Illegal downloading is not theft - its something new

[Dys]

I beleive the politicially correct term for it is "intellectual theft" which makes much more sense than "theft". As much as I pirate games, I tend to do it out of spite for a game company (often) making the gaming uplayable due to DRM (and I am not buying a new fucking dvd drive, they want my money they can supply me with a product that works), I don't try and pretend that what I'm doing isn't wrong and isn't completely unfair to the people who have worked hard to deliver a product. There are lots of people who work on games who have nothing to do with the 'bad' elements of the product.

However, a more appropiate comparison than theft would be theft of ideas. For example if I was to invtent something, I dunno a hydrogen fuel cell engine or something, and I kept the designs on my computer. It would be like somebody else hacking my computer and making my blueprints/drawings public, thus eliminating by chance to sell them and make money. Hardly fair and in a sense my opportunity as been stolen.

Or maybe it could be compared to plagurism, pasing off someone elses ideas/work as your own without permission and without actually physically removing it from their possession. Hardly fair, I rarely let people I don't know use my work.

You can argue that they are already selling games and that you wouldn't have bought it anyway, but even by seeding it (which most people do as games download) you are screwing them out of money that the devs are (apparently) entitled to.

 

[Graustein]

Don't we already have a word for it?
Yknow... piracy?

 

[TsunamiWombat]

No. It's theft. Deal with it.

 

[qbert4ever]

I declare that this new word/term SHALL BE.

ILLEGAL REPRODUCTION! (of copyrighted material)

Really? I was thinking "butt-buddies". The pirates would still be tried for theft, only instead of saying theft, we say "butt-buddies".

You're taking something that does not belong to you without permission. Is it really that big of a problem to call that theft?

In all seriousness , what you are actually doing is reproducing copyrighted material without permission , it's not really theft .

I refuse to believe you unless somebody less lazy then I can get a definition link.

And like I asked before, is this really that big of a deal? This is so far down on the list of "bad shit other people don't want you to do" that it just seems silly to make this big of a fuss over what to call it. It's illegal. End of story. If you do it anyway is up to you, but it's not like it's the difference between murder and homicide.

 

[Flying-Emu]

Not theft in the traditional sense, but still theft.
It isn't technically a decrease in "capital", but you are depriving them of money that they would otherwise acquire by taking their product for free. They worked to create this thing, and they wish to be paid for it.
How is it your right to take for free what they choose to charge for?
Music wouldn't be the moolah-megahouse it is now if they didn't charge anything.

In effect, no institution that we love would logically be in place, since they can't make money off of it. Movies wouldn't make the millions of dollars required to even repay the budget needed to make the film, musicians wouldn't be able to focus on their art since they would be required to work three jobs to support themselves, and our sweet video game devs wouldn't have the time or money to develop a play-worthy game.

Theft is taking something that isn't yours. It doesn't matter if it's physical or otherwise. I can steal your identity, that's not a physical thing (I mean, the actual card is, but using your codes etc.). By your logic, that's not theft.

In all seriousness , what you are actually doing is reproducing copyrighted material without permission , it's not really theft .

Actually, it really is, since you're taking something that doesn't belong to you for your own enjoyment without any form of return for the other party. It would be fine if they said "Oh, hey. You can have this for free. I dinnae' care." But since they request fees for their goods, you are obliged to pay them. If you don't, you're stealing.

Plain and simple.

 

[SirSchmoopy]

I don't get it, whats the difference from downloading a game and stealing a copy from Gamestop? Isn't it the same thing?

 

[Graustein]

I don't get it, whats the difference from downloading a game and stealing a copy from Gamestop? Isn't it the same thing?

Basically, if you steal the copy from Gamestop, that's one less copy they have to sell to someone else.
Downloading a copy of the game doesn't do that, because you're not physically depriving them of anything, you're simply benefiting from their effort without compensation. It's sort of like the difference between stealing a ticket to a concert and just sneaking in to the concert - either way you get to hear the music and they don't get compensated, but in the former case they have one less ticket available to sell to someone.

Doesn't make it any less reprehensible in my eyes, though.

 

[SirSchmoopy]

I don't get it, whats the difference from downloading a game and stealing a copy from Gamestop? Isn't it the same thing?

Basically, if you steal the copy from Gamestop, that's one less copy they have to sell to someone else..

Yes you are. Your stealing a copy they could be selling to YOU. It doesn't matter if you steal a copy, they will have another for someone else anyway. The point is if you download it, they lose money straight up.

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

I don't get it, whats the difference from downloading a game and stealing a copy from Gamestop? Isn't it the same thing?

Basically, if you steal the copy from Gamestop, that's one less copy they have to sell to someone else..

Yes you are. Your stealing a copy they could be selling to YOU. It doesn't matter if you steal a copy, they will have another for someone else anyway. The point is if you download it, they lose money straight up.

Well Sir Schmoopy of Awesomton (Okay I don't know how to spell that right now

They are losing money either way. You are getting a copy for free depriving them of money

 

[Knight Templar]

It is stealing, we just call it piracy to show what kind of theft. But it doesn't matter what you call it, a rose by any other name and all that.

So they still have a hard copy, you didn't take that, you just took the money they would have made from the sale. <-- Explain how that is ever O.K.

If I stole 120 bucks to buy a game you would call it theft, but if the money and game are credit and data its piracy, a form of theft.

