Piracy, simply put.

[Alterego-X]

You're gaining off of someone else's purchase, taking away from the company that is selling the game all for self entertainment. Sure, it's not stealing in the traditional sense of taking someone else's car, but you are stealing a profit from the company that makes the games. You're hurting the company. You're hurting the people that buy the games who now end up getting the blunt end of the draconian DRM stick. You're stealing.

And when more and more people stop paying for it and freeloading, less and less of a profit is made.

Now you are mixing things. Previously, you were talking about FREELOADING, not taking away profits.

If you go along for a ride where you otherwise couldn't pay, you enjoy the benefits of freeloading.

If you deny profits that you would otherwise pay, you are actively causing harm

Well, seeing how me posting in a forum is completely unrelated to me stealing a game or a movie from off the internet, I'm gonna go ahead and say no, there isn't anything wrong with that. That makes not one ounce of sense.

The point is, that right now, you are freeloading. Not paying anyone, having free entertainment, instead of buying a game at the same time. you are hurting the gaming industry, if you are freeloading here instead of paying for their games.

 

[Alterego-X]

O.K., I pirate music, and I find arguments like these incredibly stupid.

I do it because I don't have money, not because I believe it isn't stealing.

Then the difference between you and those who rationalize piracy, is that you are actually amoral, while other pirates at least have a non-conventional moral system.

 

[Launcelot111]

if you are faced with a choice between going to a concert with friends and buying a video game, you might elect to download the video game for nothing. If the technology for pirating did not exist or your moral hardware was in better repair, you would have to prioritize differently. The fact that you spend all of your disposable income is irrelevant.

If you pirate video games or music, you are a thief. There is no moral justification for what you are doing.

Why not? What makes the act of spending my money on supporting artists, and then spending my remaining time with staring at a wall, so much more moral, than spending my money on supporting artists, and then also having some more fun with some products (that I might even decide to like so much to buy later whenever I can)?

This is an absurd argument. If the original version of something had some sort of improvements or advantages over the pirated version, then the original version is thus more valuable in an objective analysis. Regardless of whether these advantages exist, you choose the pirated version because the low price is more important to you than whatever advantages might come from the original copy. Once you have made that original judgment, why would you then go back and purchase the legal copy? Unless some new development made great changes to the legal edition, you are going against your own principles if you suggest that the pirated version would inspire you to buy the retail version

 

[Alterego-X]

Well, that's certainly not the reason they're giving for it. So either they're liars, or maybe they have a point. [http://tweakguides.com/Piracy_5.html]

Or maybe they are just wrong. If my guesses were true, those would still mean lower pc sales.


By the way, even if I'm wrong, and the PCs problems are actually caused by piracy, that would still not prove the tragedy of the commons is at effect about the whole industry, as it is described in the link I gave that it isn't.

If the tragedy only hurts the balance between the genres, but doesn't hurt the media in general, then it's the balance that needs to be fixed. But the generalization that "with piracy, no one will produce anything" generally isn't true.

 

[Alterego-X]

if you are faced with a choice between going to a concert with friends and buying a video game, you might elect to download the video game for nothing. If the technology for pirating did not exist or your moral hardware was in better repair, you would have to prioritize differently. The fact that you spend all of your disposable income is irrelevant.

If you pirate video games or music, you are a thief. There is no moral justification for what you are doing.

Why not? What makes the act of spending my money on supporting artists, and then spending my remaining time with staring at a wall, so much more moral, than spending my money on supporting artists, and then also having some more fun with some products (that I might even decide to like so much to buy later whenever I can)?

This is an absurd argument. If the original version of something had some sort of improvements or advantages over the pirated version, then the original version is thus more valuable in an objective analysis. Regardless of whether these advantages exist, you choose the pirated version because the low price is more important to you than whatever advantages might come from the original copy. Once you have made that original judgment, why would you then go back and purchase the legal copy? Unless some new development made great changes to the legal edition, you are going against your own principles if you suggest that the pirated version would inspire you to buy the retail version

The original scenario was about a character who wants to buy two things, but can't, so chooses one for buying, and pirates the other because hell, why not.

