Poll: If you've ever downloaded something illegally, YOU are to blame for SOPA/PIPA.

[LilithSlave]

Burnie Burns made a horrible statement.

Power hungry corporations caused SOPA, not pirates. If anything, it's their greed and general backwardness that has encouraged piracy.

We shouldn't be blaming pirates, because pirates ten time more moral than the people who proposed this bill.

You know who I blame? Hyper entitled businesses and anyone who parades against piracy in ignorance like the OP. Anti-piracy is a cancer that slows the profits of the gaming industry and technological progress.

Yes, blame pirates who are makings things better and move forward technologically so we have more media and of a higher quality. Instead of huge corporations out to DESTROY EVERYTHING. SOPA gives the public just one more obvious taste of how the pirates are the good guys, and anti-pirates find some way to pin the wrongdoings of anti-pirates on them. Hey, if filesharers weren't so good, companies wouldn't have to stoop to being so bad!

 

[Pontifex]

I believe that this infographic puts it quite succinctly.

Hollywood would be trying to put something like SOPA/PIPA through Congress even if piracy didn't exist. The fundamental nature of the internet is rendering the content gatekeepers more and more obsolete, and they're trying everything within their power to fight against it.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

That comment won't grant him a very much popularity, but yes, everyone involved should take some fucking responsibility instead of pointing fingers so we can actually do something productive for once.

 

[RevRaptor]

pirates are to blame for anti pirate laws, well yea but only in a very small way. Most of these so called anti piracy measures target everyone with the end goal of putting more money in the fat cats pockets regardless of how it affects the end user. I would say anti piracy measures have caused more piracy than the other way round.
Back in the day I used to buy all my games from stores but now sadly I can't, the DRM on some games makes it impossible for me to play an unhacked version.

You get put in a position were you have to delete a program you use to play all your retro games to play a legit copy of a game or downland a hacked version and play it with out hassle, well it's a no brainer isn't it?

 

[Alterego-X]

Logical cause and effect, is no the same thing as moral responsibility, or blame.

Yeah, "if there would be no pirates, there would be no SOPA" that's a truism. Technically true, but doesn't tell anything about responsibility. It's just as true as "If there would be no Internet, there would be no SOPA", or "If there would be no USA, there would be no SOPA". These are true as well, but that doesn't mean that the internet is "to be blamed" for SOPA, or that the US as a country is "to be blamed" for SOPA.

Saying that piracy is "to be blamed" doesn't make any more sense than these.

 

[Zorg Machine]

Technically, yes. However, if a person steals stuff from a grocery store and because of that congress decides that there shouldn't be any stores, is the thief really responsible for the widespread starvation?

 

[mrhateful]

People people the nature of government is to gain more power, piracy is just an excuse.

 

[sniddy_v1legacy]

Just to stress a point probably made to death

If I've pirated something one of 2 things have happened...

It's crap and I deleted it - I have tried a full product at no cost to me, and have chosen not to support a developer

I will support future releases/this release - I stress this as I think there at least one/two artists or games I have come too late and brought the next few albums/games and not gone looking for bargain bucket or 2nd hand copies of older material....technically steeling the older stuff yes, but I think most artist/developers would, at a cost of zero, be happy to allow older material slide to gain 'day 1' support of future releases

 

[Thepistolman1234]

All the NO votes are just people who did download stuff, and want to make themselves feel better

 

[ablac]

Piracy caused the idea of laws to prevent piracy!? My god you're right! I never though of it that way before!!!! /( O.O)\

However, that's really NOT what you (or Burnie Burns) really is trying to say here is it?

Um yes it is. Thats exactly what they are trying to say. Its not easy to see a hidden meaning when there isnt one so i congratulate you on youre astounding achievement

This is simple, I didn't say there is a hidden meaning, I'm saying how ridiculous this post is. I doubt the OP is here saying "Oh wow you're right! Piracy DID cause SOPA/PIPA to exist! I must tell the world my discovery!"
NO
This is more of a "Hey world, you did wrong, I've done wrong, maybe we should stop pirating so we don't ruin what IS free and wonderful about the internet?!"