 

[TerraMGP]

Lets face it folks, Thanks to the internet things have changed, and perhaps thats a good thing. Part of the problem is that people will always take the means to get somethign they want that costs them the least. Few people are afraid of reprisal and while I have to admit I would not want to do something that could take away money I don't have in court most people will live with the fact that the risk is low. The way Media is created, presented and produced is changing and society is going to be dragged along with it kicking and screaming.

I find it Ironic that the creator of Urealms has posted here on this topic because it gives me a prime example of this shift in society. Without going into my personal feelings about the series I will say that I know alot of work is put into it. this work creates a program that adds to the amount of data that you can now use as an alternative to Television shows. In the future as the means for individuals to produce forms of entertainment become more and more advanced they will draw more and more people away from current mainstream entertainment. People are going to want to capitalize on this, and if they want to do that it means a shift in how things are done now.

Copyright law is going to have to change, because file sharing and pirating and things like that won't. As we move away from mediums like TV where Ad dollars and Subscription fees cover all the costs this new generation of producers for Entertainment and other content are going to have to find a way to use file sharing to their advantage. After all you can only make so much from internet adds and being members of sites like the escapist.

I don't know Mister Moran, (or if I'm spelling that right) but I'm willing to bet this gig does not pay enough to support him long term. Factor in things like inflation, the impending growth of internet entertainment, and the fact that he may want to expand a family, own a home or do other things like that and you realize that growth must come from somewhere. File sharing seems like the logical choice, though how it would be implemented is still unclear.

But people are going to download the free content, and people are going to put up any 'special exclusive content' that comes with DVDs or books to be torrented or viewed on sites like Youtube. Its only going to grow as time goes on and the only way to shut it down is going to be taking down the internet because lord knows you can't stop it. People have been getting around restrictions put on the internet ever since it moved out of the Research labs that initially used it. If independent producers of content are going to live off of it long term, especially as more people join their ranks, then things like File sharing and free redistribution are going to have to be accepted and turned so that they can get a piece of it.

Yes I realize the hole in this argument is that at this time there is no way to do that, but what I am saying is it should be looked into. Perhaps if people looked at file sharing as a potential growth market and a way to help encourage more people to put content out there things will change. All I know is for now its here to stay, wrong or right. We are never going to get rid of it, best to try and put a positive spin on it.

 

[bkd69]

It's not theft in the US (see Dowling v. United States: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&court=US&case=/us/473/207.html ).

The legal term is Copyright Infringement.

It's an infringement of property rights.

You know what infringing property rights is called?

Trespass.

And just as we can have several degrees of trespass, we have several degrees of illicit downloading.

And arrh, matey, this be effing piracy:
http://news.google.com/news?q=somalia+pirates&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&um=1&hl=en&sa=X&oi=news_group&resnum=1&ct=title
Not yer pansy torrenting of discs...fucking posers.

 

[Mariena]

Whatever you say, OP!

Here, downloading is legal. As long as you don't upload.

*dances*

 

[sheic99]

Look at it this way then had you not acquired the game through "piracy" you would have had to of bought it from a store. That is why this is theft. There is no way around it.

The game could have been rented from a store. The original company won't make money if you rent from Blockbuster or Gamefly. The same goes for borrowing, EA didn't make money when my friend lent me his copy of Crysis. Is that stealing?

 

[sheic99]

I don't get it, whats the difference from downloading a game and stealing a copy from Gamestop? Isn't it the same thing?

Basically, if you steal the copy from Gamestop, that's one less copy they have to sell to someone else..

Yes you are. Your stealing a copy they could be selling to YOU. It doesn't matter if you steal a copy, they will have another for someone else anyway. The point is if you download it, they lose money straight up.

Yes, but Gamestop purchased that disk from the company that produced said game. Gamestop would lose the money that was spent on that copy of the game. Where as in pirating, what is lost is an non-existant profit that could be payed for the game, but no company loses additional money from the act.

 

[gantzsurvivor1]

I declare that this new word/term SHALL BE.

ILLEGAL REPRODUCTION! (of copyrighted material)

I like this idea

 

[bkd69]

Look at it this way then had you not acquired the game through "piracy" you would have had to of bought it from a store. That is why this is theft. There is no way around it.

The game could have been rented from a store. The original company won't make money if you rent from Blockbuster or Gamefly. The same goes for borrowing, EA didn't make money when my friend lent me his copy of Crysis. Is that stealing?

Yes, but even then, EA made money when Gamefly or Blockbuster or the guy who sold the game to Gamestop bought the game the first time around, so they've made their sale.

What publishers have to realize is, when x% of a game's players are playing pirated copies, then (100-x)% of that game's players (plus or minus some percentage of borrowers and renters) have plunked down hard earned dosh for that game, in spite of it being widely and readily available for free, and that (100-x)% of players are either suckers, or brave supporters of gaming development, depending on what you want to call them.

There are two questions that follow from that. First, how do you treat that (100-x)% of your audience that has shown that they will gladly give you money in exchange for playing your game? And second, how much of that revenue from the (100-x)% gets factored into your development budget for the next go round of whatever franchise or title you're concerned with?

 

[Samurai Goomba]

I declare that this new word/term SHALL BE.

ILLEGAL REPRODUCTION! (of copyrighted material)

I like this idea

Yeah, me too. It's like photocopying a book that you're supposed to buy.

 

[santaandy]

I declare that this new word/term SHALL BE.

ILLEGAL REPRODUCTION! (of copyrighted material)

I like this idea

Yeah, me too. It's like photocopying a book that you're supposed to buy.

Ironically enough, this was such a problem that my old university had to implement a per-student page limit on the printers per semester. Now THAT'S sad.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

It's still theft. Sorry.