BruceVC

Holy Smoke Bos, you are little selective with your diet? But living in Australia if you cut out food types like reptiles and dogs what other food is availible that is considered meat?

Okay thanks, I have to be honest I am still finding the whole thing confusing as it seems its not as clear cut as I first thought. The reason I ask is I work for a software company and we do software audits. If customers are found to have unlicensed versions of software on there desktops they have to pay a fine or pay for the license. But there is no criminal case, yet they are aware that what they are doing is illegal. So in a way this aligns to what you are saying as its the company that owns the software that does the audit and not the South African authorities. But who polices games on your desktop that you haven't payed for?

There, fixed it for you Thats clever Gorth, I didn't even realize the significance of my words

That made me laugh ..."I mean he was a bunch of floating chunks " I suppose you can only escape the the Grim Reaper for so long

I am little concerned that we aren't seeing enough chainmail bikini clad women in the projected artwork. Anyone else share my angst?

Really? Because it's my understanding that in every single country in the world, copyright infringement is explicitly not theft. That's why "copyright infringement" and "theft" are two different crimes. Well (and I'm guessing here) if you download a copy that you don't own and then share it, isn't it technically theft and then copyright infringement. If you however own a copy and then share it, then it's only CF. No; to use BruceVC's watch example walking into the shop and taking the watch is theft- the owner is deprived of the ownership of the watch and its benefits, including selling it. If on the other hand you duplicated the watch the owner would still own the original and have its benefits no matter how many copies were made, similarly if I copied the Mona Lisa it is not the same as stealing it from the Louvre, though both end up with me having the painting one means that the Louvre still has the painting while the other deprives them of it. If you steal a CD with songs on it you will get arrested and (potentially) charged criminally with theft, if on the other hand you download the songs that make up the CD the shop can still sell the CD and the law broken is copyright infringement which is (at least in small scale cases and most jurisdictions) a civil rather than criminal matter. Okay I am confused, are you guys saying if I use Torrent to donwloand DA2 and play it with a cracked license then that is not illegal? No, he's saying that it's a civil rather than criminal matter. Though I believe large-scale distribution of copyrighted works is criminal, although I'm not aware of criminal penalties being successfully applied to non-commercial distributors. Okay, thanks for the explanation. Can you explain in your words the definition of civil and criminal in the context of downloading games and what is legal and whats not.

Now thats an impressive list of food you have eaten But honestly Whale? As far as I know only the Japanese, Norwegians and you guys still hunt them. I am not trying to judge your culture but don't you object to eating an endangered species?

I think you misunderstand direct. It's a spiritual successor. Anyway, I was part of their forums before they went from "fan sequel" to "spiritual successor" and they're a bunch of idiots. Not only are they treating it like a multiplayer e-Sport, but they're missing the point of the game. Dungeon Keeper was always about humor and these guys are playing everything straight. Everything is designed to look badass or cool, whereas half the things in Dungeon Keeper (i.e. Bile Demon) looked hilarious on first sight. They also constantly promise updates and don't deliver and disappear for weeks. Extremely unprofessional. As much as I want a successor to DK, not backing this one. Waste of money. Gee Neutral, if you don't like the concept of the game maybe you should just say so instead of obfuscating your point ? What? I'm not sure what I'm supposed to obfuscating. I stand by everything I said - I want a spiritual successor to Dungeon Keeper, but this isn't one even if that's how they're selling it. I've dealt with these people personally and I can tell you they don't have any idea of what made Dungeon Keeper a fun game. I love their core concept as presented, but they're not actually making that. I apologize, you are being clear on your view. Its just you aren't being positive, but you don't have to be. So just ignore my comment

