Print

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

[Neonivek]

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

That also isn't the answer...

[Criptfeind]

Okay. What is the answer? Are you really saying people should not try to know what they are buying?

I can not see another choice.

[Neonivek]

Okay. What is the answer? Are you really saying people should not try to know what they are buying?

I can not see another choice.

Well you weren't answering my question. You were answering what you thought my subtext was.

Even if you said everyone who pirates is the devil (and lets say it was true)... it wouldn't be an answer to my question.

[Criptfeind]

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

Answer. Or if you need it plainer. We should and Yes.

[Phmcw]

The longer I argue with you the more I realized that you are a entitled brat who thinks the world owes him everything.

So that's how you react when you're cornered?
Hehe, very mature. In case you didn't notice almost everyone is this thread have destroyed your pretty meaningless arguments one after another, I'm not alone in this. And of course, given that most of what I said is in the gnu manifesto, happy to have your opinion on the movement.

Why don't you go out and take a deep breath?

Well you weren't answering my question. You were answering what you thought my subtext was.

Even if you said everyone who pirates is the devil (and lets say it was true)... it wouldn't be an answer to my question.

Not answering the point made are what he's doing since the beginning.

[G-Flex]

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

You're right. You also can't assume that it's not zero, or that it isn't negative.

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.

Please don't misrepresent what people say. I specifically mentioned that this happens and also specifically mentioned that I'm not defending piracy in general. How many times do I have to say that?

free software

Wow. Wait. Do you really think that?

Yes, presumably he really thinks that free software exists in the world in which we live. ¯\(°_o)/¯

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.

In principle, I agree. In practice, it's sometimes difficult to find out if you'd really like something before actually experiencing it, and if one pirates a game with the foreknowledge that they'll buy it if they like it, then absolutely no harm is done (and some good is done) to the company selling it. Obviously, that only works if the person sticks to their principles.

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)

You're consistently putting forth very little effort into understanding what other people mean.


Again, I'm not saying "piracy is good" or that piracy is a net benefit to any industry; that is a completely different argument. I'm saying that you cannot compare "stealing" information with stealing a car or a carton of eggs. This is why the law actually makes a distinction between them.

[Neonivek]

if one pirates a game with the foreknowledge that they'll buy it if they like it, then absolutely no harm is done (and some good is done) to the company selling it. Obviously, that only works if the person sticks to their principles

I think this is what companies hate the most though.

They know that good games don't suffer from piracy.

it is their bad ones they sucker people into buying.

Though once again... How much should we really sypathise with a bad game losing sales because people realise it is horrible because of piracy?

[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.

BTW, in case the glib wording of my previus reply was lost on anybody, what I was saying is that the idea of stealing money that somebody does not yet have, and will not have because of your actons only makes sense if you ignore all distinctions between past, present, and future (and even then I think there may be a grandfather paradox in there somewhere).

[G-Flex]

if one pirates a game with the foreknowledge that they'll buy it if they like it, then absolutely no harm is done (and some good is done) to the company selling it. Obviously, that only works if the person sticks to their principles

I think this is what companies hate the most though.

They know that good games don't suffer from piracy.

it is their bad ones they sucker people into buying.

Though once again... How much should we really sypathise with a bad game losing sales because people realise it is horrible because of piracy?

This is somewhat of a tangent, but gamers themselves have to step up to the plate more when they come to this. As a group, they tend to act fairly entitled and a little foolish with money. For instance, they'll bitch to no end about a company's bad practices, but then will still buy their games; they treat it as if it's a need or something.

They're also really bad about buying products that do not even exist yet. Think about that for a second. Preorders are serious business, and effectively amount to buying a product before it even exists and getting it no sooner than anybody else anyway (for that matter, there's also something fishy about people who absolutely need something on launch day; why does it matter!?).

So yeah, two sides to that coin. The industry isn't blameless, but neither are the consumers.

[Criptfeind]

So that's how you react when you're cornered?
Hehe, very mature. In case you didn't notice almost everyone is this thread have destroyed your pretty meaningless arguments one after another, I'm not alone in this. And of course, given that most of what I said is in the gnu manifesto, happy to have your opinion on the movement.

No. I have been thinking that since I first started posting. When you commented on my posting quality I told you why it was so. Sides, you opened the gate on personal attacks as opposed to attacks on the theory.

Actually, I have had very low respect for you for quite a while, but it has taken quite a nose dive recently.

