Worst reasons that piracy is not "bad"

Seems pretty clear to me, the anti-piracy proponents have come up with an argument that piracy is an evil and immoral thing. Their claims are not in anyway backed up thus piracy defaults to neutral position of being neither good nor bad.

htekemerald

Completely agree. Unfortunately, we get people on both sides of the fence arguing against piracy and those arguing that "piracy isn't as bad as portrayed". I just wish we could end it once and for all.

Not completely true...I posted this earlier, here it is again:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/05/file-sharers-are-content-industrys-largest-customers.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

"Game Developers Should Love Their Pirates"
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/32761/Opinion_Game_Developers_Should_Love_Their_Pirates.php

Now I am not saying you have to take these as the ultimate truth, or that piracy is ok...but there are studies and other such content out there that put piracy more in a positive light than a negative one, especially when the real culprit is the used game market which makes up 75% of the losses game publishers face.

Shiftfallout

Don't get me wrong, I was using "proof" in the strictest use of the word. There are certainly many indicators like you have shown, but proving unequivocally that pirates will/will not buy pirated software is just nigh on impossible. My point was that we should look at piracy from a more neutral viewpoint, and analyze it from there. Starting with a bias either way may just cloud the results in an overly positive light (positive in the way that it agrees with your own viewpoint). Nice links though, they make for a good read.

Like your link analyses, it's finding that "reasonable price" that's going to change pirates into legitimate consumers. I think services such as Steam are helping to bring games down to within that "reasonable price", and thus we will likely see an increase in sales and a possible reduction in downloads (though, these are rarely a good indicator of anything :P).

Anyway, thanks again for the links, as they were pretty damn interesting.

Best argument:

Piracy has no effect on sales, and thus is not a problem.

Feel free to come up with any evidence to the contrary, I'll be waiting.

htekemerald

I love how somehow people asking for evidence of something that does not exist constitutes as a valid argument. That one cannot provide numbers on something because it is not tangible nor measurable does not mean it doesn't exist and affect something else, and you know it. Lost sales do in fact exist due to piracy, they are just unseen.

I've seen you attempt the same argument in other threads, and your point is as moot now as it was then.

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

Best argument:

Piracy has no effect on sales, and thus is not a problem.

Feel free to come up with any evidence to the contrary, I'll be waiting.

Rekunta

I love how somehow people asking for evidence of something that does not exist constitutes as a valid argument. That one cannot provide numbers on something because it is not tangible nor measurable does not mean it doesn't exist and affect something else, and you know it. Lost sales do in fact exist due to piracy, they are just unseen.

I've seen you attempt the same argument in other threads, and your point is as moot now as it was then.

The argument against reason 1 and 2 is flawed. You don't steal a lamborghini, you make one yourself which is an exact copy to the last detail. And that isn't ilegal anywhere on the world for any kind of creation, unless you then sell it.

The argument against reason 1 and 2 is flawed. You don't steal a lamborghini, you make one yourself which is an exact copy to the last detail. And that isn't ilegal anywhere on the world for any kind of creation, unless you then sell it.

SkaRy_RuLeZ

Actually, I think making certain weapons/"arms" is illegal, but that's beside the point of this thread :P

Anyways, pirates are pirates. Most people I know justify it by saying they don't care.

"I didn't want to pay to play a crappy game/watch a crappy movie."

WTF? Why did you watch it in the first place if you knew it was going to suck? I hear ppl say this everywhere online.

Oh and another fav from the mouth of my bro-in-law.

"I would buy the games if I could afford them."

Saying this while playing on his flat screen tv, on a console that he paid full price for, while sitting on brand new furnature in a new apartment.

[QUOTE="dk00111"]

Piracy and the used market are two totally different things, licenses or not. It totally blows my mind that there are people who would rather side with corporate power over their own rights as a consumer.

The licensing concept is near impossible to enforce, and should they implement it through DRM, it will only push more people towards piracy, since the people who originally bought used can no longer do so, and new game buyers are stripped of their ability to sell the game if they don't like it or get bored of it.

Don't like people buying your game used? It's simple, make a better game. That way, demand at launch, when people are forced to buy new, will be greater, and people will be more inclined to keep their game instead of selling it. With less people selling it, there won't be as many copies on the used market, causing the prices to remain high, which will then reduce the incentive to buy used.

Shiftfallout

You have no excuse to be claiming "corporate power" as if it means something. Dont play video games if you are unwilling to support the people who make them. The used game market and piracy are no different in their legality, Used Games DO MORE damage than piracy, a lot more. If you are unwilling to abide by a license, then what makes you better than the pirate? If you want to enjoy a product but not pay the makers of that product, then that is never better than piracy, it IS piracy.

Furthermore, your fallacy is in that you are ok with the retailer exploiting the market, even though they have nothing to do with making the games you like, instead of the actual makers of the game and their publishers. Make better games? haha what a lame excuse. That is no different than the excuse floated around by some pirates. Just because there is a demand at launch doesnt mean everyone will go out and play it or have time to play it at that period in time. What a silly concept. No, as a result what you are seeing is publishers locking content to new games such as in Mass Effect 2, relying purely on multiplayer over single player games, and increasing prices. They begin relying on DLC and add less to a game as a result. Buying used impacts the game industry in way too many ways that are NOT good for the consumer and this is MOSTLY a console problem, not a PC one.

The problem is you feel entitled to someone elses art.... and with the claim of "corporate power" you can obtain their work without their permission or without paying them for their effort.

You falsely accuse me of fallacies, yet use them yourself. Who said I don't support developers? Heck, I'm all for the ACTUAL video game designers, and actually buy my games new, but at the end of the day they get fixed salaries, while the majority of profits go to the corporate publishers who care more about stock prices and net profits than the video games themselves.