I am honestly confused Really? Because it's my understanding that in every single country in the world, copyright infringement is explicitly not theft. That's why "copyright infringement" and "theft" are two different crimes. Well (and I'm guessing here) if you download a copy that you don't own and then share it, isn't it technically theft and then copyright infringement. If you however own a copy and then share it, then it's only CF. No; to use BruceVC's watch example walking into the shop and taking the watch is theft- the owner is deprived of the ownership of the watch and its benefits, including selling it. If on the other hand you duplicated the watch the owner would still own the original and have its benefits no matter how many copies were made, similarly if I copied the Mona Lisa it is not the same as stealing it from the Louvre, though both end up with me having the painting one means that the Louvre still has the painting while the other deprives them of it. If you steal a CD with songs on it you will get arrested and (potentially) charged criminally with theft, if on the other hand you download the songs that make up the CD the shop can still sell the CD and the law broken is copyright infringement which is (at least in small scale cases and most jurisdictions) a civil rather than criminal matter. Okay I am confused, are you guys saying if I use Torrent to donwloand DA2 and play it with a cracked license then that is not illegal?

I think you misunderstand direct. It's a spiritual successor. Anyway, I was part of their forums before they went from "fan sequel" to "spiritual successor" and they're a bunch of idiots. Not only are they treating it like a multiplayer e-Sport, but they're missing the point of the game. Dungeon Keeper was always about humor and these guys are playing everything straight. Everything is designed to look badass or cool, whereas half the things in Dungeon Keeper (i.e. Bile Demon) looked hilarious on first sight. They also constantly promise updates and don't deliver and disappear for weeks. Extremely unprofessional. As much as I want a successor to DK, not backing this one. Waste of money. Gee Neutral, if you don't like the concept of the game maybe you should just say so instead of obfuscating your point ?

Ouch Nep, doesn't sound like a fun fulled few days I recommend a few, friendly Tequila's to sooth away that frustration

Yeah "obnoxious" that is a nice way of putting it I think half of us do not talk to him at all anymore. Have him blocked on facebook and his emails tagged as spam. But I do dread the possibility of him being present when we are due back for the graduation ceremony, as my upbringing prevents me from punching people's teeth out... Yeah "obnoxious" that is a nice way of putting it I think half of us do not talk to him at all anymore. Have him blocked on facebook and his emails tagged as spam. But I do dread the possibility of him being present when we are due back for the graduation ceremony, as my upbringing prevents me from punching people's teeth out... Now thats a good example of my point Can I ask a question, why did no one sit him down and diplomatically say how he was offending people? Be honest but polite and say he needs to change. Do you think he knows people don't like him?

I am not attacking you directly, so please don't see it like this. I am making a point around the principle of justifying Pirating that people seem to make and I disagree with. This point I am making is an analogy so it may be about watches but it applies to everything else including Pirating. In summary You have agreed with me that there are things in life that you don't own because the result of stealing them is not worth you being caught. You are an honest person and like most of us you don't want to go to jail You have agreed with me that there is no legal precedence that says you can use something without paying for it and then decide if you want to pay for it So the reason why the majority of people Pirate is that they can. I want to stress this point, they can. There are no real consequences for Pirating. Almost every single moral or legal debate around Pirating would become moot if there real consequences, you would not make a moral argument if you could get caught. You just wouldn't risk Pirating You can argue " but is it illegal to Pirate, is it theft? " In every country in the world the law says it is. So therefore from a legal perspective it is. I agree with almost everything up to here. If there we consequences to piracy I would not do it ever. That would lead in a decrease in company revenue that they receive from me. But since most pirates are not like me, it would increase their revenues received in general. The legality on this issue is clear. I would stop pirating if there were consequences, however I would still argue the morality of my case even louder. This is where I differ with you, though you may just be unclear in if you're referring to me directly or to pirates in general(seems to be directed at both). If it is directed at me, my point is this: I will buy a good game if I am convinced by the dev's, reviewers, fans or friends that it's a good game. If I am still on the fence I will either not buy it or I will pirate it if I'm intrigued by the concept but unconvinced of the execution(this has happened around 10 times in my life). If the game is good, that means less money for the food industry and more money for the game developer. If the game is bad the money goes to food, because I have no interest in playing a bad game and therefore I uninstall it. In case you still have trouble understanding, I made a quick flowchart. My way of piracy can only increase the sales of the product. This is the only way of pirating that I can approve of morally. Enjoying a game without paying for it, is in my opinion morally wrong. Both are equally wrong legally. You have made some good points. The flowchart does explain things, so Pirating is your last option in deciding to play a game. I do think you are the exception in this whole system pf Pirating, I believe the majority of people will happily Pirate games and not pay for them even if they enjoy them. So I have to be completely against pirating in any respects. I also work for a global software company so I see the insidious impact of Pirating.

