I'm guessing you posted this to also have an interesting debate on the topic? In that case, I'm going to go ahead and respectfully disagree with you on one point. Where you said he should have bought the game instead of "stealing people's work". You're right about everything else, but I just disagree that copying things is somehow theft.
There is no sane definition of theft that I can think of that would apply to "pirating" software. Stealing is when you take something that belongs to someone else without their permission. If I go to the store and take an orange without permission and without paying, that's stealing. The reason is because the store is now down one orange, I gained an orange, and they have to suffer the losses.
When I download an MP3 from the internet, the person who gave me the file shared it of his own volition. And in addition, he still has his copy. So that person didn't suffer any loss, and we now both have a copy of that song. Everybody wins. It's only when you introduce a completely fictional theoretical scenario, where a person "would have" bought the song through other means if he couldn't have downloaded it, that it looks like potential lost profit. But that's pure speculation, as that person could have also just not bought the song/software. In either case, the artist wouldn't have made a profit.
So unless you can prove that an individual would have otherwise paid for it, it's not theft. And even if you could prove it, it would still be on shaky ground. That's because when you digitally copy something, you don't do it from the original author, you copy it from someone who already has it. And if that person gave consent (which they did by file-sharing), then again it's not theft.
It would be as if I bought that same orange from before at a store, but instead of eating it I gave it to the homeless person outside the store. That homeless person didn't pay for the orange, and yet gets to enjoy it, but he's not a thief.
The only difference is that, unlike an MP3/software, you cannot infinitely replicate an orange. Well, maybe one day, when we're in a Star-Trek post scarcity world
Bigjohn. Seriously. I don't follow your logic. Are you saying that internet piracy doesn't exist? You're scenario of the hobo and the orange, it's asinine to think like that. It doesn't work that way.
Are you Nick in disguise? Your justification sounds exactly like his.
Take him down, GarageBay.
[EDIT] edited to appropriately correspond with your edits.
Look, we're not arguing semantics here. Piracy is theft. You're literally voiding every point GarageBay made. He creates games for a living, and when people get "digital copies" for free when it was intended to be purchased tp make profit, like he said it threatens his career, his well being, and his family's future. How can you tell me that isn't theft? How can you say that isn't wrong?
Yep, it's 100% Stealing in my eyes. Your example bigjohn doesn't make sense to me I'm afraid. If someone in the uk stole an orange and then a homeless dude willingly takes the orange off the thief, fully knowing that it hasn't been paid for or acquired legitametly. Police would then arrest him to assistance to theft or whatever it's called, he will get alot lower sentence than the provider but nonetheless it's stealing. Only difference is piracy is digital and getting physical evidence is really hard to prove.
I think if these pirates knew what they are doing to the entertainment industry then they would see just how bad their actions are. I read yesterday an article from the guys who made the new god of war for psp and how they cant justify making another as piracy is so strong that nobody is buying their titles. He also goes on to say about the ds with the r4 destroying the ds revenue. This comes with news yesterday also that nintendo sales figures are down hugely for the first 3/4 of the financial year. I couldn't help but feel saddened Reading this because these guys just made arguably the best game on psp. Amazing graphics, gameplay, controls etc. And they can't justify doing it anymore because of pirates.
I understand money is tight these days and alot of people would rather try before they buy or just plain out steal it but you can never justify that to the authors of these products. It's sad to see studios going down under and a big reason to their demise is piracy. Just look at the film industry right now. MGM can't afford to make a new James bond, universal struggling on.
Sharing eh? that's not sharing... that's to distribute! that's 100% PIRACY.
Omg... people that can't afford a game, the traditional excuse. I recently bought 6 games, 5 of them with special offers and under 14 euros. Who the hell can not afford a game for 10 euro? or 5?, tell your daddy to give you 5 bucks!
it's not about affording (well maybe here in China it is), it's about greed. Then again everyone does it and nobody speaks about it. There's many people out there who don't pay for every program they use (at home) - just hear around your colleagues - was the Maya version really bought, which they used for their reel?. I've met "pirates" in every place I worked so far. Some admit it, some don't. And yes, it's theft. But then again everyone has to justify this for himself.
