A potentially original take on piracy? Probably not, but interesting.

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Are you saying politics and smart business is a conspiracy theory? Maybe you really are that young but not everyone wants the best for you, they want the best for themselves and those they represent.

I'm probably a lot older than you so putting me down by making out I'm a kid isn't really going to work.

Your economic and political theories are just that. Theories. You still can't justify taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's all the piracy really comes down to. All the excuses are just self justification like I said.

 

[Cronq]

Until movies sold by online services reach the quality and versatility of pirated movies, I will continue to give my business to those who provide a superior product.

Last legitimate movie I bought had unskippable previews, lame menus, and didn't allow me to put the media on my preferred devices (it's also scratched now, so I essentially don't own it anymore). All my illegitimate movies behave exactly how I want them to and I'll gladly pay for an equal product, but in this case nothing is offered by the studios.

 

[Alterego-X]

I don't give a shit what they see it as, they're utterly wrong. It's not theft or stealing, the law is clear on this, so stop calling it that. It's impossible to have a proper discussion on piracy when so many people insist on using emotive, inaccurate language (not to mention all the stupid analogies).

And if this were a court of law, you'd have some sort of a point. This, however, is a forum. Maybe "so many people" insist on calling it that because, at the end of the day, that's what they feel it best equates to. If anything, those constantly whining about how it's not the legal definition of stealing are the ones who are trying to apply emotive arguments, specifically by attempting to move the conversation away from the emotion most people associate with the activity to terms which people generally don't see to be as bad.

I mean, seriously, if politicians went and adjusted the legal definition of theft to "Using a product or service without the permission of the owner," would you really stop arguing that we should stop calling it theft? Or would you then just be arguing that the courts have it wrong too. Your answer to that question determines whether you're a hypocrite or simply a pedant.

The problem with the "Piracy is theft" slogan, is that it moves the discussion away from WHY copright exists, what is it's purpose, and how it contributes to our life.

Theft isn't bad "because it's theft", it's bad because it causes harm to society. Laws against theft existed ever since the dawn of civilization, since it's obvious that taking away someone else's stuff harms society.

Copyright exists, because in the XVIIth century, lawmakers thought that book printing must be controlled somehow, to censor anti-government tracts, and they justified it by paying the writers for the legal copies. Later that element expaned, and now it exists to support the entertainment industry as we know it.

Is piracy harming the industry? Good arguments could be made for that.
Is the copyright system sustainable in this day and age? Probably not.

But those who bring up "Copyright is theft" don't want to discuss that, just end with an unthinking "It's bad because it's bad" argument.

 

[kurupt87]

Are you saying politics and smart business is a conspiracy theory? Maybe you really are that young but not everyone wants the best for you, they want the best for themselves and those they represent.

I'm probably a lot older than you so putting me down by making out I'm a kid isn't really going to work.

Your economic and political theories are just that. Theories. You still can't justify taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's all the piracy really comes down to. All the excuses are just self justification like I said.

Young, naive, whatever.

So you genuinely believe that if the Tories had been in power during the banking crisis the current Europe wide and American recession wouldn't have happened? Interesting, Gordon Brown had more clout than I gave him credit for...

As for the business, it is there to make money. That is it. It's why we don't trust private companies to be in charge of the police, fire service or the NHS. Why do you think the videogame industry is unique in being a paragon of virtue? If they can get you to give them more money they will. You know companies tried paying people to edit wikipedia pages right? To show them in a better light.

If someone wouldn't have bought a digital product then you are right, they have no right to pirate it. But there is no victim, so let him/her have it. You want to control and judge people; as long as there is no victim I don't care.

Edit: Tense correction

 

[Savagezion]

Because I'm pretty sure the games dev's losing their jobs because people don't pay for their products see it as exactly that.

You have to be careful with claims like that. How are you able to point a finger at any dev that went out of business and say that it is because of piracy? Even 2D boy is still in business. Activision also cut the cord on Ghostbusters because "They didn't see a way to profit from potential sequels." It was a one time money shot. The game got picked up by Atari and went on to sell over 1 million units in a month with a profit of around $40 million. Damn, that is being picky about free money. Activision turned that down because it wasn't worth their time despite it being highly anticipated to the gaming community. Atari picked it up and made an easy 40m.

