Pirating and Games

[GrandmaFunk]

If thats not stealing, I'm not sure what is.

Obviously.

If I go to an art gallery and take a picture of a painting, then email it to you, when you view that picture...are you stealing?

 

[isometry]

Alright, this has been nagging me for a long time. Look, pirating is an issue. It damages the industry constantly, and causes more issues then "used gaming" and rentals ever will.

Got any decent references for this claim? To me it looks like used games on consoles cause the publishers to lose way more money than pirating on PC.

The reason we don't hear about it as much is just that picking on pirates is safer. Taking on the millions of gamers that by used games is dangerous, that's a huge group of customers that they can't afford to piss off or it will damage their reputation.

No, there's more to it than that.

Second hand sales are legally protected in most countries.
Game developers in Japan for instance have tried, and failed to prevent such sales through various arguments.

The government said they weren't allowed to.

It's usually called 'first sale doctrine'.

The problem is, fighting piracy means you have the law on your side.
Fighting second-hand sales, you are working against the legal system.
So you're not just risking customer goodwill, you're risking being sued by various groups. (or the government).

There is an easy way to get around the legal issue, which is to expand the idea of Day 1 DLC and online passes to be a $50 one-time use code for accessing the game. In other words, require all new games to be registered online using a unique code before they can be played on that console.

It's not any different than what they've been doing to PC gamers for years in the name of combating piracy, so there is no doubt that publishers could do this if they wanted to. The only reason they don't is because, as I said in the post you quoted, they are afraid of the backlash.

In other words, it's easy to pick on pirates because they are small potatoes, and as much as they'd like to stop used games sales, so many millions of gamers buy used that the publishers have to worry about getting a bad reputation. It seems likely that in the next console generation they will aim to destroy the used game market with the kind of DRM that PC games have had for years.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Alright, this has been nagging me for a long time. Look, pirating is an issue. It damages the industry constantly, and causes more issues then "used gaming" and rentals ever will.

Got any decent references for this claim? To me it looks like used games on consoles cause the publishers to lose way more money than pirating on PC.

The reason we don't hear about it as much is just that picking on pirates is safer. Taking on the millions of gamers that by used games is dangerous, that's a huge group of customers that they can't afford to piss off or it will damage their reputation.

No, there's more to it than that.

Second hand sales are legally protected in most countries.
Game developers in Japan for instance have tried, and failed to prevent such sales through various arguments.

The government said they weren't allowed to.

It's usually called 'first sale doctrine'.

The problem is, fighting piracy means you have the law on your side.
Fighting second-hand sales, you are working against the legal system.
So you're not just risking customer goodwill, you're risking being sued by various groups. (or the government).

There is an easy way to get around the legal issue, which is to expand the idea of Day 1 DLC and online passes to be a $50 one-time use code for accessing the game. In other words, require all new games to be registered online using a unique code before they can be played on that console.

It's not any different than what they've been doing to PC gamers for years in the name of combating piracy, so there is no doubt that publishers could do this if they wanted to. The only reason they don't is because, as I said in the post you quoted, they are afraid of the backlash.

In other words, it's easy to pick on pirates because they are small potatoes, and as much as they'd like to stop used games sales, so many millions of gamers buy used that the publishers have to worry about getting a bad reputation. It seems likely that in the next console generation they will aim to destroy the used game market with the kind of DRM that PC games have had for years.

Good point. It always did rather irk me that they even get away with that on PC...

Were it any other product it'd never be accepted. Not just because they prevent second-hand sales, but also because there's essentially no right of return. No recourse to basic consumer protection laws (such as fitness for purpose, false advertising, merchantability and so on.)

You can be sold a PC game with no guarantee it will work, no right to return it, and basically none of the legal protections that are taken for granted for just about anything else. (Even things like DVD's and music retain more consumer rights.)

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

Alright, this has been nagging me for a long time. Look, pirating is an issue. It damages the industry constantly, and causes more issues then "used gaming" and rentals ever will.

Fallacy No. 1.

The problem is this, pirating is stealing, and yet there is a whole market focused on stealing products from people who spend there who lives creating a product that people like.

Fallacy No. 2.

This isn't rocket science, you treat developers and publishers badly by stealing their stuff, they are going to react. Originally they put restrictions on games to counter this, DRMs are a good example of this. And people ***** about it. There is a reason they do DRMs, to stop illegal activity. Yes, its inconvenient, but not to much of a degree. In all honesty, I wouldn't be surprised that many of the people who complain about DRMs are doing so because it stops or slows down their ability to pirate. The only real complaint I've seen that is legitimate is the people who lack internet connection, so they cannot run a game the requires internet. Its unfortunate for them, but do you know who they should blame, the pirates.

Fallacy No. 3. Yes, the whole paragraph.

