Piracy or not?

[BruceVC]

 

 

I watch porn every day. It's all supposed to be under copyright protection, but it's out in the open on tons of porn sites. Am I infringing the law everyday?

 

I mean who pays for porn, for god's sake.

 

I also sometimes stare at girl's butts on the streets, but I don't pay them anything.

 

This world is so tough... authors are being robbed of their fortunes every second.

 

Bester I don't think you are taking the scourge of Pirating seriously  It seems like you are justifying it ......

 

 

My wife is a Unity developer and while she sells her stuff on Asset Store, she also uploads all her products (to which she holds all rights) on torrents because it's just how we are. You'd never understand.

 

 

I am very surprised that your wife is in the industry and yet you guys seem fine with Pirating. So yes I probably won't ever understand

[Sarex]

I also sometimes stare at girl's butts on the streets, but I don't pay them anything.

2) That's insanely creepy and way to bring this thread into a whole new level of weird.

 

Wait that is creepy? Turn in your man card.

[Hurlshort]

 

 

 

I watch porn every day. It's all supposed to be under copyright protection, but it's out in the open on tons of porn sites. Am I infringing the law everyday?

 

I mean who pays for porn, for god's sake.

 

I also sometimes stare at girl's butts on the streets, but I don't pay them anything.

 

This world is so tough... authors are being robbed of their fortunes every second.

 

Bester I don't think you are taking the scourge of Pirating seriously  It seems like you are justifying it ......

 

 

My wife is a Unity developer and while she sells her stuff on Asset Store, she also uploads all her products (to which she holds all rights) on torrents because it's just how we are. You'd never understand.

 

 

I am very surprised that your wife is in the industry and yet you guys seem fine with Pirating. So yes I probably won't ever understand

 

 

I wouldn't really put too much stock in anything Bester reveals personally.  He's playing a character here.  His anti-kickstarter material is fantastic, but I think he's been a bit heavy handed with the piracy thing.  His intention is to elicit a reacting, hence the jumping to porn when the thread started to slow down.

 

Back to the scenario, there are plenty of creative people who put their content up for the masses.  That is a wonderful part of the internet.  I actually think that is a good argument against piracy.  There are so many free books, games, and video out there, you really have no justification to take something from a creator who wants to be paid.  This is entertainment, you can live without the stuff from big companies just fine.  

[Meshugger]

Piracy is piracy.

 

However, i think that the laws trying to curb it are ridicolous and isn't exactly helping. In the eyes of the law in the western world, you are worse scum if you pirate than if you do assault, rape, or sometimes even murder. That's simply injustifiable.

 

It should be treated as petty theft.

[Oner]

 

It's piracy because he (they) are only buying one copy and distributing multiple

 

It's essentially like buying a real book and then giving it to your friends to read it,

 

Honestly, how many centuries old is the custom of lending a book/lawnmower/whatever to your friend without it being a crime? Do we have to start now?

 

I mean yeah, it's a very blurry issue with the advent of digital posessions, but if my sister could lend me a novel (which is you know, her property now) without the police crashing the door down, that would be great.

[Sarex]

Honestly, how many centuries old is the custom of lending a book/lawnmower/whatever to your friend without it being a crime? Do we have to start now?

 

I mean yeah, it's a very blurry issue with the advent of digital posessions, but if my sister could lend me a novel (which is you know, her property now) without the police crashing the door down, that would be great.

 

In an age when even the games you buy aren't your property I wouldn't expect any positive change, baring an outcry from the people, which if history is any indicator won't happen.

[Malcador]

 

 

 

 

 

I also sometimes stare at girl's butts on the streets, but I don't pay them anything.

2) That's insanely creepy and way to bring this thread into a whole new level of weird.

Wait that is creepy? Turn in your man card.

It is MISOGYNY! Or something.

[ShadySands]

 

 

 

 

It's piracy because he (they) are only buying one copy and distributing multiple

It's essentially like buying a real book and then giving it to your friends to read it,

Honestly, how many centuries old is the custom of lending a book/lawnmower/whatever to your friend without it being a crime? Do we have to start now?

 

I mean yeah, it's a very blurry issue with the advent of digital posessions, but if my sister could lend me a novel (which is you know, her property now) without the police crashing the door down, that would be great.