The thing is, as pointed out before someone's budget is someone's budget. Their personal interest in a product is not their budget. Let's say you and me can only afford to buy 5 games a year. When we both buy our five games, that's it. One of us might buy 3-4 new and get a few more out of used games which the industry sees as worse. However, at this point a person's decision on pirating has to do with their morals and their integrity. You don't like to pirate? Good for you, I applaud your integrity. Seriously, no sarcasm at all. You know your moral stance and you adhere unshakably to it. However, understand some people don't see anything morally wrong with "borrowing" a game, for various reasons, from the industry they just spent ~$300 (as much as they could) on. I don't claim it is right, I don't claim it is wrong. I am just saying it is what it is.
At this point, it has to do with personal views and values. No sale is going to happen either way.

That isn't to say no one pirates with the intent of getting free stuff but that argument isn't backed by economical merit. It's its not even circumstantial evidence which the law ignores, it is completely unsupported. It's merely hearsay.

Here's the thing, I used to be anti-piracy when this all started to surface a few years ago in like '05. I gave the industry the "inch" that they requested and didn't pirate. I have upheld that inch for them as well. They, in return, have provided worse customer service and talk to me like I am an idiot with these unsubstantiated arguments trying to get a proverbial "mile". Their arguments get more nonsensical every year and both piracy and the net worth of the games industry both continue to grow every year. That proverbial mile they are asking for is way too much leverage to hand to them. They just tried to make posting a "Let's Play" on Youtube a criminal offense. I find myself neutral because in order to be anti-piracy rationally I find myself having to fight against the same industry I am seeking to defend. The anti-piracy side of the debate needs to let the industry stand alone in it's crusade. They have already given it more power than it deserves.

That's all the piracy really comes down to. All the excuses are just self justification like I said.

That's correct. But, understand, some people see nothing wrong with it legitimately. It isn't self-justification in the sense they are trying to ease their guilt. Anti-Piracy people shout "How could you?" and they tell you. You ask them to justify themselves and they do. You call those justifications excuses, they call them reasons. This is a moral (personal) stance.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Are you saying politics and smart business is a conspiracy theory? Maybe you really are that young but not everyone wants the best for you, they want the best for themselves and those they represent.

I'm probably a lot older than you so putting me down by making out I'm a kid isn't really going to work.

Your economic and political theories are just that. Theories. You still can't justify taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's all the piracy really comes down to. All the excuses are just self justification like I said.

Young, naive, whatever.

So you genuinely believe that if the Tories had been in power during the banking crisis the current Europe wide and American recession wouldn't have happened? Interesting, Gordon Brown had more clout than I gave him credit for...

As for the business, it is there to make money. That is it. It's why we don't trust private companies to be in charge of the police, fire service or the NHS. Why do you think the videogame industry is unique in being a paragon of virtue? If they can get you to give them more money they will. You know companies tried paying people to edit wikipedia pages right? To show them in a better light.

If someone wouldn't have bought a digital product then you are right, they have no right to pirate it. But there is no victim, so let him/her have it. You want to control and judge people; as long as there is no victim I don't care.

Edit: Tense correction

I have no love for the Tories believe me but it's not exactly relevant in this argument. The law needs to change as it pertains to copyright and the internet that's true, refer to my first post in this thread, but at the moment piracy is losing money for games developers and that to me is unacceptable. I'm not entirely sure why people who screw honest gamers over need your defense.

 

[kurupt87]

Are you saying politics and smart business is a conspiracy theory? Maybe you really are that young but not everyone wants the best for you, they want the best for themselves and those they represent.

I'm probably a lot older than you so putting me down by making out I'm a kid isn't really going to work.

Your economic and political theories are just that. Theories. You still can't justify taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's all the piracy really comes down to. All the excuses are just self justification like I said.

Young, naive, whatever.

So you genuinely believe that if the Tories had been in power during the banking crisis the current Europe wide and American recession wouldn't have happened? Interesting, Gordon Brown had more clout than I gave him credit for...

As for the business, it is there to make money. That is it. It's why we don't trust private companies to be in charge of the police, fire service or the NHS. Why do you think the videogame industry is unique in being a paragon of virtue? If they can get you to give them more money they will. You know companies tried paying people to edit wikipedia pages right? To show them in a better light.

If someone wouldn't have bought a digital product then you are right, they have no right to pirate it. But there is no victim, so let him/her have it. You want to control and judge people; as long as there is no victim I don't care.

Edit: Tense correction

I have no love for the Tories believe me but it's not exactly relevant in this argument. The law needs to change as it pertains to copyright and the internet that's true, refer to my first post in this thread, but at the moment piracy is losing money for games developers and that to me is unacceptable. I'm not entirely sure why people who screw honest gamers over need your defense.

Obviously because they don't see the bold as true, neither do they feel that they are screwing themselves over.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Are you saying politics and smart business is a conspiracy theory? Maybe you really are that young but not everyone wants the best for you, they want the best for themselves and those they represent.

