McAfee Patents Technology to Detect and Block Pirated Content - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;40419760]"Stealing potential sales" what does that even mean? Are used sales theft because you're "stealing" the potential profit that could have been made from a new purchase?[/QUOTE] No because the person who previously owned it purchased the product.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;40419869]No because the person who previously owned it purchased the product.[/QUOTE] But the person who bought the used good is receiving that good without giving money to the creator, so the creator is losing a potential sale, and thus by your definition that transaction is theft.

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;40419889]But the person who bought the used good is receiving that good without giving money to the creator, so the creator is losing a potential sale, and thus by your definition that transaction is theft.[/QUOTE] The creator already got the sale they are concerned with. Digital copies cannot be sold used.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;40419804]Yes but how many people would actually BUY photoshop if it wasn't 600$ a license? what if it cost 40$ for a personal license, then could you justify piracy? Granted photoshop is a utility, not a game, so the entertainment argument doesnt exist. Also the whole idea of "free money" doesn't exist. The company has to pay for the court and legal fees, and then HOPE that the person they sued will settle out of court, because if they don't they could potentially spend millions in fees and other court related costs, all to lose their case because they filed the case wrong or something similar. Suing someone is actually a calculated risk, not a definite way of making "free money". Look I don't agree with the fact that the penalties are crazy steep, and paying millions of dollars because you pirated 1 song is bullshit; but at the same time, there are punishments for breaking the law. Don't start with the whole argument "the company should get with the times and do X" because it doesn't matter how far ahead or behind the companies policies are, you're still breaking the law, and you'll still be punished if you get caught.[/QUOTE] Photoshop Elements is $100 and [i]still[/i] has more features than anyone really needs. If you need CS, you're ideally making a lot of money off of the skills that make use of it, and it becomes a worthwhile investment. by all means, yes lawsuits are an investment and comes with risks, but can you call it anything else when their explicit reason to sue people for a ton of money is just hypotheticals and example making? They sue out of greed and hope that in causing havok like that, they 1: get more out of the guy than if he bought everything they ever published, and 2: other people go and spend money instead of pirating. You be the judge of whether or not that works, oblivious people continue paying for things and piratey types (who know what happened) tend to avoid that company altogether, then forget what happened and keep going about their business.

[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;40416113]Yeah but what if you were trying to sell that chair to make money, and he just gave out a free "copy" to all his friends, and they gave a free copy to all their friends, and so on. Sucks for you, guess you don't get to make money from those people who now have your chair. It's okay though, they weren't going to buy your chair anyway. They should still be able to have it though, right?[/QUOTE] But making chairs costs money, so either way if the other guy is copying your chair and giving it away, he's losing money and he'll eventually stop. Meaning: this analogy sucks.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;40419951]The creator already got the sale they are concerned with. Digital copies cannot be sold used.[/QUOTE] My point is that the idea that you can somehow "steal" sales is stupid. I don't see how you can possibly argue that "I could have made money off of this person but now because you provided them with my product I can't" is theft. Piracy is copyright infringement, sure, and it's still not a legally or ethically acceptable practice, but it's still incorrect to call it theft.

It's pointless arguing about piracy, pirates are going to pirate regardless of what companies do because they don't give a fuck. Of course selling a good game or software at a reasonable price with no DRM also makes a difference to the number of people who are willing to purchase but your never going to eliminate piracy. As for this patent it's practically a joke, no one with any brains would use such garbage software in the first place.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;40415876]Where does it say that? [editline]25th April 2013[/editline] And I honestly don't see anything wrong with it.[/QUOTE] legally they cant implement it, at least in north american countries as it constitutes deep packet inspection, which is a massive privacy violation

[QUOTE=Death_God;40415717]does anyone even use mcafee anymore[/QUOTE] many IT and schools use it

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;40419634]Don't forget anecdotal arguments such ad "I know plenty of people who..." or "really shitty biased studies show...." or "They wouldn't have bought it in the first place!"[/QUOTE] Or "every pirated copy is lost profit".

[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;40416336]Sure, they might not have lost ACTUAL wealth, but they lost potential sales, which is a large amount of money gone. Money that could have gone into, like Benioff said: Special effects.[/QUOTE] "lost potential sales" doesn't mean shit, ever looked around a store and didn't buy everything you saw? [I]Hundreds[/I] of potential sales, all lost.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;40420166]Or "every pirated copy is lost profit".[/QUOTE] Expense = Money spent Revenue = Money made Profit = Revenue - Expense (Revenue - 1) - Expense < Revenue - Expense A pirated copy is lost revenue, and therefore is lost profit.

[QUOTE=daijitsu;40419255]it came with a free 3-day trial on my new laptop, in which it hogged CPU, warned me with a big obstructive popup about every action I do, and popped up reminders every hour to actually pay for it before time runs out or I'll lose all of these wonderful services[/QUOTE] Don't forget how you can't bloody uninstall it completely either with the uninstall button, it still leaves files behind that you can't remove manually.