No issue with lending and borrowing (or backups or sharing with your household) personally, it's the fact that it's a digital good and as you said it gets blurry. If someone gives you an old novel there is still just the one novel and borrowing a lawnmower doesn't spawn a second lawnmower so that you and your neighbor can have a lawn mowing race. Anyway that's still not really what bester was talking about. If he and 19 friends each pitch in a quarter and they buy 1 novella and then make 19 copies is that piracy?

[Oner]

No issue with lending and borrowing (or backups or sharing with your household) personally, it's the fact that it's a digital good and as you said it gets blurry. If someone gives you an old novel there is still just the one novel and borrowing a lawnmower doesn't spawn a second lawnmower so that you and your neighbor can have a lawn mowing race. Anyway that's still not really what bester was talking about. If he and 19 friends each pitch in a quarter and they buy 1 novella and then make 19 copies is that piracy?

 

I wasn't replying to you specifically, but the topic was wavering into the "lending is piracy" territory here and there.

[ShadySands]

oh gotcha

[Mor]

 

 

It's piracy because he (they) are only buying one copy and distributing multiple

 

It's essentially like buying a real book and then giving it to your friends to read it,

 

Honestly, how many centuries old is the custom of lending a book/lawnmower/whatever to your friend without it being a crime? Do we have to start now?

 

Obviously it is not that simple no one would argue against you lending your physical book, re-selling or donating to the local library. I read a statistic once that an average person would mean about 15k people in his life time, so even if you are hyper active how many people you would share that book over your life time? Of course with a digital copy you can share it with ten fold the people in matter of hours..

 

Even if you implement a sort of only on copy is usable at the same time DRM(so it wouldn't be a blunt piracy) in the internet it would be easy to put up a "free" library which would allow most people never buy the book, just reuse the same copies. Which is why this is generally regard as cutting into profits and or reduce the value of the product.

 

Also speaking of piracy and established real-world practices, there is the "good" ol' pricing system for every physical product (e.g. cloth\entertainment\hardware\gadgets) which starts with overpriced release and ends with xx% off sales long down the line. However, in the internet age we got the entitled bread, that believe that just because they don't like something about the product they are entitled to pirate it... i.e. I don't like the publisher, I don't think its worth the price, but I wouldn't wait for it drop because I WANT it NOW..

Edited May 31, 2014 by Mor

[Oerwinde]

 

 

 

 

It's piracy because he (they) are only buying one copy and distributing multiple

It's essentially like buying a real book and then giving it to your friends to read it,

Honestly, how many centuries old is the custom of lending a book/lawnmower/whatever to your friend without it being a crime? Do we have to start now?

 

I mean yeah, it's a very blurry issue with the advent of digital posessions, but if my sister could lend me a novel (which is you know, her property now) without the police crashing the door down, that would be great.

And here is the problem, you pay 10 bucks for a book, and you can lend it out, you buy an ebook for 10 bucks and you can't do that without handing over an expensive electronic device, deprivig you of the rest of your ebooks, or making a copy, which is illegal. So charging for ebooks the same as physical books, which is what is happening now that publishers instead of retailers are setting prices, is ridiculous.

[HoonDing]

We need an electronic equivalent of keelhauling.

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

It's piracy because he (they) are only buying one copy and distributing multiple

It's essentially like buying a real book and then giving it to your friends to read it,

Honestly, how many centuries old is the custom of lending a book/lawnmower/whatever to your friend without it being a crime? Do we have to start now?

 

I mean yeah, it's a very blurry issue with the advent of digital posessions, but if my sister could lend me a novel (which is you know, her property now) without the police crashing the door down, that would be great.

And here is the problem, you pay 10 bucks for a book, and you can lend it out, you buy an ebook for 10 bucks and you can't do that without handing over an expensive electronic device, deprivig you of the rest of your ebooks, or making a copy, which is illegal. So charging for ebooks the same as physical books, which is what is happening now that publishers instead of retailers are setting prices, is ridiculous.

 

that isn't a problem. it may be stupid, but it isn't a problem. don't buy the ebook if it is ridiculous to do so. buy the paper book. if you and many other similar folks begin buying the arguably superior paper book, then those who make ebooks will, quite naturally, come up with a solution. 

