Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Shadowlord]

Dear Capntastic:
What we've got here is... failure to communicate.

[Majestic7]

I see this like I see things with music. Record companies want us to buy separate copy for every media; but I'll be damned if I can't rip a cd I bought into mp3's to  listen on my computer or portable player.... or download mp3 version of the same album if I feel lazy. I've downloaded games for years - and I mean games I've actually bought. So many games are crippled with DRM that ware version simply works better than the legal one. (Naturally, I usually don't buy games with intrusive DRM at all since I don't want to support DRM, but there are always exceptions.)

I find it hilarious how hypocritical so many game companies are regarding piracy. They are in speak no evil, see no evil mode, where the subject can't be discussed at all on any of their forums. I can understand not allowing people actually linking to torrents or such... but not even allowing them to discuss piracy on some off-topic forum? That is ridicilous. I guess they are so afraid of people citing research that states piracy does no damage etc.

Mind you, Paradox are one of the good guys. They don't censor their forums very much. They allow people to tell their games are total shit without waving the banhammer and criticize bugs. Just look Stardock when Elemental came out to see the difference.... Not to even mention SEGA, for example, which was infamous for banning people for having anything negative to say about M:TW II. So the way they act regarding piracy kind of sets the industry low standard, since they are otherwise relaxed and not dicks like all the larger companies in policing their forums.

[dogstile]

I'm sensing confusion about torrent technology and "downloading" a game. When you download something with a (non-hacked, standard) torrent client, you aren't just flipping bits on your hard drive; you're uploading while you're downloading.

That's the key. You're distributing copyright material, not simply downloading it.

No, seriously, bittorrent has an option not to upload. At least I think it's bittorrent, It has been a while

[Capntastic]

Dear Capntastic:
What we've got here is... failure to communicate.

Exactly!  How can any communication be possible since the words you say are carried by air or text and then interpreted by my senses and brain?  Sir Pseudonymous brings up a really clever and insightful point; it's literally impossible for ideas or concepts to be conveyed or duplicated via any sort of medium at all, ergo,

[Farseer]

Dear Capntastic:
What we've got here is... failure to communicate.

He's taking the piss out of the whole "You're tranferring random packets of data so it's not copyright sharing at all" concept.

[alexandertnt]

Lots of people are claiming that illegal downloading of software is not depriving the company of anything. That's just plain false.

From what I have read of this thread, no one is claiming that. What I was (and the OP was) posting about was downloading something that would traditionally be viewed as an illegal method of acquisition, but when you have already payed for your right to use the game.

You're not uploading "copyrighted material" when your client upload packets. You're uploading arbitrary numbers that are wholly divorced from the work itself. That with several thousand of these numbers someone can procedurally recover a copy of a copyrighted work is irrelevant. It would be like trying to claim that quoting the gibberish produced by feeding a movie script into a markov chain generator is copyright infringement.



Also, a couple of Ars Technica articles relevant to the thread.

I have to disagree. That is just the method of transmission. Whilst the packets themselves cannot be copyrighted, the end result is people ending up with illegal free copies of software.

[Capntastic]

For those that don't have the stomach for facetious ribbing, I'll address what is so grandly dumb about what Sir said.   I will address the points I find most salient and use logic to prove them wrong.  I will use a broken vase as an analogy.

You're not uploading "copyrighted material" when your client upload packets.[1] You're uploading arbitrary[2] numbers that are wholly divorced from the work itself.[3] That with several thousand of these numbers someone can procedurally recover a copy of a copyrighted work is irrelevant.[4] It would be like trying to claim that quoting the gibberish produced by feeding a movie script into a markov chain generator is copyright infringement.

1.  You are indeed uploading packets of data.    Consider each packet as a fragment of a vase.
2.  The packets are not arbitrary in any definition of the word, otherwise you would be content to upload packets of randomized data.    Each packet contains specific data.  Each packet is, again, like a specifically shaped fragment of the vase.
3.  The packets are not 'divorced from the work itself' in any way, as the packets contain specific data that is originated from the original file being distributed.  The fragments of the vase came from a vase virtually being smashed apart in a computer simulation.
4.  That you can indeed generate random strings of binary to create canyon.mid or SchindlersList_Bluray.avi and anything else real or imagined with infinite variation is true.  But this is not what torrenting does, as torrenting is a file distribution method.  That's the whole point.  Torrenting is akin to taking those digitally smashed vase fragments, sending the 3d data of each of those fragments to a 3d printing shop downtown, and having them create each of those fragments with a CNC machine and then fitting them together. 

