Pirating and other illegal free options through the internet - General

[QUOTE=Bobie;32501444]you dont live in a new house for a week before buying it, you only get a look at it- yet people still do that? (and it's a few hundred thousand more involved there)[/QUOTE] It's easier to look at a house than a game. Especially since most real estate firms will allow you to get a certified & independent firm to check out the house for any damage or other suspicious things. [QUOTE=Valnar;32503764]You don't buy the game then, if it is too much of a risk to yourself and they don't provide a demo, and you don't trust any reviews and you don't have anyone else you know that owns the game just don't buy it.[/QUOTE] Well then I don't wanna hear them whine about people pirating it for trying it out. Treat potential customers like shit, and you'll get the same treatment. I miss the days where the customers where threated like friends, instead of people to rip-off.

[QUOTE=Confuzzed Otto;32376853]An imortant point of this is that it simply is [b]stealing[/b]. You wouldn't steal a handbag..! [/QUOTE] [IMG]http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp346/crayolaskiies/yada%20gifs/tumblr_lak8q9ZCR41qdrd77o1_500.jpg[/IMG] I would if I could. [editline]27th September 2011[/editline] not all stealing is the same anyway i wouldnt snatch a handbag from a woman (or man) in the street but i would rob a chocolate bar from the shop that gets billions every year

[QUOTE=Van-man;32504133]Well then I don't wanna hear them whine about people pirating it for trying it out. Treat potential customers like shit, and you'll get the same treatment. I miss the days where the customers where threated like friends, instead of people to rip-off.[/QUOTE] If you feel like a company is treating you as a customer as shit doesn't that mean that you should respond by not having anything to do with them?

That's simply not possible because pretty much no companies are willing to treat customers well. Sure you get various companies that do [i]try[/i] to treat customers well, but that doesn't make an overall impact on how companies treat consumers. You'd simply have a hard time managing to find companies to buy from that treat you well. But this isn't really the thread for that. I don't think comparing not having a demo to not having a car, while it can determine whether you get the sale or not. Having a demo would actually discourage people from pirating it [i]solely to try it[i], where when you're test-driving a car, I'm pretty sure you have someone there with you to prevent you from stealing it. If you're pirating it to try it, you're not pirating it because you want to, you're pirating it to try the game because the developer decided to not give you the option of trying it. I haven't heard of a single car dealer who refuses to let people test-drive a vehicle, so if a car dealer does it, why shouldn't a developer? The content is already there, you're taking a fair chance at showing a potential customer what your product is like, and (according to the argument that pirating is stealing, which I personally don't buy) you're not really losing any potential sales unless someone doesn't like the game, which in the end you really couldn't help, could you? Yes it's more work, but really I think it'd pay off considering most games nowadways don't have demos at all, which forces people to pirate it if they want to try it, which they don't want. If you're forcing someone to do something that you don't want, just to try your product, that means you've done something wrong. The same thing applies to game-limiting DRM, you're forcing someone (who bought your product, no less!) to torrent a game that they already purchased, in order to play it without something that the publisher (or developer) put into their game, that only punishes customers. Saying that "oh well it's your fault for not having good internet, or not being able to afford it" doesn't cut it, and you have failed at producing a valid argument as well as insulting someone. You're telling someone to get better internet when in reality they really can't, and that's simply not possible. On the other hand, what if an ISP has to temporary bring their network down to repair or replace something. You're losing internet which makes you unable to play a game, that a customer already purchased. There really is no winner here because the developer/producer is hurting their customers who already purchased the game, and the people who never wanted to buy it, suffer no consequences whatsoever.

So for the whole thread, I've searched the least to my abilities, for anyone mentioning "proof of purchase". I didn't find anything. So I've just come to ask, is pirating still illegal, if you have proof of purchase of whatever you're pirating? I guess this could tie-in to the whole "just another copy" thing, but I just want to feel like I have a definite answer. To partake in this thread, I used to pirate, and used to because I would pirate games, but I would feel bad for who ever worked so hard on them, because I knew for sure I wouldn't be able to afford any of them. So I just deleted them. I've noticed everyone uses the "if I like, I buy" excuse, which it's good on them to use, but not everybody is like that. Some people just pirate them, to play them. I know some people that buy bootleg games that are paid to be burnt onto discs, AND they have well-paying jobs. But obviously, this is a specific situation, and that's just my point. We all have the specific situation to have for doing something, but because of this, not everyone will do the same thing and think the same way as you. I only say that because so far in my time on the internet, not a lot of people recognize this.