And you know what, I couldn't be arsed going through the rest of the post, considering the "points" you've already made have already broken your argument. I shall point out what's wrong with them now, and dazzle you all with my incredible intellect and, probable, good looks (or horribly embarrass myself by completely missing the point).

Fallacy No. 1: Assuming that pirates are denying companies money. This relates to F2 really, but I'll try point out my perspective on this as best I can without resorting to explaining my point on the second one. You argue that pirates, by not paying, are making devs and publishers lose money. In order to follow that logic you'd have to assume you mean that the pirates would be consumers if they were incapable of pirating. Now, this is a pretty difficult point to argue for, because it's really impossible to judge whether that's the case. Now, I will conceit that profits would rise, but I'm guessing not all that significantly. Someone who pirates either can't pay for the product, or doesn't want to. Out of those who simply don't want to, we can assume that's because they either don't believe the game's worth paying for, that they inherently deserve it for free (i.e: a thief mentality) or are too lazy to buy it. The last group is the only one I can see buying the product if incapable of pirating it, and I doubt that they're the majority.

Fallacy No. 2: Quite simply, piracy isn't stealing. It's copyright infringement, as many on this forum have probably already pointed out.
The definition of "stealing" (from Google):
Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it: "thieves stole her bicycle".
Pirates don't take anything, they copy it. And yes, there is a visible difference, mainly in the fact that the victim isn't unquestionably losing something.

Fallacy No. 3: Assuming that punishing everyone is a justified means to stop crime. It's similar to a curfew mentality, and it's completely unfair and unjustified. Not only does always-online DRM restrict consumers from less-developed areas of the world from playing or purchasing products they enjoy, but it also accomplishes absolutely nothing when it comes to piracy prevention. Pirates will simply (and often quickly) find a way around it, leaving just the honest customer with the consequences. Also, accusing anyone who complains about it of simply being butt-hurt because we can't pirate is rather pathetic.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

PIRACY IS BAD, ABLARYBLARGYBLARGARG.

*looks at topic title*

/headdesk + facepalm x 10 000

OH LOOK. IT'S THAT THREAD AGAIN.

First off, Search bar. Use it. I don't care how suddenly peeved you are with the issue of piracy and how much you'd like to make your voice be heard, but the fact is that there isn't anything that hasn't been said about the matter already. Lemme bullet-point that out for ya:

- piracy is motivated by sales. Games are becoming ungodly expensive to make for AAA publishers, and they *have* to ensure that they get some returning revenues. DRM is to be included in the same box as Day One DLC or on-disc DLC. Your average AAA publisher will do everything in its power to ensure that sales are maintained and that the loss to pirates remains negligible. In order to *make* a sixty-million dollar megaproject requiring years of effort and a team numbering in the hundreds, money is required. Anything that hurts the cash flow becomes the project's death knell.

- piracy CANNOT be stopped, by any means whatsoever. What is made by human hands can always be unmade by human hands. No matter if Ubisoft takes to using always-on Internet DRM, there's always some genius who's going to figure out how to emulate the authentication server for Assassin's Creed II's PC version on Hamachi or Tunngle. Giving incentive to purchasers only goes so far, as the cherry on the sundae you're providing isn't part of the core experience. Some people just won't care about your preorder bonus weapon or map or whatever else!

If one leak is plugged, another one forms. You've probably noticed how even after Napster was taken down, the sharing of entire discographies didn't stop. I don't care if they use COICA or SOPA as a means to prevent access to these sites, the fact remains that these bills only apply within American jurisdiction. Being Canadian, it won't stop me from accessing Demonoid in any way whatsoever. Even if it *did*, all I have to do is memorize the blocked site's IP address and type it in manually. Voilà, problem solved.

- piracy has always existed. It's not out of control, it isn't rampant, and it isn't burning through EA, Ubisoft or any of the Hollywood studios' pockets, like they'd like us to believe. Before the Internet, people shared stuff on floppy discs. We heard the same tired discourse from the publishers and majors. "Don't copy that floppy!" they'd say, as though politely asking the pirates with the means to do so would work. Even with the inclusion of primitive DRM like code wheels, there was always a good Samaritan out there with a complete online, document-based grid translation of that wheel. You could even print out copies of the code wheel on cardboard if you needed to, and make yourself one!

- piracy WILL always exist. I don't care if I wake up one day to realize that the Internet has turned into some sort of virtual manifestation of Ingsoc; there will ALWAYS be Intranet servers, separate BBSes, IRC channels and a treasure trove's worth of developing technologies and counter-techs designed to facilitate the free and illegal distribution of data.

