An instance of piracy being okay?

[PhosphorusV]

Do what you want, ?cause a pirate is free,
YOU ARE A PIRATE!
Yar har, fiddle di dee,
Being a pirate is alright to be,
Do what you want ?cause a pirate is free,
You are a pirate!

You are a pirate!
Yay!

We've got us a map, (a map!)
To lead us to a hidden box,
That's all locked up with locks! (with locks!)
And buried deep away!

We'll dig up the box, (the box!)
We know it's full of precious booty!
Burst open the locks!
And then we'll say hooray!

 

[erztez]

I am stating an important fact many just seem to plain forget.

Well here's another fact many seem to forget: what's illegal in your country might not be in mine.

Everytime this discussion shows up, there are loads of people just saying "it's illegal, the end".
Well guess what, it is not illegal in my country, as long as you're not trying to use piracy for your own economical benefit (as in, make money out of piracy).

Yup, people do seem to be forgetting that... In here, it's absolutely legal (as in, specifically mentioned as being an exception, not just skipped over), to download ANYTHING from ANYWHERE, as long as you don't turn a profit on it. Hell, even before the new law took effect(2009 iirc), the absolute MOST they could get out of you in court(for games/software only, music/movies were exempt since the 60s), is the purchase price of the software in question.

Seems fair to me...
Our version of the MAFIAA knows its place. They bother corporations, not people.

 

[concrete89]

Why do people say these things?

Piracy. Is. Illegal.

Doesn't matter what moral label you try to attach to it to justify it, that one fact isn't changing.

surely the moral label is important, it is what defines law in the first place

Law is still the law.

I'm not saying that it is okay to pirate games, but saying that one should obey the law just because it is the law is insane. It's OFTEN the right thing to do, because most laws are there for a good reason, and it is often the smart thing to do, what with jailtime and such.

But that doesn't change the thing that it is a rigid system more concerned about stability than right and wrong, as the idea of what is right and wrong differs from individual to individual.

 

[geckoguy18]

Ok since we're on the subject of piracy I'm going to share a story. I downloaded bulletstorm off of steam, paid for it and everything. I went to start playing it and steam gave me the first time installation message which I didn't think anything of but I found out it forced me to install GFWL (which seems redundant as steam does the same thing as GFWL). Now bulletstorm updates thought GFWL and for whatever reason after trying for days I couldn't get the update to go though. (Side note: It is poor design to not put an exit button before the main menu if an update is required to get to the main menu) So I eventually got fed up with it and pirated a version of the game that had the DRM removed. I believe this is legal but what does everyone else think?

 

[EHKOS]

Steam is where it can be found, as well as all other Bethesda goodness.

Except for Daggerfall. But that's abandonware now, so no one really cares how you get your hands on it.

They give it away on their website now.

 

[smearyllama]

Steam is where it can be found, as well as all other Bethesda goodness.

Except for Daggerfall. But that's abandonware now, so no one really cares how you get your hands on it.

They give it away on their website now.

Exactly, though you need an emulator to make it work.
I use a version that sets itself up, so I don't have to do the work.

 

[Dejawesp]

Ok since we're on the subject of piracy I'm going to share a story. I downloaded bulletstorm off of steam, paid for it and everything. I went to start playing it and steam gave me the first time installation message which I didn't think anything of but I found out it forced me to install GFWL (which seems redundant as steam does the same thing as GFWL). Now bulletstorm updates thought GFWL and for whatever reason after trying for days I couldn't get the update to go though. (Side note: It is poor design to not put an exit button before the main menu if an update is required to get to the main menu) So I eventually got fed up with it and pirated a version of the game that had the DRM removed. I believe this is legal but what does everyone else think?

You paid for a licence for the game and as such its not piracy in a legal or moral sense.

 

[darkcommanderq]

My girlfriend found a copy of Morrowind recently, and has been talking about it near constantly---it's been years since I played it and thinking about it again, I've started to look into getting a copy for myself on PC (I used to have the xbox version). It's not at my local Gamestop, or Babbages, whatever, and the copy online I've found isn't the GOTY edition.

I realized something.

Of all the places I can purchase this game, not one benefits the developers at all. If all the copies circulated are used, only gamestop or whoever's on ebay gets any money.

It would be like scavenging a super-duper-mart instead of buying from raiders, just getting the torrent. :/

Am I just a jaded pirate?

If you watched the extra credits on piracy, they said if your in a region that the game was not distributed, James gave the OK to pirate anything he worked on.

So to simplify, if you live in the US/Japan/Europe probably never.
If you live in a country were no one has distributed it, sure.

But seriously that was a great extra credits go watch that one if you already haven't.

