The Police Raided a 9-Year-Old to Confiscate Her Winnie the Pooh Laptop
179 replies, posted
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560275]I was saying that piracy doesn't harm anyone, so what the fuck are you even saying "Shoplifters" for at all[/QUOTE]
Why did I say vandal? Do you want me to say murderer, bank robber, tax evader?
Piracy does harm the market. A lost sale is lost profit, which is lost taxes. Don't give me that shit about piracy doesn't harm anyone. Let's say one hundred pirated copies were had this day. If even one of them is someone who would've bought the movie/game/software (A reasonable number, wouldn't you agree?), that's a loss.
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rocko's;38560286]A raid is a raid, they go in, take shit, and leave. That's a 'raid'
Besides this, they still could have easily combated their "piracy" ways in a much more, less aggressive way, then taking computers. They can simply disable their internet.[/QUOTE]
Oh so instead of seizing the actual evidence which is needed to determine guilt you want the police to simply Draconianly to deny services to people without trial?
[QUOTE=scout1;38560289]Why did I say vandal? Do you want me to say murderer, bank robber, tax evader?
Piracy does harm the market. A lost sale is lost profit, which is lost taxes. Don't give me that shit about piracy doesn't harm anyone. Let's say one hundred pirated copies were had this day. If even one of them is someone who would've bought the movie/game/software (A reasonable number, wouldn't you agree?), that's a loss.
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
Oh so instead of seizing the actual evidence which is needed to determine guilt you want the police to simply Draconianly to deny services to people without trial?[/QUOTE]
But when most of piracy isn't a sale to begin with when they would not have purchased it regardless... where does that leave you.
The reason I don't have games I want is because I refuse to buy them, theres no sale, theres no lost profit, and if I pirated them, nothing would happen because there was never a sale to begin with. "piracy is not theft" explains that it's a copy.
now if those are physical copies... that's one shitty lost sale there.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560289]
Oh so instead of seizing the actual evidence which is needed to determine guilt you want the police to simply Draconianly to deny services to people without trial?[/QUOTE]
But how do they know if they were the ones down the torrenting? Seriously, have you ever heard of leeching wifi? People can simply connect on someone else's internet, download what they need, and log off.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560258]What aggressiveness? Police coming to seize evidence? You think that's aggressive?[/QUOTE]
stealing a little girls computer because she failed to download some stupid pop song i consider aggressive.
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560307]But when 90% of piracy isn't a sale to begin with when they would not have purchased it regardless... where does that leave you.
The reason I don't have games I want is because I refuse to buy them, theres no sale, theres no lost profit, and if I pirated them, nothing would happen because there was never a sale to begin with[/QUOTE]
So 10% of all pirated shit is stuff that would've been legitly bought? That is the number you want to cite?
That is [B]two hundred thousand[/B] copies of spore. The usual royalty rate would mean maxis lost over a million dollars from piracy.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560319]So 10% of all pirated shit is stuff that would've been legitly bought? That is the number you want to cite?
That is [B]two hundred thousand[/B] copies of spore. The usual royalty rate would mean maxis lost over a million dollars from piracy.[/QUOTE]
But what would you say if they lost that money from lost sales? Piracy is the same as lost sales, it's still the same wether a person buys the game or not, they still don't get a profit from said person.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560319]So 10% of all pirated shit is stuff that would've been legitly bought? That is the number you want to cite?
That is [B]two hundred thousand[/B] copies of spore. The usual royalty rate would mean maxis lost over a million dollars from piracy.[/QUOTE]
pirates sure wouldn't say the game is worth money. Thats why they pirated it. If it was worth money they wouldn't pirate it.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;38560311]stealing a little girls computer because she failed to download some stupid pop song i consider aggressive.[/QUOTE]
Oh, right. They stole it. 'They stole' it so it could sit in an evidence locker for a few weeks before the case is dismissed. I guess they shouldn't determine guilt or innocence! Everyone is guilty! Evidence is meaningless! Why follow rule of law at all? We can just randomly determine how to deal with those suspected of breaking the law!