"If you want to enjoy a product but not pay the makers of that product, then that is never better than piracy, it IS piracy."By that logic, EVERY used market is illegitamite. Books, cars, paintings, everything. When I buy something, I should be able to exchange my right to use the product for money. That's how the used market works. The difference between piracy and the used market is simple: With piracy, the content is enjoyed by a person without a legitamite purchase, while with used games, a purchase has already been made, and the product changes hand from one person to another.

"Furthermore, your fallacy is in that you are ok with the retailer exploiting the market, even though they have nothing to do with making the games you like, instead of the actual makers of the game and their publishers." Really? When did I say that? And which fallacy is that, exactly? Quite comically, in the very sentence you accuse me of a fallacy, you use one yourself. "Red herring fallacy" look into it.

And an increase in demand will lead to an increase in new sales. If 500,000 copies of CoD are sold, but 600,000 people want to play it at a given time, 100,000 NEW games will need to be sold to meet the demand. Are there people who wait until later to buy the game? Absolutely, and to motivate these people to purchase the game, temporary and permanant price cuts are made. I'm not saying used sales don't cut into profits, they do, but that is something every market deals with, and you are heavily overstating the effects of used games on the industry. This guy does a good job of explaining how it can actually benefit the industry as opposed to hurting it. I'm opposed to content that's locked down to new game because it is ineffective, and as always, hurts the people who buy it new more than anyone else. You cannot blame DLC on used games. DLC is the direct result of the monopoly of developers over modding games. On the PC, where virtually any game can be modded for free (often tools are created by devs to support this), DLC is much less justifiable.

"with the claim of "corporate power" you can obtain their work without their permission or without paying them for their effort." My reference to corporate power wasn't to justify buying used, in fact, very little of my original arguement was related to that. What I am saying is that corporations should not have the power to regulate what a consumer can and cannot do with their games, including selling it to another person.

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

Best argument:

Piracy has no effect on sales, and thus is not a problem.

Feel free to come up with any evidence to the contrary, I'll be waiting.

Rekunta

I love how somehow people asking for evidence of something that does not exist constitutes as a valid argument. That one cannot provide numbers on something because it is not tangible nor measurable does not mean it doesn't exist and affect something else, and you know it. Lost sales do in fact exist due to piracy, they are just unseen.

I've seen you attempt the same argument in other threads, and your point is as moot now as it was then.

[QUOTE="Rekunta"]

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

Best argument:

Piracy has no effect on sales, and thus is not a problem.

Feel free to come up with any evidence to the contrary, I'll be waiting.

htekemerald

I love how somehow people asking for evidence of something that does not exist constitutes as a valid argument. That one cannot provide numbers on something because it is not tangible nor measurable does not mean it doesn't exist and affect something else, and you know it. Lost sales do in fact exist due to piracy, they are just unseen.

I've seen you attempt the same argument in other threads, and your point is as moot now as it was then.

So no one would otherwise buy a game because they could not get it for free?

[QUOTE="Shiftfallout"]

[QUOTE="dk00111"]

Piracy and the used market are two totally different things, licenses or not. It totally blows my mind that there are people who would rather side with corporate power over their own rights as a consumer.

The licensing concept is near impossible to enforce, and should they implement it through DRM, it will only push more people towards piracy, since the people who originally bought used can no longer do so, and new game buyers are stripped of their ability to sell the game if they don't like it or get bored of it.

Don't like people buying your game used? It's simple, make a better game. That way, demand at launch, when people are forced to buy new, will be greater, and people will be more inclined to keep their game instead of selling it. With less people selling it, there won't be as many copies on the used market, causing the prices to remain high, which will then reduce the incentive to buy used.

dk00111

You have no excuse to be claiming "corporate power" as if it means something. Dont play video games if you are unwilling to support the people who make them. The used game market and piracy are no different in their legality, Used Games DO MORE damage than piracy, a lot more. If you are unwilling to abide by a license, then what makes you better than the pirate? If you want to enjoy a product but not pay the makers of that product, then that is never better than piracy, it IS piracy.

Furthermore, your fallacy is in that you are ok with the retailer exploiting the market, even though they have nothing to do with making the games you like, instead of the actual makers of the game and their publishers. Make better games? haha what a lame excuse. That is no different than the excuse floated around by some pirates. Just because there is a demand at launch doesnt mean everyone will go out and play it or have time to play it at that period in time. What a silly concept. No, as a result what you are seeing is publishers locking content to new games such as in Mass Effect 2, relying purely on multiplayer over single player games, and increasing prices. They begin relying on DLC and add less to a game as a result. Buying used impacts the game industry in way too many ways that are NOT good for the consumer and this is MOSTLY a console problem, not a PC one.

The problem is you feel entitled to someone elses art.... and with the claim of "corporate power" you can obtain their work without their permission or without paying them for their effort.

You falsely accuse me of fallacies, yet use them yourself. Who said I don't support developers? Heck, I'm all for the ACTUAL video game designers, and actually buy my games new, but at the end of the day they get fixed salaries, while the majority of profits go to the corporate publishers who care more about stock prices and net profits than the video games themselves.

"If you want to enjoy a product but not pay the makers of that product, then that is never better than piracy, it IS piracy."By that logic, EVERY used market is illegitamite. Books, cars, paintings, everything. When I buy something, I should be able to exchange my right to use the product for money. That's how the used market works. The difference between piracy and the used market is simple: With piracy, the content is enjoyed by a person without a legitamite purchase, while with used games, a purchase has already been made, and the product changes hand from one person to another.

