The Age of New DRM

[Humodour]

I don't believe I mentioned anything about Nightshape defining or making the law.

 

You were implying that if Nightshape says downloading copyright content is theft, then we should listen to him because he works on games (he's been hired by someone now has he? Good for him). Not so, and the law doesn't actually define copyright infringement as theft.

 

Perhaps that is how you roll down under, but in the US we have the NET act. 5 years in prison and $25,000.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NET_Act

 

Of course a geeky kid sitting in his basement downloading a couple games isn't going to be much of a target for law enforcement. The resources it takes to track down every bit of piracy isn't considered worth it, but that does not make it legal or put it in a moral gray area. It's wrong and there is no justifying it.

 

You don't seem to understand a very basic point: illegal or not, copyright infringement isn't the same as theft, it isn't physical, and it certainly doesn't occur on the high seas, and I can guarantee you that is true in American law as well as Australian law. It really annoys me when people mix up technical terms like that, and it misrepresents the offence (although I am sure the media industry is perfectly happy to be disingenuous).

Edited January 31, 2010 by Krezack

[Oner]

You don't seem to understand a very basic point: illegal or not, copyright infringement isn't the same as theft, it isn't physical, and it certainly doesn't occur on the high seas, and I can guarantee you that is true in American law as well as Australian law. It really annoys me when people mix up technical terms like that, and it misrepresents the offence (although I am sure the media industry is perfectly happy to be disingenuous).

Name aside, what's the difference?

[RPGmasterBoo]

Why does this topic always turn into an ethical thing. It doesn't matter whether piracy is good or not, or copyright infringment or whatever - its here to stay. Since its here to stay, what most of us here argue is that the industry should ditch the new DRM wankery because its doing absolutely nothing against pirates.

 

Of course, if as someone suggested the target is the secondhand market... well then all the more reason to rail against new DRM, because reselling games is our moral right (no matter what its status under law). If I bought it, I can sell it - and they shouldn't prevent us from doing so.

Edited January 31, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[Mamoulian War]

You don't seem to understand a very basic point: illegal or not, copyright infringement isn't the same as theft, it isn't physical, and it certainly doesn't occur on the high seas, and I can guarantee you that is true in American law as well as Australian law. It really annoys me when people mix up technical terms like that, and it misrepresents the offence (although I am sure the media industry is perfectly happy to be disingenuous).

Name aside, what's the difference?

 

Copyright Infringement: You work on your super secret business project and someone gets into your house copies all your work on his external harddrive, and then release the product as his own, you still have your product, so you can publish your version and compete with the Copyright Infringer with better support, more functions available in the product... You most likely do not get all the money you could when you would be only person in the world with the right to copy your work, but you still can make nice living out of your work and continue to make your product better and better, despite the leak...

 

Stealing: You work on your super secret business project and someone gets into your house and steals your PC, all your backups, including the backup in the cloud, and then release the product as his own, you are ****ed right in the ass, because you lost everything all your code, all your notes you had and possibly go bankrupt...

 

 

Hopefuly you now understand the difference between Stealing and Copyright Infringement...

[Oner]

Right, I remember now. Thanks.

 

Hopefully you now understand the difference between Stealing and Copyright Infringement...

I'm not sure whether you're sarcastic or mocking.

 

 

Related to the topic.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Oner

[Purkake]

I have handy chart as well:

 

 

Replace "File Sharing" with "Copyright Infringement"

Edited January 31, 2010 by Purkake

[Meshugger]

"You sodding copyright infringementers" doesn't have the same strong negative tone as "You sodding thieves".

[213374U]

"You sodding copyright infringementers" doesn't have the same strong negative tone as "You sodding thieves".

This. It's a completely irrational thing, but words convey more than just ideas.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Funny thing once you start thinking about it, its not really stealing - its more akin sneaking into the cinema without paying for your ticket. Free riding essentially.

 

Pirates after all do not sell the stuff they crack. The ones that do will be put out of business anyway, by the expansion of the internet (it already happened in these parts).

Edited January 31, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[Gorgon]

I have handy chart as well:

 

 

Replace "File Sharing" with "Copyright Infringement"

The thing about that is that in a digital environment the concept of 'original' ceases to be important. A little bit of apples and oranges going on here. The stealing illustration assumes the presence and the relative importance of an original. More to the point, Piracy is 'Robin Hood' stealing, Stealing is well, just stealing.

[Purkake]

Apples and oranges, stealing and copyright infringement.

 

It's that simple.

[Oner]

I got lemon lime.

[Gorgon]

What would stealing be in a digital enviroment. Dowloading code off a developers FTP and then deleting it, so you were the only one with a copy ?. The illustration assumes the importance of an orginal in it's definition of the concept of stealing. That seems innacurate to me.

[Purkake]

We still have the normal kind of stealing in the real world, stealing in a digital environment is fundamentally different, we think of a new word for the new concept - copyright infringement.

 

I don't see the problem here.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Purkake

[Hurlshort]

Copyright Infringement: You work on your super secret business project and someone gets into your house copies all your work on his external harddrive, and then release the product as his own, you still have your product, so you can publish your version and compete with the Copyright Infringer with better support, more functions available in the product... You most likely do not get all the money you could when you would be only person in the world with the right to copy your work, but you still can make nice living out of your work and continue to make your product better and better, despite the leak...

