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

[Viridian]

My bad. Usually when someone uses lolcat speech and all caps, they are being sarcastic.

I did notice how it seemed to contradict the rest of your post though. Again, my bad.

It's all good. I can understand why you thought I was sarcastic, and I guess I should have clarified ahead of time, or just not use lolspeak during serious discussion.

I agree though, that piracy of *commercially available stuff* is definitely a dominating factor in the creation of SOPA and it's ilk. Even if, as someone else said, it's nothing more than a scapegoat for a proposal that was going to be made anyway, it's certainly fuel for the fire, and it's probably easier to sell a bill to the house that seems (at first glance) like it's "protecting copyright holders" instead of "Big Brother be watching your internet comrade!"

 

[Something Amyss]

My point was that while SOPA was stupid, piracy made Congress think it was a good idea, so we should probably focus less of our attention on how stupid congress is (because at this point that's just beating a dead horse) and focus more on how media pirates almost fucked up the internet for all of us.

Piracy isn't what made Congress think this, the RIAA, MPAA, ESA, etc did. These industries have wanted more control over their product since before there was an issue of internet piracy, and they don't need piracy as an excuse to pass laws. You know, since they've done that in the past.

They don't want to fight piracy, not specifically. They want control. Control of what you do after you purchase. Control of how you enjoy the product you bought. Complete control of distribution channels. If not for Piracy, SOPA/PIPA would be something different.

Now, this isn't saying piracy's okay, but they were not forced into this and never will be. Blaming piracy for the underhanded dealings of the entertainment industry is STILL pointing the finger in the wrong place.

 

[Heaven's Guardian]

No, definitely not. The reason the media companies want to pass SOPA/PIPA isn't really to stop pirates. I don't believe that any of the high-priced consultants they hired have actually told them that every pirated copy is a lost sale and that sort of garbage. What they really want with these bills is the ability to control the Internet. They don't want to shut down Google or YouTube; they just want to have the ability to do so. That way, they can extort them to weaken the reach of the Internet, which is crippling their profit margins. Not because of piracy, but because they are terrified that the Internet is cutting out the middlemen, which is what they are. If people can create and advertise media without them, all of their jobs are gone. Lamar Smith may be an idiot, but the MPAA lawyers are not. They knew very well when writing the bills that they would destroy the Internet as it is, and they fully intended to do so. Piracy is just the excuse that they found.

 

[Yureina]

I don't think so. Sure, laws like this are a reaction to piracy. But... piracy is also a reaction to the draconian consumer-hurting measures that companies take to fight it (see DRM). Regulating against piracy is all and good (if done right), but a good look should also be taken towards the abusive practices companies make in the name of pursuing privacy. I'm looking at you EA and Ubisoft.

 

[dave1004]

Ay-yup. I've downloaded gigabytes upon gigabytes of pirated materials, filling up 1TB expansion drives like they were 32 gig USB's. Maybe I'm not proud of it, sure, but honestly? I don't really care. I'm not stealing anything, I'm making a copy of it to enjoy with my family. That movie I downloaded? Yep, that's $9 that can be put into either food, bills, clothing or other daily necessities. I do not promote piracy in any way, it's not a good thing, but nobody said I was a good person.

If I'm to blame for SOPA, that's sad. SOPA is temporarily shelved right now anyways, so I'm pretty happy bouncing around ACTA.

From what I can read on the WELL-known, totally legit Wikipedia site, "Copying for Private Use ... onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer?s performance or the sound recording."

Whilst that may only refer to music, I'm pretty sure the other laws work the same.

Well, in Canada, anyways. Though who knows what bullshit Wikipedia pulls. If I have the money, time and opportunity, I'd gladly rather buy something than pirate it. It's not like I distribute it to people, or make any form of money off it. Download > Watch/Play > Delete.

Finally: As I said, I do NOT condone piracy in any way, nor do I promote it.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

I fail to see how my having downloaded roms of old SNES and Gameboy games that cost upwards of a hundred dollars used online and the soundtrack to Ico, which was never released in my country and was out of print at the time, could have any bearing on the actions of entertainment industry lobbyists and their pet politicians.

