were broken for the box copy).
Stardock accepts piracy and has stated that it makes games for players (as was quoted).
Yet, still a piracy rate of 85%. I suggest that your 10 point list is heavily flawed by placing the blame / responsibility for piracy on developers when, in reality, the issue rests with PC players who pirate. Blaming the devs in this case is like blaming the domestic violence victim for being hit.
EDIT: fixed purchased copies vs concurrent users error on my part.
It doesn't have onerous DRM - this is Stardock.
The dev team and CEO are quite public and well respected.
Stardock is well known for its updates of its games.
Also Stardock is well known for commenting about piracy and not exaggerating the figures.
I can think of few dev studios with as good a reputation among players as Stardock.
I don't believe there were any leaked copies (although some street dates were broken for the box copy).
Stardock accepts piracy and has stated that it makes games for players (as was quoted).
Yet, still a piracy rate of 85%. I suggest that your 10 point list is heavily flawed by placing the blame / responsibility for piracy on developers when, in reality, the issue rests with PC players who pirate. Blaming the devs in this case is like blaming the domestic violence victim for being hit.
EDIT: fixed purchased copies vs concurrent users error on my part.
Shamus Young your list is fairly comprehensive and includes some pretty good strategies.
Using old favourites game CD keys and online registration both of them being required, perhaps?
(idea needs refinement, as even I can see problems here.)
Not very original of me, but it's getting late...darn you insomnia.
There seems to be amongst pirates a sort of self driven delusion,
that pirating is striking at the heart of major and powerful companies, or undermining evil corporations.
(If you have to sell some lie to yourself, I suppose it had better be a fanatical/grandiose one.)
Really then, what is your possible excuse for targeting indie or smaller developers then?.
Some Pirates or pretenders who post comments about how they HAVE to pirate games on comments
about this article about fighting piracy is perplexing, that they think doing so is a good idea.
People viewing these comments, (relax) the article includes suggestions on how to fight piracy.
Even if companies already follow them, that's no guarantee that their games aren't going to be pirated.
Obviously because this issue still needs reflection, refinement and sensible alternatives.
Using old favourites game CD keys and online registration both of them being required, perhaps?
(idea needs refinement, as even I can see problems here.)
Not very original of me, but it's getting late...darn you insomnia.
There seems to be amongst pirates a sort of self driven delusion,
that pirating is striking at the heart of major and powerful companies, or undermining evil corporations.
(If you have to sell some lie to yourself, I suppose it had better be a fanatical/grandiose one.)
Really then, what is your possible excuse for targeting indie or smaller developers then?.
Some Pirates or pretenders who post comments about how they HAVE to pirate games on comments
about this article about fighting piracy is perplexing, that they think doing so is a good idea.
People viewing these comments, (relax) the article includes suggestions on how to fight piracy.
Even if companies already follow them, that's no guarantee that their games aren't going to be pirated.
Obviously because this issue still needs reflection, refinement and sensible alternatives.