 

copyright laws does result in wacky possible situations. laws don't spontaneously pop into existence. it typical takes some time to get a law on the books. the process o' making laws tends to be a bit messy and rare is the most practical or efficient method gonna be the result of lawmaking. once on the books, laws that maybe were meaningful at the time o' their creation, becomes obstacles... and is even harder to get a law off the books than it is to get on. example: drive a car on non metropolitan road at night in pennsylvania has a bizarre requirement-- the motorist is 'posed to stop every mile and send up a signal flare to clear roads of possible livestock. is on the books even today. lawmaking is a slow process that is the result o' compromise. tech moves fast, and is very... uncompromising? 

 

that being said, having a paper book be a better option is not proof that copyright is bad. if piracy weren't a factor, the market would react intelligently and far quicker than would the copyright laws themselves. copyright can have odd results. lots o' laws gots funny results. find an inconsistency won't be a particular good excuse for supporting piracy though. piracy is the problem, not the solution... not that Gromnir is suggesting that oerwinde made such a ridiculous claim. what kinda yutz would do that?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Mor]

 

And here is the problem, you pay 10 bucks for a book, and you can lend it out, you buy an ebook for 10 bucks and you can't do that without handing over an expensive electronic device, deprivig you of the rest of your ebooks, or making a copy, which is illegal. So charging for ebooks the same as physical books, which is what is happening now that publishers instead of retailers are setting prices, is ridiculous.

that isn't a problem. it may be stupid, but it isn't a problem. don't buy the ebook if it is ridiculous to do so. buy the paper book. if you and many other similar folks begin buying the arguably superior paper book, then those who make ebooks will, quite naturally, come up with a solution.

 

Exactly, if physical books are so much more bang for your buck, why buy something that isn't.

 

 

@Oerwinde, also since when book lend-ability has become one of top criteria, i rarely lend my books, nor would the FBI\Interpol\whatever be concerned with people who only lend couple of ebooks. (unless the whole lending is a mask for free sharing, even then they rarely go after individuals)

 

As for your publishers vs retailers comment, tell me in the good ol' days what would happened if I set up a shop infront of retailer and buy\sell his used books? because its similar to what the internet offers, only the books ain't so used (and in many case you don't have to pay). Which is why we see all the new licences\DRM crap..

[Oerwinde]

My problem is ebooks used to be bang for your buck. Amazon used to sell ebooks for $4-5, with the Canadian dollar at Parity, that meant books for my kindle were half the price of a physical book, and I didn't need to buy a new bookshelf to hold them all. Since publishers started setting the price, now its $10 for ebooks, and often cheaper for physical books. Publishers try to justify it by saying manufacturing and distribution are negligible costs and formatting the ebooks for various ereaders is more expensive. Which is ridiculous.

 

Books are the anti-steam. Steam drove the price of PC gaming to where pirating makes no sense. Amazon was doing that for ebooks before the publishers stepped in.

[Hurlshort]

Eh, most of my ebooks aren't much cheaper than when I bought physical copies.  The benefit is I can buy them in the middle of the night or whenever something strikes my fancy, and I can carry around quite a few of them on one device.  So yeah, it's a bummer that I can't share the latest book I bought with my wife without giving up my device, but life is full of trade-offs.

[Gizmo]

Morality, (at least for this issue), doesn't really interest me. Other people's subjective morals are hardly likely to be of interest to me unless they raise interesting, new points/perspectives...of which there is almost certainly to be none of in regards to this subject, as it's such a dry, burnt topic that everyone seems to already have entrenched view points regarding. Nor am I really interested in detailing my own, equally subjective thoughts on any issues such as this in a forums as wildly polemic as these can be. Consequently, I'm more interested in the legal aspect, and would like to see the discrimination made between the two for this discussion so I can either ignore or follow this topic, accordingly. 

Why should anyone put effort into anything , and make it public, if the [global] culture takes the position that if they can steal it, then it's okay to do so?

 

A DVD movie (and probably any book or E-book), is licensed for a consumer's use ~not a public performance... so you cannot [legally] take your commercial DVD to school and play it in the auditorium for a crowd. What you own is the plastic disc ~not the media recorded on it; that is licensed for specific use.  It's the same way with most software; some software you are not allowed to sell ~it's in the license that you agreed to before being granted access to the software.  It wouldn't surprise me if the EULA on the E-books say the same, and/or prohibit performance of the work [reading it aloud for an audience].