What bothers me a bit more is that there's people who're selling other people's work as a business. It's not like "hey dude you're my friend, hand me over that DVD of-whatever-cool-game-you-have". Especially here in China this is a problem. I'm pretty sure I can buy pirate copies of some of the stuff I work on right around the corner, all in high gloss packages and on professionally pressed DVDs, all shrinkwrapped too!
Personally I don't like piracy, yet it's part of the business - it's just stupid to pretend it doesn't happen or will not happen due to some super-duper copy protection your company uses. It just will happen. It's just like drunk driving - it's not good, everyone knows it, many people do it, and many won't admit it that they have done it at least once or twice.
Sharing eh? that's not sharing... that's to distribute! that's 100% PIRACY.
Omg... people that can't afford a game, the traditional excuse. I recently bought 6 games, 5 of them with special offers and under 14 euros. Who the hell can not afford a game for 10 euro? or 5?, tell your daddy to give you 5 bucks!
Yeah same feelings here! I've spent around $900 on games this year... probably another $300 on movies (I am more the gamer type :poly142::D)
I just can't see why people buy beer for example yet have NO or little appreciation for games, movies and even literature and thus are unwilling to pay for them. I mean come one, some call it art, some call it entertainment, but it will always be a modern type of craftsmanship, and quite frankly you can't build a house without money, same applies for games...
to all those guys with shady excuses, 2 beers is around a fiver... and lasts about an hour (if you drink them slowly and you have a thing for stale beer ) games have a much more lasting value and now go look at the steam halloween sales. guess what, there are quite a few games that will occupy you for MORE than 10 hours of your live, for the excact same price... IMHO worth a thought!
kwramm, the same thing here. I bought my pc at a local pc shop owner who ordered the pieces and build the pc, and put on it about 6 pirated games, and any windows OS you choose, for free. also comes with free photoshop, eset antivirus, and more. when i visited some arabic village, there are tons of recently released games stalled outside, packed like the real thing, but when you look inside its a disk with a marker written the games title on it.
I dont think pirates care about the company's its just the economics, they buy what they can afford, and they steal what they cannot. There's no justification for it people should not do it, but they do and will do it as long as they can. Its a problem with the technology that it is so easy and guilt free to do. Perhaps it will be solved when somone comes up with a foolproof security system(but then that might slow the uptake of technology).
In the meantime company's should focus on what they get(the actual figures, instead of made up off the top of their heads guesstimates for what they think their sales should be), and how to convert those pirates into sales with carrots instead of sticks. Like does punishing legitimate buyers work?.
What basicly really freaks me out is when a person that clearly has the money to buy all the titles he wants to play refuses to spend the money. Said person pirated in his earlier years as a student. And besides talking with him about the issue I always thought that he would stop when he finally gets his wellpaid job.
But no, his behaviour just continues. And it gets even better:
He's whining that he just doesn't know on what to spend his money on, while playing a pirated version of fallout (including addons) which can be bought for maybe 30 $ or what ever. Seriously - WTF?
@ bigjohn
When I download an MP3 from the internet, the person who gave me the file shared it of his own volition. And in addition, he still has his copy. So that person didn't suffer any loss, and we now both have a copy of that song. Everybody wins. It's only when you introduce a completely fictional theoretical scenario, where a person "would have" bought the song through other means if he couldn't have downloaded it, that it looks like potential lost profit. But that's pure speculation, as that person could have also just not bought the song/software. In either case, the artist wouldn't have made a profit.
Your abolutely missing the point here. Your example perfectly shows your misslead logic. Person A who offers a mp3 on the net doesn't have any rights to redistribute the file. Even if he bought the CD in a store. He may lend his CD to a number of personal friends I think this is covered if you baught the CD.
Buying an orange in a store gives your 100 % owenership of the item. You can do what ever you want with it.
Buying a cd or game doesn't give you ownership of the game, namely the files it consists of. You own the cd, the booklet and what not and can do with them as you wish. But you hold no rigths on the digital content execept using it und the terms of the license you have agreed to by buying / using the software.
And thats the end of discussion. Everything else is just coming up with a made up justification for pirating. You bought the right to privatly use a software. Nothing else.
Digitally redistributing this product (even for free) while you continue to use the software for yourself is a violantion of said license and thus illegal.
An exception might be the reselling / donating of a software where you transfer the right of usage onto another person. But this requires you to not use or own any copies of the software after you sold / donated it.
So in every case the example you stated is a clear violation of Terms of use.
