EPTThis is the approach that I feel is best for my situation. I don't want to encourage piracy, so I don't participate in it. I also don't want to encourage developers making bad games, so I don't buy those games that I don't think earn my money. A lot of this is subjective, as I have certain developers I trust and game types I favour which factor into my decision making process. Conversely, I do view certain genres or developers in a negative light which makes it harder for them to make me spend my money. That's where the buying aspect comes in. If I'm not giving them money, then I'm hopefully influencing them to put more effort into their games or sending them out of business. I'm not going to pirate the game to find out if it's good or not, I feel like I know what I like and what I don't. Occasionally I will be let down by a game, but I'm ok with that. I don't expect every game/movie/book to be a home run and it's a lesson learned for future purchases.
Combating piracy - Page 41
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Frogsox
Australia274 Posts
This is the approach that I feel is best for my situation. I don't want to encourage piracy, so I don't participate in it. I also don't want to encourage developers making bad games, so I don't buy those games that I don't think earn my money. A lot of this is subjective, as I have certain developers I trust and game types I favour which factor into my decision making process. Conversely, I do view certain genres or developers in a negative light which makes it harder for them to make me spend my money. That's where the buying aspect comes in. If I'm not giving them money, then I'm hopefully influencing them to put more effort into their games or sending them out of business. I'm not going to pirate the game to find out if it's good or not, I feel like I know what I like and what I don't. Occasionally I will be let down by a game, but I'm ok with that. I don't expect every game/movie/book to be a home run and it's a lesson learned for future purchases. | ||
|
HereAndNow
United States185 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:20 turdburgler wrote: assuming taking that seat doesnt hurt anyone and it was going to be empty i dont see why its immortal. you are stating its immoral without saying why. you also rebuffed my claim that putting people out of business isnt inherently immoral the same way. you are just stating things without any explanation Taking something for nothing without asking or telling is immoral. Even if no one is technically getting hurt, unless you have consent for taking something, or trade money, goods, or services of your own, it's immoral. This is the way it's been for thousands of years. Are you suddenly immune to this morality or above other people? No, you're just ignoring this fact to try to feel better about your actions. It's not immoral in the same way, because not all morality is the same. It is immoral for you to want something for free and to put people out of a job. By your actions, you are gaining, they are losing. You're also forcing them into this situation by not giving them a choice. They are not choosing to let you pirate. You are choosing your actions, forcing a consequence, and it only benefits you in the long run. That is almost exactly what immorality is. There's plenty on philosophy elsewhere. If you have such a narrow and self-centered view on morality, and only do anything for your own gain and just say fuck everyone else, then you might want to read up on it. | ||
|
Prinny-tai
United States71 Posts
Why is stealing some culture from a wealthy corporation considered deviant, but suing that individual for thousands of times more then the value of the stolen media not? | ||
|
Frogsox
Australia274 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:26 HereAndNow wrote: Taking something for nothing without asking or telling is immoral. Even if no one is technically getting hurt, unless you have consent for taking something, or trade money, goods, or services of your own, it's immoral. This is the way it's been for thousands of years. Are you suddenly immune to this morality or above other people? No, you're just ignoring this fact to try to feel better about your actions. It's not immoral in the same way, because not all morality is the same. It is immoral for you to want something for free and to put people out of a job. By your actions, you are gaining, they are losing. You're also forcing them into this situation by not giving them a choice. They are not choosing to let you pirate. You are choosing your actions, forcing a consequence, and it only benefits you in the long run. That is almost exactly what immorality is. There's plenty on philosophy elsewhere. If you have such a narrow and self-centered view on morality, and only do anything for your own gain and just say fuck everyone else, then you might want to read up on it. I'm with you. The intent to buy the game is completely immaterial. If that person really never intended to buy the game, why is he downloading it? The logic to that thought process is fundamentally flawed. By indicating that the game isn't worth paying for, it's implied that the game isn't of sufficient interest to the buyer. Why obtain the game at all if it's not worth it? | ||
|
Prinny-tai
