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

[Rasmus Emilsson]

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.

Sure, just like DRM and every other damn stupid thing that's come out of the business the past years.

I'm wondering how MPAA,RIAA and ESA counts, okay, four million people downloaded Crysis 2, however, who said that 3 million of these people didn't go buy the game after they tried it?
Not to mention some studies that say that heavy pirates buy more media, from music to film to games.

The problem is NOT the pirates. The problem is lackluster products and a mindset that "the customer is the enemy"

because that would be fucking stupid. I really find it hard to believe that some pirates something, they have the full thing right there and then decide "I'm going to go buy it legally for shits and giggles."

If 4 million people commit crime, then serve the sentence, they all still commited fucking crimes. Also stop blaming big greedy corporations for everything. There's already a superhero stopping them. It's called the invisible hand of the free market. The man playing his Xbox cannot complain about the greed of microsoft.

Damn corporations, becoming successful through faults of the consumer!

I don't know about you, but me and my friends do this, if there isn't any other way to test out a game, how am I supposed to test it? I want to pay for what I enjoy, therefore, I download a game if it doesn't have a demo (which 95% of the games don't have, because so many games today are so lackluster it's not even funny)

When you want to buy a sweater, do you just go into a random store with your eyes closed and pick one? no, you search for one you like and get into a booth and test it. This is no problem for ANY other business than the media-industry where they think you should just pump your money into something completely unknown that you might even not like. Therefore my quote "The customer is the enemy"

Games have gameplay trailers and a lot of other things to help you decide if it's something you want. I don't go into a store looking for a sweater with my eyes closed. I go to my size, which i know will fit based on previous experience, find one that looks appetizing and then buy.

Also, Every EB games in australia has a 7 day return policy, where if you don't like it you can return it for a full refund. There is no excuse to pirate an available game with this in place.

You mean everyone lives in Australia or all the game retailers have this refund deal?
You mean gameplay trailers give a good real-world interpretation of how the game will play out? yeah right.

You seriously mean that if i download a game, then I like the game I go buy it, I'm not as good a person as you are? get off your high horse, I'm just a smart consumer, but the climate in the media industry don't like smart consumers, because I can see though all the bullshit the spew at me.

One example, I had never even heard of Kingdoms of Amalur before steam put up the demo, now, Kingdom of Amalur's developer got another customer, because I liked the demo.

Goods can be stolen.
Services can be used illegally.

Games are both a good and a service, with the disc being the good and the game being the service. These companies are providing you with a service that you feel somehow entitled to. Not sure if you'll like a game? Don't fucking buy it. Pirating "just to make sure" is still piracy and still illegal.

Museums are a good example. If i just waltz in and start looking around, is that okay? It's not costing them any money, and maybe i'll tell my friends and come back and pay one day! Museum's don't have demos, but i go in there because i'm confident that it's something i'll enjoy. If it isn't then oh well, i guess i wont be going to anymore museums. But the museum needs to make money for providing the service it does or else it can't continue to function. If we let one person in for free, then who's going to pay?

Companies make the games, Companies distribute the games, Companies have the right to sell their product/service however they damn well please.

As I have said, I want to buy my media.

However, you seem to think that having a motto of "Treat your customers like shit" is a good thing. This shit would NOT fly in any other branch. A waiter does'nt come forth to you saying "yo ************, you look like shit, suck my cock and pay up"

No, these bills are brought up because the media industry is run by unadaptable old men. Look at the adapting companies, like Steam, Spotify etc. these companies are going really fucking good. You know why?
Because they have good prices, the money goes to the right people (the developers, artists) and most of all, they give the people what they want.

In no way do i think treating the customer like shit is a good thing. But as the waiter he has the right to choose how he serves you without harming anyone. If you think the waiter is a douche, then don't eat at the place that helps pay his salary, allowing him to be a douche for even longer.

I hate steam (For my own reasons) and so i don't buy games from there. Im not helping support those i don't like.

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?

Yes, you may decide what to do with your product...unless you're bought by a big company that takes all the credit for the cake and 95% of the money you made of that cake.

THIS has been a main reason for pirating music for me (before spotify), the damn artists gets next to nothing from an album, pretty much all the money goes to the music company, publisher etc. Yes, I know the music companies need the money too, but it's not unusual that the artists get around 5-10% from THEIR album.

However, I go to concerts instead, this is where most of the money is for my kind of genre. But now, when next to no one go down to the city to buy a CD, the pop-aritists have to do live shows. And that's a hassle, because auto-tune just does'nt sound good live.