I'm probably a lot older than you so putting me down by making out I'm a kid isn't really going to work.

Your economic and political theories are just that. Theories. You still can't justify taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's all the piracy really comes down to. All the excuses are just self justification like I said.

Young, naive, whatever.

So you genuinely believe that if the Tories had been in power during the banking crisis the current Europe wide and American recession wouldn't have happened? Interesting, Gordon Brown had more clout than I gave him credit for...

As for the business, it is there to make money. That is it. It's why we don't trust private companies to be in charge of the police, fire service or the NHS. Why do you think the videogame industry is unique in being a paragon of virtue? If they can get you to give them more money they will. You know companies tried paying people to edit wikipedia pages right? To show them in a better light.

If someone wouldn't have bought a digital product then you are right, they have no right to pirate it. But there is no victim, so let him/her have it. You want to control and judge people; as long as there is no victim I don't care.

Edit: Tense correction

I have no love for the Tories believe me but it's not exactly relevant in this argument. The law needs to change as it pertains to copyright and the internet that's true, refer to my first post in this thread, but at the moment piracy is losing money for games developers and that to me is unacceptable. I'm not entirely sure why people who screw honest gamers over need your defense.

Obviously because they don't see the bold as true, neither do they feel that they are screwing themselves over.

Honest gamers pay for their games pirates don't. Of course piracy loses money for games developers people are getting their product for free. :/

I think a lot more people can afford the games they pirate than you think. There is no proof to the contrary.

 

[kurupt87]

Obviously because they don't see the bold as true, neither do they feel that they are screwing themselves over.

Honest gamers pay for their games pirates don't. Of course piracy loses money for games developers people are getting there product for free. :/

My last post.

If you think that every pirated copy is a lost sale then ok.

On an unrelated note; I have some magic beans, they're great and do wondrous things. I can let you have them for the low low price of £100. And you better let me know if you want them fast because these are in high demand. I could get a much better price for them elsewhere, I just like you.

I have never met a person who only pirates and never buys.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Obviously because they don't see the bold as true, neither do they feel that they are screwing themselves over.

Honest gamers pay for their games pirates don't. Of course piracy loses money for games developers people are getting there product for free. :/

My last post.

If you think that every pirated copy is a lost sale then ok.

On an unrelated note; I have some magic beans, they're great and do wondrous things. I can let you have them for the low low price of £100. And you better let me know if you want them fast because these are in high demand. I could get a much better price for them elsewhere, I just like you.

I have never met a person who only pirates and never buys.

If you pirate a game then you aren't an honest gamer... not sure what you are getting at with the magic beans (unless you are trying, poorly, to insult me ), sorry.

 

[Alterego-X]

Honest gamers pay for their games pirates don't. Of course piracy loses money for games developers people are getting their product for free. :/

These two statemens don't support each other.

People getting a product for free, is not a bad thing on it's own, and doesn't mean that they would have more money in an alternate universe where people don't pirate.

People are getting TV shows for free. It doesn't mean that they are causing harm to the channels, just that the pay-per-view model doesn't work there. It's not unimaginable, that soon, it won't work for gaming either.

It's not some horribe tragedy, it's a fact of life, that business models change.

 

[spartan231490]

Actually, his analogy is surprisingly accurate. Paying customers are the ones who pay for pirated games, meaning that the people who suffer do to pirates are paying customers. Think of it like this. 6 million copies of game x are played, 3 million are payed for. Company still needs to cecoup x price, so the cost of the game needs to be twice as expensive with piracy as without, ergo the paying customers pay twice the amount, effectively meaning that half the cost of the game is stolen from them by pirates. It's not a perfect analogy, but it is accurate.

Yes, that would perfectly explain all the video game developers going bust and the video game industry itself shrinking into ignominy...

Ah but wait, the video game industry is bigger than Hollywood? It's still growing? Even in the midst of a recession this industry still grows?

...

Did you completely miss the point of the analogy? The point is that piracy hurts paying customers far more than it harms the game industry.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Here's the thing, I used to be anti-piracy when this all started to surface a few years ago in like '05. I gave the industry the "inch" that they requested and didn't pirate. I have upheld that inch for them as well. They, in return, have provided worse customer service and talk to me like I am an idiot with these unsubstantiated arguments trying to get a proverbial "mile". Their arguments get more nonsensical every year and both piracy and the net worth of the games industry both continue to grow every year. That proverbial mile they are asking for is way too much leverage to hand to them. They just tried to make posting a "Let's Play" on Youtube a criminal offense. I find myself neutral because in order to be anti-piracy rationally I find myself having to fight against the same industry I am seeking to defend. The anti-piracy side of the debate needs to let the industry stand alone in it's crusade. They have already given it more power than it deserves.