If you don't like it and think this kind of licensing is really fucked I would expect you to just stop gaming and maybe start another hobby instead of making up weak excuses.
And if I'm at it:
Copyright protections are sometimes a real pain in the ass. I don't see why even bothering with it and spending money on copy right solutions that will be cracked within a few days after release anyway. Why not spending the money into the last weeks of development?
DRM is a different topic: I think it can provide some good protection but should be done in a comfortable way. If every publisher launches their own online destribution and requires me to have accounts and data given to them I really don't like it.
Plattforms like steam can do the very same but don't need me to have different accounts for every game I own.
BTW: I still prefer buying my games in store without any bodn to a DRM-System. But hey. times are changing.
I stopped pirated games/music when I turned 18 (and also stopped downloading/buying music from any label that wasn't independent) But yeah, now, I barely spend any money on new releases, and mostly wait for sales on steam or indy games.
Pirating is easy and can almost become a habit (oh I wanted to try that game, maybe I should download it)
I'm guessing you posted this to also have an interesting debate on the topic? In that case, I'm going to go ahead and respectfully disagree with you on one point. Where you said he should have bought the game instead of "stealing people's work". You're right about everything else, but I just disagree that copying things is somehow theft.
um no youre completely wrong.. and your making the points on a forum that consists of mainly game devs..
I stopped pirated games/music when I turned 18 (and also stopped downloading/buying music from any label that wasn't independent) But yeah, now, I barely spend any money on new releases, and mostly wait for sales on steam or indy games.
Pirating is easy and can almost become a habit (oh I wanted to try that game, maybe I should download it)
There's this funny thing called society which decides what you can and cannot do, and we've all decided that products can only change hands when both parties agree on it. You can come up with a million excuses and justifications, but those are useless - as long as the other party (the developer) doesn't agree with you copying the product, you have absolutely no right at all to copy it. If you believe so strongly in your justifications, e-mail the developer and present your plea.
I'm guilty of piracy, I used to pirate games day one. Often the excuse would be "I already own it on console so why is it wrong that I have it on PC too, I already paid for it?" or "I'm just testing to see if the game is worth buying yet."
Currently making up for it by actually buying games and throwing money at all those indie "buy the alpha, help us test!" projects.
On topic: Ice burn and also a question: How does PC feel about piracy of games that can no longer be bought? like roms, or really old PC games?
Bigjohn didn't say he thinks piracy is not wrong, nor illegal. He just said the word "theft" should be rethought, replaced, or redefined, so it better describes the act of copying data and intellectual property.
I really dont know why companies like EA and Activision havent created a deniable off the books team to flood torrent sites with broken or trojaned versions of their games and the destroy all the pirates computers. The way to stop piracy in my eyes is either make it too difficult or too dangerous to download torrents, and if there was a huge risk of computer infection, even just imagined risk, you'd see the torrents drop pronto......
You see it nowadays, ppl asking all over torrent sites if this or that has a virus. Get a team to stick in a backdoor that is inside pirated copies of the game, release as a bona fide 'cracked' version, then a bit later pipe down horrific crippling viruses to them......
Of course it would have to be done on the quiet, but i dont see a moral problem with it really! People are using the internet to rip off soooo much revenue, perhaps the thing to do is turn the tables and start hurting them back.
Bigjohn didn't say he thinks piracy is not wrong, nor illegal. He just said the word "theft" should be rethought, replaced, or redefined, so it better describes the act of copying data and intellectual property.
I see no harm on his comments.
Exactly. And I've heard the same arguments here before anyway, in various piracy threads, so why is he getting blasted for his opinion?
When purchasing software/games, whatever, it clearly states inside the EULA what you can and can't do, copying it for the purpose of distribution is illegal, and is theft.
Also when installing software/games, you have a license agreement (the EULA) you don't own the software/game, you have permission to use the software in certain conditions.
Bigjohn didn't say he thinks piracy is not wrong, nor illegal...
Uh, yeah he did - by refusing to acknowledge that software piracy is even a problem.
When I download an MP3 from the internet, the person who gave me the file shared it of his own volition. And in addition, he still has his copy. So that person didn't suffer any loss, and we now both have a copy of that song. Everybody wins.