 

This type of definition is the reason I prefer to just call it theft, because in the bolded part you are basically trying to justify the act of 'copyright infringement'. The 'copyright infringer' is still taking something that does not belong to them. They are still breaking the law. The pirate is benefiting in the same way that he/she would if they had stolen physical property, and so even if it is legally not defined in the same way, copyright infringement and theft share plenty of similarities.

 

Basically you are splitting hairs here.

[RPGmasterBoo]

The only place where piracy isn't overstated is probably the music industry.

 

On a somewhat related topic:

 

In my media studies, (TV specifically) I've come an interesting idea:

 

"The imperative of increasing viewership leads to homogenization of the program offerings, while the race for exclusive content, which increases viewership ends with a paradox: all TV stations report on the same events in a similar manner... thus one of the main reasons for privatization of state electronic media ended up in a counter productive manner - instead of greater diversity in content under the influence of the market, a greater uniformity (was achieved) under the dominant formula of sensationalism and "tastelessness" that attracts the largest viewership. "

 

Exchange viewership with "sales" and you get what's happening to games.

 

This is a much greater problem than piracy, because its probably just a question of time before current streamlined concepts of gameplay wear out and sales start dipping. All the while companies are thinking only of piracy without even considering that there is a real flaw in having every game look like every other game.

Edited January 31, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[Slowtrain]

its jus a question of time before current streamlined concepts of gameplay wear out and sales start dipping.

 

 

Which is the best thing that can be said about the current of crop of "next-gen" games.

[Hurlshort]

Coming soon, Jersey Shore - The MMO!

[RPGmasterBoo]

Coming soon, Jersey Shore - The MMO!

 

Would you really be surprised if it did?

[Gorgon]

Remember back when the Half life code was stolen. Well apparently it wasn't stolen - Potato Pot

[Gorgon]

The only place where piracy isn't overstated is probably the music industry.

 

On a somewhat related topic:

 

In my media studies, (TV specifically) I've come an interesting idea:

 

"The imperative of increasing viewership leads to homogenization of the program offerings, while the race for exclusive content, which increases viewership ends with a paradox: all TV stations report on the same events in a similar manner... thus one of the main reasons for privatization of state electronic media ended up in a counter productive manner - instead of greater diversity in content under the influence of the market, a greater uniformity (was achieved) under the dominant formula of sensationalism and "tastelessness" that attracts the largest viewership. "

 

Exchange viewership with "sales" and you get what's happening to games.

 

This is a much greater problem than piracy, because its probably just a question of time before current streamlined concepts of gameplay wear out and sales start dipping. All the while companies are thinking only of piracy without even considering that there is a real flaw in having every game look like every other game.

This is exactly what I meant when I said that popular usually means crap.

[Purkake]

I love how any thread can seamlessly turn into a "next-gen" hate thread.

[Nepenthe]

The amount of running the little rationalisation hamster in some people's head has done in this thread is just staggering. Please, people, think of the hamster and accept the fact that by pirating a game, you're ripping off the "evil corporations" that made it and freeloading on the dime of everybody who actually paid for it. If that makes you cool in some subculture, it's not one I've belonged to in a long time.

[RPGmasterBoo]

No one in this thread has even attempted to justify piracy.

[213374U]

What would stealing be in a digital enviroment. Dowloading code off a developers FTP and then deleting it, so you were the only one with a copy ?. The illustration assumes the importance of an orginal in it's definition of the concept of stealing. That seems innacurate to me.

No, it wouldn't be stealing because stealing is only superficially similar to what happens when somebody downloads and replicates code without the code author's consent. The concept of theft necessitates of an object whose original owner is deprived from. Ignoring the necessary condition for it but knowingly applying a wrong label anyway is intellectual dishonesty.

 

The problem is that words like "theft" and "original" are obsolete when applied here, and unsurprisingly doing so leads to faulty conclusions. The only reason why these words keep being used in this context is because they drive home ideas of illegitimacy and the criminal quality of the perpetrator, much more effectively than "copyright infringement"... because they are associated to other, better settled and much older things. "Intellectual property" is a relatively new concept, and a new vernacular is needed.

 

Regardless, it's not possible to argue that copyright infringement is the most correct definition. So why are some people still favoring other terms, if we are to assume good faith?

 

 

Basically you are splitting hairs here.

Yes, using deadly force against an attacker, raping a woman and strangling her, and failing to follow proper security procedures are all examples of things that can result in a person killing another. But yeah, it's all murder. Those damn lawyers and their damn equivocations, why can't they understand something so simple!

 

Those are just a bunch of silly examples... but they share a much closer resemblance to murder than copyright infringement does to theft, as they fulfill the fundamental condition defining the deed (a person killing another). The link you guys are trying to establish is purely emotional and much more feeble as a consequence.

 

 

The amount of running the little rationalisation hamster in some people's head has done in this thread is just staggering. Please, people, think of the hamster and accept the fact that by pirating a game, you're ripping off the "evil corporations" that made it and freeloading on the dime of everybody who actually paid for it. If that makes you cool in some subculture, it's not one I've belonged to in a long time.

Freeloading is in fact a much better synonym for copyright infringement than "theft". Unfortunately, it doesn't quite have the same punch about it, so I'm guessing folks will stick to "theft".

 

Also, if you think people are overthinking it, you are welcome to write a rebuttal. Should be easy enough, since you are a lawyer, IIRC. Otherwise you can take your holier-than-thou attitude and stick it where the sun don't shine. I'm sure you realize that nobody is just going to lower his head and accept defeat just because you say so. Just sayin'