This sums up my stance on the issue as well.
I'm firmly in a neutral position because I understand the economics and rationality behind business.

That said, I'm getting up on my soap box for a moment:

The one and only way to truly get what you want from the industry: DO NOT SUPPORT COMPANIES THAT DO THINGS THAT PISS YOU OFF. (If they develop DRM you hate, don't try to rationalize the purchase. Just say no, or you will never be rid of that DRM. The market has shown that it can be very profitable as it is; but we can do better if we force them to earn our money)

Do not make "exceptions" to that rule either. Investigate the games/products before you buy them, if for no other reason than because under current market conditions, getting your money back is very very difficult, if not impossible.

And don't EVER assume that "I'm just one consumer; my sale won't change anything". Solidarity exists in every market and it goes both ways for either Supply OR Demand. This isn't just romanticized rhetoric: YOUR DECISION ACTUALLY MATTERS.
Big Business fears informed consumers because it forces them to compete more.

Conventional wisdom suggests that a company's willingness to provide satisfaction to their customers 0(and to compete) is inversely proportional to the power they wield over their market (and by extension, consumers). They won't work if they think they don't have to.
Be fair in your demands, and don't accept contradictions and shoddy products; there are firms out there that genuinely try to compete but get muscled out by those that do not because WE continue to empower them.

Once you give them power over you, it's difficult to get that power back without ending the relationship entirely. Fortunately, if the backlash is strong (or organized) enough, the market CAN adjust without resorting to "scorched earth", but it's very difficult to accomplish.

(Beware: These companies WILL go back on their word if they think they can get away with it. Ubisoft is going right back to their Always-Online-DRM, despite a deluge of complaints and proven technical failures. Blizzard is going back on their word over features for Diablo 3, such as LAN for the purposes of product control; not quality. None of these benefit legitimate customers, and only mildly inconvenience the pirates at worst.)

 

[theultimateend]

You know, when I buy something at Wal Mart, I give no thought at all to shoplifters. Why do you care how others acquire games? Jealous that they are saving money?

Yeah, I've (apparently) spent a few grand in video games since I started using steam.

I don't feel a single pang of hate for people who pirate.

If someone walked up to me and told me they pirated every game I bought I'd start talking to them about the games and see where we agreed on what we liked and didn't like .

There is no data to support that piracy hurts sales, I'd prove it but proving a negative is kinda impossible.

It's all an emotional thing, people just upset that someone else has it "easier" than them. Totally silly.

The only thing hurt by piracy is pride.

Personally speaking.

Honest gamers pay for their games pirates don't. Of course piracy loses money for games developers people are getting their product for free. :/

I think a lot more people can afford the games they pirate than you think. There is no proof to the contrary.

Uh, you can't do that. You can't say "There are invisible tea cups around mars, prove me wrong."

It's not conducive to a conversation because it is stupid. You can't prove a negative. How about finding any data to support that piracy==lost sales.

If you find anything better than anecdotes or assumptions I will be very surprised.

Theft is an antiquated concept that didn't have electronic goods in mind when it was first realized. Piracy does not work by the same mechanics as theft.

Likewise if you made piracy 100% impossible tomorrow, I'd be less surprised to see the sun explode randomly that very day than see sales of any video game title raise any meaningful amount.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Uh, you can't do that. You can't say "There are invisible tea cups around mars"

That's kind of what it sounds like the other way around too. I find it unlikely that people pirate games because they are there and free rather than they can't afford them. If someone was offering the same product for a price and you had the money most people would still take the free option.

The ultimate of 'no pirates would buy the copy anyway' is a lot less likely than the possibility that some are pirating it even though they have the money.

If you pirate a game then you aren't an honest gamer... not sure what you are getting at with the magic beans (unless you are trying, poorly, to insult me ), sorry.

What if someone admits to piracy and doesn't hide it? Then they are. "Honest" is a loaded term there. As well, A game? singular? I imagine that is a typo. The best way to put it is that if you pirate a game, you don't support the game. Or that any support you try to claim is minimal at best. However, to attack their integrity is a fallacy. Your view of consumerism extends into a product support or brand loyalty theirs extends into Industrial economics or organization.

That's just semantics really. I think the context of what I was saying was clear.

 

[Savagezion]

If you pirate a game then you aren't an honest gamer... not sure what you are getting at with the magic beans (unless you are trying, poorly, to insult me ), sorry.