Many pirates are like that in real life, too. Not particularly bothered by breaching IP laws if they feel like, but generally appreciating legit copies as a superior version.

 

[Mjauv]

I'm not sure if the bus analogy has already been refuted but...

Driving and maintaining a bus isn't free. Gas costs money, the driver needs his wage and the bus needs service from time to time. If nobody pays to ride the bus, there really isn't a point in having a bus service in the first place.

Having that said... I agree piracy isn't theft and I strongly dislike the major publishers, DRM and pricing of new games. Still - copying games means that you do nothing to support all the hard working people who made the game and you do nothing to contribute to the chances that the game you enjoyed get a sequel or that the developers can keep producing quality games.

Pirating doesn't make you a theif but it damn sure makes you a dick.

 

[Radeonx]

Piracy's not stealing, because nothing is taken. They never had my money.

Walk up to an artist desperately selling his paintings and take some closeup photos of them. And then tell him these exact words.

Last time I checked EA, Activision, Ubisoft, and Valve are not desperately selling anything.
You're argument is completely invalid, because they are all still making massive profits, yet their games are consistently top pirated every year (Well, less so Valve, because they don't churn out games like the other 3, but whatever). Don't try to paint them as some small time company just barely getting by, because they aren't.

 

[Radeonx]

No, piracy is not stealing. This idea has pissed me off for a loooong time, ever since the DVD manufacturers started that fucking stupid "you wouldn't steal a car!" advert.

No, I wouldn't steal a car, because someone is going to notice their car is missing and REPORT IT AS STOLEN!

No, I wouldn't steal a handbag. Handbags, by and large, belong to people who cannot readily afford to replace its contents and would fuck up their lives.

No, I wouldn't steal a movie; it's rather hard to take something out of a store without getting caught.

But Pirating a movie? Downloading a Digital COPY of a film that was made by a company whose annual profits are more than what most people make in a lifetime, which neither destroys nor removes the original version from which the copy was made? I can do that.

Video Piracy is NOT stealing. Video Piracy is copying, and distributing those copies, without express permission of the copyright holder. If I'm supposed to feel bad about breaking the law, you first have to A) prove what I'm doing is wrong, and B) use the right fucking terminology.

Well, it's still illegal either way (Because of the whole copyright infringement thing), but that's just me being pedantic. Otherwise, I agree with you.

 

[Luciella]

i belive its more on the line of selling it and sharing it.

Selling the game or w/e else is indeed against the law and a punishable act since you are getting richer stealing the copyright and the works of others for your own benefit.

Sharing on the other hand it is not. You are not stealing anything you are not getting richer or more poor.
As a side example, i often share the games i buy with my frieds after i finish them and they do the same with me. Does that make me a pirate??
Well yeah i dont share them with thousands of people, but everyone shares the games with your group of friends, so if you sum it up its still thousands.

So instead of sharing in person, you do it bytes...is piracy?

I belive is not, but in general i normaly buy the games and i spend quite a lot on that, now that my income allows me to.
Yet when i was a kid and my parents didnt want to buy me games AND the games were so damn expensive for a kid, i had to buy pirate games for 10% of the total value of the original in order to HAVE games.

Now if a game doesnt look like somwthing worth paying for, i try it out from the sharing source.

For example, i bought Skyrim the minute it was in the store and have 83 hrs into it and counting.
While after playing bioshock i really dint have in my heart to buy bioshock 2, so i DL it and after 5 hrs never touched it again.

As for the price of games, i really cant argue with them, watching for 15 mins the credits gives the perfect idea why they are as expensive as they are.

Yet, not everyone can afford to buy every and each game of say -shooter season 2011- plus the big blockbusters uncharted 3, skyrim, Asassins Creed Revelations, etc etc in one go.

 

[Something Amyss]

Last time I checked EA, Activision, Ubisoft, and Valve are not desperately selling anything.
You're argument is completely invalid, because they are all still making massive profits, yet their games are consistently top pirated every year (Well, less so Valve, because they don't churn out games like the other 3, but whatever). Don't try to paint them as some small time company just barely getting by, because they aren't.

To be fair, Ubisoft is one of the companies taking a yearly operating loss.

