360 games even more expensive than Xbox ones

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

Change your quote to the new, edited one, it is much more edgier and overall better than the one you used.

 

"I really hope you're just being funny and trying to egg me on, because you'd be pretty stupid to argue that software piracy isn't a form of theft. Whether or not you "deprived" someone of something is irrelevent."

 

The laws of many, many countries would be inclined to disagree.

 

"The fact that you took access to something you had no legal right to is all that matters."

 

Consider this: a man borrows a wood carving from a friend (who bought it from a wood carver with real money), makes an exact replica of it for myself and then returns the original one. Theft?

 

What a strange and wonderful example I used there.

Edited November 6, 2005 by Sarjahurmaaja.

[GhostofAnakin]

Change your quote to the new, edited one, it is much more edgier and overall better than the one you used.

 

"I really hope you're just being funny and trying to egg me on, because you'd be pretty stupid to argue that software piracy isn't a form of theft. Whether or not you "deprived" someone of something is irrelevent."

 

The laws of many, many countries would be inclined to disagree.

 

"The fact that you took access to something you had no legal right to is all that matters."

 

Consider this: a man borrows a wood carving from a friend (who bought it from a wood carver with real money), makes an exact replica of it for myself and then returns the original one. Theft?

 

What a strange and wonderful example I used there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Consider this: the friend doesn't give the person permission to use that wood carving. it is theft, regardless of whether he returned the original or not. You're confusing who should represent who in your example. The person who owns the wood carving would be the company or developer, not the end user who bought the product and then let their friends make copies.

 

As for your first part, I'd really like to see your proof that countries don't consider software piracy a form of theft that carries with it fines and/or imprisonment. Which is generally what I was getting at with my point a while ago, whether or not you want to get precise to the definition of everything.

 

I would have thought that was obvious.

Edited November 6, 2005 by GhostofAnakin

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

Consider this: the man buys the wood carving from a shop and sells it on after making the copy.

 

Is it a theft now? Wouldn't you laugh yourself silly if you saw a thread titled "Wood Carvings Inc. sues man for unpermitted copying of wood carvings for personal use"?

 

Be honest to yourself now. Someone might make a thread titled just that after a month or two, or even three, and depending on the answer you give now, a hearty :D or a of disbelief might be followed by quotes, links and screenshots.

 

"As for your first part, I'd really like to see your proof that countries don't consider software piracy a form of theft that carries with it fines and/or imprisonment."

 

Wikipedia says: "In the common law, theft is usually defined as the unauthorised taking or use of someone else's property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use."

 

Ha, ha, ha.

Edited November 6, 2005 by Sarjahurmaaja.

[Darque]

That's a pretty good analogy (the wood carving one)

[GhostofAnakin]

Consider this: the man buys the wood carving from a shop and sells it on after making the copy.

 

Is it a theft now? Wouldn't you laugh yourself silly if you saw a thread titled "Wood Carvings Inc. sues man for unpermitted copying of wood carvings for personal use"?

 

Be honest to yourself now. Someone might make a thread titled just that after a month or two, or even three, and depending on the answer you give now, a hearty  :D or a of disbelief might be followed by quotes, links and screenshots.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Who cares if it's silly or not? If there was a law (ridiculous sounding or not) that you cannot sell replicas of that wood carving and a person did so anyways, it's illegal and exactly the same as piracy.

 

I honestly can't believe you're arguing this. Like I said already, whether or not piracy and theft are EXACTLY IDENTICAL in definition is irrelevant. The point was they're both illegal activities and there is no instance in which either one is okay to do. The fact you're arguing the exact definition rather than seeing the gist of my previous point proves you're just grasping at straws.

[GhostofAnakin]

So then your argument is there is nothing wrong with piracy? Your answer better be yes otherwise you basically just argued semantics rather than because you actually had a logical argument.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"Who cares if it's silly or not? If there was a law (ridiculous sounding or not) that you cannot sell replicas of that wood carving and a person did so anyways, it's illegal and exactly the same as piracy."