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560327]pirates sure wouldn't say the game is worth money. Thats why they pirated it. If it was worth money they wouldn't pirate it.[/QUOTE]
[quote]But when 90% of piracy isn't a sale to begin with when they would not have purchased it regardless... where does that leave you.[/quote]
I'm using the number [B]you[/B] cited. Make up your mind.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560341]Oh, right. They stole it. 'They stole' it so it could sit in an evidence locker for a few weeks before the case is dismissed. I guess they shouldn't determine guilt or innocence! Everyone is guilty! Evidence is meaningless! Why follow rule of law at all? We can just randomly determine how to deal with those suspected of breaking the law![/QUOTE]
his wording was bad but I really don't see the reason for a 600$ fine for like, a 1$ worth of copy.
plus they're treating the digital as physical, that's all the issue I have with the law.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560341]Oh, right. They stole it. 'They stole' it so it could sit in an evidence locker for a few weeks before the case is dismissed. I guess they shouldn't determine guilt or innocence! Everyone is guilty! Evidence is meaningless! Why follow rule of law at all? We can just randomly determine how to deal with those suspected of breaking the law!
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
I'm using the number [B]you[/B] cited. Make up your mind.[/QUOTE]
What? I'm not changing my opinion at all. What the hell are you even saying
[QUOTE=scout1;38560341]Oh, right. They stole it. 'They stole' it so it could sit in an evidence locker for a few weeks before the case is dismissed. I guess they shouldn't determine guilt or innocence! Everyone is guilty! Evidence is meaningless! Why follow rule of law at all? We can just randomly determine how to deal with those suspected of breaking the law!
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
I'm using the number [B]you[/B] cited. Make up your mind.[/QUOTE]
Jesus dude, listen to yourself. 600 dollars for a thing that probably costed 1 dollar. That's excessive. I can understand if it was 600 dollars worth of shit they stole, but that's outrageous. How do you expect someone to pay you 600 when they pirated something that was probably 1 dollar? Come on now, it's not easy.
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560351]his wording was bad but I really don't see the reason for a 600$ fine for like, a 1$ worth of copy.
plus they're treating the digital as physical, that's all the issue I have with the law.
What? I'm not changing my opinion at all. What the hell are you even saying[/QUOTE]
Gee I dunno why are speeding tickets $100+? Why don't we match all fines to exactly the cost worth? Well so what if you steal $1,000 of stuff... if you get caught you just give it back and pay $1000.
'[B]But when 90% of piracy isn't a sale to begin with [/B]when they would not have purchased it regardless... where does that leave you.'
What does this mean, then? 90% of piracy isn't a sale? So 10% would've? WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rocko's;38560370]Jesus dude, listen to yourself. 600 dollars for a thing that probably costed 1 dollar. That's excessive. I can understand if it was 600 dollars worth of shit they stole, but that's outrageous. How do you expect someone to pay you 600 when they pirated something that was probably 1 dollar? Come on now, it's not easy.[/QUOTE]
Not everyone pirates because they can't afford things. Such a fine system is ingrained into our common law and accepted everywhere else. You can't really be challenging it without taking the whole thing on. If you want to do that, I suggest you find a thread on the surpreme court.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560375]Gee I dunno why are speeding tickets $100+? Why don't we match all fines to exactly the cost worth? Well so what if you steal $1,000 of stuff... if you get caught you just give it back and pay $1000.
'[B]But when 90% of piracy isn't a sale to begin with [/B]when they would not have purchased it regardless... where does that leave you.'
What does this mean, then? 90% of piracy isn't a sale? So 10% would've? WHAT DOES IT MEAN?[/QUOTE]
that's literally not what I said at all, I was saying they should balance it for the fact that it's digitial.
you're acting like I'm saying piracy should be totally and 100% legal here
i'm saying they should take into account the digitalization and have the fine lower than stealing a physical copy but still good, rather than the possibility for people being sued for millions for a digital copy. Because of the laws your at higher risk pirating than stealing. That is not fair.
"What does this mean, then? 90% of piracy isn't a sale? So 10% would've? WHAT DOES IT MEAN?"
90% of the people would have never bought the game regardless, 10% would have if they didn't decide to do it because "lol free shit" or other
[QUOTE=scout1;38560375]Gee I dunno why are speeding tickets $100+? Why don't we match all fines to exactly the cost worth? Well so what if you steal $1,000 of stuff... if you get caught you just give it back and pay $1000.
'[B]But when 90% of piracy isn't a sale to begin with [/B]when they would not have purchased it regardless... where does that leave you.'
What does this mean, then? 90% of piracy isn't a sale? So 10% would've? WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
Not everyone pirates because they can't afford things. Such a fine system is ingrained into our common law and accepted everywhere else. You can't really be challenging it without taking the whole thing on. If you want to do that, I suggest you find a thread on the surpreme court.[/QUOTE]
Oh my god I give up like holy shit. You go on about speeding fines then change it hard. A fine should match the damages it has done to that person. If I broke a persons window, I should be fined for the crime and the repairs. For piracy, that doesn't exist, for it's a lost sale. They can make the fine 200, cause that can make up for a lot of lost sales. The money collected from the fine isn't given to the company, it goes to the government. Leaving a company to fend off for themselves and prevent piracy. So no, you're arguement doesn't work AT ALL.