United States71 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:26 HereAndNow wrote: Taking something for nothing without asking or telling is immoral. Even if no one is technically getting hurt, unless you have consent for taking something, or trade money, goods, or services of your own, it's immoral. This is the way it's been for thousands of years. Are you suddenly immune to this morality or above other people? No, you're just ignoring this fact to try to feel better about your actions. It's not immoral in the same way, because not all morality is the same. It is immoral for you to want something for free and to put people out of a job. By your actions, you are gaining, they are losing. You're also forcing them into this situation by not giving them a choice. They are not choosing to let you pirate. You are choosing your actions, forcing a consequence, and it only benefits you in the long run. That is almost exactly what immorality is. There's plenty on philosophy elsewhere. If you have such a narrow and self-centered view on morality, and only do anything for your own gain and just say fuck everyone else, then you might want to read up on it. Or maybe it's only immoral for thousands of years b/c it's useful to those in power? | ||
|
Frogsox
Australia274 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:34 Prinny-tai wrote: Or maybe it's only immoral for thousands of years b/c it's useful to those in power? Hang on while I get my tinfoil hat. But more seriously, I don't agree with you that most of culture is made inaccessible by cost. I have a supermarket job and only work a few days a week so that I can study. But I can still afford to buy the books I want, the games I think I'll like and watch the movies I'm interested in. Can I consume the whole of any of those cultural subsets? Of course not. But I can be intelligent in my approach to them and find what I like and participate in those areas. It's all about having realistic expectations about what you should and shouldn't have. Why should I think I have the right to anything I want? Why should I feel entitled to pick and choose which laws I feel like obeying? To be frank, would you be cool with someone walking into your house and just taking what he or she likes and then walking out without you being compensated? | ||
|
HereAndNow
United States185 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:33 Frogsox wrote: I'm with you. The intent to buy the game is completely immaterial. If that person really never intended to buy the game, why is he downloading it? The logic to that thought process is fundamentally flawed. By indicating that the game isn't worth paying for, it's implied that the game isn't of sufficient interest to the buyer. Why obtain the game at all if it's not worth it? This is the real point. The intent to buy a game and the intent to play it are (or should be) the same thing. To enjoy it, you must acquire it. To acquire it, you must buy it, or get it through a legal channel. On December 03 2011 02:34 Prinny-tai wrote: Or maybe it's only immoral for thousands of years b/c it's useful to those in power? Take politics elsewhere. If suddenly no one paid for anything that they didn't have to, it'd be anarchy. Why should I have to pay for someone to make me food? If they choose to make it when I ask, I'm not bound to give anything in return, I should just be able to leave. People have rebelled against the immoral powerful for less important things than paying for goods and services. If you don't want to give in return for receiving, you're immoral. Anyone past the age of 10 know this, and many under that age do as well. | ||
|
Prinny-tai
United States71 Posts
A more "fair" from of culture distribution in our society would be something akin to the various humble bundles or so | ||
|
valaki
Hungary2476 Posts
| ||
|
HereAndNow
United States185 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:43 Prinny-tai wrote: There's nothing wrong with giving something of equal value for what you are receiving, but culture sold through mainstream institutions are worth less then what you pay for them, so they can extract a profit. Do you even have numbers to back that up? You're supporting somewhere around 100 or more people for a regular to big size game title. You have a work environment, filled with top of the line equipment, a lot of power and data being used, you have server costs if you digitally distribute and manufacturing costs if you sell discs, and both if you distribute both ways. If it's an online game, you need server upkeep, both manpower and cost of data/power. Those types of games also sometimes staff constant people for balance/patching/development for years down the road. You need advertising costs. That's bloody expensive. What you think is a fair price for a game and what the actual cost of a game is are two completely different things. I'm sure if a developer could guarantee 40 million copies sold, they'd bring the cost down rapidly, but nothing aside from AAA titles makes it past a few million, tops. If you're going to talk about business, I'd recommend getting the facts right first. On December 03 2011 02:43 valaki wrote: I pirate because I can. And you're a criminal for doing so. I'm glad we can both state the truth so clearly. | ||
|
harlock78
United States94 Posts
Corporations routinely ship factories in countries where labor and living conditions are dubious, putting thousands of people in the western world out of work. Also huge corporations have so much bargaining power that they make huge profits out of the insanely hard work of small farmers in 3rd world countries, who can barely survive. That to me is more immoral than pirating a game that i would not buy anyway. | ||
|
InterestingName
United States3 Posts
| ||
|
HereAndNow
