[QUOTE=Mystlight;40577129]I fully advocate piracy.[/QUOTE]
On what basis?
[QUOTE=Mystlight;40577129]I fully advocate piracy.[/QUOTE]
Well you're in the right thread to debate that, and although I disagree with you it's fine that you believe that. But the whole point of this subforum is that you present arguments for your case.
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfZv_lPwBFI"]Is the game worth playing? If so, pay for it. Unless you cannot get it legally, say, because it was never distributed in your country, only then are you justified in Piracy.[/URL]
[QUOTE=IrishBandit;40637545][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfZv_lPwBFI"]Is the game worth playing? If so, pay for it. Unless you cannot get it legally, say, because it was never distributed in your country, only then are you justified in Piracy.[/URL][/QUOTE]
What about abandonware
[QUOTE=Rockeiro123;40639374]What about abandonware[/QUOTE]
If you watched the video, that point is addressed (pirate away). Hell he mentions it in the first minute or two.
I believe that piracy in some ways is bad, but in other words is very helpful to many.
Pirating music can actually help some musicians because since their music is being distributed for free, the artist of that music can gain more popularity and attract more listeners. Personally, whenever I download pirated music, if I like the artist's work and I look forward to their future releases, I will most likely purchase their future music and if they have merchandise for sale I will most likely buy other products they sell. But that's just me. If I ever pay money for music it's out of support for the musician, but if I'm introduced to an artist over one song that I've only listened to once, I'm not going to buy their CD on the spot. I will most likely look up their other songs and decide whether it's really worth it for me to purchase their music or not.
Pirating software, is abit different. I'm talking about pirating programs that are very expensive and are difficult for some to purchase that don't have that kind of money, such as Adobe's products for example. Granted, most companies that sell software do have 30-day trials in order to give the consumer an idea of what their product is like and how they can adapt to it, but even after the 30-day trial it might still not be possible for some individuals to actually buy it. When it comes to pirating software for non-commercial usage, there's a possibility that person will one day actually pay the money for the software. So pirating software allows you to actually create whatever it is that you want to create without having to be under a time limit. I don't believe that businesses should pirate software.
tl;dr, I think pirating is a way of getting an individual's product to gain some form of popularity.
[QUOTE=aerotem;40650817]I believe that piracy in some ways is bad, but in other words is very helpful to many.
Pirating music can actually help some musicians because since their music is being distributed for free, the artist of that music can gain more popularity and attract more listeners. Personally, whenever I download pirated music, if I like the artist's work and I look forward to their future releases, I will most likely purchase their future music and if they have merchandise for sale I will most likely buy other products they sell. But that's just me. If I ever pay money for music it's out of support for the musician, but if I'm introduced to an artist over one song that I've only listened to once, I'm not going to buy their CD on the spot. I will most likely look up their other songs and decide whether it's really worth it for me to purchase their music or not.[/quote]
So what happens if you pirate music, listen to it, but you don't like it? What do you do then?
[quote]Pirating software, is abit different. I'm talking about pirating programs that are very expensive and are difficult for some to purchase that don't have that kind of money, such as Adobe's products for example. Granted, most companies that sell software do have 30-day trials in order to give the consumer an idea of what their product is like and how they can adapt to it, but even after the 30-day trial it might still not be possible for some individuals to actually buy it. When it comes to pirating software for non-commercial usage, there's a possibility that person will one day actually pay the money for the software. So pirating software allows you to actually create whatever it is that you want to create without having to be under a time limit. I don't believe that businesses should pirate software.
tl;dr, I think pirating is a way of getting an individual's product to gain some form of popularity.[/QUOTE]
Oh, so you don't have the money to buy it? Then why do you get to have it? No other product other than digital products are ever subject to this mentality. Why are digital products treated differently? Why do you get to have it if you don't have enough money?
I won't lie, I've illegally downloaded video games and other content in the past; but any time that I do it's to try things before I buy. For example, Far Cry 3 was released at a point in time where I was squandering my pennies to save everything that I could before moving home from Greece. This made me very weary of just buying games before getting some sort of hands on experience first.
With FC3 the appeal was definitely in the story since I enjoyed FC2 a lot. (More than most) So I decided that I would try it out and see if it was worth me shelling out the money for it. Three weeks later I beat the game and was extremely satisfied; although at the end of the game you're left feeling as though the replayability is almost nil I still decided to grab it.