 

[lordmardok]

Of course pirates are to blame for SOPA and PIPA.

I've heard an analogy that SOPA is like dropping a nuke to kill an ant hill. No need to drop the nuke if the ant hill isn't already there.

Simple cause and effect, people.

Of course pirates are to blame for SOPA and PIPA.

I've heard an analogy that SOPA is like dropping a nuke to kill an ant hill. No need to drop the nuke if the ant hill isn't already there.

Simple cause and effect, people.

Here's the issue no one addresses. Have you ever bought a game that looked amazing in trailers but turned out to be a piece of shit because the trailer showed little to no ACTUAL gameplay (I'm looking at you Final Fantasy), what about a game that offered no demo and asked you take it on faith that the game was good? Or any of the other things developers have done to shoot their own games in the foot as they're walking out the door?

Pirates are a problem, I do agree with that, but what's almost or just as much of a problem are developers who do the minimum amount of work or just plain make a bad game then sell it to us full price despite knowing full well how bad it is.

I'll just list off a few of my own experiences.

Final Fantasy XIII: Slow moving and removing control of almost all aspects of the actual gameplay from the players hands. Decent story though which was it's ONLY saving grace.

Shogun 2 and pretty much every Total War game: Love the series, love the games. but oh my god the bugs are unbelievable, and Shogun 2 tops them all. It is literally unplayable on my computer, there are no fixes, they're response was: we'll patch it in a month or so. And I payed full price for that bastard because I'd been looking forward to it all damn year.

Elder Scroll IV: Oblivion: Also paid full price for this and the bugs were unbelievable. The actual gameplay was broken, and the graphics were actually kind of lame. It was only after about a half-dozen USER MADE PATCHES that the game was enjoyable.

Fallout 3: Same complaints as Oblivion, the patches were the only thing that made this game playable.

Now I'm not asking for much, just that the quality of the game that's released be actually WORTH the 50 or 60 bucks I'm shelling out for it. Starcraft 2 was amazing and easily worth the money. So was Dawn of War II and all of it's little expansion-children. I absolutely loved Mass Effect and Dragon Age, I liked thier sequels but they weren't quite as good. Still totally worth the full price for them though. So it's not like the gaming community is unpleasable. Just remember, if you sell us a shitty game without giving us a fair warning about it's quality either through a Demo or a trailer with at least 15 minutes of ACTUAL GAMEPLAY then don't come crying to us about how pirates are stealing your games. It goes both ways, if you lie to me and I buy your shitty game that makes the developer of that game as much of a cheat and a thief as any bit-torrenting pirate.

 

[lordmardok]

I don't think so. Sure, laws like this are a reaction to piracy. But... piracy is also a reaction to the draconian consumer-hurting measures that companies take to fight it (see DRM). Regulating against piracy is all and good (if done right), but a good look should also be taken towards the abusive practices companies make in the name of pursuing privacy. I'm looking at you EA and Ubisoft.

This, right here. This is what I'm talking about. Ubisoft is getting out of hand which makes me sad because I genuinely like some of their games.

 

[lordmardok]

Of course pirates are to blame for SOPA and PIPA.

I've heard an analogy that SOPA is like dropping a nuke to kill an ant hill. No need to drop the nuke if the ant hill isn't already there.

Simple cause and effect, people.

Here's the issue no one addresses. Have you ever bought a game that looked amazing in trailers but turned out to be a piece of shit because the trailer showed little to no ACTUAL gameplay (I'm looking at you Final Fantasy), what about a game that offered no demo and asked you take it on faith that the game was good? Or any of the other things developers have done to shoot their own games in the foot as they're walking out the door?

Pirates are a problem, I do agree with that, but what's almost or just as much of a problem are developers who do the minimum amount of work or just plain make a bad game then sell it to us full price despite knowing full well how bad it is.

I'll just list off a few of my own experiences.

Final Fantasy XIII: Slow moving and removing control of almost all aspects of the actual gameplay from the players hands. Decent story though which was it's ONLY saving grace.

Shogun 2 and pretty much every Total War game: Love the series, love the games. but oh my god the bugs are unbelievable, and Shogun 2 tops them all. It is literally unplayable on my computer, there are no fixes, they're response was: we'll patch it in a month or so. And I payed full price for that bastard because I'd been looking forward to it all damn year.

