Piracy and DRM

[Felithvian]

Offtopic here.

 

The people from gog are the worse ass***** I've ever seen. Most, if not all games they release come with old Dosbox versions. They don't even bother updating the open source DOS emulator. Games are terribly configured for most users, and they don't personally give any kind of technical support for "their" products. They simply leave it to the magnificent community. Users from the computer platform deserve better.

[JFSOCC]

Alright. fine. my views.

 

-Myth one. Piracy is hurting business.

The Dirty little secret is that piracy is mainstream. 80% of people with access to the internet have admitted to at one time or another having pirated something.

Despite the music industry, the film industry and television claiming it is hurting their sales since the advent of tapes, their respective industries have grown faster than the economy in that time.

A recent study focusing on music piracy found that pirates are more likely to buy albums than those who do not pirate, spend more, more often and are more likely to come to concerts. this would suggest the problem has more to do with access to affordable products than malicious intent.

 

-Myth two, Copy-right protection and ever stronger forms of DRM are the only thing companies can do to protect themselves against theft.

Well, this one is easy. there is yet to be a security feature that hasn't eventually been beaten. In the continual arms-race between those who crack game files and those who protect disks, the only real loser so far has been the legitimate users, who paid money for products that have come with problems based on their security.

Infamous is sony's decision to add malware to their audio-cd's so if the cd's would be played on a computer instead of a "normal" cd-player it would damage the computer.

They lost a big lawsuit over that. Always on DRM or online activations which limit players to playing these games only when they have a connection. It also gives some of us the idea that we're being policed. I have, in the past, bought a game with always on DRM, not installed it, but then chosen to run a pirated copy instead. I'm arguing that some forms of copy right protection have actually harmed sales. Outsourcing your security to companies like starforce also means that part of the price legitimate users pay is for a system that causes them more grief than that it does to safeguard their product, as illegitimate bans based on false positives have harmed many a users experience. I can't play spore any more, despite paying for it. not that I would want to, what a let-down that game was.

Day1 DLC is a form of DRM. People get an incomplete game despite paying for the full game. this is fraud plain and simple. Again, legitimate users get caught in the crossfire of the most pointless arms race in the world.

Sites like Good Old Games.com are proving that DRM free games are actually something a company can turn a profit with. Some companies have experimented with different models are finding that things like free to play with micro-transactions is actually better for business than selling single copies with expensive protections. Web-based game companies like innogames are making millions.

 

-Myth three, stricter laws and law-enforcement will end piracy.

The vilification of the user, the internet, and services which are conducive to file-sharing I think is a real problem and the only thing that needs addressing. SOPA type laws which have far-reaching consequences because they are vaguely worded and broad in applicability serve to put a serious amount of control into industries which are better off innovating their models. Instated and proposed laws in recent times have led to faulty take-down notices on creative works that were not infringing on copyright (using bots), abuse against competition, a break on innovation-inhibiting the development of tools that empower society-, expensive and frivolous patent lawsuits, the imprisonment of 15 year old kids, the very questionable actions against service providers such as youtube, google, mega-upload and similar sites. which while undoubtedly used for piracy to greater or lesser extent, provide services which are not inherently criminal. These laws contain punishment and ill-treatment for those who themselves have nothing to do with piracy, such as Internet Service Providers. Furthermore, these laws are so broadly worded that they infringe on privacy rights, as they allow for spying on the user regardless of whether or not he is suspect. These laws do more harm than good.

And, because the amount of cases is so large and so broad, it is impossible to police. Pirates will always find another way, moving on to ever more creative methods. (Such as the pirate bay introducing autonomous aircraft transmitting via high-altitudes) Not only are these laws harmful, they ultimately do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to prevent piracy, which is why they are supposed to exist in the first place.

 

I find it vile that some developers now claim that I didn't buy their game, I bought a license to play their game.

that's bull****. and a German supreme court rightly called it bull****.

 

To me this shows that the problem is not piracy, but rather an industry which is using outdated models struggling to stay competitive.

If companies bring out affordable games, music, movies, do so without adding "features" that harm the end-user, release everywhere at the same time, don't limit supply, don't localise prices, I think the "problem" with piracy would be minimized.

 

Piracy isn't going to go away with stricter laws or law-enforcement. Piracy isn't going away with better security, and Piracy isn't a industry ending problem.

A crime consists of three elements, means, motive and opportunity. currently all efforts are against means and opportunity, it's time to focus on motive.