As I side note im a budding developer so this issue does affect me. That said I am of the opinion that I would not mind someone 'advance' loaning my work as long as they planned on buying it. For instance otakus that already spend way to much into video games and put forth a lot of money into the industry dont really have a negative affect when they pirate (assuming they are also buying titles).

I think unexpeted poverty is a good reason for piracy (which face alot of american these days I can guess) or any other reason that truly inables you to buy a game anyway (naa, I am not talking about those shittalkers who are just to greedy to spend their money on a game and rather that buy a pack of cigarettes or anything else, but of those who are literally poor, like picking up deposit bottles out of wastebin poor)

In the very end of the day; It's just a game.

Uhhh I dont buy that argument. 1st off video games are not 'just' games. What does that even mean anyway? Games, Toys, Books, Music, Movies, (insert random medium hear), are all commodities that people work to produce.

If your going to pirate something dont also try to lie to yourself that your 'just pirating a game'. How do you even have money for a computer if your that poor to begin with.

Id think you would have much higher priorities such as getting basic shelter and steady food long before you dream of luxury items such as video games.

The only thing worse than piracy is people trying to rationalize it by belittling what they are pirating.

 

[Timmibal]

If you buy a game used, the developers already got their money for that copy. The seller isnt using it anymore, you are now, its not that there are more legit users than before. The whole debate about reselling is theft or something is the biggest pile of bullshit that was produced the last years. And people are actually falling for that one. I should start a career as manager and start the same shit with used cars, ill make millions for the companies.

Head.
Hit.
Fucking.
Desk.

Yes, the producers HAVE already made their money for THAT copy. That doesn't mean that the retailers have the right to bypass the sale of all the OTHER copies.

A resold video game is not the same as a used car. For one there are issues with warranty liability and insurance, but not knowing much about the automotive industry I will avoid commenting too far in depth on that subject.

As an earlier poster so rightly pointed out, you are largely paying for the experience of playing the game, rather than purely the presence of the physical medium. A better analogy would be a concert or film. Lets say that the retailer sold 100 tickets before the event, the event having a capacity of 10,000.

They then offer all patrons a $10 cashback to submit their whole ticket on entry as opposed to the stub, thus denying them passout/re-entry during the event. The retailer then sells these tickets at a slight discount alongside the remaining unsold tickets. The customer, seeing no effective difference between the two products, obviously purchases the cheaper one. The retailer continues this until the event begins or reaches capacity.

The retailer has pocketed the majority of ticket sales whilst only giving the producer their cut of a fraction of tickets actually sold. Do you believe that it is a fair justification on the part of any party to state that the duplicate sales were fair and legitimate because the producers recieved payment on that particular ticket already, regardless of the fact that legitimate tickets were still available for purchase?

If a product which does not benefit the owner of the IP is SOLD in DIRECT COMPETITION with the legitimate product, regardless of the legal loopholes which allow it, it is a fucking bootleg. It doesn't even have the nebulous moral justification of 'try before you buy', because as far as the customer is concerned, they HAVE already bought it.

Don't believe me? Look at all the buttpain evident when a company releases 'free for new only' content.

 

[PlasmaFrog]

Piracy is stealing, no exceptions. Most people will try to find loop holes by using instances of rational reasoning by proclaiming that the game isn't available in their country or it's no longer available. As hard as you may try, it will remain legal no matter how hard you try to bend the truth around it.

I'm fine with it though under certain circumstances, but still realize that it's cheating the system. Rather as opposed to trying to compensate by luring myself into a subjective reality.

 

[Plurralbles]

Never for avideo game. Gaussian chemistry software? Pirate that to your heart's content if you're using it for your university studies.

My friend has been told he has to supply his own license for Guassian and it's bullshit. 6K down the toilet.

 

[Fetzenfisch]

If you buy a game used, the developers already got their money for that copy. The seller isnt using it anymore, you are now, its not that there are more legit users than before. The whole debate about reselling is theft or something is the biggest pile of bullshit that was produced the last years. And people are actually falling for that one. I should start a career as manager and start the same shit with used cars, ill make millions for the companies.

Head.
Hit.
Fucking.
Desk.

Yes, the producers HAVE already made their money for THAT copy. That doesn't mean that the retailers have the right to bypass the sale of all the OTHER copies.

A resold video game is not the same as a used car. For one there are issues with warranty liability and insurance, but not knowing much about the automotive industry I will avoid commenting too far in depth on that subject.

As an earlier poster so rightly pointed out, you are largely paying for the experience of playing the game, rather than purely the presence of the physical medium. A better analogy would be a concert or film. Lets say that the retailer sold 100 tickets before the event, the event having a capacity of 10,000.