With this in mind I find that the best way to combat piracy is to give players an initiative to buy. Sure, flashy marketing campaigns chalk full of product endorsements and dubstep appeal to the target audience, I feel that the group in which most of us here falls into is overlooked in a lot of ways. We're generally a little more cautious about which titles we invest our time and money in.
Steam has done a fantastic thing with free weekends for many AAA titles. In fact, I never had an appeal for CoD; however, this past weekend my best friend and I jumped at the opportunity and had a blast. It gave me more of an incentive to buy because I obviously wasn't sucked in by the mountain dew double XP marketing bullshit.
I like hands on experiences that I can retell and share with friends; after all gaming is a social experience and I think that's what companies like EA and Ubisoft are missing because they are so worried about perfecting their obtrusive DRMs.
[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40651437]So what happens if you pirate music, listen to it, but you don't like it? What do you do then?[/quote]
Then I won't listen to that artist's music anymore? Why should I have to pay money for something that I didn't enjoy?
[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40651437]Oh, so you don't have the money to buy it? Then why do you get to have it? No other product other than digital products are ever subject to this mentality. Why are digital products treated differently? Why do you get to have it if you don't have enough money?[/QUOTE]
Because maybe for some people, pirating software will allow them to pursue their goals of working in a certain field where those programs are frequently used?
Is there a legal difference between listening to a song on youtube that isn't on the artist's official channel and just downloading it onto your pc?
[QUOTE=aerotem;40656889]Then I won't listen to that artist's music anymore? Why should I have to pay money for something that I didn't enjoy?[/quote]
So you just reaped the benefit of their work and then decided to pay them nothing.
[quote]Because maybe for some people, pirating software will allow them to pursue their goals of working in a certain field where those programs are frequently used?[/QUOTE]
I want to be a mechanic so can I steal a wrench so I can follow my dreams?
[editline]15th May 2013[/editline]
And once again you're giving piracy some sort of special status. Do you always try your food before paying for it? Like, do you go to the grocery store and drink bottles of coke and then pay later?
Do you sneak into movie theaters and then, if you like the movie, slip $10 under the cashier window?
I dont think theres a big argument here. Yes there a few people who actually buy the game and actually pirate a game to try it. But that amount of people is nothing compared to the # of people who just pirate the game because they dont want or have to pay for it, because theres such a small risk and its so damn easy to do.
[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40658334]So you just reaped the benefit of their work and then decided to pay them nothing.[/quote]
So if I listened to a musician's album on Youtube instead of downloading it, and if I didn't like their music, do I still have to pay for that?
Also, I don't think you understand how much most musicians actually make off of their works. Most of the revenue gained from musician's works go towards the record label they're signed under, rather than the artists themselves.
[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40658334]
I want to be a mechanic so can I steal a wrench so I can follow my dreams?[/quote]
So you're going to really compare a wrench that's $10 to Adobe Photoshop CS6 that's $630? Great example.
You misinterpret everything I'm saying as "I'm ok with stealing something now because I'll pay for it later". So if someone who pirated Photoshop who later on wants to start their own photography or graphic design business, are you instantly going to assume that person will not buy the product for their business?
[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40658334]And once again you're giving piracy some sort of special status.[/quote]
So by saying that as a possibility of piracy, it can get someone's works popular that might not have been achieved without this distribution, I'm giving it a special status now?
I'm saying it's a possibility, not a fact.
[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40658334]
Do you always try your food before paying for it? Like, do you go to the grocery store and drink bottles of coke and then pay later?
Do you sneak into movie theaters and then, if you like the movie, slip $10 under the cashier window?
[/quote]
I don't see how that is even relevant to piracy in any way. So because someone uploaded another individual's works on a torrenting site, and another individual downloaded that torrent, the individual who downloaded it is considered as a thief rather than the person who uploaded it? The person who downloaded that torrent didn't originally steal it and didn't distribute it by uploading it through a torrenting site, the person who downloaded the torrent is merely taking what has been made available to them by someone who was distributing it for everyone to enjoy.