What if someone admits to piracy and doesn't hide it? Then they are. "Honest" is a loaded term there. As well, A game? singular? I imagine that is a typo. The best way to put it is that if you pirate a game, you don't support the game. Or that any support you try to claim is minimal at best. However, to attack their integrity is a fallacy. Your view of consumerism extends into a product support or brand loyalty theirs extends into Industrial economics or organization.

 

[Epona]

You know, when I buy something at Wal Mart, I give no thought at all to shoplifters. Why do you care how others acquire games? Jealous that they are saving money?

Yeah, I've (apparently) spent a few grand in video games since I started using steam.

I don't feel a single pang of hate for people who pirate.

If someone walked up to me and told me they pirated every game I bought I'd start talking to them about the games and see where we agreed on what we liked and didn't like .

There is no data to support that piracy hurts sales, I'd prove it but proving a negative is kinda impossible.

It's all an emotional thing, people just upset that someone else has it "easier" than them. Totally silly.

The only thing hurt by piracy is pride.

Personally speaking.

Exactly. I want to understand why people hate on piracy so much around here but I just can't. Why does it bother you, I ask and all I get is a bunch of BS that hasn't ever been proven.

I think it may be because it's just cool to hate on piracy, gotta be in with the crowd. Atleast I hope that is the case, I would feel sorry for anyone who spends real time and effort worrying themselves sick about piracy and the bottom line of multi million dollar corporations.

 

[ThreeWords]

I think that lending it out is a fair thing for them to try and prevent, because, like piracy, it costs them sales. Bear in mind that while these guys are greedy, they aren't actually evil as such...

I think you're wrong. Loaning out a DVD is fine, loaning out a CD is fine and loaning out a video game used to be fine and should still be.

If you are taking the view that anything that costs them sales is wrong, then you are too far out there for me to converse with.

I'm trying not to put any moral bias on it at all, to be honest. I'm just saying they have a perfectly good reason for DRM; they want each person to buy a copy, rather than lose a fraction of their profits. I mean, it's not like they're stealing from you using DRM, is it? They're just trying to get as much money as possible, which they've kind of earn't given the quality and demand that there is for their games.

On the other hand, you're welcome to try to protect yourself form having to pay them all the money they want to charge you. Pirating is a bit much, given as it's illegal, but sharing games is fair play.

It goes both ways; they are within their rights to try to make you pay for their products, and you are within your rights to try and avoid doing so.

[sup]However, if we're handing out judgements, then refusing to talk to people you disagree with is dishonourable in the extreme.[/sup]

 

[Epona]

I think that lending it out is a fair thing for them to try and prevent, because, like piracy, it costs them sales. Bear in mind that while these guys are greedy, they aren't actually evil as such...

I think you're wrong. Loaning out a DVD is fine, loaning out a CD is fine and loaning out a video game used to be fine and should still be.

If you are taking the view that anything that costs them sales is wrong, then you are too far out there for me to converse with.

I'm trying not to put any moral bias on it at all, to be honest. I'm just saying they have a perfectly good reason for DRM; they want each person to buy a copy, rather than lose a fraction of their profits. I mean, it's not like they're stealing from you using DRM, is it? They're just trying to get as much money as possible, which they've kind of earn't given the quality and demand that there is for their games.

On the other hand, you're welcome to try to protect yourself form having to pay them all the money they want to charge you. Pirating is a bit much, given as it's illegal, but sharing games is fair play.

It goes both ways; they are within their rights to try to make you pay for their products, and you are within your rights to try and avoid doing so.

[sup]However, if we're handing out judgements, then refusing to talk to people you disagree with is dishonourable in the extreme.[/sup]

So your opinion is that if they are out to make money, then anything goes, to hell with consumer rights?

 

[darkstarangel]

10 years ago I used to by pirated PS1 games from a shifty asian marketeer simply because he had games that were never released in Australia at the time (I never bought copied games that were already on the shelves).
The way I see it I was justified in supporting this guys business because he was tapping into a market the game distributors neglected & benefitted from it. If they released it on the shelves I would have bought it, the companies would have made their profit, everybody but the pirate wins. Because they didn't release it on the shelves, they made no money. So when I bought the copied version that game company would have been completely unaffected, just suffer a lost opertunity.
Ofcourse everythings completely different now so theres very little justifiable loopholes these days.

Also, the same goes for foreign games that were never translated in english. If I can find a game iv been wanting to play for ages with an english translation that I can download for free I will. If buying that game as a released english translated version is an option I will but if it isnt then im not doing any game companies any harm by buying/taking a copy of a product they're not selling. Again, the lost opertunities are their problem.