"Furthermore, your fallacy is in that you are ok with the retailer exploiting the market, even though they have nothing to do with making the games you like, instead of the actual makers of the game and their publishers." Really? When did I say that? And which fallacy is that, exactly? Quite comically, in the very sentence you accuse me of a fallacy, you use one yourself. "Red herring fallacy" look into it.

And an increase in demand will lead to an increase in new sales. If 500,000 copies of CoD are sold, but 600,000 people want to play it at a given time, 100,000 NEW games will need to be sold to meet the demand. Are there people who wait until later to buy the game? Absolutely, and to motivate these people to purchase the game, temporary and permanant price cuts are made. I'm not saying used sales don't cut into profits, they do, but that is something every market deals with, and you are heavily overstating the effects of used games on the industry. This guy does a good job of explaining how it can actually benefit the industry as opposed to hurting it. I'm opposed to content that's locked down to new game because it is ineffective, and as always, hurts the people who buy it new more than anyone else. You cannot blame DLC on used games. DLC is the direct result of the monopoly of developers over modding games. On the PC, where virtually any game can be modded for free (often tools are created by devs to support this), DLC is much less justifiable.

"with the claim of "corporate power" you can obtain their work without their permission or without paying them for their effort." My reference to corporate power wasn't to justify buying used, in fact, very little of my original arguement was related to that. What I am saying is that corporations should not have the power to regulate what a consumer can and cannot do with their games, including selling it to another person.

The huge flaw in your entire argument is in the fact that you clearly have no understanding of what software is and how it differs from other markets and their products.

You say "By that logic, EVERY used market is illegitamite. Books, cars, paintings, everything. When I buy something, I should be able to exchange my right to use the product for money." yet ironically dont use logic, rather its not founded on an understanding of the subject matter. You do not BUY software as a product, only the license to use it. By your reasoning, you can purchase a game, hack into its code, change the code and sell it. Im sorry but it doesnt work that way.

You cannot compare, logicaly or rationally, to cars or any other physical object with material worth. You do not own a digital image of a painting an artist made, nor do you own an ebook. There is a difference between the digital marketplace, the laws and business and the realworld market place. A car's cost and value is made up of physical, limited, valued mass. Like physical gold, it is value in physical form. Software is not. It can be duplicated many many many times without cost at all, with no physical space being lost or materials needed. It has no physical value.

Software is purely intellectual property, it is digital and with that it is a completely different ballgame. If you purchase a game at the store new, you are given permission by the publisher, the license, to be the licensee to run that software. The disk is just the medium on which the software is stored. You can do anything you want to that disk as a medium as long as it doesnt break the EULA. You can destroy it, turn it into a frisbee, whatever, you own the phsyical disk, but not whats ON IT. Is this too hard for you to understand?

Even if you wish to disagree, the courts have stated otherwise with the final ruling on Autodesk vs Vernor.

Furthermore, you say developers get fixed salaries. This is true only SOMETIMES. Remember royalties do exist and the more money a developer makes from that, the more people they can either hire, give bonuses, go independent if third party, or more importantly, not have to lay off many of their staff. It also means a successful game will have the publisher put more money into the project, which is better for the developers.

So I think you have it all arsebackwards to be honest. Those who own the rights to their intellectual property have the the right to do whatever they want to it, and you agree to their terms by using their property with its EULA. You have NO excuses. If you want it to change, petition a change, but stop with the "corporate power" mumbo jumbo.

I love how people try to say piracy is immoral. I bet the people who say that have probably done immoral things in the past and still continue to do so, like speeding for example. They're both against the law, but more people speed than people pirating. Bad example; but you get the point.

[QUOTE="Rekunta"]

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

Best argument:

Piracy has no effect on sales, and thus is not a problem.

Feel free to come up with any evidence to the contrary, I'll be waiting.

htekemerald

I love how somehow people asking for evidence of something that does not exist constitutes as a valid argument. That one cannot provide numbers on something because it is not tangible nor measurable does not mean it doesn't exist and affect something else, and you know it. Lost sales do in fact exist due to piracy, they are just unseen.

I've seen you attempt the same argument in other threads, and your point is as moot now as it was then.

What "damned good evidence" is required? To show that piracy exists? I don't need ANY evidence to know it exists.

Go ahead and hide behind your, "you can't provide any evidence, nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah" ruse. Go ahead and try to lie to yourself to justify your decisions, that's your perogative. Pirates are thieves, are you really claiming they're not? Honestly? By what rationale? "You can't provide evidence to show that there are lost sales" therefor the people that take something for free are not thieves? That's some logic. If this is your argument, I don't know what else to say to you.

I don't understand why everyone has such an emotionally charged opinion about piracy. There are no ifrefutable facts stating that it damages OR helps the industry. From what I've read in this post, most people just argue their personal feelings or regurgitate some opinion they've heard. If you're not a pirate, great. If you are, be ethical about it.

For example, if you download a game and you dislike it(you probably won't finish it) - delete it; this is money well saved. If you greatly enjoyed a game you've pirated, be sure to support the developers; If you have the money, buy the game brand new; If you cannot afford it, write a good review about, recommend it to a friend, or simply save up until you can.

The only argument for piracy I currently consider valid is using it as a tool to decide whether a game is worth the purchase. If a demo does not exist for the game, the only way you can determine if you'll like it(legally) is to read reviews(or if you're lucky, you might have a friend who will let you borrow it). Reviews can be misleading or the reviewer may simply have a different taste in games than you. A demo only show cases a small portition of game and does not necessarily indicate the overall quality. Thus, piracy can be used as a tool to remove the risk of buying a game which you may dislike and increase the chances of buying a game you will enjoy.

Piracy is of course a moral grey region since you are taking something for free which is meant to be paid for. But since we don't live in a world with black and white moral choices, at least use piracy to support those that you believe deserve to be support.