Because yes, I have torrented an anime series. I have downloaded an Mp3 file from google. I have copied movies from my friend's hard drive. And I'm sure 99% of people here have done something along the lines of those too. That's piracy, according to international copyright laws.

And yes, maybe we should stop doing these things before we loose everything through stupid bills such as ACTA/SOPA/PIPA...

And i quote "However, that's really NOT what you (or Burnie Burns) really is trying to say here is it?" that seems to me to show you believe there is some hidden meaning to what they are saying. Your response doesnt make any sense however your essentially saying 'yes ive pirated stuff but i dont see how that makes me a pirate'. The point is that without pirates these bills wouldnt have a leg to stand on and certainly wouldnt exist as they do. therefore you are at least partially responsible.

 

[ablac]

Perhaps I'm just paranoid about TEH GUBMINT TRY TO TAKE MAH FREEDOMZ, but it's pretty obvious that piracy is just a scapegoat. You can't tell me that piracy is actually hurting the film industry when it continues to make billions, or the game industry when MW3 made a higher profit than Avatar, and Minecraft, created by a man who condones piracy, also sold massively.

No, it's just like how the government used terrorism as an excuse to create the Patriot Act and the NDAA, they're using piracy as a scapegoat to create SOPA, PIPA and ACTA because they know that the internet is a wildcard and is a threat to the government and corporations and needs to be controlled.

The real people to blame are people like OP, who've made a mountain out of the molehill that is piracy. Because you believe and spread the lies that "piracy is stealing" and "piracy is ruining the entertainment industry", you're just giving more fuel to the creators of these legislations.

Could the government have blamed have blamed terrorism for their wars had there been no terrorism? no they couldnt have and the same goes for this if there wasnt any piracy then these bills wouldnt be so easy to justify. Also just because someone makes a lot of money from what they do doesnt mean they arent harmed by piracy. If millions of people play their games or watch their movies then they deserve the money because people should pay for what they use when the creator wishes to charge. A kick to the shins doesnt kill you but it still hurts you the same goes for lost sales due to piracy.

 

[ablac]

OK i fail to see the logic in telling people who make games, movies and music that we are justified to take what they make for free if they do not behave how they wish us to. If you do not like their business practises then that's fine very few people do and with good reason. If you do not like their games or their DRM then that is also fine. If they do not release a demo of their game and you are unsure of whether you want to buy it without a demo then that is also fine. If you cannot afford it then that's fine. The answer to these issues people who pirate have is to not buy the game. It is not difficult. If you do not wish to buy a game then do not buy it. No one is forcing you. However that does not mean you are morally able to then go and get the game anyway for free. To do so is to spit in the face of those who pay for the games and subsidies your enjoyment through their purchase. If you pirate a game then you are saying it is worth playing and if that is the case then you should buy the game.

I know that your behaviour (as in you specifically) may not have done any harm to anyone as you genuinely could not afford it. But can you claim this is true for all those whom pirate it? and if you bought the game (at the price it was new from when you obtained it) after playing the 'demo' or the full game then thats great. But can you seriously tell me that this is what all did? To claim so is ridiculous. Many people are not honest. These people are pirating games when they could and would buy them if they could not obtain them for free. I enjoy games, movies and music and i want as many people as possible to enjoy them but i do not like people claiming they deserve stuff for free. That is not the way the world works. I also believe that if you actually made an issue of your reasons to not buy a game rather than pirating then you could get many resolved as companies want to sell stuff to make money and so they will listen to you if oyu make a decent case which you could do. When you pirate you are saying to them that you would have bought it but didnt want to cause you could have gotten it for free. You throw all credibility out the window.

