Print

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

[Criptfeind]

Look man. When I steal your priceless documents. By their vary nature (priceless) you can not tell how much damage (in dollars) I have caused to you.

But it is still thief.

Also. Really?

You are not taking money from anyone when you pirate something. Pirating something may cause you to not give them money

Really? The fact of the matter is not how it works out. It is that end the end they end up with less and you end up with more.

[ein]

Piracy creates a COPY.
You have one, the person who legitimately bought it and copied it originally has one, the other people who pirated it have one, and whoever originally sold it STILL has one.
The original distributor can still sell more copies, and some of the pirates will buy these copies.
Others still would never have bought it, and nobody loses ANYTHING from them pirating it.

[Criptfeind]

Piracy creates a COPY.
You have one, the person who legitimately bought it and copied it originally has one, the other people who pirated it have one, and whoever originally sold it STILL has one.
The original distributor can still sell more copies, and some of the pirates will buy these copies.
Others still would never have bought it, and nobody loses ANYTHING from them pirating it.

Then there are the people who would have purchased it, but instead they pirated it. You can not just ignore that.

[ein]

'Oh hey, I want to buy this thing because it's awesome.
Nah, fuck it, I'll just pirate it.'

[Criptfeind]

Yup.

[Bohandas]

You are pretty much missing the point there. That would only be valid if the artists and companies were making this stuff only for themselves and hoarding it away from others. Here's the big thing: They are trying to sell it.

When you steal it, the issue is not in fact the stealing of the music/game/book/ect you are stealing the profits they would have made if you had purchased it.

That money, which because of your illegal actions you have and they do not is indeed 'property'

You cannot take something away from swomeone if they don't already have it.

Your argument is only valid given the assumption that t_p is greater than or equal to the length of time beween the decision to go to the music store (or the video store, or Amazon.com, or whatever) and the time when the profits from any purchase you may make there to reach the copyright holder OR the time required to locate and download a pirated song/video/game/whatever (,whichever takes longer), or if you are a Lovecraftian entity who exists outside of time.

[G-Flex]

Look man. When I steal your priceless documents. By their vary nature (priceless) you can not tell how much damage (in dollars) I have caused to you.

I'm trying to parse the logical argument you're making here, but I can't. Since when is anything actually "priceless"? I thought we were talking about actual products with actual market values here. I'm not even going to comment more on this quote because I can't for the life of me figure out how it's relevant or what you're driving at.

But it is still thief.

No, it's not. Copyright infringement is not theft in the eyes of the law, nor is it theft in any sort of logical sense. And yes, the word is "theft".

Also. Really?

You are not taking money from anyone when you pirate something. Pirating something may cause you to not give them money

Really? The fact of the matter is not how it works out. It is that end the end they end up with less and you end up with more.

Did you even read the quote you're responding to? It says "pirating something may cause you to not give them money", which is exactly what you're arguing.
Also: "You end up with more" ... what, exactly?

If you're responding to the bit about pirating something not necessarily incurring a financial loss: Of course it doesn't all the time. I've watched "Twilight" for cheap laughs, via pirating, but is there any way I would have ever paid for it? Of course not. Well, maybe for $3 in a bargain bin somewhere, but certainly not at market price. Or maybe I'd buy it in a bargain bin anyway despite the fact that I already have pirated it (I've bought terrible movies for the price of a couple candy bars before). The fact of the matter is that you have no idea what the financial impact is to the production company that I've caused by pirating the movie, or if there even is one. This is just to provide an example.

I provided examples as well. From my experience and what I generally see, most people have listened to an album illicitly before buying it, whether it's through youtube, being sent a file from a friend, filesharing, or some other method. In these cases, piracy did not incur a financial loss to anyone, and in fact may have helped raise awareness of the musical artists involved. Granted, these days there are legal alternatives for that (official videos on sites like Youtube, services like Pandora, etc.), but that isn't the point; the point is that there are a surprisingly large number of real-world scenarios where a person pirates something and then goes on to buy it regardless, and it is self-evident in such a case that no financial loss to the distributor is involved.



