let's debate piracy and the hypocrisy behind it

[Firsttoahundred]

I dont really like that Jack guy. A thief is a thief.

 

[TPiddy]

My biggest problem with piracy is the way that it's raised the price for those who can't afford it. As someone has already said, piracy begets more piracy, and when piracy finally outnumbers the legit buyers then the producers of the product will cease to produce it and everyone loses.

Just look at software! I have to spend thousands a year on my software for work because so many people pirate their copies.

Don't worry though, once the world evolves into software as a service and everything is run from the cloud... piracy will be a lot harder.

 

[secretsantaone]

4 points to allow a rational debate on piracy:

1. Piracy is NOT theft. Piracy is piracy. No physical game is taken from another person, a copy is made.

2. The apathy factor. If someone pirates a game, it does not necesarily mean they would buy the game if piracy wasn't an option, they wouldn't feel stongly enough to spend money. Thus not all incidents of piracy would result in lost sales.

3. Piracy has the same effect on game developers as renting games or buying used games, they don't get a single penny from them. These two are perfectly legal.

4. Some pirates use piracy as a demo, particularly on games that lack one. Many pirates later buy a copy of the game to support the devs. Not all piracy results in 'lost potential sales'.

I'm not condoning piracy here but if you're going to argue about it, at least make sure you know the facts. The PIRACY = THEFT retards particularly.

 

[Internet Kraken]

so with all those things taken into consideration why are people so hateful on people like jack? :-/

Because Jack doesn't have any right to games.
They are a fluff 'extra' in life, and if Jack can't afford them, then too freaking bad.
There are plenty of things I would like that I don't have, but you've got to live within your means. It doesn't give Jack, or anyone else, the right to just steal something they'd normally have to pay for.

Poverty isn't an excuse for things like video games. You don't need them to live, and the fact that Jack might be able to afford 1 after 5 months of working should only make him thankful that he isn't one of the thousands dying from preventable diseases and starvation every day.

Jack can't afford games? Well boo-freaking-hoo. I can't afford a BMW. Oh well, life goes on.
Jack: Get a new hobby, or treasure the few games you can afford. But you aren't 'owed' anything, you don't 'deserve' games, and you have no 'right' to them. Either pay for them like a regular person, or do without.

This, to me, seems like a reason to dismiss any arguments in favor of piracy. You can try to justify piracy in any way you want, but ultimately you have to realize that video games are not a necessity. There is no need to play them. There is no need to buy them. They are a luxury, something you buy if you can afford it. So when you pirate a game you are taking something you don't need. If piracy was not an option, you wouldn't do it and would be able to survive without it. This is why I can never really understand the justification for piracy. You're trying to justify breaking the law for something that is a luxury.

 

[adderseal]

So, being broke justifies piracy?

I gotta say...I hope that Jack dies.

Call it extreme...but hey, a human life is worth very little to me. Even a non-pirate, or even myself.

If you truly, honestly believe that 'a human life is worth very little' to you, then you have some serious thinking to do about life.

 

[chronobreak]

A criminal who spits on someone for breaking the law? Sure seems like hypocrisy to me. Drugs and piracy are very hot topics here. Not a false analogy, they are actually very similar in terms of petty crime by the user.

And sure one opinion isn't hypocrisy. Two conflicting is.

I don't see how they are similar, really. There is no need to bring in drugs to a piracy argument, it's a stretch to prove a point that doesn't really matter anyways, as you have seen the majority opinion people have on both subjects.

Humans are complicated beings, with different, varying opinions on different matters. Not everything is always black and white. Yes, if you do drugs, you may very well be a criminal in most places, as is the same with piracy. But to have confliciting views doesn't have to make one a "hypocrite", because that is painting them with a broad brush. I am a Republican, but I voted for Obama. I am a hypocrite? No, just a thinking human being.

 

[ffs-dontcare]

For fuck's sake, do we need another one of these threads? Look at how this one turned out!

Fine, I'll bite.

My view on piracy isn't so black and white. There are certain moral arguments.