This post isn't advocating piracy; it is simply showing that it is a tool, and as such, not inherently good or bad. It depends on the person who uses it.

I don't understand why everyone has such an emotionally charged opinion about piracy. There are no ifrefutable facts stating that it damages OR helps the industry. From what I've read in this post, most people just argue their personal feelings or regurgitate some opinion they've heard. If you're not a pirate, great. If you are, be ethical about it.

For example, if you download a game and you dislike it(you probably won't finish it) - delete it; this is money well saved. If you greatly enjoyed a game you've pirated, be sure to support the developers; If you have the money, buy the game brand new; If you cannot afford it, write a good review about, recommend it to a friend, or simply save up until you can.

The only argument for piracy I currently consider valid is using it as a tool to decide whether a game is worth the purchase. If a demo does not exist for the game, the only way you can determine if you'll like it(legally) is to read reviews(or if you're lucky, you might have a friend who will let you borrow it). Reviews can be misleading or the reviewer may simply have a different taste in games than you. A demo only show cases a small portition of game and does not necessarily indicate the overall quality. Thus, piracy can be used as a tool to remove the risk of buying a game which you may dislike and increase the chances of buying a game you will enjoy.

Piracy is of course a moral grey region since you are taking something for free which is meant to be paid for. But since we don't live in a world with black and white moral choices, at least use piracy to support those that you believe deserve to be support.

This post isn't advocating piracy; it is simply showing that it is a tool, and as such, not inherently good or bad. It depends on the person who uses it.

ValronWolf

The reason I'm so passionately against piracy is that the people who have poured many hours of their lives, who have worked and labored day in and day out for our enjoyment, deserve compensation. Also, this self-entitled spoiled attitude grates on my nerves. I get the feeling many of these people haven't worked hard for something and then not gotten paid. I'm sure if this happened to pirates, they'd be screaming up a storm, as would anybody, and rightly so.

About "trying out a game" or whatnot, I see no sense in this. Can we go into a restaurant and order a meal to demo it before deciding to pay for it? Can we go and watch the entirety of a film before we decide we want to pay for it? No. We take aleap of faith with everything we purchase, that's why it's important to do research beforehand.

I don't see how piracy cannot be seen as immoral. If I take something from someone without giving them their due compensation for their work that they ask for (unless I have their permission), then I consider that theft.

The reason I'm so passionately against piracy is that the people who have poured many hours of their lives, who have worked and labored day in and day out for our enjoyment, deserve compensation. Also, this self-entitled spoiled attitude grates on my nerves. I get the feeling many of these people haven't worked hard for something and then not gotten paid. I'm sure if this happened to pirates, they'd be screaming up a storm, as would anybody, and rightly so.

About "trying out a game" or whatnot, I see no sense in this. Can we go into a restaurant and order a meal to demo it before deciding to pay for it? Can we go and watch the entirety of a film before we decide we want to pay for it? No. We take aleap of faith with everything we purchase, that's why it's important to do research beforehand.

I don't see how piracy cannot be seen as immoral. If I take something from someone without giving them their due compensation for their work that they ask for (unless I have their permission), then I consider that theft.

Rekunta

Technically, you're downloading it from a person who pirated the game.

If someone stole bread from a merchant and handed it to the ones who were poor, would you call that immoral?

[QUOTE="Rekunta"]

The reason I'm so passionately against piracy is that the people who have poured many hours of their lives, who have worked and labored day in and day out for our enjoyment, deserve compensation. Also, this self-entitled spoiled attitude grates on my nerves. I get the feeling many of these people haven't worked hard for something and then not gotten paid. I'm sure if this happened to pirates, they'd be screaming up a storm, as would anybody, and rightly so.

About "trying out a game" or whatnot, I see no sense in this. Can we go into a restaurant and order a meal to demo it before deciding to pay for it? Can we go and watch the entirety of a film before we decide we want to pay for it? No. We take aleap of faith with everything we purchase, that's why it's important to do research beforehand.

I don't see how piracy cannot be seen as immoral. If I take something from someone without giving them their due compensation for their work that they ask for (unless I have their permission), then I consider that theft.

CBR600-RR

Technically, you're downloading it from a person who pirated the game.

If someone stole bread from a merchant and handed it to the ones who were poor, would you call that immoral?

What do you mean by your first statement? Anyhow, yes, because the merchant has not been paid for their labor. Aside, handing food taken from the rich and given to the poor I don't consider as immoral because food is what I'd consider a necessity to live, games are not and are a luxury.

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

[QUOTE="Rekunta"]

I love how somehow people asking for evidence of something that does not exist constitutes as a valid argument. That one cannot provide numbers on something because it is not tangible nor measurable does not mean it doesn't exist and affect something else, and you know it. Lost sales do in fact exist due to piracy, they are just unseen.

I've seen you attempt the same argument in other threads, and your point is as moot now as it was then.

Rekunta

What "damned good evidence" is required? To show that piracy exists? I don't need ANY evidence

Go ahead and hide behind your, "you can't provide any evidence, nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah" ruse. Go ahead and try to lie to yourself to justify your decisions, that's your perogative. Pirates are thieves, are you really claiming they're not? Honestly? By what rationale? "You can't provide evidence to show that there are lost sales" therefor the people that take something for free are not thieves? That's some logic. If this is your argument, I don't know what else to say to you.

And to steal something of value has to be taken. Since you have no evidence that a sale is taken, the labled of theft is baseless.

[QUOTE="ValronWolf"]

I don't understand why everyone has such an emotionally charged opinion about piracy. There are no ifrefutable facts stating that it damages OR helps the industry. From what I've read in this post, most people just argue their personal feelings or regurgitate some opinion they've heard. If you're not a pirate, great. If you are, be ethical about it.