People that pirate can't afford it, or just want to play it and can't get it.
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560394]that's literally not what I said at all, I was saying they should balance it for the fact that it's digitial.
you're acting like I'm saying piracy should be totally and 100% legal here
"What does this mean, then? 90% of piracy isn't a sale? So 10% would've? WHAT DOES IT MEAN?"
90% of the people would have never bought the game regardless, 10% would have if they didn't decide to do it because "lol free shit" or other[/QUOTE]
So... 10% of pirates might have bought the game? That is exactly what I thought you were saying.
Let's go through this again.
2m copies of spore were pirated.
10% of those pirates [B]may[/B] have bought the game.
That is 200,000 copies.
Assigning an arbitrary rate, that is over $1,000,000 in lost income for Maxis.
Ergo, piracy has harmed the market.
Is that green stuff growing out of your ears? I think it might be infected.
[QUOTE=Rocko's;38560400]Oh my god I give up like holy shit. You go on about speeding fines then change it hard. A fine should match the damages it has done to that person. If I broke a persons window, I should be fined for the crime and the repairs. For piracy, that doesn't exist, for it's a lost sale. They can make the fine 200, cause that can make up for a lot of lost sales. The money collected from the fine isn't given to the company, it goes to the government. Leaving a company to fend off for themselves and prevent piracy. So no, you're arguement doesn't work AT ALL.
People that pirate can't afford it, or just want to play it and can't get it.[/QUOTE]
Fines do more than just pay for restitution. There's civil court for that. They dissuade people, among other things.
PS plenty of people pirate that CAN afford it, and CAN get it, but choose to steal.
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560411]Is that green stuff growing out of your ears? I think it might be infected.[/QUOTE]
Nice response
[QUOTE=scout1;38560403]So... 10% of pirates might have bought the game? That is exactly what I thought you were saying.
Let's go through this again.
2m copies of spore were pirated.
10% of those pirates [B]may[/B] have bought the game.
That is 200,000 copies.
Assigning an arbitrary rate, that is over $1,000,000 in lost income for Maxis.
Ergo, piracy has harmed the market.[/QUOTE]
Piracy doesn't change anything, it goes as a LOST SALE. The fine that is payed GOES TO THE COMPANY INVESTIGATING THE PIRACY, WHICH IS USUALLY HIRED BY THE GOVERMENT/COMPANY.
Companies get >0 PROFIT FROM THIS, it's still a LOST SALE.
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=scout1;38560413]Fines do more than just pay for restitution. There's civil court for that. They dissuade people, among other things.
PS plenty of people pirate that CAN afford it, and CAN get it, but choose to steal.
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
Nice response[/QUOTE]
No they don't oh my fucking god. Yeah sure, there are some out there that do that. But the rest of people that pirate can't afford to get it, parent's dont want to get it, doesn't exist where they live, and can't find it anywhere.
you know the funny thing is the massive effort these companies make for DRM / anti piracy measures is actually something that counterbalances the point of doing it in terms of cost.
AKA it's more expensive to stop it.
You're literally better off just shrugging it off than to spend a lot of money and yelling about it.
[QUOTE=Rocko's;38560418]Piracy doesn't change anything, it goes as a LOST SALE. The fine that is payed GOES TO THE COMPANY INVESTIGATING THE PIRACY, WHICH IS USUALLY HIRED BY THE GOVERMENT/COMPANY.
Companies get >0 PROFIT FROM THIS, it's still a LOST SALE.
[/QUOTE]
????????
Nobody said they did
What the fuck are you even going on about, and why do you feel the need to go ALL CAPS?
[QUOTE=Rocko's;38560418]
No they don't oh my fucking god. Yeah sure, there are some out there that do that. But the rest of people that pirate can't afford to get it, parent's dont want to get it, doesn't exist where they live, and can't find it anywhere.[/QUOTE]
Okay, so you admit that your statement is erroneous.
Why are you still attacking along the same point then? You just admitted that all piracy is not 'people who can't afford and can't get it'.
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560435]you know the funny thing is the massive effort these companies make for DRM / anti piracy measures is actually something that counterbalances the point of doing it in terms of cost.
AKA it's more expensive to stop it.[/QUOTE]
Statistically?