Interesting point, so are you saying this guy was invited to your social functions after class. And he was generally obnoxious?

I am not attacking you directly, so please don't see it like this. I am making a point around the principle of justifying Pirating that people seem to make and I disagree with. This point I am making is an analogy so it may be about watches but it applies to everything else including Pirating. In summary You have agreed with me that there are things in life that you don't own because the result of stealing them is not worth you being caught. You are an honest person and like most of us you don't want to go to jail You have agreed with me that there is no legal precedence that says you can use something without paying for it and then decide if you want to pay for it So the reason why the majority of people Pirate is that they can. I want to stress this point, they can. There are no real consequences for Pirating. Almost every single moral or legal debate around Pirating would become moot if there real consequences, you would not make a moral argument if you could get caught. You just wouldn't risk Pirating You can argue " but is it illegal to Pirate, is it theft? " In every country in the world the law says it is. So therefore from a legal perspective it is. End of the day I am hoping to convince you to see that Pirating software for whatever reason is the same as taking the Rolex, I cannot see the moral justification. People pirate software because they can get away without paying for it.

Thanks for your honest response, you don't own such a watch for the same reason that 99% of the people in this world don't own one. They can't afford it. I have a second question. Lets say you decided to take the watch but you were caught shoplifting. When you went to court what do you think the judge would say if your defense was " I was planning to buy the watch once I determined that it does add value in my life" Do you think he would dismiss charges against you? If you think he won't please tell me why. Once again can you only answer the question

I am surprised you cannot just answer the question I asked? Its not that difficult to understand, just humor me and play along with where I am going with this train of thought

All I am saying is that one person has to do the first step and saying hat "they are insincere therefor I refuse" is not it. It's ok if people decide they are not interested in salvaging a situation, but unless there is good reason, it can be seen as equally insincere to the accuse the other side. Just speaking as someone who is on reltively good terms again with a formerly estranged relative I agree with you in your example My point is more about this strange behavior with human beings where they feel the need to invite people to events and functions but they don't actually like the person or they don't really want them there. But they feel some sort of obligation. Personally I prefer not being invited in these examples

I appreciate your candid responses to this topic. I want to ask you some questions. Do you own a Rolex Daytona watch ? It will cost you about $10,000.00 but its a classic and amazing piece of engineering http://www.watchfinder.co.uk/Rolex/Daytona/116520/6418/item/23339 If you don't why don't you walk into your local Rolex store, put the watch in your pocket and walk out with it. Trust me you won't regret owning one. Please only answer the questions above, I'll get to the Pirating connection later

Yes but there is a difference between relatives who want to truly reconcile and invite you somewhere and you getting an invite to a wedding from people who have had no contact with you for years but feel they should invite you. I object to the insincerity of these types of events. This is just as example, I could name others

It always annoys and amazes me when people do that in life, they invite you somewhere but only because they feel they have to. They don't really want you there. I am firm believer in consistency and more importantly, sincerity. Why invite someone to a barbecue , wedding, b-day or similar event if you don't like them? I feel this just perpetuates an uncomfortable vibe. You see this particularly with families. I would rather be with people that aren't my family but like me than to be with my relatives who don't like me but invite me because " he is family so we must invite him as its the right thing to do"

You have raised a good point, its funny how suddenly it can become convenient to believe in certain views when it suits a religious agenda

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apocalypse-2012--how-predictions-came-from-new-age-magic-mushroom-trip-130852054.html Different perspective around the history of the "Mayan doomsday countdown"

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apocalypse-2012--how-predictions-came-from-new-age-magic-mushroom-trip-130852054.html Different perspective around the history of the "Mayan doomsday countdown"

Yeah we are weird like that, we believe people should actually pay for things they don't own and they want to utilize or benefit from. Like games for example