Granted, people have a tendency to not pay the creators for their work after they pirated it, but you can't automatically assume that everyone who downloads pirated material won't spend any money towards the creators' future works, or maybe go out and buy the same product in order to show their support. If someone supports the creator after downloading their works through piracy, then there's a [B]possibility[/B] that the individual might go out and purchase the creator's works in order to show support. There's also another [B]possibility[/B] that someone may not like the creator's works and so they will not pay for the creator's works that was downloaded through piracy, and they might not pay for the creator's future works.
I'm saying that there are both pros and cons to piracy, but it just depends on the individual who downloads the pirated material.
[QUOTE=aerotem;40658997]So if I listened to a musician's album on Youtube instead of downloading it, and if I didn't like their music, do I still have to pay for that?[/quote]
If it's on YouTube then they obviously put it there with the intention of not getting paid. I don't understand how this connects at all.
[quote]Also, I don't think you understand how much most musicians actually make off of their works. Most of the revenue gained from musician's works go towards the record label they're signed under, rather than the artists themselves.[/quote]
Yes, I understand completely that the record label makes lots of money. What is wrong with that? They help produce the music and the artist signed a contract with them why should the label not receive any money?
[quote]So you're going to really compare a wrench that's $10 to Adobe Photoshop CS6 that's $630? Great example.[/quote]
Yes thank you it is a great example. I don't understand why anything is less wrong just because it's quantitatively less.
[quote]You misinterpret everything I'm saying as "I'm ok with stealing something now because I'll pay for it later". So if someone who pirated Photoshop who later on wants to start their own photography or graphic design business, are you instantly going to assume that person will not buy the product for their business?[/quote]
Because that's what you're saying. I don't see why it matters if they pay later on they have no right to steal it first then pay later. You don't get to decide when to pay the producer of the product decides that.
[quote]So by saying that as a possibility of piracy, it can get someone's works popular that might not have been achieved without this distribution, I'm giving it a special status now?
I'm saying it's a possibility, not a fact.[/quote]
Yes.
"It's O.K. for me to steal this Craftsman wrench because it might inspire me to buy more Craftsman stuff later on!"
[quote]I don't see how that is even relevant to piracy in any way.[/quote]
It's extremely relevant. Think about my movie theater example. By your logic, it is fine to sneak in, watch a movie, and then decide later whether or not you will pay. How is it any different?
[quote]So because someone uploaded another individual's works on a torrenting site, and another individual downloaded that torrent, the individual who downloaded it is considered as a thief rather than the person who uploaded it?[/quote]
They're all thieves for collaborating.
[quote]The person who downloaded that torrent didn't originally steal it and didn't distribute it by uploading it through a torrenting site, the person who downloaded the torrent is merely taking what has been made available to them by someone who was distributing it for everyone to enjoy.[/quote]
Lol you are nutso.
"I am going to go to the next Barnes and Nobel I see, buy a book, and then reprint it for free online. It's for everyone to enjoy! This is O.K. somehow."
[quote]Granted, people have a tendency to not pay the creators for their work after they pirated it, but you can't automatically assume that everyone who downloads pirated material won't spend any money towards the creators' future works, or maybe go out and buy the same product in order to show their support. If someone supports the creator after downloading their works through piracy, then there's a [B]possibility[/B] that the individual might go out and purchase the creator's works in order to show support. There's also another [B]possibility[/B] that someone may not like the creator's works and so they will not pay for the creator's works that was downloaded through piracy, and they might not pay for the creator's future works.
I'm saying that there are both pros and cons to piracy, but it just depends on the individual who downloads the pirated material.[/QUOTE]
Again, why does it matter? Why do you get to decide to pay later? No other product is like this other than digital media apparently.
[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40659183]If it's on YouTube then they obviously put it there with the intention of not getting paid. I don't understand how this connects at all.[/quote]
Alot of musicians don't actually upload their own albums on YouTube. I'm saying if someone uploads another individual's music on Youtube and if people listen to it, should the people who listen to the music still be considered as thieves?
[quote]Yes, I understand completely that the record label makes lots of money. What is wrong with that? They help produce the music and the artist signed a contract with them why should the label not receive any money?[/quote]
You're saying that musicians would rather work for just the money instead building up a reputation or gaining some form of popularity?