 

In the case of a text book, one is basically robbing them of fair payment of the class, by buying one copy and sharing it.  One really has to ask why should they bother assembling the lessons if their work will just be stolen from them... if everyone assumes they are free to steal the work, then what's the point?  I have actually seen posts by people lauding a great work (in their opinion), and then actually suggest that the reader decide to pay for it ~like it's the unconventional nice thing to do.

 

With Software, I have talked to people who had a common interest in commercial 3D modeling work... only to hear them say minutes later that their version is cracked ~and they say this in the manner of someone stating the color of their bathroom; rather than as one might expect them to [reluctantly] state the current septic overflow of their leaking toilet... No shame nor even the slightest concept that it's wrong, and that they do not deserve to have access to an illegitimate clone of the software~or movie, or text document.

 

Some people [artist/designers/authors] want their works freely copied, and that's fine; but others stipulate an agreement prior to allowing access. In the simplest sense, it's your word of honor to abide by the agreement; but unfortunately far too few can be trusted to keep that agreement, and so we get that ghastly DRM crap that we all have to suffer under.  Some people's honest opinion of copying seems to equate to: It's wrong to rob a bank, but if you throw the money into a crowd, it's okay for them to keep it. These people create our games, books, music, and software tools, to create a living for themselves, and every single cloned copy of their initiative and skilled labor, is a service rendered without compensation for their work.  Absolutely everyone that benefits from them should pay them for it; or an authorized seller.

 

*And of course people may find a book/ or a CD/DVD second hand and get a deal ~or get it free... that's great when it's legit, but that should be the exception ~never the [mob] rule.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Gizmo

[Bartimaeus]

Sorry, that was a poor way of stating what I meant: it's not that I'm totally uninterested in the morality aspect of the issue in general, but rather the boring, bland discussions that generally arise from discussing it. The discussion did indeed mostly head that way, which is why I bowed out of the topic after that first post of mine. Everything said here has been stuff that has been said a thousand times before: people trying to justify their particular exception (or exceptions they can think of that, in their opinion, might make it...at the very least, not completely reprehensible or whatever), and the other side, equally arrogant in their condemnation for whatever reasons, too. Most everyone's already so entrenched in what they think regarding the issue, and the people that aren't generally don't have anything much interesting to say (e.g. me), either, which is no better.

 

Which is why I asked what I did: I'd have rather seen a discussion purely on the legal aspect instead of the moral, because it'd at least but something semi-new, but I guess they're both too intertwined for that to realistically happen - indeed, now that I think about it, I'm not even sure what a discussion purely about the legal aspect would even look like. To me, this is like a discussion on abortion and other such "moral" standstill issues: nobody's going to change their minds, and it's going to (probably) be boring for those of us who have seen the subject raised a dozen times before with nothing to show for it.

 

My opinion on the subject is the following: it's not black and white, (nor is anything hardly ever, really), exceptions can (and probably should be) made, laws should probably be updated to reflect the reality of the situation at some point (without doing something stupid like giving copyright infringement blanket legality), things can't be as horrible as some make it out to be, (on both sides), or there wouldn't still be massive corporation profits from making software/content, and you wouldn't be able to pirate stuff if you really "needed" to without being arrested, etc., blah blah blah. Honestly, I'm boring myself here: tempted to not post this, since it's rambly and poorly written, but...since it's already here...

Edited June 2, 2014 by Bartimaeus

[Rosbjerg]

Maybe the problem lies with the compensation and not the distribution then? If it's virtually impossible to curtail and control distribution without alienating the majority of honest payers. Then maybe one should rethink the approach.

 

From my personal perspective though, it seems it's more a matter of the right kind of distribution. Steam and Netflix seems to have done a lot about piracy in my circle of friends - before piracy was widespread, but now they simply wait for a game/film to go on sale or become available. It's become a lot more convenient for them to use the service and compensate the author, than not..

 

Perhaps music, books, art etc. needs to get with the times. It seems people won't conform - and as a compensator, I'm getting pretty annoyed with the restrictions. I stopped buying films until Netflix and I've completely stopped buying music and only listen to the radio these days. It's simply too much a hassle. I would never buy en ebook because of all of these silly restrictions. So maybe these industries should grow and realize that their services are actually what needs to be updated.. People are apparently not gonna learn it seems and if Muhammed won't come to the mountain?