For example, if you download a game and you dislike it(you probably won't finish it) - delete it; this is money well saved. If you greatly enjoyed a game you've pirated, be sure to support the developers; If you have the money, buy the game brand new; If you cannot afford it, write a good review about, recommend it to a friend, or simply save up until you can.

The only argument for piracy I currently consider valid is using it as a tool to decide whether a game is worth the purchase. If a demo does not exist for the game, the only way you can determine if you'll like it(legally) is to read reviews(or if you're lucky, you might have a friend who will let you borrow it). Reviews can be misleading or the reviewer may simply have a different taste in games than you. A demo only show cases a small portition of game and does not necessarily indicate the overall quality. Thus, piracy can be used as a tool to remove the risk of buying a game which you may dislike and increase the chances of buying a game you will enjoy.

Piracy is of course a moral grey region since you are taking something for free which is meant to be paid for. But since we don't live in a world with black and white moral choices, at least use piracy to support those that you believe deserve to be support.

This post isn't advocating piracy; it is simply showing that it is a tool, and as such, not inherently good or bad. It depends on the person who uses it.

Rekunta

The reason I'm so passionately against piracy is that the people who have poured many hours of their lives, who have worked and labored day in and day out for our enjoyment, deserve compensation. Also, this self-entitled spoiled attitude grates on my nerves. I get the feeling many of these people haven't worked hard for something and then not gotten paid. I'm sure if this happened to pirates, they'd be screaming up a storm, as would anybody, and rightly so.

About "trying out a game" or whatnot, I see no sense in this. Can we go into a restaurant and order a meal to demo it before deciding to pay for it? Can we go and watch the entirety of a film before we decide we want to pay for it? No. We take aleap of faith with everything we purchase, that's why it's important to do research beforehand.

I don't see how piracy cannot be seen as immoral. If I take something from someone without giving them their due compensation for their work that they ask for (unless I have their permission), then I consider that theft.

I understand what you're saying and I agree that the people that create these games should be compensated for all their hard work. There certainly is group of people out there who feel entitled to whatever they lay their eyes on, but these people don't represent all pirates.

I do disagree about how you framed the game developers as working day in and day out for our enjoyment; In my opinion, most games are crap and most developers want to make a quick buck. These are not martyrs we're talking about, just regular people. Some of them make outstanding products but none of them do it for selfless reasons.

Second, you say since the trying-before-you-buy model doesn't exist in some industries, that it makes no sense. You say that we should take a leap of faith. Why would would someone take a leap of faith when there an alternative?(albeit an illegal one). Trying the full product before you buy it is a common method used in many different industries. In my opinion, this is the best option you can hope for. If you don't like something, you can return it; if you like it, you pay for it. The only difference is that payment is not enforced if you're pirating.

So unless anyone can prove that piracy is directly detrimental to software sales, the only argument against piracy is that you're breaking the law (and not criminally, it's copyright infringement.)

The main reasons are that they can get away with it and all they really want is to play a game without worrying about all 'moral implications' such as damaging the industry of where they get their games from. And also the damage they cause would be so minimal because they are only 'one person' downloading a game, similar to not having a voting mentality, seeing their own actions means nothing to anyone.

I do disagree about how you framed the game developers as working day in and day out for our enjoyment; In my opinion, most games are crap and most developers want to make a quick buck. These are not martyrs we're talking about, just regular people. Some of them make outstanding products but none of them do it for selfless reasons.

ValronWolf

Of course not, it's their profession, their livelihood depends on the money they get from their work. And I know they're not matyrs, but they do work to create something that we enjoy. It's just showing appreciation. Btw, pirates don't pirate crap games, I was referring to titles such as Crysis, etc. Not Barbie horse designer.

Second, you say since the trying-before-you-buy model doesn't exist in some industries, that it makes no sense. You say that we should take a leap of faith. Why would would someone take a leap of faith when there an alternative?(albeit an illegal one). Trying the full product before you buy it is a common method used in many different industries. In my opinion, this is the best option you can hope for. If you don't like something, you can return it; if you like it, you pay for it. The only difference is that payment is not enforced if you're pirating.

ValronWolf

Why should someone be entitled to use something and after a while decide whether to pay for it or not? Would you be okay with going to a car dealership, driving a car off the lot, using it for a week and then returning it without paying because you decide you don't like it? Or going to a car rental place, driving for a week, and then returning it, not paying under the premise "no I didn't like the car, sorry". Why/whynot?

So unless anyone can prove that piracy is directly detrimental to software sales, the only argument against piracy is that you're breaking the law (and not criminally, it's copyright infringement.)

ValronWolf

*pulls hair out*

I don't know why people can't understand this. It's IMPOSSIBLE to show how piracy affects software sales, because those lost sales caused by piracy DO NOT EXIST in any tangible degree, thus they cannot be measured, nor compared to how many would've sold if piracy were somehow impossible. There is no way to show how much piracy affects the industry, it's purely speculation and opinion. And I believe copyright infringement is criminal, could be wrong though.

[QUOTE="ValronWolf"]

I do disagree about how you framed the game developers as working day in and day out for our enjoyment; In my opinion, most games are crap and most developers want to make a quick buck. These are not martyrs we're talking about, just regular people. Some of them make outstanding products but none of them do it for selfless reasons.

Rekunta

Of course not, it's their profession, their livelihood depends on the money they get from their work. And I know they're not matyrs, but they do work to create something that we enjoy. It's just showing appreciation. Btw, pirates don't pirate crap games, I was referring to titles such as Crysis, etc. Not Barbie horse designer.