This applies to Steam, it's convenient, just a few clicks away from a purchase, it's fast and reliable and the sales are unbelieavable. But most of all, most of the money goes to the developers.

Oh, one more thing. When companies count sales, they only count hard-copies, not digital distribution, so mostly, the numbers are off the chart stupidly wrong.

 

[ablac]

Depends. Did you get the Money to make that cake by selling people, Steve amoung them, a boxed (as in they couldn't see it) ''cake'' that turned out to be a pie litterally made of mud? Did you also deny returns? Yeah? Well fuck you, Steve is justified in taking that cake and the mob as a whole is justified in taking you to a dark alley and beating the shit out of you as far as I'm concerned.

OK so its descended into death threats. Nice and mature. Also that would be false advertising and there are consequences for such an act but in the analogy he didnt give or sell to steve because he didnt want to. This was his right. He didnt have to sell it even if it didnt get used as he was aloud to do this because he made it. In the same way a dev or publisher can charge whatever the hell they like and show or not show whatever they want the point is you are not forced to buy it and quality does not decide whether or not you should pay for it. If you do not like it or do not know enough to think it worth buying as you are unsure about quality then you do not but it. This is not a hard concept to understand. Going with yure broken take on the analogy the mud pie was still worth eating or oyu could have sued him for false advertising. Games sometimes dont live up to hype or advertising made them look way better than what they actually are but that doesnt give you the right to take them for free. If you want it you should pay for it. Also might wana get yuorself checked out if you want peolpe to be mercilessly beaten for bad cooking.

 

[Naeras]

SOPA was never about piracy anyways, that was just an excuse.

But the fact that it could be used as the excuse means piracy is a problem and the fact that it really isnt a justifiable act for the majority of the time means i feel no love for those who think themselves too good to pay for their games while the honest customers must bare the brunt of crap like SOPA. SOPA wasnt really about piracy but piracy was the evidence that made SOPA seem legitamate enough to actually get considered. Piracy is its own problem anyway but its reached the pint where it allows crap like SOPA to be listened to.

I still think the main driving force behind all the stupid net regulation bills recently is the fact that the internet actually scares the shit out of a lot of people, because of how freely it allows information to flow. A lot of governments and companies would honestly just see the entire thing go away, because it either facilitates too much free speech too easily, or doesn't fit their business model.

Otherwise, I don't disagree with your post =)

 

[michael87cn]

No. Whoever Burnie Burns is, I hope many people told him how fucking retarded he is.

When a soccer mom comes out and calls for normal footballs to be banned in schools because her kid got hit in the head with one and has a concussion, we call her stupid. When an athiest comes out and says religion is a bad thing because of the crusades, we point to all the good things religion and religious people have achieved. And when someone comes out and says we should cripple the internet because a few people use it as means of doing something illegal, thats perfectly fine and reasonable?

Im not going to suffer through DRM because someone once downloaded a game illegally. Im not going to stop driving a car because there are drunk drivers out there. Im not going to throw all my knifes away because some people use them as a tool for murder. Why would I be fine with SOPA?

And pirates caused it? Dont make me laugh. SOPA would not stop anyone with half a brain from downloading games or movies illegally. The people who thought it up know that, congress knows that, antipiracy outfits know it. Piracy is nothing but a scapegoat for this. In real life, they use terrorism to justify violating your privacy and harassing you. On the internet, they use copyright infringement. So fuck Burnie Burns and his naive ass for believing this is about piracy and nothing else.

tl;dr: It is apparent that even without the problem of piracy, we would still have something like SOPA coming up. Piracy is and always has been nothing more than a scapegoat.

All youve done is attacked the bills idiocy. And thats fine. You make valid points about why its a stupid bill. And it is. No one claimed it was reasonable. Youve created a very odd straw man from nowhere. No one says the bill is good. No one says it actually fights piracy. No one says its isnt stupid and reactionary.

What we ARE saying is that its caused (partly) by piracy. That piracy was among the reasons the bill was created, one of the main ones. And it was. And i believe that while its not about piracy and nothing else (again a thing no one said except you) piracy plays a key role. If piracy didnt exist SOPA and ACTA wouldnt get nearly as much commercial support. Sure its shitty, sure its unfair but at the end of the day you cant deny that it would place these bills in a weaker stance if piracy didnt exist. In the same way if terrorism didnt happen then freedoms would be more easily kept. Excuses. We are giving them. And although abused these excuses shouldnt be given in the first place.

SOPA sucks, it doesnt work and you outlined some good reasons why. Too bad that wasnt the point of the OP at all.

This just in! Breaking news! Crime is caused by criminals!

...Duh?