[QUOTE=Rents;40420271]"lost potential sales" doesn't mean shit, ever looked around a store and didn't buy everything you saw? [I]Hundreds[/I] of potential sales, all lost.[/QUOTE] And then, get this, you walked out of the store without any games, still as bored as you were before. Maybe you'll go back and actually buy one, who knows. But if you walk out the door and already have access to all those hundreds of games, well, I think the chance of you actually buying anything is zero. Not every instance of piracy is a lost sale. But the idea that [i]no[/i] instance of piracy is a lost sale, or that the idea of a sale lost to piracy is inherently bogus, is dumb.

[QUOTE=Rents;40420271]"lost potential sales" doesn't mean shit, ever looked around a store and didn't buy everything you saw? [I]Hundreds[/I] of potential sales, all lost.[/QUOTE] But you weren't going to play them in the first place. Pirating a game implies you had enough interest to play it but not buy it.

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;40419889]But the person who bought the used good is receiving that good without giving money to the creator, so the creator is losing a potential sale, and thus by your definition that transaction is theft.[/QUOTE] let's make this simple we have a seller and a consumer. when talking about any form of goods, we have consumer with money, and seller with item. [t]http://i.imgur.com/w90qhOC.png[/t] however, in goods like digital music, when you purchase something it costs nothing for the seller to hand it over, because they give you a copy. They have infinite supply of the item and cost is only driven by industry standards. In this trade, this is what you get- [t]http://i.imgur.com/oavVcCH.png[/t] the money from there is now split into [url=http://www.bearshare.com/styles/default/economic-of-music/economic-musician-divide.jpg]portions[/url] the profit gained by everyone involved is increased due to it being a digital copy with no production and shipping costs, and no profits going to retail distributors (that 25% is profit gained by walmart or wherever you buy it, or that goes directly into the rest of the pool if you purchase digi goods from the label. If there's no label, it all goes to the band grouping, which is great, but labels account for a lot of advertisement and publishing which could net far more for the band in the long run) in the case of "theft", it implies that there is a loss. This is theft- [t]http://i.imgur.com/oFxzIPP.png[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/FqDZoRN.png[/t] now the seller does not have the item, and cannot profit from selling it to someone who does have $10. In fact, they likely [i]lost[/i] more regarding the investment on it than the potential profit, as they had to pay to get the product and ship it to the store. now, we have piracy: [t]http://i.imgur.com/oFxzIPP.png[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/SXT6Uem.png[/t] [i]yes[/i], the individual artists don't earn their $0.23, and the record label who advertises them doesn't make their $6.30, which hurts their feelings a little bit. They did not physically lose anything, as the only money spent by anyone during the process is the hosts of whatever sharing server the file comes from, and that comes from ad revenue for having to put up with brazzers banner ads No, they shouldn't sit there and take it because if everybody downloaded stuff, they'd not get money. I think we can all agree that would be bad in the long run. From here we obviously have a per-case issue of "are they trying before buying?" "are they broke and wouldn't have put up the money otherwise?", or "this dude is fucking lazy" honestly, the record industry is suffering a bit, but not in profit losses. as knee jerk reactions hit about piracy, you end up with a lot of people buying up the crappy generic mainstream stuff, which tells companies "this sells fast and isn't pirated much, let's make more like that", and we slowly decline into a torrent of awful stuff that's trendy with really drunk white girls. This is also boosted by the fact that a lot of new artists who aren't generic pop culture recyclers are falling more and more into the indie scene and small labels that don't take most of the earnings just for existing. This, again, leaves all the labels currently pumping out the most advertising the choice of 'advertise bieber' and 'should backstreet actually come back but with kanye west instead of the blond dude' so I do encourage buying when you can, supporting artists is kind of a huge thing to me as a working artist, but I'd rather buy directly from people, donate a few dollars directly, because hell if much of my money spent at walmart actually makes it down to the creatives who actually drive their trade

[QUOTE=Rents;40420271]"lost potential sales" doesn't mean shit, ever looked around a store and didn't buy everything you saw? [I]Hundreds[/I] of potential sales, all lost.[/QUOTE] Many people also pirate as a trial before buying. Like watching a show on tv before deciding it's good enough that you want to buy the whole season, or watching a movie at a friends house before deciding that you also want to own it. It's to verify that it's a product that you'll like, to not judge a book by its cover.