Second, you say since the trying-before-you-buy model doesn't exist in some industries, that it makes no sense. You say that we should take a leap of faith. Why would would someone take a leap of faith when there an alternative?(albeit an illegal one). Trying the full product before you buy it is a common method used in many different industries. In my opinion, this is the best option you can hope for. If you don't like something, you can return it; if you like it, you pay for it. The only difference is that payment is not enforced if you're pirating.

ValronWolf

Why should someone be entitled to use something and after a while decide whether to pay for it or not? Would you be okay with going to a car dealership, driving a car off the lot, using it for a week and then returning it without paying because you decide you don't like it? Or going to a car rental place, driving for a week, and then returning it, not paying under the premise "no I didn't like the car, sorry". Why/whynot?

So unless anyone can prove that piracy is directly detrimental to software sales, the only argument against piracy is that you're breaking the law (and not criminally, it's copyright infringement.)

ValronWolf

*pulls hair out*

I don't know why people can't understand this. It's IMPOSSIBLE to show how piracy affects software sales, because those lost sales caused by piracy DO NOT EXIST in any tangible degree, thus they cannot be measured, nor compared to how many would've sold if piracy were somehow impossible. There is no way to show how much piracy affects the industry, it's purely speculation and opinion. And I believe copyright infringement is criminal, could be wrong though.

Heh. It was not my intention to make you pull your hair out, I apologize. Couple things before I head off to bed. All types of games are pirated, not just the ones with high production values. My other point was that a common business model is allowing the customers to try their product without restrictions to functionality. For example: software(30 day trials), food(free samples), cars(test drives). So it's no a matter of taking something and returning it whenever you want, there are stipulation and time restrictions. In the video game business you may get a demo or you can rent(which is very similar to piracy, as someone pointed out in a previous post). I believe the lack of reliable mechanism for consumers to test games before they buy them is one of the reasons for the proliferation of piracy, many people simply don't want to leave it up to faith and review scores.

Lastly, I don't believe it's impossible to showquantitativelythat piracy affects game sales. You simply need a well funded research effort to follow the trends of a thousand or so pirates(as a start); this I believe is well in the realm of possiblity. Also, copyright infringement is not tried in criminal court(in North America at least.)

I do disagree about how you framed the game developers as working day in and day out for our enjoyment; In my opinion, most games are crap and most developers want to make a quick buck. These are not martyrs we're talking about, just regular people. Some of them make outstanding products but none of them do it for selfless reasons.

ValronWolf

Second, you say since the trying-before-you-buy model doesn't exist in some industries, that it makes no sense. You say that we should take a leap of faith. Why would would someone take a leap of faith when there an alternative?(albeit an illegal one). Trying the full product before you buy it is a common method used in many different industries. In my opinion, this is the best option you can hope for. If you don't like something, you can return it; if you like it, you pay for it. The only difference is that payment is not enforced if you're pirating.

ValronWolf

Developers offer legitimate try-before-you-buy options all of the time...they're called demos.

[QUOTE="ValronWolf"]

I do disagree about how you framed the game developers as working day in and day out for our enjoyment; In my opinion, most games are crap and most developers want to make a quick buck. These are not martyrs we're talking about, just regular people. Some of them make outstanding products but none of them do it for selfless reasons.

Teufelhuhn

Second, you say since the trying-before-you-buy model doesn't exist in some industries, that it makes no sense. You say that we should take a leap of faith. Why would would someone take a leap of faith when there an alternative?(albeit an illegal one). Trying the full product before you buy it is a common method used in many different industries. In my opinion, this is the best option you can hope for. If you don't like something, you can return it; if you like it, you pay for it. The only difference is that payment is not enforced if you're pirating.

ValronWolf

Developers offer legitimate try-before-you-buy options all of the time...they're called demos.

I believe I mis-communicated my point about people in the games industry. I was simply saying that they're not altruistic and do not slave over a project purely for our enjoyment; they expect compensation. As you said, most might not be in it for the money but judging by the quality of games I've been seeing recently, I can't believe most are in it for the joy of game developement.

As for your second point, I mentioned that piracy is illegal. I was trying to explain the reason that might compel someone to become a pirate. And demos are generally released to create hype and showcase some of the more interesting mechanics in a game. I have bought games based on my impressions of a demo and have been sorely disappointed.

I have to mention this again. I am not advocating piracy. I simply want to present another perspective after all the groundless vitriol and hate I saw directed towards it.

[QUOTE="ValronWolf"]

I do disagree about how you framed the game developers as working day in and day out for our enjoyment; In my opinion, most games are crap and most developers want to make a quick buck. These are not martyrs we're talking about, just regular people. Some of them make outstanding products but none of them do it for selfless reasons.

Teufelhuhn

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

[QUOTE="ValronWolf"]

I work in the games industry, and I'll tell you right now that nobody nobody nobody works for a development studio because they're in it for the money. On the publisher side, sure. But the developers themselves? Not a chance. It's a terrible industry where you work 10-12 hour days under the constant threat of being laid off or having your company shut down, and the only reason anyone sticks it out is because they love making games and they like working with other people that are just as motivated. If you wanted to make decent money, you could find a much better job in a different industry no matter which discipline of game development that you belong to. And that's why piracy is so demoralizing: you put in years of your life into making a game good, and some punk decides he's entitled to download your hard work for free 3 days before it's released.

[QUOTE="ValronWolf"]

Second, you say since the trying-before-you-buy model doesn't exist in some industries, that it makes no sense. You say that we should take a leap of faith. Why would would someone take a leap of faith when there an alternative?(albeit an illegal one). Trying the full product before you buy it is a common method used in many different industries. In my opinion, this is the best option you can hope for. If you don't like something, you can return it; if you like it, you pay for it. The only difference is that payment is not enforced if you're pirating.

ValronWolf

Developers offer legitimate try-before-you-buy options all of the time...they're called demos.

