On the morality of copyright.

[incal11]

if it was on something like GoG or even Steam than you should always buy it, as you're supporting that developer and publisher. If you have the opportunity to buy it, you should.

On the rest of your post we agree, but the point is if you see a 10+ years old game both as an abandonware and on Gog (made more compatible for a price) you should not be forced to pay Gog if you can use the free version. I explain why shorter copyrights would be a good thing, what do you have to say about the arguments in my original post ?

File sharing is legal in Canada. Yay!

Yay for Canada

I can't imagine anything that would save us from problems with sharing that doesn't bomb us back ten centuries.

Well, let's hope the guys hiding behind the corporate veil won't use the threat of nuclear war to keep us from a larger access to ideas and culture.

your not wanting to disucse the morality, you want to say why it is a good thing and as you put it a human right to steal other peoples work. That isnt a discusion that is you trying to hide form the wrath of moderators.

I know that I'm walking a fine line, and that my opinion isn't terribly popular here. I realise my intention wasn't clear enough so I updated the title.
The point is, if copyright was a lot shorter your access to games and other media would be considerably larger, and wouldn't that be a good thing ? Being the "down to earth" type you will probably refuse to consider the possibility under the pretense that it will "never ever happen", still I ask you to make the effort

No time right now, but I will answer the longer posts later today.

 

[linwolf]

Two cases were I don't think piracy is bad, abandonware and if the copyright holder don't releases the product in you country.
In all other cases you cannot find any arguments for piracy that I would find valid.

 

[Lavi]

This

 

[Modus Operandi]

Piracy isn't stealing; thus should be legal in all respects.

So every action that isn't stealing is legal? WTF?

But, ironically, in some respects, it is. Nobody can sue you for downloading an MP3 off a warez site. You could paint a poster saying you did it, and go out into the street, waving your USB thumbdrive containing the MP3 and no authority could do anything about it whatsoever as long as you don't give the MP3 to anyone else ("downloading is stealing", legally speaking, is 100% bullshit and chips, look it up). BUT! If you have the original CD, and make an MP3 copy, you can be prosecuted for that. So I don't really see how anyone can attempt to argue that copyright laws don't need a major overhaul.

 

[Kair]

Information is free. The sharing of information is the sole reason humans still exist on the planet. The Neanderthals became extinct largely because they did not transfer information.

Information can be distributed almost without effort, but can be to great use. To put a limit on information for profit is because of this wrong.

If it is impossible to have free information in a capitalist society, then that is just one more reason to disassemble it.

 

[Wardnath]

I CALLED IT.

Which reminds me; I really need to get a credit/debit card in a while so I can actually pay for the bloody things. Nearly $7,000 in the bank and I can't use one cent online.

Quite the pain, really.

Oh yeah, and if I find out that all the copies of a game/movie/album are gone, I'm keeping the download. (this part cut out to avoid banhammer)

 

[Jasper Jeffs]

I don't really care much about piracy, if people do it because they like free stuff, then go for it. If people don't do it for their own reasons, then whatever. I know, personally, if I was a musician or a film maker I'd be happy that people were listening/watching my stuff, because I wouldn't do those things for the money to begin with. My friends pirate stuff that, if they didn't download, they wouldn't buy anyway. That of course means they think they're entitled to a free copy of anything they want, which they're not, but fuck it.

*insert give a fuck truck macro here*

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

Most of us have been raised to believe that "pirating" is always harmfull and evil, and that anyone questioning this is no better than a deluded pot smoker. I'm calling this general attitude no less than a misguided belief, so strongly (and tragically) rooted in our culture that it's difficult to talk about the act of sharing freely.
The history of copyright started with the printing of books, and the internet is simply the next step. You could say that the more easily an idea is shared, the more restrictive copyrights laws needs to be.

In order to pirate a book, I would need to re-print it page for page. Fuck that, go buy your own. In order to pirate a file, I need to press a button. The internet may be "The next step" but it is still copyrighted information and guarded by law.

There is no reason to pirate.

You don't wanna buy it? Fine, don't own it.

Don't have the money? Get a job and priorities, then vuy it when you can.

Don't feel like paying for a game? Good. Don't play them.

I don't care what a pirate's excuse for piracy is. The answer will always be "Shut up, you're lazy, you just don't want to pay for things, you think you shouldn't have to" The world don't spin that way

 

[HentMas]

Regarding Videogames

There Exist a site where you can download such old games that actually cant be found any other way, and there is also a comprehensible listing with all the info you need, box fotos, disc fotos, manuals and all that good stuff...

thing is, its not "Illegal" because they are games outside of the protection of the "ESA" (Entertainment Software Asociation, a bunch of producer like LucasArts, Interplay, nintendo and such are in) and are considered "fair play" to be distributed as "Abandonware" (meaning that the producer has "abandoned" the game, he no longer thinks on or has not made profit from that game for over "so many years" or the "franchize" of the game no longer runs and no sequel or material originating from that game is "feasible" in the near future)

in this site, there are A LOT of games listed, from many different producers, and they can all be played by the "DOSbox" emulator which is also available to download in other places and is becomming the "base" for selling old games (if you find a game that you cant get for free and still want to buy it, this is the tool to play it)

the link to the site is "www.abandonia.com" and i think you will find any game you could think of

note that the games that are protected by the "ESA" will not be available to download and it will be listed as such

happy old game hunting!!