Not all artists make music just for the sole intentions of making only money from their works, they express their perspective or experiences through their music in order to create a connection the listener. Alot of musicians (not all) would rather gain popularity through their music and gaining revenue isn't usually their primary motives.
Also, what about people who create instrumentals by using samples from other songs or those who remix songs that weren't originally made by them? Should they be considered as thieves? Even if they bought the music in the first place?
[quote]Because that's what you're saying. I don't see why it matters if they pay later on they have no right to steal it first then pay later. You don't get to decide when to pay the producer of the product decides that.[/quote]
[quote]Yes.
"It's O.K. for me to steal this Craftsman wrench because it might inspire me to buy more Craftsman stuff later on!" [/quote]
Consider some aspects of piracy. If a person's downloads a video game through piracy, that person might not be able to have the full experience that he/she would get if they actually bought the game. So by playing the game that person downloaded through piracy, if the person likes it, there's a possibility that 1) That person will tell other people how much of a good game it is and that they should play it, and this is without telling them that they should pirate it.
or 2) That person will actually purchase the game in order to get the full experience that game has to offer
With my Photoshop example, because that person pirated it and it depends on whether the person wants to continue working with Photoshop in the future to work towards a goal that the individual set for his/herself, there's a [B]possibility[/B] that person will pursue their goal and may actually purchase Photoshop in order to receive certain functions that weren't available through the pirated copy they download.
[quote]It's extremely relevant. Think about my movie theater example. By your logic, it is fine to sneak in, watch a movie, and then decide later whether or not you will pay. How is it any different?[/quote]
Because unlike pirating games or software, that person received the full experience of watching the movie without paying to see it.
[quote]They're all thieves for collaborating.[/quote]
So now it's a giant collaboration between people who download pirated material that is made publicly available by an individual who took that product and made it availiable to the public? Lol ok
[quote]Lol you are nutso.
"I am going to go to the next Barnes and Nobel I see, buy a book, and then reprint it for free online. It's for everyone to enjoy! This is O.K. somehow."[/quote]
Again, I'm not saying that uploading material for others to download is 100% ok. There is a [B]possibility[/B] that some of the individuals that read the book online because another individual paid for it and reprinted it, some individuals might go out and buy it so they can show their support towards the author and so they can read it again in the future. Like I said, it's a possibility, not a certainty.
[quote]Again, why does it matter? Why do you get to decide to pay later? No other product is like this other than digital media apparently.[/QUOTE]
Because through digital media, you're not necessarily receiving the full experience that you would get if you went out and bought a product. Some people may go out and buy it, some may not.
Again, there are [B][U]pros and cons[/U][/B] to piracy. It depends on the individual's ethics. Whether they feel that they should support the creator or not, or that they may not feel the obligation to receive the full experience by purchasing said product because a large portion of it was available for them to download.
Not gonna reply to all of your nonsense because you're restating what you already said in your last post. However, why do you say "they're not receiving the full experience if they pirate it." What? Why am I not receiving the full experience if I pirate HL2 and play it from start to finish. What did I miss?
I noticed now a days pirating is whats its called and its bad and immoral and all that jazz, Most of you are may not be as old as i am or even remember the 1980s and 90s, when cassette players and cds were all the rage. Back in those days recording your favorite song or making a mix tape wasn't wrong same when cd burners hit the market they were marketed as and even encouraged people to copy, no body had a problem with making mix cds or friends lending each other their cd collections to copy or even friends borrowing each others pc games and doing the same for lan parties and such, now we flash foward to 2002 and onward. Now its omg goto hell pirate or jail or something wtf happened guys?
[QUOTE=DELTA440;40682253]I noticed now a days pirating is whats its called and its bad and immoral and all that jazz, Most of you are may not be as old as i am or even remember the 1980s and 90s, when cassette players and cds were all the rage. Back in those days recording your favorite song or making a mix tape wasn't wrong same when cd burners hit the market they were marketed as and even encouraged people to copy, no body had a problem with making mix cds or friends lending each other their cd collections to copy or even friends borrowing each others pc games and doing the same for lan parties and such, now we flash foward to 2002 and onward. Now its omg goto hell pirate or jail or something wtf happened guys?[/QUOTE]
Maybe because electronic media like music, films and games were less mainstream back then? Now that it is becoming more widespread, laws and ethics need to be set out for these things. Your argument is like saying copyright laws on books shouldn't exist because they weren't around at the time when Beowulf was popular.