Yeah, except the developer. The obvious illegality of sharing the file (game) across the net in the first place wasn't addressed at all. The whole attitude of the terms stealing or theft only applying to physical products is ridiculous - as is the assumption that piracy doesn't impact sales because of 'fictional, hypothetical scenarios' that they would have bought it if an illegal copy weren't available.
I wonder how anyone who advocates piracy, passively or otherwise, would feel if they'd finally landed their first gig as a developer (or their long-held staffer position, on which their livelihood and family depended on), only to be canned because of poor sales - even if piracy was only 'partially'responsible.
I don't think he meant it is not a problem, my impression from what he said was just that we should have precise words for defining precise problems.
If the word "theft" is used for attacking piracy, but the definition of the word does not precisely include what happens in piracy, this my be a legal breach through which one can scape from legal charges.
What I think is that he was just debating the use of a better word.
Because, in many ways, what he said is true. Until a few years ago, if you had bought something, that truly belonged to you, so you could resale, give, distribute. Nowadays we have a different situation, where you have something, but that doesn't belong to you to do whatever you feel like doing. You only truly have a license to use that thing in strict terms and conditions. So it's a very particular situation that is very new in our society, or in any society. So maybe, just maybe, a newer word that describes this illegality in a more precise way could be good.
Yeah as a teenager I used to not have any money. It sucked because I didn't have all the games I wanted. Christmas/Birthday was the only time I could expect to get my hands on one. I also stole a couple games from a friends house, he was disorganized anyway and simply thought he lost them.
I still didn't like having games though. So I moved out and got a job, and now I have money for games when I want them. I don't have money for ALL the games I want as soon as I want but it's still better than one game a year or something of the sort. Plus I feel more gamerly when I go to the game store and am like "I want to buy this game here is the money for it so that it will be mine." Also I was able to give my old friend his games back.
I don't think he meant it is not a problem, my impression from what he said was just that we should have precise words for defining precise problems.
Funny, when I read comments like this...
I happen to disagree that copying digital content is stealing...
...I get the impression that he thinks that it's okay to rip someone off (in this case, a game developer / publisher), as long as he didn't upload the files to a torrent site, or that he's not stealing a physical product. Not that any of that matters, because hey, he probably wouldn't have bought it anyway, right?
I was humoring you, bro. I still define it as theft. :P
But like you said, whatever word we label it as, it is still illegal, and it is still wrong. No room at all for justification.
Yeah, Pedro has it right. You guys are on some sort of a crusade, but I'm just offering my opinion as a person who happen to also be working in the same industry as you all, as an artist. This being a game-art forum and all...
I'm not saying that piracy isn't happening. I'm not saying it's not illegal. I'm not saying it's not a problem.
I AM saying, that in my personal opinion, it's not theft, and therefore not a crime.
And it seems like you guys are mis-representing what I'm saying on purpose. This for instance:
Yep, it's 100% Stealing in my eyes. Your example bigjohn doesn't make sense to me I'm afraid. If someone in the uk stole an orange and then a homeless dude willingly takes the orange off the thief, fully knowing that it hasn't been paid for or acquired legitametly.
Which isn't at all the example I gave. I appreciate a good debate, don't get me wrong, but that's not the point I made.
The point was that if I fully 100% legally BUY an orange. Not steal it, buy it. Then give that to a homeless person, then that person is now the legal owner of the orange. He didn't pay for it, he gets to enjoy it, and he's not a criminal. Everyone can agree on that. Once I buy an orange, it's mine. Once you buy something, anything, it's yours.
And I don't see why software should be any different. Someone goes to the store and buys a CD. It's his now, and he should be able to do whatever he wants with it. And if he willingly gives a copy to someone, I don't see the crime there.
Again, I'm not arguing it's not illegal, or that it's not a problem, or even that it's not harmful. But morally speaking, I don't see it as a crime. It's not theft, because the original owner still has his item. When you steal an orange, the shop is down 1 orange. When you copy an MP3, the music industry still has the same number of items they had before, which nowadays is infinite.
I read yesterday an article from the guys who made the new god of war for psp and how they cant justify making another as piracy is so strong that nobody is buying their titles.
I agree. That is a problem, not gonna argue against that. But I see it more of a problem of a hard-headed industry that insists on selling physical copies of games for $60 in this day and age when people can download them online (legally).