United States185 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:51 harlock78 wrote: HereandNow, why are you trying to convince people that piracy is immoral? It is not in my book. Corporations routinely ship factories in countries where labor and living conditions are dubious, putting thousands of people in the western world out of work. Also huge corporations have so much bargaining power that they make huge profits out of the insanely hard work of small farmers in 3rd world countries, who can barely survive. That to me is more immoral than pirating a game that i would not buy anyway. And that's bad to justify like that as well. "Well, if they're going to do immoral things, I should be able to as well" Well no. -An eye for an eye leaves the world blind-. It's still wrong. Just because it's not as bad as what other people do doesn't make it ok. You know, people kill each other all the time. I mean, that's bad. So I should get to walk around and piss on the shoes of every person I see. It's not as bad as them shooting me, right? Also, if you people really thought piracy was ok, you'd use accounts that had more than 6 posts. Nice smurfs to cover your sense of worth. | ||
|
Frogsox
Australia274 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:43 Prinny-tai wrote: There's nothing wrong with giving something of equal value for what you are receiving, but culture sold through mainstream institutions are worth less then what you pay for them, so they can extract a profit. A more "fair" from of culture distribution in our society would be something akin to the various humble bundles or so Simply put, there's no way that would work on a large scale as people would abuse the system and pay significantly less that the products are worth. It's worth noting that most the humble bundles are plagued by people who only pay the bare minimum $0.01 to obtain the games. How fair would that be on a institutional scale for an entire industry where people abuse the system to their own benefit? Essentially you'd only be flipping the scenario you believe to be true so that it favours the broader populace. However, should this occur it will be fairly meaningless as the developers would lose any reason to produce the games as they see all their hard work and time under-valued to the point where it is no longer worth the effort to create games. | ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:26 HereAndNow wrote: Taking something for nothing without asking or telling is immoral. Even if no one is technically getting hurt, unless you have consent for taking something, or trade money, goods, or services of your own, it's immoral. This is the way it's been for thousands of years. Are you suddenly immune to this morality or above other people? No, you're just ignoring this fact to try to feel better about your actions. It's not immoral in the same way, because not all morality is the same. It is immoral for you to want something for free and to put people out of a job. By your actions, you are gaining, they are losing. You're also forcing them into this situation by not giving them a choice. They are not choosing to let you pirate. You are choosing your actions, forcing a consequence, and it only benefits you in the long run. That is almost exactly what immorality is. There's plenty on philosophy elsewhere. If you have such a narrow and self-centered view on morality, and only do anything for your own gain and just say fuck everyone else, then you might want to read up on it. but the point is im not saying fuck everyone else. these examples specifically state that im not directly hurting anyone and any possible hurt to the business is no different than other financial problems any business faces. im stating that many people are unwilling to pay X dollars or pounds for a game. if that means the company goes bust for charging that much then so be it. its actually irrelevant to the argument if i then take the game for free while its marketed at that price. | ||
|
Frogsox
Australia274 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:55 turdburgler wrote: but the point is im not saying fuck everyone else. these examples specifically state that im not directly hurting anyone and any possible hurt to the business is no different than other financial problems any business faces. im stating that many people are unwilling to pay X dollars or pounds for a game. if that means the company goes bust for charging that much then so be it. its actually irrelevant to the argument if i then take the game for free while its marketed at that price. If it's not worth your money, why are you downloading it? | ||
|
HereAndNow
United States185 Posts
On December 03 2011 02:55 turdburgler wrote: but the point is im not saying fuck everyone else. these examples specifically state that im not directly hurting anyone and any possible hurt to the business is no different than other financial problems any business faces. im stating that many people are unwilling to pay X dollars or pounds for a game. if that means the company goes bust for charging that much then so be it. its actually irrelevant to the argument if i then take the game for free while its marketed at that price. You are contributing to the problem, you are a part of it. If you are unwilling to get something at the price it's listed at, you don't get that. This is the way it's always worked. I don't think my house is worth as much as it is, but I have to pay for it anyway, otherwise I'm on the street. | ||
|
seppolevne
Canada1681 Posts
| ||
|
HereAndNow
United States185 Posts
On December 03 2011 03:42 seppolevne wrote: You are forgetting that this is intellectual property, not real objects. Read the thread, it's been done a dozen times or more. There's a reason IP laws exist, and it's because taking ideas or other non-physical things that don't belong to you is still stealing. | ||
|
HardMacro
Canada361 Posts
Have you ever torrented ANY games? If so, what year and world are you living in? | ||
| ||