[QUOTE=DELTA440;40682253]I noticed now a days pirating is whats its called and its bad and immoral and all that jazz, Most of you are may not be as old as i am or even remember the 1980s and 90s, when cassette players and cds were all the rage. Back in those days recording your favorite song or making a mix tape wasn't wrong same when cd burners hit the market they were marketed as and even encouraged people to copy, no body had a problem with making mix cds or friends lending each other their cd collections to copy or even friends borrowing each others pc games and doing the same for lan parties and such, now we flash foward to 2002 and onward. Now its omg goto hell pirate or jail or something wtf happened guys?[/QUOTE]
You don't remember games coming with puzzles or questions that required you to go dig up the manual and find the relevant info on a specific page, to ensure that you were playing a legitimate copy and not a pirated one? I do. Most annoying form of DRM I've ever seen.
Burning a CD for your own use has always been acceptable. Burning a CD to give to others has always been wrong. Burning a million CDs and giving them out to whoever wants them has never, ever been acceptable at all.
[QUOTE=aerotem;40659587]
Not all artists make music just for the sole intentions of making only money from their works.
[/quote]
Lucky for the record company, they are usually the holder of the rights on an artists works, and guess what, they [i]are[/i] focused on money, making how the artist feels irrelevant.
[QUOTE=aerotem;40659587]
So by playing the game that person downloaded through piracy, if the person likes it, there's a [b]possibility[/b] that...[/quote]
I've taken the liberty of emboldening the important part.
[QUOTE=aerotem;40659587]
So now it's a giant collaboration between people who download pirated material that is made publicly available by an individual who took that product and made it availiable to the public? Lol ok
[/quote]
There's not a big enough book for me to throw at you. If I steal a TV from Wal-mart, and you accept it from me knowing it is stolen, you are now part of a conspiracy to steal the TV. That's just how the law works. That this is not obvious to you baffles me.
[QUOTE=Amokov;40685483]Lucky for the record company, they are usually the holder of the rights on an artists works, and guess what, they [i]are[/i] focused on money, making how the artist feels irrelevant.
I've taken the liberty of emboldening the important part.
There's not a big enough book for me to throw at you. If I steal a TV from Wal-mart, and you accept it from me knowing it is stolen, you are now part of a conspiracy to steal the TV. That's just how the law works. That this is not obvious to you baffles me.[/QUOTE] I agree with what your saying but theres only one problem with that. You cant compare theft to piracy why? Because that tv you stole is a complete lost sell the store physically no longer has that tv in its possesion to sell where as piracy is somebody making a copy of something without removing the original, so technically it isnt a lost sell, now look at it like this lest say your wal mart tv is on the shelf and a person walks in and looks at the tv and suppose they know everything about that tv and instead of buying that tv they go home fabricate the same parts and generated a copy of that tv without buying it 3d printing comes to mind would you consider it stealing if you could goto a store and look at a physical product and replicate it at home?
[QUOTE=DELTA440;40686253]I agree with what your saying but theres only one problem with that. You cant compare theft to piracy why? Because that tv you stole is a complete lost sell the store physically no longer has that tv in its possesion to sell where as piracy is somebody making a copy of something without removing the original, so technically it isnt a lost sell[/QUOTE]
Lost sales are not restricted to goods that have physically been stolen. A pirate who copies a game, rather than buying it, is also a lost sale.
[QUOTE=DELTA440;40686253]now look at it like this lest say your wal mart tv is on the shelf and a person walks in and looks at the tv and suppose they know everything about that tv and instead of buying that tv they go home fabricate the same parts and generated a copy of that tv without buying it 3d printing comes to mind would you consider it stealing if you could goto a store and look at a physical product and replicate it at home?[/QUOTE]
Aside from that example being very contrived, it would still be illegal due to design patenting laws.
Ultimately, I agree that piracy is not the same as theft. However, it still holds the same principles in that you are taking something (the money, time and effort put into creating a game) and not giving anything in return.