Now, this could be multiple reasons, but just because they're not small time doesn't mean they don't take a hit. Sure, they're not desperate, but "massive profits?"

 

[Caverat]

Wow, a day and already 5 pages. Nice troll work.

To put piracy simply requires a lot less text though.

Piracy: Is illegal, and like many other crimes, people do it anyway. There will always be an excuse provided, and whatever particular excuse it is can simply be replaced with 'X' as they are all utterly irrelevant.

Ex: "I pirate software because of X", "I steal cars because of X", " I held up that 711 and shot the 17 year old clerk because of X"

X can be anything, but mostly it revolves around a few core elements.

1. The person committing the crime says they need it more than the other.

or

2. They say they can't afford it through legal means/need it to get something else legally.

or

3. They say the other party deserves to have this done because they're rich(or just have more than the offender)

Sometimes it sounds like they have a legitimate point, they are passionate and unflinching in their conviction. They don't, don't get suckered in. Few people want to see themselves as a bad person, so they will jump through all sorts of mental hoops to justify their actions so they can get what they want without them actually having to work through normal means.

You are better off avoiding anyone who makes those justification themed statements, as anyone who makes them is an utterly selfish and stupid individual. Not to mention the lacking in the character department to just own their actions.

 

[Radeonx]

Last time I checked EA, Activision, Ubisoft, and Valve are not desperately selling anything.
You're argument is completely invalid, because they are all still making massive profits, yet their games are consistently top pirated every year (Well, less so Valve, because they don't churn out games like the other 3, but whatever). Don't try to paint them as some small time company just barely getting by, because they aren't.

To be fair, Ubisoft is one of the companies taking a yearly operating loss.

Now, this could be multiple reasons, but just because they're not small time doesn't mean they don't take a hit. Sure, they're not desperate, but "massive profits?"

I suppose massive profits is a hyperbole, but the top pirated games are consistently selling very well, and a lot of companies are still making profits.

 

[Compatriot Block]

Piracy isn't like stealing a car because you couldn't afford it anyways.

To me, it seems closest to sneaking into a movie theater without buying a ticket, and sitting on the floor while watching the movie. Technically you aren't stopping anyone from taking the seats (the physical copies of this example), and they aren't technically losing a sale, but you are seeing a movie that you didn't pay for.

Can you justify that? Even if you use the same bullcrap argument that "it's not technically stealing," can you justify it morally?

And another thing. If you think that they are charging "ridiculous amounts" for the product in question, that does not justify pirating. If you don't agree with the price of something, they are not obligated to lower it to a price you feel is "more reasonable."

By the way, the company's financial status is also a bullcrap argument. Is there some line you can cross, where if you have a certain amount of money then you aren't allowed to make more at the previous rate? That's just a way of telling yourself "They have plenty of money, they won't miss just a little bit."

 

[spectrenihlus]

If they can't provide a better product than what the pirates have then they fail simply put. Like I said in another thread by going the legalistic route you do not solve the problem you are trying to kill a hydra by chopping off heads. The only way to kill piracy is to offer a better product and until you do so piracy will continue.

Considering that the value of a product is always some relationship between the utility of that product over the cost of that product, kindly explain to me how you expect companies to be able to offer a better product with a price point of zero.

I agree that legal methods are not enough to stop pirates. We need societal methods as well. First and foremost, we need people to stop blaming piracy on the companies that produce products. If the product isn't satisfactory, the answer is not to pirate the product, but rather is to not access or use the product. And until we as a society make it clear to our friends, families, and each other that piracy is not an acceptable answer, it will continue.

Do you realize how difficult it is sometimes to get a pirated copy to work. Take netflix for example for only 15 dollars a month I get almost infinite entertainment options that I can watch, I can watch these things on my phone, my tv and my computer. I don't have to download anything and wait hours until I can use it. On the other hand you have dvds with UNSKIPPPABLE FUCKING TRAILERS before I even get to the title menu. So let's see I play a movie right now on netflix ad free instantly or load up a dvd that may or may not work due to scratches then wade through about 30 minutes of ads before I can watch the film. Which is the superior system?

Considering I don't pirate, no, I don't know how difficult it is to get a pirated copy to work. Why you might I'm not going to question.