Buying a game basically entails that you're buying that single copy for your own use, like how you only have one copy of music for yourself, not for yourself and your 10 friends. No idea how common it is for the former half of that sentence to have the emphasis on it, but you've got to assume that the lawyers who come up with the EULAs have their bases covered [editline]29th September 2011[/editline] The very least I can say from my view that obtaining something through normally illegal channels when you already own it is morally justifiable. That is, unless you're buying something like a paperback book, and then downloading the audiobook for it. And I'm pretty sure that some games (And iTunes when you associate a computer with a user) make it obvious that you're paying for the rights to a specific number of downloads/whatever, in which case it's kind of the same thing, where you move outside the justifiable realm.

[QUOTE=Jabberwocky;32455479]No, stealing means you're taking something without consent. In regards to intellectual property (including media), this also encompasses acquiring a copy when you aren't supposed to.[/QUOTE]No clearly you guys don't understand what stealing really means. You can argue that piracy is morally right or wrong, you can argue why it should be legal or illegal, and you can even argue exceptions to both. But stop mincing words. Piracy is not stealing, period. Piracy is piracy. It is a totally different word with a totally different meaning and you need to understand this.

[QUOTE=Duxfever;32534483]So for the whole thread, I've searched the least to my abilities, for anyone mentioning "proof of purchase". I didn't find anything. So I've just come to ask, is pirating still illegal, if you have proof of purchase of whatever you're pirating? I guess this could tie-in to the whole "just another copy" thing, but I just want to feel like I have a definite answer. To partake in this thread, I used to pirate, and used to because I would pirate games, but I would feel bad for who ever worked so hard on them, because I knew for sure I wouldn't be able to afford any of them. So I just deleted them. I've noticed everyone uses the "if I like, I buy" excuse, which it's good on them to use, but not everybody is like that. Some people just pirate them, to play them. I know some people that buy bootleg games that are paid to be burnt onto discs, AND they have well-paying jobs. But obviously, this is a specific situation, and that's just my point. We all have the specific situation to have for doing something, but because of this, not everyone will do the same thing and think the same way as you. I only say that because so far in my time on the internet, not a lot of people recognize this.[/QUOTE] From a copyright law standpoint; yes it is illegal to download a copy of tpb even if you've purchased it. It would be the same violation as normal piracy.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;32541601]No clearly you guys don't understand what stealing really means. You can argue that piracy is morally right or wrong, you can argue why it should be legal or illegal, and you can even argue exceptions to both. But stop mincing words. Piracy is not stealing, period. Piracy is piracy. It is a totally different word with a totally different meaning and you need to understand this.[/QUOTE] You keeps saying we're wrong, we keep saying you're wrong. This goes nowhere. [editline]29th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=clanratc;32542226]From a copyright law standpoint; yes it is illegal to download a copy of tpb even if you've purchased it. It would be the same violation as normal piracy.[/QUOTE] Piracy isn't illegal if you don't upload where I live. Or rather, it is illegal, just not prosecutable.

I don't find there to be very much justification to pirating anything. It's copying something that someone made and more often than not a product that he or she has a financial reliance on, and using it without paying the developer a single cent. How is that morally right? Lots of people say if they enjoy the game, then they will pay for it, but do all people who say this stick to their word? Piracy may be good advertisement for some developers, but developers should implement trials and demos more often than what is done at the moment so that people shouldn't have to pirate the game to trial it. So in summary piracy is morally unjustifiable, but developers should also fight it responsibly rather than whine about it, so that less people may actually pirate it.