Piracy isn't automatically stealing. Let me paint an example:
Person A wants to try a game, but either there's no demo for it or he believes that demos aren't enough of a decision maker for him, so to speak. So he downloads the full game illegitimately. He either likes it or he doesn't. If he likes it, he goes and buys the game properly. If he doesn't like it, he wipes the game from his HDD and carries on with his normal every-day life.

Another example:
Person B buys a game and installs it. The DRM turns out to be highly restrictive and/or it turns out he bought a second-hand Steam game* from the clueless idiot behind the counter at Gamestop/EB Games/whatever game store. Naturally, this means he's having utmost difficulty getting the game to work. So, being as frustrated as he is, he downloads the game illegitimately (or at the very least, he downloads the cracks for it), allowing him to actually play the game that he paid for.

In my opinion, the two situations described above are completely justified. They do not, to me, count as stealing. The way I see it, piracy is stealing only if the reason for the piracy was to avoid paying for the game being pirated. If you paid for it, there is nothing morally reprehensible about pirating it if you are truly having issues with the DRM or are an honest person who tries before he buys (although that honesty would admittedly be a far less common thing, since people like money too much to so easily part with it). You could mention game demos but while the common consensus is that demos are the standard try-before-you-buy method, some of us these days need more than petty demos to be impressed enough into buying a game. Remember the days of shareware? "Play the first episode free, and if you like it you can buy the rest of the game!" Those were the days.

And no, don't try comparing piracy to car theft. Piracy consists of making an additional copy of a file; unlike the original file, this copy did not require any resources to be made. The same cannot be said for cars, due to the fact that each individual car and all copies made thereafter require time and resources to be manufactured.

To me, it's not about "piracy is wrong and there's no way around it". It's about "why did you pirate it?". Piracy isn't immoral in itself - it depends on each individual situation.

Did you download the game illegally in order to avoid paying $110 for it? Immoral.
Did you download the game (or cracks) illegally to order to bypass the "always online or pause" DRM of the one you bought from the store? Morally fine.

I'd make a flowchart, but I can't be assed.

If anyone chooses to reply to this, I hope I get better answers than "lol piracy is wrong period end of story there is no argument /thread" or anything with the word "owned" used in the gaming context. I won't waste any more of my time responding to a particularly rude or unintelligent rebuttal. If you want me to respect your opinion (because that's what it is - an opinion), you had better respect mine. Piracy isn't a mere black and white issue. And I shouldn't have to point out that I do in fact buy my games (except for abandonware).

Piracy should at all times be legal for products that aren't available in retail or otherwise anymore. Music, games and movies alike.

Definitely this, especially concerning games. You can usually find films and music in stores long after their initial release date but games aren't exactly on that same level. I actually ended up buying a lot of my classic games like Shogo: Mobile Armor Division, Tiberian Sun (before it became freeware), etc second-hand from previous owners, and if I couldn't find them I would've just downloaded them regardless of whether or not it was legal for me to do so. All abandonware is, to me, perfectly fine to be downloaded if you can't find it in stores anymore. You might say that I should pay for them anyway by buying them second-hand from their previous owners but no, I don't have to do that unless I particularly want a physical copy of the game to add to my collection. Nobody's missing out if I download abandonware instead of buying it second-hand, because any money I did pay for it would go to the previous owner, not the developers.

* [sub]Yes, a family member of mine actually did buy what turned out to be a second-hand copy of Left 4 Dead from what I can only assume to be a trained gorilla behind the counter at EB Games. He was not happy. He didn't pirate the game, however - he gave the game to me instead because he figured I would get the game cracked myself. I probably would if I was even interested in the game. On another note, I reckon it should be compulsory training for all employees in game stores to not accept or sell Steam games second-hand.[/sub]

 

[TPiddy]

Piracy is a crime, but it is not theft. Of course some people believe it should not be a crime. I really can't think of any reason for why it is a crime. I mean unless someone manages to prove that piracy->reduced income for creator(s). And don't go "That's totally logical and intuitive", it might seem that way but even so you have to prove it.