[Felithvian]

Pirating games isn't sharing it's duplicating. When I share a book I cannot read the book until it's returned. If I seed a torrent I'm not sharing I'm duplicating which is in fact illegal, regardless if you're making a profit it or not. Once again if you're pirate that's your choice, nobody will convince you otherwise. I just want people to stop acting like it's a noble thing they're doing by 'sharing' these games with the internet. The actions of pirates hurt game developers and publishers and retailers which in turn hurts the populace since there are less jobs available when these companies lose money or close. If you argue that you're simply deluding yourself.

 

Also most countries don't prosecute on piracy simply because it costs too much to do so. Most people can drive around with tons of parking tickets without ever paying for them, it doesn't make it ok to park in handicap spaces.

 

Those who download from the net any form of art, are not commiting crime. They're not even tresspassing the intellectual property law.

 

A particular user doesn't need to ask for the authors authorization to copy any musical or audiovisual work. If the user makes a copy, without being an object of business, it will remain into legal lines. It will be considered as "PRIVATE USE" (Uso Privado).

[jezz555]

I mean on a basic level I suppose you want to support the developers of games you like, and you want other people to as well, but lets be real here. The main victims of piracy are gigantic faceless emotionless corporations who would gladly fire their employees or exploit legal loopholes for material gain, so what's wrong with reciprocating?

 

The underpinning idea behind capitalism is competition, If I can find something cheaper(or free) I'm going to use that instead and the companies that sell crappy goods at jacked-up prices are just going to have lower their prices, make better goods or deal. it's not my responsibility as a consumer to care about this kind of thing, it's theirs. When corporations suddenly grow a conscience and stop exploiting slave labor, cheating content developers and poisoning the air and water to save a buck, maybe I'll start shelling out for their products until then, worlds smallest violin.

 

I am pretty sure this is the exact logic companies use to implement increasingly draconian DRM and to treat all their customers as criminals. Just thought you should know.

 

 

For all the good it does them.

[Hormalakh]

Actually I don't think I gave you enough kudos for what you've done here, Hormalakh. You have made me reexamine my own views on piracy. If I'm honest with myself, piracy is act that I allow myself by ignoring the effect of it. It's hard to get yourself to consider the consequences when the act you yourself perform is so small and apparently harmless.

 

My views are a little too close to Felithvian's above me to consider piracy an 'evil' though. Piracy (in the context of digital goods) is the sharing of information. The internet has caused this sharing to explode, but other than pure scale, piracy is no different that the used goods market (as it relates to media specifically). I don't see a way to admonish piracy completely without drawing in used book stores, used games stores, old record sellers, or even borrowing, lending, and renting media. Each of those allow more people access to a given media source than have paid for said media. While I am still somewhat shaky on piracy itself, I have a hard time believing those things are morally wrong.

 

This leaves my actual actions a bit undecided. If I still believe in the free exchange of media (even as it relates to IPs) then piracy is only a legal issue, it's morality is more or less fine. However, the effect it has had on industries I enjoy is indisputable. If I continue to support piracy, even by simply judging it morality correct, then I need to be part of the solution. This is actually what I believe your OP advocated (though I don't want to speak for you so correct me if I'm wrong). P:E should not be pirated as it is a step in the right direction which means I should not make any DRM-free copies I'll recieve available for mass sharing as that might suggest this move was unappreciated. I should also advocate others do the same. Most importantly, I should donate to Obsidian's cause here and encourage others to do the same. Further more, I should be participating in both the discussions and implementations of those that are trying to adapt to sharing on the internet's scale instead of trying to stop it. Whether it's Netflix making whatever I want to watch available anytime for a fee or companies foregoing DRM and relying on goodwill to support their efforts. I don't know if this is what you were try to get across, though I'm sure it's not what you meant exactly. Either way, you forced me to reexamine my own thought processes, so thanks for that.

I liked what you wrote so much I wanted others to read it twice.

[Hormalakh]

Good thing this reached 9 pages before I noticed it or it would have been hulk smash, as I absolutely loathe that infernal tweakguides garbage article*. As it stands there will be a drm free copy and I for one would not have contributed to the KS if there hadn't been, and I'll simply state that I refuse to get OUTRAEGED!!1!! at pirates because it's the most pointless exercise imaginable.

 

*Full of half truths, stats that prove the reverse of what it claims and the like. He proves that relative piracy rates are higher with activation DRM and it's obvious he never read the actual conditions for the Starforce Challenge- sadly star force no longer has them up and archive.org doesn't seem to have them, but it involved paying your own way to Moscow to reproduce the error on their picked hardware plus more and was absolutely and obviously set up specifically to be fundamentally unwinnable. Even the updates are dishonest, saying that TWitcher 2 was DRM free when the pirated version- as stated by CDPR themselves- was the SecuROMed retail version rather than the DRM free GOG one. Half truths, selective facts, strawmen and every other cheap rhetorical trick in the book.