Those $60 don't go all to the people who make the game. Everyone wants their cut. Distributors, manufacturers (of the physical discs and box), retailers, all of them want their cut, when the reality is that the game we're all making could be sold for a fraction of the price, directly to the consumer through the internet.
We just refuse to because it's making a lot of money to a lot of people. But as devs, we just get our small cut from those $60 either way. So why do we need to over-charge our fans again? For the sake of "fighting piracy"? I don't buy it.
um no youre completely wrong.. and your making the points on a forum that consists of mainly game devs..
As if I'm not a game dev? What do you think I'm doing here? I guess I should be apologizing for the blasphemy? I just happen to hold a different opinion than yours. No harm in that.
Alright man, I'm gonna copy and use your portfolio. THANKS!
Go for it. When I put something online, I'm doing so fully knowing it's on the wild-west that is the internet, and anything could happen with it. If you wanted to actually make a game with them though, you're gonna need the source files. Which are available for a price
I really dont know why companies like EA and Activision havent created a deniable off the books team to flood torrent sites with broken or trojaned versions of their games and the destroy all the pirates computers
It doesn't have to be a game company, all it takes is any group or individual who is trying to be a vigilante for the game industry.
And its true, if there was more risk involved when pirating then it will definitely deter a large number of pirates. Most of the time they'll go for whatever has the most positive comments or seeds, but that isn't exactly hard to fake for a determined team/individual. Actually it doesn't even need to be a proper team, it can just be a general "community" who help the game industry by posting fake comments (but they'll need to know which ones work first, which I guess they could do by reading the existing comments).
Only the private pirate communities will really know which files are the "safe" ones and even then, they could also be influenced if the vigilantes "infiltrate" their communities and lie about which ones work or not, or post fake ones and claim they work, or bribe a respected pirate to do that for them.
The point was that if I fully 100% legally BUY an orange. Not steal it, buy it. Then give that to a homeless person, then that person is now the legal owner of the orange. He didn't pay for it, he gets to enjoy it, and he's not a criminal. Everyone can agree on that. Once I buy an orange, it's mine. Once you buy something, anything, it's yours.
And I don't see why software should be any different. Someone goes to the store and buys a CD. It's his now, and he should be able to do whatever he wants with it. And if he willingly gives a copy to someone, I don't see the crime there.
You can't copy an orange. If you could and started giving it away, food companies would be out of business.
Go for it. When I put something online, I'm doing so fully knowing it's on the wild-west that is the internet, and anything could happen with it. If you wanted to actually make a game with them though, you're gonna need the source files. Which are available for a price
Following your logic. If i bought your source files, I would then own, them, they would be mine.
I could then upload it to where ever, and 1000 people then download said files, and it would be theft - according to you. Would you no feel robbed, would you not have lost the opportunity of getting paid for your work - robbed of it?
Well, I'll tell you what I'm going to DO about all of this. I'm going to keep buying my games, and not redistribute them for free. I have enough respect for the people that made them to do that. What more can be said?
Replies
People keep telling me I'm a better writer than an artist... Kind of depressing and encouraging at the same time. o_O
I'm guessing you posted this to also have an interesting debate on the topic? In that case, I'm going to go ahead and respectfully disagree with you on one point. Where you said he should have bought the game instead of "stealing people's work". You're right about everything else, but I just disagree that copying things is somehow theft.
There is no sane definition of theft that I can think of that would apply to "pirating" software. Stealing is when you take something that belongs to someone else without their permission. If I go to the store and take an orange without permission and without paying, that's stealing. The reason is because the store is now down one orange, I gained an orange, and they have to suffer the losses.
When I download an MP3 from the internet, the person who gave me the file shared it of his own volition. And in addition, he still has his copy. So that person didn't suffer any loss, and we now both have a copy of that song. Everybody wins. It's only when you introduce a completely fictional theoretical scenario, where a person "would have" bought the song through other means if he couldn't have downloaded it, that it looks like potential lost profit. But that's pure speculation, as that person could have also just not bought the song/software. In either case, the artist wouldn't have made a profit.
So unless you can prove that an individual would have otherwise paid for it, it's not theft. And even if you could prove it, it would still be on shaky ground. That's because when you digitally copy something, you don't do it from the original author, you copy it from someone who already has it. And if that person gave consent (which they did by file-sharing), then again it's not theft.