I think Piracy is a reaction to the current market. See, buying and selling used to be a deal right? You would go out into a market and see something you like and then you would haggle, until you reached an agreement both sides could agree to(or you'd fail and walk off). Nowadays, you can only get the extreme cases: Buying regularly, in which case you have no say in the price, or pirate, in which case you have all the say. The former is good for the producer/retailer, the latter is good for the consumer.

What's with all the banhammer fear? Surely we are allowed to freely discuss a subject of major importance to the gaming industry without tiptoeing?

You always have a say in the price... games go on sale, you can purchase them used... then again, used games don't go to the developers either... I will still stand by my point that piracy just raises the prices for those who do pay.

 

[Petromir]

If you want to be pedantic then a pay car park, that alwyas has spaces in it, its still theft to use it. Theft can be of an idea, of an object or a service.

Again, the car park lost something. Even if it has always free space, it's still taking up space for someone who would have paid for it.

If its empty apart form my car how am i actually preventing anyone form using it legitimately?? Answer I'm not.

 

[JoJo]

Quote: "A man works for his new car, he's proud that he's been able to save up and afford it. A poor man sees the car and steals it, he can never afford this car so it's okay that he stole it.

This would be an alright arguement if you where entitled to games, but your not, they are a nessessity. Someone stealing drugs to save his daughter's life is wrong even if his reasons are right, it's a tragedy but it's life. Someone being poor therefore stealing games is just a crime, and jack's a douche because of it."

I'd agree with most of this, except the bit about stealing drugs to save a child's life, I would argue, and I think most would agree with me, that the wrong of stealing would be less than the wrong of letting the daughter die...

 

[Bat Vader]

Calling Piracy stealing is just hype for effect. I thought we'd sorted all this out. Can people be a bit more mature and stop doing this maybe?

Obviously not. If you walk into a book store pick up a book on the shelf and sit down and read the whole thing you are not a thief. Oh and for the record no content creator or distributor can be said to have the right to make a profit.

That's a bit of a false analogy. Piracy is more akin to walking into a bookstore, picking up a book, making a copy of each page, and then walking out.

Also, what? You're saying people who work hard making content don't have a right to be rewarded for their effort?

No it isn't a false analogy. The underlying point is that you enjoyed the product and did not buy it. By the time you have enjoyed the product all that needs to happen has already happened. The content provider hasn't lost the book have they?

They did not lose the book but you did not pay to take the book home and read it either. What is the point of walking into a bookstore and reading the entire book with no thought on purchasing it? If someone does not want to buy the book they could just as easily go to their local library and check the book out.

 

[secretsantaone]

Calling Piracy stealing is just hype for effect. I thought we'd sorted all this out. Can people be a bit more mature and stop doing this maybe?

When and where was this sorted out? Link please.
Explain how thinking a pirate isn't a thief makes us more mature too please.

theft: 'the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny.' Dictionary.com. It is not theft if nothing is taken away. It is still wrong in some cases, but not theft. In a lot of cases, piracy is victimless and therefore, as far as my morals are concerned, perfectly ok in those.

And because in the more mature, intelligent debates about piracy even the people who are strongly against piracy in all forms accept that piracy is not theft. Conceding to this does not mean you are saying it is ok.

So we can go back to the bookstore excuse. It's not ok to make a copy of a book at a bookstore and walk out with it right? You didn't take anything away, but it shouldn't be called theft? I admit I am no saint, but I think it's theft, and wrong.

Way to miss the point buddy.

It's not that it's not wrong, it's that it's not theft.

I don't call assault arson because it's not arson.
I don't call piracy stealing because it's not theft.

 

[RathWolf]

If piracy was eliminated tomorrow would people like me who rent games and buy second hand be the new immoral??

Is it the fact that it's illegal that makes it wrong or that the people who have made it aren't getting money for it?

To answer the second question: a little of both.

See, the thing is, while renting/buying used games may not profit the developer completely, it's still a much better alternative than piracy. If more people rent games, the demand in rental stores go up, and they buy more copies, which benefits the developer.