Developers should try to benefit from piracy instead of trying to combat it. If they uploaded a copy of the game onto a torrent site for free but had none intrusive ingame adverts or something then atleast they could get some money back to make up from the potential loss while selling the ad-free version on steam or in retail. It's inevitable that the game is going to get cracked, so why not beat them to the chase?

[QUOTE=squids_eye;32548254]Developers should try to benefit from piracy instead of trying to combat it. If they uploaded a copy of the game onto a torrent site for free but had none intrusive ingame adverts or something then atleast they could get some money back to make up from the potential loss while selling the ad-free version on steam or in retail. It's inevitable that the game is going to get cracked, so why not beat them to the chase?[/QUOTE] Well some pirates are douchey enough to go and crack the game anyways to get rid of the ads

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;32541601]No clearly you guys don't understand what stealing really means. You can argue that piracy is morally right or wrong, you can argue why it should be legal or illegal, and you can even argue exceptions to both. But stop mincing words. Piracy is not stealing, period. Piracy is piracy. It is a totally different word with a totally different meaning and you need to understand this.[/QUOTE] Well, my post was a rebuttal to people saying that piracy wasn't stealing because stealing meant that the original owner had to lose something. I was merely corrcting that definition of stealing. Piracy - the unauthorized use or appropriation of patented or copyrighted material, ideas, etc (from the Collin's World English Dictionary) I don't think that the meanings are that radically different though.

[QUOTE=Valnar;32503764]You don't buy the game then, if it is too much of a risk to yourself and they don't provide a demo, and you don't trust any reviews and you don't have anyone else you know that owns the game just don't buy it.[/QUOTE] But if people do that, then those who pirate the game [i]then actually buy it[/i] wouldn't buy it at all. Companies would actually lose some sales.

[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;32549466]But if people do that, then those who pirate the game [i]then actually buy it[/i] wouldn't buy it at all. Companies would actually lose some sales.[/QUOTE] Well then that's incentive for developers to put out a proper demo.

The end-user level is making this debate a huge headache. You've simultaneously got at least some lost sales and some gained sales only because they were only able to download and try it. I think you have to forget what happens when the pirated game actually gets into the player's hands and remember that there ARE going to be some lost sales. Maybe piracy got a few good games out into the open or let people play without shitty DRM, but we should really be pushing the developers to improve the way they do things instead.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32548582]Well some pirates are douchey enough to go and crack the game anyways to get rid of the ads[/QUOTE] True, but it is still better than having everyone play the cracked version.

I have as a routine to pirate something I'm interested in and try it out for 20 minutes before buying it. If I like it, I buy it. If I don't like it, I uninstall it and forget it existed.

[QUOTE=Splarg!;32549868]The end-user level is making this debate a huge headache. You've simultaneously got at least some lost sales and some gained sales only because they were only able to download and try it. I think you have to forget what happens when the pirated game actually gets into the player's hands and remember that there ARE going to be some lost sales. Maybe piracy got a few good games out into the open or let people play without shitty DRM, but we should really be pushing the developers to improve the way they do things instead.[/QUOTE]There are even more layers than that. I mean some people argue that it's morally ok to pirate in certain circumstances, other argue it's NEVER ok (leading to a moral level). Then there's the legal level, which is a problem because piracy isn't illegal in every country (like here in Canada it isn't expressly illegal... yet). And finally there is, as you said, the more external level of end-users and developers/producers. Both groups feel more entitled than the other, as far as their opinion reaches. Sorting through all these levels is frustrating and turns this debate into a clusterfuck whenever it happens.

[QUOTE=Confuzzed Otto;32376853]An imortant point of this is that it simply is [b]stealing[/b].[/QUOTE] It isn't stealing. If I were to take something personal, then I would have it and you wouldn't. If I pirate a game, I have it and you have it. The company loses no money because I would most likely not buy it in the first place.

[QUOTE=NicoleEmilid;32556773]It isn't stealing. If I were to take something personal, then I would have it and you wouldn't. If I pirate a game, I have it and you have it. The company loses no money because I would most likely not buy it in the first place.[/QUOTE] Argh, regardless of whether piracy can be considered stealing, that definition of stealing and justification is WRONG! Stealing is taking something without consent.