It would be as if I bought that same orange from before at a store, but instead of eating it I gave it to the homeless person outside the store. That homeless person didn't pay for the orange, and yet gets to enjoy it, but he's not a thief.
The only difference is that, unlike an MP3/software, you cannot infinitely replicate an orange. Well, maybe one day, when we're in a Star-Trek post scarcity world
He's probably crying, crouching in the shower, slowly scrubbing that public pwnage from his psyche.
Are you Nick in disguise? Your justification sounds exactly like his.
Take him down, GarageBay.
[EDIT] edited to appropriately correspond with your edits.
*tumbleweed*
Did I say that?
I just said that I happen to disagree that copying digital content is stealing and I explained why.
I think if these pirates knew what they are doing to the entertainment industry then they would see just how bad their actions are. I read yesterday an article from the guys who made the new god of war for psp and how they cant justify making another as piracy is so strong that nobody is buying their titles. He also goes on to say about the ds with the r4 destroying the ds revenue. This comes with news yesterday also that nintendo sales figures are down hugely for the first 3/4 of the financial year. I couldn't help but feel saddened Reading this because these guys just made arguably the best game on psp. Amazing graphics, gameplay, controls etc. And they can't justify doing it anymore because of pirates.
I understand money is tight these days and alot of people would rather try before they buy or just plain out steal it but you can never justify that to the authors of these products. It's sad to see studios going down under and a big reason to their demise is piracy. Just look at the film industry right now. MGM can't afford to make a new James bond, universal struggling on.
Omg... people that can't afford a game, the traditional excuse. I recently bought 6 games, 5 of them with special offers and under 14 euros. Who the hell can not afford a game for 10 euro? or 5?, tell your daddy to give you 5 bucks!
What bothers me a bit more is that there's people who're selling other people's work as a business. It's not like "hey dude you're my friend, hand me over that DVD of-whatever-cool-game-you-have". Especially here in China this is a problem. I'm pretty sure I can buy pirate copies of some of the stuff I work on right around the corner, all in high gloss packages and on professionally pressed DVDs, all shrinkwrapped too!
Personally I don't like piracy, yet it's part of the business - it's just stupid to pretend it doesn't happen or will not happen due to some super-duper copy protection your company uses. It just will happen. It's just like drunk driving - it's not good, everyone knows it, many people do it, and many won't admit it that they have done it at least once or twice.
Yeah same feelings here! I've spent around $900 on games this year... probably another $300 on movies (I am more the gamer type :poly142::D)
I just can't see why people buy beer for example yet have NO or little appreciation for games, movies and even literature and thus are unwilling to pay for them. I mean come one, some call it art, some call it entertainment, but it will always be a modern type of craftsmanship, and quite frankly you can't build a house without money, same applies for games...
to all those guys with shady excuses, 2 beers is around a fiver... and lasts about an hour (if you drink them slowly and you have a thing for stale beer
I dont think pirates care about the company's its just the economics, they buy what they can afford, and they steal what they cannot. There's no justification for it people should not do it, but they do and will do it as long as they can. Its a problem with the technology that it is so easy and guilt free to do. Perhaps it will be solved when somone comes up with a foolproof security system(but then that might slow the uptake of technology).
In the meantime company's should focus on what they get(the actual figures, instead of made up off the top of their heads guesstimates for what they think their sales should be), and how to convert those pirates into sales with carrots instead of sticks. Like does punishing legitimate buyers work?.
But no, his behaviour just continues. And it gets even better:
He's whining that he just doesn't know on what to spend his money on, while playing a pirated version of fallout (including addons) which can be bought for maybe 30 $ or what ever. Seriously - WTF?
@ bigjohn
Your abolutely missing the point here. Your example perfectly shows your misslead logic. Person A who offers a mp3 on the net doesn't have any rights to redistribute the file. Even if he bought the CD in a store. He may lend his CD to a number of personal friends I think this is covered if you baught the CD.
Buying an orange in a store gives your 100 % owenership of the item. You can do what ever you want with it.
Buying a cd or game doesn't give you ownership of the game, namely the files it consists of. You own the cd, the booklet and what not and can do with them as you wish. But you hold no rigths on the digital content execept using it und the terms of the license you have agreed to by buying / using the software.
And thats the end of discussion. Everything else is just coming up with a made up justification for pirating. You bought the right to privatly use a software. Nothing else.