I believe I mis-communicated my point about people in the games industry. I was simply saying that they're not altruistic and do not slave over a project purely for our enjoyment; they expect compensation. As you said, most might not be in it for the money but judging by the quality of games I've been seeing recently, I can't believe most are in it for the joy of game developement.

As for your second point, I mentioned that piracy is illegal. I was trying to explain the reason that might compel someone to become a pirate. And demos are generally released to create hype and showcase some of the more interesting mechanics in a game. I have bought games based on my impressions of a demo and have been sorely disappointed.

I have to mention this again. I am not advocating piracy. I simply want to present another perspective after all the groundless vitriol and hate I saw directed towards it.

Its not uncommon for a developer to be working on a game they absolutely hate but stick with because its what brings in the paycheck. There are also cases in which some "marketing guru" ends up pushing the design decisions, which usually end up doing more harm than done. Internal drama, producer ego...ect these also happen. Then again, there is also a huge lack of talent in some of these studios, especially with designers. So a game thats a total mess can be caused by a number of issues. Sadly there is no guild or union type that will help developers stand up for good work conditions, so it generally takes a lot of love for games in general to work as a developer. A dev might love games, but have no joy in working on a project.

Not all devs think too negatively towards piracy as well. Trust me, some are even pirates themselves. Some good even comes from piracy, over all I think we can all agree that the best situation would be for games to sell well new with no piracy at all, but until then we have to look at reality and continue to look how to encourage game sales over piracy and not in a way that hurts the consumer.

Reason 1 is so pretty hilarious.

You need a Reason 4 though.

I never planned to buy it nor i got any money. I got a high speed internet connection and a download is only a few clicks away. Since the developers/pubishers never made or lost any money on me downloading this, it don't impact the gaming industry. It's also not like stealing a physical object like a ferrari, the only impact is my own morals.

To all those trying to justify theft here: If you had a killer idea for a film, spent weeks drafting it out, went to the bank for a loan to start production, hired actors, film crew, studio so on and so forth, then spent months shooting and re-shooting, then choosing scores for scenes etc etc.

If after lets say 2 years of work you have a finished product. A film that you have made with your name on the top. You place it into the charts with baited breath to see how well it does. Thousands of people buy it, take it home and watch it - watch your work - and enjoy it. Thats what makes the last 2 years worth it. Some bleeping snotrag copies your film, pays you nothing for it, and calls you a tard. Goes on a forum and parades his epeen around, "I got this film 4 free".

Would you be happy with that? Would you want something done about it? Get some sense.

Edit:

Also think of it this way. I work hard every week in a heavy job. I go home with my paycheque and pay my taxes. Some drugged up waste of skin down the road who could work, but refuses to, claims some of my tax so he can go buy more drugs.

Those here who buy the games are supporting the games industry (paying our taxes).

Those who pirate are leeching the system (drugged up waste of skin).

It's only because those of us here buy the games that the freeloaders have anything to pirate in the first place. Yes, you are scumbags. Get over yourselves and at least have the honesty to admit what you're doing is wrong.

To all those trying to justify theft here: If you had a killer idea for a film, spent weeks drafting it out, went to the bank for a loan to start production, hired actors, film crew, studio so on and so forth, then spent months shooting and re-shooting, then choosing scores for scenes etc etc.

If after lets say 2 years of work you have a finished product. A film that you have made with your name on the top. You place it into the charts with baited breath to see how well it does. Thousands of people buy it, take it home and watch it - watch your work - and enjoy it. Thats what makes the last 2 years worth it. Some bleeping snotrag copies your film, pays you nothing for it, and calls you a tard. Goes on a forum and parades his epeen around, "I got this film 4 free".

Would you be happy with that? Would you want something done about it? Get some sense.

Smileyvirus

Free publicity

Edit:

Also think of it this way. I work hard every week in a heavy job. I go home with my paycheque and pay my taxes. Some drugged up waste of skin down the road who could work, but refuses to, claims some of my tax so he can go buy more drugs.

Those here who buy the games are supporting the games industry (paying our taxes).

Those who pirate are leeching the system (drugged up waste of skin).

It's only because those of us here buy the games that the freeloaders have anything to pirate in the first place. Yes, you are scumbags. Get over yourselves and at least have the honesty to admit what you're doing is wrong.

Smileyvirus

I'll just say this to #1.

I'll just say this to #1.

McStrongfast

Its the DUMBEST analogy ever.

1) this analogy is bad. piracy isn't stealing the lamborghini reventon, it would be making a copy of it and using the copy.

2) Some things in life are free (water) yet some still choose to buy it while others don't.

3) But if the pirate never intended on purchasing the game legally then his/her friends would have never purchased the games for themselves.

Btw I'm %100 anti piracy I just love to debate :P

I'll just say this to #1.

McStrongfast

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

[QUOTE="James161324"]

This or they can't afford it.

You can say this and that about piracy but neither side is totally right.

You are infringing copyright, not stealing.

Its a simple fact there are to many games that come out and half of them are far overpriced, 60 dollars for a 9 hr game is retarded when i can spend 60 on a game thats last 40 hrs. Until developers stop overpricing piracy will be just as strong.

This isn't killing the indusutry what so ever, the economy and the half done 60 dollar games is hurting it more. Heck even games like cyrsis sold more copies becuase of piracy.

The companies are not loosing actual money, every time a game is pirated its not like they just lost x number of dollars, a possible sale may have been lost, but no actual looses are taken. You can't loose money on something that has no cost to the company.