 

I would be interested in hearing your counterclaims (and evidence) to the article especially the DRM bit. Really. Please be specific though.

[Hormalakh]

What exactly do you want people to do here? Go on Pirate Bay's forums and spam them calling them ****? Put up fake torrents labeled Project: Eternity with viruses on them? Not to mention how the **** are you going to "see someone pirate the game?" There is literally nothing you can do that would deter piracy; so focus your efforts on something else that would actually HELP Obsidian.

 

You CAN make a difference believe it or not, albeit not as big of a difference than Obsidian can make.

But you can contribute by offering suggestions to curb piracy of this game. I came up with a few that I listed, maybe others have other ideas too.

 

Going on pirate bay could actually help as well, I'd suggest Obsidian puts some form of pay what you want on their pirate bay torrent pages.

 

You could leave nice comments on the torrent page too, being rude won't get anyone to donate.

However, being nice, and suggesting that the devs deserve at least a little bit for their work could net some donations at the least.

 

All those things are pretty much what I meant when I said do something that would actually help Obsidian. The OP wants us to grab pitchforks and storm the Pirate ship in an attempt to tear it down which simply a) wont work and b) be a massive waste of time and energy. Putting out good will and talking up P:E, on the other hand, will have an actual effect.

No I don't. Pitchforks aren't good weapons anyway. They're what 1D4 or something?

[Agelastos]

I mean on a basic level I suppose you want to support the developers of games you like, and you want other people to as well, but lets be real here. The main victims of piracy are gigantic faceless emotionless corporations who would gladly fire their employees or exploit legal loopholes for material gain, so what's wrong with reciprocating?

 

The underpinning idea behind capitalism is competition, If I can find something cheaper(or free) I'm going to use that instead and the companies that sell crappy goods at jacked-up prices are just going to have lower their prices, make better goods or deal. it's not my responsibility as a consumer to care about this kind of thing, it's theirs. When corporations suddenly grow a conscience and stop exploiting slave labor, cheating content developers and poisoning the air and water to save a buck, maybe I'll start shelling out for their products until then, worlds smallest violin.

 

 

Wouldn't that make the employees the real victims? That's something to keep in mind. You make it sound like the pirates are taking some kind of grand stand against corporate corruption, but in reality they're just hurting some poor working schmucks. The head of the snake remains intact, but its tail hurts like hell.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Agelastos

[Dream]

All those things are pretty much what I meant when I said do something that would actually help Obsidian. The OP wants us to grab pitchforks and storm the Pirate ship in an attempt to tear it down which simply a) wont work and b) be a massive waste of time and energy. Putting out good will and talking up P:E, on the other hand, will have an actual effect.

No I don't. Pitchforks aren't good weapons anyway. They're what 1D4 or something?

 

...each backer here can do their fair share by saying, "**** you, pirate. I bought my game, you didn't. Go get your own."

 

That's hardly the way to foster good will.

[Hormalakh]

What I was trying to say was that we shouldn't actively be helping pirates. I will admit that was a little overblown. But no, I don't want to encourage inflammatory comments or active hate. I do like to encourage discussion and debate about this topic as it relates to P:E.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Hormalakh

[Zoraptor]

I would be interested in hearing your counterclaims (and evidence) to the article especially the DRM bit. Really. Please be specific though.

To be honest, I cannot be bothered to be detailed, sorry, as that requires digging through 3 year old links and the like- though I did do some detailed rebuttal at the time I may be able to dig up.

 

The main problem wrt to the effects of drm was that he was very fond of using absolute figures without context. For example, using the figures he supplies, Fallout 3 which was effectively DRM free was torrented only as much over the first month as Crysis: Warhead, a game which sold far fewer copies. Similar with Farcry2, both games got torrented similar amounts despite Farcry 2 having the activation DRM, selling less than F3 but otherwise being very similar (in terms of being multiplatform sequels to a PC game, similar release dates etc). Far from suggesting that DRM is effective those figures suggest it is, at best, a neutral proposition. And if DRM is either neutral or an actual negative then what exactly is the point?

[Pshaw]

Pirating games isn't sharing it's duplicating. When I share a book I cannot read the book until it's returned. If I seed a torrent I'm not sharing I'm duplicating which is in fact illegal, regardless if you're making a profit it or not. Once again if you're pirate that's your choice, nobody will convince you otherwise. I just want people to stop acting like it's a noble thing they're doing by 'sharing' these games with the internet. The actions of pirates hurt game developers and publishers and retailers which in turn hurts the populace since there are less jobs available when these companies lose money or close. If you argue that you're simply deluding yourself.