Elder Scroll IV: Oblivion: Also paid full price for this and the bugs were unbelievable. The actual gameplay was broken, and the graphics were actually kind of lame. It was only after about a half-dozen USER MADE PATCHES that the game was enjoyable.

Fallout 3: Same complaints as Oblivion, the patches were the only thing that made this game playable.

Now I'm not asking for much, just that the quality of the game that's released be actually WORTH the 50 or 60 bucks I'm shelling out for it. Starcraft 2 was amazing and easily worth the money. So was Dawn of War II and all of it's little expansion-children. I absolutely loved Mass Effect and Dragon Age, I liked thier sequels but they weren't quite as good. Still totally worth the full price for them though. So it's not like the gaming community is unpleasable. Just remember, if you sell us a shitty game without giving us a fair warning about it's quality either through a Demo or a trailer with at least 15 minutes of ACTUAL GAMEPLAY then don't come crying to us about how pirates are stealing your games. It goes both ways, if you lie to me and I buy your shitty game that makes the developer of that game as much of a cheat and a thief as any bit-torrenting pirate.[/quote]

 

[As Seen On 360]

Burnie Burns made a great point on the Rooster Teeth podcast this week about what actually caused SOPA. It's not congressmen who don't understand the internet, nor is it greedy publishers trying to get as much money as they can. It's you, the people who download things without paying for them. Piracy caused SOPA, and it's what will cause the next SOPA and the one after that. As long as people keep downloading things illegally, congress will be forced to make bills like SOPA.

I'm not asking anyone to admit they've downloaded illegally, nor am I referring to any specific person when I say "you." It is true that Congress is dumb when it comes to the internet, but it is also true that they wouldn't be making these bills if people would just pay for the things they want like they should. We shouldn't be blaming congress for these bills (at least not fully), we should be blaming media pirates and demanding THEM to stop.

Except that these bills also aimed to restrict Google, Wikipedia and anything else that vaguely seemed to infringe on any copyright. So once we take the fight to Google and Wikipedia, get them to shut down because of our outrage, we won't need to worry about laws like this again, because no one will have a need to make them. The fact that they'd go after Google at all just because it links to sites that do pirate is a stepping stone on the way to heavier censorship. Next we should rewrite historical texts, so they're not filling your head with facts that might contradict the society you live in and force you to question things.

It's pretty much like saying, if everyone followed all the rules blindly, all the time, dictators would step down and cease to exist. You're following all the rules after all, so why would they want power over you anymore? Oh yes, because power is power, people want it even if they don't need it. If SOPA actually aimed to target piracy specifically, and only that, instead of policing the internet, I might have sympathy for it. You don't win loyalty by punishing everyone for the actions of a few.

 

[lordmardok]

Pirates are only as responsible for SOPA and PIPA as the people who make games and distribute them.

also for some reason instead of editing my post it copied it so that's why there's two of me up there.

 

[wintercoat]

Of course pirates are to blame for SOPA and PIPA.

I've heard an analogy that SOPA is like dropping a nuke to kill an ant hill. No need to drop the nuke if the ant hill isn't already there.

Simple cause and effect, people.

It's more like they nuked the planet from orbit to take out some ants, just to be sure. Who do you blame, the ant, or the idiot who ordered a tactical nuclear strike on the planet? Mind you, the ant burrow goes miles underground and the ants will most likely be able to survive.

 

[Total LOLige]

If piracy was legal SOPA wouldn't exist. I thought SOPA got shelved?

 

[lordmardok]

Elder Scroll IV: Oblivion: Also paid full price for this and the bugs were unbelievable. The actual gameplay was broken, and the graphics were actually kind of lame. It was only after about a half-dozen USER MADE PATCHES that the game was enjoyable.

Please, never, ever, ever complain about graphics when it comes to a games worth. All it does is help justify a multimillion dollar budget spent entirely on graphics rather than gameplay.


Anyhow: Lol @ OP.
No. This would have come around whether piracy existed or not. This ain't about pirates, they're just a scapegoat and buzz word.