This thread is pointless, that's why there are so many people choosing instead to talk about how dumb SOPA was. It's obvious to say something like "anti piracy laws are caused by pirates! if there was no piracy there would be no laws!" well no shit sherlock. If there was no crime there would be no laws... CRIME and PIRACY are eternal entities that will always be with us. Making a thread (talking to the OP now, not you so don't worry) to place blame serves no purpose but to cause a flame war. If I was a mod, this thread would be closed because nothing positive or informative can be gained by it. Its just going to be this, over and over again:

"SOPAs bad! Pirates suck!"

"I agree SOPA is bad but pirating isn't as bad as you say!"

"Yes it is! You suck!"

"No I don't!"

"Yes you do!"

"Nanny nanny weener face!"

 

[Something Amyss]

SOPA wasnt really about piracy but piracy was the evidence that made SOPA seem legitamate enough to actually get considered. Piracy is its own problem anyway but its reached the pint where it allows crap like SOPA to be listened to.

Piracy wasn't really the evidence. It was the illusory numbers pulled from asses.

 

[ablac]

Thats business and artists would have a bigger problem with it if it was unfair. Think of how much money a successful album make now think of the costs related to the album including advertising and production. 5-10% for an individual is a huge sum of money and they can negotiate a better deal if they want to but they rarely take up arms against this as it is a good deal. I can see where your coming from but if you dont buy the music then the artist gets no money so doesnt that make you worse than their publishers who in your eyes take such a big cut it justifies taking it for free?

 

[Robert Ewing]

Well if there was no piracy, i'm sure the industry would put some other pissing move on us to get their sales up.

But like ANY industry, there is a black market for it. In this case, the very free (And free being the reason it's so popular) pirating circuit. It's inescapable.

 

[Sjakie]

Allthough i do agree that illegal downloaders are responsible for the increased DRM and whatnot from developers/publishers. Saying those pirates are responsible for SOPA is going to far.

to me that is like saying: because some kid keyed your car, now noboby in the entire world is allowed to carry keys anymore on penalty of jailtime.

SOPA/PIPA/ACTA are responses to the illegal donwloading problem that are just way out of proportion.

Pirates might be guilty of something illegal, but not responsible for the reaction to that problem.

The Entertainment industry left downloaders alone for years and years and never came up with services that allowed for legal downloads because they did not care about providing better service to its customers. So people jumped on the bandwagon that is P2P, since there was no legal alternative at the time. And now that the problem has become 'too big' (it isn't, just in their eyes) they want to make up for that failure by turning the internet in a digital version of a police-state.

nah, that shit aint right.

 

[Antari]

Ok here's your solution. You want to eliminate piracy? Your only option is to eliminate the human race. So really, stop wasting your time arguing about something you can't do anything about.

 

[ablac]

I didnt mean numbers (though those came into it) but more the existence of it. Piracy is very common for all these industries, hell you can tell that form the number of people stepping up to defend their bullshit, and the existence of it is evidence enough for there to be justification for these bills to exist.

 

[Musiclly enhanced]

if we never stole and pirated so much these stupid laws would of never happened, tbh we only have ourselves to blame for this.

 

[ablac]

SOPA=Stop Online Piracy Act. Piracy is in the freaking name it was the justification and its hardly justifiable anyway. This is why I dont like pirates because when they come after you they harm the honest of us as well. SOPA was about power and control and it was broken but it was also about piracy and pirates created through their behaviour the justification and reasoning for this act.

 

[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

 

[ablac]

Well you shouldnt take it personally your reaosns are hardly that of the majority's.

 

[cthulhumythos]

You got me, I take full credit for everything that has been happening. I just wanted to listen to some Weird Al, I was 13 Dammit.

dude, you start out stealing songs, then you're robbing liquor stores, and sellin' crack, and running over school kids with your car.

it's a slippery slope.

 

[Reggie Rock]

one small snip for man, one giant snip for mankind

I dont think piracy is a black or white issue. I think that in some situations that piracy would be okay, others questionably so, questionably not so, or not okay.

Piracy is not an objective bad, but a subjective one. I personally have the money to afford a lot of games, so i like to buy to support my favourite developers. I've always felt that Piracy is wrong because i have no reason to do it and so i haven't been exposed to any situation where it has been acceptable..

The fact is it has to remain illegal. Sure in some circumstances it's okay, but if we let everyone do it, we'll be fucked. I'm not saying SOPA is good, But some measure needs to be taken.

 

[Reggie Rock]

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.

Did you just insinuate that steve will die if i dont give him my cake? It's a luxury item. Im entitled to decide what i do with my cake.