Oh and a company being big does not mean you have any more right to pirate their games than you would a small indie company just because they are less vulnerable. If they are successful then they deserve their success. If you do not like them then do not buy their game to show that they do not deserve success. Piracy is not justifiable and personal cases are not the rule. You may or may not have been the reason for SOPA and PIPA and ACTA but you sure as hell made them stand better under scrutiny. They claimed they were fighting the bad guys (pirates) with these bills but really they were trying to get power that is probably true. But they could only have a chance because you gave them a valid argument. And everyone had to work hard and makke sacrifices to stop something that wouldnt have existed had you not pirated (which is not justifiable morally or legally).

 

[ablac]

What im saying is that when someone makes something, they can choose how it is used. Say i made a cake. I let everyone have a piece except Steve, because he is a douche. Steve comes and takes a piece. I would have thrown away that piece and it may have been a waste, but i told steve he couldn't have it. It was my choice to decide who eats my cake right?

So you would rather throw something away and watch a person go hungry rather than share just because you happen to not like someone.

And you lost your moral high ground just like that.

Steve is not in a situation of cake or starvation he just didnt get a nice thing because hes a dick and the person who made it decided he didnt want to give him any. He never said he starved to death. If you feel so strongly then make sure that every crumb of food yuo dont eat ends up in someone else belly until youre doing that dont take an analogy to its ridiculous extremes just so you can feel as if you won an argument when all youre doing is being rather petty. Grow up.

I didnt say he was going to starve to death, just go hungry. Can you go hungry without starving? Or are you incapable of that feat? And It is not a single crumb we are talking about, its a whole piece of cake, I do infact share as much as I can with others, I make a lot of food and give leftovers out at work and to my friends. You are the one taking things to extremes by calling a piece of cake a crumb, and telling people to grow up because YOU fail at reading comprehension.

Who was the one being petty?

You for failing to see that the analogy was trying to say that he could choose who got what he made and that he didnt want to give the bell end a slice because he was a bell end. Point is you inferred he lost his moral high ground for not sharing when there was no morally involved. But to bring this back to the argument creators (producers and devs) can sell at whatever price they like. Just because you dont like their terms doesnt mean yu are justified to take it anyway. Games unlike food are not neccessary to life. Therefore you are not in anyway able to justify taking them without the sellers consent. Also the terms go hungry and starvation can be easily seen as synonymous and it doesn't take a genius to work out that i thought this was what you meant. Although i do think you meant starvation but changed what you meant to oppose me and make your point seem valid and anything other than petty.

 

[ablac]

OK i fail to see the logic in telling people who make games, movies and music that we are justified to take what they make for free if they do not behave how they wish us to. If you do not like their business practises then that's fine very few people do and with good reason. If you do not like their games or their DRM then that is also fine. If they do not release a demo of their game and you are unsure of whether you want to buy it without a demo then that is also fine. If you cannot afford it then that's fine. The answer to these issues people who pirate have is to not buy the game. It is not difficult. If you do not wish to buy a game then do not buy it. No one is forcing you. However that does not mean you are morally able to then go and get the game anyway for free. To do so is to spit in the face of those who pay for the games and subsidies your enjoyment through their purchase. If you pirate a game then you are saying it is worth playing and if that is the case then you should buy the game.

I know that your behaviour (as in you specifically) may not have done any harm to anyone as you genuinely could not afford it. But can you claim this is true for all those whom pirate it? and if you bought the game (at the price it was new from when you obtained it) after playing the 'demo' or the full game then thats great. But can you seriously tell me that this is what all did? To claim so is ridiculous. Many people are not honest. These people are pirating games when they could and would buy them if they could not obtain them for free. I enjoy games, movies and music and i want as many people as possible to enjoy them but i do not like people claiming they deserve stuff for free. That is not the way the world works. I also believe that if you actually made an issue of your reasons to not buy a game rather than pirating then you could get many resolved as companies want to sell stuff to make money and so they will listen to you if oyu make a decent case which you could do. When you pirate you are saying to them that you would have bought it but didnt want to cause you could have gotten it for free. You throw all credibility out the window.