 

You're saying that laws, no matter how silly and inappropriate, should be upheld no matter what? Personally, I believe silly laws don't deserve to exist.

 

"I honestly can't believe you're arguing this. Like I said already, whether or not piracy and theft are EXACTLY IDENTICAL in definition is irrelevant. The point was they're both illegal activities and there is no instance in which either one is okay to do."

 

I see no one arguing here whether or not software "piracy" is illegal or not (I do believe it isn't illegal in a few countries, it was - for personal use - legal in Finland a while ago, by the way, but that is beside the point).

 

I daresay I disagree on the second part, however!

Edited November 7, 2005 by Sarjahurmaaja.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"So then your argument is there is nothing wrong with piracy? Your answer better be yes otherwise you basically just argued semantics rather than because you actually had a logical argument."

 

Are you saying we were arguing seriously? I thought we were doing it for laughs and giggles, old chap!

 

Now, oh dear old friend, I don't understand... Why did you make such a bloody damn stupid comparison as you did if you wanted for us to have a serious debate, a discussion? Surely you see the folly in making a comparison between the theft of a Ferrari and "pirating" a PlayStation 2 game!

 

"That's a pretty good analogy (the wood carving one)"

 

Really? Thanks!

 

I thought it was all sorts of batguanohumpingcrazy, what with it being pretty much totally disjointed from reality and all.

(I only wrote that because I wanted to write bat********ingcrazy, and then I decided to post it because I liked the way I bypassed the censorship with it.)

Edited November 7, 2005 by Sarjahurmaaja.

[Kaftan Barlast]

Burglary is theft, piracy is copyright infringement. No matter how you twist and turn it, you cannot escape that

 

 

1. The company still has the product, they lose nothing material. They still have X printed copies for ale on the shelf

 

2. What they lose is only potential sales in a very abstract sense that cannot be estimated.

[Diamond]

Piracy can't be justified and is not comparable to "wood carving" if you ask me. It is a fact, that if we were now to be allowed to copy stuff from each other, there will be a rapid decline in software (and movie) industry.

 

On the other hand, it is not the case with countries with lower income, where people wouldn't buy software product in the first place. Only increase of income can reduce piracy in such countries (which comes at a cost of decreasing income in some other countries, though).

 

One way for companies to get money from their product is to release them at extremely low prices in such countries. In Russia some games are translated and released by a local publisher at symbolic price (Heroes of Might and Magic 4 was $5 when released). That way game company gets some money, which is still better than nothing.

 

P. S.

And copyright infringement is a much broader idea than just copying a movie off a friend's harddrive.

Edited November 7, 2005 by Diamond

[kumquatq3]

Piracy can't be justified

 

Yes it can

 

If you wear an eye patch!

 

Yarrrrrrrrrrrr

Edited November 7, 2005 by kumquatq3

[Diamond]

Piracy can't be justified

 

Yes it can

 

If you wear an eye patch!

 

Yarrrrrrrrrrrr

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I imagine... "

 

[Epiphany]

That's so messed up.

 

But Epiphany will tell us it's for our own good! As M$ is our friend

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

PS3 games will be the same way.

 

Deal with it if you want to play console games next gen, on a HD console.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"Piracy can't be justified and is not comparable to 'wood carving' if you ask me. It is a fact, that if we were now to be allowed to copy stuff from each other, there will be a rapid decline in software (and movie) industry."

 

Why isn't it comparable? Because copying a wood carving is much more difficult than copying a game?

 

Would piracy suddenly became justifiable if it was insanely difficult to do?

[kumquatq3]

You bastard

 

Seriously tho, you can't really defend piracy

 

 

 

 

unless you have a ship with 30 cannons and a sword, yarrrrr

[Diamond]

Why isn't it comparable? Because copying a wood carving is much more difficult than copying a game?

With wood carving you sell a hand-made piece of artwork, which is paid for for being hand-made, you can carve all you want, but main effort is "producing a hard copy" (same with painting, sculpture, anywhere, where work outcome is unique).