No, no it's not.
Valve and Notch seems to make a killing even though they seem to ignore it. Albeit they do have a "in the background" drm, they aren't spending NEARLY as much as ubisoft.
Louis CK also made shitloads of money.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560443]
Statistically?
No, no it's not.[/QUOTE]
Alrighty then, got a source on this statistic? Cause, lets use EA for this, EA would have to pay a company to investigate and see if they can hunt down "pirates". Something like this isn't cheap due to resources. And they get virtually nothing back from this as the fine issued to a person illegally downloaded goes back to the company investigating.
It hurts a company more to go out and do this then it does to admit it's a lost sale.
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560456]Valve and Notch seems to make a killing even though they seem to ignore it. Albeit they do have a "in the background" drm.[/QUOTE]
Yes. DESPITE.
It is meaningless to look at absolute values, rather you have to look at the percentage of what they're losing. Valve and Notch may have large revenues, but a large portion may be lost due to piracy. So whilst they're rolling in the money, they could be rolling around in a [I]substantially larger pile of money[/I] if piracy was nonexistent.
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rocko's;38560463]Alrighty then, got a source on this statistic? Cause, lets use EA for this, EA would have to pay a company to investigate and see if they can hunt down "pirates". Something like this isn't cheap due to resources. And they get virtually nothing back from this as the fine issued to a person illegally downloaded goes back to the company investigating.
It hurts a company more to go out and do this then it does to admit it's a lost sale.[/QUOTE]
Check out the EA quarterly reports. Anti-piracy measures are not confined to 'hunting down pirates', either.
[QUOTE=Rocko's;38560463]Alrighty then, got a source on this statistic? Cause, lets use EA for this, EA would have to pay a company to investigate and see if they can hunt down "pirates". Something like this isn't cheap due to resources. And they get virtually nothing back from this as the fine issued to a person illegally downloaded goes back to the company investigating.
It hurts a company more to go out and do this then it does to admit it's a lost sale.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.gamespot.com/news/valve-worth-3-billion-report-6365049[/url]
[url]http://www.abload.de/img/1339675094945i7fd7.jpg[/url]
not "Golden" proof but it helps.
[QUOTE=scout1;38560467]Yes. DESPITE.
It is meaningless to look at absolute values, rather you have to look at the percentage of what they're losing. Valve and Notch may have large revenues, but a large portion may be lost due to piracy. So whilst they're rolling in the money, they could be rolling around in a [I]substantially larger pile of money[/I] if piracy was nonexistent.
[editline]23rd November 2012[/editline]
Check out the EA quarterly reports. Anti-piracy measures are not confined to 'hunting down pirates', either.[/QUOTE]
Like I said
the only reason I don't have games I want is because I didn't already pirate them. I would have otherwise never purchased them. Same could be said for others.
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560473][url]http://www.gamespot.com/news/valve-worth-3-billion-report-6365049[/url]
[url]http://www.abload.de/img/1339675094945i7fd7.jpg[/url]
not "Golden" proof but it helps.[/QUOTE]
Not absolute values
Let's go over this again
Not absolute values.
the funny thing is that piracy rate statistics are also very hard to make, you can't actually now aside from a general rough mentality if piracy truly was a lost sale or now.
but if you know from experience (talking to pirates), you'll know that generally there was never a sale.
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560490]the funny thing is that piracy rate statistics are also very hard to make, you can't actually now aside from a general rough mentality if piracy truly was a lost sale or now.[/QUOTE]
Which is actually a fine example to go back to the top of this page.
We have now confirmed that at least SOME piracy is lost sales, yes? Ergo, piracy is harmful to the market.
What if I accidentally change bytes on the same sequence as in the mp3 file, pirating without Internet o_O
not harmful enough to have 600$ fines a song I'd say. Even still.
[QUOTE=FluD;38560508]What if I accidentally change bytes on the same sequence as in the mp3 file, pirating without Internet o_O[/QUOTE]
You'd need Kyle XY though.
[QUOTE=J!NX;38560512]not harmful enough to have 600$ fines a song I'd say. Even still.
[/QUOTE]
No point arguing in the specifics of the fine amount. It can be statistically derived through aggregation. But, I said that to counter your previous assertion:
[quote]I was saying that piracy doesn't harm anyone[/quote]
the thing about those 'fines' is that they aren't even to do with law enforcement and in many cases the groups don't giving them out don't even have the support of the copyright holders they're claiming to protect. it's just some scumbags trying to scare people into paying them when they don't have to
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.