[QUOTE=Jabberwocky;32568050]Argh, regardless of whether piracy can be considered stealing, that definition of stealing and justification is WRONG! Stealing is taking something without consent.[/QUOTE] But I have consent of my peers to take a copy from them. Why else would they upload/seed it? Face it, I'm not taking anything from the company, one person got the game and I'm making a copy of that, he loses nothing, the company loses nothing. It'd be stealing if I managed to nick a disk, which would lower their supply without any monetary return. Sharing is caring, and we pirates care for one another.

[QUOTE=Nekrietns;32604054]But I have consent of my peers to take a copy from them. Why else would they upload/seed it? Face it, I'm not taking anything from the company, one person got the game and I'm making a copy of that, he loses nothing, the company loses nothing. It'd be stealing if I managed to nick a disk, which would lower their supply without any monetary return. Sharing is caring, and we pirates care for one another.[/QUOTE] What? What you need is the consent of the lawful owner of the property; usually the developer. Regardless of how much the company has lost in sales (it is usually not a matter of if but how much) you do not have the right to copy or obtain unlawfully a copy of whatever intellectual property if the owner does not give you that right.

[QUOTE=Nekrietns;32604054]But I have consent of my peers to take a copy from them. Why else would they upload/seed it? Face it, I'm not taking anything from the company, one person got the game and I'm making a copy of that, he loses nothing, the company loses nothing. It'd be stealing if I managed to nick a disk, which would lower their supply without any monetary return. Sharing is caring, and we pirates care for one another.[/QUOTE] You are stealing the license to use that piece of software when you copy it. When you pirate you are stealing the license to use that software.

When I pirate, they company who's software I am pirating really doesn't lose a potential sale. I only pirate what I can't afford (a lot). Therefore, if I never were to pirate it, the company would make as much money if I had pirated it, because i never would have bought it.

[QUOTE=Pvt. Banana;32616292]When I pirate, they company who's software I am pirating really doesn't lose a potential sale. I only pirate what I can't afford (a lot). Therefore, if I never were to pirate it, the company would make as much money if I had pirated it, because i never would have bought it.[/QUOTE] So how exactly does that justify pirating? Why do you have a right to pirate?

i would be tempted to get software for education that i couldn't afford, luckily Autodesk give students a free version of the program. without a industry job i cant afford to drop £1000 on software not including a computer to run it. in my opinion a majority of the time its not a loss to the company if people pirate a program ,because if they didn't pirate the program they would just go without it.

I think the service that media (and information in general) provides to society is extremely important. So much so, that I think everyone should have unrestricted access to all media. I also think that because of how gigantic and expensive the big-media industry is, being (I assume) the most consumed of all media, it negatively effects the social good media provides. Why? Simply because that money has to come from investors and advertisers. And these people aren't interested in the social good of the product, but in how much money it will make them. So what I'm suggesting is: the less expensive it is to produce media, the more free and truthful that media is. To bring the above two points into relation to piracy, I think that piracy 1) expands the sphere of people that media effects, thus increasing it's social good, and 2) could possibly bring about a new generation of popular, cheaper media, thus also increasing it's social impact by giving the creators more artistic license. In addition, there might be enough money/ viewership to expand the amount of creators and media that can fit in the top bracket of popularity; in other words instead of 90% of the profits going to the top 5%, it could be going to the top 20%. The new system I mention in the last paragraph is something I have envisioned for some time. The basic idea is that instead of content creators enforcing what they think their product is worth to everyone in the world, instead, they put their content up on some platform which allows users to download as much as they want, and distribute micro-funding to the stuff they like. The expectation is to give as much as you think is right. Which I realize is pretty much a description of Flattr. :argh: But "I thought of it first" aside, I actually am interested in Flattr, and I'd like to see it be successful. However, I think something like a cross between a content delivery system (Steam, Netflix) and Flattr would have the most chance for success.

RyanDv3, the internet, by it's very nature, basically provides the framework for something exactly like what you describe to happen. As society progresses and people become more easily and cheaply connected, big media is going to have a hard time competing with the people themselves. I expect great things