 

Whereas in a game or a movie the bulk of all the work is done on "intellectual property". To customer it is very abstract, but for the company it is real money, which you pay to programmers, artists, actors, support staff, administration and marketing staff, renting offices, equipment, etc.

 

The budget is incomparably larger, and to be sustainable, the company must sell a certain number of copies.

 

I hope it answers your question.

 

Would piracy suddenly became justifiable if it was insanely difficult to do?

If reproducing a copie of a movie would be so difficult, we would be getting our "copies" in the local theatre.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"With wood carving you sell a hand-made piece of artwork, which is paid for for being hand-made, you can carve all you want, but main effort is 'producing a hard copy' (same with painting, sculpture, anywhere, where work outcome is unique)."

 

Would it be acceptable to take someone else's unique and succesful wood carving design and start making copies of them for sale then?

 

"If reproducing a copie of a movie would be so difficult, we would be getting our 'copies' in the local theatre."

 

That doesn't answer my question.

[Arkan]

Wikipedia says: "In the common law, theft is usually defined as the unauthorised taking or use of someone else's property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use."

 

Ha, ha, ha.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Wikipedia stands up well to scrutiny in a court of law?

 

I can take things from the store without paying for them as long as I have the intent to return them?

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"I can take things from the store without paying for them as long as I have the intent to return them?"

 

Truth to be told, I have no idea why the word "permanently" is there. It doesn't mention it even in the example that follows. It just speaks of "intent to deprive", so I guess you can't take things from store without paying for them, even if you intend to return them later.

[Diamond]

Would it be acceptable to take someone else's unique and succesful wood carving design and start making copies of them for sale then?

Unless they explicitly patent it.

 

 

That doesn't answer my question.

I guess, this situation now is very artificial. Would copying be so expensive, we would not have piracy problem in the first place.

 

The question should be "Without mass-production in place, would we have piracy issues?". The answer is no.

 

The notion of "intellectual property" appeared appeared, when people started investing in IP, not the production of physical copies. Without mass-production IP would be of a secondary concern.

[Diamond]

Wikipedia stands up well to scrutiny in a court of law?

I can take things from the store without paying for them as long as I have the intent to return them?

Yes, but you will have hard time proving it in the court

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"Unless they explicitly patent it."

 

Why don't they have to do this with games and such?

 

"The question should be 'Without mass-production in place, would we have piracy issues?'. The answer is no."

 

That's the question you want to answer. The question I want the answer to is "Without mass-production in place, would piracy be morally acceptable?" I'm guessing "yes".

 

"Yes, but you will have hard time proving it in the court"

 

And even then, there's still civil liability for it and all.

 

I'm not defending piracy here. I'm just saying it's silly to compare it to theft.

 

Now, I disappear in a puff of ninja smoke.

 

*PUFF*

[Diamond]

Why don't they have to do this with games and such?

They do.

 

That's the question you want to answer. The question I want the answer to is "Without mass-production in place, would piracy be morally acceptable?" I'm guessing "yes".

Without mass-production there wouldn't be a notion of piracy, so your question describes an artificial situation.

 

I'm not defending piracy here. I'm just saying it's silly to compare it to theft.

I wouldn't say it is silly, but indeed current legal framework is not yet suited for IP, the law for IP is being made today.

[Judge Hades]

I will say this about games and prices. Back in the days of the Commodore 64 games were $30 to $50. Inthe days of the 486 games were $30 to $50. Now, games are $30 to $50.

 

As inflation has increased the prices of many products, games have pretty much stayed the same. Its time that inflation catches up with games.

[Darque]

I will say this about games and prices.  Back in the days of the Commodore 64 games were $30 to $50.  Inthe days of the 486 games were $30 to $50.  Now, games are $30 to $50. 

 

As inflation has increased the prices of many products, games have pretty much stayed the same.  Its time that inflation catches up with games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yikes, I had no idea.

 

Hmm... you may be right.... but wouldn't that hurt the sales and thus the market since a lot of... umm... short or weak games are being made? And I don't see people dishing out 50-70$ for a short or underdeveloped game.