 

Also most countries don't prosecute on piracy simply because it costs too much to do so. Most people can drive around with tons of parking tickets without ever paying for them, it doesn't make it ok to park in handicap spaces.

 

Those who download from the net any form of art, are not commiting crime. They're not even tresspassing the intellectual property law.

 

A particular user doesn't need to ask for the authors authorization to copy any musical or audiovisual work. If the user makes a copy, without being an object of business, it will remain into legal lines. It will be considered as "PRIVATE USE" (Uso Privado).

 

I'm a bit confused, you're saying that downloading copy righted material is legal? It is not. Fair use doesn't cover as much as some people like to think it does. Generally it only applies in specific instances such as educational purposes or only a small portion of something being reproduced. If you download music off the internet and store it on your hard drive you can be sued by the copyright holders for copyright infringement. They couldn't do that if it was legal to download anything you please of the net . Furthermore I'm sure most people aren't just leechers and upload something while they download in which case you're distributing not merely downloading and that is also illegal regardless if you're making a profit or not.

 

Now I'm talking about US law, I know that some countries like in Canada and Spain it IS legal to download things from the internet for personal use so long as you're not making a profit off it.

 

Also let's just get real for a minute, forget all the legal BS for a second. There is a reason you're supposed to pay for games/movies/books/music/what-have-you. Namely because people put time and effort into creating that product for you to enjoy and they should be paid for their efforts. Is there really an argument that musicians, artists, authors, game studios, movie crews, actors and who the hell knows how many other people shouldn't be payed for the work they do? I really hope not. These people have talent (generally) and talent should rewarded, there's a reason not everybody can be an A list actor or an artist that's a house hold name.

 

Anyway last post for this topic I don't intend to get bogged down nit picking people who aren't comfortable admitting piracy is wrong. Lets face it, you know it's wrong. You just want to justify it so you don't need to admit to yourself that it's the wrong way to go about getting that content so you can feel free to continue doing it. Once again my stance is pirate all you want, just admit that you know you shouldn't be doing it and that is wrong and knowing that you'll continue to do it anyway for whatever reasons you may have. So with that said I wash my hands of this thread.

[Valsuelm]

Explain it to me then.

 

Like many things, piracy has many different aspects to it. The legality of what is considered piracy in one place may not be considered piracy in another. The ethics and morality of piracy are not always cut and dry. As I mentioned to the OP there's just no way I have time to explain all of the aspecs and I myself might not be aware of some. Despite the length of this post it will only touch on the tip of the iceberg.

 

Piracy has a great deal of grey. It's got some very black. ie: if I bought a piece of software, then made a thousand copies of it, and then sold all of those copies for personal profit and didn't share any profits with a developer most of us, even many of the most prolific pirates, would agree this is bad, but this is the rare situation and not the common one. A great many situations are grey.

 

Rather than explain things to you I'll just give you a few examples of not clear cut piracy, or at least piracy (as defined by the MPAA, RIAA, et al) that many are more than ok with.

• An example of a grey area is one that I gave in my post about the band I worked for unable to get a legitimate copy of something that they themselves created. They had to go to the bootleggers and get a copy.
  

• Would you consider it piracy and bad if a person goes and loses one of the disks they bought to a multidisk game and goes and gets a copy from a torrent of a disk they bought?
  

• Would you consider it piracy and bad if a person goes and replaces a disk that was slowly destroyed by the 'disk must be in tray' DRM that used to be common on games with a disk free crack.
  

The above are examples of things that I don't see as piracy, and as a consumer I do appreciate that it is possible to go and get these things. I've done both of the above myself, and neither would be possible without the pirate community or individuals that while not considered pirates by some would be considered pirates by others.

 

Some other examples from the grey:

• Would you consider it piracy and bad if a person purchases a product gets it home and discovers that the DVD is damaged in the box. Rather than drive all the way back to the store to trade it in (knowing that the store will likely give them a problem) they opt to hop online and download a copy of what they bought instead?
  

• A person has cable television. They very rarely watch it but the person they live with likes to watch it. There's a show they download off the net weekly after it airs and they watch it in their bedroom on their computer as they prefer to do that to watching it on TV in the other room. They pay for cable television. They could easily record this show and watch it on a TV, but they prefer to watch it on their computer and find it much easier and convienient to download the episode of the show they watch on a channel they pay for.
  

• A person owns a movie. It's one of their favorites. They bouht it on Beta, VHS, Laserdisk, DVD, and Blueray as they always wanted what was advertised as the best version of this movie. They just moved to a new house. They have some friends over and really want to watch the movie with them. They have no idea what box this movie is in. Though they know where they can go on the internet and download it within an hour. They own the media multiple times. The distributer (maybe not even the creator of this movie due to their contract they signed with the distributor) has been paid more than once for what is essentially the same product. The person goes and downloads a copy of the DVD version of the movie. Is that piracy? The MPAA certinaly thinks so.
  