However, I fail to see how your little story answers my question. How does a company compete with a price point of zero in the long term? Your answer seems to be right now that pirate copies are difficult to get working. OR in otherwords, that there's a marketspace for legit firms so long as pirates are incompetent.

Well that's just great. And once they get competent?

Convenience, many times if I want to watch a specific movie I check if it is on netflix first. If it isn't i then go the arduous task of tracking down a working file of the film on the internet. Many links don't work and some sites link to virus laden crap that a layman would not want to deal with. However I still find it way easier then getting into a car spending gas to go to a dvd store in the hope that the product I want is even there at all. Then spend more gas traveling home putting after what might have been a fruitless attempt. If I do succeed in finding the right movie I then run the rare risk of the dvd being faulty and not working at all. Then after you have watched the dvd you put the dvd away and forget about it. YEars later you end up with a situation many have had with vhs tapes. You end up with a lot of vhs tapes and no way to play them because who the hell owns a vhs player anymore. So in that regard piracy is WAAAAAAAAAAY superior. Bussiness loved this model however because you end up paying multiple times for the same product over a lifetime. For you the consumer it sucks and until now there was no other way around it.

And you STILL haven't answered the question.

Once again, how are legit companies to compete with a zero price point once pirates become vaguely competent -- since you seem to be arguing they're incompetent now.

I dunno how does VALVE do it? There's your answer. I have literally bought almost a hundred games that I have yet to play through their sales simply because they are so cheap.

 

[Erana]

Piracy's not stealing, because nothing is taken.

You're right, it's not stealing. It's copyright infringement.

Which is illegal, just like Stealing.

So is murder.

Am I murderer for pirating? (hypothetical, I don't have the nerve to state I never committed copyright infringements like everyone else on the Escapist - because I sure did commit a lot of them back when we had music and VHS tapes)

Copyright infringement is not stealing, otherwise both would be the same crime and have the same sentences.

When you were a kid you noticed the fine print in the cover of your favourite album?

If you borrowed or lent someone a tap/CD/VHS you were committing copyright infringement. If you let your friends watch that film during a sleepover, you have committed copyright infringement.

Now, according to your logic you have been stealing.

Get off your moral high horse so I can steal it.

1. Did I say that piracy was just like stealing? No. I said that piracy is illegal, as is stealing.
I could say, "That fire hydrant is red, just like that cardinal over there" and it would not mean that I was saying that a fire hydrant and a bird are the same thing.

2. "Am I murderer for pirating?"
wat

3. Where have I been taking moral high ground? I haven't been saying, "Lol, I don't pirate, I'm better than everyone who pirates because they are dirty scoundrelssss!!!1!"
All I want is for people to stop all these "attempts at rationalizing piracy to myself by ranting at the internet" because no amount of justification is going to make piracy any more legal in most parts of the world. If someone goes about committing this illegal act for something on par with borrowing your cousins' dvd or the likes, then fine, whatever. It doesn't need to even be brought up.
But when people are going around, stealing the privilege to play many, many more games than one could ever reasonably expect to be lent or borrowed in a reasonable, real-world situation THEN waltz into whatever anonymous but public place they can find and insist that it is not only harmless, but is wholeheartedly justifiable that they have behaved this way is, at the very least, even if their outrageous theory of their act of piracy of many, many luxuries being 100% A-OK for their situation, really, really annoying.
The thing is, its not just annoying. Its the excuse big companies use to implement all sorts of really annoying DRM, and is just a huge "fuck you" to all the little guys out there who could really use the money, and whose games are stolen. Yes, there are some people and companies that have stated that they don't mind piracy, but taking their word for everyone in the business is, again, just grabbing for excuses to make someone feel better about their actions.
Ever had your work, ideas or art stolen? Let me tell you, it feels like crap, and hearing people trying to justify their blatant theft of your efforts instead of just ponying up to their own actions is even more frustrating.

I mean, what the Hell is up with this self-entitled attitude? How hard is it to find something to do that doesn't have the potential to ruin things who genuinely are entitled to the activity?