Digitally redistributing this product (even for free) while you continue to use the software for yourself is a violantion of said license and thus illegal.
An exception might be the reselling / donating of a software where you transfer the right of usage onto another person. But this requires you to not use or own any copies of the software after you sold / donated it.
So in every case the example you stated is a clear violation of Terms of use.
If you don't like it and think this kind of licensing is really fucked I would expect you to just stop gaming and maybe start another hobby instead of making up weak excuses.
And if I'm at it:
Copyright protections are sometimes a real pain in the ass. I don't see why even bothering with it and spending money on copy right solutions that will be cracked within a few days after release anyway. Why not spending the money into the last weeks of development?
DRM is a different topic: I think it can provide some good protection but should be done in a comfortable way. If every publisher launches their own online destribution and requires me to have accounts and data given to them I really don't like it.
Plattforms like steam can do the very same but don't need me to have different accounts for every game I own.
BTW: I still prefer buying my games in store without any bodn to a DRM-System. But hey. times are changing.
Pirating is easy and can almost become a habit (oh I wanted to try that game, maybe I should download it)
um no youre completely wrong.. and your making the points on a forum that consists of mainly game devs..
Alright man, I'm gonna copy and use your portfolio. THANKS!
ZacD said what I was going to say,
also i would like to add
You owned your bro.
Currently making up for it by actually buying games and throwing money at all those indie "buy the alpha, help us test!" projects.
On topic: Ice burn and also a question: How does PC feel about piracy of games that can no longer be bought? like roms, or really old PC games?
While it's still not legal in most cases, i don't see it as a problem (at least not in the same sense).
If there is some old game, that is impossible to dig up in its original form, why let it go unplayed by people who want to play it?
If however there is the slightest chance that it can be bought from somewhere/someone at a reasonable price, you should do it.
But it really is a shame to let really good old games go unplayed, just because you can't find a way to legally get it.
That's my opinion anyway.
I see no harm on his comments.
You see it nowadays, ppl asking all over torrent sites if this or that has a virus. Get a team to stick in a backdoor that is inside pirated copies of the game, release as a bona fide 'cracked' version, then a bit later pipe down horrific crippling viruses to them......
Of course it would have to be done on the quiet, but i dont see a moral problem with it really! People are using the internet to rip off soooo much revenue, perhaps the thing to do is turn the tables and start hurting them back.
Exactly. And I've heard the same arguments here before anyway, in various piracy threads, so why is he getting blasted for his opinion?
Because when it comes to intellectual property and legal definitions, what he describes IS theft.. its that simple ..
Also when installing software/games, you have a license agreement (the EULA) you don't own the software/game, you have permission to use the software in certain conditions.
Uh, yeah he did - by refusing to acknowledge that software piracy is even a problem.
Yeah, except the developer. The obvious illegality of sharing the file (game) across the net in the first place wasn't addressed at all. The whole attitude of the terms stealing or theft only applying to physical products is ridiculous - as is the assumption that piracy doesn't impact sales because of 'fictional, hypothetical scenarios' that they would have bought it if an illegal copy weren't available.
I wonder how anyone who advocates piracy, passively or otherwise, would feel if they'd finally landed their first gig as a developer (or their long-held staffer position, on which their livelihood and family depended on), only to be canned because of poor sales - even if piracy was only 'partially'responsible.
If the word "theft" is used for attacking piracy, but the definition of the word does not precisely include what happens in piracy, this my be a legal breach through which one can scape from legal charges.
What I think is that he was just debating the use of a better word.
Because, in many ways, what he said is true. Until a few years ago, if you had bought something, that truly belonged to you, so you could resale, give, distribute. Nowadays we have a different situation, where you have something, but that doesn't belong to you to do whatever you feel like doing. You only truly have a license to use that thing in strict terms and conditions. So it's a very particular situation that is very new in our society, or in any society. So maybe, just maybe, a newer word that describes this illegality in a more precise way could be good.
I still didn't like having games though. So I moved out and got a job, and now I have money for games when I want them. I don't have money for ALL the games I want as soon as I want but it's still better than one game a year or something of the sort. Plus I feel more gamerly when I go to the game store and am like "I want to buy this game here is the money for it so that it will be mine." Also I was able to give my old friend his games back.
Again, this isn't about semantics. We're talking about real situations and concepts that actually affect people. This is not a philosophy.