Why don't you go out and take a deep breath?

Why would I?

You're right. You also can't assume that it's not zero, or that it isn't negative.

Well... Not really. But I have been because that is the much more logical conclusion and I have not seen numbers ether way.

Please don't misrepresent what people say. I specifically mentioned that this happens and also specifically mentioned that I'm not defending piracy in general. How many times do I have to say that?

To be fair, I am arguing with like three or four people here and you all keep saying the same things. It is quite hard to keep you guys apart.

Yes, presumably he really thinks that free software exists in the world in which we live. ¯\(°_o)/¯

I was more talking about the fact he implied that there is no production costs. (Which might be what you mean here as well) but I needed to say that is a great emoticon.

In principle, I agree. In practice, it's sometimes difficult to find out if you'd really like something before actually experiencing it, and if one pirates a game with the foreknowledge that they'll buy it if they like it, then absolutely no harm is done (and some good is done) to the company selling it. Obviously, that only works if the person sticks to their principles.

This is indeed quite true... But I seriously think most people do not stick to these principles.

You're consistently putting forth very little effort into understanding what other people mean.

Eh. Sometimes I try to cut though the bullshit to something new cause we are going around in circles here. Of course no one wants that.

Also I am quite tired as I said. So yeah, I am not putting much effort into this.

Again, I'm not saying "piracy is good" or that piracy is a net benefit to any industry; that is a completely different argument. I'm saying that you cannot compare "stealing" information with stealing a car or a carton of eggs. This is why the law actually makes a distinction between them.

Both are illegal though. I can indeed draw that line as I have. I do not see the issue when the end result is the same.

BTW, in case the glib wording of my previus reply was lost on anybody, what I was saying is that the idea of stealing money that somebody does not yet have, and will not have because of your actons only makes sense if you ignore all distinctions between past, present, and future (and even then I think there may be a grandfather paradox in there somewhere).

So you are saying that, when you do something illegal that ends up making it so that some one has less money, it is not stealing because they do not have that money and ownership of money transends time and it was your manifest DESTINY to own that money.

Replace gibberish with a real reason cause I could not find anything in your post.

[G-Flex]

You're right. You also can't assume that it's not zero, or that it isn't negative.

Well... Not really. But I have been because that is the much more logical conclusion and I have not seen numbers ether way.

It's logical to assume that, taken as a whole, piracy has caused a net financial loss. It is not reasonable to assume this about a particular person who pirates, or a particular act of piracy, nor is it ever clear how much that financial loss actually is.

I was more talking about the fact he implied that there is no production costs. (Which might be what you mean here as well) but I needed to say that is a great emoticon.

That is not what "free software" means, and I'm pretty sure he didn't imply what you think he did.

Both are illegal though. I can indeed draw that line as I have. I do not see the issue when the end result is the same.

The end result is not the same and I've made that very clear. If you steal a car, the damage to the company is the cost that went into making that car and getting it where it is, and possibly whatever profit they'd have made off you (except nobody would actually consider that part in court as far as I know). When you pirate a movie, the damage to the company is anything from the potential profit to zero to a negative amount.

I have gone over, time and time again, why stealing a physical product and pirating information do not have identical impact on the person selling them.

I'm aware both are illegal. Murder and jaywalking are also both illegal. That does not make them equivalent.

[ChairmanPoo]

It's not illegal everywhere, either.

[G-Flex]

Yeah, there's generally a huge distinction between distributing and accepting copyrighted materials, and in some places, the law doesn't seem to even give much of a damn about the latter.

[Criptfeind]

I have gone over, time and time again, why stealing a physical product and pirating information do not have identical impact on the person selling them.

See this is the fundamental disconnect that I am unsure how to bridge.

I do not see, other then degree (which of course is worthless because it is only this case that hurts the 'real' goods maker more then the 'not real' goods maker.) what the difference is.

Like I said. The end result is the same. So I do not see how it is different.

[G-Flex]

Like I said. The end result is the same. So I do not see how it is different.

How is the end result the same, exactly? Please inform me of that. If the end result is "they might hypothetically lose money" then you might as well say that any crime possibly linked to depriving someone of money is "the same".

I honestly don't know how you can conflate "this person deprived me of real, actual property, which I no longer have, because he took it" and "this person deprived me of absolutely nothing except the extremely hypothetical money he would have otherwise given me for the information he accessed illicitly". They are not the same thing.