Now, used games are a bit different. True, the used game market doesn't really benefit the developer, but that's why several titles now offer free DLC with new purchases that can otherwise be bought normally as a way to motivate the purchase of new copies/ offset the losses from used game sales.

 

[TPiddy]

1. Piracy is NOT theft. Piracy is piracy. No physical game is taken from another person, a copy is made.

Ok, if you want to get into the pure technical definition of it... but it's still immoral and illegal.

2. The apathy factor. If someone pirates a game, it does not necesarily mean they would buy the game if piracy wasn't an option, they wouldn't feel stongly enough to spend money. Thus not all incidents of piracy would result in lost sales.

If we can't make the assumption that a pirated copy is a lost sale then you can't make the assumption that it isn't a lost sale. The fact remains that a reasonable percentage would likely buy the game because they obviously like it enough to want to play it. It's certainly not 100%, but it's certainly not 0% either, and that is still lost money for the devs.

3. Piracy has the same effect on game developers as renting games or buying used games, they don't get a single penny from them. These two are perfectly legal.

Except for the fact that rental retailers have to PURCHASE copies of the games, meaning more sales for the Dev. rental retailers also acquire copies for re-sale and provide another advertising outlet for the devs. This arrangement is still mutually beneficial.

4. Some pirates use piracy as a demo, particularly on games that lack one. Many pirates later buy a copy of the game to support the devs. Not all piracy results in 'lost potential sales'.

So you're basically countering your own point #2 then?

 

[Flour]

If you want to be pedantic then a pay car park, that alwyas has spaces in it, its still theft to use it. Theft can be of an idea, of an object or a service.

Again, the car park lost something. Even if it has always free space, it's still taking up space for someone who would have paid for it.

If its empty apart form my car how am i actually preventing anyone form using it legitimately?? Answer I'm not.

You're preventing someone from standing in that spot. Which does not happen with a copied game(your copied car would be floating above that spot allowing another car under yours).

 

[Assassin Xaero]

why are people so hateful on people like jack? :-/

Because he seems to think that it is perfectly ok to steal stuff because he doesn't have the money to buy it, maybe? Has he tried to get a job? Probably not. Well, I can't afford to live on my own, drive a nice car, or have the insurance for a nice car. Using Jack's logic that means it is perfectly ok for me to go steal a nice car and have a nice house without paying for any of it...

piracy EXISTS and if we're not open to discussion about it and treat it like a virus it will be forever there to haunt us because it's always easiest to break a protection then to build one.

Yes, piracy exist, thanks for telling us something we already know. So does rape, murder, genocide, and many other things, but does that mean we have to be open to discussion about them? No.



When I pirated games, the majority of the time was for two reasons:
1. To try them because there was no demo or it was too short.
2. Because the game was old and I could no longer find it.

There is only one game I pirated that I have not bought (minus Starcraft because my friend made me pirate that and it sucked ass) and that is because I have not found anywhere to buy it from (yet).

 

[shadow skill]

Calling Piracy stealing is just hype for effect. I thought we'd sorted all this out. Can people be a bit more mature and stop doing this maybe?

Obviously not. If you walk into a book store pick up a book on the shelf and sit down and read the whole thing you are not a thief. Oh and for the record no content creator or distributor can be said to have the right to make a profit.

That's a bit of a false analogy. Piracy is more akin to walking into a bookstore, picking up a book, making a copy of each page, and then walking out.

Also, what? You're saying people who work hard making content don't have a right to be rewarded for their effort?

No it isn't a false analogy. The underlying point is that you enjoyed the product and did not buy it. By the time you have enjoyed the product all that needs to happen has already happened. The content provider hasn't lost the book have they?

No, the difference is, you gained a copy of that product without paying for it. While the content provider may still have the original, that does nothing for them. The content provider has received no compensation despite you having received something from them. This is wrong.

So you haven't received anything by reading the book? They were not compensated for your reading the book either.

 

[vallorn]

one of my friends pirates games then usually goes and buys them.
he recently did this with AC2 and went back the next day and traded it in because he hated the DRM.
so i Do support piracy, but only if the game is overpriced/has evil DRM.