 

[incal11]

Cutting this post into one for those who did not read my first post, and then one for those who (apparently) read it.
Starting with the ones who did not read it

You are being selfish and greedy and want to steal other people's work, got it.

If you actually read my post you would know that I explain why in some case it is not stealing, or rather should not be seen as stealing, and that you were manipulated since your birth to be fanatically convinced that "if it is copyrighted it shall be paid for". When the way copyright is enforced is detrimental to our culture and even our technological progress.

Piracy isn't stealing, no, but it is still copyright infringement which, like it or not, is still illegal.

My opinion is more nuanced than that, it is wrong that it is considered stealing in some (but not all) cases. I cover the details in the other posts.

Two cases were I don't think piracy is bad, abandonware and if the copyright holder don't releases the product in you country.
In all other cases you cannot find any arguments for piracy that I would find valid.

That is fine, but it does not solve the fact that copyrights are way too long.

happy old game hunting!!

I apreciate the tip even though I am far from being a beginner, knew about abandonia, and feel a little bit looked down on and insulted by your post.
You should re-read my OP, all old games and future old games should be freely available like on abandonia, and I explain why.

 

[incal11]

If you can buy it(you have the money, its sold near you, ect) - you can buy it, stop being a prick. Either buy it, or go without.

I agree with your post to a point, if the game is recent and/or you know that part of your money will reach the authors and original publishers it's best to pay. Also if you want something physical (box and all) it is logical to pay at least for those who made and handled the material.
Beyond that is where I think the whole copyright thing, that I argue in my OP is a harmfull ploy forcefuly implanted in our culture, is being abusive.
Despite the evidences I found I still assume I might be wrong, this is why I made a thread to talk about it.

1) Sharing and stealing are antonyms. Regardless of their moral aspects, the two actions are fundamentally opposite. It's like calling chastity belts "rape".

Blurring the meanings of these words is part of the large campain of stigmatisation made by the publishers. As you can see, I only had to put "sharing" in the title for people to come saying "OMG Pirate !".

2) Personal profit and widespread development in any creative field are also opposites. (...) copyright laws should be about balancing the interests of the individual with the interests of others.

I'd like to do away with the whole copyright thing altogether, but I agree, though as it is now copyright is anything but balanced.
You have a good example of this :

we have books that are easily over 100 or even 200 years old and are still copyrighted.

My question is why you think games should be different from other forms of media when it comes to copyright.

No I don't think they should be treated differently, in fact I would like the copyrights to be shorter for everything, but I feared that would be asking for too much at once and this is a gaming forum after all.

How old does a game need to be before you feel you're entitled to enjoy it for free, in order to experience culture?

Being a gamer, I picked 10 years since it is (or was) about the time it took for a game to be forgotten by it's publisher, when it's not the publisher itself that disappears. Of course this may need to be longer... or shorter.

Unfortunately, you kind of devolved into just saying you should be able to pirate (or share, in your terminology) games.

I tried to avoid "devolving" as you say, sharing isn't necessarily "pirating" , as said earlier the two words are opposite. I'll see how I can reword my post, if you have more interesting insights please share them

when I was younger, they taught me that "Sharing was caring", but now they say it's wrong.

Sharing is caring, many pieces of art disappeared (like most of the very first movies) because noone cared at the time.

There is loads of games you can play for free(...) On the other end of spectrum you have games that were done for living.

Freewares rarely equals games made for a living, and if the game is really good unless you are insensible you will want to pay for it, I know I do.

The problem with it is that society is not exactly ready for such model in wide scale. Too many people would and will abuse it to get 'stuff for free'. Until the mentality among the end-users changes don't expect the creators to go all out for it.

That is a constant through history, people will always want stuff for free. However I tend to have a little bit of faith in the rest of humanity, if a correct way to reward good artists could be made available to the people it could be more profitable to good artists than the current system, despite most still "abusing" it.
Also it would work as a way of selection, the ones that suck get no money, period.

the purchase or pirating of a game should come down to "Did the developers earn my hard-earned cash?"

Exactly, but don't worry, I try to avoid pirating recent indie games (the kittens are tasty though ).

 

[incal11]

SNIP

Enjoy your perma-ban

I already made it clear that discussing the morality of sharing (or rather of copyright itself) is not against the rules, and was even expressly permited by a few mods.
Instead of trying to sink this thread you could intelligently argue why you disagree.

Actually, I wonder why I didn't realise earlier, but the style of these posts and these "opinion" are a little too similar.
If I'm right you should be the one fearing perma-ban. Are you using your multiple accounts to troll and trick people into getting banned ?
Fat chance. This is my last answer to you, unless you start being creative.

 

[HentMas]

happy old game hunting!!

