Neither are Straw Man arguments, which is what this is. Piracy isn't theft, it's copyright infringement. You're arguing against an incorrect definition of what piracy is.RubyT said:
Piracy, simply put.
- Thread starter RubyT
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Why piracy (with a few exceptions) is not a justifiable practice, in simple terms...
1. Access to video, audio, textual and interactive media and software is a priveledge, not a right.
2. In spite of point 1, there are examples of all the above that are legally available for free.
3. Most of what is mentioned in point 1, will eventually depreciate in value and also be available 2nd hand at reduced prices.
So in short, piracy is generally an act of: misguided self entitlement, ignorance of alternatives and impatience.
1. Access to video, audio, textual and interactive media and software is a priveledge, not a right.
2. In spite of point 1, there are examples of all the above that are legally available for free.
3. Most of what is mentioned in point 1, will eventually depreciate in value and also be available 2nd hand at reduced prices.
So in short, piracy is generally an act of: misguided self entitlement, ignorance of alternatives and impatience.
It's even worse than that, taking a photo implies a loss in quality when copied.tlgAlaska said:
People who pirate games are always faced with the ethical issue of, "someone worked hard on this and I took it for free." Plus, it's a *luxury*. You don't need it. And it's natural for people who paid for the game and supported the developers to think unkindly of people who took without giving back. Sure, you can give back in praises and spreading the news of such a good (or not-so-good) game, but so can game reviews. And other people who *have* paid for the game can do just a good a job at spreading the word as a pirate can, making that whole aspect pretty moot.
As for the purely economic side...
The problem with piracy is that there are people who pirate who would otherwise get their games legally if pirating wasn't an option. They were a potential source of revenue, and if they turned to piracy, that might as well have been a loss in profits. We can't know how many of these people there are amongst the vast navy of scurvy pirates, but they exist, and they hurt the industry with their cruel, plunderin' ways.
Your argument is the equivalent of saying that it's ok to steal a farrari because you couldn't have afforded it anyway. Wrong is wrong, regardless of how much money you make, and piracy is wrong.RubyT said:
Access to culture is a priviledge, huh? Says who?fletch_talon said:
But I guess these are just the wrong forums for this discussion.
There's a poll about a dude with a crowbar being shot 10 times, 4 shots while he was already down, and 60% of the people said "totally justified".
This is a nice crowd here.
Piracy, simply put, taking something which has a perceived value without paying that price for it. Yeah, that doesn't sound like stealing at all. I mean, if I shoplift something from a store, they never had my money and weren't going to get it after all.
I tend to view people who pirate as very self-entitled, and here's me putting piracy very simply:
You live in a first world society, you have or had the money to afford the thing on which you pirate (console, tv, computer) which means that making the argument 'I don't have the money' is almost definitely bullshit. And even beyond that, at what point did entertainment become a right and not a privilege? I have a basic human right to life, liberty and security of person. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights I in fact have rights to a lot of things. You know what I don't have inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being?
The right to free videogames and television shows or movies.
Entertainment as created by artists is a privilege, and one that can and I believe should be taken away if you abuse the trust and work of the creator. If you pirate, whether it's copying someone's wallpaper from a website or downloading an entire season of Chuck, you are abusing the creator.
Seemples.
I tend to view people who pirate as very self-entitled, and here's me putting piracy very simply:
You live in a first world society, you have or had the money to afford the thing on which you pirate (console, tv, computer) which means that making the argument 'I don't have the money' is almost definitely bullshit. And even beyond that, at what point did entertainment become a right and not a privilege? I have a basic human right to life, liberty and security of person. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights I in fact have rights to a lot of things. You know what I don't have inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being?
The right to free videogames and television shows or movies.
Entertainment as created by artists is a privilege, and one that can and I believe should be taken away if you abuse the trust and work of the creator. If you pirate, whether it's copying someone's wallpaper from a website or downloading an entire season of Chuck, you are abusing the creator.
Seemples.
Let's say you have a house, and you only need 2 square meters to sleep on. Thanks to your logic, you don't mind it if I ask all the local homeless to fill up your house since you're not using the space yourself. Who are you helping keeping your house for yourself? Not you, because you only need the surface area of your bed to sleep in.
You mind if I fill up your fridge with unusable crap to? There might be some space left that you're not using, and who are you helping by keeping it empty for yourself?
Oh what's that? It's your house that you bought? How does this matter?
How bout this. Defending piracy is incredible arrogance. If everyone pirated games then there would be no games made as there would not be any money to support their development nor would there be any incentive to create them. This is irrefutable. When you pirate you are stating that others should pay so that you don't have to. You are stating that youre so great you deserve to have it for free and that others should indirectly subsidise your enjoyment. That is ridiculously arrogant.
The Search Bar - Simply use it.
This exact thread has been done countless times. Whether you classify it as theft or not, it's still illegal.
This exact thread has been done countless times. Whether you classify it as theft or not, it's still illegal.
Good points.Thedutchjelle said:
I'd say that all of the homeless people coming into my house does diminish my usage of this house, while me riding an empty house does not.