The main complain wasn't about the graphics, it was really just a side thing that I noted. The main issue was all the bugs. Thank god for modders, the Unofficial Oblivion Patch in it's current incarnation fixes 2,200 bugs left in the game. Not to mention all the content they just plain left out. It had a boring and repetitive combat system, the character model animations were blocky and badly optimized. All of these things were fixed in patches made by users. It shouldn't be up to your users to fix your own god damn game Bethesda!

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I have to disagree here. If piracy didn't exist then this act still would, minus the P for Piracy of course, still exist. Albeit in some other form. Here's why;

Whenever something new comes along, the old ways and those who adhere to them, will feel threatened by them and will seek to undermine, destroy or conquer so that they can remain at the height of their power.

Piracy/copyright infringement has existed since before the printed word. Arguably, the printed word was the very first infraction of copyrighted work.

We the people are not to blame, it squarely the fault of those who try to destroy what they don't understand. In this case a transmission medium that would make them richer than Midas and Scrooge combined, if only they had the wisdom and intelligence to see it.

 

[RJ 17]

It's a "the chicken or the egg" question. People are naturally going to take free stuff if it's offered to them, so you can blame the sites for having it. But the sites wouldn't offer it if people didn't want it, so you can indeed blame the "consumers" for wanting it.

The fact remains, however, that they put a stop to Napster's days of free music without such wide-ranging legislation, I can only imagine they could do the same to other individual sites. Hell, they already brought down MegaUpload without the need for SOPA. "They" being various government agencies, but the FBI in particular. People will never like the idea of such broad, vaguely-worded regulations...especially not on such a naturally open medium such as the internet.

The US is burning tax-dollars either way. So if it comes down to lock-down or witch-hunt, I'd prefer a witch-hunt.

 

[Marcus Kehoe]

Not everyone who pirate's for real reasons such as they cannot acquire in any other way or lost disk's can be blamed but shouldn't. Those who have every means to buy a game or movie or song are to blame. I had someone download music for me as a kid I'm to blame. I used Lime wire, I'm to blame. I downloaded games to check if my crap computer would work with them before I bought games, I can be blamed but for that reason I find legitimacy ok.

Pirating shouldn't be a problem but idiots let it get out of hand. 4 million people pirating the witcher 2 their is no justification for that.

 

[Lunar Templar]

Really though, SOPA is a predictable outcome they should have seen coming 10 years ago. SOPA exists because of piracy, and piracy exists not because of consumer cheapness, but because of poor business models.

Music for example, albums were becoming ridiculously expensive to purchase, and nobody ever wanted to pay for an entire album just for a couple songs they enjoy. There was no iTunes or anything of the sort to counter that problem, but there were things such as Napster. Napster provided an alternative, you could pay 15 dollars for 1 song, or you could just stick it to the companies and get it for free, and that's what happened.

iTunes came into the picture eventually, but it was too late, piracy had already become an integral part of our society, and though they were offering more reasonable alternatives to consumers, it's just set in our minds by now that music should be free, even though it shouldn't be free.

Movies are more of the same to an extent, there's a lot of price gouging for new movies, and for older movies it's hard to find them for a good price at times. Piracy in this case rose because of lack of availability. I don't blame the companies so much on this part because regulating it would have been a nightmare 10 years ago. Digital distribution is the way to go for movies in terms of availability, but how are you going to swing that in an era where Windows 98 is still the most popular OS?

It's this unavailability that is really starting to fuel piracy even more though, because you used to be able to just rent an older movie at your local video store. But guess what? The local video store is dead. And guess what, you can't legally view 95% of your movies now unless you went and paid for them in full. Price gouging also impacted physical piracy of movies, people feel absolutely violated when they pay like 1/3 of the movie's retail price for effectively 1 total viewing, but not so much when they just burn a copy and get their money's worth.

Anyway, what I'm really getting at is that people will rather be dishonest than pay companies absurdly large amounts of money for what little they get in return. People are not getting their money's worth because of corporate greed and outdated business models.

this, also, those same business are become more and more unnecessary, the internet it self is dangerous to them because people can get their product (indie music, games and movies) to the people with out a middle man of the publishers