I apreciate the tip even though I am far from being a beginner, knew about abandonia, and feel a little bit looked down on and insulted by your post.
You should re-read my OP, all old games and future old games should be freely available like on abandonia, and I explain why.

heh, i dont see why you are "offended" i already explaine "why" the "ESA" is in place

look at Interplay! they are releasing their games on the XBOX arcade section, (Lost Vikings and such) obviously they cant allow for such games to be spreaded in the net

there are a lot of "old games" that are still being sold, like Duke Nukem 3d

and Lucas Arts is still running its old franchizes, obviously they have to keep their "Copyright" in case a "remake" or simmilar could appear

that´s what my post intended to say

and a lot of games that are currently "abandoned" sometimes get again inside the ESA protection because they start planning for sequels or remakes, there are hundreds if not thoudsands of free abandoned games, and if you "want" one that is "protected" then that means the "publisher" stills distributes the game and provides support for it, which should obviously mean that they deserve to get paid

if DN:3d crashes you can get support from 3d realms, if "high seas trader" crashes you are on your own, is that so hard to get?

now, let me go to your "arguments"

Principal arguments:
-sharing still is very usefull, and counterbalance centralized media that would have you concentrate on a small number of work.

thats true! but it also means that the publishers would get nothing for their work, if i buy 1 game and "share" it with 100 other people, no matter how "spreading" the media will help, i´m taking away "profits" from a company by probiding a product they "worked" to create, and are still working to support and madtain certain "standard" on their work (if i didnt get that right, please elaborate, it sounds kind of vague or something got lost on translation)

-Publishers get you to concentrate on a small number of works by stigmatizing file sharing, thus limiting your own ability to create.

thats not true, how in the gods name does that mean "limiting your ability to create"??? you can find mods and other media based on a single product EVERYWHERE, granted people cant sell it, because its based on someone elses work!, people can always "make their own engine and their own game" but if they create content based on someone else´s work and dont give them credit (and i mean proper credit) then they are stealing their work!, lets say i get "the mona lisa" and i deside to paint a mustache on her face, its something new!! i created it! but its not mine!!!, in videogames, hell "Valve" sells its engine so people can make their own games, and its "relativelly" cheap, if anything, the "ability to create" is increasing, by allowing more access to the "tools" needed to create.

-Freer access to more media would allow more artists to rise from their state of passive consumers, making for a richer culture, and an even more profitable entertainment market.

again a bunch of bollocks, if someone wants to really make a game, people will make a game, no matter how, its the engine?? they can create their own, its the code? they can code for themselves, they dont know how??, well, there are already "pre made" engines that they can BUY, but why would they "steal" someone elses work to profit from it?? thats just wrong.

-Sharing should be a basic human right.

that sounds a hell lot like communism

lets see, you are in class and you get "10" answers right from an exam, and your best friend gets a ridiculous "0"

why dont you "share" with your friend one halve of your rightly answered questios so you both get a more "adequate" grade?? that way you both would have "5" answers right

well, if you busted your ass to work for that "10" you definitelly want to have that "10" why would you give more points to a guy who obviously doesnt care enough to study???


what i hear you say is that you have no respect for the work of "legitimate" people that actually made an "effort" to create something, but you want it for "free" because its "there" and making your own would be too much effort...

thats just "lazy" and "stealing".

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

-SNIP-

So wait...

1) Three people have the same opinion, so we MUST know each other and we MUST not have ready the first post? What ever happened to opinions?

2) I do like how you changed your ENTIRE post and I'm no longer quoted in it...

3) "If you actually read my post you would know that I explain why in some case it is not stealing, or rather should not be seen as stealing"

Here's the meat... Are you getting the product? YES! Are you paying for it? NO! Did the develloper say you can take it without paying? They didn't?

You're stealing!

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

SNIP

Enjoy your perma-ban

I already made it clear that discussing the morality of sharing (or rather of copyright itself) is not against the rules, and was even expressly permited by a few mods.
Instead of trying to sink this thread you could intelligently argue why you disagree.

Actually, I wonder why I didn't realise earlier, but the style of these posts and these "opinion" are a little too similar.
If I'm right you should be the one fearing perma-ban. Are you using your multiple accounts to troll and trick people into getting banned ?
Fat chance. This is my last answer to you, unless you start being creative.

Multiple accounts? Online at the same time? You realize she'd need to sit next to two computers, because logging out of the escapist in ONE window logs you out of it in the OTHER window. Now if you can, I'd see if you can ask the mods to check our IP addresses. One is Australian, the other is Canadian. Do not accuse without proof

 

[Dags90]

I've never really heard a good justification for the time period extending pass the life of the copyright holder. I don't see why copyright needs to be protected for that long, it seems excessive (50-70 years past creator death or 95 years after first publication). Patents don't last that long and the guiding principle is the same.

 

[Haukur Isleifsson]

I would argue that information should not be owned. Although I respect most attempts to limit the spreading of certain information, such as blueprints for a new revolutionary car or Passwords, I think that legally no information should be "owned". And I think that anything that is copyrighted is basically information or at least only valuable because of the information put into it. This applies to music, literature, pictures, films, inventions, trademarks and many many other things.

I also would like to add that I condemn any dishonest use of such information especially if it is done to make money. For example copying a picture and claiming to have made it yourself should be criminal.