[Chilloutman]

As someone mentioned steam having good price policy.... well until they dont change their mind of euro = dollar 1:1 i am not going to buy ANY new game here, most of my games on steam are 1. bought somewhere else 2. in ridiculouse promotions eg 50% off

[Mor]

From my personal perspective though, it seems it's more a matter of the right kind of distribution. Steam and Netflix seems to have done a lot about piracy in my circle of friends - before piracy was widespread, but now they simply wait for a game/film to go on sale or become available. It's become a lot more convenient for them to use the service and compensate the author, than not..

Those are good examples of why anti-piracy campaigns works. Some people think its about stopping it, but there is no wining with crime, it is always about marginalizing the undesired activity. In these case it requires to understand that most are selfish pigs, who care mostly about their convenience/cost and if they can break the law and get away with it, they are far more likely to break it.

 

So their campaign was focused on several points: raising awareness e.g. those personal suits did their job well despite or because the outrage; hit the major illegal sites, even though others pop instead, it is really about griefing and lowering quality fracturing their contribute/user base; and last and arguably the most important aspect of it is creating a legal outlet that would cater to the majority needs e.g. steam offers an easy to browse/purchase/update service as well as hose of other social and technical services and are integrate with everything else we do for convenience.

 

 

Books are the anti-steam. Steam drove the price of PC gaming to where pirating makes no sense. Amazon was doing that for ebooks before the publishers stepped in.

I agree, but since the topic is what piracy is, i'd have to reiterate that don't use publishers as scapegoats, if you don't like it don't buy it. Edited June 2, 2014 by Mor

[Oerwinde]

As someone mentioned steam having good price policy.... well until they dont change their mind of euro = dollar 1:1 i am not going to buy ANY new game here, most of my games on steam are 1. bought somewhere else 2. in ridiculouse promotions eg 50% off

 

Whats happened with Steam for me, is I buy so much for stupid cheap, like 75-80% off, or through Humble Bundle, getting 6 games for $5 or whatnot, that I have such a backlog that when a game I want comes out at full price, I have plenty to play to keep me busy until it also hits 75% off.

[Rosbjerg]

That's not a bad thing. It just means 5-19€ in their pockets later rather than never.

[marelooke]

 

From my personal perspective though, it seems it's more a matter of the right kind of distribution. Steam and Netflix seems to have done a lot about piracy in my circle of friends - before piracy was widespread, but now they simply wait for a game/film to go on sale or become available. It's become a lot more convenient for them to use the service and compensate the author, than not..

Those are good examples of why anti-piracy campaigns works. Some people think its about stopping it, but there is no wining with crime, it is always about marginalizing the undesired activity. In these case it requires to understand that most are selfish pigs, who care mostly about their convenience/cost and if they can break the law and get away with it, they are far more likely to break it.

 

The crime here was keeping an outdated business model alive in spite of the consumers. If you push people hard enough they'll take matters in their own hands, which is what lead to such widespread piracy.

 

As far as I'm concerned there was no successful anti-piracy campaign but a successful piracy campaign that forced a stale industry to get its act together by hitting it where it hurts: their profits.

 

The results seem a pretty obvious win for the consumer: fairer prices and more convenient access to the product.

 

This is just typical for any industry really, sooner or later they find a business model that works and when they do they'll want to stick with it at all costs because change = risk and risk is the antithesis of big business. So they'll defend their business model tooth and nail until someone else demonstrates a working way to make money with a new business model, which they'll then gleefully copy (the Netflix/Spotify/Steam idea, though I'm unsure if either of them was the first to do what they do). I'm hoping that the Internet will be able to keep forcing businesses to reinvent themselves on a regular basis so we won't end up with some outdated business model hardcoded into the law again (after we finally get rid of this stuff that was added for book publishing before telecommunication was invented).

 

After that I'd just like to point out that I'm a firm believer in providing fair reward for effort done as such I've never been much of a pirate, but being a software developer I am of course interested in the entire software patent debacle, an interest in the copyright system was a natural result (which isn't to say that I'm an expert, far from it, ianal etc).

 

EDIT: typos

Edited June 2, 2014 by marelooke