Most importantly, if what serial pirates are doing is justifiable, then why are there so many unprovoked rants about people trying to tell strangers about why they think piracy is OK in their personal situation?
Chances are, what they're doing is illegal in their country, end of story.
Morality, however, is not black and white, and they are arguing their position on the spectrum about their position. I'm pretty sure that most people here have already decided on where different sorts of piracy lie on the spectrum, so beyond stating what sort of activities you participate in, talk of what shade which piracy should be is about as productive as pokemon fans debating which generation is best.

Have I made myself clear?
Well, I suppose not; I've really been rambling on about the sentiments my original post already contained, though it really seems as though you stopped reading after the first six words, so here's the post again:

Piracy's not stealing, because nothing is taken.

You're right, it's not stealing. It's copyright infringement.

Which is illegal, just like Stealing.

And for Christ's sake, if you're a pirate, grow a proverbial pair and acknowledge that you're breaking the law.
End of story.
With piracy, its the bad side of a legal binary.

If you're doing something that isn't so morally unacceptable, like downloading a ROM of a game you've bought three times already including remakes, or there is something you simply can't do legally that improves the gaming experience (I bet tons of people downloaded illegal ROMs for Bottles's Revenge) OK, whatever, don't feel guilty and keep quiet about it.
One doing something like this IS still having a small negative effect in illegal duplication/distribution or whatever and adds to the big, scary numbers that companies like to throw around to justify bad DRM, just to be clear.


Going, "Oh, I'm not at fault for taking a luxury that I did not purchase!!!" is rediculous. TF2 is FREE now. NetHack has always been free. There are sooo many RPGs out there that are now free, including Daggerfall, and Steam and other online sellers have supersales regularly. If you're not using public library internet to write this post, then like Hell can you not afford $4.00 for Oblivion or even just one cent for the HIB.

I have a small library of games. I can count the games I own for any one of my consoles on one hand. Half my meager Steam game list was a gift or free, and none of them I spent more than $15 on. (In fact, I only spent $15 on two; one because a friend *really* wanted to play with me, and another because I was supporting one of my favorite indie devs.)
And you know what? I still haven't beaten most of them because I often don't have the time. If you're really going through all the games that are available on a meager budget, then Jesus Christ! You must game 24/7!

And sorry if I sound a bit sour here, but words being put in my mouth really, really really bothers me, and such a blatant lack of effort in perceiving your interlocutor's meaning is below the standard I hold the Escapist to, because it makes it really hard to have a respectful discussion.

 

[Del-Toro]

Piracy's not stealing, because nothing is taken. They never had my money. They make the case they'd gotten it without piracy, but since I've probably streamed more movies than my cumulative net worth, that argument is defeated by simple math.

An interesting arguement. I propose to you a test of that logic. Go to a movie theatre to see a film. However, do not purchase a ticket, instead, sneak in without paying. If you are not discovered, repeat as necessary until you are caught, and when the authorities arrive, use that same logic to escape punishment. Tell them that your being there doesn't actually deprive the theatre of the power to sell any tickets, doesn't cost them money, nor does it deprive the theatre or the studio of the use of film itself. When you get out of the slammer let me know how that was recieved.

The arguement that no money or product is lost due to piracy might work a little better if Gamestop were the ones putting DRM in games because as a retailer, "theft" as it relates to physical units would be a problem and that reasoning would hold water. However, it's publishers and developers that are responsible for this so it doesn't. If you consider their business model, and I should note that this is publishers and developers of all sizes and stripes, even (arguably especially) the smallest independants, it depends, for success, on people paying money to consume their product. An indie developer only makes any money if enough people pay however much the price is to download their game off of whatever online service, or other sales platform, it is offered on. Someone pirating it might not deprive them of a physical unit, reducing their supply without compensation, but the pile of money formed from the proceeds of each purchase probably won't grow as tall, and if enough people do that then he won't even break even when you consider the cost in time and labour, plus any monetary investment he had to make to get his project started and bring the final product to market.

I'm not going to go into the moral ramifications of this because if I said "and therefore media piracy is wrong" I would be acting rather hypocritically, but the arguement that it's not theft and doesn't damage profit bothers me immensly because it's poorly thought through in a world where digital distribution services like steam have gained such traction.