Funny, when I read comments like this...
...I get the impression that he thinks that it's okay to rip someone off (in this case, a game developer / publisher), as long as he didn't upload the files to a torrent site, or that he's not stealing a physical product. Not that any of that matters, because hey, he probably wouldn't have bought it anyway, right?
Makkon, maybe... Swindle, larceny, fraud are words used to define other law infringements that "theft" or "stealing" would not precisely define.
But like you said, whatever word we label it as, it is still illegal, and it is still wrong. No room at all for justification.
I am a developer myself, I'm a provider to my family because I'm a character artist and I do not approve piracy in any form.
I am just defending Bigjohn's comments because I think he was just talking about the use of the word, and not the act itself.
I'm not saying that piracy isn't happening. I'm not saying it's not illegal. I'm not saying it's not a problem.
I AM saying, that in my personal opinion, it's not theft, and therefore not a crime.
And it seems like you guys are mis-representing what I'm saying on purpose. This for instance:
Which isn't at all the example I gave. I appreciate a good debate, don't get me wrong, but that's not the point I made.
The point was that if I fully 100% legally BUY an orange. Not steal it, buy it. Then give that to a homeless person, then that person is now the legal owner of the orange. He didn't pay for it, he gets to enjoy it, and he's not a criminal. Everyone can agree on that. Once I buy an orange, it's mine. Once you buy something, anything, it's yours.
And I don't see why software should be any different. Someone goes to the store and buys a CD. It's his now, and he should be able to do whatever he wants with it. And if he willingly gives a copy to someone, I don't see the crime there.
Again, I'm not arguing it's not illegal, or that it's not a problem, or even that it's not harmful. But morally speaking, I don't see it as a crime. It's not theft, because the original owner still has his item. When you steal an orange, the shop is down 1 orange. When you copy an MP3, the music industry still has the same number of items they had before, which nowadays is infinite.
I agree. That is a problem, not gonna argue against that. But I see it more of a problem of a hard-headed industry that insists on selling physical copies of games for $60 in this day and age when people can download them online (legally).
Those $60 don't go all to the people who make the game. Everyone wants their cut. Distributors, manufacturers (of the physical discs and box), retailers, all of them want their cut, when the reality is that the game we're all making could be sold for a fraction of the price, directly to the consumer through the internet.
We just refuse to because it's making a lot of money to a lot of people. But as devs, we just get our small cut from those $60 either way. So why do we need to over-charge our fans again? For the sake of "fighting piracy"? I don't buy it.
As if I'm not a game dev? What do you think I'm doing here? I guess I should be apologizing for the blasphemy? I just happen to hold a different opinion than yours. No harm in that.
Go for it. When I put something online, I'm doing so fully knowing it's on the wild-west that is the internet, and anything could happen with it. If you wanted to actually make a game with them though, you're gonna need the source files. Which are available for a price
It doesn't have to be a game company, all it takes is any group or individual who is trying to be a vigilante for the game industry.
And its true, if there was more risk involved when pirating then it will definitely deter a large number of pirates. Most of the time they'll go for whatever has the most positive comments or seeds, but that isn't exactly hard to fake for a determined team/individual. Actually it doesn't even need to be a proper team, it can just be a general "community" who help the game industry by posting fake comments (but they'll need to know which ones work first, which I guess they could do by reading the existing comments).
Only the private pirate communities will really know which files are the "safe" ones and even then, they could also be influenced if the vigilantes "infiltrate" their communities and lie about which ones work or not, or post fake ones and claim they work, or bribe a respected pirate to do that for them.
It's immoral and illegal, but so is pirating.
There are many pirating-safe guides out there, heres a random one I found;
http://netforbeginners.about.com/u/ua/peersharing/how_to_identify_fake_torrents.htm
Just take all the points and use it against them.
It's absurd that the internet in general accepts pirating and even publishes tips and guides like this to HELP people pirate more safely.
There are extremists for everything, so its strange how these vigilantes I speak of have not popped up yet.
You can't copy an orange. If you could and started giving it away, food companies would be out of business.
Following your logic. If i bought your source files, I would then own, them, they would be mine.
I could then upload it to where ever, and 1000 people then download said files, and it would be theft - according to you. Would you no feel robbed, would you not have lost the opportunity of getting paid for your work - robbed of it?