You are right that we cannot ignore the fact that there are many, many people who pirate something instead of purchasing it. However, this is not the only common or plausible scenario in the real world. There are people who purchase without pirating, pirate without purchasing, and also people who do both. Nor is it assumed that a pirate would have paid for it at all, ever, and even if they would, it cannot be assumed when they would, or what they would pay for it. You would need both telepathy and a pretty powerful crystal ball in order to do that.

[Criptfeind]

At Bohandas: How cute. Countering with sheer gibberish.

I'm trying to parse the logical argument you're making here, but I can't. Since when is anything actually "priceless"? I thought we were talking about actual products with actual market values here. I'm not even going to comment more on this quote because I can't for the life of me figure out how it's relevant or what you're driving at.

The point is that just because you can not tell how much damage something is doing, you should not assume it is zero.

Did you even read the quote you're responding to? It says "pirating something may cause you to not give them money", which is exactly what you're arguing.
Also: "You end up with more" ... what, exactly?

My point is that it is one and the same. Also yes, when you steal something you naturally end up with more of that something.

Also, once again. Everyone is saying that since some people buy things after they steal them, that means of course no one has ever stolen and not purchased something ever.

[Phmcw]

Out of interest, do you apply the same logic to video games? To films?

Pretty much. I only use free software (that I sometime pay for), and yes for the movies.

Criptfeind, no. It's not.
The proof is : try to make free car as they make free software and see where you goes. How noes that's not possible! Why? Because car and software are not the same things.
Another difference is that what they loose is an expected gain based on what they would gain if they made the sale. Which is not at all what you lose if I steal your car.
And now try to actualy make a point instead of a poorly thought metaphor.

[Criptfeind]

free software

Wow. Wait. Do you really think that?

[Neonivek]

For the most part an anti-piracy bill will get passed eventually because of course Money Talks.

The issue mostly is how far will we go to stop piracy. Especially since Piracy isn't as harmful is it appears (going by research mind you, it is nearly impossible to calculate losses from piracy. Since people who pirate games tend to buy a lot of games, so the question is how many of those people were going to buy a copy. I project, based on nothing, 10% of piracy is true loss of sale. ALSO how much should we REALLY sympathise with a company who WOULD have gotten great sales if people had to buy the game to realise it was a complete worthless pile of crud?)

Though really anything that takes money away from someone is an issue that someone else will petition for.

[Criptfeind]

how much should we REALLY sympathise with a company who WOULD have gotten great sales if people had to buy the game to realise it was a complete worthless pile of crud?)

If people are unaware consumers I will not feel sorry if they buy crappy games.

[Neonivek]

how much should we REALLY sympathise with a company who WOULD have gotten great sales if people had to buy the game to realise it was a complete worthless pile of crud?)

If people are unaware consumers I will not feel sorry if they buy crappy games.

That doesn't really answer the question.

Should we REALLY blame piracy for a loss of sale of a horrible product that plagues on ignorance to make a sale? It seems more like a "In a decent world that game wouldn't have gotten any sales even without piracy"

Mind you I don't have a well formed oppinion in this case.

I know that it very Well could be a MAJOR factor in anti-piracy... That they are having a harder time selling their mass produced poor games that no one would buy if they knew what they were getting their hands on.

[Phmcw]

Criptfiend, you know you should add Tl;dr before any of your post. Because it's painfully obvious.

You don't respond to the point made, you make snappy one liners.

[Criptfeind]

This is the information age you know? You can tell how good a game is before you buy it.

If you buy a crappy game it is cause you did not research it.

The correct answer is not stealing the game. The correct answer is researching the game.

Criptfiend, you know you should add Tl;dr before any of your post. Because it's painfully obvious.

You don't respond to the point made, you make snappy one liners.

Yeah. Well. The longer I argue with you the more I realized that you are a entitled brat who thinks the world owes him everything. Quite frankly at this point I do not care for the effort it takes at this hour to truly respond to you.

Edit: To clarify, my 'snappy one liners' are condensed versions of what I would say if I cared. Most people are willing to understand what I mean. But not you of course. (Cause I owe you my full attention)