Trying to hide behind a layer of digital abstraction and "well, who's to say this mp3 album didn't come about as a hard drive error?" irrational babble just hinders your cause.
I literally don't care about the legality of torrenting in this situation, but you're arguing in incredibly poor faith and completely misrepresenting what torrenting is to a group of people who know better.  It's insulting to people on both sides of the issue.

[Flaede]

Yeah, that argument is as bad as the one comparing it to shoplifting.

EDIT: and by "that argument", I mean the ridiculous one about how "it's all just random data".

[Deon]

Well, if seeding torrent is uploading random data which has no sense and does not aid to pirate the file, then downloading is what... downloading random data too? So if you download a game, you don't download it, right? Hehe.

People, really. Actually this thread amuzes me, in an entertaining way. And I am always unsure about "digital products". Every time I payed for something "digital" I felt like I decided to give my money away and expected something in reply, but did not rely to "own" anything I recieve. I know it's not a new and a huge market now, but it's so easy to break the system that I just can't take it seriously .

[Capntastic]

Trying to use "well I use bit-torrent to obtain totally random packets which may or may not, if assembled in a particular order, coincide with theoretical games and music I don't want to pay for" as a defense is completely disingenuous and insane compared to an honest "Yeah I wanted it and took it without paying."  It's the same sort of broken reasoning people use to push stuff like trickle-down economics without just saying "I'm rich and want to be richer."

[Deon]

Moreover, nobody can sue or accuse anyone here, it's just a forum thread, there's no need to "defend" yourself. So it's funny to see such "theories". Do people really think so, or is it a joke I don't barely get?

[Capntastic]

To address Farseer's original point of "Is it wrong of me to talk about pirating games on the company's forum??":

Legality aside, it's a "DICK MOVE" thing to do.  Here's an example of what you are doing, transposed into a situation in which everyone is being completely legal, since this is based in not-being-a-dick more than it is legality.

You own a chocolate shop.  You work very hard to make chocolates you think people will like.  Your shop is often crowded with people discussing your chocolates.  One day a customer walks in and starts talking to other customers; he has a legitimate complaint about the chocolates he bought not tasting right at all, to the point of inedibility.  He then proceeds to casually mention the wizard down the street who will make you all the chocolates you want, for free, and forever.

Now, as a confectioner, you can't really hope to take down the wizard on your own, and you know he exists.  But you still don't want people going to that wizard, since you like making chocolate, and you have rent.  So telling the disgruntled customer to stop talking about the wizard, or to leave, is a totally rational response.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Stop comparing software piracy to actual theft. The only theft is intellectual, and the product being downloaded would have rarely gotten paid for if the downloader wouldn't be able to get ahold of said software free otherwise, so it's a catch-22.

Piracy is taking a pie, then making two or three or four more pies to distribute to the other, pie-wanting people. It's not beating up a poor old chocolate shopkeeper and taking his money, goods, and wife.

The piracy issue is an entire fabrication by corporations trying to save their profits in the digital age. They can't and won't be able to do anything about it. Piracy is better for people in general, in a world where information is free the software itself should also be free, open-source (in most cases) and not be held back by a legally binging and yet out-of-date contract.

[MouzurX]

http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/1305211/abe3ad25/joss_stone_over_piracy.html

[Astral]

To address Farseer's original point of "Is it wrong of me to talk about pirating games on the company's forum??":

Legality aside, it's a "DICK MOVE" thing to do.  Here's an example of what you are doing, transposed into a situation in which everyone is being completely legal, since this is based in not-being-a-dick more than it is legality.

You own a chocolate shop.  You work very hard to make chocolates you think people will like.  Your shop is often crowded with people discussing your chocolates.  One day a customer walks in and starts talking to other customers; he has a legitimate complaint about the chocolates he bought not tasting right at all, to the point of inedibility.  He then proceeds to casually mention the wizard down the street who will make you all the chocolates you want, for free, and forever.

Now, as a confectioner, you can't really hope to take down the wizard on your own, and you know he exists.  But you still don't want people going to that wizard, since you like making chocolate, and you have rent.  So telling the disgruntled customer to stop talking about the wizard, or to leave, is a totally rational response.

To add to this, if the wizard makes better chocolates that don't get you sick if you try giving them to someone else, and don't implant things inside of you which can monitor your every move, such as chocolate habits and brand choices, then maybe you've got an argument.

DRM free games/music are a major draw for piracy. I don't enjoy having monitoring software installed on my computer that pretty much says "You bought our game, so we don't trust you" while most pirated versions get off scott free anyway.