• A person is told by a friend that new show X on TV is super amazingly awesome and he needs to check it out. The person not only doesn't have cable TV, but even if they did the show's airing has come and gone, and it's two months before season two premieres. The person really has no interest in getting Cable TV as he thinks the cost is way too high, especially if he's only going to watch one show, but they are very intrigued based on what their friend said. The show is not available on Hulu or any other legitimate free internet source but the person knows where he can download the show and watch it from the pirate community. He does this, loves the show, and when season one is released on DVD a year later he buys it, he also buys season 2 (show's cancelled and there is no season 3). Is this example of piracy all bad?
  

• Point of view: A person is fed up with DRM, EA, Steam, and a slew of other gaming companies. They're tired of buying products that when they get them home are buggy, and obviously underdeveloped, shipped before they should have no doubt because of pressure from the suits. They think they've been ripped off with product misrepresentation in the past, so much so that they refuse to buy any more products from most software companies (they still hold a few in high regard) sight unseen. They then take up downloading pirated copies of games and other software that they think might be interesting/useful. They don't even play/use most of them for more than a few minutes, and most of what is downloaded is discarded. But the few games/software they do end up liking they make sure they go out and buy as they want to support the developers and see more good products from them. (This is a philosophy of many in the game pirating community, and for some it's just words in regards to buying what they downloaded and used, for others it's something they do indeed do.) Is this example of piracy all bad? It's one where something is ultimately bought that otherwise would not have, yet other things were tried and used, albiet briefly and nothing went to the makers of that product.
  

• It's 10 years from now. Gabe Newell ate one double bacon cheeseburger too many a couple of years ago and hasn't been with us since then. Since his passing Valve has been plagued by mismanagement and despite incredible revenue streams the company has gone under due to bad investments and other reasons that remain unclear to the public. Another generation has discovered to their surprise that mighty giants can and do fall. The promised unlocking of all of the software that was made to those who 'bought' games on their site has not happened. In part due to the logistics of doing this, but more in part due to greedy execs hoping to take advantage of their captive audience on a resurrected Steam under different management. Months go by and a court battle over the rights to all the Steam accounts as well as other things keeps the site from coming back up. Multitudes of Steam users finally begin to understand what it means to have a gloried rental contract rather than actual ownership of a product. To their horror and great dismay the class action lawsuit filed on their behalf against Valve is dismissed on grounds that they had agreed to binding arbitration, though an appeal to a higher court to allow the suit to go forward is pending. Fed up, thousands of former Steam users head to the pirate community to download games that they had bought from Steam, thinking there'd never be a situation that they'd not be able to play them. Would this be piracy and bad?
  

Some people might consider all of the above piracy. I do not necessarily, and would not necessarily, nor do many others, in some of the examples. Depending on where you live some or all of the above may be 100% legal. There are definitely other examples out there. The courts have cases in front of them all the time.

 

And whether you agree with the above or not, the above does represent a sizable percentage of those who are downloading X via the internet, and examples of how not every individual user in any given torrent stream is lost revenue for product X that is being downloaded.

 

Perhaps I didn't give the best examples. Some will see things in black and white no matter what. As pointed out in the Good and Evil thread on this forum though, what is perceived as bad isn't always what it might seem to the perceiver.

 

 

Were you confused to whom I was replying to? I type my responses in the quick reply box at the bottom, so my desire to recall to type out name="BasaltineBadger" every time I type out [ quote] isn't particularly high. This perspective is reaffirmed given that you responded to my post just fine.

 

When replying to me: No. When replying to others: Yes.

 

I can recognize what I wrote, but if I wish to reference the post you're quoting that isn't mine it's not easy to do. Only takes a couple seconds to sitck a users name that you're quoting in there.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Valsuelm

[Mandragore]

I don't know if this has been mentioned already, but the amount of money developers supposedly lose from piracy is negligible compared to the amount of money they lose from used game stores like gamestop. If you think about it, most pirates are probably people who wouldn't have paid for the game either way, while gamestop customers are buying a used copy, the sale of which the dev won't see a cent of, instead of a new one.

 

All this pissing and moaning about piracy is both pointless and unwarranted.

[jezz555]

I mean on a basic level I suppose you want to support the developers of games you like, and you want other people to as well, but lets be real here. The main victims of piracy are gigantic faceless emotionless corporations who would gladly fire their employees or exploit legal loopholes for material gain, so what's wrong with reciprocating?