[QUOTE=DELTA440;40686253]I agree with what your saying but theres only one problem with that. You cant compare theft to piracy why? Because that tv you stole is a complete lost sell the store physically no longer has that tv in its possesion to sell where as piracy is somebody making a copy of something without removing the original, so technically it isnt a lost sell, now look at it like this lest say your wal mart tv is on the shelf and a person walks in and looks at the tv and suppose they know everything about that tv and instead of buying that tv they go home fabricate the same parts and generated a copy of that tv without buying it 3d printing comes to mind would you consider it stealing if you could goto a store and look at a physical product and replicate it at home?[/QUOTE]
It's still theft bro. It's not physical theft, but it's theft. Look it up man.
[QUOTE=DELTA440;40686253]I agree with what your saying but theres only one problem with that. You cant compare theft to piracy why? Because that tv you stole is a complete lost sell the store physically no longer has that tv in its possesion to sell where as piracy is somebody making a copy of something without removing the original, so technically it isnt a lost sell, now look at it like this lest say your wal mart tv is on the shelf and a person walks in and looks at the tv and suppose they know everything about that tv and instead of buying that tv they go home fabricate the same parts and generated a copy of that tv without buying it 3d printing comes to mind would you consider it stealing if you could goto a store and look at a physical product and replicate it at home?[/QUOTE]
Yes. Then you're stealing intellectual property. Stolen patents and copyrights do cost the holding company money.
[QUOTE=Truckasaurus1;40546255]So what about buying a magazine and photocopying all the pages and redistributing it for free?[/QUOTE]
Nobody seems to have answered this question. I think its a good one.
[QUOTE=Amokov;40689699]Yes. Then you're stealing intellectual property. Stolen patents and copyrights do cost the holding company money.[/QUOTE]
I agree but this is not the case, and it's a bit incorrect.
In an accounting sense, it doesn't cost the company anything. Nothing of tangible value was actually stolen. In an economic sense, yes it is costing the company through opportunity costs. When publishers complain about piracy it is from an economic perspective, which is logical. In this case it deals with "how much revenue are we receiving now compared to how much we would receive if everyone who had pirated the game had bought it instead?"
Piracy does not cost the company any money at all (you state that it does), but it does present an opportunity cost. Of course there is the argument that high piracy can lead to lower opportunity costs and better accounting profits (as exposure to the game through piracy can lead to sales which might not have happened without the piracy), but that's the whole point of this debate.
I'll disagree with that argument because there is no proof that a pirate would end up buying a game that he or she pirates, and from moral (making use of a product without acknowledging the creator) and economic perspectives (the stuff about opportunity costs) it's just wrong. At least with buying pre-owned games I wouldn't consider it immoral if the original owner didn't keep a copy of the game.
While it is true that software is always a cost-up-front thing, making piracy not stealing money, but rather denying the vendor of money they should be getting.
Yes, it does likely only effect their profit margin, but if enough people pirated the game and never bought it, you start effecting the bottom line of the game developer.
I'm not against piracy, if you're willing to do illegal things to get what you want, that's cool, lots of people do it every day. But it isn't a victim-less crime in the large scale. Because the company has less profits, they give slightly less of a raise to their employees, and now those employees cut back slightly on how much they spend.
Basically, it's a ripple effect. You deprive a company of profits, employee gets paid less than he would have, employee buys less products from other businesses.
I believe piracy can be a valid and sustainable business model.
Free advertisement.
The minnows, dolphins, whales model comes to mind. It's been proven to work in several ways.
I also think that this is really the only business model that the music industry can take to stay alive. I don't understand why people try so hard to fight and speak out against piracy when it can easily be turned into a viable economic option?
Neil Gaiman said it best I suppose:
[video=youtube;0Qkyt1wXNlI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qkyt1wXNlI[/video]
[QUOTE=JJ Isaac;40753236]I believe piracy can be a valid and sustainable business model.
Free advertisement.
The minnows, dolphins, whales model comes to mind. It's been proven to work in several ways.
I also think that this is really the only business model that the music industry can take to stay alive. I don't understand why people try so hard to fight and speak out against piracy when it can easily be turned into a viable economic option?
Neil Gaiman said it best I suppose:
[video=youtube;0Qkyt1wXNlI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qkyt1wXNlI[/video][/QUOTE]
The owners of the products can market them however they see fit. You don't really have any say in it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