In short, nothing can be done. Nothing COULD possibly be done to stop piracy, since you'd have to perform some sort of pinpoint trepanation on the brains of every last one of us. You'd have to excise the very idea of thievery out of our minds, which is plainly impossible. At least, not without some crazy Sci-Fi tech and a complete disregard for laws that enforce and protect personal liberties. Thievery feeds on the cracks of the supply-and-demand system, which itself rests on the fact that developers might not always invest their millions into worthwhile projects.

- piracy is not the Devil. Let's be honest here, we've all cracked games once before. We've all been starved students scraping our money for textbooks and yet still hungrily eyeing the latest releases. I'm at a point in my life where I don't really need to worry about my day-to-day finances, but any sixty bucks I plop on a game has to be worth it. I've known Hungry Cow years where the only way I could conceivably get my fix was by turning to peer-to-peer sites. Did I indulge in that because I consciously knew I was hurting the developers? Of course not. I felt like an ass on most occasions for doing so.

You have to remember that gaming isn't solely a First World activity. Plenty of people play games in countries that have close to no access to the open market. Plenty of people pirate games because it's the only damn way they can play, after laying down several years' worth of their undervalued cash for a halfway-decent rig or a previous-generation system.

So please, do understand that you're not stating anything new. The PC platform isn't quite so dead yet and there's still plenty of people willing and able to pay for their entertainment with cold, hard cash. The only viable options the publishers have are to release content that's actually worth the damned sixty bucks, or pare down their price point to something more manageable, in the hopes that this will make the product more attractive and could produce more sales.

In short:

An exquisite nugget of reasoning and logic.

I, sir, may very well be in love. Might I have your spawn?

 

[teebeeohh]

no, most people bitching about DRM are not pirates because people don't crack their own games anymore, they wait for others to do it. you average pirate probably couldn't disable ubisofts bullshit DRM but there are those who can and they will just open the game for the challenge of it.

 

[Sixcess]

If piracy was as big a problem as some are saying then CD Projekt would be out of business. Good Old Games would be out of business. Frictional Games would be out of business. Steam would be out of business.

Piracy is a problem, but the kind of hysterical diatribes we've seen from Ubisoft in the last two days isn't helping. It's their loss. If the big names withdraw from the PC market then smaller names will rush to fill that gap, because PC gamers are still proven to support good games from developers and publishers who don't treat them as criminals.

 

[DEAD34345]

Ok, first of all, PIRACY IS NOT STEALING. Copying something without permission is not stealing in any sense of the word.

Illegal? Sure.
Wrong? Probably.
Stealing? No.

Secondly, DRM does not affect pirates (or at least it doesn't affect them negatively...). No matter how good the DRM is every game is still cracked within a week of release, most games are cracked on the release day, and some games are cracked before they're released. It only hinders paying customers, and I know more than one person who has chosen to pirate a game to avoid the obnoxious DRM. Some of those people have bought the game and then pirated it afterwards because the paid-for version is inferior. How messed up is that?

 

[Summoner Rezialn Weisritter]

Cool thread. I'm going to say that only thing that needs to be said on this issue.

All anti-piracy software can be cracked.

It will more than likely be cracked by pirates.

The pirated version becomes much more convenient than the version that has anti-piracy features.

The consumer is inconvenienced by the anti-piracy software. The pirate is not.

That is why anti-piracy software hurts the consumer, and not the pirate. No, anti-piracy software is not justified. No, piracy itself is not justified. Yelling about how bad piracy is for the industry isn't going to change anything.

The only thing that you, personally, can do to have any impact on the piracy issue is to not pirate games yourself.

 

[OriginalLadders]

I'm not proud of it, but I stopped reading after:

pirating is stealing

I'm utterly sick of this fallacy. Stealing is defined in law as depriving another person (or an organisation) of their property. Piracy is not stealing as the owners do not lose the original and they are not entitled to your money if you would never have bought it in the first place. Say what you will about piracy, but to call it stealing is just wrong.

I should, at this point, make it perfectly clear that I am by no means in favour of game piracy; I will always buy the games I want. Usually used.

 

[ElPatron]

Sure it is. Copy-write infringement is completely stealing. That is why it is both illegal and warrants jail time for doing so. Not to mention people should morally have a problem with it. They are taking something that is someone else's, which they have worked hard a long to create, and are using it without they consent. If thats not stealing, I'm not sure what is.

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



Pirates try really hard to defend their doings for some reason. I am beginning to think that people who constantly attack them with morals has something to hide too.

I'm not proud of it, but I stopped reading after:

pirating is stealing

I'm utterly sick of this fallacy. Stealing is defined in law as depriving another person (or an organisation) of their property. Piracy is not stealing as the owners do not lose the original and they are not entitled to your money if you would never have bought it in the first place. Say what you will about piracy, but to call it stealing is just wrong.

I should, at this point, make it perfectly clear that I am by no means in favour of game piracy; I will always buy the games I want. Usually used.