 

The underpinning idea behind capitalism is competition, If I can find something cheaper(or free) I'm going to use that instead and the companies that sell crappy goods at jacked-up prices are just going to have lower their prices, make better goods or deal. it's not my responsibility as a consumer to care about this kind of thing, it's theirs. When corporations suddenly grow a conscience and stop exploiting slave labor, cheating content developers and poisoning the air and water to save a buck, maybe I'll start shelling out for their products until then, worlds smallest violin.

 

 

Wouldn't that make the employees the real victims? That's something to keep in mind. You make it sound like the pirates are taking some kind of grand stand against corporate corruption, but in reality they're just hurting some poor working schmucks. The head of the snake remains intact, but its tail hurts like hell.

 

I think you missed my point. A corporation is without feelings, there is no reason therefore that a consumer should feel for one. The whole "Poor corporations!" mindset people have when arguing against piracy is frankly sickening. Despite what some have said, corporations are not people and you conflating the two, as if pirating games somehow directly translates to employees being fired is stupid. They have easily enough money to pay all their employees they just choose to send it all to the top of the ladder, if we accept your absurd scenario and a corporation for some reason fires all their employees as a result of my pirating their game, then perhaps they will realize that a company doesn't last very long without employees and realize their value.

 

The simple ideas behind capitalism that are drilled into our heads at school in America are that the system runs on competition. If a company cannot make me a better offer than a pirate, it's my obligation to get the better product. Don't try and make me feel bad for taking the best offer, that's how the system works.

[Hormalakh]

 

The simple ideas behind capitalism that are drilled into our heads at school in America are that the system runs on competition. If a company cannot make me a better offer than a pirate, it's my obligation to get the better product. Don't try and make me feel bad for taking the best offer, that's how the system works.

 

Pirates haven't made a better product. That's bull**** and I'm going to call you out on it. Pirates duplicate a game and release that duplicate for free because they haven't invested in time and money to make the game in the first place. Competition would be for a developer to make a similar game to PE and sell it at a cheaper price point.

 

If you want to argue that pirates give better service, then you should also realize that their competition would be places like gog.com or a brick and mortar. Those companies still pay the developers/publisher for the product that they are selling.

[jezz555]

The simple ideas behind capitalism that are drilled into our heads at school in America are that the system runs on competition. If a company cannot make me a better offer than a pirate, it's my obligation to get the better product. Don't try and make me feel bad for taking the best offer, that's how the system works.

 

Pirates haven't made a better product. That's bull**** and I'm going to call you out on it. Pirates duplicate a game and release that duplicate for free because they haven't invested in time and money to make the game in the first place. Competition would be for a developer to make a similar game to PE and sell it at a cheaper price point.

 

If you want to argue that pirates give better service, then you should also realize that their competition would be places like gog.com or a brick and mortar. Those companies still pay the developers/publisher for the product that they are selling.

 

Competition refers to price as well. I think even you will concede that free beats 60 bucks, so no it's not bull****, it's demonstrably a better product. Now granted it make lack features or have some minor hiccups because it's pirated but it still beats 60 bucks.

Edited November 30, 2012 by jezz555

[Valsuelm]

Pirates haven't made a better product. That's bull**** and I'm going to call you out on it. Pirates duplicate a game and release that duplicate for free because they haven't invested in time and money to make the game in the first place. Competition would be for a developer to make a similar game to PE and sell it at a cheaper price point.

 

Many would argue that a DRM free version of product X that is identical to the official version in all ways save it's lack of DRM is superior to the official product that has DRM.

 

Also, while I cannot vouch for the quality of the work. I have seen .nfos of pirate releases that did advertise a release where they said they fixed known bugs in a game before the developer did. Some pirates do more than just crack DRM.

 

Pirating aside, the modding community of some games have been known to fix known bugs of game X when the developer did not. For example: even Baldur's Gate has some mods that fix bugs that the developer did not, at least officially. So it is not always the developer that does indeed give the better product. In some cases what the better product is, is in the eye of the beholder, especially when you consider mods.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Valsuelm

[Agelastos]

I mean on a basic level I suppose you want to support the developers of games you like, and you want other people to as well, but lets be real here. The main victims of piracy are gigantic faceless emotionless corporations who would gladly fire their employees or exploit legal loopholes for material gain, so what's wrong with reciprocating?

 

The underpinning idea behind capitalism is competition, If I can find something cheaper(or free) I'm going to use that instead and the companies that sell crappy goods at jacked-up prices are just going to have lower their prices, make better goods or deal. it's not my responsibility as a consumer to care about this kind of thing, it's theirs. When corporations suddenly grow a conscience and stop exploiting slave labor, cheating content developers and poisoning the air and water to save a buck, maybe I'll start shelling out for their products until then, worlds smallest violin.