Oh and a company being big does not mean you have any more right to pirate their games than you would a small indie company just because they are less vulnerable. If they are successful then they deserve their success. If you do not like them then do not buy their game to show that they do not deserve success. Piracy is not justifiable and personal cases are not the rule. You may or may not have been the reason for SOPA and PIPA and ACTA but you sure as hell made them stand better under scrutiny. They claimed they were fighting the bad guys (pirates) with these bills but really they were trying to get power that is probably true. But they could only have a chance because you gave them a valid argument. And everyone had to work hard and makke sacrifices to stop something that wouldnt have existed had you not pirated (which is not justifiable morally or legally).

And what if someone pirates a game to demo it and then goes and buys it, even though if they hadn't pirated it they never would have bought it. If they didn't pirate it, they wouldn't have bought a full copy and no one wins. If they pirated it and never pay for it no one is affected anyway. If I give my friend an old game that I was never going to play again he probably won't buy a new copy, so in your view is this as bad as piracy?

The argument that people don't "deserve" to use media they haven't paid for is pointless, since not everyone has the exact same sense of morality. It's a victimless crime (the Swiss government found that people who pirate are also the ones who buy the most media, so no one loses money due to piracy [http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/12/05/swiss-government-study-finds-internet-downloads-increase-sales/]). If you want to sit on your moral high horse, then do that, but if people want to pirate, I say let them.

Ok first of i believe i stated that i understood the argument about downloading as a demo. What i have an issue with is that there is little to no incentive to proceed to go and buy the game when you already have it and i did say that while some do go and buy it it is hardly unreasonable to suggest many simply decide not to buy when when they are full capable of doing so.

The swiss research is a case of misplaced correlation. The study found that those whom pirate also buy the most media. This does not mean they buy the media they pirate nor does it mean they buy everything they do pirate. For example pirates may also be the ones who can afford/ are willing to spend the most money on a computer capable of handling any game (an expensive pursuit). Therefore they are also going to be buying more on account of having the most disposable income. I am not suggesting this is true as i do not know the facts but i am merely demonstrating how pirating does not equal purchases and why would it. When one can obtain expensive items for free without real consequence why would one not. To claim that no money is lost to piracy is utterly naive at best and complete bullshit at worse. Also worth noting is that the study was limited to Sweden. This does not make it true for america or anywhere else in the world.

I fail to see how someone else morality makes my opinion, that those who do not pay for media do not deserve it, null or pointless. Im sorry it just doesn't make sense to me that because something is 'right' in one persons eyes it makes it al right for them to do it.

I am not trying to sit on a moral high horse i am simply stating my argument on an issue that i think is pretty clear cut. I do wish to keep this a mature argument and while there are idiots in favor of piracy there are also those like yourself who have a better argument than making those you disagree with look ridiculous. However i do not recognise personal situations as evidence as they do not paint a picture of the entire scenario. I have stated sometimes it is justified and regularily can be a good thing but i feel it is wrong on account of the majority being people after free stuff.

Those who oppose piracy are not sheep they are simply honest and undersatnd the way the world works. They lack the ridiculous sense of entitlement bestowed on those who pirate and despise how they pay while many dont only to be insulted for supporting the industry and thinking paying for what you use is something other than utter madness.

 

[jovack22]

True, the idea of these bills is ridiculous and the industry should have tried to change to find a better answer, but they are there to counter-act piracy...

If this was about piracy, they could have used the tools already at their disposal. Piracy was little more than an excuse, a convenience, one of many that have been used to try and expand corporate authority over the years.

Do you also believe the Patriot act was about Patriotism and the Induce act actually about protecting children?

I agree the government does try to push boundaries too far in terms of liberties.

This issue does go a lot deeper though, but it is for another discussion.

 

[DanDeFool]

Yes, because I pirated a game, my legislators put together a hastily crafted piece of bullshit legislation that spits in the face of our basic freedoms and threatens the integrity of the Internet in ways that many of them didn't even try to understand, at the behest of lobbyists who are paid thousands of dollars to not care about anything but boosting their company's bottom line by a few percentage points...

...Oh, wait...