Exactly.

If piracy consists on the leeching of intellectual property without paying royalties to it's owner, then any kind of used sale is stealing too!

 

[KindlySpastic]

The problem is this, pirating is stealing,

Yes pirating invovles stealing but only when we are talking about the stuff going on on the high seas. Software piracy on the other hand is all about copyright infringement which is in fact not stealing at all.

Sure it is. Copy-write infringement is completely stealing. That is why it is both illegal and warrants jail time for doing so. Not to mention people should morally have a problem with it. They are taking something that is someone else's, which they have worked hard a long to create, and are using it without they consent. If thats not stealing, I'm not sure what is.

By that logic, breaking and entering is obviously murder because they both warrant jail time. Pretty bizarre reasoning, no?

The difference between stealing and software piracy is that one removes the item from the rightful owner, while the other one illicitly copies the item.

There's a big difference in damage incurred there, since I can easily sell my game even if someone ends up pirating it. The same thing doesn't apply to stealing something like a steak.

 

[vrbtny]

PIRACY IS BAD, ABLARYBLARGYBLARGARG.

*looks at topic title*

/headdesk + facepalm x 10 000

OH LOOK. IT'S THAT THREAD AGAIN.

Would you like to use this handy gif that I made?

 

[Bad Jim]

Copy-write infringement is completely stealing. That is why it is both illegal and warrants jail time for doing so.

Just because they are illegal does not mean they are the same. Murder isn't theft. Rape isn't theft. Treason isn't theft. And neither is copyright infringement.

Let's spell that correctly, in case you are confused. Copy Right. The right to copy. More accurately, restriction of the right to copy. If I buy a game, I probably cannot arbitrarily make copies. But if I do it anyway, I am not stealing, because the game is mine, I bought it.

Common property and copyright are two different crimes, established by different laws, and this is true in every country. You will never be charged with copyright infringement for stealing a car, and you will never be charged with theft for illegal copying, even if you make millions before the police catch on. These laws only interact when the right to copy itself is traded, and theft is rarely involved, because it is hard to steal a legal monopoly.

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

Frankly, the publishers' excuse that it's piracy that is causing them to lose interest in PC gaming is just nonsense. It's really a question of money and time. Why spend it doing more than just a crappy console port when you can sink those developers into developing [Same Console Game But With +1 On Name] for next year?

You must not have been playing games for very long. That old same old game but with a +1 thing has been going on with both the PC and consoles for the over fifteen years. Sometimes however instead of putting a +1 they will change the name. Its still the same old game but they decided to spice it up a bit.

Oh really? Why do you hate steam? I only ask because I work with someone who reckons Steam is the best thing that's ever happened...

I dont like the attidute or customer service of the people who run it. Their whole you dont own this game and we can ban you whenever we want for whatever reason we feel like. Oh and if you have a problem with that then go fuck yourself, but first create a new account and buy all your games again.

But enough of that its probably not a good conversation for me to get into. I shall simply leave it at I used steam before and they told me to go fuck myself for no reason at all and banned my account.

Yeah I've heard horror stories about people getting banned from Steam for their computers having "suspicious" programs on them and getting their account banned and losing some 200+ games because of something that is actually a legitimate program on their computer that Steam just "thought" was illegal stuff

 

[m3nt1a]

I find this thread about as educational and entertaining as two cats fighting over a dead bug, which is to say I find it VERY entertaining but not very educational.

I just wanted to post to say that it's funny how the best argument some people have against piracy is that it's "wrong" aka "I DONT LIKE IT".

 

[blackdwarf]

if you want to do something against pirating, then that is great! BUT it must in no way have any effect on players who bought the game legit. this is indeed a really hard to do, but you will get much happier costumers for it. one way is to give players that bought the game some extra content. like what happened in batman with the catwoman DLC. you could finish the game without it and still have a great time. if you bought the game new in the store, you got a code for the DLC to download it free. if you bougth it secondhanded, you had to pay a price for that content, that isn't needed to fully enjoy the game. some people will complain that that is first-day DLC and that it is cut from the game, but that is wrong. if you bought the game legit then you would have the content.

this way you are not annoying people who bought it legit. pirates and people who bought secondhanded will still have something to be desired (but not needed), so that the company still can make some money from it.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Has anyone noticed how the OP's been rather silent?

"Oshit, I just read the last couple news reports on Ubisoft! Ocrap, that Eurotrash guy from the I Am Alive production team bashed PC gamers for being freaking pirates! Ohgod, Ubisoft is PULLING AWAY FROM THE PC GAMES MARKET! Chaos in the streets! WHAT A WOILD, WHAT A WOILD!"

In other words, smells like a troll. Or someone who's understood just how ridiculous his claims were.