[QUOTE=catbarf;40420305]And then, get this, you walked out of the store without any games, still as bored as you were before. Maybe you'll go back and actually buy one, who knows. But if you walk out the door and already have access to all those hundreds of games, well, I think the chance of you actually buying anything is zero. Not every instance of piracy is a lost sale. But the idea that [i]no[/i] instance of piracy is a lost sale, or that the idea of a sale lost to piracy is inherently bogus, is dumb.[/QUOTE] Piracy does lose you sales, but it's also free advertising, companies need to adapt to piracy, not bitch and throw lawsuits around, because it's not going away.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;40420314]But you weren't going to play them in the first place. Pirating a game implies you had enough interest to play it but not buy it.[/QUOTE] Well yeah. The game might be complete shit, or it might turn out to be awesome. So trying before buying is a good way to know if you're going to regret purchasing or not. I personally don't... because I'm firstly a bit carefree with how I handle my money, and because I can't fucking stand the whole cracking and rarring and pirated game glitches :v:

I see a lot of people who mistake revenue as profit.

[QUOTE=daijitsu;40420343]Stuff[/QUOTE] I can't actually tell if you're trying to refute my point or if we're arguing the same thing here.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;40420392]If they're broke and would have put up the money had they had it, they still shouldn't be downloading it. Music/Movies/Games/Software are all luxury items, as such you should be paying for them. It'd be different if you were starving and took bread, rather you're not starving; you're bored, and looking for a free source of entertainment that doesn't result in you walking outside.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but you can't stop them without massively breaching everyone's online privacy, so it doesn't really matter if someone who can't buy the product is pirating it.

I know piracy can be a bitch but a lot of the time the DRM just makes piracy worse if you don't do it the right way. Not only that, but, [I]being sued for 1 billion because you downloaded a single song that costs 25c is[/I] [B][I]out right bullshit[/I][/B], but piracy is just sooo bad that its that big of an issue, right? They don't give a shit if they ruin a family by suing the mother because the kid downloaded it without realizing it, they just want to use that to scare people.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;40420421]OR they can do the cheaper more economical thing and just keep creating more and more intrusive DRM, thus causing the customer to bitch and moan. It's a two way street. Pirates need to realize that they are doing harm, and companies need to realize that people are still going to take the lazy way out and pirate the shit out of their stuff.[/QUOTE] DRM often makes piracy worse, less people want to pay for something they know will be an inconvenience when an alternative that's both free and simpler to use exists.

[QUOTE=Rents;40420377]Piracy does lose you sales, but it's also free advertising, companies need to adapt to piracy, not bitch and throw lawsuits around, because it's not going away.[/QUOTE] exactly this [QUOTE=Rents;40420459]DRM often makes piracy worse, less people want to pay for something they know will be an inconvenience when an alternative that's both free and simpler to use exists.[/QUOTE] and this is true because who the fuck wants to buy a game that's offline but needs to connect to a server when you can actually have it offline 100% and still work equally as good for [I]free[/I]?

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;40420421]OR they can do the cheaper more economical thing and just keep creating more and more intrusive DRM, thus causing the customer to bitch and moan. It's a two way street. Pirates need to realize that they are doing harm, and companies need to realize that people are still going to take the lazy way out and pirate the shit out of their stuff.[/QUOTE] Have the companies provide their product at more reasonable prices and doesn't contain drm which ends up negatively affecting actual customers more than the pirates, and then their product will be more worth buying then pirating. [editline]25th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=ilikecorn;40420479]What i'm saying is people need to get the idea of being "entitled" to entertainment out of their head. If you couldnt buy it, dont play it.[/QUOTE] I'll still say "fuck you" if you still think this way when considering country restrictions. If there is a country restriction, I have absolutely NO FUCKING WHAT SO EVER remorse for pirating their product. Then they're the ones screwing themselves over by refusing me to be their customer.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;40420479]What i'm saying is people need to get the idea of being "entitled" to entertainment out of their head. If you couldnt buy it, dont play it.[/QUOTE] And I'm saying if they can't buy it, it doesn't really affect anything other than giving companies free publicity, so why worry?

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;40420535]The alternative is not caring about people who reap the benifit of your work without compensating you for said work [editline]25th April 2013[/editline] Because someone is reaping benifit without paying for said benifit.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but you can't stop them, so you can either bitch about it or come up with a better marketing strategy.

[QUOTE=Rents;40420573]Yeah, but you can't stop them, so you can either bitch about it or come up with a better marketing strategy.[/QUOTE] normally when you bitch about it, HUGE issues are caused, and people get all grr and its just a childish "GRRR" match do what steam does. Make a service that is better than piracy. why? Because Piracy is a service issue. [QUOTE=ilikecorn;40420584]Looks like they did, shit like this. Pirates dont realize the consequences of their actions.[/QUOTE] its not that they don't realize the consequences. its that they simply do not give a fuck. And that is why people pirate, they want nothing to do with spending money or piracy is a better option than giving a shit.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;40420283]Expense = Money spent Revenue = Money made Profit = Revenue - Expense (Revenue - 1) - Expense < Revenue - Expense A pirated copy is lost revenue, and therefore is lost profit.[/QUOTE] You have no proof that pirated copy is lost revenue. You simply don't.