AncientDozer

While we're on the subject, people complaining about games costing too much and being too short now need to get back to reality. When factoring in the relative buying power of the dollar, games are cheaper right now than in any previous generation (while simultaneously costing more to produce...). Games are also about as long as they ever were, or longer. I mean, if you're comparing RPGs from earlier gens to action games from this gen, sure they're shorter. But games like Super Mario Bros can be beat in what, under 10 minutes? Contra 3 on the SNES is beatable in under 20 minutes? And people think 9 hours is short for a shooter or action/platformer now?

To all those trying to justify theft here: If you had a killer idea for a film, spent weeks drafting it out, went to the bank for a loan to start production, hired actors, film crew, studio so on and so forth, then spent months shooting and re-shooting, then choosing scores for scenes etc etc.

If after lets say 2 years of work you have a finished product. A film that you have made with your name on the top. You place it into the charts with baited breath to see how well it does. Thousands of people buy it, take it home and watch it - watch your work - and enjoy it. Thats what makes the last 2 years worth it. Some bleeping snotrag copies your film, pays you nothing for it, and calls you a tard. Goes on a forum and parades his epeen around, "I got this film 4 free".

Would you be happy with that? Would you want something done about it? Get some sense.

Edit:

Also think of it this way. I work hard every week in a heavy job. I go home with my paycheque and pay my taxes. Some drugged up waste of skin down the road who could work, but refuses to, claims some of my tax so he can go buy more drugs.

Those here who buy the games are supporting the games industry (paying our taxes).

Those who pirate are leeching the system (drugged up waste of skin).

It's only because those of us here buy the games that the freeloaders have anything to pirate in the first place. Yes, you are scumbags. Get over yourselves and at least have the honesty to admit what you're doing is wrong.

Smileyvirus

Wow your a very very angry man. So you never borrowed a book? Made a mix tape (depends on how old you are)? Lent anyone a dvd? Bought a pre-owned game? Sold a game?

copyright infringement (piracy) =/= theft

Quit synonymizing them. A Lamborghini Revention is a "real" physical object that is possessed by someone. Having it taken would mean a loss to the possessor. Having someone copy your data, you don't lose the original data. It is like taking a book out from the library, photocopying it, bringing the book back and reading the copy. Not only was nothing "lost" but it is impossible to prove whether or not the person making the copy ever intended on paying to use the data.

Piracy is bad... but definitely not for the silly reasons cited in the OP. But then again, one can turn around and justify how it is beneficial. For instance, many indie musical groups rely on piracy to get their music out there, and then when people realize how good they are, they come to the concerts (buy the tickets and merchandise) and even buy the albums.

If game developers started giving out free "full" copies of their games with time-limits, I don't doubt piracy rates would drop substantially. Most "demos" these days don't showcase either what is best about a game, nor give the player enough time to experience it (level isn't long enough, etc.).

copyright infringement (piracy) =/= theft

Quit synonymizing them. A Lamborghini Revention is a "real" physical object that is possessed by someone. Having it taken would mean a loss to the possessor. Having someone copy your data, you don't lose the original data. It is like taking a book out from the library, photocopying it, bringing the book back and reading the copy. Not only was nothing "lost" but it is impossible to prove whether or not the person making the copy ever intended on paying to use the data.

Piracy is bad... but definitely not for the silly reasons cited in the OP. But then again, one can turn around and justify how it is beneficial. For instance, many indie musical groups rely on piracy to get their music out there, and then when people realize how good they are, they come to the concerts (buy the tickets and merchandise) and even buy the albums.

If game developers started giving out free "full" copies of their games with time-limits, I don't doubt piracy rates would drop substantially. Most "demos" these days don't showcase either what is best about a game, nor give the player enough time to experience it (level isn't long enough, etc.).

foxhound_fox

They should go back to the shareware system. Put out the first third of the game for free. Hell, Fable 2 goes the shareware route on xbox live, you can download the first fifth of the game free of charge.

It's sad, but the "industry's" propaganda is apparently easily accepted as truth by some of the more naive individuals.

I just have to clear some things up.

Publishers like to bundle up people, actions and expressions and paint it all as being something extremely bad and hurtful, for instance "piracy".

What piracy really means in the software business is to make a copy of something, and then start selling it yourself, making money solely off of someone else's efforts.
Most people tend to think that this is wrong as this likely influences the sales and income for the author in a negative way.

The problems begin when publishers, developers and others start to give new meaning to in this case, "piracy", so that it also includes non-profit copying and sharing between individuals. This results in the general notion that even this non-profit sharing is as hurtful as the real piracy of software - something that clearly is not the case.
To my knowledge there have been no proof that non-profit sharing of copied games has damaged the gaming industry.
While many people think that one should always pay for what you use, one cannot say that those that doesn't pay but still use the product takes away income, because that is only potential income.
Although I have no proof, I dare to say that the majority of shared copies of games would not have been sales if buying would have been the only way to come by the product.

This is pretty much the same as the music industry saying that they "lose" this and that much to non-profit sharing, while at the same time they produce record profits every year. It just doesn't add up.

Another popular propaganda scheme by the industry - that easily influenced people falls for all the time - is that they tend to claim that someone is "stealing" their product, when what is happening is that it's being copied. Copying is not stealing.
The reason why they call copying stealing is quite obvious, everyone knows that stealing is bad, so if copying is the same as stealing, then copying is bad.
Clearly it isn't the same thing, but if you repeat it over and over, eventually it will stick. I'll just say it again, copying is not stealing, no matter who tells you that it is.

If something is stolen, the original holder no longer have that something.
If something is copied, the original holder still have that something.

Quite a big difference there, but the industry don't want you to think about that.

Personally I think there's a lot of begrudging behind all this, publishers don't care if they lose money or not, the main thing is that no one should use their stuff without paying for it. Unfortunately it's western-people nature to begrudge others, much like small children not letting another child borrow their toys just because "It's mine!".