They then offer all patrons a $10 cashback to submit their whole ticket on entry as opposed to the stub, thus denying them passout/re-entry during the event. The retailer then sells these tickets at a slight discount alongside the remaining unsold tickets. The customer, seeing no effective difference between the two products, obviously purchases the cheaper one. The retailer continues this until the event begins or reaches capacity.

The retailer has pocketed the majority of ticket sales whilst only giving the producer their cut of a fraction of tickets actually sold. Do you believe that it is a fair justification on the part of any party to state that the duplicate sales were fair and legitimate because the producers recieved payment on that particular ticket already, regardless of the fact that legitimate tickets were still available for purchase?

If a product which does not benefit the owner of the IP is SOLD in DIRECT COMPETITION with the legitimate product, regardless of the legal loopholes which allow it, it is a fucking bootleg. It doesn't even have the nebulous moral justification of 'try before you buy', because as far as the customer is concerned, they HAVE already bought it.

Don't believe me? Look at all the buttpain evident when a company releases 'free for new only' content.

Sorry i still have to disagree. I buy a Disc containing Software. Not entrance to an event. If you want to compare it with a movie or music, then with a DVD of an concert, for its replayable. When i sold my SNES games, i didnt sell them the right to come to my place and play it. It was a cartridge. Everything else still is brainwash bull. I can go buy whatever product you like, if you dont like cars, even on the day after its released it is my right to say, nay dont want it anymore and resell it for less money to get a lil of my cash back. Thats how it worked since the dawn of currency and suddenly its piracy to sell something that you own. Well then everyone is a pirat somehow.

 

[gamer_parent]

Not just developers who need butter on their bread, they're not the sole persons whose livelihood is worth legal protection when there's still reasonably something which could be called a market position for the game.

Why do people say these things?

Piracy. Is. Illegal.

Doesn't matter what moral label you try to attach to it to justify it, that one fact isn't changing.

Laws and ethics do not always match up.

While it will never be fully "okay" to break a legitimately and democratically passed law, there's considerable ethical difference in someone downloading a game commonly sold on their home market (or otherwise easily available through digital distribution), or some Chinese dude downloading a French independent film that will never ever see release in China, and thus never gain any sort of market position there for the law to reasonably protect (i.e. fulfil the purpose it had in the first place).

The former can be condemned for hurting the interests of developers and retailers, while the latter can only be "condemned" based on an abstract notion of compliance with even inane and pointless parts of laws being part of the social contract. Both are illegal, and both are to some degree wrong, but they're not equally wrong. Much like a pedestrian crossing for red light isn't the same situation in a busy city at noon, where all kinds of chaos can result from it, or in the middle of nowhere at 2 a.m, with plenty of light sources and no cars in sight anywhere. This despite it being regulated by the same law.

So laws are laws, but violations are not simply violations.

now THAT's a reply.

 

[Leg End]

If this were true Id've been banned long ago.
So would a fair few other people I can see traipsing around not-banned.

Please take a look at the rules [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct] and show me the anti-piracy part?

For reference:

Use Our Forums Appropriately
Our forums are a place to talk with like-minded people, not a place to advertise your blog or YouTube channel. Your profile has a place for such things, and that is where it should stay. Similarly, posts including, advocating, or linking to illegal or adult material are a very quick way to end your time as part of The Escapist community.

Personally, I think it comes completely down to:
a) whether anybody reports the post (otherwise the mods don't see it);
b) whether a mod stumbles across it anyway (and is energetic enough to deal with it rather than the HUGE pile of /report spamming his inbox); and
c) the massive variability in moderators - it really just depends on who picks you up on it.

I've seen a mod suspend somebody for calling somebody else's IDEA stupid, and I've seen the mods totally ignore somebody calling somebody else a "racist, nazi bigot". It seems to depend on who you get and the mood they're in.

Given all that, I'd say it's more accurate to say "You haven't been banned YET" rather than "They don't ban for this" or whatever.

But there are also the "invisible rules" that it is relied upon warnings to tell people about them, as well as users. Since, the most recent topic ban is nowhere on the list and is not actually covered in the rules. Though, it may have been reversed as we have a 8 page thread that is very closely related to the topic, as well as directly discussing it.

Also, as you said, depends on the mod. :L

 

[Lenin211]

I don't pirate, I have never found a need to.

 

[Yopaz]

An instance of piracy being okay?

None.

But it's always cute to hear people try to justify themselves. Silly pirates.

Really? I pirated the new Rise Against album, but I also pre-ordered it a month before it was released. It took ages to receive the album because I couldn't order it from a site that was close and would have it anywhere near release date (closest was a month after release). So I did in fact hand over my money to them for the CD before I downloaded it. Now is this something that hurts anyone at all?