But yeah, if I had an unused room in my house, it would probably be a decent thing to let somebody sleep in it so they don't freeze in the winter. I'll admit I would probably not do this.
Well, if you take it away from me, I'm homeless. If you manage to download a copy of it through BitTorrent, I'd be okay with it. I'd even seed it for you!
So, according to you, a pirate that buys more games than someone who doesn't pirate ever, but still pirates a game every month or so is a lazy freeloaders?GrandmaFunk said:
There is no way to see this as a black or white topic, it can only be seen as a case by case topic.
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.
Now the people who claim that Piracy is wrong, answer me this:
Think of a game that is coming out in the future that you want to buy. Would you buy it if it cost you:
A) £60,000
B) Nothing.
In theory, we should have 0% answering 'Yes' to A, and 100% answering 'Yes' to B. Here, then, is where Piracy comes in.
Piracy is NOT "I don't want to pay so I'll steal". Piracy for the most part is "I don't think it is worth paying what they ask, so I'll steal."
How many of you who pirate mainstream games would do so if they were £30 new? How about £20? How about £10 and DRM free? What about £15 and all future DLC was free of charge for the rest of time?
That's how Piracy is fought. It's why iTunes and App stores charge about 70p an item. It's fuck-all money, so we don't really mind spending it. Investing 70p on a whim is easy, but investing £70 is not. Hence, the expensive stuff gets pirated.
In order to stop piracy, or at least curb it, you need to strike the balance. Most people who pirate won't do it if you offer them a fair and reasonable alternative. Major companies don't, by and large, do this.
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.
Now the people who claim that Piracy is wrong, answer me this:
Think of a game that is coming out in the future that you want to buy. Would you buy it if it cost you:
A) £60,000
B) Nothing.
In theory, we should have 0% answering 'Yes' to A, and 100% answering 'Yes' to B. Here, then, is where Piracy comes in.
Piracy is NOT "I don't want to pay so I'll steal". Piracy for the most part is "I don't think it is worth paying what they ask, so I'll steal."
How many of you who pirate mainstream games would do so if they were £30 new? How about £20? How about £10 and DRM free? What about £15 and all future DLC was free of charge for the rest of time?
That's how Piracy is fought. It's why iTunes and App stores charge about 70p an item. It's fuck-all money, so we don't really mind spending it. Investing 70p on a whim is easy, but investing £70 is not. Hence, the expensive stuff gets pirated.
In order to stop piracy, or at least curb it, you need to strike the balance. Most people who pirate won't do it if you offer them a fair and reasonable alternative. Major companies don't, by and large, do this.
I have a very simple response to most of the original post. Now I am not advocating piracy, because it is illegal, and to promote an illegal activity would violate my user agreement, in addition to being morally questionable and irresponsible.
However, if I were to pirate something that I simply could not acquire through honest means, I can safely say its not something I would be likely to feel a whole lot of remorse for. Mostly because the sorts of things that fall into the category of things I could not justly acquire, are likely products from long since disbanded, gutted, or bankrupt creators, or the faceless corporations who now own the rights but never plan to use them.
Pirating is easy to do, but not to justify, because in addition to being morally dubious, it is entirely against the law. One could argue from that alone that the act is unjust, though I would simply argue that pirating is gaining something you haven't earned, and is a fundamentally flawed practice that teaches a very bad habit.
To put simply I think you are incorrect, not just in your belief of piracy being justified, but in your analogy involving a bus.
Piracy is not like paying for part of the trip, and sticking around until your stop, it is more like using technology to conceal yourself so that you can ride without paying at all. I think you'll find when it is put that way, few will agree that it is just.
However, if I were to pirate something that I simply could not acquire through honest means, I can safely say its not something I would be likely to feel a whole lot of remorse for. Mostly because the sorts of things that fall into the category of things I could not justly acquire, are likely products from long since disbanded, gutted, or bankrupt creators, or the faceless corporations who now own the rights but never plan to use them.
Pirating is easy to do, but not to justify, because in addition to being morally dubious, it is entirely against the law. One could argue from that alone that the act is unjust, though I would simply argue that pirating is gaining something you haven't earned, and is a fundamentally flawed practice that teaches a very bad habit.
To put simply I think you are incorrect, not just in your belief of piracy being justified, but in your analogy involving a bus.
Piracy is not like paying for part of the trip, and sticking around until your stop, it is more like using technology to conceal yourself so that you can ride without paying at all. I think you'll find when it is put that way, few will agree that it is just.
Oh boy this bullshit again.RubyT said:
No, culture is all around us, you access it by walking down the street and interacting with the world we live in.
If, on the other hand you want access to the parts of culture created by the time, effort and money of others, then unless the creator decides that they can survive without being reimbursed for their work, yes its a priveledge, not a right.
As for the poll you mention. I doubt you or anyone here has ever had to shoot someone in order to prevent harm to another person. As such, nobody is qualified to make an objective judgement on what was or was not "justified".