 

 

Wouldn't that make the employees the real victims? That's something to keep in mind. You make it sound like the pirates are taking some kind of grand stand against corporate corruption, but in reality they're just hurting some poor working schmucks. The head of the snake remains intact, but its tail hurts like hell.

 

I think you missed my point. A corporation is without feelings, there is no reason therefore that a consumer should feel for one. The whole "Poor corporations!" mindset people have when arguing against piracy is frankly sickening. Despite what some have said, corporations are not people and you conflating the two, as if pirating games somehow directly translates to employees being fired is stupid. They have easily enough money to pay all their employees they just choose to send it all to the top of the ladder, if we accept your absurd scenario and a corporation for some reason fires all their employees as a result of my pirating their game, then perhaps they will realize that a company doesn't last very long without employees and realize their value.

 

 

One person pirating may not make a difference. But when millions of people do it, it does make a difference. Especially for smaller companies (or game developers that focus on PC-exclusive games). I think there are plenty of good reasons to download something "illegally" (like the ones Valsuelm listed), I do it all the time, but it's not always a victimless crime. If a company loses enough sales, it will have to downsize (not fire all of its employees - I never said that). That's not absurd at all.

 

I don't understand how you can complain about corporations "exploiting slave labor, cheating content developers and poisoning the air and water to save a buck" one minute, and defend pitiless capitalism the next.

 

The simple ideas behind capitalism that are drilled into our heads at school in America are that the system runs on competition. If a company cannot make me a better offer than a pirate, it's my obligation to get the better product. Don't try and make me feel bad for taking the best offer, that's how the system works.

 

Good thing I live in "socialist Sweden", then.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Agelastos

[Heresiarch]

One person pirating may not make a difference. But when millions of people do it, it does make a difference. Especially for smaller companies (or game developers that focus on PC-exclusive games). I think there are plenty of good reasons to download something "illegally" (like the ones Valsuelm listed), I do it all the time, but it's not always a victimless crime. If a company loses enough sales, it will have to downsize (not fire all of its employees - I never said that). That's not absurd at all.

The argument is fine, if anyone could have pointed at a company destroyed by piracy. A single one will do. Simply a convincing approximation of those supposedly huge profit losses incurred by the video game industry would do, actually. but I've yet to see any of that.

 

So until I see it, I find this argument a purely emotional and misleading one, along the lines of "smoking killed my father and raped my mother".

 

Now, don't get me wrong, piracy is bad. When a bunch of Somalian dudes point guns at your face and commandeer your fishing trawler, it sure as hell sucks. But if you're talking about copyright infringement, it's more of a wealth redistribution system.

[jezz555]

One person pirating may not make a difference. But when millions of people do it, it does make a difference. Especially for smaller companies (or game developers that focus on PC-exclusive games). I think there are plenty of good reasons to download something "illegally" (like the ones Valsuelm listed), I do it all the time, but it's not always a victimless crime. If a company loses enough sales, it will have to downsize (not fire all of its employees - I never said that). That's not absurd at all.

 

I don't understand how you can complain about corporations "exploiting slave labor, cheating content developers and poisoning the air and water to save a buck" one minute, and defend pitiless capitalism the next.

 

The simple ideas behind capitalism that are drilled into our heads at school in America are that the system runs on competition. If a company cannot make me a better offer than a pirate, it's my obligation to get the better product. Don't try and make me feel bad for taking the best offer, that's how the system works.

 

Good thing I live in "socialist Sweden", then.

 

Nothing great about capitalism, and I'm not defending it by any means. It just works both ways. If a corporation can screw the human race over and then say "hey that's capitalism baby, supply and demand. Eat it!" I should be allowed to do the same. That's really the only way the system works, with equity. The reason capitalism often doesn't work is that corporations have so much power, this is a way of taking it back.

 

Anti-piracy advocates often use so called "small companies" as a form of straw-man, pretending that they are representative of the majority. But the fact is that most of them been devoured by monopolizing jerks like EA by now. Independent Small companies of today often get funding through things like kick-starter and make small games for loyal niche audiences who likely don't pirate them anyway. Don't pretend like their the ones being hurt by piracy I never heard the guy who invented mine-craft whining about piracy, oh wait that's right he was quoted as saying that if people couldn't afford his game, they should pirate it. EGADS! He's going to go bankrupt!

Edited November 30, 2012 by jezz555

[Umberlin]

The simple ideas behind capitalism that are drilled into our heads at school in America are that the system runs on competition. If a company cannot make me a better offer than a pirate, it's my obligation to get the better product. Don't try and make me feel bad for taking the best offer, that's how the system works.

 

Pirates haven't made a better product. That's bull**** and I'm going to call you out on it. Pirates duplicate a game and release that duplicate for free because they haven't invested in time and money to make the game in the first place. Competition would be for a developer to make a similar game to PE and sell it at a cheaper price point.

 

If you want to argue that pirates give better service, then you should also realize that their competition would be places like gog.com or a brick and mortar. Those companies still pay the developers/publisher for the product that they are selling.

 

While I don't disagree with you (in fact I wholly agree that pirates have not made a better product), necessarily, I'll point out that this is exactly the principle Valve operate on these days, and quite vocally. They compete with the pirates, offer rewards and deals and service to the legitimate user, rather than punishing them while attempting to squash pirates. Many forms of DRM falter here, in that, honestly, some of them do hit the legitimate user, and barely effect the pirate, if they effect the pirate at all. Valve's approach, thusly, is to ensure their service to the legitimate user is something that the pirate cannot offer, rewarding the legitimate user, instead of punishing them in a quest to thwart the pirate.

 

The issue is that when a game has been cracked, and distributed, free of its DRM, versus a DRM ridden game that has issues because of its DRM (which does happen, though, obviously, some forms of DRM don't really effect the user much at all) you can see the basic idea of the point in light of what it really is. Not a better product. Not a better product at all. The same product, stripped of the things that, really, tend to hinder the legitimate user more than any pirate.

 

It's a tightrope walk. DRM doesn't have to be a negative thing, but too many companies go too far, and make it so. Valve's Steam, no matter how you twist it, is DRM, but, as someone who has experienced DRM that actually keeps me from playering games . . . I look at Steam fondly. It's DRM that works from a company that rewards me as a legitimate user. This is acceptable. However, on Steam, you'll find products that think, "Steam and Valve's policies are not enough" and thus you get things like Anno 2070. I love the game. I really do, but when I bought it on Steam I didn't realize something. That the game would require I be running both Steam and Uplay in the background. Really? And it's not the only example, there are examples that also, again, don't think Steam is enough, so I have Windows Live, or some other nonsense, also running. It's incredibly counter productive, and not user friendly in the least (especially windows live).

 

Anyways, like I said, I don't disagree with you, I simply do think there's something to be said for offering the user a reason to use your product, rather than punishing the user, potentially, in an attempt to squash pirating.

[jezz555]

^ that's why valve are heroes.

Edited November 30, 2012 by jezz555

[LadyCrimson]

I don't know if this has been mentioned already, but the amount of money developers supposedly lose from piracy is negligible compared to the amount of money they lose from used game stores like gamestop. If you think about it, most pirates are probably people who wouldn't have paid for the game either way, while gamestop customers are buying a used copy, the sale of which the dev won't see a cent of, instead of a new one.

 

All this pissing and moaning about piracy is both pointless and unwarranted.

 

So? And your point is what? That games cannot be resold? That's against the free market laws. Why game developers should be treated differently from all the others developers and manufacturers? Used cars is a billions dollar market, yet you don't see Mercedes shouting to ban the reselling of used car. I bought it I can resell it, end of story,

There is often confusion about copyright vs. patent, and patent vs. industrial design rights and trademarks and so on. They are not all the same and are not all governed by the same laws/management. This is, of course, just a matter of legal definition - with some grey areas (and loopholes) I'm sure - which tends to be challenged periodically....but while I understand when people use the "I can sell a car/bike" reasoning, legally, I don't think it's quite the same thing as this topic is talking about (software piracy), at this time.

 

P.S. I should add, "in the United States." Also, I'm not a lawyer.

Edited November 30, 2012 by LadyCrimson

[alanschu]

@Valsuelm

 

Here's why pirating that stuff is bad: It provides ammunition for those to enact tougher DRMs.

 

If you don't like DRM, don't provide data points that convince someone that they should implement it.

 

 

Your examples are still all examples of entitlement. They're simply exploiting the convenience of the digital medium and maintaining the demand for pirated goods by doing so. They contribute to the cause of DRM. They also contribute to excuses for poor quality content.

 

For all of your examples, what genuine cost really exists for the people if piracy just didn't exist. Inconvenience, and perhaps a degree of accountability in the event of misplacing/losing something. Especially when concerning video games.

 

 

Competition refers to price as well. I think even you will concede that free beats 60 bucks, so no it's not bull****, it's demonstrably a better product. Now granted it make lack features or have some minor hiccups because it's pirated but it still beats 60 bucks.

 

I'll disagree that it's a better product, but it's trivially obvious that it's a better value to the customer. But I'm just playing semantics at this point. As much as I loathe piracy, however, I'll give you respect for just being straight up honest about it.

Edited November 30, 2012 by alanschu